Classical Numismatics Discussion Members' Gallery
  Welcome Guest. Please login or register.

Members' Gallery Home | Member Collections | Last Added | Last Comments | Most Viewed | Top Rated | My Favorities | Search Galleries
Home > Members' Coin Collection Galleries > Tracy Aiello

Sextus Pompey


rr_1074_revised_Large.jpg

6 files, last one added on Jun 14, 2019

Vabalathus and Aurelian


A_and_V_Antioch_8th_Wksp.jpeg

8 files, last one added on Mar 07, 2019

Severina


Severina_Concordiae_Militvm_Large.jpg

1 files, last one added on Apr 20, 2019

Larissa


Larissa_Obe_and_Rev.jpg

5 files, last one added on Jul 07, 2019

4 albums on 1 page(s)

Last additions - Tracy Aiello's Gallery
Larissa_Obe_and_Rev.jpg
Facing Head of Larissa29 viewsThessaly Greece, the City of Larissa

Obv: Head of the nymph Larissa 3/4 facing l., wearing ampyx flanked by two hornlike locks, round curl to the l. of the head1; earring on the r. (?), wearing wire necklace (?). Border of dots.
Rev: Horse crouching r., l. foreleg raised and bent (parallel with the lower part of the hind legs), preparing to roll, ΛAPIΣ above horse and AIΩN in the exergue.
Denomination: Silver Drachm; Mint: Larissa; Date: c. 356 - 346 BC2; Weight: 6.05g; Diameter: 19mm; Die axis: 130º; References, for example: Lorber Hoard, Phase L-III; SNG COP 121.

Notes:
1On p. 10 of Lorber Hoard Catharine Lorber observes that on later Phase L-III head types the round curl to the left of the head “...tends to evolve into a long wavy lock scarcely different from the others above and below it.” Therefore, perhaps this coin falls earlier in Phase L-III.
2This is the date range given in Lorber Hoard, p. 11. She states that the Third Sacred War must have been the historical context for the intensive Phase L-III drachm production.
The city of Larissa was named after the local water nymph, said to be the daughter of Pelasgos. He was said to be the ancestor of the pre-Greek Pelasgians. According to myth Larissa drowned while playing ball on the banks of the Peneios river. (HGC p. 130).

Provenance: ex. Pegasi Auction, A22, lot 117

Photo credits: Harlan J. Berk Ltd.

Sources

HGC: Hoover, Oliver D. Handbook of Coins of Northern and Central Greece: Achaia Phthiotis, Ainis, Magnesia, Malis, Oita, Perrhaibia, Thessaly, Akarnania, Aitolia, Lokris, Phokis, Boiotia, Euboia, Attica, Megaris, and Corinthia, Sixth to First Centuries BC, The Handbook of Greek Coinage Series, Vol. 4. Lancaster/London: Classical Numismatic Group, Inc, 2014.
Lorber Hoard: Lorber, Catharine C. “A Hoard of Facing Head Larissa Drachms” in Schweizerische Numismatische Rundschau, vol. 79 (2000): 7 - 15.
SNG COP: Sylloge Nummorum Graecorum, The Royal Collection of Coins and Medals, Danish National Museum: Thessaly - Illyricum. Copenhagen: Einar Munksgaard, 1943.
4 commentsTracy AielloJul 07, 2019
Larissa_Head_BCD_Thessaly_II_283_.jpg
Facing Head of Larissa47 viewsThessaly Greece, the City of Larissa

Obv: Head of the nymph Larissa facing slightly r., wearing ampyx, pendant earring, and wire necklace. Border of dots.
Rev: reverse horse crouching l., l. foreleg raised, preparing to roll and lie down. ΛAPI above horse and ΣAIΩN in the exergue.
Denomination: Silver Drachm; Mint: Larissa; Date: c. 380 - 365 BC1; Weight: 5.812g; Diameter: 20.8mm; Die axis: 90º; References, for example: BCD Thessaly I 1149; BCD Thessaly II 283; McClean 4623; HGC 4 441; Lorber - Shahar, Middle Series 1 Type A (O1/R42

Notes:
1This is the date range stated in BCD Thessaly I.
2Unfortunately this website no longer functions and it will not be brought back up (Catharine Lorber, personal communication, September 7, 2018).
The city of Larissa was named after the local water nymph, said to be the daughter of Pelasgos. He was said to be the ancestor of the pre-Greek Pelasgians. According to myth Larissa drowned while playing ball on the banks of the Peneios river. (HGC p. 130).

Photo credits: Forum Ancient Coins

Sources

BCD Thessaly I: Nomos AG, Auction 4. Coins of Thessaly, the BCD Collection. (10 May 2011, Zurich).
BCD Thessaly II: Classical Numismatic Group, Inc. The BCD Collection of the Coinage of Thessaly. Triton XV Auction. (3 January 2012, New York).
HGC: Hoover, Oliver D. Handbook of Coins of Northern and Central Greece: Achaia Phthiotis, Ainis, Magnesia, Malis, Oita, Perrhaibia, Thessaly, Akarnania, Aitolia, Lokris, Phokis, Boiotia, Euboia, Attica, Megaris, and Corinthia, Sixth to First Centuries BC, The Handbook of Greek Coinage Series, Vol. 4. Lancaster/London: Classical Numismatic Group, Inc, 2014.
Lorber, Catharine and Shahar C. “The Silver Facing Head Coins of Larissa.” 2005. http://www.lightfigures.com/numismat/larissa/index.php. Note: this website no longer functions.
McClean: Grose, S. W. Catalogue of the McClean Collection of Greek Coins, Volume II The Greek Mainland, The Aegaean Islands, Crete. London: Cambridge University Press, 1926.
3 commentsTracy AielloJun 22, 2019
Larissa_Head_BCD_Thessaly_II_323_var.jpg
Facing Head of Larissa52 viewsThessaly Greece, the City of Larissa
Obv: Head of the nymph Larissa facing slightly l., round curl to the l. of he head, wearing ampyx flanked by two hornlike locks, a pendant earring represented by three pellets in a vertical line, and a simple necklace.
Rev: Horse crouching r., l. foreleg raised and bent (almost parallel with belly/ground), preparing to roll, small plant (control mark) below. ΛAPIΣ above horse and AIΩN in the exergue.
Denomination: Silver Drachm; Mint: Larissa; Date: c. 356 - 342 BC1; Weight: 5.869g; Diameter: 18.3mm; Die axis: 0 º; References, for example: BMC Thessaly p. 30, 61; BCD Thessaly I 1156; BCD Thessaly II 323 var. [same obv. die, but no trident (control mark) below the horse pointing to the left].

Notes:
1This is the date range stated in BCD Thessaly I. This coin appears to fall within Lorber’s Phase Late II or Phase Late III. See Lorber Hoard and Lorber 2008.
The city of Larissa was named after the local water nymph, said to be the daughter of Pelasgos. He was said to be the ancestor of the pre-Greek Pelasgians. According to myth Larissa drowned while playing ball on the banks of the Peneios river. (HGC p. 130).

Provenance: from the David Cannon Collection, ex Beast Coins.

Photo credits: Forum Ancient Coins

Sources

BCD Thessaly I: Nomos AG, Auction 4. Coins of Thessaly, the BCD Collection. (10 May 2011, Zurich).
BCD Thessaly II: Classical Numismatic Group, Inc. The BCD Collection of the Coinage of Thessaly. Triton XV Auction. (3 January 2012, New York).
BMC Thessaly: Gardner, Percy. A Catalogue of the Greek Coins in the British Museum, Thessaly to Aetolia. London, 1883.
HGC: Hoover, Oliver D. Handbook of Coins of Northern and Central Greece: Achaia Phthiotis, Ainis, Magnesia, Malis, Oita, Perrhaibia, Thessaly, Akarnania, Aitolia, Lokris, Phokis, Boiotia, Euboia, Attica, Megaris, and Corinthia, Sixth to First Centuries BC, The Handbook of Greek Coinage Series, Vol. 4. Lancaster/London: Classical Numismatic Group, Inc, 2014.
Lorber Hoard: Lorber, Catharine C. “A Hoard of Facing Head Larissa Drachms” in Schweizerische Numismatische Rundschau, vol. 79 (2000): 7 - 15.
Lorber, Catharine C. “Thessalian Hoards and the Coinage of Larissa” in American Journal of Numismatics, second series 20 (2008): 119 - 142.

