| Image search results - "text" |
WESTERN ASIATIC CUNEIFORM TABLET, A LETTER FROM KARARIYA TO TARIDUM A SERVANT OF KING ILUNI
2ND MILLENNIUM B.C.
3 1/4 in. (110 grams, 82 mm).
A roughly rectangular clay tablet bearing dense rows of cuneiform text to both principal faces and to each of the four side edges; a letter from Karariya to Ṭaridum, probably a servant of Iluni, Karariya serves a foreign ruler (as indicated by the mention of the deity Hitti) who has just ascended the throne; he is of the same rank as Taridum, who considers him his brother: 'May Šamaš and Hitti preserve my brother alive forever!'; they deal with matters they have in common, a lawsuit to be tried by Karariya, and exchanges of goods between their two houses: 'There are no more wicks (?) for the lamps in my house (...). The wine from my stock is spent and we could not load the donkeys (with
wine) for you';Quant.Geek
|
|
PALEO-AKKADIAN CUNEIFORM TABLET RELATING TO BARLEY FROM LUGALNITAZI
CIRCA 2300 B.C.
1 3/8 in. (20.1 grams, 36 mm wide).
A broadly pillow-shaped clay tablet bearing cuneiform text to one face, a Paleo-Akkadian receipt (from Adab?): barley from Lugalnitazi received by the men of the kitchens. Quant.Geek
|
|
UR III CUNEIFORM TABLET FRAGMENT RELATING TO FOOD DISTRIBUTION
LATE 3RD MILLENNIUM B.C.
2 5/8 in. (82 grams, 67 mm).
A fragment of a pillow-shaped ceramic tablet with neatly impressed columns of cuneiform text, accounting of Ur III food distribution,
representing wages.
LITERATURE:
Cf. Liverani, M., Antico Oriente, Storia, societa' ed economia, Roma, 1988, pp.608-609, fig.111, for type.Quant.Geek
|
|
UR III CUNEIFORM TABLET FRAGMENT, A NOTE ON A QUANTITY OF BARLEY
2ND MILLENNIUM B.C.
1 1/2 in. (23 grams, 39 mm).
A clay tablet bearing cuneiform text to one face, roughly lentoid in cross-section, a note on a quantity of barley, possibly Paleo-BabylonianQuant.Geek
|
|
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
  *Alex
|
|
Licinius II RIC VII Rome 154 Licinius II
AE 20-22 mm 3.1 grams
OBV :: LICINIVS IVN NOB C. Laureate, draped and cuirassed bust right
REV :: ROMAE A-ETERNAE. Roma seated right holding shield on lap inscribed with XV. P in left , R in right fields.
EX :: R ? ( Rome )
REF :: RIC VII Rome 154
from uncleaned lot 02/2009
Coin is bouble struck as is seen above the bust. Also has " clogged die " error at the IVN part of the obverse legend making the text appear as CIN Johnny
|
|
"Obol" As of Marcus AureliusThis as of Marcus Aurleius with reverse of Providentia holding wand over globe has a layer of thick blue crystals on both sides. Many believe that this kind of patina comes from contact with the dead and such coins are therefore know as "obol" coins from the practice of placing payment for the afterlife in the deceased's mouth. It is not certain if there is any truth to these rumours. When coins, like this one, come from ploughed field contexts it is impossible to determine what their original deposition context was. SC
|
|
(502a) Roman Republic, L. Calpurnius Piso Frugi, 90 B.C.Silver denarius, S 235, Calpurnia 11, Crawford 340/1, Syd 663a, VF, rainbow toning, Rome mint, 3.772g, 18.5mm, 180o, 90 B.C. obverse: laureate head of Apollo right, scorpion behind; Reverse naked horseman galloping right holding palm, L PISO FRVGI and control number CXI below; ex-CNA XV 6/5/91, #443. Ex FORVM.
A portion of the following text is a passage taken from the excellent article “The Calpurnii and Roman Family History: An Analysis of the Piso Frugi Coin in the Joel Handshu Collection at the College of Charleston,” by Chance W. Cook:
In the Roman world, particularly prior to the inception of the principate, moneyers were allotted a high degree of latitude to mint their coins as they saw fit. The tres viri monetales, the three men in charge of minting coins, who served one-year terms, often emblazoned their coins with an incredible variety of images and inscriptions reflecting the grandeur, history, and religion of Rome. Yet also prominent are references to personal or familial accomplishments; in this manner coins were also a means by which the tres viri monetales could honor their forbearers. Most obvious from an analysis of the Piso Frugi denarius is the respect and admiration that Lucius Calpurnius Piso Frugi, who minted the coin, had for his ancestors. For the images he selected for his dies relate directly to the lofty deeds performed by his Calpurnii forbearers in the century prior to his term as moneyer. The Calpurnii were present at many of the watershed events in the late Republic and had long distinguished themselves in serving the state, becoming an influential and well-respected family whose defense of traditional Roman values cannot be doubted.
Lucius Calpurnius Piso Frugi, who was moneyer in 90 B.C., depicted Apollo on the obverse and the galloping horseman on the reverse, as does his son Gaius. However, all of L. Piso Frugi’s coins have lettering similar to “L-PISO-FRVGI” on the reverse, quite disparate from his son Gaius’ derivations of “C-PISO-L-F-FRV.”
Moreover, C. Piso Frugi coins are noted as possessing “superior workmanship” to those produced by L. Piso Frugi.
The Frugi cognomen, which became hereditary, was first given to L. Calpurnius Piso, consul in 133 B.C., for his integrity and overall moral virtue. Cicero is noted as saying that frugal men possessed the three cardinal Stoic virtues of bravery, justice, and wisdom; indeed in the Thesaurus Linguae Latinae, a synonym of frugalitas is bonus, generically meaning “good” but also implying virtuous behavior. Gary Forsythe notes that Cicero would sometimes invoke L. Calpurnius Piso’s name at the beginning of speeches as “a paragon of moral rectitude” for his audience.
L. Calpurnius Piso Frugi’s inclusion of the laureled head of Apollo, essentially the same obverse die used by his son Gaius (c. 67 B.C.), was due to his family’s important role in the establishment of the Ludi Apollinares, the Games of Apollo, which were first instituted in 212 B.C. at the height of Hannibal’s invasion of Italy during the Second Punic War. By that time, Hannibal had crushed Roman armies at Cannae, seized Tarentum and was invading Campania.
Games had been used throughout Roman history as a means of allaying the fears
of the populace and distracting them from issues at hand; the Ludi Apollinares were no different. Forsythe follows the traditional interpretation that in 211 B.C., when C. Calpurnius Piso was praetor, he became the chief magistrate in Rome while both consuls were absent and the three other praetors were sent on military expeditions against Hannibal.
At this juncture, he put forth a motion in the Senate to make the Ludi Apollinares a yearly event, which was passed; the Ludi Apollinares did indeed become an important festival, eventually spanning eight days in the later Republic. However, this interpretation is debatable; H.H. Scullard suggests that the games were not made permanent until 208 B.C. after a severe plague prompted the Senate to make them a fixture on the calendar. The Senators believed Apollo would serve as a “healing god” for the people of Rome.
Nonetheless, the Calpurnii obviously believed their ancestor had played an integral role in the establishment of the Ludi Apollinares and thus prominently displayed
the head or bust of Apollo on the obverse of the coins they minted.
The meaning of the galloping horseman found on the reverse of the L. Calpurnius Piso Frugi coin is more complicated. It is possible that this is yet another reference to the Ludi Apollinares. Chariot races in the Circus Maximus were a major component of the games, along with animal hunts and theatrical performances.
A more intriguing possibility is that the horseman is a reference to C. Calpurnius Piso, son of the Calpurnius Piso who is said to have founded the Ludi Apollinares. This C. Calpurnius Piso was given a military command in 186 B.C. to quell a revolt in Spain. He was victorious, restoring order to the province and also gaining significant wealth in the process.
Upon his return to Rome in 184, he was granted a triumph by the Senate and eventually erected an arch on the Capitoline Hill celebrating his victory. Of course
the arch prominently displayed the Calpurnius name. Piso, however, was not an infantry commander; he led the cavalry.
The difficulty in accepting C. Calpurnius Piso’s victory in Spain as the impetus for the galloping horseman image is that not all of C. Piso Frugi’s coins depict the horseman or cavalryman carrying the palm, which is a symbol of victory. One is inclined to believe that the victory palm would be prominent in all of the coins minted by C. Piso Frugi (the son of L. Calpurnius Piso Frugi) if it indeed signified the great triumph of C. Calpurnius Piso in 186 B.C. Yet the palm’s appearance is clearly not a direct reference to military feats of C. Piso Frugi’s day. As noted, it is accepted that his coins were minted in 67 B.C.; in that year, the major victory by Roman forces was Pompey’s swift defeat of the pirates throughout the Mediterranean.
