Classical Numismatics Discussion Members' Coin Collection Photo Gallery

Image search results - "replica"

(500a) Roman Republic, 119 BC, M. Furius Philius - Furia 18Roman Republic, 119 BC, M. Furius Philius - Furia 18. Crawford 281/1, Sydenham 529; 19mm, 3.23 grams. aVF, Rome; Obverse: laureate head of Janus, M FORVRI L F around; Reverse: Roma standing left erecting trophy, Galic arms around, PHLI in exergue. Ex Ephesus Numismatics.

Gauis Marius
As a novus homo, or new man, Marius found the rise in the Roman cursus honorum ( "course of honours"-- the sequential order of public offices held by aspiring politicians in the Roman Republic) a daunting challenge. It is certain that he used his old family client contacts and his military relations as a source of support. Among these contacts were the powerful Metelli family, and their early support was to prove to be a disaster for them. Just a few short years after his service as Quaestor, Marius was elected Tribune of the Plebes in 119 BC. In this position so soon after the political turmoil and murder of the Gracchi brothers (Gaius murdered 123 BC), Marius chose to follow the populares path, making a name for himself under similar auspices. As Tribune, he would ensure the animosity of the conservative faction of the Senate, and the Metelli, by passing popular laws forbidding the inspection of ballot boxes. In do doing, he directly opposed the powerful elite, who used ballot inspection as a way to intimidate voters in the citizen assembly elections.

Marius would go on to be elected Consul seven times and figure prominantly in the civil unrest of the early eighties as Lucius Cornelius Sulla's opponent. In 88 BC, Sulla had been elected Consul. There was now a choice before the Senate about which general to send to Asia (a potentially lucrative command): either Marius or Sulla. The Senate chose Sulla, but soon the Assembly appointed Marius. In this unsavory episode of low politics, Marius had been helped by the unscrupulous actions of Publius Sulpicius Rufus, whose debts Marius had promised to erase. Sulla refused to acknowledge the validity of the Assembly's action.

Sulla left Rome and traveled to "his"army waiting in Nola, the army the Senate had asked him to lead to Asia. Sulla urged his legions to defy the Assembly's orders and accept him as their rightful leader. Sulla was successful, and the legions murdered the representatives from the Assembly. Sulla then commanded six legions to march with him opon Rome and institute a civil war.

This was a momentous event, and was unforeseen by Marius, as no Roman army had ever marched upon Rome—it was forbidden by law and ancient tradition.

Sulla was to eventually rule Rome as Dictator. In his book Rubicon, historian Tom Holland argues that Sulla's actions had no lasting negative effect upon the health of the Republic, that Sulla was at heart a Republican. However, once a Roman general has defied Republican tradition, once a Roman general has used his command to combat fellow Romans, once a Roman general has set-up himself as Dictator--it follows that the decision to replicate these decsions (think: Caesar and Rubicon) is that much more easiely taken.

J. P. Fitzgerald, Jr.

Cleisthenes

1794 AE Halfpenny Token. Coventry, Warwickshire.Obverse: PRO BONO PUBLICO. Lady Godiva riding side-saddle on horse to left; in exergue, 1794.
Reverse: COVENTRY HALFPENNY. Representation of Coventry's old town cross with COV CROSS in small letters at base.
Edge: PAYABLE AT THE WAREHOUSE OF ROBERT REYNOLDS & CO.
Diameter 29.5mm | Axis 12
Dalton & Hamer: 249
RARE

This token was manufactured by William Lutwyche and the dies were engraved by William Mainwaring.
It was issued by Robert Reynolds & Co., who were ribbon weavers with a business in Coventry.

The original Coventry Cross stood at the place where Broadgate met Cross Cheaping, near Spicer Stoke, a very short row which led through from Broadgate to Butcher Row and Trinity church. Though it is likely that a cross had been standing in this place since the 13th century, the first actual record for the building of a cross was on 1st July 1423 when the Mayor, Henry Peyto, officially sanctioned that a new cross should be built. Although it was quite a substantial structure, within a century it was rather the worse for wear, and by 1506 discussions had begun about replacing it.
In 1541, the former mayor of London, Sir William Hollis, left £200 in his will toward the building of a new cross, and by 1544 the 57 foot high cross was completed. As well as being brightly painted, the cross was also covered with much gold and it was renowned for its fame and beauty. It was built in four sections, with statues in the top three storeys: the lower of these holding statues of Henry VI, King John, Edward I, Henry II, Richard I and Henry. Above these were Edward III, Henry II, Richard III, St Michael and St George. The top storey held statues of St Peter, St James, St Christopher and two monks, with representations of Liberty and Justice at the highest point. In 1608 repairs were carried out to the cross during which the figure of Christ was replaced with one of Lady Godiva. Possibly the obverse of this token is based on this statue since there is no record of there being any other Lady Godiva memorial statues before 1949.
After standing gloriously for two centuries, decay once more set into the cross and, in 1753 and 1755, the top two stages were removed to avoid the danger of collapse. By 1771 the cross was declared to be in too ruinous a state to retain, and it's demolition was authorised. The remains stood for a short while longer though, at least until after 1778 when a visitor to Coventry wrote that the decayed cross "...has no longer anything to please".
This token is dated 1794, but must depict the cross as it was in it's heyday before it was totally demolished and it's parts reused. Two of the statues from the cross now reside at St. Mary's Guildhall.
A modern replica of the cross was unveiled in 1976, it is situated about 100 metres away from the site of the original one.*Alex

Alexander Jannaeus (Yehonatan)103 - 76 B.C.
Widow’s Mite
Bronze prutah (or lepton)
1.55 g, 19 mm
Obv.: Î’Î‘Î£Î™Î›Î•Î©Î£ AÎ›EÎžANÎ”POY around inverted anchor
Rev.: star surrounded by diadem

Modern replica received in advertisement for
The Jewish Voice Ministries
Jaimelai

ANCIENT FORGERY -Dilver - Caracalla - NobilitasBearded Caracalla looking - apparently - clearly not ancient.
Obverse legend (probably intended as): ANTONINIVSPIVSAVG
Reverse legend (most likely): NOBILITAS
Reverse (again, probably): Nobilitas standing right, holding scepter and palladium, shield to right
(as per Aorta)

Above reflects the best, most likely attribution that I had but it did seem odd that the only attribution that I could come up with was for a 'Quinarius' as it's about the same size as my not-a-quinarius Elagabalus silver coin. I posted it in good faith thinking I'd done a good job to ID it given its condition. Below you can read the comments from other Forum members who told me it was most likely an ancient forgery.

It looks like that rather than go with a recognised, common coin that would stand out against the real thing, the forgers took a chance with a design known to be on the quinarius, but not on the denari. I suppose that they figured that folks would just assume that the mint was making denari with the same features as the quinarius (beared Caracalla, NOBILITAS etc) and not ask too many questions. OR, NOBILITAS was just the shortest reverse legend and the easiest picture to replicate. Why knows? A relic of the otherwise unpublished seedy underbelly of Rome... I like it. Hope you do to.
5 commentsBanjaxed

Assortment of replica Biblical coinsI'm told that these were made in the 50's for use in Sunday schools. 7 coins encased in a slab of plastic. From smallest to largest they are as follows:

Lepton of Caponius 6 AD
Lepton of Pontius Pilate 29 AD
Herod Antipas 29 AD
Denarius of Tiberius14-37 AD
Harod the Great 37 BC
Shekel of Tyre 126 BC
Vespasian 72 AD

Quality is not as good as modern replicas but it makes a nice addition to my desk. I don't think these coins would fool anyone! :DJay GT4

Augustus, RIC 120 cf. (replica)Augustus, 27 BC- AD 14
AR - denarius, 4.37g, 19.46mm
Colonia Patricia(?), 18 BC
obv. CAESARI AVGVSTO
Head, laureate, l.
rev. Frontal view of tetrastyle temple of Mars, domed roof and decorated with 9 figures and acroterias; within
triumphal chariot with eagle-sceptre and 4 small horses galopping r.
in l. and r. field S.P. - Q.R.
ref. RIC I, 120 cf.; BMCR 386; RSC 282
(for the original only!)

This is a replica struck from new dies. Easily recognized by the odd portrait on the obv. It is made by CopyCoins.com
Jochen

Fake RIC 8These are often called "Museum replicas" and similar things are sold at museums. A copy of a real coin, cast in wrong metal and stamprd with "R" for replica. Without the "R" and the surface manipulated this can be very convincing as a heavily worn, affordable Otho.jmuona

Greek, Sogdiana, Imitative Antiochos I Soter, 281-261 BC, AR Drachm Laureate head of Antiochos right.
Retrograde legend Î’Î‘Î£Î™Î›Î•Î©Î£ ANT[I]OXOY curving from left to below and before a bridled horned horse head right, circled Î” to far right.
SC 461-462 (var. – controls); HGC 9, 136 (var. - controls) (R3).
Sogidana, uncertain mint, mid-third century BC.
A unique and unrecorded variant of SC 461-462.
(17 mm, 2.86 g, 6h)
ex- William K. Raymond Collection

The crude style, the retrograde semi-circular legend, the disposition of the mint control and the low weight of this coin are indicative of a Sogdian imitation of the Antiochos I drachm type that was issued by the mint at Ai Khanoum in Baktria during the period 281-261 BC. Unlike the imitative coin the official issue was struck on the Attic weight standard of 4.3 grams. The style of this coin and the full replication of the Ai Khanoum mint control place it early in the Sogdian imitative series, possibly contemporaneous with the lifetime Antiochos I issue that it imitates. Marcanda/Samarkand and Bukhara are likely candidates for the origin of this coin.