3 commentsTracy AielloJun 19, 2019
rr_1074_revised_Large.jpg
Sextus Pompey -- Pompey the Great and Neptune with Catanaean Brothers36 viewsSextus Pompey, Imperator and Prefect of the Fleet
[Youngest Son of Gnaeus Pompeius Magnus (Pompey the Great)]

Obv: [MAG⦁PIVS⦁IMP⦁ITER]; portrait of Gnaeus Pompeius Magnus r.; behind jug; before lituus. Border of dots.
Rev: above, [PRAE (AE ligatured) F]; in exergue, CLAS⦁ET⦁[ORAE (AE ligatured)⦁MAR (ligatured) IT⦁EX⦁S⦁C]; Neptune standing l., wearing diadem, aplustre in r. hand, cloak over l. arm, r. foot on prow,; on either side a Catanaean brother bearing one of his parents on his shoulders1. Border of dots.
Denomination: silver denarius; Mint: Sicily, uncertain location2; Date: summer 42 - summer 39 BC3; Weight: 3.68g; Diameter: 17mm; Die axis: 30º; References, for example: Sear CRI 334; BMCRR v. II Sicily 7, 8, 9, and 10; Sydenham 1344; Crawford RRC 511/3a.

Notes:

Obverse legend: MAG[NUS]⦁PIVS⦁IMP[ERATOR]⦁ITER[UM]
Reverse legend: PRAEF[ECTUS]⦁CLAS[SIS]⦁ET⦁ORAE⦁MARIT[IMAE]⦁EX⦁S[ENATUS]⦁C[ONSULTO]

1Grueber BMCRR v. II Sicily appears a bit hesitant in his pronouncement that the representation of the Catanaean brothers in fact refers to Sextus’ title Pius (p. 561), but Sear CRI appears to have no such hesitation when he states “...the type illustrates the theme of ‘Pietas’ in connection with the assumption of the name Pius.” (p.203). DeRose Evans (1987) goes further (pp. 115 - 116), arguing that Sextus chose the Catanaean brothers (“...he consciously identifies himself with the south Italian heroes”) as a way to deliberately contrast his Pietas with that of Octavian’s.
2Grueber BMCRR v. II Sicily tentatively suggests Catana as a possible location and Sear CRI follows suit.
3This is the date range argued for in Estiot 2006 (p. 145). Estiot recommends returning to Crawford’s proposal of 42 - 40 BC. Crawford RRC, p. 521 suggests the period in 42 BC after Sextus Pompey defeated Q. Salvidienus Rufus. Grueber BMCRR v. II Sicily, p.560 proposes 42 - 38 BC and Sydenham, p. 210 follows suit. DeRose Evans (1987), p. 129 offers a time between late summer 36 and September 36 BC.

Provenance: From the collection of W. F. Stoecklin, Amriswil, Switzerland, acquired from Hess AG in Luzern prior to 1975. Ex Dr. Jacob Hirsch 33, 17 November 1913, lot 1058

Photo credits: Shanna Schmidt Numismatics

Sources

BMCRR: Grueber, H. A. Coins of the Roman Republic in the British Museum v. II. London: 1910.
Crawford, Michael H. Roman Republican Coinage v. I. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2019 reprint with the 1982 corrections.
DeRose Evans, Jane. "The Sicilian Coinage of Sextus Pompeius (Crawford 511)" in Museum Notes (American Numismatic Society), vol. 32 (1987): 97 - 157.
Estiot, Sylviane. “Sex. Pompée, La Sicile et La Monnaie: Problèmes de Datation.” In Aere Perennivs, en hommage á Hubert Zehnacker, édité par Jacqueline Champeaux et Martine Chassignet. Paris: L’Université Paris - Sorbonne, 2006.
Sear, David R. The History and Coinage of the Roman Imperators 49 - 27 BC. London: Spink, 1998.
Sydenham, Edward A. The Coinage of the Roman Republic. New York: Arno Press, 1975, rev. ed.
2 commentsTracy AielloJun 14, 2019
reference_rr_1074_Hirsch_Auc_Cat_Large.jpg
Sextus Pompey -- Pompey the Great and Neptune with Catanaean Brothers Hirsch Auction Catalogue20 viewsDr. Jacob Hirsch 33, 17 November 1913, lot 1058

Photo credits: Shanna Schmidt Numismatics
Tracy AielloJun 14, 2019
Larissa_Head_BCD_Thessaly_II_316_.jpg
Facing Head of Larissa37 viewsThessaly Greece, the City of Larissa
Obv: Head of the nymph Larissa facing slightly l., round curl to the l. of the head, wearing ampyx flanked by two hornlike locks, a pendant earring, and a simple necklace.
Rev: Horse crouching r., l. foreleg raised and bent (almost parallel with belly/ground), preparing to roll. ΛAPIΣ above horse and AIΩN in the exergue.
Denomination: Silver Drachm; Mint: Larissa; Date: c. 356 - 342 BC1; Weight: 5.920g; Diameter: 19.2mm; Die axis: 135º; References, for example: Lorber Hoard, pl. 3, 27 (same dies); BCD Thessaly I 11582; BCD Thessaly II 316; HGC 4 4543.

Notes:
1This is the date range stated in BCD Thessaly I. This coin appears to fall within Lorber’s Phase Late II or Phase Late III. See Lorber Hoard and Lorber 2008.
2The coin referenced in this auction catalogue is actually a silver stater, but in discussing the coin the catalogue states that the earliest Larissian staters “...bear the normal types of a drachm….”
3The picture of the coin in this reference does not show the foreleg raised and bent, but the entry does reference BCD Thessaly II, lots 312 - 320, which matches one of the references here.
The city of Larissa was named after the local water nymph, said to be the daughter of Pelasgos. He was said to be the ancestor of the pre-Greek Pelasgians. According to myth Larissa drowned while playing ball on the banks of the Peneios river. (HGC p. 130).

Provenance: from the BCD collection, with his tag noting "Thz. G/ni ex Thess., Apr. 94, SFr. 100.-"

Photo credits: Forum Ancient Coins

Sources

BCD Thessaly I: Nomos AG, Auction 4. Coins of Thessaly, the BCD Collection. (10 May 2011, Zurich).
BCD Thessaly II: Classical Numismatic Group, Inc. The BCD Collection of the Coinage of Thessaly. Triton XV Auction. (3 January 2012, New York).
HGC: Hoover, Oliver D. Handbook of Coins of Northern and Central Greece: Achaia Phthiotis, Ainis, Magnesia, Malis, Oita, Perrhaibia, Thessaly, Akarnania, Aitolia, Lokris, Phokis, Boiotia, Euboia, Attica, Megaris, and Corinthia, Sixth to First Centuries BC, The Handbook of Greek Coinage Series, Vol. 4. Lancaster/London: Classical Numismatic Group, Inc, 2014.
Lorber Hoard: Lorber, Catharine C. “A Hoard of Facing Head Larissa Drachms” in Schweizerische Numismatische Rundschau, vol. 79 (2000): 7 - 15.
Lorber, Catharine C. “Thessalian Hoards and the Coinage of Larissa” in American Journal of Numismatics, second series 20 (2008): 119 - 142.
1 commentsTracy AielloJun 13, 2019
Larissa_Bull_Wrestling_Large.jpg
Bull Wrestling Drachm90 viewsThessaly Greece, the City of Larissa

Obv: The hero Thessalos1 to r. naked, except for chlamys around his shoulders and petasos, flying in the air, attached to his neck by a cord, holding with both hands a band that is around the forehead of a bull leaping r. All within a border of dots (not here visible).
Rev: ΛΑΡΙ above, Σ to the r. (not here visible), ΙΑ below (not here visible), bridled horse with trailing rein prancing r., no ground line. All within incuse square.
Denomination: Silver Drachm; Mint: Larissa; Date: c. 420 - 400 BC2; Weight: 6.06g; Diameter: 18mm: Die axis: 270º; References, for example: HGC 4, 423 (same obv.); Lorber 2008, pl. 43, 59 (same dies); BCD Thessaly II 372.7 (same dies).

Notes:
1Considered the ancestor of all Thessalians. The figure is also sometimes considered to be Jason (of Jason and the Argonauts), who according to one tradition was the father of Thessalos (HGC 4, p. 132).
2This is the date given in HGC 4. According to Lorber 2008 this coin should be placed in the revived bull wrestling drachm coinage, beginning c. 450 - 440 BC.

This type is related to the Thessalian sport of bull wrestling (taurokathapsia) “...regularly showcased at the Taureia games honoring Poseidon Taureios.” (HGC 4, p. 132).

Provenance: from the BCD collection, reportedly found 8 kms west of Pharsalus, May 1997.

