Log in or Sign up
Coin Talk
Home
Forums
>
Coin Forums
>
Ancient Coins
>
What one could gather from two (very cheap) small lots of Crusader coins
>
Reply to Thread
Message:
<p>[QUOTE="seth77, post: 4811293, member: 56653"]So lately I have done something that I don't usually do: I bought two small lots (6 coins in total) from what seems to be a collection and/or a deposit of Crusader coins, offered by a German dealer.</p><p><br /></p><p>From the 6, three were regular fragmentary Bohemond III "helmeted knight" deniers of the regular type from the 1170s and 1180s, while the other three were rather interesting finds from the early 13th century.</p><p><br /></p><p>[ATTACH=full]1167144[/ATTACH]</p><p><font size="3">BOHEMOND IV "le Borgne" of ANTIOCH (1201-1216, 1219-1233)</font></p><p><font size="3">AR18mm, 1.01g, billon denier, minted in the City of Antioch, cca. 1201-1203(?).</font></p><p><font size="3">+ BOANVNDVS; helmeted bust l., mail composed of upwards crescents, crescent </font></p><p><font size="3">and star flanking the bust l and r</font></p><p><font size="3">+ AMTIOCIIIA; cross, inverted crescent in second quarter.</font></p><p><font size="3">mule between Metcalf Class E and Class H(?)</font></p><p><br /></p><p>This coin is part of an irregular series minted for Bohemond IV in his first reign, struck with an older Bohemond III die on the obverse and a newer Class H(?) die on the reverse. The resulting coin must be an early irregular coinage, struck in the early years of 1200, showing characteristics of both pre-1188 deniers (the upwards crescents in the mail of the knight, double-barred and pelleted N's) and the newer style (halved O, III instead of HI). Rare and irregular specimen, but other similar mules were present in the general lot, so likely this is the point when much of the material was gathered.</p><p><br /></p><p>This particular specimen has residues of other coins attached to it, specifically of the coin presented below:</p><p><br /></p><p>[ATTACH=full]1167145[/ATTACH]</p><p><font size="3">BOHEMOND IV "le Borgne" of ANTIOCH (1201-1216, 1219-1233)</font></p><p><font size="3">AR17mm, 0.67g, billon denier, minted in the City of Antioch, cca. 1201-1203(?).</font></p><p><font size="3">+ BAMVNDVS; helmeted bust l., mail composed of downwards crescents, inverted crescent and star flanking the bust l and r</font></p><p><font size="3">+ ANTIOCMA; cross, inverted crescent in second quarter.</font></p><p><font size="3">cf Malloy 75, Metcalf mule Class G-H</font></p><p><br /></p><p>This coin is part of an irregular series minted for Bohemond IV in his first reign, of a particularly distinct style: double-barred and pelleted V(!), a complex M instead of HI on the reverse and an inverted crescent on the obverse left field. The shape of the letter V is probably unique to this issue and suggests some outside influence, probably from Tripolis, where these ornate letter shapes were very <i>en vogue</i> during the reigns of Raymond II and Raymond III. The influence started likely in the 1190s, as Antioch was bestowed to the ruling House of Tripoli by Bohemond III. Very rare, similar specimen <a href="https://www.acsearch.info/search.html?id=4172962" target="_blank" class="externalLink ProxyLink" data-proxy-href="https://www.acsearch.info/search.html?id=4172962" rel="nofollow">here</a>.</p><p><br /></p><p>This particular specimen seems to have been attached to the specimen before -- for a reattachment see here:</p><p><br /></p><p>[ATTACH=full]1167146[/ATTACH]</p><p><br /></p><p>-- from which it was broken loose, leaving parts of it on the surface of said coin. The coins must have circulated together and were definitely lost or hidden together, which means they were very close chronologically. The circulation of different styles of irregular coinage during the first years of 1200 proves that the transition between the earlier regular deniers of Bohemond III (that had been minted at least until 1188) lasted for more than a decade, in which although the mint did not close, it minted coinage scarcely, reusing dies from the "golden age" of Antioch as an economic and trade powerhouse in the 1160s to 1180s.