Chrestomathy: Annual Review of Undergraduate Research at the College of Charleston. Volume 1, 2002: pp. 1-10© 2002 by the College of Charleston, Charleston SC 29424, USA.All rights to be retained by the author.
http://www.cofc.edu/chrestomathy/vol1/cook.pdf
There are six (debatably seven) prominent Romans who have been known to posterity as Lucius Calpurnius Piso:
Lucius Calpurnius Piso Frugi: (d. 261 A.D.) a Roman usurper, whose existence is
questionable, based on the unreliable Historia Augusta.
Lucius Calpurnius Piso Licinianus: deputy Roman Emperor, 10 January 69 to15 January
69, appointed by Galba.
Lucius Calpurnius Piso: Consul in 27 A.D.
Lucius Calpurnius Piso: Consul in 1 B.C., augur
Lucius Calpurnius Piso: Consul in 15 B.C., pontifex
Lucius Calpurnius Piso Caesoninus: Consul in 58 B.C. (the uncle of Julius Caesar)
Lucius Calpurnius Piso Frugi: Moneyer in 90 B.C. (our man)
All but one (or two--if you believe in the existence of "Frugi the usurper" ca. 261 A.D.) of these gentlemen lack the Frugi cognomen, indicating they are not from the same direct lineage as our moneyer, though all are Calpurnii.
Calpurnius Piso Frugi's massive issue was intended to support the war against the Marsic Confederation. The type has numerous variations and control marks.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lucius_Calpurnius_Piso
http://www.forumancientcoins.com/catalog/indexfrm.asp?vpar=55&pos=0
Edited by J. P. Fitzgerald, Jr.
Cleisthenes
|
|
(504c) Roman Republic, L. Cassius Longinus, 63 B.C.Silver denarius, Crawford 413/1, RSC I Cassia 10, SRCV I 364, aVF, struck with worn dies, Rome mint, weight 3.867g, maximum diameter 20.3mm, die axis 0o, c. 63 B.C. Obverse: veiled bust of Vesta left, kylix behind, L before; Reverse: LONGIN III V, voter standing left, dropping tablet inscribed V into a cista.
The reverse of this Longinus denarius captures a fascinating moment when a Roman citizen casts his ballot. "The abbreviation III V [ir] indentifies Longinus as one of the three annually appointed mintmasters (officially called tres viri aere argento auro flando feriundo). A citizen is seen casting his vote into the urn. On the ballot is the letter 'U', short for uti rogas, a conventional formula indicating assent to a motion. The picture alludes to the law, requested by an ancestor of the mintmaster, which introduced the secret ballot in most proceedings of the popular court" (Meier, Christian. Caesar, a Biography. Berlin: Severin and Siedler, 1982. Plate 6).
The date that this denarius was struck possesses unique significance for another reason. Marcus Tullius Cicero (politician, philosopher, orator, humanist) was elected consul for the year 63 BC -- the first man elected consul who had no consular ancestors in more than 30 years. A "new man," Cicero was not the descendant of a "patrician" family, nor was his family wealthy (although Cicero married "well"). Cicero literally made himself the man he was by the power of the words he spoke and the way in which he spoke them. A witness to and major player during the decline of the Roman Republic, Cicero was murdered in 43 BC by thugs working for Marc Antony. But Cicero proved impossible to efface.
Cicero's words became part of the bed rock of later Roman education. As Peter Heather notes, every educated young man in the late Roman Empire studied "a small number of literary texts under the guidance of an expert in language and literary interpretation, the grammarian. This occupied the individual for seven or more years from about the age of eight, and concentrated on just four authors: Vergil, Cicero, Sallust and Terence" (Heather, Peter. The Fall of the Roman Empire: A New History of Rome and the Barbarians. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2006. 17).
Plutarch: Cicero's Death
But in the meantime the assassins were come with a band of soldiers, Herennius, a centurion, and Popillius, a tribune, whom Cicero had formerly defended when prosecuted for the murder of his father. Finding the doors shut, they broke them open, and Cicero not appearing, and those within saying they knew not where he was, it is stated that a youth, who had been educated by Cicero in the liberal arts and sciences, an emancipated slave of his brother Quintus, Philologus by name, informed the tribune that the litter was on its way to the sea through the close and shady walks. The tribune, taking a few with him, ran to the place where he was to come out. And Cicero, perceiving Herennius running in the walks, commanded his servants to set down the litter; and stroking his chin, as he used to do, with his left hand, he looked steadfastly upon his murderers, his person covered with dust, his beard and hair untrimmed, and his face worn with his troubles. So that the greatest part of those that stood by covered their faces whilst Herennius slew him. And thus was he murdered, stretching forth his neck out of the litter, being now in his sixty-fourth year. Herennius cut off his head, and, by Antony's command, his hands also, by which his Philippics were written; for so Cicero styled those orations he wrote against Antony, and so they are called to this day.
When these members of Cicero were brought to Rome, Antony was holding an assembly for the choice of public officers; and when he heard it, and saw them, he cried out, "Now let there be an end of our proscriptions." He commanded his head and hands to be fastened up over the rostra, where the orators spoke; a sight which the Roman people shuddered to behold, and they believed they saw there, not the face of Cicero, but the image of Antony's own soul. And yet amidst these actions he did justice in one thing, by delivering up Philologus to Pomponia, the wife of Quintus; who, having got his body into her power, besides other grievous punishments, made him cut off his own flesh by pieces, and roast and eat it; for so some writers have related. But Tiro, Cicero's emancipated slave, has not so much as mentioned the treachery of Philologus.
Translation by John Dryden: http://intranet.grundel.nl/thinkquest/moord_cicero_plu.html
Edited by J. P. Fitzgerald, Jr.Cleisthenes
|
|
00099 Facing Head of LarissaThessaly Greece, the City of Larissa
Obv: Head of the nymph Larissa 3/4 facing l., wearing ampyx flanked by two hornlike locks, round curl to the l. of the head1; earring on the r. (?), wearing wire necklace (?). Border of dots.
Rev: Horse crouching r., l. foreleg raised and bent (parallel with the lower part of the hind legs), preparing to roll, ΛAPIΣ above horse and AIΩN in the exergue.
Denomination: silver drachm; Mint: Larissa; Date: c. 356 - 346 BC2; Weight: 6.05g; Diameter: 19mm; Die axis: 130º; References, for example: Lorber Hoard, Phase L-III; SNG COP 121.
Notes:
1On p. 10 of Lorber Hoard Catharine Lorber observes that on later Phase L-III head types the round curl to the left of the head "...tends to evolve into a long wavy lock scarcely different from the others above and below it." Therefore, perhaps this coin falls earlier in Phase L-III.
2This is the date range given in Lorber Hoard, p. 11. She states that the Third Sacred War must have been the historical context for the intensive Phase L-III drachm production.
The city of Larissa was named after the local water nymph, said to be the daughter of Pelasgos. He was said to be the ancestor of the pre-Greek Pelasgians. According to myth Larissa drowned while playing ball on the banks of the Peneios river. (HGC 4 p. 130).
Provenance: Ex Harlan J. Berk Ltd. June 28, 2019; Ex Pegasi Auction, A22, lot 117 April 20, 2010.
Photo credits: Harlan J. Berk Ltd.
CLICK FOR SOURCESTracy Aiello
|
|
002. Augustus (31 BC- 14 AD)Augustus
He suffered but two severe and ignominious defeats, those of Lollius [15 B.C.] and Varus [9 A.D.], both of which were in Germany. Of these the former was more humiliating than serious, but the latter was almost fatal, since three legions were cut to pieces with their general, his lieutenants, and all the auxiliaries. In fact, they say that he was so greatly affected that for several months in succession he cut neither his beard nor his hair, and sometimes he would dash his head against a door, crying: "Quintilius Varus, give me back my legions!" And he observed the day of the disaster each year as one of sorrow and mourning.