Photo credits: Shanna Schmidt Numismatics

Sources

BCD Thessaly II: Classical Numismatic Group, Inc. The BCD Collection of the Coinage of Thessaly. Triton XV Auction. (3 January 2012, New York).
HGC: Hoover, Oliver D. Handbook of Coins of Northern and Central Greece: Achaia Phthiotis, Ainis, Magnesia, Malis, Oita, Perrhaibia, Thessaly, Akarnania, Aitolia, Lokris, Phokis, Boiotia, Euboia, Attica, Megaris, and Corinthia, Sixth to First Centuries BC, The Handbook of Greek Coinage Series, Vol. 4. Lancaster/London: Classical Numismatic Group, Inc, 2014.
Lorber, Catharine C. “Thessalian Hoards and the Coinage of Larissa” in American Journal of Numismatics, second series 20 (2008): 119 - 142.
7 commentsTracy AielloJun 04, 2019
lot+2889_Adolph+E+Cahn_Large.jpg
Sextus Pompey -- Neptune and Naval Trophy Auction Catalogue37 viewsCahn & Hess auction, Frankfurt, July 17, 1933, Ernst Haeberlin collection, lot 2889

Photo credits: Shanna Schmidt Numismatics
1 commentsTracy AielloMay 25, 2019
rr_1073_revised_Large.jpg
Sextus Pompey -- Neptune and Naval Trophy90 viewsSextus Pompey, Imperator and Prefect of the Fleet
[Youngest Son of Gnaeus Pompeius Magnus (Pompey the Great)]
Obv: [MAG or MA (ligatured) G]⦁PIVS⦁IMP⦁ITER; Portrait of Neptune facing r., diademed and bearded, trident over l. shoulder. Border of dots.
Rev: [PRAE (AE ligatured) F⦁CLAS⦁ET⦁ORAE (AE ligatured)]⦁MAR (ligatured) IT⦁EX⦁S⦁C⦁; Naval trophy with trident on top and anchor on bottom, prow stem on l. and aplustre on r., at base two representations of Charybdis and two dog heads of Scylla. Border of dots.
Denomination: silver denarius; Mint: Sicily, uncertain location1; Date: summer 42 - summer 39 BC2; Weight: 3.89g; Diameter: 17mm; Die axis: 30º; References, for example: Sear CRI 333; BMCRR v. II Sicily 15, 16, and 17 variant3; Sydenham 1347 variant3; Crawford RRC 511/2a or 2b4.

Notes:

Obverse legend: MAG[NUS]⦁PIVS⦁IMP[ERATOR]⦁ITER[UM]
Reverse legend: PRAEF[ECTUS]⦁CLAS[SIS]⦁ET⦁ORAE⦁MARIT[IMAE]⦁EX⦁S[ENATUS]⦁C[ONSULTO]

1Sear CRI, Crawford RRC, Sydenham, and DeRose Evans (1987) all place the minting of this coin type in Sicily, but they do not reference a possible location. Grueber BMCRR v. II Sicily suggests Messana.
2This is the date range argued for in Estiot 2006 (p. 145). Estiot recommends returning to Crawford’s proposal of 42 - 40 BC. Crawford RRC, p. 521 suggests the period in 42 BC after Sextus Pompey defeated Q. Salvidienus Rufus. Grueber BMCRR v. II Sicily, p.562 proposes 38 - 36 BC and Sydenham, p. 210 adopts the same datation. DeRose Evans (1987), p. 129 offers a time between late summer 36 and September 36 BC.
3Grueber BMCRR v. II Sicily 15, 16, and 17 and Sydenham 1347 only list a reverse legend containing MAR (ligatured) I but the coin here is MAR (ligatured) IT.
4It is impossible to see the full obverse legend, so it cannot be determined if MA is ligatured or not. The reverse legend is clearly the first variety of 2a or 2b, a variety not found on 2c.

Provenance: from the collection of W. F. Stoecklin, Amriswil, Switzerland; acquired from Hess AG in Luzern, from the Ernst Haeberlin collection, Cahn & Hess, Frankfurt, July 17, 1933, lot 2889.

Photo credits: Shanna Schmidt Numismatics

Sources

Crawford, Michael H. Roman Republican Coinage v. I. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2001 reprint with the 1982 corrections.
DeRose Evans, Jane. "The Sicilian Coinage of Sextus Pompeius (Crawford 511)" in Museum Notes (American Numismatic Society), vol. 32 (1987): 97 - 157.
Estiot, Sylviane. “Sex. Pompée, La Sicile et La Monnaie: Problèmes de Datation.” In Aere Perennivs, en hommage á Hubert Zehnacker édité par Jacqueline Champeaux et Martine Chassignet. Paris: L’Université Paris - Sorbonne, 2006.
Grueber, H. A. Coins of the Roman Republic in the British Museum v. II. London: 1910.
Sear, David R. The History and Coinage of the Roman Imperators 49 - 27 BC. London: Spink, 1998.
Sydenham, Edward A. The Coinage of the Roman Republic. New York: Arno Press, 1975, rev. ed.
7 commentsTracy AielloMay 24, 2019
Severina_Concordiae_Militvm_Large.jpg
Ulpia Severina - A Coin of an Interregnum?8 viewsUlpia Severina, Augusta (274 AD), wife of Aurelian
Obv: SEVERINA AVG; Bust of Severina, diademed, draped, on a lunar crescent, facing right.
Rev: CONCORDIAE MILITVM; Concordia standing left, facing left, flanked by two standards, one in each hand, VI in left field, XXI in exergue.
Denomination: billion antoninianus; Mint: Antioch; Officina: 6th; Issue: 6; Date: early 275 to September 275 AD; Weight: 3.77g; Diameter: 23.3mm; Die axis: 180º; References, for example: RIC V v.1 20; MER - RIC 3198.

Notes:

Is this a coin of an interregnum?
That there was an interregnum, in the literal meaning of the word, between the murder of Aurelian and the Senatorial appointment of Tacitus as emperor is undisputed. What is disputed, however, is the length of the interregnum as well as its meaningfulness, i.e. for whatever period of interregnum that did exist, did Severina or the Senate actually rule the empire and thereby make decisions that engendered consequences and/or directed actions? This coin type (although not the only coin type) has played a part in the interregnum story. In Aurelian and the Third Century (London and New York: Routledge, 1999) Alaric Watson dedicates seven and a half pages (pp. 109 - 116) to discussing the interregnum, where he vociferously argues that there was no meaningful interregnum. As part of this discussion he references, on p. 115, this particular coin type and in footnote 66 he cites a number of sources that assign this type in the name of Severina to the period after Aurelian’s death. For example:
Percy Webb in RIC, vol. V, part 1 (1927), pp. 4, 35, and 253 does not take a stance on the possible length of the interregnum, but on p. 253 he states that if the interregnum lasted eight months, then the mints certainly could not have been closed and so “...it is necessary to find coins representing their output.”1 This coin type, dedicated to Concordia and in the name of Severina alone, might represent that output. In “The Imperial Recovery” (chapter nine of The Cambridge Ancient History, vol. XII, The Imperial Crisis and Recovery AD 193 - 324. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1939) Harold Mattingly acknowledges that although the length of the interregnum is in debate “... the coinage shows clearly that for some considerable period government was carried on in the name of the Empress Severina for the the dead Aurelian.” (p. 310). In all officina for several mints the coinage of Severina, such as the “Concordia Militum” type “...bear witness to the conditions of the interregnum.” (p. 310). In “The Reform of Aurelian” (Revue Numismatique, 6th series, vol. 7, 1965: 225 - 235) R. A. G. Carson mentions on pp. 233 and 234 that Severina’s Concordia Militum type is for Severina alone, and that as such it was minted after the death of Aurelian (p. 233). Carson is not concerned with the question of an interregnum, but his placement of this coin type for Severina alone after Aurelian’s death allows this coin type to be taken as evidence of an interregnum. Eugen Cizek in L’Empereur Aurélien Et Son Temps (Paris: Les Belles Lettres, 1994) also refers to this coin type (not by specific legend, but by reference to “concord with the soldiers”) when discussing the interregnum. He notes that other scholars assign this coinage to the interregnum, a position that he appears to adopt. In Repostiglio della Venèra Nuovo Catalogo Illustrato Aureliano II/I (Rome: L'Erma di Bretschneider, 1995) Sylviane Estiot also assigns this coin type to the period after Aurelian’s death.2

But what of the coin here, this coin actually attributed to the 6th officina, mint of Antioch, 6th issue? Estiot attributes this coin not to an interregnal period between Aurelian and Tacitus, when Severina might have ruled in her own right. Rather, on p. 90 of “Aureliana” (Revue Numismatique, 6th series, vo. 150, 1995: 50 - 94) Estiot attributes this coin, because of exact parallelisms to Aurelian’s coinage at Antioch at this time, to a period of joint coinage between Aurelian and Severina.3

Footnotes:

1He actually allows for the possibility of coinage even if the interregnum was short. See footnote 1, p. 253.
2I assume this to be the case. Although I have no reason to doubt Watson’s citation I was unable to verify it because I am unable to obtain a copy of this book by Estiot.
3Also see Estiot, Monnaies de L’Empire romain XII.1: D’Aurelian à Florien (270 - 276 apres J.-C.). Paris: Bibliothèque nationale de France, 2004, pp. 28 (table 1) and 122.