Italy, Populonia - Content of an etruscian grave In the museum of Piombino there is a Replica of an grave of the Populonia necropole, with the original content of this grave.

Italy, St. Peter's gate in the Basicilica of St. Mark in Venice.This is one of the frontal (western facade) portico entrances to St Mark's basilica in Venice. The church was founded in 1063 and is an fine example of byzantine architecture. Many of the columns, reliefs, and sculptures were spoils stripped from the churches, palaces, and public monuments of Constantinople as a result of the Venetian participation in the Fourth Crusade. Among the plundered artefacts brought back to Venice were the four ancient bronze horses that were placed prominently over the entry.

The mosaic depicts the arrival St Mark's body in Venice.

St Mark the Evangelist's body is buried here, after the Venetians plundered if from Alexandria.
Not shown, but sitting just above this mosaic, were the 4 bronze horses that adorned the main gate to Constantinople. Since 1974, these are exact replicas - the originals are in a nearby museum. The venetians carried them off as plunder when the 4th crusade sacked Constantinople in 1204.Ron C2

Judaea First Revolt AR "Shekel" Year 5 ŠQL YSR’L (shekel of Israel)
around a chalice used in the temple cult, above Year 5

YRWŠLM HKDWŠH (Jerusalem the holy)
around a branch with three pomegranates

Jerusalem; March 4th-August 70 CE

13.45g

Hendin 6399 (6th);1370 (5th); TJC 215

Hand struck with modern dies in silver

Shekels were minted in all five years of the revolt with year 1 being scarce, years 2 and 3 the most common, year 4 very rare and year 5 the rarest. Only about 25 of the year 5 shekels are recorded. The rarity and price excludes me from the market for a real coin, hence the purchase of a modern hand struck replica in silver.

4 commentsJay GT4

JUNIA 52 - BRUTUS EID MAR denarius (replica)obv: BRVT IMP L PLAET CEST (bare head of Brutus right)
rev: EID MAR (liberty cap and two daggers)
ref: RSC 15, Syd 1301, Cr502/4, Albert1617
3.53gms, 18mm
replica

This coin commemorates the most important single day event in ancient history. With this famous reverse type Brutus commemorates his assassination of Julius Caesar on the notorious Ides of March, 44 BC, and claims that the deed was done to secure liberty for the Roman people (the liberty cap).
Somewhat more than 50 of these remarkable coins exist. The fact that a lot of people would like to own one, along with the additional fact that most of these coins are in museums, has created the justifiable price structure that exists today.berserker

Marcus Aurelius Equestrian statueThis is the copy of the Equestrian statue of Marcus Aurelius on the Capitoline hill. The original is in the Capitoline Museum, this replica sits outside. It is said to have survived because it was mistakenly believed to be of Constantine the Great. Picture taken September 2008.2 commentsJay GT4

MINT 7 (ABM070)An example of my so-called 'Mint VII', characterised by the accurate replication of Trier's first issue coins from the first workshop. This coin is a mule, pairing a Constantinopolis obverse with a wolf and twins reverse.Adrianus

MINT 7 (ABM071)A coin from my so-called 'Mint VII', whose specimens are characterised by their accurate replication of both the style and mintmark of coins from the first workshop of Trier during the first issue. Diameter 14.5mm. Weight 1.25g.Adrianus

MINT 7 (ABM072)A coin from my so-called 'Mint VII', the examples of which are characterised by accurate replication of both the style and mintmark of Issue I specimens from the first workshop at Trier. Adrianus

Moesia inferior, Nikopolis ad Istrum, Diadumenian, HrHJ (2018) 8.25.46.2 var. (Coinlandia replica)Diadumenian, AD 217-218
AE 31, 17.45g, 30.5mm, 0°
Original: AE 28, 12.4g!
struck under governor Marcus Claudius Agrippa
obv. K M OPPEL ANTWNI DIADOVMENIANOC
Bare head r.
rev. VP AGRIPPA NIKOPOL - ITWN PR / OC ICTRW
City-gate with 3 towers, each with 3 pinnacles, closed double door
ref. a) AMNG I/1, 1826
b) Varbanov 3673
c) Hristova/Hoeft/Jekov (2018) No. 8.25.46.2 var. (has NIKOPO - LITWN)
Replica from Coinlandia/Bulgaria

All our coins are high quality, high standard, hand struck interpetations of museum pieces. The coins intentionally differentiate in weight and size from the museum coins, so they cannot be used as counterfeit. Struck by a master artisan in Plovdiv, Bulgaria.Jochen

Nero, RIC 168 (WRL replica)Nero, 54-68
AE - sestertius, 16.73g,36.29mm, 165°
obv. NERO CLAVD CAESAR AVG GER PM TRP IMP PP
laureate head l.
bust stamped with WRL
rev. Nero, bare-headed, cuirassed, with waving chlamys galloping r., holding spear in his
hand, behind him soldier galloping r., holding vexillum over r. shoulder
between big S - C
in ex. DECVRSIO
border stamped with WRL
ref. RIC I, 168; BMCR 142 (for the original only)

WRL = Westair Reproduction Limited, Birmingham, UK. I bought this token 2014 in Hechingen/Germany during its famous biennial "Römerspiele"Jochen

Pantikapaion, Thrace, 3rd century B.C.?Obverse head of bearded pan facing left with pointed ears protruding from his hair. About 10/16ths of an inch wide. Weighing 3.0 grams

Not sure if it's real or a replica, that's why I joined this forum. I spent hours looking at photos till I saw a similar coin from Pantikapaion. Any input or advice will be greatly appreciated!Ryan M2

Pantikapaion, Thrace?Reverse with griffin, spear in mouth with wings flared and below a shaft of wheat? Three Greeks letter encircling the outside of coin. 10/16ths of an inch across and weights 3.0 grams. Bronze presumably with nice patina.

Uncertain if it's the real thing or a replica, copy, fake....

Any help would be appreciated Ryan M2

Play Money: SP MUNZE Wilhelm I (1861-88)Play Money: SP MUNZE
Wilhelm I (1861-88) struck in the name of (ruler). Germany after (state). Balmberger, C. (issuer)
Rogers Toy Coin Collection coin replica 20 marks (denomination) toy coins (Series) replicas (subseries) Material/s brass (alloy)
Dimensions: image(width): 12.4 mm image(height): 12.3 mm
Date: 1887 to 1888
Position: obverse
Content: WILHELM D. KAISER
Description: Head of Wilhelm right with legend around in circle of points
design
Position: reverse
Content: BALMBERGER'S SP.MÜNZE / · MARK ·
Description: Denomination with legends around in beaded border
Nüremberg (origin) (place)
Documentation: Rogers, David J de Sola (1990) Toy Coins, Wolverhampton: Galataprint [page: 167]

ReplicaSyracusan Dekadrachm
circa 19th century AD
(silver-plated bronze)
Cast replica in the style of Kimon.Enodia

Replica of a Domitian aureusDomitian, as Caesar (under Vespasian, AD 69–79). AV aureus (7.09 gm). Rome, AD 73. CAES AVG F DOMIT COS II, laureate head of Domitian right / Domitian on horseback left, raising right hand and holding scepter surmounted by human head. BMCRE 123. RIC 232. CBN 100. RCTV 2627

two marks, 1 Owl left ?, the other: LUMIareich

Replica of a Trajan aureusAureus 103/111, Rome. IMP TRAIANO AVG GER DAC P M TR P COS V P P Draped and cuirassed bust, laureate, to r. Rev. SPQR / OPTIMO / PRINCIPI within oak-wreath. 7,11 g. RIC 150. C. 581. Calicó 1121

two marks, 1 Owl left ?, the other: LUMI3 commentsareich

RIC 0427AR Denarius (19mm, 3.30g, 6h). Rome mint, struck 86 (First Issue).
IMP CAES DOMIT AVG GERM P M TR P V, head laureate right; IMP XI COS XII CENS P P P, Aventine Minerva replica (ἀπεικόνισμα) standing right on processional litter (ferculum), with spear and shield, owl to right (M2).
RIC 427 (R), BMC 90 p. 318 note , RSC 74.
Purchased from James Hazelton

Struck before September of 86 CE, this denarius is part of a rare issue. All coins of this issue with 2 exceptions are rare to very rare. I bought this coin for 2 reasons. First, I bought it for the dates of the imperial acclamations IMP and COS on the reverse. I did not have this dating combination so I wanted it for my collection. The other reason was the portrait. I really like the look of this portrait. It definitely has its own style. It has both veristic and artistic features. I liked this combination very much. Clearly the celator was a person of some talent.

While many might consider these Minerva types boring or dull, I do not. I like comparing the dates and I really like seeing the different styles of portraits used on the obverses of these coins.1 commentsorfew

RIC 0759 VespasianÆ Dupondius, 14.46g
Rome mint, 74 AD
Obv: IMP CAESAR VESPASIANVS AVG; Head of Vespasian, laureate, l.
Rev: PON•MAX•TR•POT•P•P•COS•V CENS; Winged caduceus between crossed cornuacopiae
RIC 759 (C). BMC p. 219 note. RPC 1983 (6 spec.). BNC 905.
Ex eBay, 16 October 2018. Ex Klassische Münzen.

Traditionally, the issue this rather strange dupondius is from has been attributed to various different mints over the years. Ted Buttrey writing in the RIC II.1 Addenda commented extensively on it. Because both the Addenda has yet to see the light of day and T. Buttrey's thoughts on the subject are important (and indeed likely correct), I have largely quoted it in full here with some minor editing.

