Technically, my 12 Caesars set is complete once my AMCC 2 Otho arrives. But I would like to upgrade my Titus. My collecting guideline for my 12 Caesars set is to collect as many middle bronze issues as can reasonably be had. (I have opted for denarii only for Julius Caesar and Otho.) And indeed I have collected imperial, not provincial, issues. However, I do not insist that a given emperor be Augustus at the time of the coin strike. If the coin features a good portrait, it might be of the emperor as Caesar. And yes, I know that a 12 Caesars set is whatever I want to make it. But these were my (admittedly arbitrary) guidelines. Now I’m somewhat taken with this coin design. It looks imperial, with the Latin legends, but it was struck for use in the Commagene / Syria. So what is the status of a coin struck at Rome for provincial use? Is it excluded from my collecting guidelines if I intend to be strict with them? (This image is from VCoins seller Incitatus coins—an old sold coin from their inventory. It is just to illustrate the type.)
If you were to want to include it in your set based on your guidelines, you could justify it by saying it’s listed in RIC. If you’re uncomfortable with any ambiguity, then you could point out that it’s also listed in RPC and pass on it. Big help I am.
My personal opinion is that Provincials will usually have a legend in Greek or the name of the city spelled out or abbreviated on the reverse. Otherwise, coins with a ruler portrait, Latin legends, Roman titles and in a size that aligns with a Roman denomination (e.g. an as) can be considered Imperials.
Actually that is a big help. The RIC part. The query is a bit silly, I know. If I like the coin type, I should get it. But these are the head games we play with ourselves—at least I do.
I would treat it as the first coin of your Coins-That-Didn't-Quite-Make-It-Into-My-12-Caesars-Collection Collection.
It's considered an imperial issue and likely not struck for Syria but for circulation in the Western provinces! See my write-up here. http://www.forumancientcoins.com/gallery/displayimage.php?pos=-150330
I recently posted a Commagene dupondius struck for Tiberius (with crossed coruncopiae) and was similarly puzzled. Why does this coin have an RIC number? Isn't it provincial? From what I can tell, this type for Tiberius circulated in the East, not the West, the way that interesting Flavian series David Atherton mentions above. The rather "Eastern" countermark suggests this too. But perhaps there is uncertainty about this - thus the RIC number? I just don't know. Tiberius Dupondius (19-20 A.D.) Uncertain Commagene Mint [TI CAESAR DIVI AVGVSTI F AVGVSTVS], laureate head right / [PONT MAXIM] COS [III IMP VII TR POT XXI(I)], caduceus between crossed cornucopiae RIC 89 (XXI) or 90 (XXII). (11.59 grams / 27 mm) Countermark: Π Δ T around uncertain object (harpa?) in 8 x 6 mm oval. Howgego 500. "Howgego is unable to fully explain the types and legends of this countermark, suggesting that the legend may be a date in an uncertain era, and the type may be a trophy or the birth of Malakbel from a cypress tree." Richard Baker Collection, via CNG Ele. Auct. 439; Lot 267
Well that is the most generous, on-point information I’ve read about these issues to date. Thanks both to you and Mike for recent posts. I think I’m going to make a run at this coin type soon.