Photo credits: Forum Ancient Coins
Tracy AielloApr 20, 2019
A_and_V_Antioch_8th_Wksp.jpeg
Vabalathus and Aurelian Antioch 8th Officina20 viewsVabalathus: 270 - 272 AD; Aurelian: 270 - 275 AD
Julius Aurelius Septimius Vabalathus Athenodorus (Wahb Allat), son of Septimius Odaenathus and Septimia Zenobia. Palmyrene Empire.
Obv: VABALATHVS V C R IM D R1; Bust of Vabalathus, draped and curiassed, facing right.
Rev: IMP C AVRELIANVS AVG; Bust of Aurelian, radiate and curiassed, facing right, from the rear, H in exergue.
Denomination: billion antoninianus; Mint: Antioch; Officina: 8th; Issue: 1st; Date: Nov. 270 - Mar. 272; Weight: 3.96g; Diameter: 21mm; Die axis: 180º; References, for example: RIC V v.1 381 correc; MER - RIC 3113; SRCV III 11718

Notes:

1VABALATHVS V[IR] C[LARISSIMUS] R[EX] IM[PERATOR] D[UX] R[OMANORUM]. See for example, Bland (2011), pp. 135, 141 and Estiot, p. 118, esp. note 462. Although Potter, page 267 and footnote 24 postulates V[IR] C[ONSULARIS] for the mint at Antioch I would certainly side with Bland and Estiot.

Which side of this coin is the obverse and which side is the reverse?
Webb in RIC V, v.1 puts great weight on the titulature of Aurelian and mentions that mint marks on the obverse of coins were not unknown at Antioch. He considers the coin to have been struck as a sign of vassalage instead of having been struck as an insult. Webb states that Aurelian’s bust is on the obverse of the coin (p. 260). Robertson, pp. cxix and 142 also considers Aurelian’s bust to be on the obverse of the coin, but does not state an explicit reason for her position. Mattingly (1936) holds that the mint mark is the determining factor, and therefore believes that Aurelian’s bust is on the reverse of the coin. In SRCV III, p. 442 Sear follows the reasoning of Mattingly and although Vagi agrees that Aurelian’s bust is on the reverse of the coin (p. 403) he does not explicitly state his reason for believing so. Estiot states that the officina mark under the bust of Aurelian clearly indicates that his portrait is on the reverse of the coin (p. 118). Bland (2011) follows suit. When discussing this issue from Antioch he states that the officina mark is always placed on the reverse of coins. He notes that the placement of the officina mark sent a signal that Aurelian was “...being accorded a lower status than Vabalathus, although he was given his correct titles of Imperator and Augustus, and he wore a radiate crown, also traditionally associated with the senior Augustus” (p. 142 - 3). Watson argues that Queen Zenobia’s assertion of Palmyrene independence from Rome took place gradually (pp. 67 - 9). Bland believes that the placement of the officina mark under the bust of Aurelian on this coin was just another step in that assertion of independence.

Photo credits: Aegean Numismatics

Sources

Bland 2011: Bland, Roger. “The Coinage of Vabalathus and Zenobia from Antioch and Alexandria" in Numismatic Chronicle, 171 (2011): 133 - 186.
Estiot, Sylviane. Monnaies de L’Empire romain XII.1: D’Aurelian à Florien (270 - 276 apres J.-C.). Paris: Bibliothèque nationale de France, 2004.
Mattingly 1936: Mattingly, Harold. “The Palmyrene Princes and the Mints of Antioch and Alexandria.” The Numismatic Chronicle and Journal of the Royal Numismatic Society, fifth Series, vol. 16, no. 62 (1936): pp. 89 - 114.
MER - RIC: Maison de l’Orient et la Méditerranée: Monnaies de l’Empire Romain / Roman Imperial Coinage AD 268-276. Accessed March 7, 2019. http://www.ric.mom.fr/en/home.
Potter, David S. The Roman Empire at Bay: AD 180 - 395. New York: Routledge, 2004
RIC V v.1: Webb, Percy. The Roman Imperial Coinage, Vol. V, Part 1: Valerian to Florian, edited by Harold Mattingly and Edward Sydenham. London: Spink & Son, 1927.
Robertson, Anne. Roman Imperial Coins in the Hunter Coin Cabinet, Vol. IV Valerian I to Allectus. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1978.
SRCV III: Sear, David. Roman Coins and Their Values, Vol. III: Maximinus I to Carinus. London: Spink, 2005.
Vagi, David. Coinage and History of the Roman Empire, Volume One: History. Sidney, Ohio: Coin World, 1999.
Watson, Alaric. Aurelian and the Third Century. New York: Routledge, 1999.
Tracy AielloMar 07, 2019
A_and_V_Antioch_7th_Wksp_Large.jpg
Vabalathus and Aurelian Antioch 7th Officina17 viewsVabalathus: 270 - 272 AD; Aurelian: 270 - 275 AD
Julius Aurelius Septimius Vabalathus Athenodorus (Wahb Allat), son of Septimius Odaenathus and Septimia Zenobia. Palmyrene Empire.
Obv: VABALATHVS V C R IM D R1; Bust of Vabalathus, laureate, diademed, draped and curiassed, facing right, seen from behind.
Rev: IMP C AVRELIANVS AVG; Bust of Aurelian, radiate and curiassed, facing right, from the front, Z in exergue.
Denomination: billion antoninianus; Mint: Antioch; Officina: 7th; Issue: 1st; Date: Nov. 270 - Mar. 272; Weight: 4.137g; Diameter: 20.3mm; Die axis: 0º; References, for example: RIC V v.1 381 correc; MER - RIC 3110; SRCV III 11718

Notes:

1VABALATHVS V[IR] C[LARISSIMUS] R[EX] IM[PERATOR] D[UX] R[OMANORUM]. See for example, Bland (2011), pp. 135, 141 and Estiot, p. 118, esp. note 462. Although Potter, page 267 and footnote 24 postulates V[IR] C[ONSULARIS] for the mint at Antioch I would certainly side with Bland and Estiot.

Which side of this coin is the obverse and which side is the reverse?
Webb in RIC V, v.1 puts great weight on the titulature of Aurelian and mentions that mint marks on the obverse of coins were not unknown at Antioch. He considers the coin to have been struck as a sign of vassalage instead of having been struck as an insult. Webb states that Aurelian’s bust is on the obverse of the coin (p. 260). Robertson, pp. cxix and 142 also considers Aurelian’s bust to be on the obverse of the coin, but does not state an explicit reason for her position. Mattingly (1936) holds that the mint mark is the determining factor, and therefore believes that Aurelian’s bust is on the reverse of the coin. In SRCV III, p. 442 Sear follows the reasoning of Mattingly and although Vagi agrees that Aurelian’s bust is on the reverse of the coin (p. 403) he does not explicitly state his reason for believing so. Estiot states that the officina mark under the bust of Aurelian clearly indicates that his portrait is on the reverse of the coin (p. 118). Bland (2011) follows suit. When discussing this issue from Antioch he states that the officina mark is always placed on the reverse of coins. He notes that the placement of the officina mark sent a signal that Aurelian was “...being accorded a lower status than Vabalathus, although he was given his correct titles of Imperator and Augustus, and he wore a radiate crown, also traditionally associated with the senior Augustus” (p. 142 - 3). Watson argues that Queen Zenobia’s assertion of Palmyrene independence from Rome took place gradually (pp. 67 - 9). Bland believes that the placement of the officina mark under the bust of Aurelian on this coin was just another step in that assertion of independence.

