Commodus - Moesia ?

[Adax]

Hi, Am seeking some help with a Commodus coin. I think it is from Nicopolis Ad istrum in Moesia but i cannot find exact reference.
Coin is ~ 24mm in diameter and weight some 10g. The reverse read as     
 (HGE KL ATTALOU...) and i have found a reference in wildwinds saying that it is struck under magistrate Claudius Attalus but if i check Moushmov i cannot see any coin for this magistrate. Also on the obverse the bust of Commodus faces left while in all examples in Moushmov, the bust faces always to right.
This coin is bizarre so any information would be welcomed.
Many thanks
regards
Adax

[Akropolis]

Well, then Mouchmov is wrong, because Attalus was definitely a legate In Nicopolis, Moesia Inferior.
PeteB

[Pekka K]

Nikopolis yes, but ad Nestum.

Compare to Varbanov 4302. (Mouchmov 4046)

Pekka K

[curtislclay]

The coin illustrated by Varbanov 4302 is the same as Hristova-Hoeft-Jekov, Nicopolis ad Istrum ed. 2012, p. 30, first coin. It has ethnic NEIKOΠOΛ at end of circular legend, ΠPOC I in exergue, so is definitely of Nicopolis ad Istrum, which at the time was still part of the province of Thrace, so names Claudius Attalus who was governor of Thrace.

Mouchmov 4046 attributes a similar coin, but with incomplete legends, to Nicopolis ad Mestum:

"4046   ..Y..YPH..O, Commodus’s (?) bearded head right Rev. : NEIKOΠΟΛΕΩC TH E MK AI..Y.., Zeus half-naked seated left, holding patera and sceptre; below – eagle with wings spread."

Maybe just a misdescription of the similar Nikopolis ad Istrum coin, with governor's name misread?
"TH E MK AI..Y." might be a misread
HΓE KΛ ATTAΛOV.

I can't properly attribute Adax' coin, however. Perhaps indeed of Nicopolis ad Mestum, with rev. legend

HΓE KΛ ATTAΛOV NEIK ΠP MCT, the engraver having left out the E of MECT? NEIK is a very short abbreviation of the city name, however, and I have nothing to suggest for the apparent letters in exergue after MCT.

I couldn't find anything similar in RPC online, maybe just because I didn't search correctly.

[Adax]

Hello,
Thanks for your feedback. I am slightly confused now. What I have found searching since yesterday is that Claudius Attalus was effectively governor of Thrace region under Commodus (http://www.akropoliscoins.com/page8.html) so as the attribution to this legate under this emperor is clear on my coin and thus it seems “genuine” to see both names associated on it.
However, you say the coin is from Nicopolis ad Nestum/Mestum and not for Nicopolis ad Istrum but I have found very conflicting information since yesterday on this city: I found a coin in RPC for Commodus for this city (http://rpc.ashmus.ox.ac.uk/coins/4/7417/). But, I have found another source saying that Nicopolis ad N/Mestum did not issue coins before the reign of Caracalla. Wikipedia mentioning a source by a German scholar named Holger Kommick says that coins of this city before Caracalla should be treated as forgeries or are misattributed and should be regarded as coins issued for Nicopolis ad Istrum.

The legend on the reverse reads correctly the name of the legate and also as HGE KL ATTALOU then I can see a NEIK then PR then MCT, which would point to Nicopolis ad N/Mestum but maybe it could also read as  then  then maybe  which would thus point to Nicopolis ad Istrum? Like the one listed under Moushmov 891f in wildwinds?

Also, all coins I have seen for Commodus for Nicopolis show an obverse bust always to the right whereas on my coin the bust is oriented to the left. Which again is very unsettling for me. I start to fear that I have a fake coin. Sad....

Cheers

Adax

[curtislclay]

The RPC coin you link to, illustrated also by Varbanov 4300, is certainly an old fake, since there was already a specimen in Queen Christina's collection (died 1689), and since Volker Heuchert observed that the obv. die of this coin is also known from genuine coins of Commodus at Ankara in Galatia, a very unlikely die link if the Nicopolis coin too were authentic!

But the existence of this old fake doesn't mean that your coin too must be false. There is no reason Nicopolis ad Mestum might not have a coin for Commodus with his bust facing left, unless of course that same obv. die can be found on coins of a distant Asia Minor mint, as in the case just mentioned! However the rev. legend of your coin does present problems, as I stated: the surprising abbreviation NEIK, the misspelled MET, and the illegible further legend in exergue. Another difficulty is that according to Komnick the city's name on all other known coins is always preceded by Ulpia, the name that it took from its founder Trajan.

I think your coin presents difficulties, but should not yet be condemned as false. Maybe new specimens with a clear legend or discovery of other uses of the same obv. die will eventually clarify the coin's correct attribution and the question of its authenticity.