Lyons mint, 2 BC - ca 13 AD. CAESAR AVGVSTVS DIVI F PATER PATRIAE. laureate head right / AVGVSTI F COS DESIG PRINC IVVENT, C L CAESARES below, Gaius & Lucius standing front, each with a hand resting on a round shield, a spear, & in field above, a lituus right & simpulum left ("b9"). BMC 533, RSC 43
This is one of my first 12 caesar coins. I got this from an all text list from M&R coins. ecoli
|
|
037ai Marcus Aurelius (139-161 A.D. as Caesar, 161-180 A.D. as Augustus), AR-Denarius, RIC III 0429a (imitacio)(Ant.Pius), Rome, IIONOS, Honos standing facing, #1037ai Marcus Aurelius (139-161 A.D. as Caesar, 161-180 A.D. as Augustus), AR-Denarius, RIC III 0429a (imitacio)(Ant.Pius), Rome, IIONOS, Honos standing facing, #1
avers: IVAIIIVCCAR TAIIAVCIIII, bare head right. (Confused text)
reverse: IIONOS, Honos standing facing, head left, holding branch, and cornucopiae.
exergue: -/-//--, diameter: 17,5mm, weight: 25,7g, axis: 6h,
mint: Rome, date: A.D.,
ref: RIC III. 0429a (imitacio)(Ant.Pius), p- , RSC-,
Q-001quadrans
|
|
05 Constantius IIBGN353 - Constantius II (A.D. 337-361), Pre-Magnentian Revolt, AE Centenionalis, 21mm, 5.14g., Arles mint, first officina, A.D. 348-350, pearl-diademed, draped and cuirassed bust of the Emperor right, A behind head, rev., FEL TEMP REPARATIO, PARL in exergue, helmeted soldier spearing fallen horseman, A in field, (RIC 119/121-22; Bridgnorth Report #79), very fine. RIC Arles 118
Ex Bridgnorth Hoard, Shropshire, England, buried circa A.D. 355, discovered 2007.
"On October 10th, 2007 a metal detectorist discovered a large scattered hoard of late Roman coins that had been disturbed by deep plowing in a potato field near Bridgnorth, Shropshire. His subsequent actions are praised in the UK government 2007 Portable Antiquities and Treasure Annual Report, where local finds officer Peter Reavill states: “The finder is to be congratulated on the careful plotting and speedy reporting of this hoard as it enabled the excavation to take place and vital depositional information recorded. In turn, this minimised the impact to the landowner and his farming activity.” The majority of hoards that come to light are found outside of planned archaeological excavations, the original owner having selected a secluded spot to conceal his or her wealth away from human habitation, leading to loss of information on the archaeological context of the hoard. In this instance, swift action and close cooperation by the finder and the local Finds Liaison Officer led to an excavation of the findspot. The results of which showed that the hoard had been contained in a large pottery vessel (broken by the plow), most probably previously used as a cooking pot as evidenced by burns marks on the outer edges. The pot had been buried in a U-shaped gulley or ditch that formed part of an otherwise unknown late Roman site.
The hoard consisted of 2892 coins, ranging in date from a Reform Antoninianus of Probus to post Magnentian issues of Constantius II up to A.D. 355. The majority of the hoard was issues of Magnentius and Decentius (75%), followed by pre-Magnentian issues of Constantius II and Constans (18%) and closing with post Magnentian issues of Constantius II and Gallus (7%)."
Better PhotoRandygeki(h2)
|
|
1308b, Licinius I, 308 - 324 A.D. (Siscia)Licinius I, 11 November 308 - 18 September 324 A.D. Bronze follis, RIC 4, F, Siscia, 3.257g, 21.6mm, 0o, 313 - 315 A.D. Obverse: IMP LIC LICINIVS P F AVG, laureate head right; Reverse IOVI CONSERVATORI AVGG NN, Jupiter standing left holding Victory on globe and scepter, eagle with wreath in beak left, E right, SIS in exergue.
De Imperatoribus Romanis : An Online Encyclopedia of Roman Rulers and their Families
Licinius (308-324 A.D.)
Michael DiMaio, Jr.
Salve Regina University
Licinius' Heritage
Valerius Licinianus Licinius, more commonly known as Licinius, may have been born ca. 265. Of peasant origin, his family was from Dacia. A close friend and comrade of arms of the Emperor Galerius, he accompanied him on his Persian expedition in 297. When campaigns by Severus and Galerius in late 306 or early 307 and in the summer of 307, respectively, failed to dislodge Maxentius who, with the luke warm support of his father Maximianus Herculius, was acclaimed princeps on 28 October 306, he was sent by the eastern emperor to Maxentius as an ambassador; the diplomatic mission, however, failed because the usurper refused to submit to the authority of his father-in-law Galerius. At the Conference of Carnuntum which was held in October or November of 308, Licinius was made an Augustus on 11 November 308; his realm included Thrace, Illyricum, and Pannonia.
Licinius' Early Reign
Although Licinius was initially appointed by Galerius to replace Severus to end the revolt of Maxentius , Licinius (perhaps wisely) made no effort to move against the usurper. In fact, his first attested victory was against the Sarmatians probably in the late spring, but no later than the end of June in 310. When the Emperor Galerius died in 311, Licinius met Maximinus Daia at the Bosporus during the early summer of that year; they concluded a treaty and divided Galerius' realm between them. It was little more than a year later that the Emperor Constantine defeated Maxentius at the Battle of the Milvian Bridge on 28 October 312. After the defeat of the usurper, Constantine and Licinius met at Mediolanum (Milan) where Licinius married the former's sister Constantia; one child was born of this union: Valerius Licinianus Licinius. Licinius had another son, born of a slave woman, whose name is unknown. It appears that both emperors promulgated the so-called Edict of Milan, in which Constantine and Licinius granted Christians the freedom to practice their faith without any interference from the state.
As soon as he seems to have learned about the marital alliance between Licinius and Constantine and the death of Maxentius, who had been his ally, Daia traversed Asia Minor and, in April 313, he crossed the Bosporus and went to Byzantium, which he took from Licinius after an eleven day siege. On 30 April 313 the armies of both emperors clashed on the Campus Ergenus; in the ensuing battle Daia's forces were routed. A last ditch stand by Daia at the Cilician Gates failed; the eastern emperor subsequently died in the area of Tarsus probably in July or August 313. As soon as he arrived in Nicomedeia, Licinius promulgated the Edict of Milan. As soon as he had matters in Nicomedeia straightened out, Licinius campaigned against the Persians in the remaining part of 313 and the opening months of 314.
The First Civil War Between Licinius and Constantine
Once Licinius had defeated Maximinus Daia, the sole rulers of the Roman world were he and Constantine. It is obvious that the marriage of Licinius to Constantia was simply a union of convenience. In any case, there is evidence in the sources that both emperors were looking for an excuse to attack the other. The affair involving Bassianus (the husband of Constantius I's daughter Anastasia ), mentioned in the text of Anonymus Valesianus (5.14ff), may have sparked the falling out between the two emperors. In any case, Constantine' s forces joined battle with those of Licinius at Cibalae in Pannonia on 8 October 314. When the battle was over, Constantine prevailed; his victory, however, was Pyrrhic. Both emperors had been involved in exhausting military campaigns in the previous year and the months leading up to Cibalae and each of their realms had expanded so fast that their manpower reserves must have been stretched to the limit. Both men retreated to their own territory to lick their wounds. It may well be that the two emperors made an agreement, which has left no direct trace in the historical record, which would effectively restore the status quo.
Both emperors were variously engaged in different activities between 315 and 316. In addition to campaigning against the Germans while residing in Augusta Treverorum (Trier) in 315, Constantine dealt with aspects of the Donatist controversy; he also traveled to Rome where he celebrated his Decennalia. Licinius, possibly residing at Sirmium, was probably waging war against the Goths. Although not much else is known about Licinius' activities during this period, it is probable that he spent much of his time preparing for his impending war against Constantine; the latter,who spent the spring and summer of 316 in Augusta Treverorum, was probably doing much the same thing. In any case, by December 316, the western emperor was in Sardica with his army. Sometime between 1 December and 28 February 317, both emperors' armies joined battle on the Campus Ardiensis; as was the case in the previous engagement, Constantine' s forces were victorious. On 1 March 317, both sides agreed to a cessation of hostilities; possibly because of the intervention of his wife Constantia, Licinius was able to keep his throne, although he had to agree to the execution of his colleague Valens, who the eastern emperor had appointed as his colleague before the battle, as well as to cede some of his territory to his brother-in-law.
Licinius and the Christians
Although the historical record is not completely clear, Licinius seems to have campaigned against the Sarmatians in 318. He also appears to have been in Byzantium in the summer of 318 and later in June 323. Beyond these few facts, not much else is known about his residences until mid summer of 324. Although he and Constantine had issued the Edict of Milan in early 313, Licinius turned on the Christians in his realm seemingly in 320. The first law that Licinius issued prevented bishops from communicating with each other and from holding synods to discuss matters of interest to them. The second law prohibited men and women from attending services together and young girls from receiving instruction from their bishop or schools. When this law was issued, he also gave orders that Christians could hold services only outside of city walls. Additionally, he deprived officers in the army of their commissions if they did not sacrifice to the gods. Licinius may have been trying to incite Constantine to attack him. In any case, the growing tension between the two rulers is reflected in the consular Fasti of the period.
