Classical Numismatics Discussion Board
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
July 24, 2014, 02:27:14 am
Search Calendar Login Register

Recent Additions to Forum's Shop


FORVM`s Classical Numismatics Discussion Board  |  Numismatic and History Discussions  |  Roman Coins (Moderator: Severus_Alexander)  |  Topic: Laodicea or Rome? 0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic. « previous next »
Pages: [1] Go Down Print
Author Topic: Laodicea or Rome?  (Read 928 times)
Greyshadow
Praetorian
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 38


« on: December 24, 2011, 02:49:31 am »

Hi at all:

Few days ago, I bought this denarius :

RIC shows this coin with two references, RIC 122 c (mint in Rome) and RIC 500 (mint in Laodicea).

I´d like to know how is possible recognize one or other mint. I mean, is only for your style?  Anyone knows if this coin was minted for be used only in the East or also circulate in Rome?

Regards.
Logged
maridvnvm
Tribunus Plebis 2008
Procurator Monetae
Caesar
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 3901



« Reply #1 on: December 24, 2011, 03:23:09 am »

Rome.
The only way to differentiate is by style.
Regards,
Martin
Logged
Greyshadow
Praetorian
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 38


« Reply #2 on: December 26, 2011, 02:37:48 pm »

Thanks for your response, Martin. I think that is very dificult classify a coin based on his style, it´s so personal...

And about this coin, do you think that is a coin minted in Rome or in Laodicea?

Regards.
Logged
slokind
Tribuna Plebis Perpetua
Procurator Monetae
Caesar
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 7136


Art is an experimental science


WWW
« Reply #3 on: December 26, 2011, 02:41:04 pm »

Eventually, one learns to differentiate Laodicea and Rome denarii, provided one doesn't refuse to undertake learning it.  There are few rules of thumb.  It took me about a year before I felt confident.  PatL.
Logged
Greyshadow
Praetorian
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 38


« Reply #4 on: December 26, 2011, 02:51:38 pm »

Yes Slokind, you´re right. Normally the style may be identificated and the coin classificate, but in this case, what do you think?

Regards,

Carlos
Logged
curtislclay
Tribunus Plebis Perpetuus
Procurator Monetae
Caesar
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 9002



« Reply #5 on: December 26, 2011, 03:07:00 pm »

Carlos,

As Martin said, your coin is of Rome, not the new-style Eastern mint that Mattingly conjecturally located at Laodicea.

Here is an Eastern specimen for comparison. Note slightly thicker letters, cruder style. Eastern flans usually have smooth edges, almost never jagged sections as at the bottom of your coin.
Logged

Curtis Clay
Greyshadow
Praetorian
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 38


« Reply #6 on: December 26, 2011, 03:24:39 pm »

Oh, I´m afraid that I did´n see the word "Rome" in the answer of Martin...

Really the style of the portrait seems of Rome but the reverse I bought that may be was from Laodicea. Clearly you´re right and this coin was minted in Rome. Wink

I have another Septimius Severus denarius that was minted in Laodicea and really the style of the portrait is very different, as you say:

Logged
Greyshadow
Praetorian
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 38


« Reply #7 on: December 27, 2011, 10:01:09 am »

Is really interesting your description to recognize coins minted in Laodicea, thanks!

And then, do you think that this one is minted in Laodicea? I have it classified like minted in Rome, but your style seems oriental, don´t have jagged sections, letters are slightly thicker ( I think) and have smooth edges.

Regards

Carlos


Logged
curtislclay
Tribunus Plebis Perpetuus
Procurator Monetae
Caesar
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 9002



« Reply #8 on: December 27, 2011, 10:12:12 am »

Correct, that denarius too is new-style Eastern, not Rome.

The typical Roman fabric in 197 is quite different: the denarii are usually thick but too small, meaning that parts of the legends are often off flan.

Here is an example from Wildwinds. It is hard to get these two mixed up, wouldn't you agree?
Logged

Curtis Clay
mauseus
Procurator Caesaris
Caesar
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2564


Ah Allectus, my trusted friend.......


WWW
« Reply #9 on: December 27, 2011, 10:46:23 am »

Hi Curtis,

Have you seen the monograph by Gitler And Ponting (Glaux 16) that undertakes the chemical analysis of Severan silver. In it they "identify" (from memory) three mixes on trace elements, a Rome one, an Emisan one and a Laodicean one and then go on to show a few Rome style coins but with a Laodicean mix.

Have you had the opportunity to form an opinion on their findings?

Kind regards & best wishes for the season,

Mauseus
Logged

curtislclay
Tribunus Plebis Perpetuus
Procurator Monetae
Caesar
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 9002



« Reply #10 on: December 27, 2011, 12:19:45 pm »

Mauseus,

I am aware of the book, but can't give an opinion. I can't clearly remember whether I have ever been able to look at it, and if so, what opinion I formed!

Through Google, I found that Yahoo has copied the book, but I couldn't see any way to read their electronic copy.

Best holiday wishes to you too!

Curtis
Logged

Curtis Clay
Greyshadow
Praetorian
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 38


« Reply #11 on: December 27, 2011, 03:10:05 pm »

It is hard to get these two mixed up, wouldn't you agree?

Really! Thanks for yours explanations, Curtis.

Maybe it´s a nonsense, but I think that another way to distinguish both types would be the shape of the beard...wouldn´t you agree?

Take a look to another three denarius of my collection (from Rome, I think), seems that the beard depicted is very different...

Best Regards and a lot of thanks from Spain Wink

Carlos




Logged
jon gress
Praetorian
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 86


« Reply #12 on: December 27, 2011, 03:46:35 pm »

A paper presenting some of Gitler and Ponting's findings is available here on academia.edu
Logged
Greyshadow
Praetorian
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 38


« Reply #13 on: December 28, 2011, 08:43:42 am »

Thanks Jon, it´s very interesting.
Logged
maridvnvm
Tribunus Plebis 2008
Procurator Monetae
Caesar
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 3901



« Reply #14 on: December 28, 2011, 10:24:53 am »

The article makes makes some very strong claims about the accuracy of the chemical analysis vs. numismatic analysis of style. It gives two examples of coins which had been attributed to Rome but would chemically be attributed to the east. They argue that these coins should be re-attributed rather than the alternative possibility that the chemical analysis is not as deterministic as is argued.
I think that we have to rely on style.
Martin
Logged
Greyshadow
Praetorian
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 38


« Reply #15 on: December 28, 2011, 11:35:13 am »


Hi, Martin;

Is possible that another difference to distinguish both will be the absence of flan crack (in coins minted in Laodicea)?

I have had searching in Coinarchives and I think that most coins minted in Rome shows flan cracks and most denarius minted in Laodicea have your flan without breaking.
May be the minting process in Laodicea used a very warm silver...

Regards.

Carlos
Logged
Robert_Brenchley
Comitia Curiata X
Procurator Caesaris
Caesar
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 7698

Honi soit qui mal y pense.


WWW
« Reply #16 on: December 28, 2011, 03:33:54 pm »

How consistent is the analysis from any given mint?
Logged

Robert Brenchley

My gallery: http://www.forumancientcoins.com/gallery/index.php?cat=10405
Fiat justitia ruat caelum
Pages: [1] Go Up Print 
FORVM`s Classical Numismatics Discussion Board  |  Numismatic and History Discussions  |  Roman Coins (Moderator: Severus_Alexander)  |  Topic: Laodicea or Rome? « previous next »
Jump to:  

Recent Price Reductions in Forum's Shop


Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.19 | SMF © 2013, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!
Page created in 1.563 seconds with 58 queries.