'RIC 756-767 are irregular Dupondii, which should be taken together with Asses, semisses and quadrantes (RIC 1564-1581), forming together a single extraordinary issue in four denominations, distinct in typology and metal, as well as overall character from the regular coinage of the year. Although Eastern in aspect and reverse type, the circulation area of the dupondii is almost exclusively Gaul, Germany, Italy – i.e. the West, with scarcely any penetration of the East. Finds of the smaller denominations are rarely attested anywhere, East or West. The Eastern finds appear to be simply the débris of Mediterranean circulation.

Previously the series had been attributed to Commagene (BMCRE II, pp.217-222), then as a likelihood to Antioch (e.g. RPC II 1982-2005). The correct attribution to Rome is proved by mules of the dupondii with regular issues (Buttrey, “Vespasian’s Roman Orichalcum: An Unrecognized Celebratory Coinage” in David M. Jacobson and Nikos Kokkinos, Judaea and Rome in Coins, 65 CBE – 135 CE (2012). The series had nothing to do with Syria or with the East at all, yet it was purposefully designed to appear non-Roman: the suppression of the traditional reverse sub-inscription S C throughout; the suppression of the radiate crown of the Dupondius; the shifting of the consular dating from the obv. to the rev.; the striking of all four denominations in orichalcum; and most obviously the selection of rev. dies which reek of the East.

There is nothing like this series in the whole of Roman imperial coinage. It is a deliberate act of Orientalism, imposing the flavour of the East on a Western coinage. The key to its understanding is the reverse type of the dupondius, two crossed cornuacopiae with a winged caduceus between. It replicates the type of an obscure issue of the Galilean city of Sepphoris, an issue which had been, astonishingly, signed by Vespasian himself (ΕΠΙ ΟΥΕCΠΑCΙΑΝΟΥ, “on the authority of…”) when on duty there in the last days of Nero. The dupondius-sized bronze was accompanied by a half-unit with the type of a large, central S C – again signed by Vespasian, and now imitated on the As of the orichalcum series with the wreath of the As of Antioch (RPC I 4849-50).
The whole of this series memorializes not Vespasian the conquering general (IVDAEA CAPTA, VICTORIA AVGVSTI), but the man. His re-use of earlier coin types is well-known; here he re-uses his own, harking back to his career just prior to his final success in seizing the empire. And the series was struck in 74 A.D., co-terminous with the celebration of Vespasian’s first quinquennium.'

The coin itself is a superb example in very fine style. Beautiful dark golden patina with highlights of emerald green. 8 commentsDavid Atherton

RIC 0762 Titus as Caesar [Vespasian]Æ Dupondius, 11.90g
Rome mint, 74 AD
Obv: T•CAESAR•IMP•PONT; Head of Titus, laureate, bearded, l.
Rev: TR•POT•COS III•CENSOR•; Winged caduceus between crossed cornuacopiae
RIC 762 (R2). BMC -. BNC 909. RPC 1992 (1 spec.).
Acquired from Aegean Numismatics, July 2020.

A truly remarkable dupondius. Struck in Rome, but lacking the traditional radiate portrait on the obverse and the de rigueur S C on the reverse. The reverse with crossed cornucopiae echoes similar types from the East. Traditionally, the issue this rather strange coin is from has been attributed to various different mints over the years. Ted Buttrey writing in the RIC II.1 Addenda commented extensively on it. Because both the Addenda has yet to see the light of day and T. Buttrey's thoughts on the subject are important, I have largely quoted it in full here with some minor editing.

'RIC 756-767 are irregular Dupondii, which should be taken together with Asses, semisses and quadrantes (RIC 1564-1581), forming together a single extraordinary issue in four denominations, distinct in typology and metal, as well as overall character from the regular coinage of the year. Although Eastern in aspect and reverse type, the circulation area of the dupondii is almost exclusively Gaul, Germany, Italy – i.e. the West, with scarcely any penetration of the East. Finds of the smaller denominations are rarely attested anywhere, East or West. The Eastern finds appear to be simply the débris of Mediterranean circulation.

Previously the series had been attributed to Commagene (BMCRE II, pp.217-222), then as a likelihood to Antioch (e.g. RPC II 1982-2005). The correct attribution to Rome is proved by mules of the dupondii with regular issues (Buttrey, “Vespasian’s Roman Orichalcum: An Unrecognized Celebratory Coinage” in David M. Jacobson and Nikos Kokkinos, Judaea and Rome in Coins, 65 CBE – 135 CE (2012). The series had nothing to do with Syria or with the East at all, yet it was purposefully designed to appear non-Roman: the suppression of the traditional reverse sub-inscription S C throughout; the suppression of the radiate crown of the Dupondius; the shifting of the consular dating from the obv. to the rev.; the striking of all four denominations in orichalcum; and most obviously the selection of rev. dies which reek of the East.

There is nothing like this series in the whole of Roman imperial coinage. It is a deliberate act of Orientalism, imposing the flavour of the East on a Western coinage. The key to its understanding is the reverse type of the dupondius, two crossed cornuacopiae with a winged caduceus between. It replicates the type of an obscure issue of the Galilean city of Sepphoris, an issue which had been, astonishingly, signed by Vespasian himself (ΕΠΙ ΟΥΕCΠΑCΙΑΝΟΥ, “on the authority of…”) when on duty there in the last days of Nero. The dupondius-sized bronze was accompanied by a half-unit with the type of a large, central S C – again signed by Vespasian, and now imitated on the As of the orichalcum series with the wreath of the As of Antioch (RPC I 4849-50).
The whole of this series memorializes not Vespasian the conquering general (IVDAEA CAPTA, VICTORIA AVGVSTI), but the man. His re-use of earlier coin types is well-known; here he re-uses his own, harking back to his career just prior to his final success in seizing the empire. And the series was struck in 74 A.D., co-terminous with the celebration of Vespasian’s first quinquennium.'

Curtis Clay has a few objections to Buttrey's theory as to why the issue was struck: 'As far as I am aware, there is nothing "astonishing" about Vespasian's "signing" of the two coins of Sepphoris. EΠI followed by the governor's name appeared frequently on Roman provincial coins, meaning simply, "Struck while the man named was governor". So there was no evident reason for Vespasian to consider it extraordinary that he had been named as governor of Syria on coins of Sepphoris struck for Nero near the end of his reign (Year 14), and no evident reason why he should have referred to the Sepphoris coins in his orichalcum issue struck at Rome five years later. It seems quite probable that Vespasian never even noticed his name on the coins of Sepphoris, and certainly very few Romans in the West will ever have seen such a coin, though Buttrey thinks the orichalcum coins were struck for circulation in the West in 74 in order to recall precisely those Sepphoris coins with their reference to Vespasian some months before his accession. Why waste coin types on references that were inconsequential, and that nobody was likely to comprehend?'

If Buttrey's argument is wrong it brings us back to the original question - why was an Eastern flavoured coinage struck for circulation in the West? Perhaps it may be nothing more than Vespasian paying homage to the part of the world that elevated him. This is a fairly rare example with left facing portrait, which, ironically, in this series are much more commonly struck for Vespasian than for Titus Caesar. Missing from the BM and only one example cited in RPC.

Dark patina and fine style.2 commentsDavid Atherton

RIC 1565 VespasianÆ As, 6.57g
Rome mint, 74 AD
Obv: IMP CAESAR VESP AVG; Head of Vespasian, laureate, l.
Rev: S • C in laurel wreath
RIC 1565 (C2). BMC 894. RPC 1984 (20 spec.). BNC 913.
Acquired from Ephesus Numismatics, January 2019.

In 74 AD the Rome mint produced an extraordinary issue of bronze coinage of dupondii, asses, semisses, and quadrantes with a somewhat Eastern theme. Previously, these coins had been attributed to either Commagene (BMCRE) or Syria (RPC, and doubtfully so in RIC), but more recent scholarship has shown they actually were struck in Rome. The circulation pattern confirms this - out of a total of 112 of the smaller denominations cited by RPC, all but 4 were found in Western Europe. Ted Buttrey confirms 'The Eastern finds appear to be simply the débris of Mediterranean circulation.' But why was this series produced in such a fashion? Buttrey proffers a plausible theory - 'There is nothing like this series in the whole of Roman imperial coinage. It is a deliberate act of Orientalism, imposing the flavour of the East on a Western coinage. The key to its understanding is the reverse type of the dupondius, two crossed cornuacopiae with a winged caduceus between. It replicates the type of an obscure issue of the Galilean city of Sepphoris, an issue which had been, astonishingly, signed by Vespasian himself (ΕΠΙ ΟΥΕCΠΑCΙΑΝΟΥ, “on the authority of…”) when on duty there in the last days of Nero. The dupondius-sized bronze was accompanied by a half-unit with the type of a large, central S C – again signed by Vespasian, and now imitated on the As of the orichalcum series with the wreath of the As of Antioch (RPC I 4849-50). The whole of this series memorializes not Vespasian the conquering general (IVDAEA CAPTA, VICTORIA AVGVSTI), but the man. His re-use of earlier coin types is well-known; here he re-uses his own, harking back to his career just prior to his final success in seizing the empire. And the series was struck in 74 A.D., co-terminous with the celebration of Vespasian’s first quinquennium.' So, in essence, a very personally important issue for Vespasian.