Photo credits: Forum Ancient Coins

Sources

Bland 2011: Bland, Roger. “The Coinage of Vabalathus and Zenobia from Antioch and Alexandria" in Numismatic Chronicle, 171 (2011): 133 - 186.
Estiot, Sylviane. Monnaies de L’Empire romain XII.1: D’Aurelian à Florien (270 - 276 apres J.-C.). Paris: Bibliothèque nationale de France, 2004.
Mattingly 1936: Mattingly, Harold. “The Palmyrene Princes and the Mints of Antioch and Alexandria.” The Numismatic Chronicle and Journal of the Royal Numismatic Society, fifth Series, vol. 16, no. 62 (1936): pp. 89 - 114.
MER - RIC: Maison de l’Orient et la Méditerranée: Monnaies de l’Empire Romain / Roman Imperial Coinage AD 268-276. Accessed March 7, 2019. http://www.ric.mom.fr/en/home.
Potter, David S. The Roman Empire at Bay: AD 180 - 395. New York: Routledge, 2004
RIC V v.1: Webb, Percy. The Roman Imperial Coinage, Vol. V, Part 1: Valerian to Florian, edited by Harold Mattingly and Edward Sydenham. London: Spink & Son, 1927.
Robertson, Anne. Roman Imperial Coins in the Hunter Coin Cabinet, Vol. IV Valerian I to Allectus. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1978.
SRCV III: Sear, David. Roman Coins and Their Values, Vol. III: Maximinus I to Carinus. London: Spink, 2005.
Vagi, David. Coinage and History of the Roman Empire, Volume One: History. Sidney, Ohio: Coin World, 1999.
Watson, Alaric. Aurelian and the Third Century. New York: Routledge, 1999.
Tracy AielloMar 07, 2019
A_and_V_Antioch_6th_Wksp_Large.jpg
Vabalathus and Aurelian Antioch 6th Officina16 viewsVabalathus: 270 - 272 AD; Aurelian: 270 - 275 AD
Julius Aurelius Septimius Vabalathus Athenodorus (Wahb Allat), son of Septimius Odaenathus and Septimia Zenobia. Palmyrene Empire.
Obv: VABALATHVS V C R IM D R1; Bust of Vabalathus, laureate, diademed, draped and curiassed, facing right, seen from behind.
Rev: IMP C AVRELIANVS AVG; Bust of Aurelian, radiate and curiassed, facing right, from the front, S in exergue.
Denomination: billion antoninianus; Mint: Antioch; Officina: 6th; Issue: 1st; Date: Nov. 270 - Mar. 272; Weight: 2.812g; Diameter: 21.3mm; Die axis: 150º; References, for example: RIC V v.1 381 correc; MER - RIC 3108; SRCV III 11718

Notes:

1VABALATHVS V[IR] C[LARISSIMUS] R[EX] IM[PERATOR] D[UX] R[OMANORUM]. See for example, Bland (2011), pp. 135, 141 and Estiot, p. 118, esp. note 462. Although Potter, page 267 and footnote 24 postulates V[IR] C[ONSULARIS] for the mint at Antioch I would certainly side with Bland and Estiot.

Which side of this coin is the obverse and which side is the reverse?
Webb in RIC V, v.1 puts great weight on the titulature of Aurelian and mentions that mint marks on the obverse of coins were not unknown at Antioch. He considers the coin to have been struck as a sign of vassalage instead of having been struck as an insult. Webb states that Aurelian’s bust is on the obverse of the coin (p. 260). Robertson, pp. cxix and 142 also considers Aurelian’s bust to be on the obverse of the coin, but does not state an explicit reason for her position. Mattingly (1936) holds that the mint mark is the determining factor, and therefore believes that Aurelian’s bust is on the reverse of the coin. In SRCV III, p. 442 Sear follows the reasoning of Mattingly and although Vagi agrees that Aurelian’s bust is on the reverse of the coin (p. 403) he does not explicitly state his reason for believing so. Estiot states that the officina mark under the bust of Aurelian clearly indicates that his portrait is on the reverse of the coin (p. 118). Bland (2011) follows suit. When discussing this issue from Antioch he states that the officina mark is always placed on the reverse of coins. He notes that the placement of the officina mark sent a signal that Aurelian was “...being accorded a lower status than Vabalathus, although he was given his correct titles of Imperator and Augustus, and he wore a radiate crown, also traditionally associated with the senior Augustus” (p. 142 - 3). Watson argues that Queen Zenobia’s assertion of Palmyrene independence from Rome took place gradually (pp. 67 - 9). Bland believes that the placement of the officina mark under the bust of Aurelian on this coin was just another step in that assertion of independence.

Photo credits: Forum Ancient Coins

Sources

Bland 2011: Bland, Roger. “The Coinage of Vabalathus and Zenobia from Antioch and Alexandria" in Numismatic Chronicle, 171 (2011): 133 - 186.
Estiot, Sylviane. Monnaies de L’Empire romain XII.1: D’Aurelian à Florien (270 - 276 apres J.-C.). Paris: Bibliothèque nationale de France, 2004.
Mattingly 1936: Mattingly, Harold. “The Palmyrene Princes and the Mints of Antioch and Alexandria.” The Numismatic Chronicle and Journal of the Royal Numismatic Society, fifth Series, vol. 16, no. 62 (1936): pp. 89 - 114.
MER - RIC: Maison de l’Orient et la Méditerranée: Monnaies de l’Empire Romain / Roman Imperial Coinage AD 268-276. Accessed March 7, 2019. http://www.ric.mom.fr/en/home.
Potter, David S. The Roman Empire at Bay: AD 180 - 395. New York: Routledge, 2004
RIC V v.1: Webb, Percy. The Roman Imperial Coinage, Vol. V, Part 1: Valerian to Florian, edited by Harold Mattingly and Edward Sydenham. London: Spink & Son, 1927.
Robertson, Anne. Roman Imperial Coins in the Hunter Coin Cabinet, Vol. IV Valerian I to Allectus. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1978.
SRCV III: Sear, David. Roman Coins and Their Values, Vol. III: Maximinus I to Carinus. London: Spink, 2005.
Vagi, David. Coinage and History of the Roman Empire, Volume One: History. Sidney, Ohio: Coin World, 1999.
Watson, Alaric. Aurelian and the Third Century. New York: Routledge, 1999.
Tracy AielloMar 07, 2019
A_and_V_Antioch_5th_WKshp_Large.jpg
Vabalathus and Aurelian Antioch 5th Officina12 viewsVabalathus: 270 - 272 AD; Aurelian: 270 - 275 AD
Julius Aurelius Septimius Vabalathus Athenodorus (Wahb Allat), son of Septimius Odaenathus and Septimia Zenobia. Palmyrene Empire.
Obv: VABALATHVS V C R IM D R1; Bust of Vabalathus, laureate, diademed, draped and curiassed, facing right, seen from behind.
Rev: IMP C AVRELIANVS AVG; Bust of Aurelian, radiate and curiassed, facing right, from the front, ϵ in exergue.
Denomination: billion antoninianus; Mint: Antioch; Officina: 5th; Issue: 1st; Date: Nov. 270 - Mar. 272; Weight: 3.262; Diameter: 20.3mm; Die axis: 315º; References, for example: RIC V v.1 381 correc; MER - RIC 3107; SRCV III 11718

Notes:

1VABALATHVS V[IR] C[LARISSIMUS] R[EX] IM[PERATOR] D[UX] R[OMANORUM]. See for example, Bland (2011), pp. 135, 141 and Estiot, p. 118, esp. note 462. Although Potter, page 267 and footnote 24 postulates V[IR] C[ONSULARIS] for the mint at Antioch I would certainly side with Bland and Estiot.

Which side of this coin is the obverse and which side is the reverse?
Webb in RIC V, v.1 puts great weight on the titulature of Aurelian and mentions that mint marks on the obverse of coins were not unknown at Antioch. He considers the coin to have been struck as a sign of vassalage instead of having been struck as an insult. Webb states that Aurelian’s bust is on the obverse of the coin (p. 260). Robertson, pp. cxix and 142 also considers Aurelian’s bust to be on the obverse of the coin, but does not state an explicit reason for her position. Mattingly (1936) holds that the mint mark is the determining factor, and therefore believes that Aurelian’s bust is on the reverse of the coin. In SRCV III, p. 442 Sear follows the reasoning of Mattingly and although Vagi agrees that Aurelian’s bust is on the reverse of the coin (p. 403) he does not explicitly state his reason for believing so. Estiot states that the officina mark under the bust of Aurelian clearly indicates that his portrait is on the reverse of the coin (p. 118). Bland (2011) follows suit. When discussing this issue from Antioch he states that the officina mark is always placed on the reverse of coins. He notes that the placement of the officina mark sent a signal that Aurelian was “...being accorded a lower status than Vabalathus, although he was given his correct titles of Imperator and Augustus, and he wore a radiate crown, also traditionally associated with the senior Augustus” (p. 142 - 3). Watson argues that Queen Zenobia’s assertion of Palmyrene independence from Rome took place gradually (pp. 67 - 9). Bland believes that the placement of the officina mark under the bust of Aurelian on this coin was just another step in that assertion of independence.

