Classical Numismatics Discussion Members' Coin Collection Photo Gallery

Image search results - "attributed"

Unattributed Roman Vota...Possibly ConstansDumanyu2

Anonymous Class C Follis, attributed to Michael IV.
Obverse: +EMMANOVHA. Christ Antiphonetes,
nimbate, standing facing / IC-XC-NI-KA divided by
jewelled cross. Coin #412

cars100

EDWARD IV
Edward IV was King of England from March 1461 to October 1470, and again from April 1471 until his sudden death in 1483. He was the first Yorkist King of England. The first half of his rule was marred by the violence associated with the Wars of the Roses, but he overcame the Lancastrian challenge to the throne at Tewkesbury in 1471 and there were no further rebellions in England during the rest of his reign.
In 1475, Edward declared war on France, landing at Calais in June. However, his ally Charles the Bold, Duke of Burgundy, failed to provide any significant military assistance leading Edward to undertake negotiations with the French, with whom he came to terms under the Treaty of Picquigny. France provided him with an immediate payment of 75,000 crowns and a yearly pension of 50,000 crowns, thus allowing him to "recoup his finances". Edward also backed an attempt by Alexander Stewart, 1st Duke of Albany and brother of King James III of Scotland, to take the Scottish throne in 1482. Edward's younger brother, the Duke of Gloucester (and future King Richard III) led an invasion of Scotland that resulted in the capture of Edinburgh and the Scottish king himself. Alexander Stewart, however, reneged on his agreement with Edward. The Duke of Gloucester then withdrew from his position in Edinburgh, though he did retain Berwick-upon-Tweed.
Edward became subject to an increasing number of ailments when his health began to fail and he fell fatally ill at Easter in 1483. He survived long enough though to add some codicils to his will, the most important being to name his brother Richard, Duke of Gloucester as Protector after his death. He died on 9th April 1483 and was buried in St George's Chapel, Windsor Castle. He was succeeded first by his twelve-year-old son Edward V of England, who was never crowned, and then by his brother who reigned as Richard III.
It is not known what actually caused Edward's death. Pneumonia, typhoid and poison have all been conjectured, but some have attributed his death to an unhealthy lifestyle because he had become stout and inactive in the years before his death.*Alex

RHODOS - AR Drachm - Magistrat EPMIAΣ CARIAN ISLANDS.
Pseudo-Rhodian (c.175-170 B.C.),
Silver Drachm, Imitation issue minted in Thessaly.
2.48 g / 14 x 15 mm

Head of Helios facing, slightly inclined to right.
R/ EPMIAΣ , rose, with a bud on right, Z-Ω either side of stem

(SNG Keckman 793-795 (att ributed to Thessaly); Price, Kra ay-Mørkholm Essays, pp. 241-2 (attributed to Northern Greece); SNG Copenhagen Su ppl. 358 (attributed to Rhodian Peraia)).

Lightly toned, good extremely fine. Great head facing

Although the attribution of this issue has been debated, it seems likely that it was struck by Perseus to pay Cretan mercenaries, who would have been familiar with Rhodian issues, in the Third Macedonian War against the Romans (see R. Ashton, NC 1988, pp. 29-30)
paul1888

JUSTINIAN I, AR Siliqua or Half-Siliqua, struck 537 - 552 at CarthageObverse: D N IVSTINIANVS P P AV. Diademed, draped and cuirassed bust of Justinian I facing right.
Reverse: Monogram, cross above, S below, within circle, all encircled by wreath. (SBCV Monogram 3)

Diameter: 13mm | Weight: 1.17gms | Die Axis: 6
SBCV: 254 (Siliqua) | Sommer 4.119
Scratched obverse. Not in DOC.
RARE

The monogram on the reverse of this coin was originally interpreted as being that of the Ostrogothic queen Mathasunta (cf. BMC 80, 1). However, a later re-interpretation by Wolfgang Hahn (MIB) attributed this issue as being a regular African Imperial issue of Justinian, and this is the attribution that was adopted by SBCV.

On September the 15th 533 Justinian's army, led by Belisarius, entered the city of Carthage and brought it back into the Roman Empire after 98 years of Vandal rule. In March 534 the Vandal king Gelimer surrendered to Belisarius ending the Vandal kingdom and returning the African provinces to the empire. Large numbers of captured Vandals were transported to Constantinople and in April Belisarius returned there too and was permitted by Justinian I to celebrate a triumph, the first non-imperial triumph for over 500 years.*Alex

1st Century CE, IRON AGE BRITAIN, Tribe: Iceni, AR Unit, Struck c.60 - 61 under Boudica (Boadicea)Obverse: No legend. Abstract Celtic style head with slit for eye and no ear facing right. Three pellets below head, branch emblem behind neck.
Reverse: No legend. Celtic style horse facing right, lozenge-shaped box with pellets on outer corners below horse. Section of large elaborate wheel-like object above horse, pellet below horse's tail.
Class: Icenian O
Diameter: 14mm | Weight: 0.9gms | Axis: 10
Spink: 434

The first known recorded example of this coin was made by William Stukely, an English antiquarian whose ideas influenced various antiquaries throughout the eighteenth and early nineteenth centuries. Stukeley published over twenty books on archaeology and other subjects during his lifetime and he is regarded as an important forerunner of archaeology for his emphasis on methodically measuring and documenting ancient sites. He died of a stroke in early 1765.
The theory that this coinage was connected with Boudica was originally reported in 1987 and this was endorsed by R D Van Arsdell, an authority on the Celtic coinage of Britain, as Boudican in the 1990's. At the time though this was disputed by many in the numismatic community, some of whom continued to rely on older studies that lumped all "Face-Horse" coins together in a group dating before 20 CE.
However, John Talbot of the University of Oxford carried out research on these issues and, as his die-link and hoard work gradually progressed through the 1990's into the early twenty-first century, these coins were confirmed to be the final coinage of the Iceni. As Talbot's findings were only gradually revealed over a period of time, the accepted dating used in some dealer catalogues did not always keep up with the latest information. During his studies, Talbot discovered that coins from several die sets are only found in the Boudican Rebellion hoards. He also confirmed that these coins were struck in abnormally great numbers for any Icenian issue. But, because he was not certain that this was enough evidence to date the coins to 61 CE. he suggested only that they could have been struck any time after the Claudian Invasion of 43 CE.
Considering though that some die sets are known only from the Boudican Rebellion hoards, that it is still the case that these coins appear in uncirculated condition in the hoards, and that to date none of these coins have been found from secure contexts earlier than the time of the Boudican rebellion, it would appear that the 1987 report was essentially correct and these coins must have been struck nearer to the date of the Boudican Rebellion than earlier, possibly in connection with the financing of that rebellion. The conclusion now is that these coins can, with some confidence, be attributed to Boudica.

THE ICENI
The Iceni were a tribe located in eastern Britain during the Iron Age and the early Roman era. Their territory was bordered by the Corieltauvi to the west, and the Catuvellauni and Trinovantes to the south. In the Roman period, their capital was Venta Icenorum at modern-day Caistor St Edmund.
Julius Caesar did not mention the Iceni in his account of his invasions of Britain in 55 and 54 BC, though they may have been related to the Cenimagni, whom Caesar notes as living north of the River Thames at that time. The Iceni were a significant power in eastern Britain during Claudius I's conquest of Britain in AD 43, in which they allied with Rome. Increasing Roman influence on their affairs led to a revolt in AD 47, though they remained nominally independent under king Prasutagus up until his death around AD 60. Roman encroachment after Prasutagus' death led his wife Boudica to launch a major revolt from 60–61. Boudica's uprising seriously endangered Roman rule in Britain and resulted in the burning of Londinium and other cities. The Romans finally crushed the rebellion, and the Iceni were eventually incorporated into the Roman province.
Archaeological evidence of the Iceni includes torcs, which are heavy rings of gold, silver or electrum worn around the neck and shoulders. The Iceni began producing coins around 10 BC. Their coins were a distinctive adaptation of the Gallo-Belgic "face/horse" design, and in some early issues, most numerous near Norwich, the horse was replaced with a boar. Some coins are inscribed ECENI, making them the only coin-producing group to use their tribal name on coins. The earliest personal name to appear on coins is Antedios (about 10 BC), and other abbreviated names like AESU and SAEMU followed. The name of Prasutagus also appears on some coins as PRASTO.

QUEEN BOUDICA
Queen Boudica was married to Prasutagus, ruler of the Iceni people of East Anglia. When the Romans conquered southern England in AD 43, they allowed Prasutagus to continue to rule. However, when Prasutagus died he left a will dividing his lands between the Roman emperor and his family. The Romans decided to rule the Iceni directly and confiscated all the king's property. When this was contested they are said to have stripped and flogged Boudica and raped her daughters. These actions exacerbated the widespread resentment at Roman rule.
In 60 or 61 AD, while the Roman governor Gaius Suetonius Paullinus was leading a campaign in North Wales, the Iceni rebelled, other tribes joined them, and Boudica led a major uprising against the occupying Roman forces.
Boudica's warriors defeated the Roman Ninth Legion and destroyed the then capital of Roman Britain, Camulodunum (Colchester). They then went on to destroy Londinium (London) and Verulamium (St Albans) killing thousands in the process. Finally, Boudica was defeated by a Roman army led by Paulinus. A great number of her army were killed and, though Boudica's fate is unknown, she is alleged to have either died in battle or poisoned herself to avoid capture. The site of the battle which brought an end to her uprising is also unknown.
The photograph below is of the Victorian statue of Boudica (Boadicea) situated on the Thames embankment in London.

CLICK ON THE IMAGES BELOW TO ENLARGE THEM

3 comments*Alex

20 Commodus ProvincialNot attributed yet
RI0083Sosius

26 Geta (or Caracalla)Unattributed AE provincial
Sosius

3 AurelianAURELIAN
AE Antoninianus, Siscia Mint
SECOND SPECIMEN KNOWN?
IMP CAES L DOM AVRELIANVS AVG, Radiate, draped and cuirassed bust right (with huge nose) / ANNONA AVG, Annona stg. l., holding corn-ears in r. hand and cornucopiae in l. hand; at feet to l., prow of ship., P in r. field.
RIC temp #1927

Attributed with help from FORVM member Mauseus, who pointed to the following website, which indicates that this may be the second specimen known of this coin: http://www.ric.mom.fr/en/coin/1927

UPDATE: According to S. Estiot & J. Mairat of ric.mom.fr: "It is indeed the second specimen known of RIC temp 1927, and your coin is from the same pair of dies as the coin in Zagreb (Komin hoards)."1 commentsSosius

449bisCarausius 287-93AD
Antoninianus
Obv "IMP C CARAVSIVS PF AVG"
Radiate, draped and cuirassed bust right
Rev "ERCVLI PACIFERO"
Hercules standing left holding club and lions scalp
Unattributed mint
S/P//
RIC - (449 bis)mauseus

475-83cfCarausius 287-93
Antoninianus
Obv "IMP CARAVSIVS PF AVGG" sic
Radiate, draped and cuirassed bust right
Rev "PAX AVG"
Pax standing left holding vertical sceptre
Unattributed Mint
S/C (reversed)//-
RIC - (cf 475-83)mauseus

515cfCarausius 287-93AD
Antoninianus
Obv "IMP C CARAVSIVS P AVG"
Radiate, draped & cuirassed bust right
Rev "PROVIDE AVG"
Providentia standing left holding baton over globe and cornucopia
Unattributed mint
S/C//-
RIC - (cf515)mauseus

522-3cfCarausius 287-93 AD
Antoninianus
Obv "IMP C CARAVSIVS P AVG"
Radiate, draped and cuirassed bust right
Rev "SPES PVBL"
Spes walking left holding flower
Unattributed mint
S/P//-
RIC - (cf 522-3)mauseus

716 - 757, ANGLO-SAXON, AR Sceat, struck under Aethelbald, King of Mercia.Obverse: No legend. Two crude diademed heads in profile, face to face, long cross on pedestal between them; all within pelleted circle.
Reverse: A whorl of four stylised birds, facing clockwise, round a central cross pommée; all within pelleted circle.
Slightly chipped edge
Secondary Phase, Series J, Type 37
Diameter: 13mm | Weight: 0.8gms | Die Axis: Uncertain
SPINK: 802A | Metcalf: 296 - 300 | Abramson (Sceatta List): 19 - 30
RARE

These coins do not bear inscriptions and it is only recently (2022) that research has permitted their correct dating and attribution to a specific area.
Although originally thought to be Northumbrian and attributed to York, the coinage of series J is now confidently attributed to Mercia. This coin was struck during the period when Æthelbald (716 - 757) was king of Mercia and overlord of Southern England. Æthelbald came to the throne of Mercia in 716 after the death of his cousin, King Ceolred, who had previously driven him into exile. During Æthelbald's long reign, Mercia became the dominant kingdom of the Anglo-Saxons, and the contemporary chronicler, the Venerable Bede, described Æthelbald as ruling all England south of the river Humber.
Æthelbald was killed in 757 by his bodyguards. He was succeeded briefly by Beornred, of whom little is known, but within a year, Offa, the grandson of Æthelbald's cousin Eanwulf, had seized the throne and, under him, Mercia entered its most prosperous and influential period.*Alex

Byzantine Empire: Æ Anonymous Class I Follis, Attributed to Nicephorus III (Sear-1889, DOC I.1-64)Obv: Facing bust of Christ Pantokrator
Rev: Latin cross with central X and globus and two pellets at the end of each extremity; crescents to upper left and right, floral scroll below Quant.Geek

Ptolemy XII Auletes AR Tetradrachm, 72 BCOBV: Diademed head right in aegis
REV: Eagle standing left on Thunderbolt; PTOLEMAIOY BASILEWS, [Pi A] in right field; Dated L.Theta (Year 9)

This coin was minted in the ninth year of Ptolemy XII Auletes. Svoronos originally ascribed this coin type to year 9 of Cleopatra VII (43 BC) but was reattributed by Regling to her father. This re-attribution is generally accepted. The coin is of relatively low-grade silver (ca 30%) and flat-struck on the obverse.
Svoronos 1856, Ref. Svoronos on-line
wt 13.8 gm1 commentsdaverino

INDONESIA, Sultanate of Palembang. Circa AD 1790's-1821
Tin Cash (20mm, 0.61 g)
Palembang mint
Shi Dan Li Bao in Hànzì
Blank
T.D. Yih, "Tiny Pitis Inscribed 'Shi-Dan' (Sultan) from Palembang," in ONS Newsletter 204 (Summer 2010), type I-1

Found in Palembang

Hang Li Po first appears in the Malay Annals as a Chinese princess sent to be the fifth bride of sultan Mansur Shah of Malacca. However, there is no reference to this event in official Ming documents. Li Po may merely be a beautiful concubine given to the Sultan. Alternatively, she may be the daughter of an otherwise unknown Chinese ruler in the area, to whom this coin may perhaps be attributed.1 commentsArdatirion

D.606 Charles II the Bald (denier, class 1d, Melle)Charles the Bald, king of the Franks (840-877)
Denier (Melle, class 1d, 840-864)

Silver, 1.35 g, 20.5 mm diameter, die axis 12h

O/ +CÎ›RLVS REX FR; cross pattée
R/ +METVLLO; carolingian monogram

The KRLS monogram was first introduced by Charles' great father, Charles the Great (Charlemagne). Charlemagne's son (Louis the Pious) never used a monogram, contrary to most carolingian rulers as Charles the Bald in particular.

This is the second most common carolingian coin.

Charlemagne minted exactly similar coins (Class 3). The question of the attribution to Charles the Great or the Bald has of course been widely discussed on grounds of style, weight, composition (work of Guillaume Sarah), position of the legend... These studies didn't lead to any clear conclusion although these deniers may often be attributed to Charlemagne. New hoards have to be found to resolve this issue.
By then, these coins have to be attributed to Charles the Bald by reason of the relative number of minted coins.