The Second Civil War Between Licinius and Constantine and Licinius' Death
War actually broke out in 321 when Constantine pursued some Sarmatians, who had been ravaging some territory in his realm, across the Danube. When he checked a similar invasion of the Goths, who were devastating Thrace, Licinius complained that Constantine had broken the treaty between them. Having assembled a fleet and army at Thessalonica, Constantine advanced toward Adrianople. Licinius engaged the forces of his brother-in-law near the banks of the Hebrus River on 3 July 324 where he was routed; with as many men as he could gather, he headed for his fleet which was in the Hellespont. Those of his soldiers who were not killed or put to flight, surrendered to the enemy. Licinius fled to Byzantium, where he was besieged by Constantine. Licinius' fleet, under the command of the admiral Abantus, was overcome by bad weather and by Constantine' s fleet which was under the command of his son Crispus. Hard pressed in Byzantium, Licinius abandoned the city to his rival and fled to Chalcedon in Bithynia. Leaving Martinianus, his former magister officiorum and now his co-ruler, to impede Constantine' s progress, Licinius regrouped his forces and engaged his enemy at Chrysopolis where he was again routed on 18 September 324. He fled to Nicomedeia which Constantine began to besiege. On the next day Licinius abdicated and was sent to Thessalonica, where he was kept under house arrest. Both Licinius and his associate were put to death by Constantine. Martinianus may have been put to death before the end of 324, whereas Licinius was not put to death until the spring of 325. Rumors circulated that Licinius had been put to death because he attempted another rebellion against Constantine.
Copyright (C) 1996, Michael DiMaio, Jr.
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
|
|
1308c, Licinius I, 308-324 A.D. (Alexandria)Licinius I, 308-324 A.D. AE Follis, 3.60g, VF, 315 A.D., Alexandria. Obverse: IMP C VAL LICIN LICINIVS P F AVG - Laureate head right; Reverse: IOVI CONS-ERVATORI AVGG - Jupiter standing left, holding Victory on a globe and scepter; exergue: ALE / (wreath) over "B" over "N." Ref: RIC VII, 10 (B = r2) Rare, page 705 - Hunterian Museum, Glasgow, Scotland.
De Imperatoribus Romanis : An Online Encyclopedia of Roman Rulers and their Families
Licinius (308-324 A.D.)
Michael DiMaio, Jr.
Salve Regina University
Licinius' Heritage
Valerius Licinianus Licinius, more commonly known as Licinius, may have been born ca. 265. Of peasant origin, his family was from Dacia. A close friend and comrade of arms of the Emperor Galerius, he accompanied him on his Persian expedition in 297. When campaigns by Severus and Galerius in late 306 or early 307 and in the summer of 307, respectively, failed to dislodge Maxentius who, with the luke warm support of his father Maximianus Herculius, was acclaimed princeps on 28 October 306, he was sent by the eastern emperor to Maxentius as an ambassador; the diplomatic mission, however, failed because the usurper refused to submit to the authority of his father-in-law Galerius. At the Conference of Carnuntum which was held in October or November of 308, Licinius was made an Augustus on 11 November 308; his realm included Thrace, Illyricum, and Pannonia.
Licinius' Early Reign
Although Licinius was initially appointed by Galerius to replace Severus to end the revolt of Maxentius , Licinius (perhaps wisely) made no effort to move against the usurper. In fact, his first attested victory was against the Sarmatians probably in the late spring, but no later than the end of June in 310. When the Emperor Galerius died in 311, Licinius met Maximinus Daia at the Bosporus during the early summer of that year; they concluded a treaty and divided Galerius' realm between them. It was little more than a year later that the Emperor Constantine defeated Maxentius at the Battle of the Milvian Bridge on 28 October 312. After the defeat of the usurper, Constantine and Licinius met at Mediolanum (Milan) where Licinius married the former's sister Constantia; one child was born of this union: Valerius Licinianus Licinius. Licinius had another son, born of a slave woman, whose name is unknown. It appears that both emperors promulgated the so-called Edict of Milan, in which Constantine and Licinius granted Christians the freedom to practice their faith without any interference from the state.
As soon as he seems to have learned about the marital alliance between Licinius and Constantine and the death of Maxentius, who had been his ally, Daia traversed Asia Minor and, in April 313, he crossed the Bosporus and went to Byzantium, which he took from Licinius after an eleven day siege. On 30 April 313 the armies of both emperors clashed on the Campus Ergenus; in the ensuing battle Daia's forces were routed. A last ditch stand by Daia at the Cilician Gates failed; the eastern emperor subsequently died in the area of Tarsus probably in July or August 313. As soon as he arrived in Nicomedeia, Licinius promulgated the Edict of Milan. As soon as he had matters in Nicomedeia straightened out, Licinius campaigned against the Persians in the remaining part of 313 and the opening months of 314.
The First Civil War Between Licinius and Constantine
Once Licinius had defeated Maximinus Daia, the sole rulers of the Roman world were he and Constantine. It is obvious that the marriage of Licinius to Constantia was simply a union of convenience. In any case, there is evidence in the sources that both emperors were looking for an excuse to attack the other. The affair involving Bassianus (the husband of Constantius I's daughter Anastasia ), mentioned in the text of Anonymus Valesianus (5.14ff), may have sparked the falling out between the two emperors. In any case, Constantine' s forces joined battle with those of Licinius at Cibalae in Pannonia on 8 October 314. When the battle was over, Constantine prevailed; his victory, however, was Pyrrhic. Both emperors had been involved in exhausting military campaigns in the previous year and the months leading up to Cibalae and each of their realms had expanded so fast that their manpower reserves must have been stretched to the limit. Both men retreated to their own territory to lick their wounds. It may well be that the two emperors made an agreement, which has left no direct trace in the historical record, which would effectively restore the status quo.
Both emperors were variously engaged in different activities between 315 and 316. In addition to campaigning against the Germans while residing in Augusta Treverorum (Trier) in 315, Constantine dealt with aspects of the Donatist controversy; he also traveled to Rome where he celebrated his Decennalia. Licinius, possibly residing at Sirmium, was probably waging war against the Goths. Although not much else is known about Licinius' activities during this period, it is probable that he spent much of his time preparing for his impending war against Constantine; the latter,who spent the spring and summer of 316 in Augusta Treverorum, was probably doing much the same thing. In any case, by December 316, the western emperor was in Sardica with his army. Sometime between 1 December and 28 February 317, both emperors' armies joined battle on the Campus Ardiensis; as was the case in the previous engagement, Constantine' s forces were victorious. On 1 March 317, both sides agreed to a cessation of hostilities; possibly because of the intervention of his wife Constantia, Licinius was able to keep his throne, although he had to agree to the execution of his colleague Valens, who the eastern emperor had appointed as his colleague before the battle, as well as to cede some of his territory to his brother-in-law.
Licinius and the Christians
Although the historical record is not completely clear, Licinius seems to have campaigned against the Sarmatians in 318. He also appears to have been in Byzantium in the summer of 318 and later in June 323. Beyond these few facts, not much else is known about his residences until mid summer of 324. Although he and Constantine had issued the Edict of Milan in early 313, Licinius turned on the Christians in his realm seemingly in 320. The first law that Licinius issued prevented bishops from communicating with each other and from holding synods to discuss matters of interest to them. The second law prohibited men and women from attending services together and young girls from receiving instruction from their bishop or schools. When this law was issued, he also gave orders that Christians could hold services only outside of city walls. Additionally, he deprived officers in the army of their commissions if they did not sacrifice to the gods. Licinius may have been trying to incite Constantine to attack him. In any case, the growing tension between the two rulers is reflected in the consular Fasti of the period.
The Second Civil War Between Licinius and Constantine and Licinius' Death
War actually broke out in 321 when Constantine pursued some Sarmatians, who had been ravaging some territory in his realm, across the Danube. When he checked a similar invasion of the Goths, who were devastating Thrace, Licinius complained that Constantine had broken the treaty between them. Having assembled a fleet and army at Thessalonica, Constantine advanced toward Adrianople. Licinius engaged the forces of his brother-in-law near the banks of the Hebrus River on 3 July 324 where he was routed; with as many men as he could gather, he headed for his fleet which was in the Hellespont. Those of his soldiers who were not killed or put to flight, surrendered to the enemy. Licinius fled to Byzantium, where he was besieged by Constantine. Licinius' fleet, under the command of the admiral Abantus, was overcome by bad weather and by Constantine' s fleet which was under the command of his son Crispus. Hard pressed in Byzantium, Licinius abandoned the city to his rival and fled to Chalcedon in Bithynia. Leaving Martinianus, his former magister officiorum and now his co-ruler, to impede Constantine' s progress, Licinius regrouped his forces and engaged his enemy at Chrysopolis where he was again routed on 18 September 324. He fled to Nicomedeia which Constantine began to besiege. On the next day Licinius abdicated and was sent to Thessalonica, where he was kept under house arrest. Both Licinius and his associate were put to death by Constantine. Martinianus may have been put to death before the end of 324, whereas Licinius was not put to death until the spring of 325. Rumors circulated that Licinius had been put to death because he attempted another rebellion against Constantine.