Curtis Clay has a few objections for Buttrey's theory why the issue was struck. 'As far as I am aware, there is nothing "astonishing" about Vespasian's "signing" of the two coins of Sepphoris. EΠI followed by the governor's name appeared frequently on Roman provincial coins, meaning simply, "Struck while the man named was governor". So there was no evident reason for Vespasian to consider it extraordinary that he had been named as governor of Syria on coins of Sepphoris struck for Nero near the end of his reign (Year 14), and no evident reason why he should have referred to the Sepphoris coins in his orichalcum issue struck at Rome five years later. It seems quite probable that Vespasian never even noticed his name on the coins of Sepphoris, and certainly very few Romans in the West will ever have seen such a coin, though Buttrey thinks the orichalcum coins were struck for circulation in the West in 74 in order to recall precisely those Sepphoris coins with their reference to Vespasian some months before his accession. Why waste coin types on references that were inconsequential, and that nobody was likely to comprehend?

If the orichalcum issue was meant to recall those two coins of Sepphoris, shouldn't it have been struck for Vespasian only, and using only those two rev. types, caduceus between crossed cornucopias and large SC? But that was not the case. Both the caduceus between crossed cornucopias type and the large SC type were struck not only for Vespasian, but also for Titus and Domitian as Caesars. Moreover those were not the only two rev. types of the issue: other coins showed a bust of Antioch with legend ANTIOCHIA , and (on small coins only) the same winged caduceus as on the crossed cornucopias dupondii, but without the cornucopias (see images below). It seems to me highly unlikely that the three main types of this issue, all struck for Titus and Domitian as well as Vespasian, were inspired by and meant to recall the far simpler issue of Sepphoris, using just two changing types (obv. types in this case) and of course naming Vespasian only.'

If Buttrey's argument is wrong it brings us back to the original question - why was an Eastern flavoured coinage struck for circulation in the West? Perhaps the issue may be nothing more than Vespasian paying homage to the part of the world that elevated him.

This As is a fine example of the smaller denomination, nicely centred with a beautiful emerald green patina.2 commentsDavid Atherton

RIC 1566 VespasianÆ As, 4.91g
Rome mint, 74 AD
Obv: IMP•VESP•AVG•P•M•T•P; Head of Vespasian, laureate, r.
Rev: S • C in laurel wreath
RIC 1566 (R). BMC 879. RPC 1986 (3 spec.). BNC -.
Acquired from eBay, May 2022.

In 74 AD the Rome mint produced an extraordinary issue of bronze coinage of dupondii, asses, semisses, and quadrantes with a somewhat Eastern theme. Previously, these coins had been attributed to either Commagene (BMCRE) or Syria (RPC, and doubtfully so in RIC), but more recent scholarship has shown they actually were struck in Rome. The circulation pattern confirms this - out of a total of 112 of the smaller denominations cited by RPC, all but 4 were found in Western Europe. Ted Buttrey confirms 'The Eastern finds appear to be simply the débris of Mediterranean circulation.' But why was this series produced in such a fashion? Buttrey proffers a plausible theory - 'There is nothing like this series in the whole of Roman imperial coinage. It is a deliberate act of Orientalism, imposing the flavour of the East on a Western coinage. The key to its understanding is the reverse type of the dupondius, two crossed cornuacopiae with a winged caduceus between. It replicates the type of an obscure issue of the Galilean city of Sepphoris, an issue which had been, astonishingly, signed by Vespasian himself (ΕΠΙ ΟΥΕCΠΑCΙΑΝΟΥ, “on the authority of…”) when on duty there in the last days of Nero. The dupondius-sized bronze was accompanied by a half-unit with the type of a large, central S C – again signed by Vespasian, and now imitated on the As of the orichalcum series with the wreath of the As of Antioch (RPC I 4849-50). The whole of this series memorializes not Vespasian the conquering general (IVDAEA CAPTA, VICTORIA AVGVSTI), but the man. His re-use of earlier coin types is well-known; here he re-uses his own, harking back to his career just prior to his final success in seizing the empire. And the series was struck in 74 A.D., co-terminous with the celebration of Vespasian’s first quinquennium.' So, in essence, a very personally important issue for Vespasian.

A rare variant 'S C' as featuring a right facing portrait paired with a scarce obverse legend. Unusually, the asses of this series were struck in orichalcum not copper and are much smaller than traditional contemporary asses. Missing from the Paris collection. 1 commentsDavid Atherton

RIC 1572 Titus as Caesar [Vespasian]Æ As, 4.84g
Rome mint, 74 AD
Obv: T•CAES•IMP•TR•POT; Head of Titus, laureate, bearded, r.
Rev: S • C in laurel wreath
RIC 1572 (C). BMC -. BNC 897. RPC 1996 (6 spec.).
Acquired from Sebastian Sänn, September 2022

In 74 AD the Rome mint produced an extraordinary issue of bronze coinage of dupondii, asses, semisses, and quadrantes with a somewhat Eastern theme. Previously, these coins had been attributed to either Commagene (BMCRE) or Syria (RPC, and doubtfully so in RIC), but more recent scholarship has shown they actually were struck in Rome. The circulation pattern confirms this - out of a total of 112 of the smaller denominations cited by RPC, all but 4 were found in Western Europe. Ted Buttrey confirms 'The Eastern finds appear to be simply the débris of Mediterranean circulation.' But why was this series produced in such a fashion? Buttrey proffers a plausible theory - 'Previously the series had been attributed to Commagene (BMCRE II, pp.217-222), then as a likelihood to Antioch (e.g. RPC II 1982-2005). The correct attribution to Rome is proved by mules of the dupondii with regular issues (Buttrey, “Vespasian’s Roman Orichalcum: An Unrecognized Celebratory Coinage” in David M. Jacobson and Nikos Kokkinos, Judaea and Rome in Coins, 65 CBE – 135 CE (2012). The series had nothing to do with Syria or with the East at all, yet it was purposefully designed to appear non-Roman: the suppression of the traditional reverse sub-inscription S C throughout; the suppression of the radiate crown of the Dupondius; the shifting of the consular dating from the obv. to the rev.; the striking of all four denominations in orichalcum; and most obviously the selection of rev. dies which reek of the East. There is nothing like this series in the whole of Roman imperial coinage. It is a deliberate act of Orientalism, imposing the flavour of the East on a Western coinage. The key to its understanding is the reverse type of the dupondius, two crossed cornuacopiae with a winged caduceus between. It replicates the type of an obscure issue of the Galilean city of Sepphoris, an issue which had been, astonishingly, signed by Vespasian himself (ΕΠΙ ΟΥΕCΠΑCΙΑΝΟΥ, “on the authority of…”) when on duty there in the last days of Nero. The dupondius-sized bronze was accompanied by a half-unit with the type of a large, central S C – again signed by Vespasian, and now imitated on the As of the orichalcum series with the wreath of the As of Antioch (RPC I 4849-50). The whole of this series memorializes not Vespasian the conquering general (IVDAEA CAPTA, VICTORIA AVGVSTI), but the man. His re-use of earlier coin types is well-known; here he re-uses his own, harking back to his career just prior to his final success in seizing the empire. And the series was struck in 74 A.D., co-terminous with the celebration of Vespasian’s first quinquennium.' So, in essence, a very personally important issue for Vespasian.

Curtis Clay has a few objections to Buttrey's theory. 'As far as I am aware, there is nothing "astonishing" about Vespasian's "signing" of the two coins of Sepphoris. EΠI followed by the governor's name appeared frequently on Roman provincial coins, meaning simply, "Struck while the man named was governor". So there was no evident reason for Vespasian to consider it extraordinary that he had been named as governor of Syria on coins of Sepphoris struck for Nero near the end of his reign (Year 14), and no evident reason why he should have referred to the Sepphoris coins in his orichalcum issue struck at Rome five years later. It seems quite probable that Vespasian never even noticed his name on the coins of Sepphoris, and certainly very few Romans in the West will ever have seen such a coin, though Buttrey thinks the orichalcum coins were struck for circulation in the West in 74 in order to recall precisely those Sepphoris coins with their reference to Vespasian some months before his accession. Why waste coin types on references that were inconsequential, and that nobody was likely to comprehend?

If the orichalcum issue was meant to recall those two coins of Sepphoris, shouldn't it have been struck for Vespasian only, and using only those two rev. types, caduceus between crossed cornucopias and large SC? But that was not the case. Both the caduceus between crossed cornucopias type and the large SC type were struck not only for Vespasian, but also for Titus and Domitian as Caesars. Moreover those were not the only two rev. types of the issue: other coins showed a bust of Antioch with legend ANTIOCHIA , and (on small coins only) the same winged caduceus as on the crossed cornucopias dupondii, but without the cornucopias (see images below). It seems to me highly unlikely that the three main types of this issue, all struck for Titus and Domitian as well as Vespasian, were inspired by and meant to recall the far simpler issue of Sepphoris, using just two changing types (obv. types in this case) and of course naming Vespasian only.'

If Buttrey's argument is wrong it brings us back to the original question - why was an Eastern flavoured coinage struck for circulation in the West? Perhaps the issue may be nothing more than Vespasian paying homage to the part of the world that elevated him.

This as is a fine example of the smaller denomination - nicely centred, darkly toned, and sporting a stylish portrait of the young prince.1 commentsDavid Atherton

RIC 1574 Titus as Caesar [Vespasian]Æ Semis, 3.31g
Rome mint, 74 AD
Obv: T•CAES•IMP•TR•POT; Head of Titus, laureate, bearded, r.
Rev: ANTIOCHIA; Bust of city-goddess, r.
RIC 1574 (C). BMC -. BNC -. RPC 1997 (10 spec.).
Acquired from Forvm Ancient Coins, January 2020.

Traditionally, the issue this rather interesting semis is from has been attributed to various different mints over the years. Ted Buttrey writing in the RIC II.1 Addenda commented extensively on it. Because both the Addenda has yet to see the light of day and T. Buttrey's thoughts on the subject are important (and indeed likely correct), I have largely quoted it in full here with some minor editing.