D.626 Charles II the Bald (denier, class 1d, Melle)Charles the Bald, king of the Franks (840-877)
Denier (Melle, class 1d, 840-864)

Silver, 1.73 g, 21 mm diameter, die axis 5h

O/ +CÎ›RLVS REX; cross pattée
R/ +METVLLO; carolingian monogram

This coinage with the shorter legend CÎ›RLVS REX is much rarer than the common one with the legend CÎ›RLVS REX FR. The composition of a hoard in Poitou suggests that this type can be unambiguously attributed to Charles the Bald. This coinage may have been minted at the beginning of Charles the Bald's reign, just before Pippin II took the control of Melle in 845.
Among the 12 known specimens, 5 have a deformed monogram, with the L and the S exchanging places, and on their sides. This feature, the shorter legend, as well as the unusual position of the legend opening cross on top of the monogram may suggest that there was some confusion in Melle at this time, when Charles gave back (temporarily) Aquitaine to Pippin.
The reverse is slightly double struck.

D.1007 Charles II the Bald (denier, class 3, Toulouse)Charles the Bald, king of the Franks (840-877) and Holy Roman Emperor (875-877)
Denier (Toulouse, class 2, 876-877)

Silver, 1.59 g, 20 mm diameter, die axis 7h

O/ +CÎ›RLVS IMP R- ; cross pattée
R/ +TOLOSÎ›+CIVI ; CA / RL in the center

The presence of the name of the sovereign on the reverse is quite rare for carolingian coins. This is also the case for Toulouse deniers of Charles the Bald's Louis II (or grandson Louis III) with LV / DO.

This coinage is also sometimes attributed to Charles the Fat.1 comments

D.774 Rudolph (denier, Paris)Rudolph (or Raoul, Radulf), king of the Franks (923-936)
Denier (Paris)

Silver, 1.13 g, 18 mm diameter, die axis 11h

O/ +CRATIA DI REX; monogram
R/ + / PΛRISI / CIVITΛ / +

Rudolph was elected king of Franks by noblemen in 923, after his father-in-law (Robert I)'s death.

Although Rudolph wasn't a carolingian, his coinage used a monogram.This monogram is clearly inspired by the habitual KRLS monogram. The letters seem to be R(?)DFS. Anyway, the F on the bottom can be cleary distinguished, and this coin can be attributed to Rudolph.

Charles II the Bald (denier, Melle, immobilization)Charles the Bald, king of the Franks (840-877)
Denier (Melle, 10th century)

Silver, 1.15 g, 21 mm diameter, die axis 3h

O/ +CÎ›RLVS REX R; cross pattée (S retrograd)
R/ MET / . / ALO

Not really a type that can be attributed to Charles the Bald... this type was immobilized and struck from the middle of the 10th century to the end of the 11th century ! Minting was then totally in the hands of of the counts of Poitou and out of control of the royal administration.
The obverse is similar to previous coinage, but with a retrograd S on most of the specimen. On the contrary, the mint name (in the field on the obverse) had never been used by Charles the Bald (METALO instead of METALLVUM).

*SOLD*Carausius Antoninianus

Attribution: RIC 482, Unattributed mint
Date: AD 290-293
Obverse: IMP C CARAVSIVS PF I AVG, draped, cuirassed, and radiate bust r.
Reverse: PAX AVG, Pax stg. l. holding olive branch & vertical scepter, S-P across fields
Size: 23.8 mm
Weight: 3.58 grams
ex-ForvmNoah

001 - Anonymus follis class A2 - Sear 1813Obv: +EMMANOVHA, Bust of Christ facing, wearing nimbus cross with two pellets in each limb of cross, pallium and colobium, and holding book of Gospels, the cover ornamented with central pellet in border of dots. To left IC and to right XC.
Rev: IhSYS / XRISTYS / bASILEY / bASILE in foyr lines. Dot above and below.
This type is attributed to the joint regin of Basil II and Constantine VIII 976-1025 AD.
30.0 mm. diameter.pierre_p77

001n2. FulviaAR Quinarius. 43 BC. Lugdunum Mint. Obv: III VIR R P C, bust of Victory right with the probable likeness of Fulvia
Rev: Lion right between A and XLI; ANTONI above, IMP in ex. Cr489/6; Sy 1163.

NOTE: Although the portrait is not absolutely confirmed as being Fulvia, it is very similar to those of other provincial coins that are attributed to her.1 commentslawrence c

012 Claudius I. (41-54 A.D.), RIC I 112var. (?), Thracian ?, AE-Sestertius, EX-S-C/P-P/OB-CIVES/SERVATOS, Rare !!!,012 Claudius I. (41-54 A.D.), RIC I 112var. (?), Thracian ?, AE-Sestertius, EX-S-C/P-P/OB-CIVES/SERVATOS, Rare !!!,
Claudius became “Father of the Country” in 50 AD, and this title was added to the coinage, at the end of the legend, with it’s abbreviation: PP. The reverse legend translates to “For Saving the Lives of Citizens.
avers: TI CLAVDIVS CAESAR AVG P M TR P IMP P P, laureate head of Claudius right
reverse: No legend - Wreath, EX S C/P P/OB CIVES/SERVATOS within,
exergue:-/-//--, diameter: 34-36mm, weight: 23,63g, axis:11h,
mint:Thracian ?, date: 50-54 A.D., ref: RIC I 112, C 38,
Q-001
"RIC is in error to state that P P only appeared on Claudius' bronze coins in 50 AD. In fact Claudius became P P very early in 42 AD, and P P appeared immediately not only on his quadrantes, which are specifically dated to 42 by the title COS II, but also on his sestertii and middle bronzes.
Stylistically your coin should not be attributed to Rome, but to a Thracian mint perhaps active only towards the end of the reign. These coins, scarcer than the Rome-mint ones, are not recognized in RIC!" by Curtis Clay. Thank you "curtisclay".5 commentsquadrans

012 Claudius I. (41-54 A.D.), RIC I 112var. (?), Thracian ?, AE-Sestertius, EX-S-C/P-P/OB-CIVES/SERVATOS, Rare !!!, Re-Shot !012 Claudius I. (41-54 A.D.), RIC I 112var. (?), Thracian ?, AE-Sestertius, EX-S-C/P-P/OB-CIVES/SERVATOS, Rare !!!, Re-Shot !
Claudius became “Father of the Country” in 50 AD, and this title was added to the coinage, at the end of the legend, with it’s abbreviation: PP. The reverse legend translates to “For Saving the Lives of Citizens.
avers: TI CLAVDIVS CAESAR AVG P M TR P IMP P P, laureate head of Claudius right
revers: No legend - Wreath, EX S C/P P/OB CIVES/SERVATOS within,
exergue:-/-//--, diameter: 34-36mm, weight: 23,63g, axis:11h,
mint:Thracian ?, date: 50-54 A.D., ref: RIC I 112, C 38,
Q-001
"RIC is in error to state that P P only appeared on Claudius' bronze coins in 50 AD. In fact Claudius became P P very early in 42 AD, and P P appeared immediately not only on his quadrantes, which are specifically dated to 42 by the title COS II, but also on his sestertii and middle bronzes.
Stylistically your coin should not be attributed to Rome, but to a Thracian mint perhaps active only towards the end of the reign. These coins, scarcer than the Rome-mint ones, are not recognized in RIC!" by Curtis Clay. Thank you "curtisclay".1 commentsquadrans

012p Claudius I. (41-54 A.D.), Macedonia, Phillipi, (Time of Claudius or Nero, circa 41-68, A.D.), RPC I 1651, AE-18, (AE Semis?), COHOR PRAE PHIL, Three military standards, #1012p Claudius I. (41-54 A.D.), Macedonia, Phillipi, (Time of Claudius or Nero, circa 41-68, A.D.), RPC I 1651, AE-18, (AE Semis?), COHOR PRAE PHIL, Three military standards, #1
Augustus Macedon Phillipi Æ18 / Struck to Commemorate the Battle of Actium
avers: VIC AVG, Nike standing left holding wreath and palm branch.
reverse: COHOR PRAE PHIL, Three military standards.
exergue: VIC/AVG//--, diameter:18mm, weight: , axis: h,
mint: City: Philippi, Region: Macedonia, Province: Macedonia, Pseudo-autonomous issue, date: Time of Claudius or Nero, circa AD 41-68.,
ref: RPC I Online (1651), SNG ANS 677, SNG Copenhagen 305, AMNG 14-15, BMC 23, SGI 32, FITA 274,
Q-001
"This coin has traditionally been attributed to Augustus, but due to its copper composition, RPC attributes it as likely from Claudius to Nero; Philippi probably did not issue copper coins during the reign of Augustus."1 commentsquadrans

026/3 Litra or 1/8 ounceAnonymous. Æ Litra or 1/8 ounce. Rome. 234-231 BC. ( 3.43g, 15mm, 5h) Obv: Laureate head of Apollo right Rev: Horse rearing left, wearing bridle, bit, and reins; ROMA below.

Crawford 26/3; Sydenham 29 (Half-litra); Kestner 56-65; BMCRR Romano-Campanian 70-74 (Half-litra)

This coin is attributed as a Litra by Crawford, others define it as half-litra. However, it could be argued that "1/8 ounce piece" is the better description.

First of all, on litra and half-litra:

"According to Crawford, the weight standard of the series 26 litra and half litra are based on a litra of 3.375 grams . The half litra in Crawford is described as having a dog on the reverse rather than a horse, and the average weight of the half litra of several specimens is described as 1.65 grams. BMCRR does refer to these as half litrae; but keep in mind that Grueber was writing circa 1900 and based on older scholarship. Sydenham was writing in the 1950s. Of the three major works cited, Crawford is the most current and likely based on a greater number of more recent finds."

Andrew Mccabe:

"It's very doubtful to me that the word "litra" is correct. Much more likely, these small bronze coins were simply fractions of the Aes Grave cast coinage system, as they come in weights of 1/4, 1/8 and 1/16 ounce, and the Aes Grave coinage generally had denominations from As down to Semuncia (1/2 ounce). So this coin would be 1/8 ounce coin. That's my view, which differs from their long term designation as "Litra", which presume them to be overvalued token bronze coinage on the Sicilian model, whereby bronze coins had value names that indicate a relationship to the silver coinage.

Litra, the word, is from the same stem as Libra, i.e. pound, would suggest a denomination of a (light) Sicilian pound of bronze, which sometimes equates in value to a small silver coin in Sicily weighing about 1/12 didrachm (about 0.6 grams) so by this definition, a Litra = an Obol. But it hardly stands up to scrutiny that such a tiny bronze coin, weighing 3.375 grams, could have been equivalent to a 0.6 gram silver obol. It would imply a massive overvaluation of bronze that just does not seem credible.

So. throw out the Litras, and call these coins 1/8 ounce pieces, and I think we have a sensible answer."

Paddy

03 02 Tiberius RIC 30Tiberius. 14-37 A.D. AR Denarius. Lugdunum (Lyon) Mint. 3.78 g., 19 mm. Obv: TI CAESAR DIVI AVG F AVGVSTVS, laureate head right. Rev: PONTIF MAXIM, Livia as Pax, seated right, holding scepter and olive branch. Feet on footstool. Ornate chair legs. One line below throne. RIC I 30, RSC 16a.

The well known "tribute penny." When brought a coin as requested, Jesus asked, "Whose is this image and superscription?" When told it was Caesar, He said, ''Render therefore unto Caesar the things which are Caesar's and unto God the things that are God's" (Matthew 22:20-21). Since Tiberius was Caesar at the time, this denarius type is attributed by scholars as the "penny" referred to in the Bible.8 commentsLucas H

044 - Hadrian Denarius - RIC 357 corr.Obv:- HADRIANVS AVGVSTVS P P, Laureate head right
Rev:- COS III, Crescent with five stars. .
Minted in Eastern mint
Reference:- RIC 357 corr. (wrongly attributed to Rome) Cohen 464. BMCRE p. 380 #28 (different dies)1 commentsmaridvnvm

045. Aurelian, 270-275AD. BI Antoninianus.BI Antoninianus. Unattributed mint.
Obv.Radiate and cuirassed bust right IMP AVRELIANVS AVG
Rev. Female figure presenting the emperor with wreath RESTITVT ORBIS

RIC 399, Cohen 192.

A bit dirty, significant silvering left. A great portrait and reverse..
LordBest

053. 2'nd Jewish (bar Kokhba) Revolt.Zuz (denarius), attributed to Year 3 (134-35 AD).
Obverse: (Shim'on) / Bunch of Grapes.
Reverse: (For the Freedom of Jerusalem) / Lyre with three strings.
3.19 gm., 18.5 mm.
Mildenberg #205.19 (this coin); Hendin #734.

This coin likely started out as a denarius of one of the Roman emperors between Vespasian and Hadrian. Many coins of the Second Jewish Revolt show traces of the earlier Roman coin. This coin is no exception, and traces of the previous coin can be seen on the obverse in and around the bunch of grapes.

The bunch of grapes on the obverse is an ancient symbol of blessing and fertility. As such it occasionally appears on ancient coins of other areas besides this series. Given the messianic nature of the Bar Kokhba revolt, the bunch of grapes takes on added significance because in Jewish prophetic literature, grapes (and the vine or vineyard) are often symbolic of the restoration of Israel, or even symbolic of Israel itself.

The lyre on the reverse is associated with temple worship, as are trumpets, which are also found on coins of the Bar Kokhba Revolt. King David is mentioned as playing a lyre, and there are numerous Biblical references to praising the Lord with the lyre and trumpets. (The word "kinnor," sometimes translated as "harp," is really a type of lyre.) Even today the lyre is an important Jewish symbol and the state of Israel has chosen to portray it on the half New Israeli Sheqel coin. Callimachus

067a. Proculus (?)Possible Usurper ca. 280 - 281

A possible usurper in Gaul. Although a figure by that name is mentioned in passing by a couple ancient historians, the principal source is the Historia Augusta, which is notoriously unreliable. There are two coins attributed to him, with a possible third recently noted. The British Museum has not accepted any of these coins as being authentic, so the question remains unresolved. For a thorough discussion of Proculus, see the Forum discussion board. This also contains links to two excellent articles by Mark Fox on the coins.lawrence c

068a. Bonosus (?)Possible Usurper ca. 280 -281

As with Proculus, the primary source for this possible usurper is the Historia Augusta. Some coins attributed to him, but the current consensus (although not universally shared) is that these were barbarous radiates.lawrence c

069. Commodus.Denarius, 189 AD, Rome mint.
Obverse: M COMM ANT P FEL AVG BRIT / Laureate bust of Commodus.
Reverse: OPTIME MAXIME C V P P / Jupiter standing, holding thunderbolt and spear.
3.37 gm., 18 mm.
RIC #192; Sear #5664.

Jupiter was called optimus for his beneficence, and maximus for his power. These were also qualities Commodus attributed to himself. This coin and a similar brass coin also of Commodus, represent the only time the inscription OPTIME MAXIME appear on Roman coinage.Callimachus

077 - Severus Alexander - Denarius, RIC -
Severus Alexander Denarius
Obv:- IMP C M AVR SEV ALEXAND AVG, Laureate, draped and cuirassed bust right
Rev:- SALVS PVBLICA, Salus seated, feeding serpent rising from altar
Minted in Antioch
References - RIC -. BMCRE -. RSC -.
3.11 g. 20.11 mm. 0 degrees.

