what does S C mean on a Roman coin?

To clarify, your coin is not of much monetary value--you'd be lucky to get $5 for it if you tried to sell it--but like any ancient coin, it has a lot of historical value. It is, after all, close to 2,000 years old. Try to imagine all it's been through as you hold it and look at it.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

Coins with historical value need to retain enough design that they are identifiable with some certainty and show enough legends that you can read at least a bit of the history. I can not imagine why anyone would pay $5 for a coin with no details unless it were so rare that its existence was history. This is a common type. Decent coins are like educational books. When terribly corroded, they are like the ashes you get when you burn a book. Their information is lost. I hate to see beginners spending hundreds of dollars on many things they will not learn from and passing them on to other beginners (often at a profit) who believe anything that old has some mystical value. I do suggest spending $10-20 on one 'book' rather than 2-20 piles of 'ashes'. There is no need to follow the fad believing that only Mint State coins are collectible but there is a lower limit under which the benefit gained is not worth the trouble for the beginner. Coins like this (or better most likely) were sacrificed by the scholars that determined the orichalcum used in them matched that used in Rome rather than in the East showing the coins were made in Rome and shipped East for use. Those destroyed coins will live on as historical documents even though they no longer exist as physical pieces of metal. Collectors need to discriminate between things from which they can learn and things better left to the scientists. I regret no one commented, confirmed or denied my ID of the coin. What we got was arguments over SC. Are all SC's the same? Because someone writes a theory are we all to accept it without question? Did the people who made or used these coins know or care about the meaning of the SC? IDK.

Do those reading this far see any significance in the SC being in Latin letters while the rest of the legend is in Greek? Can you ID the coin below?

 

Diadumenian?


Diadumenian, Caesar AD 217-218.
Roman provincial Æ 16.5 mm, 4.63 g, 11:00.
Syria: Seleucis and Pieria, Antioch ad Orontem.
Obv: ΚΑΙ Μ Ο ΔΙA ΑΝΤΩΝΙΝΟC CЄ, bare-headed and cuirassed bust right.
Rev: Large SC, Δ/Є above and beneath; all within laurel wreath interrupted by star above.
Refs: Sear 3017; BMC 20. 201,408; SNG Cop. 235; McAlee 745a.
Notes: Reverse die match to McAlee plate coin.

 

@cmezner, you're already going over my head, but it sounds like you have a point!

 

A silver 'S C' coin.

Vespasian [Titus]
AR Denarius, 3.08g
Rome mint, 79-80 AD
Obv: DIVVS VESPASIANVS AVGVSTVS; Head of Vespasian, laureate, r.
Rev: EX SC in exergue; Tensa r., surmounted by two Victories
RIC 362 (R2). BMC 117. RSC 147a. BNC 91. Hendin 1585a.

 

@David Atherton, that is one Terrific Vespasian denarius. (Only ever had one, on the legible side of worn, and was glad of it.) Really like that Flavian 'backwards' obverse legend, and the cool reverse. What's the significance of the "EX" in the exergue?

 

Expresses the same meaning as 'S C' (by special decree of the Senate) but written out more fully.

 

Many thanks, @David Atherton.
...Doh, I can only wish I was as literate in Latin as I wanted to be. At my (public) school (...don't End it; Fix it!), it was exactly nowhere in the curriculum. First and only Latin course I ever got was an undergraduate one in, ...wait for it; drum-roll, please (followed by a 3-flag Oxymoron Alert: ) "Conversational Latin." Nope, Not making this up. As in, if you wanted to order a hamburger at the McDonald's in Vatican City, ......Here's How! Any scrap of actual primary-source literature was at the very end of the course, as an afterthought.

 

The oak wreath / corona civica was the second highest honor in the Roman republic (continuing into the Imperial years), awarded to Roman citizens "ex senatus consulto" (by special decree of the Senate).

"THE ACORN OAK. THE CIVIC CROWN.
It is with the leaves of this class of trees that our civic crown is made, the most glorious reward that can be bestowed on military valor, and, for this long time past, the emblem of the imperial clemency; since the time, in fact, when, after the impiety of civil war, it was first deemed a meritorious action not to shed the blood of a fellow-citizen."
- Pliny, Natural History, 16.3​

"The crown is called "civic" which one citizen gives to another who has saved his life in battle, in recognition of the preservation of his life and safety. It is made of the leaves of the esculent oak, because the earliest food and means of supporting life were furnished by that oak; it was formerly made also from the holm oak, because that is the species which is most nearly related to the esculent;"
- A. Cornelius Gellius, attic Nights, V.6.11​