'RIC 756-767 are irregular Dupondii, which should be taken together with Asses, semisses and quadrantes (RIC 1564-1581), forming together a single extraordinary issue in four denominations, distinct in typology and metal, as well as overall character from the regular coinage of the year. Although Eastern in aspect and reverse type, the circulation area of the dupondii is almost exclusively Gaul, Germany, Italy – i.e. the West, with scarcely any penetration of the East. Finds of the smaller denominations are rarely attested anywhere, East or West. The citations in RPC II are drawn almost entirely from Western collections, and total: Western - 108, Eastern - 4.

The Eastern finds appear to be simply the débris of Mediterranean circulation. Previously the series had been attributed to Commagene (BMCRE II, pp.217-222), then as a likelihood to Antioch (e.g. RPC II 1982-2005). The correct attribution to Rome is proved by mules of the dupondii with regular issues (Buttrey, “Vespasian’s Roman Orichalcum: An Unrecognized Celebratory Coinage” in David M. Jacobson and Nikos Kokkinos, Judaea and Rome in Coins, 65 CBE – 135 CE (2012).
The series had nothing to do with Syria or with the East at all, yet it was purposefully designed to appear non-Roman: the suppression of the traditional reverse sub-inscription S C throughout; the suppression of the radiate crown of the Dupondius; the shifting of the consular dating from the obv. to the rev.; the striking of all four denominations in orichalcum; and most obviously the selection of rev. dies which reek of the East (while admitting that they are not Eastern, see on the semis the bust of the city-goddess accompanied by the Latin legend ANTIOCHIA, in imitation of the type actually struck there with the Greek legend ΑΝΤΙΟΧΕΩΝ – SNG Cop Antioch 99-103, 112, etc. ).
There is nothing like this series in the whole of Roman imperial coinage. It is a deliberate act of Orientalism, imposing the flavour of the East on a Western coinage. The key to its understanding is the reverse type of the dupondius, two crossed cornuacopiae with a winged caduceus between. It replicates the type of an obscure issue of the Galilean city of Sepphoris, an issue which had been, astonishingly, signed by Vespasian himself (ΕΠΙ ΟΥΕCΠΑCΙΑΝΟΥ, “on the authority of…”) when on duty there in the last days of Nero.

The whole of this series memorializes not Vespasian the conquering general (IVDAEA CAPTA, VICTORIA AVGVSTI), but the man. His re-use of earlier coin types is well-known; here he re-uses his own, harking back to his career just prior to his final success in seizing the empire. And the series was struck in 74 A.D., co-terminous with the celebration of Vespasian’s first quinquennium.'

I think it quite extraordinary that the Rome mint would produce a coin blatantly featuring a provincial city-goddess that was intended for circulation in the West. Vespasian's fondness for the region that elevated him to the purple must have been strong indeed! The heavy use of dots in the obverse legend is a curiosity as well.

Good style and well centred.3 commentsDavid Atherton

RIC 204 var.Denarius, 103-111
Obv: IMP TRAIANO AVG GER DAC P M TR P COS V P P
Laur. r., dr. l. s.
Rev: S P Q R OPTIMO PRINCIPI
Virtus standing r., holding spear and parazonium; l. foot on helmet.

3.35g, 18mm
Sold as replica on eBay UK, 15 November 2014, for GBP21.1 commentsklausklage

RIC 390 - 2Sestertius, 98-99
Obv: IMP CAES NERVA TRAIAN AVG GERM P M
Laur. r.
Rev: TR POT COS II – S C
Pax seated l., holding branch and sceptre.

Sold on eBay as replica, 10.99 GBPklausklage

RIC 401Sestertius, 98-99
Obv: IMP CAES NERVA TRAIAN AVG GERM P M
Laur. r.
Rev: TR POT COS II P P – S C
Pax seated l., holding branch and sceptre.

24g, 34mm
Sold on eBay, Nov. 23, 2011, for $15.99 by legendsfromancienttimes as a museum replica.

klausklage

RIC 743Denar
Obv: DIVA AVGVSTA MARCIANA
Bust of Marciana r.
Rev: CONSECRATIO
Eagle with spread wings walking l. on sceptre, head turned r.

Sold as a replica on eBay, Dec. 2011, by antik-coins for €5.99.
klausklage

RIC 750-232g, 35mm, sold on eBay as replica, February 2012, $12.klausklage

RIC 759-2Denarius
Obv: MATIDIA AVG DIVAE - MARCIANAE F.
Rev: PIETAS – AVGVST
Matidia standing to front, head turned l., placing her hands on heads of Sabina and Matidia the younger.

Offered on eBay as Replica for £17.99 (21 January 2013)klausklage

RIC 8 replicaThis box contained the three replicas: Galba, Otho, Vitellius-jmuona

RIC 8 replicaCast replica based on real dies, offered as a gift to ?businesspeople and including "authentication" for the replica's quality by an offical source.jmuona

RPC 2708 DomitianÆ Drachm, 21.63g
Alexandria mint, 94-95 AD
Obv: ΑΥΤ ΚΑΙϹ ΘƐΟΥ ΥΙΟϹ ΔΟΜΙΤ ϹƐΒ ΓƐΡΜ; Head of Domitian, laureate, bearded, r.
Rev: Triumphal arch; date LΙΔ
RPC 2708 (6 spec.). Emmett 257.14. Dattari-Savio 542-3.
Ex Harlan J Berk BBS 225, 30 November 2023, lot 505. Ex Shimmer, 1986, lot 118.

'He erected so many and such huge vaulted passage-ways and arches in the various regions of the city, adorned with chariots and triumphal emblems, that on one of them someone wrote in Greek: "enough!" '- Suetonius, Life of Domitian, 13.2.

Thus we begin with a pun. Some nameless wag scrawled ARCI on one of Domitian’s many arches, punning on the similarity between arcus (‘arch’) and the Greek arkei (‘enough’). Suetonius thought it clever enough to pass it along in his Life of Domitian. Domitian was a builder and he did indeed erect many arches throughout the city of Rome and the wider empire. This remarkable drachm struck at Alexandria for Domitian features a grandiose triple-span triumphal arch. The exact location of the structure is unknown. Some scholars have argued it represents a local Alexandrian arch (Price-Trell 1977, Vogt 1924, Handler 1971). F. Kleiner on the other hand convincingly proposes it to be a triumphal arch erected in Rome commemorating Domitian's victory over the Germanic Chatti. That it's a triumphal arch is fairly sound. The rooftop central figure of the emperor driving a triumphal quadriga pulled by six horses, flanked by twin trophies with defeated captives makes it fairly clear the arch was erected with a triumph in mind. The type first appeared on Alexandrian tetradrachms in 86, just a few years after the victory over the Chatti making a connection to that triumph very appealing. How accurate is the depiction? We simply do not know. Quite possibly the Alexandrian engravers based the composition on generic stock triumphal types, perhaps augmented by written descriptions, paintings, or sketches. The arch did not survive antiquity but is replicated on drachms of Trajan and Hadrian, likely repurposed for their own needs (whether it was located in Rome or Alexandria) and seemingly escaped damnatio memoriae destruction. Luckily, the coins survive to give us an idea of what this impressive monument may have looked like.4 commentsDavid Atherton

RPC 2728 DomitianÆ Drachm, 21.82g
Alexandria mint, 95-96 AD
Obv: ΑΥΤ ΚΑΙϹ ΘƐΟΥ ΥΙΟϹ ΔΟΜΙΤ ϹƐΒ ΓƐΡΜ; Head of Domitian, laureate, bearded, r.
Rev: Triumphal arch; date LΙΕ
RPC 2728 (9 spec.). Emmett 257.15. Dattari-Savio 544.
Acquired from Glenn Terry, eBay, October 2020.

This remarkable drachm struck at Alexandria during Domitian's final regnal year features a grandiose triple-span triumphal arch. The exact location of the structure is unknown. Some scholars have argued it represents a local Alexandrian arch (Price-Trell 1977, Vogt 1924, Handler 1971). F. Kleiner on the other hand convincingly proposes it to be a triumphal arch erected in Rome commemorating Domitian's victory over the Germanic Chatti. That it's a triumphal arch is fairly sound. The rooftop central figure of the emperor driving a triumphal quadriga pulled by six horses, flanked by twin trophies with defeated captives makes it fairly clear the arch was erected with a triumph in mind. The type first appeared on Alexandrian tetradrachms in 86, just a few years after the victory over the Chatti making a connection to that triumph very appealing. How accurate is the depiction? We simply do not know. Quite possibly the Alexandrian engravers based the composition on generic stock triumphal types, perhaps augmented by written descriptions, paintings, or sketches. The arch did not survive antiquity but is replicated on drachms of Trajan and Hadrian, likely repurposed for their own needs. The fact the structure was not pulled down and suffered damnatio memoriae, the fate of many Domitianic arches, is surprising. Luckily the coins survive to give us an idea of what this impressive monument may have looked like.