Attributed to Antioch rather than Rome based on the style and lettering. The As also lack the horizontal bars. RIC 178 has the correct description for this coin, but it is from Rome. RIC 298 is Antioch but has the shorter obverse legend IMP SEV ALEXAND AVG and a star in the left field on the reverse.maridvnvm

098-117 AD - TRAJAN AR denarius - struck 112-114 ADobv: IMP TRAIANO AVG GER DAC P M TR P COS VI PP (laureate bust right, slight drapery on left shoulder)
rev: SPQR OPTIMO PRINCIPI (Abundantia standing left, holding cornucopiae and grain ears; at her feet, a child holding a roll), in ex. ALIM ITAL [Alimenta Italiae]
ref: RIC II 243, C.9 (3frcs)
mint: Rome
2.91gms, 19mm

The Alimenta was a welfare program for poor children and orphans. Credit for designing the program is usually attributed to Nerva, but it was increased and formally organized under Trajan. The Alimenta was funded from several sources. Probably, money from the Dacian Wars was used to initially underwrite the program; however, the long-term existence of the program was insured through 5% interest paid by wealthy landowners on loans and estate taxes. Philanthropy was also encouraged and contributed to the total funding.
Under Alimenta, boys of freemen received 16 sesterces monthly, girls received 12, while children borne out of wedlock received a bit less. The Alimenta was supplemented with a special young girls foundation initiated by Antoninus Pius in honor of his deceased wife Faustina. Municipal magistrates administered the alimentary funds and in turn were supervised by imperial clerks who had the status of knights. 1 commentsberserker

098a Aureolus (267-268 A.D.), Mediolanum, RIC V-II 372 (Postumus), AE-Antoninianus, -/-//S, CONCORDIA EQVIT, Fortuna standing left, #1098a Aureolus (267-268 A.D.), Mediolanum, RIC V-II 372 (Postumus), AE-Antoninianus, -/-//S, CONCORDIA EQVIT, Fortuna standing left, #1
avers: (IMP C )POSTVMVS AVG, In the name of Postumus. Radiate draped and cuirassed bust right. Attributed by Alföldi to Aureolus.
reverse: CONCORDIA EQVIT, Fortuna standing left, foot on prow, holding patera and rudder.
exergue: -/-//S, diameter: 18,5-19,5mm, weight: 2,20g, axes:11h,
mint: Mediolanum, date: 267-268 A.D.,
ref: RIC V-II 372 (Postumus), RSC-20a (Postumus),
Q-001quadrans

098a Aureolus (267-268 A.D.), Mediolanum, RIC V-II 372 (Postumus), AE-Antoninianus, -/-//S, CONCORDIA EQVIT, Fortuna standing left, #2098a Aureolus (267-268 A.D.), Mediolanum, RIC V-II 372 (Postumus), AE-Antoninianus, -/-//S, CONCORDIA EQVIT, Fortuna standing left, #2
avers: IMP C POSTVMVS AVG, In the name of Postumus. Radiate draped and cuirassed bust right. Attributed by Alföldi to Aureolus.
reverse: CONCORDIA EQVIT, Fortuna standing left, foot on prow, holding patera and rudder.
exergue: -/-//S, diameter: 18,5-21,5mm, weight: 2,42g, axes:0h,
mint: Mediolanum, date: 267-268 A.D.,
ref: RIC V-II 372 (Postumus), RSC-20a (Postumus),
Q-0024 commentsquadrans

098a Aureolus (267-268 A.D.), Mediolanum, RIC V-II 388 (Postumus), AE-Antoninianus, -/-//T, VIRTVS EQVIT, Virtus advancing right, #1098a Aureolus (267-268 A.D.), Mediolanum, RIC V-II 388 (Postumus), AE-Antoninianus, -/-//T, VIRTVS EQVIT, Virtus advancing right, #1
avers: IMP POSTVMVS AVG, In the name of Postumus. Radiate draped and cuirassed bust right. Attributed by Alföldi to Aureolus.
reverse: VIRTVS EQVIT, Virtus advancing right, holding spear and shield.
exergue: -/-//T, diameter: 18,0-19,0 mm, weight: 2,57g, axes:11h,
mint: Mediolanum, date: 267-268 A.D.,
ref: RIC V-II 388(Postumus), RSC 441 (Postumus),
Q-0011 commentsquadrans

101 Victorinus (268-270 A.D.), AE-Antoninianus, RIC V-II 126, Unattributed mint, AEQVITAS AVG, Aequitas standing left, #1101 Victorinus (268-270 A.D.), AE-Antoninianus, RIC V-II 126, Unattributed mint, AEQVITAS AVG, Aequitas standing left, #1
avers: IMP C PI VICTORINVS AVG, Radiated and cuirassed bust right.
reverse: AEQVITAS AVG, Aequitas standing left, holding scales and cornucopia.
exergue: -/-//--, diameter: 20,5-21,5mm, weight: 3,60g, axes: 8h,
mint: Unattributed mint, date: 260-270 A.D.,
ref: RIC V-II 126, Cunetio hoard 2552, Elmer 702; Sear -.
Q-001quadrans

101 Victorinus (268-270 A.D.), AE-Antoninianus, RIC V-II ???, Unattributed mint, SALVS AVG, Salus standing right, #1101 Victorinus (268-270 A.D.), AE-Antoninianus, RIC V-II ???, Unattributed mint, SALVS AVG, Salus standing right, #1
avers: IMP C PI VICTORINVS AVG, Radiated and cuirassed bust right.
reverse: SALVS AVG, Salus standing right, feeding serpent in arms.
exergue: -/-//--, diameter: 19,0-20,4mm, weight: 3,01g, axes: 0h,
mint: Unattributed mint, date: 269-271 A.D.,
ref: RIC V-II ???,
Q-001quadrans

115 - Postumus Ant. - RIC 060 CObv:- IMP C POSTVMVS P F AVG, radiate, draped and cuirassed bust right.
Rev:- FORTV-NA AVG, Fortuna, standing left, holding rudder and cornucopiae.
Ref:- RIC 60 Bust Type C, attributed to Lugdunummaridvnvm

115 - Postumus Ant. - RIC 064 CObv:– IMP C POSTVMVS P F AVG, Radiate, draped and cuirassed bust right
Rev:– HERC DEVSONIENSI, Hercules, standing right, leaning on club, holding bow and lion’s skin
Ref:- RIC 64 Bust Type C, attributed to Lugdunummaridvnvm

115 - Postumus Ant. - RIC 067 AObv:– IMP C POSTVMVS P F AVG, Radiate, draped bust right
Rev:– HERC PACIFERO, Hercules, standing left, holding olive branch, club and lion’s skin
Ref:- RIC 67 Bust Type A, attributed to Lugdunummaridvnvm

115 - Postumus Ant. - RIC 076 AObv:- IMP C POSTVMVS P F AVG, radiate, draped and cuirassed bust R.
Rev:- NEPTVNO REDVCI, Neptune standing left with dolphin and trident.
Ref:- RIC 76 Bust Type A, attributed to Lugdunum

Nice strong portrait and reasonable reverse strike even though the legends are a bit weak.1 commentsmaridvnvm

115 - Postumus Ant. - RIC 089 CObv:- IMP C POSTVMVS P F AVG, radiate, draped and cuirassed bust right.
Rev:- VICTORIA AVG, Victory, walking left, holding wreath and palm, at foot captive.
Ref:- RIC 89 Bust Type C, attributed to Lugdunum

Very strong portrait and somewhat weak reverse strike as it typical of the type. 2 commentsmaridvnvm

115 - Postumus Ant. - RIC 093 CObv:- IMP C POSTVMVS P F AVG, radiate, draped and cuirassed bust right.
Rev:- VIRT-VS AVG, Mars, standing right, holding spear and resting on shield.
Ref:- RIC 93 Bust Type C, attributed to Lugdunum
2 commentsmaridvnvm

12. Constantius I.Follis, ca 298-300 AD, London mint (group II).
Obverse: FL VAL CONSTANTINVS NOB C / Laureate and curiassed bust of Constantius I.
Reverse: GENIO POPVLI ROMANI / Genius standing, holding patera and cornucopiae.
Mint mark: (none)
9.71gm., 27 mm.
RIC # 14a; Sear #14034 (this coin !).

Although RIC lists these last four coins (Diocletian, Maximian, Galerius, and Constantius I) with other coins minted in London, a careful reading of the introduction to the mint of London (vol. VI, p. 113-122) shows the editors of RIC had serious reservations about this attribution.

The unmarked folles -- ie without a mint mark in the exergue -- can be divided into three groups. After many years of careful study, group I has been attributed to Lugdunum (Lyon, France), and groups II and III to Britain.

Of group II, RIC says (p. 115), " It is possible that the unmarked II coins were produced in Britain either from a travelling mint, or even from the "C" (Camulodunum?) mint of Carausius and Allectus, with which there are perhaps some stylistic affinities: the period of issue would fall from c. 298 onwards, perhaps until c. 300 or later."

Of group III, RIC says (p. 115), " The unmarked III coins are in everyway more sophisticated in style, and it may well be that they were produced at London, though lack of signature would be difficult to account for: probably it is best to class them as a British series which, for reasons unknown to us, was struck elsewhere. Their date is between 300 and 305." Callimachus

125 - Aurelian Ant. - RIC 399 Bust Type FObv:– IMP AVRELIANVS AVG, Radiated and cuirassed bust right
Rev:– RESTITVT ORBIS, Orbis Terrarum presenting wreath to Aurelian
Minted at an Unattributed Mint
Reference:– RIC 399 Bust Type Fmaridvnvm

128/1. Decia - denarius (206-200 BC)AR Denarius (uncertain mint, 206-200 BC)
O/ Helmeted head of Roma right; X behind head.
R/ The Dioscuri galloping right; shield & carnyx below horses; ROMA in exergue.
4.01g; 20.5mm
Crawford 128/1 (less than 10 obverse dies/less than 12 reverse dies)
- Privately bought from Münzen & Medaillen Basel.
- Ex collection of Elvira Elisa Clain-Stefanelli (1914-2001), former director of the National Numismatic Collection (part of the Smithsonian Institute).
- Naville Numismatics Live Auction 29, lot 479.

* Anonymous (shield & carnyx), Decius?:

This very rare issue has traditionally been attributed to a descendant of a line of three heroes named Publius Decius Mus. The first of that name was Consul in 340 BC; he received the Grass Crown after having saved his army from destruction against the Samnites, then sacrificed himself at the Battle of Vesuvius during his consulship in an act of devotio (exchanging his life against the victory of his army). His son was four times Consul (312, 308, 297 and 295 BC) and similarly sacrificed himself at the Battle of Sentinum in 295 BC against a coalition of Etruscans, Samnites, and Gauls. The third of that name was Consul in 279 BC and fought against Pyrrhus, who successfully thwarted his attempt to sacrifice himself like his ancestors (cf. discussion in Broughton, vol. I, p. 193).

300 years later, Trajan restored several issues of the Republic, including this one, but with the addition of DECIVS MVS on the obverse (RIC 766). Babelon thus assumed that this denarius was minted by the son of the last Publius Decius Mus (Decia 1). In this hypothesis, the shield and Carnyx refers to the second Mus -- the one who fought the Gauls.

However, Crawford contested this view, writing: "The restoration of this issue by Trajan with the added legend DECIVS MVS provides no grounds whatever for supposing that it was originally struck by someone of that name - the family was certainly extinct by this period."

It is still very strange that Trajan picked this rare denarius, from an irregular mint, for restoration. He could have chosen many other anonymous issues of the early Roman coinage, and simply add the name of Decius Mus. It thus shows that the imperial mint had retained some specimens or archives of previous issues up to the 3rd century BC, because due to its rarity, this denarius had already disappeared from circulation by the time of Trajan. A list of the magistrates behind each issue could therefore have been kept as well; Trajan might have selected the moneyers whom he thought were significant for the history of Rome and restored their issue. A Publius Decius Subulo was living in these years (Livy, xliii. 17) and perhaps minted this coin; his name could have been preserved in the archives of the mint, which might have led Trajan to pick his denarius for restoration.1 commentsJoss

1405t, Constans, 9 September 337 - 19 January 350 A.D. (Thessalonica )Constans, 9 September 337 - 19 January 350 A.D., Bronze AE 3, unattributed; Thessalonica mint, 2.25g, 18.9mm, 0; aVF.

Flavius Julius Constans, third and youngest son of Constantine I and Fausta, was born between 320 and 323 A.D. Primary sources for the life and reign of Constans I are scarce. To reconstruct his life and career, one must draw on a variety of references in both fourth century and later works. Raised as a Christian, he was made a Caesar on 25 December 333 A.D. Constans I and his two brothers, after the death of their father on 22 May 337 and the subsequent "massacre of the princes" in which many other relatives were purged, met in the first part of September 337 in Pannonia to re-divide the empire among themselves. There they were acclaimed Augusti by the army. Constans' new realm included Italy, Africa, Illyricum, Macedonia, and Achaea. Shortly before his father's death, Constans' engagement to Olympias, the daughter of the Praetorian Prefect Ablabius, was announced; although the match was never solemnized because of political reasons.

It would appear that Constans was successful in the military sphere. Following his accession to the purple in 337, he seems to have won a victory over the Sarmatians. In 340 Constans was able to beat back an attempt by his brother Constantine II to seize some of his realm. The latter died in a battle fought near Aquileia and Constans absorbed his late brother's territory. In 341 and 342 he conducted a successful campaign against the Franci. He also visited Britain in 343, probably on a military campaign.

As an emperor Constans gets mixed reviews. In what may be a topos, sources suggest that the first part of his reign was moderate but in later years, however, he became overbearing. The emperor apparently attempted to obtain as much money as he could from his subjects and sold government posts to the highest bidder. His favorites were allowed to oppress his subjects. Sources also condemn his homosexuality. He did have some military success and, in addition to other military threats, he had to deal with Donatist-related bandits in North Africa.

Like his father Constantine I and his brother Constantius II, Constans had a deep interest in Christianity. Together with Constantius II he issued (or perhaps re-issued) a ban against pagan sacrifice in 341. The next year, they cautioned against the destruction of pagan temples. Unlike his brother Constantius II, who supported the Arian faction, he stood shoulder to shoulder with Athanasius and other members of the Orthodox clique. In fact, it is due to his request that the Council of Serdica was called to deal with the ecclesiastical squabble between Athanasius of Alexandria and Paul of Constantinople on one side and the Arian faction on the other.

When Magnentius was declared emperor in Gaul during January 350, Constans realized his reign was at an end. When he learned of the revolt, he fled toward Helena, a town in the Pyrenees. Constans was put to death by Gaeso and a band of Magnentius' assassins, who dragged their victim from a temple in which he had sought refuge.

By Michael DiMaio, Jr., Salve Regina University and Robert Frakes, Clarion University.
Published: De Imperatoribus Romanis: An Online Encyclopedia of Roman Rulers and their Families http://www.roman-emperors.org/startup.htm. Used by permission.

Edited by J. P. Fitzgerald, Jr.Cleisthenes

1409a, Julian II "the Philosopher," February 360 - 26 June 363 A.D.Julian II, A.D. 360-363; RIC 167; VF; 2.7g, 20mm; Constantinople mint; Obverse: DN FL CL IVLIANVS P F AVG, helmeted & cuirassed bust right, holding spear & shield; Reverse: VOT X MVLT XX in four lines within wreath; CONSPB in exergue; Attractive green patina. Ex Nemesis.

De Imperatoribus Romanis,
An Online Encyclopedia of Roman Emperors

Julian the Apostate (360-363 A.D.)

Walter E. Roberts, Emory University
Michael DiMaio, Jr., Salve Regina University

Introduction

The emperor Flavius Claudius Julianus reigned from 360 to 26 June 363, when he was killed fighting against the Persians. Despite his short rule, his emperorship was pivotal in the development of the history of the later Roman empire. This essay is not meant to be a comprehensive look at the various issues central to the reign of Julian and the history of the later empire. Rather, this short work is meant to be a brief history and introduction for the general reader. Julian was the last direct descendent of the Constantinian line to ascend to the purple, and it is one of history's great ironies that he was the last non-Christian emperor. As such, he has been vilified by most Christian sources, beginning with John Chrysostom and Gregory Nazianzus in the later fourth century. This tradition was picked up by the fifth century Eusebian continuators Sozomen, Socrates Scholasticus, and Theodoret and passed on to scholars down through the 20th century. Most contemporary sources, however, paint a much more balanced picture of Julian and his reign. The adoption of Christianity by emperors and society, while still a vital concern, was but one of several issues that concerned Julian.