Julius Caesar received the corona civica for ending the civil wars

"Having ended the civil wars Cæsar [Julius] hastened to Rome, honored and feared as no one had ever been before. All kinds of honors were devised for his gratification without stint, even such as were superhuman -- sacrifices, games, statues in all the temples and public places, by every tribe, by all the provinces, and by the kings in alliance with Rome. His likeness was painted in various forms, in some cases crowned with oak as the savior of his country, by which crown the citizens were accustomed formerly to reward those to whom they owed their safety."
-Appian Book 2 Chapter XVI​

Augustus received it in 27 B.C. for saving citizens by ending the civil war

"Now Caesar [Octavina/Augustus] had received many privileges and honours even previously, when the question of declining the sovereignty and that of apportioning the provinces were under discussion. For the right to place the laurel trees in front of the royal residence and to hang the crown of oak above them was then voted him to symbolise that he was always victor over his enemies and the saviour of the citizens."
-Cassius Dio, Roman History, LIII.16.4​

Coins reading "ob cives servatos" = “for saving [the lives of] citizens” with an oak wreath, like this one of Claudius sold in April (not mine):

Seleucis and Pieria, Antioch, Diadumenianus AD 218-218, AE
Obv: KAIC M OΠ ΔI ANTΩNINO, bare-headed, draped and cuirassed bust left
Rev: Large S C within wreath, dot in circle over Δ above, E below
Example (not mine):


Greek/Latin does bother me, it causes me to question an interpretation other than "Senatus Consulto" on these provincial coins. It would seem to me more likely that these coins copy SC of roman coins as a symbol of "valid AE currency" rather than a locally relevant meaning (I say this in complete ignorance of the case that is made for Syria Coele).

I find this rebuttal of Kraft compelling (published posthumously for Aase Bay with support of M. Crawford) - making the case for a simpler explanation for Senatus Consulto.

 

With all this talk about SC meaning, and much of it relating to Antioch AE coinage, I'll toss these two coins out there. Post-Caracalla Antiochene bronze and billion coins added Δ and Є in their fields:



But these examples below take them up a notch making them the prominent element on the reverse where an SC would appear, and the SC doesn't make any appearance on this coin type.


Elagabalus, Ruled 218-222 AD
AE20, Syria, Antioch Mint
Obverse: IMP C MAVR ANTONINVS [AVG], laureate bust right, three dots at top of laurel.
Reverse: ΔЄ across field, star below, all within wreath of 10 elements fastened at top with garland.
Reference: BMC 447-50, McAlee 799
Size: 20mm, 4.64g


Elagabalus, Ruled 218-222 AD
AE19, Syria, Antioch Mint
Obverse: IMP C MAV[R ANT]ONINVS AVG, laureate bust right, three dots at top of laurel.
Reverse: ΔЄ across field, star below, all within wreath of 10 elements fastened at top with garland.
Reference: BMC 447-50, McAlee 799
Size: 19mm, 6.94g

A while back I was doing some searching about the Delta and Epsilon and came across two opinions...

Forvm's "moonmoth" contributor suggests that it stands for something like Demosia Exousia or ΔHMAPXIKHΣ EXOYΣIAΣ, Greek for Public or Tribunician Power.

The other, proposed by Butcher in Coinage of Roman Syria, is that it stands for Δ EΠAPXEIΩN, "of the four eparchies," and is related to the imperial cult at Antioch (and later at Laodicea).

Additionally, Elagabalus issued an AE type from Antioch with K and A above and below SC on reverse instead of Δ and Є (not my coin):


I haven't searched about this reverse type, as I don't have one. Anyone have info about K & A?

 

SILVER ROMAN REPUBLIC SC COINS


RR L Rustius 76 BCE AR Denarius 19mm 3.6g Mars SC Rome - Ram L RVSTI Cr 389-1 Sear 320



RR Naevius Balbus 79 BCE AR Denenarius Venus SC TRIGA Sulla S 309 Cr 382-1



RR L and C Memmius L F Galeria 87 BCE AR Denarius Saturn harpa EX S C Venus Biga Cupid Sear 262 Craw 349-1 Left

 

@Alegandron, No Clue there was Any Such Beast.

 

“Everyone” seems focused on the “Imperial” period. Pretty much during the CE years. I enjoy the BCE years when Rome was a Republic...

They had been a Republic for almost 500 years, and had been an Empire almost 250 years before Augustus. In fact MOST of the Empire was GAINED during the Republic. The Republic was the crucible that made the later Imperial period.

To me, save for fighting to KEEP the Empire, it was a stagnant Empire... Augustus not wanting to conquer new borders, cuz Varus lost a few Legions in Germany; perhaps Trajan gaining a little territory in Dacia, but later lost; some territories gained in Persia/Parthia, but lost; then an Emperor throws up a wall in Northern Britain. Kinda downhill trend after Augustus set the pace to KEEP the Empire vs real strides in truly EXPANDING it, as was the pace during the REPUBLIC.