Copyright (C) 1996, Michael DiMaio, Jr.
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
|
|
1355 - 1375, Edward the Black Prince, AR Hardi d'Argent, Struck 1362 -1372 at Limoges, Aquitaine, FranceObverse: ED PO GNS REGI AGEL. Facing robed half-length figure of Edward wearing a coronet of a simple band around his head (as opposed to the crown of a king) under Gothic canopy, holding sword in right hand, left hand raised with finger pointing in benedictory position. Rosette either side of coronet.
Reverse: ✤ PRI-CPS ✤ AQIT-ANE Long cross collarino, pattée at the ends, extending through legend. Fleur de lis in first and second quarters; lion passant, guardant in second and third quarters. Rosettes (marked in text by ✤) in legend.
Diameter: 19.1mm | Weight: 1.033gms | Axis 6h
SPINK: 8134 | Elias: 204
Ex. FORVM Ancient Coins
Scarce
This coin was struck for use in the English territory held in France, it had the value of an English silver penny.
THE BLACK PRINCE
Edward the Black Prince (1330-1376) was the eldest son of Edward III and Philippa of Hainaut. He was an excellent military leader and his victory over the French at the battle of Crécy in 1346 made him very popular at home in England. He was strongly impressed by the chivalrous attitude of John the Blind, King of Bohemia, who preferred to die rather than bear the dishonour of defeat and Edward took as his heraldic arms the ostrich feathers which the King of Bohemia had already worn. In 1356 Edward crushed the French at Poitiers, taking King Jean le Bon prisoner. The Treaty of Brétigny in May 1360, confirmed the independence of Aquitaine and Edward was its first prince (from 1362 to 1372). In 1369, war resumed with France but, after the first English defeats in Aquitaine, in 1371 the Black Prince returned to England and renounced his principality the following year. He died in 1376, his father Edward III died the next year, 1377, and Richard II, who was the son of the Black Prince, ascended the throne. The Black Prince, was the first English Prince of Wales not to become King of England.*Alex
|
|
138 Siscia, RIC VII 224, Commemorative, CONSTANTINOPOLIS, (330-333 A.D.), AE-3, -/-//BSIS, Victory standing on prow, #1138 Siscia, RIC VII 224, Commemorative, CONSTANTINOPOLIS, (330-333 A.D.), AE-3, -/-//BSIS, Victory standing on prow, #1
avers: CONSTAN TINOPOLIS, Helmeted and mantled bust of Constantinopolis left, holding sceptre.
reverse: Without legends, Victory standing on prow, holding scepter and resting a hand on shield.
exergue: -/-//BSIS, diameter: 17,5-18,0mm, weight: 2,84g, axes: 6h,
mint: Siscia, date: 330-333 A.D., ref: RIC VII 224 B, p-453, C3, Sear 3890,
Q-001quadrans
|
|
1399 - 1413, Henry IV, AR Hardi d'Argent, Struck 1399 -1453 at Bordeaux, Aquitaine, FranceObverse: ERIC R ANGLIE ✤ Crowned and robed half-length figure of Henry facing under Gothic canopy, holding sword in right hand, left hand raised with finger pointing in benedictory position. Mullet over crown, rosette either side of crown. Rosette (marked in text by ✤) in legend.
Reverse: FRA-CIE ✤ DNS AQI ✤ Long cross collarino, pattée at the ends, extending through legend. Fleur de lis with roundel underneath in second and third quarters; lion passant, guardant in first and fourth quarters, roundel over lion in fourth quarter. Rosettes (marked in text by ✤) in legend.
Diameter: 18mm | Weight: 1.13gms | Axis 10h
SPINK: 8147 | Elias: 233h
Ex. Bazas Hoard | Ex. Jean Elsen (Belgium) | Scarce
The last series of these Anglo-Gallic coins was likely struck under more than one Henry and they have not currently been differentiated by ruler because the legends and types are generic. However, over time, Anglo-Gallic issues suffered from regular debasement and a deterioration in workmanship, the size, weight and quality of the strike of this coin would therefore all seem to point to it being an early example.
Henry IV
In 1399, Henry, Duke of Lancaster, overthrew his cousin, Richard II and took the throne as Henry IV, ruling until his death in 1413. Henry's first major problem as monarch was what to do with the deposed Richard. In January 1400, soon after an early assassination plot against Henry was foiled, Richard died in prison, allegedly of starvation. Though Henry was suspected of having had Richard murdered, it was also claimed that he took his own life.
Henry, also known as Henry Bolingbroke, was a grandson of Edward III and when he took the throne he asserted his grandfather's claim to the Kingdom of France. He founded the Lancaster branch of the House of Plantagenet and he was the first King of England since the Norman Conquest whose mother tongue was English rather than French.
Early in his reign, Henry hosted the visit of Manuel II Palaiologos, the only Byzantine emperor ever to visit England, and he gave monetary support to Manuel II to aid him against the Ottoman Empire.
Despite the example set by most of his recent predecessors, after their deaths, Henry and his second wife, Joan of Navarre, Queen of England, were buried not at Westminster Abbey but at Canterbury Cathedral, on the north side of Trinity Chapel and directly adjacent to the shrine of St Thomas Becket.
The Bazas Hoard
This hoard was discovered in May 2004 by a builder at Bazas in south West France when he was renovating a house. Bazas was a regional centre in the middle ages. The hoard consisted of a mixture of medieval coins which had been minted in Spain, Portugal, Italy, England, the Netherlands and various French duchies. Of the 1010 coins found, 157 were gold, 300 were silver and the remainder were billon. The oldest coin was a King Jean II franc from 1360 and the rarest coin was a gold castellano from the time of Henry IV of Castile, of which only one other example is known to exist.
Henry is depicted here standing in a similar pose to that shown on this coin.*Alex
|
|
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.
Cleisthenes
|
|
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
|
|
153b Julianus II. (360-363 A.D.), Arles, RIC VIII 320-322var ???, AE-1, -/-//???, SECVRITAS REIPVB, Bull standing right, Barbarous Imitation, #1153b Julianus II. (360-363 A.D.), Arles, RIC VIII 320-322var ???, AE-1, -/-//???, SECVRITAS REIPVB, Bull standing right, Barbarous Imitation, #1
avers:- confusing text, Diademed (pearls), draped and cuirassed bust right
reverse:- confusing text, Bull standing right, two stars above,
exergue: -/-//???, diameter: 22-23mm, weight: 5,39g, axis: 7h,
mint: Arles (Barbar), date: ???, ref: RIC VIII 320-322var ???,
Q-001quadrans
|
|
153b Julianus II. (360-363 A.D.), Barbar, RIC VIII ???, AE-1, Confusing text, Bull standing right, Barbarous Imitation, #01153b Julianus II. (360-363 A.D.), Barbar, RIC VIII ???, AE-1, Confusing text, Bull standing right, Barbarous Imitation, #01
avers: Confusing text, Diademed (pearls), draped and cuirassed bust right.
reverse: Confusing text, Bull standing right, two stars above.
exergue:-/-//-???-, diameter: mm, weight: 0,0g, axis: h,
mint: Barbar, date: ??, ref: RIC VIII ???,
Q-001quadrans
|
|
153b Julianus II. (360-363 A.D.), Barbar, RIC VIII ???, AE-1, Confusing text, Bull standing right, Barbarous Imitation, #02153b Julianus II. (360-363 A.D.), Barbar, RIC VIII ???, AE-1, Confusing text, Bull standing right, Barbarous Imitation, #02
avers: Confusing text, Diademed (pearls), draped and cuirassed bust right.
reverse: Confusing text, Bull standing right, two stars above.
exergue:-/-//-???-, diameter: mm, weight: 0,0g, axis: h,
mint: Barbar, date: ??, ref: RIC VIII ???,
Q-002quadrans
|
|
153b Julianus II. (360-363 A.D.), Barbar, RIC VIII ???, AE-1, Confusing text, Bull standing right, Barbarous Imitation, #03153b Julianus II. (360-363 A.D.), Barbar, RIC VIII ???, AE-1, Confusing text, Bull standing right, Barbarous Imitation, #03
avers: Confusing text, Diademed (pearls), draped and cuirassed bust right.
reverse: Confusing text, Bull standing right, two stars above.
exergue:-/-//-???-, diameter: mm, weight: 0,0g, axis: h,
mint: Barbar, date: ??, ref: RIC VIII ???,
Q-003quadrans
|
|
153b Julianus II. (360-363 A.D.), Barbar, RIC VIII ???, AE-1, Confusing text, Bull standing right, Barbarous Imitation, #04153b Julianus II. (360-363 A.D.), Barbar, RIC VIII ???, AE-1, Confusing text, Bull standing right, Barbarous Imitation, #04
avers: Confusing text, Diademed (pearls), draped and cuirassed bust right.