It is fortunate that extensive writings from Julian himself exist, which help interpret his reign in the light of contemporary evidence. Still extant are some letters, several panegyrics, and a few satires. Other contemporary sources include the soldier Ammianus Marcellinus' history, correspondence between Julian and Libanius of Antioch, several panegyrics, laws from the Theodosian Code, inscriptions, and coinage. These sources show Julian's emphasis on restoration. He saw himself as the restorer of the traditional values of Roman society. Of course much of this was rhetoric, meant to defend Julian against charges that he was a usurper. At the same time this theme of restoration was central to all emperors of the fourth century. Julian thought that he was the one emperor who could regain what was viewed as the lost glory of the Roman empire. To achieve this goal he courted select groups of social elites to get across his message of restoration. This was the way that emperors functioned in the fourth century. By choosing whom to include in the sharing of power, they sought to shape society.

Early Life

Julian was born at Constantinople in 331. His father was Julius Constantius, half-brother of the emperor Constantine through Constantius Chlorus, and his mother was Basilina, Julius' second wife. Julian had two half-brothers via Julius' first marriage. One of these was Gallus, who played a major role in Julian's life. Julian appeared destined for a bright future via his father's connection to the Constantinian house. After many years of tense relations with his three half-brothers, Constantine seemed to have welcomed them into the fold of the imperial family. From 333 to 335, Constantine conferred a series of honors upon his three half-siblings, including appointing Julius Constantius as one of the consuls for 335. Julian's mother was equally distinguished. Ammianus related that she was from a noble family. This is supported by Libanius, who claimed that she was the daughter of Julius Julianus, a Praetorian Prefect under Licinius, who was such a model of administrative virtue that he was pardoned and honored by Constantine.

Despite the fact that his mother died shortly after giving birth to him, Julian experienced an idyllic early childhood. This ended when Constantius II conducted a purge of many of his relatives shortly after Constantine's death in 337, particularly targeting the families of Constantine's half-brothers. ulian and Gallus were spared, probably due to their young age. Julian was put under the care of Mardonius, a Scythian eunuch who had tutored his mother, in 339, and was raised in the Greek philosophical tradition, and probably lived in Nicomedia. Ammianus also supplied the fact that while in Nicomedia, Julian was cared for by the local bishop Eusebius, of whom the future emperor was a distant relation. Julian was educated by some of the most famous names in grammar and rhetoric in the Greek world at that time, including Nicocles and Hecebolius. In 344 Constantius II sent Julian and Gallus to Macellum in Cappadocia, where they remained for six years. In 351, Gallus was made Caesar by Constantius II and Julian was allowed to return to Nicomedia, where he studied under Aedesius, Eusebius, and Chrysanthius, all famed philosophers, and was exposed to the Neo-Platonism that would become such a prominent part of his life. But Julian was most proud of the time he spent studying under Maximus of Ephesus, a noted Neo-Platonic philospher and theurgist. It was Maximus who completed Julian's full-scale conversion to Neo-Platonism. Later, when he was Caesar, Julian told of how he put letters from this philosopher under his pillows so that he would continue to absorb wisdom while he slept, and while campaigning on the Rhine, he sent his speeches to Maximus for approval before letting others hear them. When Gallus was executed in 354 for treason by Constantius II, Julian was summoned to Italy and essentially kept under house arrest at Comum, near Milan, for seven months before Constantius' wife Eusebia convinced the emperor that Julian posed no threat. This allowed Julian to return to Greece and continue his life as a scholar where he studied under the Neo-Platonist Priscus. Julian's life of scholarly pursuit, however, ended abruptly when he was summoned to the imperial court and made Caesar by Constantius II on 6 November 355.

Julian as Caesar

Constantius II realized an essential truth of the empire that had been evident since the time of the Tetrarchy--the empire was too big to be ruled effectively by one man. Julian was pressed into service as Caesar, or subordinate emperor, because an imperial presence was needed in the west, in particular in the Gallic provinces. Julian, due to the emperor's earlier purges, was the only viable candidate of the imperial family left who could act as Caesar. Constantius enjoined Julian with the task of restoring order along the Rhine frontier. A few days after he was made Caesar, Julian was married to Constantius' sister Helena in order to cement the alliance between the two men. On 1 December 355, Julian journeyed north, and in Augusta Taurinorum he learned that Alamannic raiders had destroyed Colonia Agrippina. He then proceeded to Vienne where he spent the winter. At Vienne, he learned that Augustudunum was also under siege, but was being held by a veteran garrison. He made this his first priority, and arrived there on 24 June 356. When he had assured himself that the city was in no immediate danger, he journeyed to Augusta Treverorum via Autessioduram, and from there to Durocortorum where he rendezvoused with his army. Julian had the army stage a series of punitive strikes around the Dieuse region, and then he moved them towards the Argentoratum/Mongontiacum region when word of barbarian incursions reached him.

From there, Julian moved on to Colonia Agrippina, and negotiated a peace with the local barbarian leaders who had assaulted the city. He then wintered at Senonae. He spent the early part of the campaigning season of 357 fighting off besiegers at Senonae, and then conducting operations around Lugdunum and Tres Tabernae. Later that summer, he encountered his watershed moment as a military general. Ammianus went into great detail about Julian's victory over seven rogue Alamannic chieftains near Argentoratum, and Julian himself bragged about it in his later writing. After this battle, the soldiers acclaimed Julian Augustus, but he rejected this title. After mounting a series of follow-up raids into Alamannic territory, he retired to winter quarters at Lutetia, and on the way defeated some Frankish raiders in the Mosa region. Julian considered this campaign one of the major events of his time as Caesar.

Julian began his 358 military campaigns early, hoping to catch the barbarians by surprise. His first target was the Franks in the northern Rhine region. He then proceeded to restore some forts in the Mosa region, but his soldiers threatened to mutiny because they were on short rations and had not been paid their donative since Julian had become Caesar. After he soothed his soldiers, Julian spent the rest of the summer negotiating a peace with various Alamannic leaders in the mid and lower Rhine areas, and retired to winter quarters at Lutetia. In 359, he prepared once again to carry out a series of punitive expeditions against the Alamanni in the Rhine region who were still hostile to the Roman presence. In preparation, the Caesar repopulated seven previously destroyed cities and set them up as supply bases and staging areas. This was done with the help of the people with whom Julian had negotiated a peace the year before. Julian then had a detachment of lightly armed soldiers cross the Rhine near Mogontiacum and conduct a guerilla strike against several chieftains. As a result of these campaigns, Julian was able to negotiate a peace with all but a handful of the Alamannic leaders, and he retired to winter quarters at Lutetia.

Of course, Julian did more than act as a general during his time as Caesar. According to Ammianus, Julian was an able administrator who took steps to correct the injustices of Constantius' appointees. Ammianus related the story of how Julian prevented Florentius, the Praetorian Prefect of Gaul, from raising taxes, and also how Julian actually took over as governor for the province of Belgica Secunda. Hilary, bishop of Poitiers, supported Ammianus' basic assessment of Julian in this regard when he reported that Julian was an able representative of the emperor to the Gallic provincials. There is also epigraphic evidence to support Julian's popularity amongst the provincial elites. An inscription found near Beneventum in Apulia reads:
"To Flavius Claudius Julianus, most noble and sanctified Caesar, from the caring Tocius Maximus, vir clarissimus, for the care of the res publica from Beneventum".

Tocius Maximus, as a vir clarissimus, was at the highest point in the social spectrum and was a leader in his local community. This inscription shows that Julian was successful in establishing a positive image amongst provincial elites while he was Caesar.

Julian Augustus

In early 360, Constantius, driven by jealousy of Julian's success, stripped Julian of many troops and officers, ostensibly because the emperor needed them for his upcoming campaign against the Persians. One of the legions ordered east, the Petulantes, did not want to leave Gaul because the majority of the soldiers in the unit were from this region. As a result they mutinied and hailed Julian as Augustus at Lutetia. Julian refused this acclamation as he had done at Argentoratum earlier, but the soldiers would have none of his denial. They raised him on a shield and adorned him with a neck chain, which had formerly been the possession of the standard-bearer of the Petulantes and symbolized a royal diadem. Julian appeared reluctantly to acquiesce to their wishes, and promised a generous donative. The exact date of his acclamation is unknown, but most scholars put it in February or March. Julian himself supported Ammianus' picture of a jealous Constantius. In his Letter to the Athenians, a document constructed to answer charges that he was a usurper, Julian stated that from the start he, as Caesar, had been meant as a figurehead to the soldiers and provincials. The real power he claimed lay with the generals and officials already present in Gaul. In fact, according to Julian, the generals were charged with watching him as much as the enemy. His account of the actual acclamation closely followed what Ammianus told us, but he stressed even more his reluctance to take power. Julian claimed that he did so only after praying to Zeus for guidance.

Fearing the reaction of Constantius, Julian sent a letter to his fellow emperor justifying the events at Lutetia and trying to arrange a peaceful solution. This letter berated Constantius for forcing the troops in Gaul into an untenable situation. Ammianus stated that Julian's letter blamed Constantius' decision to transfer Gallic legions east as the reason for the soldiers' rebellion. Julian once again asserted that he was an unwilling participant who was only following the desire of the soldiers. In both of these basic accounts Ammianus and Julian are playing upon the theme of restoration. Implicit in their version of Julian's acclamation is the argument that Constantius was unfit to rule. The soldiers were the vehicle of the gods' will. The Letter to the Athenians is full of references to the fact that Julian was assuming the mantle of Augustus at the instigation of the gods. Ammianus summed up this position nicely when he related the story of how, when Julian was agonizing over whether to accept the soldiers' acclamation, he had a dream in which he was visited by the Genius (guardian spirit) of the Roman state. The Genius told Julian that it had often tried to bestow high honors upon Julian but had been rebuffed. Now, the Genius went on to say, was Julian's final chance to take the power that was rightfully his. If the Caesar refused this chance, the Genius would depart forever, and both Julian and the state would rue Julian's rejection. Julian himself wrote a letter to his friend Maximus of Ephesus in November of 361 detailing his thoughts on his proclamation. In this letter, Julian stated that the soldiers proclaimed him Augustus against his will. Julian, however, defended his accession, saying that the gods willed it and that he had treated his enemies with clemency and justice. He went on to say that he led the troops in propitiating the traditional deities, because the gods commanded him to return to the traditional rites, and would reward him if he fulfilled this duty.

During 360 an uneasy peace simmered between the two emperors. Julian spent the 360 campaigning season continuing his efforts to restore order along the Rhine, while Constantius continued operations against the Persians. Julian wintered in Vienne, and celebrated his Quinquennalia. It was at this time that his wife Helena died, and he sent her remains to Rome for a proper burial at his family villa on the Via Nomentana where the body of her sister was entombed. The uneasy peace held through the summer of 361, but Julian concentrated his military operations around harassing the Alamannic chieftain Vadomarius and his allies, who had concluded a peace treaty with Constantius some years earlier. By the end of the summer, Julian decided to put an end to the waiting and gathered his army to march east against Constantius. The empire teetered on the brink of another civil war. Constantius had spent the summer negotiating with the Persians and making preparations for possible military action against his cousin. When he was assured that the Persians would not attack, he summoned his army and sallied forth to meet Julian. As the armies drew inexorably closer to one another, the empire was saved from another bloody civil war when Constantius died unexpectedly of natural causes on 3 November near the town of Mopsucrenae in Cilicia, naming Julian -- the sources say-- as his legitimate successor.

Julian was in Dacia when he learned of his cousin's death. He made his way through Thrace and came to Constantinople on 11 December 361 where Julian honored the emperor with the funeral rites appropriate for a man of his station. Julian immediately set about putting his supporters in positions of power and trimming the imperial bureaucracy, which had become extremely overstaffed during Constantius' reign. Cooks and barbers had increased during the late emperor's reign and Julian expelled them from his court. Ammianus gave a mixed assessment of how the new emperor handled the followers of Constantius. Traditionally, emperors were supposed to show clemency to the supporters of a defeated enemy. Julian, however, gave some men over to death to appease the army. Ammianus used the case of Ursulus, Constantius' comes sacrum largitionum, to illustrate his point. Ursulus had actually tried to acquire money for the Gallic troops when Julian had first been appointed Caesar, but he had also made a disparaging remark about the ineffectiveness of the army after the battle of Amida. The soldiers remembered this, and when Julian became sole Augustus, they demanded Ursulus' head. Julian obliged, much to the disapproval of Ammianus. This seems to be a case of Julian courting the favor of the military leadership, and is indicative of a pattern in which Julian courted the goodwill of various societal elites to legitimize his position as emperor.

Another case in point is the officials who made up the imperial bureaucracy. Many of them were subjected to trial and punishment. To achieve this goal, during the last weeks of December 361 Julian assembled a military tribunal at Chalcedon, empanelling six judges to try the cases. The president of the tribunal was Salutius, just promoted to the rank of Praetorian Prefect; the five other members were Mamertinus, the orator, and four general officers: Jovinus, Agilo, Nevitta, and Arbetio. Relative to the proceedings of the tribunal, Ammianus noted that the judges, " . . . oversaw the cases more vehemently than was right or fair, with the exception of a few . . .." Ammianus' account of Julian's attempt at reform of the imperial bureaucracy is supported by legal evidence from the Theodosian Code. A series of laws sent to Mamertinus, Julian's appointee as Praetorian Prefect in Italy, Illyricum, and Africa, illustrate this point nicely. On 6 June 362, Mamertinus received a law that prohibited provincial governors from bypassing the Vicars when giving their reports to the Prefect. Traditionally, Vicars were given civil authority over a group of provinces, and were in theory meant to serve as a middle step between governors and Prefects. This law suggests that the Vicars were being left out, at least in Illyricum. Julian issued another edict to Mamertinus on 22 February 362 to stop abuse of the public post by governors. According to this law, only Mamertinus could issue post warrants, but the Vicars were given twelve blank warrants to be used as they saw fit, and each governor was given two. Continuing the trend of bureaucratic reform, Julian also imposed penalties on governors who purposefully delayed appeals in court cases they had heard. The emperor also established a new official to weigh solidi used in official government transactions to combat coin clipping.

For Julian, reigning in the abuses of imperial bureaucrats was one step in restoring the prestige of the office of emperor. Because he could not affect all elements of society personally, Julian, like other Neo-Flavian emperors, decided to concentrate on select groups of societal elites as intercessors between himself and the general populace. One of these groups was the imperial bureaucracy. Julian made it very clear that imperial officials were intercessors in a very real sense in a letter to Alypius, Vicar of Britain. In this letter, sent from Gaul sometime before 361, the emperor praises Alypius for his use of "mildness and moderation with courage and force" in his rule of the provincials. Such virtues were characteristic of the emperors, and it was good that Alypius is representing Julian in this way. Julian courted the army because it put him in power. Another group he sought to include in his rule was the traditional Senatorial aristocracy. One of his first appointments as consul was Claudius Mamertinus, a Gallic Senator and rhetorician. Mamertinus' speech in praise of Julian delivered at Constantinople in January of 362 is preserved. In this speech, Claudius presented his consular selection as inaugurating a new golden age and Julian as the restorer of the empire founded by Augustus. The image Mamertinus gave of his own consulate inaugurating a new golden age is not merely formulaic. The comparison of Julian to Augustus has very real, if implicit, relevance to Claudius' situation. Claudius emphasized the imperial period as the true age of renewal. Augustus ushered in a new era with his formation of a partnership between the emperor and the Senate based upon a series of honors and offices bestowed upon the Senate in return for their role as intercessor between emperor and populace. It was this system that Julian was restoring, and the consulate was one concrete example of this bond. To be chosen as a consul by the emperor, who himself had been divinely mandated, was a divine honor. In addition to being named consul, Mamertinus went on to hold several offices under Julian, including the Prefecture of Italy, Illyricum, and Africa. Similarly, inscriptional evidence illustrates a link between municipal elites and Julian during his time as Caesar, something which continued after he became emperor. One concrete example comes from the municipal senate of Aceruntia in Apulia, which established a monument on which Julian is styled as "Repairer of the World."