Fine style with fetching mottled olive green patina.4 commentsDavid Atherton

Severus Alexander - cast replica222.228 AD

rev: VIRTVS AVGNiclas E

Slavey , Lysimachos tetradrachm.Slavey, Struck Replica.4 commentsJerome Holderman

Spintria. Temp. Vespasian-Titus, 70-75 AD. Modern reproduction.Roman Empire. Vespasian-Titus (temp). 70-75 AD. AE Spintria (28.51 gm, 37.1mm, 12h). Modern reproduction. Couple engaged on a couch under a canopy. / VIIII within a laurel wreath (VIII mark of value in asses = 2 sesterti (1 quinarius) + 1 as. EF. Agora Auction 78 #255. Bronze tesserae. Modern replica. Buttrey, Spintriae 7/VIIII. Simonetta Group C, Scene 12. Cf. Simonetta & Riva scene 9 (for obv.). Ex-Los Angeles private collection.Anaximander

Syracuse, Sicily405-400 B.C.
Slavey Replica of Kimon Signed Silver Tetradrachm
16.78 gm, 28 mm
Obv.: Head of Arethusa facing three-quarters left wearing pearl earrings and necklace; hair flowing in loose tresses; across her forehead ampyx with the signature KIMΩN. Around her, four dolphins emerging from curls. APEΘOSA above, outside linear border. In field left, ΣΩ (savior).
Rev.: Quadriga at speed with prancing horses driven left by chiton-clad charioteer, holding kentron in right hand and reins in left; above, Nike flying right to crown him.
ΣYPAKOΣIΩN in exergue.

Stamped СЛАВЕИ (Slavey in Cyrillic) on edge.

Ancients.info Slavey GK-09444 commentsJaimelai

Syracuse, Sicily317-289 B.C.
Slavey Replica of Agathokles Silver Tetradrachm
16.42 gm, 30 mm
Obv.: Head of Arethusa facing left wreathed in grain leaves, wearing triple pendant earrings and pearl necklace; Around her swim three dolphins.
Rev.: Quadriga with prancing horses driven left by chiton-clad charioteer, holding kentron in right hand and reins in left; above, Nike flying right to crown.
ΣYPAKOΣIΩN in exergue, AI mongram below.

Stamped СЛАВЕИ (Slavey in Cyrillic) on edge and engraved in exergue line.

Ancients.info Slavey GK-09711 commentsJaimelai

Syracuse, SicilyRobert Ready Electrotype Replica of Kimon Signed Silver Tetradrachm
14.61 gm, 27 mm
Obv.: Head of Arethusa facing three-quarters left wearing pearl earrings and necklace; hair flowing in loose tresses; across her forehead ampyx with the signature KIMΩN. Around her, four dolphins emerging from curls. APEΘOSA above, outside linear border. In field left, ΣΩ (savior).
Rev.: Quadriga at speed with prancing horses driven left by chiton-clad charioteer, holding kentron in right hand and reins in left; above, Nike flying right to crown him.
ΣYPAKOΣIΩN in exergue.

Stamped RR on edge3 commentsJaimelai

Tiberius, under Augustus, Æ Sestertius. 8-10 AD, Lyons mint.RARE MINT OF PADUAN Giovanni Cavino (1499-1570).
Diameter: 33m/m. Weight: 23,2gr.

Note: Cavino worked under the direction of Alessandro Bassiano, a local antiquarian in the Italian city of Padua. Many of his large-diameter replicas of Roman bronze coins, especially of sestertii, are very good work; however, these are unmistakable because of their Renaissance artistic style.

Obverse: BUST OF TIBERIUS. CAESAR AVGVSTVS DIVI F PATER PATRIAE.
Reverse: ROM ET AVG, front elevation of the Altar of Lugdunum, decorated with corona civica, laurels, nude male figures & Victories on columns.
Antonivs Protti

Turkey, Metropolis, Ionia from the EastMetropolis was on the road between Smyrna and Ephesus. Neolithic, Hittite, Mycenaean, Classical, Hellenistic, Roman, Byzantine and Ottoman periods are represented at the site. Metropolis was a part of the Kingdom of Pergamum during the Hellenistic period, the time when the city reached a zenith of cultural and economic life. Metropolis had a temple dedicated to Ares, one of only two known dedicated to the war god. Strabo wrote that the district produced excellent wine. The ruins are of a Hellenistic city heavily Romanized, with Byzantine remains laid across it – a church to the east of the city, and fortification walls laid across city that connect to the Hellenistic defenses on the Acropolis. Excavations began in 1989. A Hellenistic marble seat of honor with griffins was found in the Ancient Theater. The original seat is in the Ä°zmir Archeological Museum and a replica has been placed at the site.

Source:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Metropolis_(Anatolia)
https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Metropolis_from_the_east.jpg
By David Hill (DiaboloDave), 2003.
Released to the public domain.
Joe Sermarini

Turkey, Metropolis, Ionia, the Roman TheaterMetropolis was on the road between Smyrna and Ephesus. Neolithic, Hittite, Mycenaean, Classical, Hellenistic, Roman, Byzantine and Ottoman periods are represented at the site. Metropolis was a part of the Kingdom of Pergamum during the Hellenistic period, the time when the city reached a zenith of cultural and economic life. Metropolis had a temple dedicated to Ares, one of only two known dedicated to the war god. Strabo wrote that the district produced excellent wine. The ruins are of a Hellenistic city heavily Romanized, with Byzantine remains laid across it – a church to the east of the city, and fortification walls laid across city that connect to the Hellenistic defenses on the Acropolis. Excavations began in 1989. A Hellenistic marble seat of honor with griffins was found in the Ancient Theater. The original seat is in the Ä°zmir Archeological Museum and a replica has been placed at the site.

Source:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Metropolis_(Anatolia)
https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Amph_theatre_Metropolis.JPG
By David Hill (DiaboloDave), 2007.
Released to the public domain.Joe Sermarini

USA, fractional California gold 25-cent piece, 1872These are tiny little things. Replicas and fantasy issues abound, but I'm pretty sure this and the other one I have are genuine.lordmarcovan

USA, fractional California gold half dollar, 1872Here's a rather sourfaced Lady Liberty on a tiny little California fractional. Replicas and fantasy issues abound, but I'm pretty sure this and the other one I have are genuine. I like the octagonal shape.lordmarcovan

[905a] Marcus Aurelius, 7 March 161 - 17 March 180 A.D.MARCUS AURELIUS AE [b[Sestertius. RIC 1222. 30mm, 24.5g. Struck at Rome, 177 AD. Obverse: M ANTONINUS AVG GERM SARM TR P XXXI, laureate head right; Reverse: LIBERALITAS AVG VII IMP VIIII COS III P P, Liberalitas standing left holding coin counter & cornucopia, SC in fields. Nice portrait. Ex Incitatus. Photo courtesy of Incitatus.

De Imperatoribus Romanis: An Online Encyclopedia of Roman Rulers and their Families

Marcus Aurelius (A.D. 161-180)

Herbert W. Benario
Emory University

Introduction and Sources
The Vita of the emperor in the collection known as the Historia Augusta identifies him in its heading as Marcus Antoninus Philosophus, "Marcus Antoninus the Philosopher." Toward the end of the work, the following is reported about him, sententia Platonis semper in ore illius fuit, florere civitates si aut philosophi imperarent aut imperantes philosopharentur (27.7), "Plato's judgment was always on his lips, that states flourished if philosophers ruled or rulers were philosophers." It is this quality of Marcus' character which has made him a unique figure in Roman history, since he was the first emperor whose life was molded by, and devoted to, philosophy (Julian was the second and last). His reign was long and troubled, and in some ways showed the weaknesses of empire which ultimately led to the "Decline and Fall," yet his personal reputation, indeed his sanctity, have never failed of admirers. Contributing to his fame and reputation is a slender volume of Stoic philosophy which served as a kind of diary while he was involved in military campaigns, the Meditations, a book which can be described as an aureus libellus, a little golden book.

The sources for understanding Marcus and his reign are varied but generally disappointing. There is no major historian. The chief literary sources are the biography in the Historia Augusta, as well as those of Hadrian, Antoninus, Verus, and Avidius Cassius. Debate about this collection of imperial biographies has been heated and contentious for more than a century. In all likelihood, it is the work of a single author writing in the last years of the fourth-century. The information offered ranges from the precisely accurate to the wildly imaginative.

Cassius Dio, who wrote in the decade of the 230s, produced a long history of the empire which has survived, for our period, only in an abbreviated version. Fourth century historians, such as Aurelius Victor and Eutropius, occasionally furnish bits of information. Marcus' teacher, Fronto, a distinguished orator and rhetorician, is extremely useful. Papyri, inscriptions, coins, legal writings, and some of the church writers, such as Tertullian, Eusebius, and Orosius, are very important. Archaeology and art history, with their interpretation of monuments, make the history of Marcus' principate literally visible and offer important clues for understanding the context of his actions.

Early Life
He was born M. Annius Verus on April 26, 121, the scion of a distinguished family of Spanish origin (PIR2 A697). His father was Annius Verus (PIR2 A696), his mother Domitia Lucilla (PIR2 D183). His grandfather held his second consulate in that year and went on to reach a third in 126, a rare distinction in the entire history of the principate, and also served Hadrian as city prefect. The youth's education embraced both rhetoric and philosophy; his manner was serious, his intellectual pursuits deep and devoted, so that the emperor Hadrian took an interest in him and called him "Verissimus," "Most truthful," by punning on his name. He received public honors from an early age and seems to have long been in Hadrian's mind as a potential successor. When Hadrian's first choice as successor, L. Ceionius Commodus, died before his adoptive father, the second choice proved more fruitful. The distinguished senator T. Aurelius Fulvus Boionius Arrius Antoninus, from Cisalpine Gaul, did succeed Hadrian, whose arrangements for the succession planned for the next generation as well. He required Antoninus to adopt the young Verus, now to be known as M. Aelius Aurelius Verus, as well as Commodus' son, henceforth known as L. Aelius Aurelius Commodus (PIR2 C606). The former was a bit more than seventeen years old, the latter was eight.