reverse: Confusing text, Bull standing right, two stars above.
exergue:-/-//-???-, diameter: mm, weight: 0,0g, axis: h,
mint: Barbar, date: ??, ref: RIC VIII ???,
Q-004quadrans
|
|
153b Julianus II. (360-363 A.D.), Barbar, RIC VIII ???, AE-1, Confusing text, Bull standing right, Barbarous Imitation, #05153b Julianus II. (360-363 A.D.), Barbar, RIC VIII ???, AE-1, Confusing text, Bull standing right, Barbarous Imitation, #05
avers: Confusing text, Diademed (pearls), draped and cuirassed bust right.
reverse: Confusing text, Bull standing right, two stars above.
exergue:-/-//-???-, diameter: mm, weight: 0,0g, axis: h,
mint: Barbar, date: ??, ref: RIC VIII ???,
Q-005quadrans
|
|
153b Julianus II. (360-363 A.D.), Barbar, RIC VIII ???, AE-1, Confusing text, Bull standing right, Barbarous Imitation, #06153b Julianus II. (360-363 A.D.), Barbar, RIC VIII ???, AE-1, Confusing text, Bull standing right, Barbarous Imitation, #06
avers: Confusing text, Diademed (pearls), draped and cuirassed bust right.
reverse: Confusing text, Bull standing right, two stars above.
exergue:-/-//-???-, diameter: mm, weight: 0,0g, axis: h,
mint: Barbar, date: ??, ref: RIC VIII ???,
Q-006quadrans
|
|
153b Julianus II. (360-363 A.D.), Barbar, RIC VIII ???, AE-1, Confusing text, Bull standing right, Barbarous Imitation, #07153b Julianus II. (360-363 A.D.), Barbar, RIC VIII ???, AE-1, Confusing text, Bull standing right, Barbarous Imitation, #07
avers: Confusing text, Diademed (pearls), draped and cuirassed bust right.
reverse: Confusing text, Bull standing right, two stars above.
exergue:-/-//-???-, diameter: mm, weight: 0,0g, axis: h,
mint: Barbar, date: ??, ref: RIC VIII ???,
Q-007quadrans
|
|
153b Julianus II. (360-363 A.D.), Barbar, RIC VIII ???, AE-1, Confusing text, Bull standing right, Barbarous Imitation, #08153b Julianus II. (360-363 A.D.), Barbar, RIC VIII ???, AE-1, Confusing text, Bull standing right, Barbarous Imitation, #08
avers: Confusing text, Diademed (pearls), draped and cuirassed bust right.
reverse: Confusing text, Bull standing right, two stars above.
exergue:-/-//-???-, diameter: mm, weight: 0,0g, axis: h,
mint: Barbar, date: ??, ref: RIC VIII ???,
Q-008quadrans
|
|
153b Julianus II. (360-363 A.D.), Barbar, RIC VIII ???, AE-1, Confusing text, Bull standing right, Barbarous Imitation, #09153b Julianus II. (360-363 A.D.), Barbar, RIC VIII ???, AE-1, Confusing text, Bull standing right, Barbarous Imitation, #09
avers: Confusing text, Diademed (pearls), draped and cuirassed bust right.
reverse: Confusing text, Bull standing right, two stars above.
exergue:-/-//-???-, diameter: mm, weight: 0,0g, axis: h,
mint: Barbar, date: ??, ref: RIC VIII ???,
Q-009quadrans
|
|
153b Julianus II. (360-363 A.D.), Barbar, RIC VIII ???, AE-1, Confusing text, Bull standing right, Barbarous Imitation, #10153b Julianus II. (360-363 A.D.), Barbar, RIC VIII ???, AE-1, Confusing text, Bull standing right, Barbarous Imitation, #10
avers: Confusing text, Diademed (pearls), draped and cuirassed bust right.
reverse: Confusing text, Bull standing right, two stars above.
exergue:-/-//-???-, diameter: mm, weight: 0,0g, axis: h,
mint: Barbar, date: ??, ref: RIC VIII ???,
Q-010quadrans
|
|
153b Julianus II. (360-363 A.D.), Barbar, RIC VIII ???, AE-1, Confusing text, Bull standing right, Barbarous Imitation, #11153b Julianus II. (360-363 A.D.), Barbar, RIC VIII ???, AE-1, Confusing text, Bull standing right, Barbarous Imitation, #11
avers: Confusing text, Diademed (pearls), draped and cuirassed bust right.
reverse: Confusing text, Bull standing right, two stars above.
exergue:-/-//-???-, diameter: mm, weight: 0,0g, axis: h,
mint: Barbar, date: ??, ref: RIC VIII ???,
Q-011quadrans
|
|
153b Julianus II. (360-363 A.D.), Barbarous, RIC VIII 106-107 ???, AE-26, SECVRITAS REIPVB (?) retrograde, Bull standing left, Barbarous Imitation, #01153b Julianus II. (360-363 A.D.), Barbarous, RIC VIII 106-107 ???, AE-26, SECVRITAS REIPVB (?) retrograde, Bull standing left, Barbarous Imitation, #01
avers: Confusing text, DN AU IL VLIAͶVS PF HVG, Diademed (pearls), draped and cuirassed bust right.
reverse: Confusing text, SECVRITAS REIPVB right to left, completely retrograde, Bull standing left, two stars above, -IISV IIII•-(?) in exergue.
exergue:-/-//-IISV IIII•-, diameter:30mm, weight: 0,0g, axis: h,
mint: Barbarous), date: ??, ref: RIC VIII 106-107 ???,
Q-001quadrans
|
|
153b Julianus II. (360-363 A.D.), Sirmium ???, RIC VIII 106-107 ???, AE-1, SECVRITAS REIPVB, Bull standing right, Barbarous Imitation, #01153b Julianus II. (360-363 A.D.), Sirmium ???, RIC VIII 106-107 ???, AE-1, SECVRITAS REIPVB, Bull standing right, Barbarous Imitation, #01
avers: Confusing text, Diademed (pearls), draped and cuirassed bust right
reverse: Confusing text, Bull standing right, two stars above, ?-SIRN-? in exergue.
exergue:-/-//-SIRN-, diameter:30mm, weight: 0,0g, axis: h,
mint: Sirmium (Barbar), date: ??, ref: RIC VIII 106-107 ???,
Q-001
quadrans
|
|
153b Julianus II. (360-363 A.D.), Sirmium ???, RIC VIII 106-107 ???, AE-1, SECVRITAS REIPVB, Bull standing right, Barbarous Imitation, #02153b Julianus II. (360-363 A.D.), Sirmium ???, RIC VIII 106-107 ???, AE-1, SECVRITAS REIPVB, Bull standing right, Barbarous Imitation, #02
avers: Confusing text, Diademed (pearls), draped and cuirassed bust right
reverse: Confusing text, Bull standing right, two stars above, ?-SIRN-? in exergue.
exergue:-/-//-SIRN-, diameter:25mm, weight: 0,0g, axis: h,
mint: Sirmium (Barbar), date: ??, ref: RIC VIII 106-107 ???,
Q-002quadrans
|
|
153b Julianus II. (360-363 A.D.), Sirmium ???, RIC VIII 106-107 ???, AE-1, SECVRITAS REIPVB, Bull standing right, Barbarous Imitation, #03153b Julianus II. (360-363 A.D.), Sirmium ???, RIC VIII 106-107 ???, AE-1, SECVRITAS REIPVB, Bull standing right, Barbarous Imitation, #03
avers: Confusing text, Diademed (pearls), draped and cuirassed bust right
reverse: Confusing text, Bull standing right, two stars above.
exergue: /-//confusing text, diameter: 22,5-23,5mm, weight: 6,18g, axis: 1h,
mint: Sirmium (Barbar), date: ???, ref: RIC VIII 106-107 ???,
Q-003quadrans
|
|
153b Julianus II. (360-363 A.D.), Siscia, RIC VIII 418var., AE-1-25, -/-//ASISC, SECVRITAS REIPVB "BARBAROUS Imitation Siscia", Bull standing right, #1153b Julianus II. (360-363 A.D.), Siscia, RIC VIII 418var., AE-1-25, -/-//ASISC, SECVRITAS REIPVB "BARBAROUS Imitation Siscia", Bull standing right, #1
avers:- Confusing text, Diademed (pearls), draped and cuirassed bust right.
reverse:- Confusing text, Bull standing right, two stars above, A-SIS-C in exergue.
exergue: -/-//ASISC, diameter: 25mm, weight: 6,93g, axis: h,
mint: Siscia ???, date: ???, ref: RIC-VIII 418 var ??