Julian seems to have given up actual Christian belief before his acclamation as emperor and was a practitioner of more traditional Greco-Roman religious beliefs, in particular, a follower of certain late antique Platonist philosophers who were especially adept at theurgy as was noted earlier. In fact Julian himself spoke of his conversion to Neo-Platonism in a letter to the Alexandrians written in 363. He stated that he had abandoned Christianity when he was twenty years old and been an adherent of the traditional Greco-Roman deities for the twelve years prior to writing this letter.

(For the complete text of this article see: http://www.roman-emperors.org/julian.htm)

Julian’s Persian Campaign

The exact goals Julian had for his ill-fated Persian campaign were never clear. The Sassanid Persians, and before them the Parthians, had been a traditional enemy from the time of the Late Republic, and indeed Constantius had been conducting a war against them before Julian's accession forced the former to forge an uneasy peace. Julian, however, had no concrete reason to reopen hostilities in the east. Socrates Scholasticus attributed Julian's motives to imitation of Alexander the Great, but perhaps the real reason lay in his need to gather the support of the army. Despite his acclamation by the Gallic legions, relations between Julian and the top military officers was uneasy at best. A war against the Persians would have brought prestige and power both to Julian and the army.

Julian set out on his fateful campaign on 5 March 363. Using his trademark strategy of striking quickly and where least expected, he moved his army through Heirapolis and from there speedily across the Euphrates and into the province of Mesopotamia, where he stopped at the town of Batnae. His plan was to eventually return through Armenia and winter in Tarsus. Once in Mesopotamia, Julian was faced with the decision of whether to travel south through the province of Babylonia or cross the Tigris into Assyria, and he eventually decided to move south through Babylonia and turn west into Assyria at a later date. By 27 March, he had the bulk of his army across the Euphrates, and had also arranged a flotilla to guard his supply line along the mighty river. He then left his generals Procopius and Sebastianus to help Arsacius, the king of Armenia and a Roman client, to guard the northern Tigris line. It was also during this time that he received the surrender of many prominent local leaders who had nominally supported the Persians. These men supplied Julian with money and troops for further military action against their former masters. Julian decided to turn south into Babylonia and proceeded along the Euphrates, coming to the fortress of Cercusium at the junction of the Abora and Euphrates Rivers around the first of April, and from there he took his army west to a region called Zaitha near the abandoned town of Dura where they visited the tomb of the emperor Gordian which was in the area. On April 7 he set out from there into the heart of Babylonia and towards Assyria.

Ammianus then stated that Julian and his army crossed into Assyria, which on the face of things appears very confusing. Julian still seems to be operating within the province of Babylonia between the Tigris and Euphrates rivers. The confusion is alleviated when one realizes that,for Ammianus, the region of Assyria encompassed the provinces of Babylonia and Assyria. On their march, Julian's forces took the fortress of Anatha, received the surrender and support of several more local princes, and ravaged the countryside of Assyria between the rivers. As the army continued south, they came across the fortresses Thilutha and Achaiachala, but these places were too well defended and Julian decided to leave them alone. Further south were the cities Diacira and Ozogardana, which the Roman forces sacked and burned. Soon, Julian came to Pirisabora and a brief siege ensued, but the city fell and was also looted and destroyed. It was also at this time that the Roman army met its first systematic resistance from the Persians. As the Romans penetrated further south and west, the local inhabitants began to flood their route. Nevertheless, the Roman forces pressed on and came to Maiozamalcha, a sizable city not far from Ctesiphon. After a short siege, this city too fell to Julian. Inexorably, Julian's forces zeroed in on Ctesiphon, but as they drew closer, the Persian resistance grew fiercer, with guerilla raids whittling at Julian's men and supplies. A sizable force of the army was lost and the emperor himself was almost killed taking a fort a few miles from the target city.
Finally, the army approached Ctesiphon following a canal that linked the Tigris and Euphrates. It soon became apparent after a few preliminary skirmishes that a protracted siege would be necessary to take this important city. Many of his generals, however, thought that pursuing this course of action would be foolish. Julian reluctantly agreed, but became enraged by this failure and ordered his fleet to be burned as he decided to march through the province of Assyria. Julian had planned for his army to live off the land, but the Persians employed a scorched-earth policy. When it became apparent that his army would perish (because his supplies were beginning to dwindle) from starvation and the heat if he continued his campaign, and also in the face of superior numbers of the enemy, Julian ordered a retreat on 16 June. As the Roman army retreated, they were constantly harassed by guerilla strikes. It was during one of these raids that Julian got caught up in the fighting and took a spear to his abdomen. Mortally wounded he was carried to his tent, where, after conferring with some of his officers, he died. The date was 26 June 363.

Conclusion

Thus an ignominious end for a man came about who had hoped to restore the glory of the Roman empire during his reign as emperor. Due to his intense hatred of Christianity, the opinion of posterity has not been kind to Julian. The contemporary opinion, however, was overall positive. The evidence shows that Julian was a complex ruler with a definite agenda to use traditional social institutions in order to revive what he saw as a collapsing empire. In the final assessment, he was not so different from any of the other emperors of the fourth century. He was a man grasping desperately to hang on to a Greco-Roman conception of leadership that was undergoing a subtle yet profound change.
Copyright (C) 2002, Walter E. Roberts and Michael DiMaio, Jr. Used by permission.

In reality, Julian worked to promote culture and philosophy in any manifestation. He tried to reduce taxes and the public debts of municipalities; he augmented administrative decentralisation; he promoted a campaign of austerity to reduce public expenditure (setting himself as the example). He reformed the postal service and eliminated the powerful secret police.
by Federico Morando; JULIAN II, The Apostate, See the Julian II Page on NumisWiki

Flavius Claudius Iulianus was born in 331 or maybe 332 A.D. in Constantinople. He ruled the Western Empire as Caesar from 355 to 360 and was hailed Augustus by his legions in Lutetia (Paris) in 360. Julian was a gifted administrator and military strategist. Famed as the last pagan emperor, his reinstatement of the pagan religion earned him the moniker "the Apostate." As evidenced by his brilliant writing, some of which has survived to the present day, the title "the Philosopher" may have been more appropriate. He died from wounds suffered during the Persian campaign of 363 A.D. Joseph Sermarini, FORVM.

Edited by J. P. Fitzgerald, Jr.

2 commentsCleisthenes

141 - Diocletian - Follis - RIC VI Trier 677a (corr. Cyzicus)Obv:– D N DIOCLETIANO FELICISSIMO SEN AVG, laureate bust right in imperial mantle, olive branch in right hand, mappa in left
Rev:– PROVIDENTIA DEORVM QVIES AVGG, Providentia standing right, extending right hand to Quies standing left, branch upward in right hand, vertical sceptre in left
Minted in Cyzicus (not Trier) ( S | F / KS //PTR)
Reference:– RIC VI Trier 677a (R) (see notes)
Notes:- This is perhaps one of the most unusual issues in the entire follis series. It is nearly always attributed to Trier (Treveri), but a comparison of portrait styles and an examination of follis hoards reveals that this issue was not struck in Trier but in Cyzicus. Two officinae struck this issue, and the KS in the field between the two figures is actually the mintmark, not the PTR. A look at the coins of Cyzicus (RIC 22-23) shows that the same two officinae struck this issue without the PTR also. The Senior Augustus issues of Diocletian and Maximianus were struck at every mint currently in operation. Apparently, the first coins of this type were prepared at Trier and examples were sent to the various mints for the individual mints to copy. At Cyzicus, the die engravers copied everything, including the Trier mintmark and put their own mintmark in the field. Eventually someone soon realized the mistake and new dies were prepared with the mintmark in its proper location.

Nicely silvered with little / no visible wear.maridvnvm

1410a, Jovian, 27 June 363 - 17 February 364 A.D.Bronze AE 3, RIC 179, aVF, Constantinople, 3.126g, 21.6mm, 180o. Obverse: D N IOVIANVS P F AVG, pearl diademed, draped and cuirassed bust left; Reverse: VOT V MVLT X within wreath, CONSPG in exergue; scarce.

Flavius Jovianuswas born in 331 at Singidunum, modern Belgrade. His distinguished father, Varronianus, had been a tribune of the legion Ioviani and a comes domesticorum, perhaps under Constantius II, who had retired to private life shortly before Jovian's elevation to the purple. Jovian married a daughter of Lucillianus, perhaps named Charito, and by her produced at least two children.

Jovian himself was a protector domesticus under Constantius II and Julian and, under Julian, primicerius domesticorum. Various Christian sources maintain that Jovian's Christianity led to his deposition by Julian, though most modern scholars dismiss this as ex post facto Christian apologetic. Jovian, recalled to the ranks if he had ever been dismissed, marched with Julian against Sapor in 363, and on 27 June, the day after that emperor's death, was acclaimed Augustus.

Ammianus and Zosimus, among others, detail the difficult straits of the Roman army during its withdrawal from Persian territory, Ammianus from the perspective of a proud soldier confident even in defeat of the superiority of Roman arms, Zosimus, in a much shorter and confused version, concentrating on the predicament of Jovian's troops and on the dire effects to the empire of the peace terms agreed to with Sapor. These terms entailed the cessation to Persia of Roman territory beyond the Tigris -- the cities of Singara and Nisibis, however, to be surrendered on the condition of the safe passage of their inhabitants -- and the guarantee of the neutrality of Rome's ally Arsaces, King of Armenia, in the event of future hostilities between Roman and Persia. Ammianus asserts that in agreeing to these terms Jovian misjudged his tactical strength and wasted an opportunity presented by negotiations with Sapor to move his forces closer to supplies at Corduena, and that Jovian acted on the advise of flatterers to preserve the fighting strength of his forces in the event of an attempt by Julian's relative Procopius to seize the throne. Others present the treaty terms as unavoidable given the Roman predicament.

Jovian appears to have treaded cautiously with regard to religious matters during the early months of his reign. Eunapius says that Jovian continued to honor Maximus and Priscus, the Neoplatonist advisors of Julian, and, upon reaching Tarsus, Jovian performed funeral rites for Julian. Nonetheless, various Christians, most notably Athanasius, took the initiative in an effort to gain Jovian's favor and support. An adherent of the Nicaean creed, Jovian did eventually recall various bishops of homoousian disposition and restore to their followers churches lost under earlier emperors. But in spite of such measures, unity among various Christian sects seems to have been the foremost concern of Jovian, whose ipsissima verba Socrates Scholasticus purports to give: "I abhor contentiousness, but love and honor those hurrying towards unanimity" (Hist. Eccl. 3.25).

Jovian died at the age of thirty-two on 17 February 364 at Dadastana on the boundary of Bithynia and Galatia. The cause of his death was most probably natural and is variously attributed to overeating, the consumption of poisonous mushrooms, or suffocation from fumes of charcoal or of the fresh paint on the room in which he was sleeping. Ammianus' comparison of the circumstances of Jovian's death to those of Scipio Aemilianus suggest the possibility of foul play, as does John of Antioch's reference to a poisoned rather than a poisonous mushroom, while John Chrysostom -- in a highly suspect literary context of consolatio-- asserts outright that the emperor was murdered. Eutropius records that he was enrolled among the gods, inter Divos relatus est. Zonaras says he was buried in the Church of the Holy Apostles and that his wife, Charito, was eventually laid to rest beside him.

Ancient authors agree that Jovian was of modest intellect but imposing physique and disposed to excessive eating and drinking.

By Thomas Banchich, Canisius College
Published: De Imperatoribus Romanis: An Online Encyclopedia of Roman Rulers and their Families http://www.roman-emperors.org/startup.htm. Used by permission.

Edited By J. P. Fitzgerald, Jr.

Cleisthenes

1471 - 1483, EDWARD IV (Second Reign), AR Groat, Struck 1477 - 1480 at London, EnglandObverse: EDWARD DEI GRA REX ANGL (Z FRANC +). Crowned bust of Edward IV facing within tressure of arches, trefoils on cusps, all within beaded circle. Small crosses in spaces between words in legend. Mintmark, off-flan, pierced cross.
Reverse: POSVI DEVM ADIVTORE MEVM +/ CIVITAS LONDON. Long cross dividing two concentric legends separated by two beaded circles into quarters, trefoil in each quarter of inner circle. Mintmark, pierced cross, small crosses between words in outer legend.
Diameter: 25mm | Weight: 2.7gms | Die Axis: 11h
SPINK: 2096 var. (DEI rather than DI in obverse legend)

Edward IV was King of England from March 1461 to October 1470, and again from April 1471 until his sudden death in 1483. He was the first Yorkist King of England. The first half of his rule was marred by the violence associated with the Wars of the Roses, but he overcame the Lancastrian challenge to the throne at Tewkesbury in 1471 and there were no further rebellions in England during the rest of his reign.
In 1475, Edward declared war on France, landing at Calais in June. However, his ally Charles the Bold, Duke of Burgundy, failed to provide any significant military assistance leading Edward to undertake negotiations with the French, with whom he came to terms under the Treaty of Picquigny. France provided him with an immediate payment of 75,000 crowns and a yearly pension of 50,000 crowns, thus allowing him to "recoup his finances". Edward also backed an attempt by Alexander Stewart, 1st Duke of Albany and brother of King James III of Scotland, to take the Scottish throne in 1482. Edward's younger brother, the Duke of Gloucester (and future King Richard III) led an invasion of Scotland that resulted in the capture of Edinburgh and the Scottish king himself. Alexander Stewart, however, reneged on his agreement with Edward. The Duke of Gloucester then withdrew from his position in Edinburgh, though he did retain Berwick-upon-Tweed.
Edward became subject to an increasing number of ailments when his health began to fail and he fell fatally ill at Easter in 1483. He survived long enough though to add some codicils to his will, the most important being to name his brother Richard, Duke of Gloucester as Protector after his death. He died on 9th April 1483 and was buried in St George's Chapel, Windsor Castle. He was succeeded first by his twelve-year-old son Edward V of England, who was never crowned, and then by his brother who reigned as Richard III.
It is not known what actually caused Edward's death. Pneumonia, typhoid and poison have all been conjectured, but some have attributed his death to an unhealthy lifestyle because he had become stout and inactive in the years before his death.
2 comments*Alex

148 - Galerius - Follis - RIC VI Antioch 059bObv:– GAL VAL MAXIMIANVS NOB CAES, Laureate head right
Rev:– GENIO POPVL-I ROMANI, Genius standing left holding patera
Minted in Antioch (_ | G // ANT Dot). A.D. 304-305
Reference:– RIC VI Antioch 59b

Slabbed by ANACS and mis-attributed to Maximinus II - ANACS 6091129maridvnvm

16 - 37 A.D. Tiberius - Ric 30 "Tribute Penny"Silver denarius, Lugdunum mint, 3.494g, 18.8mm, 225o, 16 - 37 A.D.;
TI CAESAR DIVI AVG F AVGVSTVS, laureate head right;
PONTIF MAXIM, Livia seated right holding scepter and branch, legs on chair ornamented, feet on footstool; nicely centered
RIC 30, RSC 16a, S 1763, VF

Jesus, referring to a "penny" asked, "Whose is this image and superscription?" When told it was Caesar, He said, ''Render therefore unto Caesar the things which are Caesar's and unto God the things that are God's" (Matthew 22:20-21). Since Tiberius was Caesar at the time, this denarius type is attributed by scholars as the "penny" referred to in the Bible.2 commentsjimwho523

161-169 AD - LUCIUS VERUS AE sestertius - struck 169 ADobv: DIVVS VERVS (bare head of Divus Verus right)
rev: CONSECRATIO (elephant quadriga advancing left, atop car shrine containing statue of Divus Verus seated left, raising hand), S-C in ex.
ref: RIC III 1507 (M.Aurelius), C.53 (30frcs), BMCRE (Marcus) 1369
23.51gms, 30mm, bronze
Very Rare
History: In the end of 168 AD as Marcus Aurelius and Lucius Verus were returning home from the fontier of south Pannonia, Lucius suddenly became ill with symptoms attributed to food poisoning, and was dead at the age of 38 near Altinum (Altino). The older Emperor accompanied the body to Rome, where he offered games to honour his memory. After the funeral, the senate declared Verus divine to be worshipped as Divus Verus.2 commentsberserker

1649 - 1660, THE COMMONWEALTH OF ENGLAND, AR Half-groat, Struck 1651 - 1653 at London, EnglandObverse: No legend. Shield bearing the Cross of Saint George between palm branch to left and laurel branch to right.
Reverse: • II • above two conjoined shields side by side, that on the left bearing the Cross of Saint George, that on the right bearing the Harp of Ireland.
Diameter: 17mm | Weight: 0.9gms | Die Axis: 11h
SPINK: 3221

This particular coin denomination is undated, but it has been suggested that the coin above can probably be attributed to the first coinage period (1651 - 1653) on stylistic grounds.