Photo credits: Forum Ancient Coins

Sources

Bland 2011: Bland, Roger. “The Coinage of Vabalathus and Zenobia from Antioch and Alexandria" in Numismatic Chronicle, 171 (2011): 133 - 186.
Estiot, Sylviane. Monnaies de L’Empire romain XII.1: D’Aurelian à Florien (270 - 276 apres J.-C.). Paris: Bibliothèque nationale de France, 2004.
Mattingly 1936: Mattingly, Harold. “The Palmyrene Princes and the Mints of Antioch and Alexandria.” The Numismatic Chronicle and Journal of the Royal Numismatic Society, fifth Series, vol. 16, no. 62 (1936): pp. 89 - 114.
MER - RIC: Maison de l’Orient et la Méditerranée: Monnaies de l’Empire Romain / Roman Imperial Coinage AD 268-276. Accessed March 7, 2019. http://www.ric.mom.fr/en/home.
Potter, David S. The Roman Empire at Bay: AD 180 - 395. New York: Routledge, 2004
RIC V v.1: Webb, Percy. The Roman Imperial Coinage, Vol. V, Part 1: Valerian to Florian, edited by Harold Mattingly and Edward Sydenham. London: Spink & Son, 1927.
Robertson, Anne. Roman Imperial Coins in the Hunter Coin Cabinet, Vol. IV Valerian I to Allectus. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1978.
SRCV III: Sear, David. Roman Coins and Their Values, Vol. III: Maximinus I to Carinus. London: Spink, 2005.
Vagi, David. Coinage and History of the Roman Empire, Volume One: History. Sidney, Ohio: Coin World, 1999.
Watson, Alaric. Aurelian and the Third Century. New York: Routledge, 1999.
Tracy AielloMar 07, 2019
A_and__V_Antioch_4th_Wkshp_Large.jpg
Vabalathus and Aurelian Antioch 4th Officina10 viewsVabalathus: 270 - 272 AD; Aurelian: 270 - 275 AD
Julius Aurelius Septimius Vabalathus Athenodorus (Wahb Allat), son of Septimius Odaenathus and Septimia Zenobia. Palmyrene Empire.
Obv: VABALATHVS V C R IM D R1; Bust of Vabalathus, laureate, diademed, draped and curiassed, facing right, seen from behind.
Rev: IMP C AVRELIANVS AVG; Bust of Aurelian, radiate and curiassed, facing right, from the front, Δ in exergue.
Denomination: billion antoninianus; Mint: Antioch; Officina: 4th; Issue: 1st; Date: Nov. 270 - Mar. 272; Weight: 3.563g; Diameter: 21.8mm; Die axis: 180º; References, for example: RIC V v.1 381 correc; MER - RIC 3106; SRCV III 11718

Notes:

1VABALATHVS V[IR] C[LARISSIMUS] R[EX] IM[PERATOR] D[UX] R[OMANORUM]. See for example, Bland (2011), pp. 135, 141 and Estiot, p. 118, esp. note 462. Although Potter, page 267 and footnote 24 postulates V[IR] C[ONSULARIS] for the mint at Antioch I would certainly side with Bland and Estiot.

Which side of this coin is the obverse and which side is the reverse?
Webb in RIC V, v.1 puts great weight on the titulature of Aurelian and mentions that mint marks on the obverse of coins were not unknown at Antioch. He considers the coin to have been struck as a sign of vassalage instead of having been struck as an insult. Webb states that Aurelian’s bust is on the obverse of the coin (p. 260). Robertson, pp. cxix and 142 also considers Aurelian’s bust to be on the obverse of the coin, but does not state an explicit reason for her position. Mattingly (1936) holds that the mint mark is the determining factor, and therefore believes that Aurelian’s bust is on the reverse of the coin. In SRCV III, p. 442 Sear follows the reasoning of Mattingly and although Vagi agrees that Aurelian’s bust is on the reverse of the coin (p. 403) he does not explicitly state his reason for believing so. Estiot states that the officina mark under the bust of Aurelian clearly indicates that his portrait is on the reverse of the coin (p. 118). Bland (2011) follows suit. When discussing this issue from Antioch he states that the officina mark is always placed on the reverse of coins. He notes that the placement of the officina mark sent a signal that Aurelian was “...being accorded a lower status than Vabalathus, although he was given his correct titles of Imperator and Augustus, and he wore a radiate crown, also traditionally associated with the senior Augustus” (p. 142 - 3). Watson argues that Queen Zenobia’s assertion of Palmyrene independence from Rome took place gradually (pp. 67 - 9). Bland believes that the placement of the officina mark under the bust of Aurelian on this coin was just another step in that assertion of independence.

Photo credits: Forum Ancient Coins

Sources

Bland 2011: Bland, Roger. “The Coinage of Vabalathus and Zenobia from Antioch and Alexandria" in Numismatic Chronicle, 171 (2011): 133 - 186.
Estiot, Sylviane. Monnaies de L’Empire romain XII.1: D’Aurelian à Florien (270 - 276 apres J.-C.). Paris: Bibliothèque nationale de France, 2004.
Mattingly 1936: Mattingly, Harold. “The Palmyrene Princes and the Mints of Antioch and Alexandria.” The Numismatic Chronicle and Journal of the Royal Numismatic Society, fifth Series, vol. 16, no. 62 (1936): pp. 89 - 114.
MER - RIC: Maison de l’Orient et la Méditerranée: Monnaies de l’Empire Romain / Roman Imperial Coinage AD 268-276. Accessed March 7, 2019. http://www.ric.mom.fr/en/home.
Potter, David S. The Roman Empire at Bay: AD 180 - 395. New York: Routledge, 2004
RIC V v.1: Webb, Percy. The Roman Imperial Coinage, Vol. V, Part 1: Valerian to Florian, edited by Harold Mattingly and Edward Sydenham. London: Spink & Son, 1927.
Robertson, Anne. Roman Imperial Coins in the Hunter Coin Cabinet, Vol. IV Valerian I to Allectus. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1978.
SRCV III: Sear, David. Roman Coins and Their Values, Vol. III: Maximinus I to Carinus. London: Spink, 2005.
Vagi, David. Coinage and History of the Roman Empire, Volume One: History. Sidney, Ohio: Coin World, 1999.
Watson, Alaric. Aurelian and the Third Century. New York: Routledge, 1999.
Tracy AielloMar 07, 2019
A_and_V_Antioch_3rd_Wkshp_Large.jpg
Vabalathus and Aurelian Antioch 3rd Officina15 viewsVabalathus: 270 - 272 AD; Aurelian: 270 - 275 AD
Julius Aurelius Septimius Vabalathus Athenodorus (Wahb Allat), son of Septimius Odaenathus and Septimia Zenobia. Palmyrene Empire.
Obv: VABALATHVS V C R IM D R1; Bust of Vabalathus, laureate, diademed, draped and curiassed, facing right, seen from behind.
Rev: IMP C AVRELIANVS AVG; Bust of Aurelian, radiate and curiassed, facing right, from the front, Γ in exergue.
Denomination: billion antoninianus; Mint: Antioch; Officina: 3rd; Issue: 1st; Date: Nov. 270 - Mar. 272; Weight: 3.146g; Diameter: 21.2mm; Die axis: 180º; References, for example: RIC V v.1 381 correc; MER - RIC 3105; SRCV III 11718

Notes:

1VABALATHVS V[IR] C[LARISSIMUS] R[EX] IM[PERATOR] D[UX] R[OMANORUM]. See for example, Bland (2011), pp. 135, 141 and Estiot, p. 118, esp. note 462. Although Potter, page 267 and footnote 24 postulates V[IR] C[ONSULARIS] for the mint at Antioch I would certainly side with Bland and Estiot.

Which side of this coin is the obverse and which side is the reverse?
Webb in RIC V, v.1 puts great weight on the titulature of Aurelian and mentions that mint marks on the obverse of coins were not unknown at Antioch. He considers the coin to have been struck as a sign of vassalage instead of having been struck as an insult. Webb states that Aurelian’s bust is on the obverse of the coin (p. 260). Robertson, pp. cxix and 142 also considers Aurelian’s bust to be on the obverse of the coin, but does not state an explicit reason for her position. Mattingly (1936) holds that the mint mark is the determining factor, and therefore believes that Aurelian’s bust is on the reverse of the coin. In SRCV III, p. 442 Sear follows the reasoning of Mattingly and although Vagi agrees that Aurelian’s bust is on the reverse of the coin (p. 403) he does not explicitly state his reason for believing so. Estiot states that the officina mark under the bust of Aurelian clearly indicates that his portrait is on the reverse of the coin (p. 118). Bland (2011) follows suit. When discussing this issue from Antioch he states that the officina mark is always placed on the reverse of coins. He notes that the placement of the officina mark sent a signal that Aurelian was “...being accorded a lower status than Vabalathus, although he was given his correct titles of Imperator and Augustus, and he wore a radiate crown, also traditionally associated with the senior Augustus” (p. 142 - 3). Watson argues that Queen Zenobia’s assertion of Palmyrene independence from Rome took place gradually (pp. 67 - 9). Bland believes that the placement of the officina mark under the bust of Aurelian on this coin was just another step in that assertion of independence.

