In 271 AD, Zenobia the queen of Palmyra found herself harassed by the mounting Roman hegemony. She had the courage to name her son Vabalathus as Augustus. It didn't take Emperor Aurelian too much time to wage war against the usurper and his mother. Soon he gained control of that Syrian province, while Vabalathus and Zenobia were led to Rome. The following coin figures both Aurelian and Vabalathus, each on either side of the bronze antoninianus. I wonder which Authority struck this coin and under which circumstances. It weighs 3.52 g. and is believed to have been struck in Antioch.
Nice addition Vabalathus (270 - 275 A.D.) AE Antoninianus O: VABALATHVS V CRIMDR, Laureate and draped bust right. R: IMP C AVRELIANVS AVG, Radiate and draped bust right. Antioch 20mm 3.3g RIC-381
Vabalathus struck these coins, but recognized that Aurelian was senior, that is why the legend for Aurelian ends with AVG; while Vabalathus merely takes the title of Imperator, which is the I in VCRIMDR of his legend. RIC states that "The coin would appear to have been struck rather as an admission of vassalage to an emperor whose great power must have been felt by the eastern ruler to be menacing, and issued rather as a peace offering than as an insult." RIC Vi pg 260 The side with Vabalathus might actually be the obverse, as the side with Aurelian has the workshop under his bust. RIC points out though, that mint marks on the obverse were not unknown at Antioch and Aurelian is recognized through the use of AVG as senior.
I may be a little off on this but if I were admitting Aurelian was greater than I am, I would have put him on the obverse and left the first R (Rex=king) out of my legend.
So if I bought this type, would I classify it as Palmyrene Empire or Roman Empire? I'm guessing it should be the former since Antioch was controlled by Zenobia and Vabalathus.
It always shows up in Roman catalogs following Aurelian and listed as "with Aurelian". I suspect things might be different but there are not other Palmyrene coins so Zenobia and her son end up as Romans. For the record we should mention they also controlled Alexandria resulting in a tetradrachm. In this case, both sides have a regnal year date (4/1 here).
Vabalathus, Antoninianus minted in Antioch, 8th officina, AD 271-272 VABALATHVS V C R IM D R, Draped, laureate and diademed bust of Vabalathus right IMP C AVRELIANVS AVG, Radiate and cuirassed bust of Aurelianus right. H at exergue 2.45 gr Ref : Cohen #1, RCV # 11718 Q
I have the Vabalathus with Aurelian portraits. I IMAGINE the Aurelius is the OBVERSE... RI Vabalathus 271-272 CE and Aurelian