CLICK ON IMAGES BELOW TO ENLARGE AND FOR INFO ON COMMONWEALTH COINAGE

1 comments*Alex

1701a, Saladin, 1169-1193AYYUBID: Saladin, 1169-1193, AR dirham (2.92g), Halab, AH580, A-788, lovely struck, well-centered & bold, Extremely Fine, Scarce.

His name in Arabic, in full, is SALAH AD-DIN YUSUF IBN AYYUB ("Righteousness of the Faith, Joseph, Son of Job"), also called AL-MALIK AN-NASIR SALAH AD-DIN YUSUF I (b. 1137/38, Tikrit, Mesopotamia--d. March 4, 1193, Damascus), Muslim sultan of Egypt, Syria, Yemen, and Palestine, founder of the Ayyubid dynasty, and the most famous of Muslim heroes.

In wars against the Christian crusaders, he achieved final success with the disciplined capture of Jerusalem (Oct. 2, 1187), ending its 88-year occupation by the Franks. The great Christian counterattack of the Third Crusade was then stalemated by Saladin's military genius.

Saladin was born into a prominent Kurdish family. On the night of his birth, his father, Najm ad-Din Ayyub, gathered his family and moved to Aleppo, there entering the service of 'Imad ad-Din Zangi ibn Aq Sonqur, the powerful Turkish governor in northern Syria. Growing up in Ba'lbek and Damascus, Saladin was apparently an undistinguished youth, with a greater taste for religious studies than military training.
His formal career began when he joined the staff of his uncle Asad ad-Din Shirkuh, an important military commander under the amir Nureddin, son and successor of Zangi. During three military expeditions led by Shirkuh into Egypt to prevent its falling to the Latin-Christian (Frankish) rulers of the states established by the First Crusade, a complex, three-way struggle developed between Amalric I, the Latin king of Jerusalem, Shawar, the powerful vizier of the Egyptian Fatimid caliph, and Shirkuh. After Shirkuh's death and after ordering Shawar's assassination, Saladin, in 1169 at the age of 31, was appointed both commander of the Syrian troops and vizier of Egypt.

His relatively quick rise to power must be attributed not only to the clannish nepotism of his Kurdish family but also to his own emerging talents. As vizier of Egypt, he received the title king (malik), although he was generally known as the sultan. Saladin's position was further enhanced when, in 1171, he abolished the Shi'i Fatimid caliphate, proclaimed a return to Sunnah in Egypt, and consequently became its sole ruler.

Although he remained for a time theoretically a vassal of Nureddin, that relationship ended with the Syrian emir's death in 1174. Using his rich agricultural possessions in Egypt as a financial base, Saladin soon moved into Syria with a small but strictly disciplined army to claim the regency on behalf of the young son of his former suzerain.
Soon, however, he abandoned this claim, and from 1174 until 1186 he zealously pursued a goal of uniting, under his own standard, all the Muslim territories of Syria, northern Mesopotamia, Palestine, and Egypt.

This he accomplished by skillful diplomacy backed when necessary by the swift and resolute use of military force. Gradually, his reputation grew as a generous and virtuous but firm ruler, devoid of pretense, licentiousness, and cruelty. In contrast to the bitter dissension and intense rivalry that had up to then hampered the Muslims in their resistance to the crusaders, Saladin's singleness of purpose induced them to rearm both physically and spiritually.

Saladin's every act was inspired by an intense and unwavering devotion to the idea of jihad ("holy war")-the Muslim equivalent of the Christian crusade. It was an essential part of his policy to encourage the growth and spread of Muslim religious institutions.

He courted its scholars and preachers, founded colleges and mosques for their use, and commissioned them to write edifying works especially on the jihad itself. Through moral regeneration, which was a genuine part of his own way of life, he tried to re-create in his own realm some of the same zeal and enthusiasm that had proved so valuable to the first generations of Muslims when, five centuries before, they had conquered half the known world.

Saladin also succeeded in turning the military balance of power in his favour-more by uniting and disciplining a great number of unruly forces than by employing new or improved military techniques. When at last, in 1187, he was able to throw his full strength into the struggle with the Latin crusader kingdoms, his armies were their equals. On July 4, 1187, aided by his own military good sense and by a phenomenal lack of it on the part of his enemy, Saladin trapped and destroyed in one blow an exhausted and thirst-crazed army of crusaders at Hattin, near Tiberias in northern Palestine.

So great were the losses in the ranks of the crusaders in this one battle that the Muslims were quickly able to overrun nearly the entire Kingdom of Jerusalem. Acre, Toron, Beirut, Sidon, Nazareth, Caesarea, Nabulus, Jaffa (Yafo), and Ascalon (Ashqelon) fell within three months.

But Saladin's crowning achievement and the most disastrous blow to the whole crusading movement came on Oct. 2, 1187, when Jerusalem, holy to both Muslim and Christian alike, surrendered to the Sultan's army after 88 years in the hands of the Franks. In stark contrast to the city's conquest by the Christians, when blood flowed freely during the barbaric slaughter of its inhabitants, the Muslim reconquest was marked by the civilized and courteous behaviour of Saladin and his troops. His sudden success, which in 1189 saw the crusaders reduced to the occupation of only three cities, was, however, marred by his failure to capture Tyre, an almost impregnable coastal fortress to which the scattered Christian survivors of the recent battles flocked. It was to be the rallying point of the Latin counterattack.

Most probably, Saladin did not anticipate the European reaction to his capture of Jerusalem, an event that deeply shocked the West and to which it responded with a new call for a crusade. In addition to many great nobles and famous knights, this crusade, the third, brought the kings of three countries into the struggle.

The magnitude of the Christian effort and the lasting impression it made on contemporaries gave the name of Saladin, as their gallant and chivalrous enemy, an added lustre that his military victories alone could never confer on him.

The Crusade itself was long and exhausting, and, despite the obvious, though at times impulsive, military genius of Richard I the Lion-Heart, it achieved almost nothing. Therein lies the greatest-but often unrecognized--achievement of Saladin. With tired and unwilling feudal levies, committed to fight only a limited season each year, his indomitable will enabled him to fight the greatest champions of Christendom to a draw. The crusaders retained little more than a precarious foothold on the Levantine coast, and when King Richard set sail from the Orient in October 1192, the battle was over.

Saladin withdrew to his capital at Damascus. Soon, the long campaigning seasons and the endless hours in the saddle caught up with him, and he died. While his relatives were already scrambling for pieces of the empire, his friends found that the most powerful and most generous ruler in the Muslim world had not left enough money to pay for his own grave.

BIBLIOGRAPHY
H.A.R. Gibb, "The Arabic Sources for the Life of Saladin," Speculum, 25:58-72 (1950). C.W. Wilson's English translation of one of the most important Arabic works, The Life of Saladin (1897), was reprinted in 1971. The best biography to date is Stanley Lane-Poole, Saladin and the Fall of the Kingdom of Jerusalem, new ed. (1926, reprinted 1964), although it does not take account of all the sources.1 commentsCleisthenes

1789 AE Halfpenny Token. Macclesfield, Cheshire.Obverse: MACCLESFIELD. Ornamental cypher of “R & Co” (Roe & Company), surmounted by a beehive and six bees.
Reverse: HALFPENNY. The Genius of industry, presented as a female figure, seated facing left, holding drill in her right hand and an eight spoked cogwheel in her left hand by her side; in right field behind her is a mine capstan; in exergue, 1789.
Edge: Incuse legend “PAYABLE AT MACCLESFIELD LIVERPOOL OR CONGLETON • X •”.
Diameter 29mm | Die Axis 6.
Dalton & Hamer: 13
RARE

This token was issued by Charles Roe a leading Cheshire industrialist. The design for the token is attributed to John Gregory Hancock. Hancock was probably also responsible for the minting of these tokens, although the manufacture of them can be traced back to a separate contract placed with Matthew Boulton at his Soho Works in Birmingham.

Charles Roe was born in 1715 and died in 1781, he was the founder of Roe and Company, (also known as the Macclesfield Copper Company) which owned extensive works for smelting and making copper on land to the east of Macclesfield. Roe was a leading industrialist in the mid 18th Century, and much of his wealth and business empire was based on his various mining and metallurgical interests, he became a partner in several copper mines, and the famous Anglesey Mines in Wales were first worked under his direction.
Charles Roe was also a well known silk manufacturer and mill owner in his home county of Cheshire and there still exists today a memorial tablet to him in Christ Church, Macclesfield, which carries a lengthy inscription to his various lifetime achievements in the silk and metal trades.*Alex

1791 AE Halfpenny Token. Macclesfield, Cheshire.Obverse: CHARLES ROE ESTABLISHED THE COPPER WORKS 1758 • Bust of Charles Roe, facing right.
Reverse: MACCLESFIELD HALFPENNY. The Genius of industry, presented as a female figure, seated facing left, holding drill in her right hand and a six spoked cogwheel in her left hand by her side; in right field behind her is a mine capstan; in exergue, 1791.
Edge: Incuse legend “PAYABLE AT MACCLESFIELD LIVERPOOL OR CONGLETON • X •”.
Diameter 30mm | Die Axis 6.
Dalton & Hamer: 55

This token was issued by Charles Roe a leading Cheshire industrialist. The design for the token is attributed to John Gregory Hancock. Hancock was probably also responsible for the minting of these tokens, although the manufacture of them can be traced back to a separate contract placed with Matthew Boulton at his Soho Works in Birmingham.

Charles Roe was born in 1715 and died in 1781, he was the founder of Roe and Company, (also known as the Macclesfield Copper Company) which owned extensive works for smelting and making copper on land to the east of Macclesfield. Roe was a leading industrialist in the mid 18th Century, and much of his wealth and business empire was based on his various mining and metallurgical interests, he became a partner in several copper mines, and the famous Anglesey Mines in Wales were first worked under his direction.
Charles Roe was also a well known silk manufacturer and mill owner in his home county of Cheshire and there still exists today a memorial tablet to him in Christ Church, Macclesfield, which carries a lengthy inscription to his various lifetime achievements in the silk and metal trades.*Alex

1922C ALEXIUS METROPOLITAN TETARTERON S-1922 DOC 35 CLBC 2.4.3 OBV Christ Bearded and nimbate wearing tunic and kolobion, seated on a throne without back; holds gospel in l. hand. ( This is what it should be , coin is a brokerage of sorts.)

REV: Bust of emperor wearing stemma, divitision, and chlamys; holds in r. hand scepter cruciger and in l. hand Globus crucifer.

Size 15/16mm

Weight 4.00gm

Metropolitan Issues were minted in Constantinople, each of these coins had an added silver content of 3% and were also issued with a very light silver wash (Silver traces are common on Metropolitan issues but intact fully silvered coins are very rare.) These more than likely were tariffed at a higher rate than the Thessalonica issues that have been shown to have no silver content. Metropolitan issues are in general far scarcer than the Thessalonica issues.

This coin was attributed by rev alone, it is the only possible match for Alexius and it is clearly by inscription, his rule.

DOC catalog lists 9 examples with weights ranging from 2.95gm to 3.72 and size from 16mm to 20mm Simon

1932 ALEXIUS AE HALF TETARTERON S-1932 DOC 45 CLBC 2.4.8
OBV Patriarchal cross on two steps.

REV Bust of emperor wearing stemma divitision and jeweled loros and in r. hand holding jeweled scepter and in l. Globus cruciger.

Size 15.81mm

Weight 2.0gm

DOC lists 42 examples with weights ranging from .59gm to 3.22gm and sizes ranging from 13mm to 18mm

I have many of these coins that very much vary in their design, I do not believe these coins came from one mint but many different mints. The cross design changes in many different ways. This is an easy coin to acquire, the trick is finding the nice ones and with a denomination so small little effort was put into minting perfect coins. This example has good relief on both sides but the Globus Cruciger is missing due to an imperfect strike. I believe this one by style alone to be minted in Thessalonica.
Interesting find, even though Michael Hendy attributed this to a unknown mint recent excavations of the Metro in Thessalonica have shown
these coins in the hundreds, bringing once again Thessalonica back in to the fold.Simon

1932A ALEXIUS AE HALF TETARTERON S-1932 DOC 45 CLBC 2.4.8
OBV Patriarchal cross on two steps.

REV Bust of emperor wearing stemma divitision and jeweled loros and in r. hand holding jeweled scepter and in l. Globus cruciger.

Size

Weight

DOC lists 42 examples with weights ranging from .59gm to 3.22gm and sizes ranging from 13mm to 18mm

I have many of these coins that very much vary in their design, I do not believe these coins came from one mint but many different mints. The cross design changes in many different ways. This is an easy coin to acquire, the trick is finding the nice ones and with a denomination so small little effort was put into minting perfect coins. This example has good relief on both sides but the Globus Cruciger is missing due to an imperfect strike. I believe this one by style alone to be minted in Thessalonica.
Interesting find, even though Michael Hendy attributed this to a unknown mint recent excavations of the Metro in Thessalonica have shown
these coins in the hundreds, bringing once again Thessalonica back in to the fold.Simon

1993 ISAAC COMNENUS OF CYPRUS AG TETARTERON S-1993 DOC 6 CLBC 6.3.1 OBV Bust of virgin nimbate, wearing tunic and maphorion

REV Bust of emperor wearing stemma, divitision and chlamys; holds in r hand scepter cruciger, and in l. globus cruciger.

Size 19.73 mm

Weight 1.9 gm

This issues in Cyprus have a small amount of silver in them 1.5% make them more related to the Metropolitan issue of the empire.

DOC list 1 example with a weight of 2.48 and sized at 19mm.

Battered example, Very rare . This coin was originally attributed as a Manuel coin, the version this one was based off of. However a few details that are clear prove it to be Isaac, the main one is the hand scepter cruciger vs a labrum and the type of cross style on the globus cruciger. Simon

1en Julian II "Apostate"360-363

AE3

Pearl-diademed, helmeted, cuirassed bust left, holding shield & spear, D N FL CL IVLIANVS P F AVG
VOT X MVLT XX in four lines within wreath, palm branch-BSIS-palm branch in ex [?].