Career under Antoninus Pius
The long tenure of Antoninus Pius proved one of the most peaceful and prosperous in Roman history. The emperor himself was disinclined to military undertakings and never left Italy during his reign. Disturbances to the pax Romana occurred on the fringes of empire. Responses were decisive and successful, with legates in charge in the provinces. As a consequence, neither Caesar gained military experience nor was shown to the armies, a failing which later could have proved decisive and disastrous. Marcus rose steadily through the cursus honorum, holding consulates in 140 and 145, combining magistracies with priesthoods. He received the tribunicia potestas in 147, and perhaps also imperium proconsulare. Yet he never neglected the artes liberals. His closest contacts were with Fronto (c.95-c.160), the distinguished rhetorician and orator. His acquaintance included many other distinguished thinkers, such as Herodes Atticus (c.95-177), the Athenian millionaire and sophist, and Aelius Aristides (117-c.181), two of whose great speeches have survived and which reveal much of the mood and beliefs of the age. Yet it was Epictetus (c.50-c.120) who had the greatest philosophical impact and made him a firm Stoic. In the year 161 Marcus celebrated his fortieth birthday, a figure of noble appearance and unblemished character. He was leading a life which gave him as much honor and glory as he could have desired, probably much more than his private nature enjoyed, yet his life, and that of the empire, was soon to change. The emperor died on March 7, but not before clearly indicating to magistrates and senate alike his desire that Marcus succeed him by having the statue of Fortuna, which had been in his bedroom, transferred to Marcus. There was no opposition, no contrary voice, to his succession. He immediately chose his brother as co-emperor, as Hadrian had planned. From the beginning of the year they were joint consuls and held office for the entire year. Their official titulature was now Imperator Caesar M. Aurelius Antoninus Augustus and Imperator Caesar L. Aurelius Verus Augustus. The military qualities adumbrated by the word Imperator were soon much in demand, for the empire was under pressure in the year 161 in Britain, in Raetia, and in the east, where Parthia once again posed a significant danger.

The Parthian War (161-166)
The incursion in northern Britain and the difficulties along the Danube were soon satisfactorily managed by legates. The danger in the East was of a different magnitude. Tensions between Rome and Parthia had intensified in the last years of Antoninus' reign over control of Armenia, the vast buffer state which had often aroused enmity between the two powers, since each wished to be able to impose a king favorable to its interests. With Antoninus' death and the uncertainty attendant upon a new emperor (in this case two, a dyarchy, for the first time in Rome's history), the Parthian monarch, Vologaeses III, struck rapidly, placed his own candidate upon the Armenian throne, and inflicted severe setbacks upon the Roman forces sent to oppose him. Marcus decided to send his colleague Lucius Verus, whose imperial prestige would underscore the seriousness of the empire's response. Verus lacked military experience and was sorely lacking in the attributes of leadership and command; further, he was notorious for being chiefly interested in amusements and luxury. But Marcus surrounded him with several of the best generals at the empire's disposal, chief among them Avidius Cassius (c.130-175) (PIR2 A1402). From 162 on, Rome's successes and conquests were extensive and decisive. Most of Parthia's significant cities and strongholds, such as Seleucia and Ctesiphon, were stormed and destroyed, and the army's movements eastward recalled the movements of Alexander the Great some five centuries earlier. By 166, Parthia had capitulated and a Roman nominee sat on the Armenian throne. The victory appeared to be the most decisive since Trajan's conquest of Dacia, but, when Verus returned to Italy with his triumphant army, there came also a devastating plague, which had enormous effect on all provinces.
As is the case with all ancient diseases, it is almost impossible to identify this one. In all likelihood, however, it was smallpox; how severe the toll was is debated. Clearly, it cast a pall over the triumph celebrated by the two emperors, who were honored with the titles Armeniacus and Parthicus. The last years of this decade were dominated by efforts to overcome the plague and provide succour to its victims. But already in 166, the German tribes smashed the Danubian limes, threatening the empire's stability and even existence, more than Parthia had ever done. The first campaigns were punctuated by the death of Verus in 169, leaving Marcus as sole emperor. And so began the most difficult period of his life.

The German Wars
Early in 169, the Marcomanni and Quadi crossed the Danube, penetrated the intervening provinces, and entered Italy. The culmination of their onslaught was a siege of Aquileia. The effect upon the inhabitants of the peninsula was frightful. This was the first invasion of Italy since the late second century B.C., when the Cimbri and Teutones had been separately crushed by Marius. Perhaps more vivid in the collective imagination was the sack of Rome by the Gauls in 387, when the city was saved only by the payment of ransom.
The two emperors hastened north, after a rapid mobilization of forces, which included the drafting of slaves, since the manpower potential of the empire had been so impaired by the consequences of the plague and the losses and troop commitments in the East. Verus died while in the north; Marcus returned to Rome with the body and gave his brother full honors. He then turned north again and began his counterattacks against the barbarians. He did not know it at the time, but he was destined to spend most of his remaining years on the northern frontier. The only interlude was caused by revolt in the east.

We have no record of Marcus' ultimate intentions in these campaigns, yet the various stages were clear. First and foremost, the enemy had to be driven out of Italy and then into their own territory beyond the Danube. He strove to isolate the tribes and then defeat them individually, so that the ultimate manpower superiority of the empire and its greater skill in warfare and logistics could more easily be brought to bear. It was a successful strategy, as one tribe after another suffered defeat and reestablished ties with Rome. But it was a time-consuming and expensive operation, requiring the recruitment of two new legions, II Italica and III Italica, the construction of many new camps, such as the legionary fortress at Regensburg, with success accruing year by year. He intended to create two new provinces, Marcomannia and Sarmatia, thereby eliminating the Hungarian Plain and the headwaters of the Elbe as staging areas for invasion.

This steady, slow progress was interrupted in 175 by the action of the distinguished general Avidius Cassius, governor of Syria, who claimed the empire for himself. Whether he responded to a rumor of Marcus' death or, as gossip had it, conspired with Marcus' wife, the emperor's response was quick and decisive. Leaving the northern wars, he traveled to the East, but Avidius was killed before Marcus arrived in the region. After spending time settling affairs and showing himself to some of the provinces, with particular attention shown to Athens, where he was initiated into the Eleusinian mysteries, as Hadrian and Verus had been. He returned to Italy and soon answered the call to duty once more on the northern frontier. He took with him as colleague his son Commodus, now merely sixteen years old but already long since marked out as his father's intended successor. The military campaigns proved successful, but in the spring of 180, when Marcus died, at least one more year of warfare was necessary for the attainment of the grand enterprise. Marcus recommended to Commodus continuation of the war, but the new emperor was eager to return to Rome and the ease and luxury of the imperial court and entered into a peace agreement. Never again was Rome to hold the upper hand in its dealings with the Germanic tribes beyond the now reestablished borders of the empire.

Administrative and Religious Policy
Marcus was a conscientious and careful administrator who devoted much attention to judicial matters. His appointments to major administrative positions were for the most part admirable. Difficult tasks were put in the charge of the most capable men; he was not afraid of comparison with his subordinates. Social mobility continued as it had been under his predecessors, with men from the provinces advancing into the upper echelons of the Roman aristocracy. Those of humble birth could make a good career; such a one was Pertinax (126-193), a gifted general, who in early 193 became emperor for a space of less than three months.

The judicial administration of Italy was put in the hands of iuridici, who represented the emperor and thus spoke with his authority. This was a practice which had been established by Hadrian but had been allowed to lapse by Antoninus. The centralization of government continued apace. The imperial finances were sorely stretched by the almost continuous wars. Trajan had brought great wealth, Decebalus' treasure, into the empire after his conquest of Dacia. No such profit awaited Marcus. When preparing for the northern wars, he auctioned off much of the imperial palace's valuables. In spite of the enormous expenses of war, Commodus found ample funds upon his accession as sole emperor for his expenditures and amusements.

Although Marcus was a devoted thinker and philosopher, he was deeply religious, at least outwardly. The state cult received full honor, and he recognized the validity of other people's beliefs, so that the variety of religions in the vast extent of the empire caused no difficulties for inhabitants or government, with one significant exception. The Christians were not hampered by any official policy; indeed the impact of the church spread enormously in the second century. Yet their availability as scapegoats for local crises made them subject to abuse or worse. There was violence against them in 167, and perhaps the worst stain on Marcus' principate stemmed from the pogrom of Christians in Lugdunum in southern France in 177. He did not cause it, nor, on the other hand, did he or his officials move to stop it. Indeed, Tertullian called him a friend of Christianity. Yet the events were a precursor of what would come in the century and a quarter which followed.

Building Programs and Monuments
Many of Marcus' predecessors transformed the face of the capital with their building programs, either by the vast range of their undertaking or by the extraordinary significance of individual monuments. Others did very little to leave a tangible mark. Marcus fell into the latter group. There is record of very few monuments for which he and his brother were responsible. Very early in their reign they honored the deceased Antoninus with a column in the Campus Martius, no longer in situ but largely surviving. The shaft, which seems not to have been sculpted, was used for the restoration of Augustus' obelisk, now in Piazza Montecitorio, in the eighteenth century. The base, which was sculpted on all four sides, is now on display in the Vatican Museum. The chief feature is the apotheosis of the emperor and his long deceased wife, the elder Faustina, as they are borne to heaven. Also presented on this relief are two eagles and personifications of the goddess Roma and of the Campus Martius, represented as a young male figure.

There were three arches which commemorated the military achievements of the two emperors. No trace has been found of an early monument to Verus. Two arches later honored Marcus, both of which have disappeared but have left significant sculptural remains. The eight rectangular reliefs preserved on the Arch of Constantine came from one arch. Similarly, the three reliefs displayed in the stairwell of the Conservatori Museum on the Capitoline Hill came from another. One relief has disappeared from the latter monument.