Q-001quadrans
|
|
1612 Edition of the King James Bible, 1st Quarto - The Crucifixion of ChristThis is from the so-called 'HE' edition of the 1612 Roman-Type Quatro KJB (H313). The 'HE' refers to Ruth 3:15 as the verse was written as:
Also he said, “Bring the veil that thou hast upon thee and hold it.” And when she held it, he measured six measures of barley, and laid it on her; and he went into the city.
The 'SHE' edition of 1612 has the verse written as:
Also he said, “Bring the veil that thou hast upon thee and hold it.” And when she held it, he measured six measures of barley, and laid it on her; and she went into the city.
For further information, see Norton, David, A Textual History of the King James Bible, Cambridge University Press, 2005
Quant.Geek
|
|
1633 - Mark Antony, DenariusStruck in a travelling mint, moving with Mark Antony in 41 BC
ANT AVG IMP III VI R P C, Head of Mark Antony right
Fortuna standing left, holding rudder in right hand and cornucopiae in left; at feet, stork; below, PIETAS COS
3,82 gr - 20 mm
Ref : Crawford # 516/2, Sydenham # 1174, HCRI # 241, C # 77
Ex. Auctiones.GmbH
The following comment is copied from NAC auction # 52/294 about the very rare corresponding aureus :
The year 41 B.C., when this aureus was struck at a mint travelling in the East with Marc Antony, was a period of unusual calm for the triumvir, who took a welcomed, if unexpected, rest after the great victory he and Octavian had won late in 42 B.C. against Brutus and Cassius at the Battle of Philippi. Antony’s original plan of organising an invasion of Parthia was put on hold after he sailed to Tarsus, where he had summoned Cleopatra VII, the Greek queen of Egypt. She was to defend herself against accusations that she had aided Brutus and Cassius before Philippi, but it is generally agreed that the summons was merely a pretext for Antony’s plan to secure aid for his Parthian campaign. Their meeting was anything but a source of conflict; indeed, they found much common ground, including their agreement that it was in their mutual interests to execute Cleopatra’s sister and rival Arsinoe IV, who had been ruling Cyprus. In addition to sharing political interests, the two agreed that Antony would winter in Egypt to share a luxurious vacation with Cleopatra that caused a further postponement of Antony’s designs on Parthia. Thus began another of the queen’s liaisons with noble Romans, a prior having been Julius Caesar (and, according to Plutarch, Pompey Jr. before him). During the course of his stay in Egypt Cleopatra was impregnated, which resulted in twins born to her in 40 B.C. But this care-free period was only a momentary calm in the storm, for trouble was brewing in both the East and the West. Early in 40 B.C. Syria was overrun by the Parthians, seemingly while Antony travelled to Italy to meet Octavian following the Perusine War, in which Octavian defeated the armies of Antony’s wife and brother. The conflict with Octavian was resolved when they signed a pact at Brundisium in October, and Syria was eventually recovered through the efforts of Antony’s commanders from 40 to 38 B.C.{/i]
Potator II
|
|
170 - Constantius II - AE3 - RIC VIII Lugdunum 097 AE3
Obv:– D N CONSTANTIVS P F AVG, Laureate, draped & cuirassed bust right
Rev:– FEL TEMP REPARATIO, Emperor standing left on galley, holding phoenix on globe and labarum; Victory behind, steering galley
Minted in Lugdunum (//*SLG). A.D. 348-350.
Reference:- RIC VIII Lugdunum 97 (R)
17 mm
Ex Col. Hermann-Joseph Lückger, Germany (1864-1951). Lückger was a German entrepreneur in the textile industry and amateur historian and collector of art.maridvnvm
|
|
1778. Louis XVI Port Commemorative .Obv. Draped bust right LUD XVI REX CHRISTIANISS
Rev. Text PIETAS REGIA AEDE AD MARLIACI PORTUM STRUCTA MDCCLXXVIII
Commemorates the construction/expansion of a port.LordBest
|
|
1791 AE Halfpenny Token. Rochdale, Lancashire.Obverse: ROCHDALE / 1791. Sheep facing left, being weighed suspended in a sling round it's waist.
Reverse: HALFPENNY. Detailed view from behind of a weaver, sitting half-right, working at a loom.
Edge: PAYABLE AT THE WAREHOUSE OF IOHN KERSHAW • X •.
Diameter 30mm | Die Axis 6
Dalton & Hamer: 140
This token was engraved and manufactured by J.G.Hancock in Birmingham.
It was issued by John Kershaw who appears to have been a mercer and draper with a business in Rochdale, and who is also thought to have been connected with a woollen mill in the town.
Rochdale's recorded history begins with an entry in the Domesday Book of 1086 under Recedham Manor. The ancient parish of Rochdale was a division of the hundred of Salford and one of the largest ecclesiastical parishes in England comprising several townships. By 1251, Rochdale had become important enough to have been granted a Royal charter. Subsequently, the town flourished into a centre of northern England's woollen trade, and by the early 18th century was described as being "remarkable for many wealthy merchants".
During the 19th century, Rochdale rose to prominence as a major mill town and centre for textile manufacture. It was amongst the first ever industrialised towns during the Industrial Revolution and the Rochdale Canal was a highway of commerce during this time, being used for the haulage of cotton, wool and coal.*Alex
|
|
1794 AE Halfpenny Token. J. Lackington, London, Middlesex.Obverse: J. LACKINGTON ✤. Three-quarter facing bust of J.Lackington left, 1794 below.
Reverse: HALFPENNY OF LACKINGTON • ALLEN & Co ★ / CHEAPEST BOOKSELLERS IN THE WORLD • in a double line of text around Fame, portrayed as a winged female figure facing right, head left, holding a laurel-wreath and blowing a trumpet.
Edge: PAYABLE AT THE TEMPLE OF THE MUSES ★ / ★ / ★.
Diameter 29mm | Die Axis 6
Dalton & Hamer: 353
This token was manufactured by William Lutwyche in Birmingham and the dies were engraved by Roger Dixon.
It was issued by James Lackington who was a bookseller with a large business at his premises known as “The Temple of the Muses”, No 32 Finsbury Place South, Finsbury Square, London. This token marked the sale of a 25% interest in his company to Robert Allen.*Alex
|
|
1811 "VINCIT AMOR" AE Halfpenny, Walthamstow, Essex.Obverse: VINCIT AMOR PATRIÆ 1811. Large laureate bust of Lucius Junius Brutus facing right.
Reverse: Britannia seated facing left holding olive branch and trident, a shield at her side, BCC bottom right of shield, all within an oak-wreath.
Edge: Grained.
Die damage, a common feature of these tokens, is visible at 10 o'clock on the obverse.
Diameter: 28mm.
Davis 17
The principal die engraver for this token was Thomas Wyon the elder (1767–1830). It was issued by the British Copper Company, a Welsh based company who, in 1808, erected copper rolling mill buildings at Walthamstow beside the River Lea. Walthamstow is now a suburb of north east London.
'Vincit amor patriæ' is a quotation from Virgil, though what Virgil wrote was vincet, in the future tense (Aeneid 6.823). The context is the visit of Aeneas to the underworld, where he sees a vision of the future of Rome, and the lines describe one of the first pair of consuls, Lucius Junius Brutus, who was said to have killed two of his sons who were plotting to restore the monarchy of the Tarquins. So it appears that Lucius Junius Brutus was chosen for this token as a hero for patriotism and freedom.*Alex
|
|
1811 "VINCIT AMOR" AE Halfpenny, Walthamstow, Essex.Obverse: VINCIT AMOR PATRIÆ 1811. Small laureate bust of Lucius Junius Brutus facing right.
Reverse: Britannia seated facing left holding olive branch and trident, a shield at her side, BCC bottom right of shield, all within an oak-wreath.
Edge: Grained.
Diameter: 28mm.
Davis 17, Coxall type 10
The principal die engraver for this token was Thomas Wyon the elder (1767–1830). It was issued by the British Copper Company, a Welsh based company who, in 1808, erected copper rolling mill buildings at Walthamstow beside the River Lea. Walthamstow is now a suburb of north east London.
'Vincit amor patriæ' is a quotation from Virgil, though what Virgil wrote was vincet, in the future tense (Aeneid 6.823). The context is the visit of Aeneas to the underworld, where he sees a vision of the future of Rome, and the lines describe one of the first pair of consuls, Lucius Junius Brutus, who was said to have killed two of his sons who were plotting to restore the monarchy of the Tarquins. So it appears that Lucius Junius Brutus was chosen for this token as a hero for patriotism and freedom.*Alex
|
|
1aa Julius Caesar60 BC (formation of the First Triumvirate)-44 BC (assassination)
Denarius
44 BC
Caesar's head, right, eight-pointed star behind. CAESAR IMP.