 

LOL. I also enjoy Histories of the Chinese Empires, and the Egyptian Empires. Both, flat out longer entities in time.

Oh, and the Roman Republic STARTED and EXPANDED the Empire. They WERE the Roman Empire.

I just enjoy the Human dynamics of “growth vs. let’s just kinda hold on to what we got”.

 

An interesting article from K. Butcher mentions one possibility for K.A. as KOΛΩNIAΣ ANTIOXEΩN or ANTIOXIA connected with a visit in AD 218 by Elagabalus to Antioch-on-the-Orontes after his victory over Macrinus, and issuing of bronze coins naming Antioch as a Roman colony which lasted until the beginning of the reign of Valerian. Other variants from Elagabalus listed:

BUTCHER, K. (1988). The Colonial Coinage of Antioch-on-the-Orontes c.AD 218-53. The Numismatic Chronicle (1966-), 148, 63-75

 

Thank you everyone! Some of what you talked about is way over my head, but what I do understand is it is simply amazing to sit here and think that this coin is 2000 years old! I can’t imagine all the hands that it passed through over the years! It makes history seem “real”.

Does anyone know what these various coins were worth…... Meaning, if they were a coin today would they be worth a quarter? A dime? A dollar? And did they have different names like quarter, dime, nickel etc.…? Sorry if these are stupid questions!

Thank you,
Amber

 

Both good questions - there were different denominations:
e.g. Aureus, Denarius, Quinarius, Sestertius, Dupondius, As, Semis
with multiple ancient systems that changed and differed over time and between ancient locations/governments.

"what would it buy" is also a good question and not an easy one to answer specifically for Antioch or your coin. Here's a good page on the subject:
https://www.forumancientcoins.com/numiswiki/view.asp?key=Ancient Wages and Prices

It would take 20 of your coin to equal a silver denarius and for rough estimates a denarius and a drachm can be consider roughly equivalent. For an idea of scale of what you could buy, I would guess that you could buy an afternoon snack with your coin (4-5 modern slices of bread). It will be interesting to hear other estimates.

Here's a table of purchasing power/income needs in Ancient Egypt from two periods (Period 1 = late 1st century to AD 160 - period for your coin) and (Period 2 = AD 190-270). The article illustrates all the assumptions that have to be made to estimate buying power.

Ref: Scheidel, Walter. “Real Wages in Early Economies: Evidence for Living Standards from 1800 BCE to 1300 CE.” Journal of the Economic and Social History of the Orient, vol. 53, no. 3, 2010, pp. 425–462

 

Very cool table!

Let's compare this to our standard 40 hour, 5 day work week (inaccurately, cuz I'm sure the average ancient person worked more?). So an Annual Wage (regardless of pay cadence) would be 250-288 drachms, or about 4.8-5.5 drachm per week, or 0.96-1.1 drachm per day (roughly 1/day for this exercise). And if 1 drachm is about 20 of your bronze coin, you can think the ancient person earned 20 of them per day or like 2.5 per hour (considering an 8-hr workday).

Let's consider, say, an "average Joe or Jane" working at Aldi with a starting $14/hr wage, your coin would be worth about $5.60 USD. Or if the above person they are referring to is a skilled craftsman and earns $40/hr in modern terms, meaning your coin is worth $16 USD. **this is just my own math and breakdown as a way to illustrate the concepts, and the actuals are very likely flawed.**.

What this does show you is that coinage in ancient civilization was more similar to our modern day bills rather than our coins as change. Fun to think about though, certainly!!!

 

Not stupid questions at all... We've all been a beginner, some more recent than others (3 1/2 years in myself). A couple years ago I was working through the same thing and doing research on the subject of denominations, values, and their evolution and I did what I do professionally but for my hobby -- I designed two infographics for others like yourself to help you grasp what I had been learning (it helped me solidify the I go in my brain too ).

This first one deals with denominations, and their value in relation to eachother, of Roman Imperial coinage from Augustus to, say, Gallienus or Aurelian or so.


This next one is more of a timeline of these (and other) denominations throughout the Empire, and though there is some nuance that isn't captured that I didn't know about at the time (like how though denominations existed of the same name during Republican and Imperial times, the coins themselves were drastically different like the As, Sestertius, Semis), it's still a solid base of info.


Edit: it also makes you think when seeing the emperors placed on a timeline, cuz Aurelian and Caracalla are closer in years than Caracalla and Antoninus Pius... It didn't feel like that in my mind when you just look at the years and know how many emperors passed thru between Caracalla and Aurelian rather than the later. Maybe that'd be the topic of my next timeline infographics lol an emperor Gantt chart...