Photo credits: Forum Ancient Coins

Sources

Bland 2011: Bland, Roger. “The Coinage of Vabalathus and Zenobia from Antioch and Alexandria" in Numismatic Chronicle, 171 (2011): 133 - 186.
Estiot, Sylviane. Monnaies de L’Empire romain XII.1: D’Aurelian à Florien (270 - 276 apres J.-C.). Paris: Bibliothèque nationale de France, 2004.
Mattingly 1936: Mattingly, Harold. “The Palmyrene Princes and the Mints of Antioch and Alexandria.” The Numismatic Chronicle and Journal of the Royal Numismatic Society, fifth Series, vol. 16, no. 62 (1936): pp. 89 - 114.
MER - RIC: Maison de l’Orient et la Méditerranée: Monnaies de l’Empire Romain / Roman Imperial Coinage AD 268-276. Accessed March 7, 2019. http://www.ric.mom.fr/en/home.
Potter, David S. The Roman Empire at Bay: AD 180 - 395. New York: Routledge, 2004
RIC V v.1: Webb, Percy. The Roman Imperial Coinage, Vol. V, Part 1: Valerian to Florian, edited by Harold Mattingly and Edward Sydenham. London: Spink & Son, 1927.
Robertson, Anne. Roman Imperial Coins in the Hunter Coin Cabinet, Vol. IV Valerian I to Allectus. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1978.
SRCV III: Sear, David. Roman Coins and Their Values, Vol. III: Maximinus I to Carinus. London: Spink, 2005.
Vagi, David. Coinage and History of the Roman Empire, Volume One: History. Sidney, Ohio: Coin World, 1999.
Watson, Alaric. Aurelian and the Third Century. New York: Routledge, 1999.
Tracy AielloMar 07, 2019

Random files - Tracy Aiello's Gallery
rr_1074_revised_Large.jpg
Sextus Pompey -- Pompey the Great and Neptune with Catanaean Brothers36 viewsSextus Pompey, Imperator and Prefect of the Fleet
[Youngest Son of Gnaeus Pompeius Magnus (Pompey the Great)]

Obv: [MAG⦁PIVS⦁IMP⦁ITER]; portrait of Gnaeus Pompeius Magnus r.; behind jug; before lituus. Border of dots.
Rev: above, [PRAE (AE ligatured) F]; in exergue, CLAS⦁ET⦁[ORAE (AE ligatured)⦁MAR (ligatured) IT⦁EX⦁S⦁C]; Neptune standing l., wearing diadem, aplustre in r. hand, cloak over l. arm, r. foot on prow,; on either side a Catanaean brother bearing one of his parents on his shoulders1. Border of dots.
Denomination: silver denarius; Mint: Sicily, uncertain location2; Date: summer 42 - summer 39 BC3; Weight: 3.68g; Diameter: 17mm; Die axis: 30º; References, for example: Sear CRI 334; BMCRR v. II Sicily 7, 8, 9, and 10; Sydenham 1344; Crawford RRC 511/3a.

Notes:

Obverse legend: MAG[NUS]⦁PIVS⦁IMP[ERATOR]⦁ITER[UM]
Reverse legend: PRAEF[ECTUS]⦁CLAS[SIS]⦁ET⦁ORAE⦁MARIT[IMAE]⦁EX⦁S[ENATUS]⦁C[ONSULTO]

1Grueber BMCRR v. II Sicily appears a bit hesitant in his pronouncement that the representation of the Catanaean brothers in fact refers to Sextus’ title Pius (p. 561), but Sear CRI appears to have no such hesitation when he states “...the type illustrates the theme of ‘Pietas’ in connection with the assumption of the name Pius.” (p.203). DeRose Evans (1987) goes further (pp. 115 - 116), arguing that Sextus chose the Catanaean brothers (“...he consciously identifies himself with the south Italian heroes”) as a way to deliberately contrast his Pietas with that of Octavian’s.
2Grueber BMCRR v. II Sicily tentatively suggests Catana as a possible location and Sear CRI follows suit.
3This is the date range argued for in Estiot 2006 (p. 145). Estiot recommends returning to Crawford’s proposal of 42 - 40 BC. Crawford RRC, p. 521 suggests the period in 42 BC after Sextus Pompey defeated Q. Salvidienus Rufus. Grueber BMCRR v. II Sicily, p.560 proposes 42 - 38 BC and Sydenham, p. 210 follows suit. DeRose Evans (1987), p. 129 offers a time between late summer 36 and September 36 BC.

Provenance: From the collection of W. F. Stoecklin, Amriswil, Switzerland, acquired from Hess AG in Luzern prior to 1975. Ex Dr. Jacob Hirsch 33, 17 November 1913, lot 1058

Photo credits: Shanna Schmidt Numismatics

Sources

BMCRR: Grueber, H. A. Coins of the Roman Republic in the British Museum v. II. London: 1910.
Crawford, Michael H. Roman Republican Coinage v. I. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2019 reprint with the 1982 corrections.
DeRose Evans, Jane. "The Sicilian Coinage of Sextus Pompeius (Crawford 511)" in Museum Notes (American Numismatic Society), vol. 32 (1987): 97 - 157.
Estiot, Sylviane. “Sex. Pompée, La Sicile et La Monnaie: Problèmes de Datation.” In Aere Perennivs, en hommage á Hubert Zehnacker, édité par Jacqueline Champeaux et Martine Chassignet. Paris: L’Université Paris - Sorbonne, 2006.
Sear, David R. The History and Coinage of the Roman Imperators 49 - 27 BC. London: Spink, 1998.
Sydenham, Edward A. The Coinage of the Roman Republic. New York: Arno Press, 1975, rev. ed.
2 commentsTracy Aiello
Larissa_Bull_Wrestling_Large.jpg
Bull Wrestling Drachm90 viewsThessaly Greece, the City of Larissa

Obv: The hero Thessalos1 to r. naked, except for chlamys around his shoulders and petasos, flying in the air, attached to his neck by a cord, holding with both hands a band that is around the forehead of a bull leaping r. All within a border of dots (not here visible).
Rev: ΛΑΡΙ above, Σ to the r. (not here visible), ΙΑ below (not here visible), bridled horse with trailing rein prancing r., no ground line. All within incuse square.
Denomination: Silver Drachm; Mint: Larissa; Date: c. 420 - 400 BC2; Weight: 6.06g; Diameter: 18mm: Die axis: 270º; References, for example: HGC 4, 423 (same obv.); Lorber 2008, pl. 43, 59 (same dies); BCD Thessaly II 372.7 (same dies).

Notes:
1Considered the ancestor of all Thessalians. The figure is also sometimes considered to be Jason (of Jason and the Argonauts), who according to one tradition was the father of Thessalos (HGC 4, p. 132).
2This is the date given in HGC 4. According to Lorber 2008 this coin should be placed in the revived bull wrestling drachm coinage, beginning c. 450 - 440 BC.

This type is related to the Thessalian sport of bull wrestling (taurokathapsia) “...regularly showcased at the Taureia games honoring Poseidon Taureios.” (HGC 4, p. 132).

Provenance: from the BCD collection, reportedly found 8 kms west of Pharsalus, May 1997.

Photo credits: Shanna Schmidt Numismatics

Sources

BCD Thessaly II: Classical Numismatic Group, Inc. The BCD Collection of the Coinage of Thessaly. Triton XV Auction. (3 January 2012, New York).
HGC: Hoover, Oliver D. Handbook of Coins of Northern and Central Greece: Achaia Phthiotis, Ainis, Magnesia, Malis, Oita, Perrhaibia, Thessaly, Akarnania, Aitolia, Lokris, Phokis, Boiotia, Euboia, Attica, Megaris, and Corinthia, Sixth to First Centuries BC, The Handbook of Greek Coinage Series, Vol. 4. Lancaster/London: Classical Numismatic Group, Inc, 2014.
Lorber, Catharine C. “Thessalian Hoards and the Coinage of Larissa” in American Journal of Numismatics, second series 20 (2008): 119 - 142.
7 commentsTracy Aiello
Severina_Concordiae_Militvm_Large.jpg
Ulpia Severina - A Coin of an Interregnum?8 viewsUlpia Severina, Augusta (274 AD), wife of Aurelian
Obv: SEVERINA AVG; Bust of Severina, diademed, draped, on a lunar crescent, facing right.
Rev: CONCORDIAE MILITVM; Concordia standing left, facing left, flanked by two standards, one in each hand, VI in left field, XXI in exergue.
Denomination: billion antoninianus; Mint: Antioch; Officina: 6th; Issue: 6; Date: early 275 to September 275 AD; Weight: 3.77g; Diameter: 23.3mm; Die axis: 180º; References, for example: RIC V v.1 20; MER - RIC 3198.