RIC 415

According to Zosimus: Constantius, having so well succeeded in his design against Vetranio, marched against Magnentius, having first conferred the title of Caesar on Gallus, the son of his uncle, and brother to Julian who was afterwards emperor, and given him in marriage his sister Constantia. . . . CONSTANTIUS, after having acted towards Gallus Caesar in the manner I have related, left Pannonia to proceed into Italy. . . . He scarcely thought himself capable of managing affairs at this critical period. He was unwilling, however, to associate any one with himself in the government, because he so much desired to rule alone, and could esteem no man his friend. Under these circumstances he was at a loss how to act. It happened, however, that when the empire was in the greatest danger, Eusebia, the wife of Constantius, who was a woman of extraordinary learning, and of greater wisdom than her sex is usually endowed with, advised him to confer the government of the nations beyond the Alps on Julianus Caesar, who was brother to Gallus, and grandson to Constantius. As she knew that the emperor was suspicious of all his kindred, she thus circumvented him. She observed to him, that Julian was a young man unacquainted with the intrigues of state, having devoted himself totally to his studies; and that he was wholly inexperienced in worldly business. That on this account he would be more fit for his purpose than any other person. That either he would be fortunate, and his success would be attributed to the emperor's conduct, or that he would fail and perish; and that thus Constantius would have none of the imperial family to succeed to him.

Constantius, having approved her advice, sent for Julian from Athens, where he lived among the philosophers, and excelled all his masters in every kind of learning. Accordingly, Julian returning from Greece into Italy, Constantius declared him Caesar, gave him in marriage his sister Helena, and sent him beyond the Alps. . . .

Constantius, having thus disposed of Julian, marched himself into Pannonia and Moesia, and having there suppressed the Quadi and the Sarmatians, proceeded to the east, and was provoked to war by the inroads of the Persians. Julian by this time had arrived beyond the Alps into the Gallic nations which he was to rule. Perceiving that the Barbarians continued committing the same violence, Eusebia, for the same reasons as before, persuaded Constantius to place the entire management of those countries into the hands of Julian. . . . Julian finding the military affairs of Gallia Celtica in a very ruinous state, and that the Barbarians pased the Rhine without any resistance, even almost as far as the sea-port towns, he took a survey of the remaining parts of the enemy. And understanding that the people of those parts were terrified at the very name of the Barbarians, while those whom Constantius had sent along with him, who were not more than three hundred and sixty, knew nothing more, as he used to say, than how to say their prayers, he enlisted as many more as he could and took in a great number of volunteers. He also provided arms, and finding a quantity of old weapons in some town he fitted them up, and distributed them among the soldiers. The scouts bringing him intelligence, that an immense number of Barbarians had crossed the river near the city of Argentoratum (Strasburg) which stands on the Rhine, he no sooner heard of it, than he led forth his army with the greatest speed, and engaging with the enemy gained such a victory as exceeds all description.

After these events he raised a great army to make war on the whole German nation; He was opposed however by the Barbarians in vast numbers. Caesar therefore would not wait while they came up to him, but crossed the Rhine, preferring that their country should be the seat of war, and not that of the Romans, as by that means the cities would escape being again pillaged by the Barbarians. A most furious battle therefore took place; a great number of the Barbarians being slain on the field of battle, while the rest fled, and were pursued by Caesar into the Hercynian forest, and many of them killed. . . .

But while Julian was at Parisium, a small town in Germany, the soldiers, being ready to march, continued at supper till midnight in a place near the palace, which they so called there. They were as yet ignorant of any design against Caesar [by Constantius], when some tribunes, who began to suspect the contrivance against him, privately distributed a number of anonymous billets among the soldiers, in which they represented to them, that Caesar, by his judicious conduct had so managed affairs, that almost all of them had erected trophies over the Barbarians ; that he had always fought like a private soldier, and was now in extreme danger from the emperor, who would shortly deprive him of his whole army, unless they prevented it. Some of the soldiers having read these billets, and published the intrigue to the whole army, all were highly enraged. They suddenly rose from their seats in great commotion, and with the cups yet in their hands went to the palace. Breaking open the doors without ceremony, they brought out Caesar, and lifting him on a shield declared him emperor and Augustus. They then, without attending to his reluctance, placed a diadem upon his head. . . .

Arriving at Naisus, he consulted the soothsayers what measures to pursue. As the entrails signified that he must stay there for some time, he obeyed, observing likewise the time that was mentioned in his dream. When this, according to the motion of the planets, was arrived, a party of horsemen arrived from Constantinople at Naisus, with intelligence that Constantius was dead, and that the armies desired Julian to be emperor. Upon this he accepted what the gods had bestowed upon him, and proceeded on his journey. On his arrival at. Byzantium, he was received with joyful acclamations. . . .

[After slashing through Persia and crossing the Tigris,] they perceived the Persian army, with which they engaged, and having considerably the advantage, they killed a great number of Persians. Upon the following day, about noon, the Persians drew up in a large body, and once more attacked the rear of the Roman army. The Romans, being at that time out of their ranks, were surprised and alarmed at the suddenness of the attack, yet made a stout and spirited defence. The emperor, according to his custom, went round the army, encouraging them to fight with ardour. When by this means all were engaged, the emperor, who sometimes rode to the commanders and tribunes, and was at other times among the private soldiers, received a wound in the heat of the engagement, and was borne on a shield to his tent. He survived only till midnight. He then expired, after having nearly subverted the Persian empire.

Note: Julian favored the pagan faith over Christianity and was tarred by the church as "the apostate." Blindado

20. Philip I.Antoninianus, 244-245 AD, Antioch mint (or "Unknown mint").
Obverse: IMP C M IVL PHILIPPVS PF AVG PM / Radiate bust of Philip I.
Reverse: PAX FVNDATA CVM PERSIS / Pax holding branch and transverse sceptre.
3.25 gm., 21 mm.
RIC #69; Sear #8941.

On Roman coins, PM usually stands for Pontifex Maximus. However, the PM at the end of the obverse legend on this coin (and on the following 2 coins) is usually taken to mean Persicus Maximus -- a title Philip took for himself to commemorate his "victory" over the Persians. It exists only on the earliest coins of Philip I minted in Antioch, but was soon dropped as word got out that the "victory" was really a hastily concluded peace treaty which gave the Romans no advantages whatsoever. The PM is found at the end of the obverse legend or under the bust.
The reverse legend celebrates the lasting peace with Persia.

Recent research indicates that the first series of coins attributed to Antioch by RIC may have been produced at what is currently being called the "Unknown mint." This coin and the next 2 coins are from that mint.Callimachus

2014.054.1Rome, 4.00 g

Obverse: IMP C M AVR PROBVS AVG; Radiate, cuirassed bust right.
Reverse: SALVS AVG; XXIS in exergue; Salus standing left, holding scepter in left and feeding snake rising from altar from patera in right.
Ref: RIC 744 (under Siscia); Re-attributed to Rome by Pink V1/1, 1st Emission.gordian_guy

2015x ALEXIUS III ANGELUS-COMNENUS AE Half? TETARTERON S-2015/7v DOC 5 CLBC 8.4.3v VARIATION UNLISTEDOBV Bust of St. George , beardless and nimbate , wearing tunic, breastplate wearing tunic, breastplate, and sagion; holds spear in r. hand resting on l. shoulder and in l. scroll or hilt of sword AND shield behind left arm.

REV Full length figure of emperor wearing stemma, divitision, and chlamys; holds in r. hand labarum on long shaft and in l. Globus cruciger with patriarchal cross.

Size 17.94mm

Weight 2.4gm

I purchased this as part of a collection from Europe. The coin was attributed by previous owner as S-2017 a much rarer coin to find. Upon reexamining the coin, it turned out it has a shield and hilt of sword that the left hand is holding. On the reverse the gl.cr. has a patriarchal cross, this is seen on his half Tetartera.

The weight is average for a half Tetarteron and a bit low for a full Tetarteron . the die size is around 15mm, small for a Tetarteron and large for a half.
AKA the Diane Variation
Simon

22. Celtic Alexander Tetradrachm (?)Tetradrachm, ca 2'nd century BC, Danube region.
Obverse: Head of Alexander as Herakles, wearing lion's skin headdress.
Reverse: ΑΛΕΞΑΝΔΡΟΥ / Zeus sitting, holding his attendant eagle and sceptre. Tripod at left.
17.25 gm., 28 mm.

In researching this coin, I found five coins which are from the same pair of dies as this one. These are the only examples of this type (tripod on reverse) that I've been able to find.

1. Palladium sale #10 (Nov. 1995), attributed to the mint at Pella and catalogued as Muller #146.

2. Palladium sale #11 (April 1996), described as "unlisted in Price, and apparently unknown before a recent hoard find. Variant of Price 633."

3. CNG sale #54, lot 99, described as a Celtic imitation of Alexander's coinage from the Danube region, ca 2'nd century BC. c.f. Goble, OTA, 566. This is the coin pictured above.

4. CNG sale #72, lot 13, described as "Celtic, Lower Danube, uncertain tribe, early 3'rd century BC . . . . Unpublished in the standard references . . . . By virtue of its style, fabric, and weight, this Alexander imitation is certainly an early issue, probably struck during the first decades of the third century BC."

5. Harlan J Berk 156th Buy or Bid Sale (Oct. 2007), lot 75, described as "Possibly unpublished . . . Somewhat unusual style on the obverse."

Five coins from the same pair or dies, five different attributions. I will agree, though, with the last statement of coin #4 above, that this appears to be an early issue. This coin is on a thick flan resembling coins minted during Alexander's lifetime and immediately thereafter and is made from good silver. There is something a bit barbaric about the style of this coin, although there are genuine Alexander coins listed and pictured in Martin J. Price's book which are more barbaric than this one. An interesting coin.1 commentsCallimachus

283-285 AD - CARUS AE antoninianusobv: DIVO CARO (radiate head right)
rev: CONSECRATIO (eagle standing facing, head left), KAA in ex.
ref: RIC Vii 47, C 15 (1fr)
mint: Rome, struck under Numerian and Carinus
3.23gms, 22mm

Having defeated the Quadi and Sarmatians on the Danube, Carus proceeded through Thrace and Asia Minor, annexed Mesopotamia, pressed on to Seleucia and Ctesiphon, and carried his arms beyond the Tigris. His death was variously attributed to disease, the effects of lightning, or a wound received in a campaign against the Persians. The facts that he was leading a victorious campaign, and that his son Numerian succeeded him without opposition, suggest that his death may have been due to natural causes.berserker

3159 CAPPADOCIA, Caesarea. Hadrian 124 AD Sol on Mt ArgaeusReference.
Cohen -, cf. 457 (laureate and without aegis). Henseler -, cf. X29a var. (without aegis). RIC -. RPC III -, cf. 3158-9 (differing bust types). Sydenham -, cf. 290a (laureate and without aegis). An unpublished variety of a very rare type.

Issue Bronze with latin legends and Mount Argaeus as reverse design

Obv. HADRIANVS AVGVSTVS
Radiate head of Hadrian to right, with aegis on his left shoulder.

Rev. COS III
Mount Argaeus surmounted by statue of Sol-Helios, radiate, holding globe in his right hand and long scepter with his left.

4.81 gr
19 mm
6h

Note.
From the Collection of Sir A. J. Evans, Ars Classica XVII, 3 October 1934, 1400.

While usually being attributed to Caesarea, the style of the very rare small bronzes of Hadrian with Latin legends showing the Mount Argaios is clearly that of Rome. It is generally believed that the Rome mint shipped its dies to the East in such cases to have the coins struck on the spot, but the fact that RPC records an obverse die match between an Argaios-semis and a regular Rome mint piece in Vienna with a modius on the reverse (RPC III 3159.3 resp. BMC p. 442*) strongly indicates that all semisses were struck in Rome. The emergence of a local motive on a Roman Imperial coin is, in any case, very unusual and the coins may have been struck to commemorate Hadrian's visit to Cappadocia in 124 or 130/1. 1 commentsokidoki

32. Otacilia Severa.Antoninianus, ca 245 - 247 AD, "Branch mint" (?)
Obverse: M OTACIL SEVERA AVG / Diademed bust of Severa, on a crescent.
Reverse: IVNO CONSERVAT / Juno standing, veiled, holding patera and sceptre.
4.27 gm., 21 mm.
RIC #127; Sear #9152.

RIC tentatively assigns this coin to Antioch, Sear assigns it to Rome (See RIC, vol. IV, part III, pages 54 and 64). Stylistically, this coin does not fit in with Rome and that is why RIC attributed it to Antioch. Curtis Clay recently suggested this coin is part of a small issue minted at a branch mint to produce coinage for Philip's Carpic campaign of 245-247. So at present, the mint for this coin is still open to question. Callimachus

320. CarusMarcus Aurelius Carus (c. 230 - late July/early August, 283), Roman emperor (282-283), was born probably at Narbona (more correctly, Narona -- now the ruins at Vid, Croatia) in Illyria, but was educated at Rome. He was a senator, and had filled various civil and military posts before he was appointed prefect of the Praetorian Guard by the emperor Probus. After the murder of Probus at Sirmium, Carus was proclaimed emperor by the soldiers.

Although Carus severely avenged the death of Probus, he was himself suspected of having been an accessory to the deed. He does not seem to have returned to Rome after his accession, but contented himself with an announcement of the fact to the Senate.

Bestowing the title of Caesar upon his sons Carinus and Numerian, he left Carinus in charge of the western portion of the empire, and took Numerian with him on the expedition against the Persians which had been contemplated by Probus. Having defeated the Quadi and Sarmatians on the Danube, Carus proceeded through Thrace and Asia Minor, conquered Mesopotamia, pressed on to Seleucia and Ctesiphon, and carried his arms beyond the Tigris.

His hopes of further conquest were cut short by his death. One day, after a violent storm, it was announced that he was dead. His death was variously attributed to disease, the effects of lightning, or a wound received in a campaign against the Huns. However it seems more probable that he was murdered by the soldiers, who were averse to further campaigns against Persia, at the instigation of Arrius Aper, prefect of the Praetorian Guard.

VF/VF Carus AE Antoninianus / Virtus
Attribution: VM 16
Date: 282-283 AD
Obverse: IMP C M AVR CARVS P F AVG, radiate bust r.
Reverse: VIRTVS AVGGG, Carus receiving globe from Jupiter
Size: 20.32 mm
Weight: 2.7 grams
Description: An attractive Carus ant
ecoli

37-41 AD - AGRIPPA memorial AE dupondius - struck under Caligula (by RIC)obv: M AGRIPPA LF COS III (head left wearing rostral crown)(with Vespasian countermark)
rev: - / S.C. (Neptune holding small dolphin in right hand & vertical trident in left)
ref: RIC58(Gaius), BMC(Tib)161
10.51gms, 28mm
Rare with this cmk

The capricorn originally a sign related to Augustus, it became a symbol of Vespasian' reign also. This countermark often attributed to Vespasian during the civil war, mostly found on eastern provincial coins. A similiar countermark exists on regular roman coinage from Claudius, likely applied in the balkan region. The emblem beneath could be variously interpreted as a plough or a globe with ships rudder, or maybe instrument. This Agrippa coin with Vespasian cmk was found in the balkan region, too. Top of the picture is the original counterstamp-mint.berserker

4 tessera provincial holed tycheAE provincial tessera
0.86 g, 13.4 mm, 6 h.
Obv. Crescent moon with three starts within.
Rev. Nemesis standing left holding cornucopiea and rudder. Holed above Nemesis for use as a pendant.
Reportedly recently attributed to Nikolpolis although I don't know the details.Aleph

4) Antony: SosiusGAIUS SOSIUS
General to Antony
Æ 26mm (14.5 g). ~ 38 BC.
Cilicia, Uncertain Mint.

Bare head right / Fiscus, sella, quaestoria and hasta; Q below.

Coin has been attributed to multiple rulers, including Julius Caesar, Augustus and Brutus. Now believed to be Sosius, General to Antony and Governor of Syria.

RPC I 5409; Laffaille 324; Grant, FITA, pg. 13. aFine, brown patina, scratches. Rare.
0001SOS

Sosius was wily and accomplished man. A talented general, he received a triumph. However, he consistently picked the wrong side in Rome's Civil Wars (Senate vs. Caesar, then Antony vs. Octavian) yet somehow managed to keep his head.

According to Wikipedia:

Gaius Sosius was a Roman general and politician.

