Venus from Behind - Salonina & Julia Domna (Emesa)

Venus is a third declension noun. As such, its inflectional endings are built from the genitive singular stem, Vener-; the nominative, accusative, and vocative plural form is Veneres. One Venus, two Veneres. The nominative singular is often the oddball in Latin (and Greek) third declension nouns. Here's the complete declension:

.........sing..........plu
nom: Venus......Venerēs
gen: Veneris.....Venerum
dat: Venerī.......Veneribus
acc: Venerem...Venerēs
abl: Venere......Veneribus
voc: Venus.......Venerēs

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

Five years (no kidding) of Latin and I am still horrible at this. Thank you, Roman Collector.

 

The Aureus is a fake from Lipanoff dies.

 

I have clothed the Venus for Sept. Sev.




And one where the engraver of the legend thought "Venus" and the engraver of the device thought "Victory"

 

Sorry to hear that, for the winning bidder's sake. I thought it seemed a bit flashy and gold for an eBay auction.

 

Here is the obverse die in a silver depiction.

 

A while back I got a Sev. Alexander that has always looked kind of suspicious to me, and it looks a bit like the fake you posted, maridvnvm. The weight was okay, but it seemed a little too good to be true for a Sev. Alex. denarius. Compounding my confusion, the style of Sev. Alexander coins always baffle me - some of them look great, but others are pretty awful.

 

IMO these are too common to be accidental mules with Domna reverses. This mint did not see boy types and girl types as strictly as did Rome. How many dies were used for them?

 

Since earlier versions are being shown too, Sabina provided an interesting anepigraphic antecedent:

 

Just checked “LIPANOFF STUDIO: Catalog of all registered coin types” - that aureus is not there. Any source of your information?