Certainly the best known monument of Marcus' principate is the column, which rises from Piazza Colonna. It is twin to Trajan's column in height and design, although the artistic craftsmanship of the reliefs which envelop the shaft is much inferior. The subject is Marcus' campaigns against the Marcomanni and Sarmati in the years 172-75. The most interesting panel represents the famous rainstorm, when the army, overwhelmed by drought, was suddenly saved by the divine intervention of rain. Although begun in the latter part of the decade, the column was not completed until 193, when Septimius Severus had become emperor.

The famous equestrian statue of Marcus Aurelius, which survived the centuries near San Giovanni in Laterano because the rider was identified as Constantine, no longer greets the visitor to the Capitoline, where Michelangelo had placed it in the sixteenth century. It was removed in the 1980s because pollution was destroying it. After careful treatment and restoration, it is now displayed within the museum, with a replica placed in the center of the piazza.

Although outside Rome, mention should be made of the monumental frieze commemorating Lucius Verus' victory over the Parthians in 165. It was an ornament of the city of Ephesus; the extensive sculptural remains are now in the Ephesus Museum in Vienna.

Family
As part of Hadrian's plans for his succession, when Ceionius Commodus was his choice, Marcus was betrothed to the latter's daughter. But when Ceionius died and Antoninus became Hadrian's successor, that arrangement was nullified and Marcus was chosen for the Emperor's daughter, the younger Faustina (PIR2 A716). She had been born in 129, was hence eight years younger than he. They were married in 145; the marriage endured for thirty years. She bore him thirteen children, of whom several died young; the most important were a daughter, Lucilla, and a son Commodus. Lucilla was deployed for political purposes, married first to Lucius Verus in 164, when she was seventeen, and then, after his death, to Claudius Pompeianus Quintianus of Antioch, a much older man who was an important associate of her father /ii]PIR2 C973). Commodus became joint-emperor with his father in 177 and three years later ruled alone.

Faustina's reputation suffered much abuse. She was accused of employing poison and of murdering people, as well as being free with her favors with gladiators, sailors, and also men of rank, particularly Avidius Cassius. Yet Marcus trusted her implicitly and defended her vigorously. She accompanied him on several campaigns and was honored with the title mater castrorum. She was with him in camp at Halala in southern Cappadocia in the winter of 175 when she died in an accident. Marcus dedicated a temple to her honor and had the name of the city changed to Faustinopolis.

Death and Succession
In early 180, while Marcus and Commodus were fighting in the north, Marcus became ill. Which disease carried him off we do not know, but for some days Marcus took no food or drink, being now eager to die. He died on March 17, in the city of Vindobona, although one source reports that it was in Sirmium. His ashes were brought to Rome and placed in Hadrian's mausoleum. Commodus succeeded to all power without opposition, and soon withdrew from the war, thereby stymieing his father's designs and ambitions. It was a change of rulers that proved disastrous for people and empire. Dio called the succession a change from a golden kingdom to one of iron and rust.

Reputation
Gibbon called Marcus "that philosophic monarch," a combination of adjective and noun which sets Marcus apart from all other Roman emperors. His renown has, in subsequent centuries, suffered little, although he was by no means a "perfect" person. He was perhaps too tolerant of other people's failings, he himself used opium. The abundance of children whom his wife bore him included, alas, a male who was to prove one of Rome's worst rulers. How much better it would have been if Marcus had had no son and had chosen a successor by adoption, so that the line of the five good emperors, Nerva, Trajan, Hadrian, Antoninus, Marcus, could have been extended. It was not to be, and for that Marcus must accept some responsibility.

Yet he was a man of ability and a sense of duty who sacrificed his own delights and interests to the well-being of the state. He was capax imperii, he did his best, and history has been kind to him. As Hamlet said to Horatio, when awaiting the appearance of the ghost of his father,

"He was a man! Take him for all in all, I shall not look upon his like again." (I 2, 187-88)

His memory remains vivid and tactile because of the famous column, the equestrian statue, and his slender volume of thoughts, written in Greek, the Meditations, from which I choose two quotations with which to conclude:

"If mind is common to us, then also the reason, whereby we are reasoning beings, is common. If this be so, then also the reason which enjoins what is to be done or left undone is common. If this be so, law also is common; if this be so, we are citizens; if this be so, we are partakers in one constitution; if this be so, the Universe is a kind of Commonwealth." (4.4)

"At dawn of day, when you dislike being called, have this thought ready: 'I am called to man's labour; why then do I make a difficulty if I am going out to do what I was born to do and what I was brought into the world for?'" (5.1; both in Farquharson's translation)

Copyright (C) 2001, Herbert W. Benario.
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

LINK TO COINEDWARD I OF ENGLAND
Edward I was King of England from 1272 - 1307. He was the eldest surviving son of Henry III and Eleanor of Provence. The contests between his father and the barons led by Simon de Montfort called Edward early into active life when he restored the royal authority within months by defeating and killing de Montfort at the battle of Evesham in 1265. He then proceeded to Palestine, where no conquest of any importance was achieved. After further campaigns in Italy and France he returned to England on his father's death and was crowned at Westminster Abbey in 1274.
Edward was popular because he identified himself with the growing tide of nationalism sweeping the country, displayed later in his persecution and banishment of the Jews which was the culmination of many years of anti-semitism in England.
Edward now turned his attention to the mountainous land to the west which had never been completely subdued. So, following a revolt in the Principality of Wales against English influence, Edward commenced a war which ended in the annexation of the Principality to the English Crown in 1283. He secured his conquest by building nine castles to watch over it and created his eldest son, Edward the Prince of Wales in 1301.
Edward's great ambition, however, was to gain possession of Scotland, but the death of Margaret, the Maid of Norway, who was to have been married to Edward's son, for a time frustrated the king's designs. However the sudden death of the King of Scotland, Alexander III, and the contested succession soon gave him the opportunity to intervene. He was invited by the Scots to arbitrate and choose between the thirteen competitors for the Scottish throne. Edward's choice, John Balliol, who he conceived as his puppet, was persuaded to do homage for his crown to Edward at Newcastle but was then forced to throw off Edward's overlordship by the indignation of the Scottish people. An alliance between the French and the Scots now followed, and Edward, then at war with the French king over possession of Gascony, was compelled to march his army north. Edward invaded Scotland in 1296 and devastated the country, which earned him the sobriquet 'Hammer of the Scots'. It was at this time that the symbolic Stone of Destiny was removed from Scone. Edward's influence had tainted Balliol's reign and the Scottish nobility deposed him and appointed a council of twelve to rule instead. Balliol abdicated and was eventually sent to France where he retired into obscurity, taking no more part in politics. Scotland was then left without a monarch until the accession of Robert the Bruce in 1306.
Meanwhile Edward assumed the administration of the country. However the following summer a new opposition to Edward took place under William Wallace whose successes, notably at Stirling Bridge, forced Edward to return to Scotland with an army of 100,000 men. Although he defeated Wallace's army at Falkirk, and Wallace himself was betrayed, Edward's unjust and barbaric execution of him as a traitor in London made Wallace a national hero in Scotland, and resistance to England became paramount among the people. All Edward's efforts to reduce the country to obedience were unravelling, and after the crowning of Robert Bruce, Earl of Carrick, as Robert I of Scotland in 1306 an enraged Edward assembled another army and marched yet again against the Scots. However, Edward only reached Burgh-on-Sands, a village near Carlisle, when he died. His body was taken back to London and he was buried at Westminster Abbey.
Edward I was married twice: to Eleanor of Castile, by whom he had sixteen children, and Margaret of France by whom he had three. Twelve memorials to his first wife stood between Nottingham and London to mark the journey taken by her funeral cortege. Three of those memorials, known as "Eleanor Crosses", can still be seen today at Geddington, Hardingstone near Northampton and Waltham Cross. London's Charing Cross is also named after one, but the original was demolished in 1647 and the monument seen there today is a Victorian replica.

BERWICK
In September 1290, upon the death of Margaret, Maid of Norway, there arose a number of claimants to the throne of Scotland. The Guardians of Scotland, who were the de facto heads of state until a king was chosen, asked Edward I of England to conduct the court proceedings in the dispute because the late King Alexander III had been married to Edward's sister, Margaret of England.
John Balliol, a descendant of King David I, was chosen and he was inaugurated at Scone, on St. Andrew's Day, 30 November 1292. But Edward I treated both Baliol and Scotland with contempt and demanded military support for his war against France. The Scottish response was to form an alliance with the French, invade England, and launch an attack on Carlisle.
After the failure of the Scottish attack on Carlisle, Edward I marched north and, on 28th March 1296, he crossed the river Tweed which borders the two countries, with his troops. On the following day he marched on the town of Berwick, which was Scotland's most important trading port and second only to London in economic importance in medieval Britain at that time.
Contemporary accounts of the number slain range anywhere from 4,000 to 20,000. "When the town had been taken in this way and its citizens had submitted, Edward spared no one, whatever the age or sex, and for two days streams of blood flowed from the bodies of the slain, for in his tyrannous rage he ordered 7,500 souls of both sexes to be massacred...So that mills could be turned by the flow of their blood." - Account of the Massacre of Berwick, from Bower's Scotichronicon.
Berwick's garrison was commanded by William the Hardy, Lord of Douglas, whose life and those of his garrison were spared after he surrendered and the English took the castle.
Berwick was recaptured by the Scots in 1318 but the town changed hands between the two countries several times during the following years until it was finally captured for the English by Richard, Duke of Gloucester, the future Richard III of England, in 1482. The Scots however, did not accept this conquest for at least two centuries after this date as is evidenced by innumerable charters.*Alex

54 files on 1 page(s)