Gaius Sosius was elected quaestor in 66 BC and praetor in 49 BC. Upon the start of the civil war, he joined the party of the Senate and Pompey. Upon the flight of Pompey to Greece, Sosius returned to Rome and submitted to Julius Caesar.

After the assassination of Caesar, Sosius joined the party of Mark Antony, by whom in 38 BC he was appointed governor of Syria and Cilicia in the place of Publius Ventidius. As governor, Sosius was commanded by Antony to support Herod against Antigonus the Hasmonean, when the latter was in possession of Jerusalem. In 37 BC, he advanced against Jerusalem and after he became master of the city, Sosius placed Herod upon the throne. In return for this services, he was awarded a triumph in 34 BC, and he became consul along with Gnaeus Domitius Ahenobarbus as his colleague in 32 BC.

When civil war broke out between Antony and Octavian, Sosius espoused the cause of Antony and violently attacked Octavian in the senate, for which he was forced to flee to the east. In 31 BC, Sosius commanded a squadron in Mark Antony's fleet with which he managed to defeat the squadron of Taurius Rufus – according to Dio 50.14 – and put it to flight, but when the latter was reinforced by Marcus Agrippa, Sosius's ally Tarcondimotus – the king of Cilicia – was killed and Sosius himself was forced to flee. At Actium, Sosius commanded the left wing of Antony's fleet. After the battle, from which he managed to escape, his hiding place was detected and Sosius was captured and brought before Octavian but, at the intercession of Lucius Arruntius, Octavian pardoned him. He returned to Rome and completed his building project on the temple of Apollo Medicus (begun in 34 BC), dedicating it in Octavian's name.

Unknown sons, but two daughters : Sosia and Sosia Galla, possibly by an Asinia,[1] a Nonia or an Aelia. However the name reappears with Q. Sosius Senecio, (consul in 99 and 107).[2] and Saint Sosius (275-305 AD).

Sosius attended the Ludi Saeculares in 17 according to an inscription CIL 6.32323 = ILS 5050 as a quindecimvir.
RM00024 commentsSosius

44346 Aurelian/Mars44346 Aurelian/Mars
Antoninianus 270-275 AD,
Obv: IMP AVRELIANVS AVG
Radiate cuirassed bust right
Rev: FIDES EXERCITI
Mars walking right holding a spear and trophy over his shoulder
Mint: 22.6mm 3.6g
RIC V-1, 393 unattributed mint; Sear 11531
Blayne W

49. Philp II, year 5.Tetradrachm, Year 5 (247 / 248 AD), Alexandria, Egypt.
Obverse: A K M IOΥ ΦIΛIΦΦOC E / Bust of Philip II.
Reverse: L E / Homonoia (Concordia) standing, hand extended, holding double cornucopiae.
13.97 gm.,
22.5 mm.

During the last few years of the reign of Philip I, both father and son shared the same titles. Coin portraits of father and son can often be distinguished from each other since Philip I is usually portrayed with a beard and Philip II is not. This coin was purchased as a tetradrachm of Philip I, but is being attributed here as a coin of Philip II since there is no trace of a beard on the portrait. Callimachus

50. Edward IIPenny, London mint.
Obverse: +EDWAR R ANGL DNS HYB / Crowned bust, facing.
Reverse: CIVITAS LONDON / Long cross with three pellets in each angle.
1.41 gm., 19 mm.
North #1065; Seaby #1468.

Classification from North, Vol. 2, p. 24-25; and Seaby 1994:
- E with angular back = types 11b - 15b.
- Bifoliate crown = types 10a - 15b.
- The distinguishing feature is the central fleur of the crown with straight sides and tall lis (fig. 13 on p. 25 of North, vol. 2.)
- Along with this goes the "large smiling face with leering eyes."
- This coins is therefore type 14 -- which is attributed to Edward II.

Perhaps unusual is the obverse legend with two Rs in it, not mentioned by North or Seaby.
Callimachus

50. Valerian II.Antoninianus, 256 - 258 AD, either the Antioch mint or a mint in Samaosata.
Obverse: P LIC COR VALERIANVS CAES / Radiate bust of Valerian II.
Reverse: VICTORIA PART / Victory presenting wreath to Valerian II, in military dress, holding globe and spear.
3.77 gm., 21 mm.
RIC #54; Sear #10742.

Attributed to Antioch, 255 AD by RIC.
Attributed to "Eastern field mint," 256-58 AD by Sear, vol. III.
This coin shows a cuirass at the bottom edge of the obverse. Since it is way to the right, this bust type is "seen from behind." Not mentioned in RIC or Sear.
Just what victory over the Parthians is referred to on this coin is open to question.Callimachus

5787 EGYPT, Alexandria. Hadrian Tetradrachm 131-32 AD SabinaReference.
RPC III, 5787; Köln 1039; Dattari (Savio) 7360; K&G 32.515; Emmett 886.16

Issue L IϚ = year 16

Obv. ΑΥΤ ΚΑΙ - ΤΡΑΙ ΑΔΡΙΑ ϹƐΒ
Laureate draped and cuirassed bust of Hadrian, r., seen from rear

Rev. ϹΑΒƐΙΝΑ ϹƐΒΑϹΤΗ, L ΙϚ
Draped bust of Sabina, r. (hair on top of head)

12.97 gr
23.50 mm
12h

Note.
From the Stein A. Evensen Collection. Ex VAuctions 219 (8 January 2009), lot 103 (misattributed to RY 13).1 commentsokidoki

703a, Tiberius, 19 August 14 - 16 March 37 A.D., Tribute Penny of Matthew 22:20-21Silver denarius, RIC I 30, RSC II 16a, SRCV 1763, gVF, Lugdunum mint, 3.837g, 18.7mm, 90o, 16 - 37 A.D.; obverse TI CAESAR DIVI AVG F AVGVSTVS, laureate head right; reverse PONTIF MAXIM, Pax/Livia seated right holding scepter and branch, legs on chair ornamented, feet on footstool; toned. Ex FORVM.

De Imperatoribus Romanis
An Online Encyclopedia of Roman Emperors

Tiberius (A.D. 14-37)

Garrett G. Fagan
Pennsylvania State University

Introduction
The reign of Tiberius (b. 42 B.C., d. A.D. 37, emperor A.D. 14-37) is a particularly important one for the Principate, since it was the first occasion when the powers designed for Augustus alone were exercised by somebody else. In contrast to the approachable and tactful Augustus, Tiberius emerges from the sources as an enigmatic and darkly complex figure, intelligent and cunning, but given to bouts of severe depression and dark moods that had a great impact on his political career as well as his personal relationships.

. . . .

Early life (42-12 B.C.)
Tiberius Claudius Nero was born on 16 November 42 B.C. to Ti. Claudius Nero and Livia Drusilla. Both parents were scions of the gens Claudia which had supplied leaders to the Roman Republic for many generations. . . [I]n 39 B.C., his mother Livia divorced Ti. Claudius Nero and married Octavian, thereby making the infant Tiberius the stepson of the future ruler of the Roman world. Forever afterward, Tiberius was to have his name coupled with this man, and always to his detriment.

. . . .

Accession and Early Reign (A.D. 14 - 23)
The accession of Tiberius proved intensely awkward. After Augustus had been buried and deified, and his will read and honored, the Senate convened on 18 September to inaugurate the new reign and officially "confirm" Tiberius as emperor. Such a transfer of power had never happened before, and nobody, including Tiberius, appears to have known what to do. Tacitus's account is the fullest. . . Rather than tactful, he came across to the senators as obdurate and obstructive. He declared that he was too old for the responsibilities of the Principate, said he did not want the job, and asked if he could just take one part of the government for himself. The Senate was confused, not knowing how to read his behavior. Finally, one senator asked pointedly, "Sire, for how long will you allow the State to be without a head?" Tiberius relented and accepted the powers voted to him, although he refused the title "Augustus."

. . . .

Tiberius allowed a trusted advisor to get too close and gain a tremendous influence over him. That advisor was the Praetorian Prefect, L. Aelius Sejanus, who would derail Tiberius's plans for the succession and drive the emperor farther into isolation, depression, and paranoia.

Sejanus (A.D. 23-31)
Sejanus hailed from Volsinii in Etruria. He and his father shared the Praetorian Prefecture until A.D. 15 when the father, L. Seius Strabo, was promoted to be Prefect of Egypt, the pinnacle of an equestrian career under the Principate. Sejanus, now sole Prefect of the Guard, enjoyed powerful connections to senatorial houses and had been a companion to Gaius Caesar on his mission to the East, 1 B.C. - A.D. 4. Through a combination of energetic efficiency, fawning sycophancy, and outward displays of loyalty, he gained the position of Tiberius's closest friend and advisor.

. . . .

[I]n a shocking and unexpected turn of events, [a] letter sent by Tiberius from Capri initially praised Sejanus extensively, and then suddenly denounced him as a traitor and demanded his arrest. Chaos ensued. Senators long allied with Sejanus headed for the exits, the others were confused -- was this a test of their loyalty? What did the emperor want them to do? -- but the Praetorian Guard, the very troops formerly under Sejanus's command but recently and secretly transferred to the command of Q. Sutorius Macro, arrested Sejanus, conveyed him to prison, and shortly afterwards executed him summarily. A witch-hunt followed. . . All around the city, grim scenes were played out, and as late as A.D. 33 a general massacre of all those still in custody took place.

Tiberius himself later claimed that he turned on Sejanus because he had been alerted to Sejanus's plot against Germanicus's family. This explanation has been rejected by most ancient and modern authorities, since Sejanus's demise did nothing to alleviate that family's troubles.

. . . .

The Last Years (A.D. 31-37)
The Sejanus affair appears to have greatly depressed Tiberius. A close friend and confidant had betrayed him; whom could he trust anymore? His withdrawal from public life seemed more complete in the last years. Letters kept him in touch with Rome, but it was the machinery of the Augustan administration that kept the empire running smoothly. Tiberius, if we believe our sources, spent much of his time indulging his perversities on Capri.

. . . .

Tiberius died quietly in a villa at Misenum on 16 March A.D. 37. He was 78 years old. There are some hints in the sources of the hand of Caligula in the deed, but such innuendo can be expected at the death of an emperor, especially when his successor proved so depraved. The level of unpopularity Tiberius had achieved by the time of his death with both the upper and lower classes is revealed by these facts: the Senate refused to vote him divine honors, and mobs filled the streets yelling "To the Tiber with Tiberius!" (in reference to a method of disposal reserved for the corpses of criminals).

Tiberius and the Empire
Three main aspects of Tiberius's impact on the empire deserve special attention: his relative military inertia; his modesty in dealing with offers of divine honors and his fair treatment of provincials; and his use of the Law of Treason (maiestas).

. . . .

Conclusion
. . . Tiberius's reign sporadically descended into tyranny of the worst sort. In the right climate of paranoia and suspicion, widespread denunciation led to the deaths of dozens of Senators and equestrians, as well as numerous members of the imperial house. In this sense, the reign of Tiberius decisively ended the Augustan illusion of "the Republic Restored" and shone some light into the future of the Principate, revealing that which was both promising and terrifying.

[For the entire article please refer to http://www.roman-emperors.org/tiberius.htm]

Copyright © 1997, Garrett G. Fagan. Used by permission.

"Some of the things he did are hard to believe. He had little boys trained as minnows to chase him when he went swimming and to get between his legs and nibble him. He also had babies not weaned from their mother breast suck at his chest and groin . . . "
(Suetonius. The Twelve Caesars. Trans. Robert Graves. London: Penguin Books, 1979. XLIV).

Jesus, referring to a "penny" asked, "Whose is this image and superscription?" When told it was Caesar, He said, ''Render therefore unto Caesar the things which are Caesar's and unto God the things that are God's" (Matthew 22:20-21). Since Tiberius was Caesar at the time, this denarius type is attributed by scholars as the "penny" referred to in the Bible(Joseph Sermarini).

Edited by J. P. Fitzgerald, Jr.

Cleisthenes

74.8 Charles Edward Stuart & Henry Benedict Stuart.Legitimacy of Jacobite Succession, ca 1737-40. Bronze Medal attributed to Ermenegildo Hamerani.

Obverse: HVNC SALTEM EVERSO IVVENEM [svccvrrere sæclo] / Bust of Charles Edward Stuart as an adolescent (about age 16 or 17), in armor and wearing ermine mantle. Wolf & Twins on bust truncation.

Reverse: TRIPLICIS SPES TERTIA GENTIS / Bust of Henry Benedict Stuart as a child (about age 11 or 12), in armor.

44.80 gm., 45 mm.
MI ii 493/35; Eimer 544A; Woolf 47:1.

Translations:
Obverse: A quote from Virgil, of which only the first 4 words appear on the medal: HVNC SALTEM EVERSO IVVENEM which translates as “At Least Permit This Youth . . . “ But Virgil continues with the words “svccvrrere sæclo” which are not on the medal. The meaning of the entire quote is usually given as “At least permit this youth to repair the ruins of the age.”

Reverse: The Third Hope of a Triple Nation.

The Wolf & Twins on the truncation of the obverse bust indicate this medal was struck in Rome.
Callimachus

78. Aurelian.Antoninianus, 270 - 275 AD, possibly minted in Siscia.
Obverse: AVRELIANVS AVG / Radiate bust of Aurelian.
Reverse: ORIENS AVG / Sol standing, right hand raised, left hand holding globe; captive at his feet. S in exergue.
3.97 gm., 21 mm.
RIC #248.

Attribution: There are three coins listed in RIC that have the correct obverse legend (5), portrait (F), and reverse type: RIC 135 Milan, RIC 248 Siscia, and RIC 277 Serdicia. The characteristics of coins from Siscia found on this coin are busts with long necks, and square A and V. I have tentatively attributed this coin to Siscia based on these characteristics. Callimachus

A Metapontine Nomos Depicting LeukipposGreek (Late Classical). Lucania, Metapontion AR Nomos (21mm, 7.79g, 7h), temp. Alexander Molossian, King of Epirus, c. 340-330 BCE.
Obv: Helmeted head of Leukippos right; to left, lion's head; below, monogram (Gamma?).
Rev: META. Grain ear with leaf, club of Hercules above leaf; below, AMI (monogram of Alexander).
Ref: Johnston class B 2.35; HN Italy 1575; F.S. Benson, "Ancient Greek Coins: II. Magana Graecia" (AJN 35.1, 1900) No. 23 & ill. 15 [LINK] = Nanteuil 159 (same dies).
Prov: Ex-VAuctions Triskeles. Ex-JB (Edmonton, d. 2019) Collection (with his original insert)

Notes: Metapontion was one of the Greek colonies on the Italian peninsula known collectively as Magna Graecia, settled by the Achaeans around the turn of the 7th century BCE. Leukippos, who appears in Corinthian helmet on the obverse, was the legendary founder of the city who reputedly led the first settlement. Johnston attributed this scarce pair of "mature dies" to the same artist who engraved the finest Distater dies, or possibly an engraver under his tutelage, very closely approximating his refined style.
[ALT: Stater, Didrachm, Leucippus, Metapontum]1 commentsCurtis JJ

aa Aeolis, Kyme. AE19. Magistrate SekoyndaO: Hd Amazon Kyme r.
R: Horse stepping r., KY above, EPI PR SEKOYNDAS around.
SNG Cop 116. RPC 1.2432

FORVM post from Curtis Clay:
The CEKOYNDAC issue "was attributed by BMC to the reign of Nero, because of the similarity of the reverse type with 2435 [a coin of Nero at Cyme with rev. unbridled trotting horse]. There are, however, differences of style, detail (bridled versus unbridled horse), technique (the die axis), metal (brass rather than bronze) and ethnic (only the abbreviated KY), which suggest that the issue cannot be exactly contemporaneous. Similar types were used on Hellenistic bronzes, so it does not seem clear when this issue was made, perhaps in either first century BC or the early first century AD." ancientone

963 files on 11 page(s)