Notes:

Is this a coin of an interregnum?
That there was an interregnum, in the literal meaning of the word, between the murder of Aurelian and the Senatorial appointment of Tacitus as emperor is undisputed. What is disputed, however, is the length of the interregnum as well as its meaningfulness, i.e. for whatever period of interregnum that did exist, did Severina or the Senate actually rule the empire and thereby make decisions that engendered consequences and/or directed actions? This coin type (although not the only coin type) has played a part in the interregnum story. In Aurelian and the Third Century (London and New York: Routledge, 1999) Alaric Watson dedicates seven and a half pages (pp. 109 - 116) to discussing the interregnum, where he vociferously argues that there was no meaningful interregnum. As part of this discussion he references, on p. 115, this particular coin type and in footnote 66 he cites a number of sources that assign this type in the name of Severina to the period after Aurelian’s death. For example:
Percy Webb in RIC, vol. V, part 1 (1927), pp. 4, 35, and 253 does not take a stance on the possible length of the interregnum, but on p. 253 he states that if the interregnum lasted eight months, then the mints certainly could not have been closed and so “...it is necessary to find coins representing their output.”1 This coin type, dedicated to Concordia and in the name of Severina alone, might represent that output. In “The Imperial Recovery” (chapter nine of The Cambridge Ancient History, vol. XII, The Imperial Crisis and Recovery AD 193 - 324. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1939) Harold Mattingly acknowledges that although the length of the interregnum is in debate “... the coinage shows clearly that for some considerable period government was carried on in the name of the Empress Severina for the the dead Aurelian.” (p. 310). In all officina for several mints the coinage of Severina, such as the “Concordia Militum” type “...bear witness to the conditions of the interregnum.” (p. 310). In “The Reform of Aurelian” (Revue Numismatique, 6th series, vol. 7, 1965: 225 - 235) R. A. G. Carson mentions on pp. 233 and 234 that Severina’s Concordia Militum type is for Severina alone, and that as such it was minted after the death of Aurelian (p. 233). Carson is not concerned with the question of an interregnum, but his placement of this coin type for Severina alone after Aurelian’s death allows this coin type to be taken as evidence of an interregnum. Eugen Cizek in L’Empereur Aurélien Et Son Temps (Paris: Les Belles Lettres, 1994) also refers to this coin type (not by specific legend, but by reference to “concord with the soldiers”) when discussing the interregnum. He notes that other scholars assign this coinage to the interregnum, a position that he appears to adopt. In Repostiglio della Venèra Nuovo Catalogo Illustrato Aureliano II/I (Rome: L'Erma di Bretschneider, 1995) Sylviane Estiot also assigns this coin type to the period after Aurelian’s death.2

But what of the coin here, this coin actually attributed to the 6th officina, mint of Antioch, 6th issue? Estiot attributes this coin not to an interregnal period between Aurelian and Tacitus, when Severina might have ruled in her own right. Rather, on p. 90 of “Aureliana” (Revue Numismatique, 6th series, vo. 150, 1995: 50 - 94) Estiot attributes this coin, because of exact parallelisms to Aurelian’s coinage at Antioch at this time, to a period of joint coinage between Aurelian and Severina.3

Footnotes:

1He actually allows for the possibility of coinage even if the interregnum was short. See footnote 1, p. 253.
2I assume this to be the case. Although I have no reason to doubt Watson’s citation I was unable to verify it because I am unable to obtain a copy of this book by Estiot.
3Also see Estiot, Monnaies de L’Empire romain XII.1: D’Aurelian à Florien (270 - 276 apres J.-C.). Paris: Bibliothèque nationale de France, 2004, pp. 28 (table 1) and 122.

Photo credits: Forum Ancient Coins
Tracy Aiello
A_and_V_Antioch_2nd_Wkshp_Large.jpg
Vabalathus and Aurelian Antioch 2nd Officina 11 viewsVabalathus: 270 - 272 AD; Aurelian: 270 - 275 AD
Julius Aurelius Septimius Vabalathus Athenodorus (Wahb Allat), son of Septimius Odaenathus and Septimia Zenobia. Palmyrene Empire.
Obv: VABALATHVS V C R IM D R1; Bust of Vabalathus, laureate, diademed, draped and curiassed, facing right, seen from behind.
Rev: IMP C AVRELIANVS AVG; Bust of Aurelian, radiate and curiassed, facing right, from the front, B in exergue.
Denomination: billion antoninianus; Mint: Antioch; Officina: 2nd; Issue: 1st; Date: Nov. 270 - Mar. 272; Weight: 3.855g; Diameter: 20.5mm; Die axis: 180º; References, for example: RIC V v.1 381 correc; MER - RIC 3103; SRCV III 11718

Notes:

1VABALATHVS V[IR] C[LARISSIMUS] R[EX] IM[PERATOR] D[UX] R[OMANORUM]. See for example, Bland (2011), pp. 135, 141 and Estiot, p. 118, esp. note 462. Although Potter, page 267 and footnote 24 postulates V[IR] C[ONSULARIS] for the mint at Antioch I would certainly side with Bland and Estiot.

Which side of this coin is the obverse and which side is the reverse?
Webb in RIC V, v.1 puts great weight on the titulature of Aurelian and mentions that mint marks on the obverse of coins were not unknown at Antioch. He considers the coin to have been struck as a sign of vassalage instead of having been struck as an insult. Webb states that Aurelian’s bust is on the obverse of the coin (p. 260). Robertson, pp. cxix and 142 also considers Aurelian’s bust to be on the obverse of the coin, but does not state an explicit reason for her position. Mattingly (1936) holds that the mint mark is the determining factor, and therefore believes that Aurelian’s bust is on the reverse of the coin. In SRCV III, p. 442 Sear follows the reasoning of Mattingly and although Vagi agrees that Aurelian’s bust is on the reverse of the coin (p. 403) he does not explicitly state his reason for believing so. Estiot states that the officina mark under the bust of Aurelian clearly indicates that his portrait is on the reverse of the coin (p. 118). Bland (2011) follows suit. When discussing this issue from Antioch he states that the officina mark is always placed on the reverse of coins. He notes that the placement of the officina mark sent a signal that Aurelian was “...being accorded a lower status than Vabalathus, although he was given his correct titles of Imperator and Augustus, and he wore a radiate crown, also traditionally associated with the senior Augustus” (p. 142 - 3). Watson argues that Queen Zenobia’s assertion of Palmyrene independence from Rome took place gradually (pp. 67 - 9). Bland believes that the placement of the officina mark under the bust of Aurelian on this coin was just another step in that assertion of independence.

Photo credits: Forum Ancient Coins

Sources

Bland 2011: Bland, Roger. “The Coinage of Vabalathus and Zenobia from Antioch and Alexandria" in Numismatic Chronicle, 171 (2011): 133 - 186.
Estiot, Sylviane. Monnaies de L’Empire romain XII.1: D’Aurelian à Florien (270 - 276 apres J.-C.). Paris: Bibliothèque nationale de France, 2004.
Mattingly 1936: Mattingly, Harold. “The Palmyrene Princes and the Mints of Antioch and Alexandria.” The Numismatic Chronicle and Journal of the Royal Numismatic Society, fifth Series, vol. 16, no. 62 (1936): pp. 89 - 114.
MER - RIC: Maison de l’Orient et la Méditerranée: Monnaies de l’Empire Romain / Roman Imperial Coinage AD 268-276. Accessed March 7, 2019. http://www.ric.mom.fr/en/home.
Potter, David S. The Roman Empire at Bay: AD 180 - 395. New York: Routledge, 2004
RIC V v.1: Webb, Percy. The Roman Imperial Coinage, Vol. V, Part 1: Valerian to Florian, edited by Harold Mattingly and Edward Sydenham. London: Spink & Son, 1927.
Robertson, Anne. Roman Imperial Coins in the Hunter Coin Cabinet, Vol. IV Valerian I to Allectus. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1978.
SRCV III: Sear, David. Roman Coins and Their Values, Vol. III: Maximinus I to Carinus. London: Spink, 2005.
Vagi, David. Coinage and History of the Roman Empire, Volume One: History. Sidney, Ohio: Coin World, 1999.
Watson, Alaric. Aurelian and the Third Century. New York: Routledge, 1999.
Tracy Aiello