</p><p><br /></p><p>The circulation of deniers struck with both old and new dies, and of the irregulars (like this spec) together, indicates that they might be earlier than Malloy and others date them (post 1208). The new types decidedly of Bohemond IV (Classes J and K) might be pushed to the second part of his first reign, likely after the troubles of 1203-1207 (the feudal revolt of Renart de Nephin in the County of Tripoli and the encroachments of Levon of Cilician Armenia in Antioch), when the coinage becomes more stable, more copious (although still rather scarce), and more regular, but at least these mule types of early Bohemond III types and classes G, H and possibly I are the coinage of the Principality in the early years of Bohemond IV's reign.</p><p><br /></p><p>The actual regularization of the coinage takes place in Bohemond's second reign (Class N), following the stylistic innovations introduced during the short reign of Raymond Roupen.</p><p><br /></p><p>Speaking of which, here is an early Raymond Roupen from the same lot:</p><p><br /></p><p>[ATTACH=full]1167147[/ATTACH]</p><p><font size="3">RAYMOND ROUPEN of ANTIOCH-POITIERS (1216-1219)</font></p><p><font size="3">AR19mm, 0.73g, denier, minted at the City of Antioch cca. 1216.</font></p><p><font size="3">+ 8R♧V8P8I8I♧V8S8 ; Helmeted head left with chin guard, with chainmail composed of upward crescents, crescent in the left field, star in the right field.</font></p><p><font size="3">+ AMTIOCIIIA.; cross pattee, crescent in second quarter.</font></p><p><font size="3">Malloy 93, Metcalf Class M, 328-9.</font></p><p><br /></p><p>He was a scion of the Armenian faction of the Poitiers family and the heir presumptive of the throne of Armenia. Levon helped him acquire the throne of Antioch in a revolt against Bohemond IV in 1216 during the so-called <i>War of Antiochene Succession</i>.</p><p><br /></p><p>His coinage is consistent and similar to Bohemond IV's. This particular specimen seems to be of an earlier type, possibly as the die cutters were not really familiar with the new name (carving RVPIIVS instead of RVPINVS), so probably dating to around 1216. A scarce variation, similar specimen <a href="https://www.acsearch.info/search.html?id=7197772" target="_blank" class="externalLink ProxyLink" data-proxy-href="https://www.acsearch.info/search.html?id=7197772" rel="nofollow">here</a>.</p><p><br /></p><p>This post could be interesting for collectors of Crusader coinage or/and numismatists working their way to trace back together coins to their initial lots/hoards.[/QUOTE]</p><p><br /></p>
[QUOTE="seth77, post: 4811293, member: 56653"]So lately I have done something that I don't usually do: I bought two small lots (6 coins in total) from what seems to be a collection and/or a deposit of Crusader coins, offered by a German dealer. From the 6, three were regular fragmentary Bohemond III "helmeted knight" deniers of the regular type from the 1170s and 1180s, while the other three were rather interesting finds from the early 13th century. [ATTACH=full]1167144[/ATTACH] [SIZE=3]BOHEMOND IV "le Borgne" of ANTIOCH (1201-1216, 1219-1233) AR18mm, 1.01g, billon denier, minted in the City of Antioch, cca. 1201-1203(?). + BOANVNDVS; helmeted bust l., mail composed of upwards crescents, crescent and star flanking the bust l and r + AMTIOCIIIA; cross, inverted crescent in second quarter. mule between Metcalf Class E and Class H(?)[/SIZE] This coin is part of an irregular series minted for Bohemond IV in his first reign, struck with an older Bohemond III die on the obverse and a newer Class H(?) die on the reverse. The resulting coin must be an early irregular coinage, struck in the early years of 1200, showing characteristics of both pre-1188 deniers (the upwards crescents in the mail of the knight, double-barred and pelleted N's) and the newer style (halved O, III instead of HI). Rare and irregular specimen, but other similar mules were present in the general lot, so likely this is the point when much of the material was gathered. This particular specimen has residues of other coins attached to it, specifically of the coin presented below: [ATTACH=full]1167145[/ATTACH] [SIZE=3]BOHEMOND IV "le Borgne" of ANTIOCH (1201-1216, 1219-1233) AR17mm, 0.67g, billon denier, minted in the City of Antioch, cca. 1201-1203(?). + BAMVNDVS; helmeted bust l., mail composed of downwards crescents, inverted crescent and star flanking the bust l and r + ANTIOCMA; cross, inverted crescent in second quarter. cf Malloy 75, Metcalf mule Class G-H[/SIZE] This coin is part of an irregular series minted for Bohemond IV in his first reign, of a particularly distinct style: double-barred and pelleted V(!), a complex M instead of HI on the reverse and an inverted crescent on the obverse left field. The shape of the letter V is probably unique to this issue and suggests some outside influence, probably from Tripolis, where these ornate letter shapes were very [I]en vogue[/I] during the reigns of Raymond II and Raymond III. The influence started likely in the 1190s, as Antioch was bestowed to the ruling House of Tripoli by Bohemond III. Very rare, similar specimen [URL='https://www.acsearch.info/search.html?id=4172962']here[/URL]. This particular specimen seems to have been attached to the specimen before -- for a reattachment see here: [ATTACH=full]1167146[/ATTACH] -- from which it was broken loose, leaving parts of it on the surface of said coin. The coins must have circulated together and were definitely lost or hidden together, which means they were very close chronologically. The circulation of different styles of irregular coinage during the first years of 1200 proves that the transition between the earlier regular deniers of Bohemond III (that had been minted at least until 1188) lasted for more than a decade, in which although the mint did not close, it minted coinage scarcely, reusing dies from the "golden age" of Antioch as an economic and trade powerhouse in the 1160s to 1180s. The circulation of deniers struck with both old and new dies, and of the irregulars (like this spec) together, indicates that they might be earlier than Malloy and others date them (post 1208). The new types decidedly of Bohemond IV (Classes J and K) might be pushed to the second part of his first reign, likely after the troubles of 1203-1207 (the feudal revolt of Renart de Nephin in the County of Tripoli and the encroachments of Levon of Cilician Armenia in Antioch), when the coinage becomes more stable, more copious (although still rather scarce), and more regular, but at least these mule types of early Bohemond III types and classes G, H and possibly I are the coinage of the Principality in the early years of Bohemond IV's reign. The actual regularization of the coinage takes place in Bohemond's second reign (Class N), following the stylistic innovations introduced during the short reign of Raymond Roupen. Speaking of which, here is an early Raymond Roupen from the same lot: [ATTACH=full]1167147[/ATTACH] [SIZE=3]RAYMOND ROUPEN of ANTIOCH-POITIERS (1216-1219) AR19mm, 0.73g, denier, minted at the City of Antioch cca. 1216. + 8R♧V8P8I8I♧V8S8 ; Helmeted head left with chin guard, with chainmail composed of upward crescents, crescent in the left field, star in the right field. + AMTIOCIIIA.; cross pattee, crescent in second quarter. Malloy 93, Metcalf Class M, 328-9.[/SIZE] He was a scion of the Armenian faction of the Poitiers family and the heir presumptive of the throne of Armenia. Levon helped him acquire the throne of Antioch in a revolt against Bohemond IV in 1216 during the so-called [I]War of Antiochene Succession[/I]. His coinage is consistent and similar to Bohemond IV's. This particular specimen seems to be of an earlier type, possibly as the die cutters were not really familiar with the new name (carving RVPIIVS instead of RVPINVS), so probably dating to around 1216. A scarce variation, similar specimen [URL='https://www.acsearch.info/search.html?id=7197772']here[/URL]. This post could be interesting for collectors of Crusader coinage or/and numismatists working their way to trace back together coins to their initial lots/hoards.[/QUOTE]
Your name or email address:
Do you already have an account?
No, create an account now.
Yes, my password is:
Forgot your password?
Stay logged in
Coin Talk
Home
Forums
>
Coin Forums
>
Ancient Coins
>
What one could gather from two (very cheap) small lots of Crusader coins
>
Home
Home
Quick Links
Search Forums
Recent Activity
Recent Posts
Forums
Forums
Quick Links
Search Forums
Recent Posts
Competitions
Competitions
Quick Links
Competition Index
Rules, Terms & Conditions
Gallery
Gallery
Quick Links
Search Media
New Media
Showcase
Showcase
Quick Links
Search Items
Most Active Members
New Items
Directory
Directory
Quick Links
Directory Home
New Listings
Members
Members
Quick Links
Notable Members
Current Visitors
Recent Activity
New Profile Posts
Sponsors
Menu
Search
Search titles only
Posted by Member:
Separate names with a comma.
Newer Than:
Search this thread only
Search this forum only
Display results as threads
Useful Searches
Recent Posts
More...