Venus standing left, holding victory and scepter. P SEPVLLIVS MACER.
RSC 41
Plutarch said of the first triumvirate: There is a law among the Romans, that whoever desires the honour of a triumph must stay without the city and expect his answer. And another, that those who stand for the consulship shall appear personally upon the place. Caesar was come home at the very time of choosing consuls, and being in a difficulty between these two opposite laws, sent to the senate to desire that, since he was obliged to be absent, he might sue for the consulship by his friends. Cato, being backed by the law, at first opposed his request; afterwards perceiving that Caesar had prevailed with a great part of the senate to comply with it, he made it his business to gain time, and went on wasting the whole day in speaking. Upon which Caesar thought fit to let the triumph fall, and pursued the consulship. Entering the town and coming forward immediately, he had recourse to a piece of state policy by which everybody was deceived but Cato. This was the reconciling of Crassus and Pompey, the two men who then were most powerful in Rome. There had been a quarrel between them, which he now succeeded in making up, and by this means strengthened himself by the united power of both, and so under the cover of an action which carried all the appearance of a piece of kindness and good-nature, caused what was in effect a revolution in the government. For it was not the quarrel between Pompey and Caesar, as most men imagine, which was the origin of the civil wars, but their union, their conspiring together at first to subvert the aristocracy, and so quarrelling afterwards between themselves.
Of Caesar's military leadership, Plutarch wrote: He was so much master of the good-will and hearty service of his soldiers that those who in other expeditions were but ordinary men displayed a courage past defeating or withstanding when they went upon any danger where Caesar's glory was concerned. . . . This love of honour and passion for distinction were inspired into them and cherished in them by Caesar himself, who, by his unsparing distribution of money and honours, showed them that he did not heap up wealth from the wars for his own luxury, or the gratifying his private pleasures, but that all he received was but a public fund laid by the reward and encouragement of valour, and that he looked upon all he gave to deserving soldiers as so much increase to his own riches. Added to this also, there was no danger to which he did not willingly expose himself, no labour from which he pleaded an exemption. His contempt of danger was not so much wondered at by his soldiers because they knew how much he coveted honour. But his enduring so much hardship, which he did to all appearance beyond his natural strength, very much astonished them. For he was a spare man, had a soft and white skin, was distempered in the head and subject to an epilepsy, which, it is said, first seized him at Corduba. But he did not make the weakness of his constitution a pretext for his ease, but rather used war as the best physic against his indispositions; whilst, by indefatigable journeys, coarse diet, frequent lodging in the field, and continual laborious exercise, he struggled with his diseases and fortified his body against all attacks. He slept generally in his chariots or litters, employing even his rest in pursuit of action. In the day he was thus carried to the forts, garrisons, and camps, one servant sitting with him, who used to write down what he dictated as he went, and a soldier attending behind him with his sword drawn. Blindado
|
|
1ab Marcus Licinius CrassusFormed First Triumvirate with Caesar and Pompey in 60 BC, killed at Carrhae in Parthia in 53 BC.
Denarius, minted by son, P Licinius Crassus, ca 54 BC.
Bust of Venus, right, SC behind
Amazon with horse, P CRASSVS MF.
Seaby, Licinia 18
These coins were probably minted to pay Crassus' army for the invasion of Parthia, which led to its destruction. My synthesis of reviewing 90 examples of this issue revealed a female warrior wearing a soft felt Scythian cap with ear flaps; a fabric garment with a decorated skirt to the knees; probably trousers; an ornate war belt; a baldric; a cape, animal skin, or shoulder cord on attached to the left shoulder; and decorated calf-high boots. She matches the historically confirmed garb of the real amazons—Scythian horsewomen—and of course holds her steed. The horse’s tack is consistent with archeological discoveries of tack in use by Scythians and Romans.
Adrienne Mayor writes that amazon imagery on Greek vases suddenly appeared in 575-550 BC, initially depicting them in Greek-style armor. By the end of the century, as the Greeks learned more through direct and indirect contact with Scythians, they began to appear wearing archeologically confirmed Scythian-Sarmatian-Thracian patterned attire. (Adrienne Mayor, The Amazons: Lives and Legends of Warrior Women Across the Ancient World, Princeton, Princeton University Press, 2014, 199-200). To this, artists added their own creative ideas regarding colors, fabric patterns, and decorations. “They dressed the warrior women in body-hugging ‘unitards’ or tunics, short chitons or belted dresses, sometimes over leggings or trousers. . . . In paintings and sculpture, pointed or soft Scythian caps with earflaps or ties (kidaris) soon replaced the Greek helmets, and the women wear a variety of belts, baldrics (diagonal straps), corselets, shoulder cords or bands, and crisscrossing leather straps attached to belt loops like those worn by the archer huntress Artemis. . . . Amazon footgear included soft leather moccasin-like shoes, calf-high boots (endromides), or taller laced boots (embades) with scallops or flaps and lined with felt or fur.” (Mayor, 202)
The artists apparently had detailed knowledge of gear used by real Scythian horsewomen to equip their imagined Amazons. “Archeological discoveries of well-preserved sets of clothing confirm that real horsewomen of ancient Scythian lands dressed much as did those described in Greek texts and illustrated in Scythian and Greek artwork.” (Mayor, 203)Blindado
|
|
1ab_2 Marcus Licinius CrassusFormed First Triumvirate with Caesar and Pompey in 60 BC, killed at Carrhae in Parthia in 53 BC.
Denarius, minted by son, P Licinius Crassus, ca 54 BC.
Bust of Venus, right, SC behind
Amazon with horse, P CRASSVS MF.
Seaby, Licinia 18
These coins were probably minted to pay Crassus' army for the invasion of Parthia. My synthesis of reviewing 90 examples of this issue revealed a female warrior wearing a soft felt Scythian cap with ear flaps (visible in this example); a fabric garment with a decorated skirt to the knees; probably trousers; an ornate war belt; a baldric; a cape, animal skin, or shoulder cord on attached to the left shoulder; and decorated calf-high boots. She matches the historically confirmed garb of the real amazons—Scythian horsewomen—and of course holds her steed. The horse’s tack is consistent with archeological discoveries of tack in use by Scythians and Romans.
Adrienne Mayor writes that amazon imagery on Greek vases suddenly appeared in 575-550 BC, initially depicting them in Greek-style armor. By the end of the century, as the Greeks learned more through direct and indirect contact with Scythians, they began to appear wearing archeologically confirmed Scythian-Sarmatian-Thracian patterned attire. (Adrienne Mayor, The Amazons: Lives and Legends of Warrior Women Across the Ancient World, Princeton, Princeton University Press, 2014, 199-200). To this, artists added their own creative ideas regarding colors, fabric patterns, and decorations. “They dressed the warrior women in body-hugging ‘unitards’ or tunics, short chitons or belted dresses, sometimes over leggings or trousers. . . . In paintings and sculpture, pointed or soft Scythian caps with earflaps or ties (kidaris) soon replaced the Greek helmets, and the women wear a variety of belts, baldrics (diagonal straps), corselets, shoulder cords or bands, and crisscrossing leather straps attached to belt loops like those worn by the archer huntress Artemis. . . . Amazon footgear included soft leather moccasin-like shoes, calf-high boots (endromides), or taller laced boots (embades) with scallops or flaps and lined with felt or fur.” (Mayor, 202)
The artists apparently had detailed knowledge of gear used by real Scythian horsewomen to equip their imagined Amazons. “Archeological discoveries of well-preserved sets of clothing confirm that real horsewomen of ancient Scythian lands dressed much as did those described in Greek texts and illustrated in Scythian and Greek artwork.” (Mayor, 203)
Plutarch wrote of Crassus: People were wont to say that the many virtues of Crassus were darkened by the one vice of avarice, and indeed he seemed to have no other but that; for it being the most predominant, obscured others to which he was inclined. The arguments in proof of his avarice were the vastness of his estate, and the manner of raising it; for whereas at first he was not worth above three hundred talents, yet, though in the course of his political life he dedicated the tenth of all he had to Hercules, and feasted the people, and gave to every citizen corn enough to serve him three months, upon casting up his accounts, before he went upon his Parthian expedition, he found his possessions to amount to seven thousand one hundred talents; most of which, if we may scandal him with a truth, he got by fire and rapine, making his advantages of the public calamities. . . . Crassus, however, was very eager to be hospitable to strangers; he kept open house, and to his friends he would lend money without interest, but called it in precisely at the time; so that his kindness was often thought worse than the paying the interest would have been. His entertainments were, for the most part, plain and citizen-like, the company general and popular; good taste and kindness made them pleasanter than sumptuosity would have done. As for learning he chiefly cared for rhetoric, and what would be serviceable with large numbers; he became one of the best speakers at Rome, and by his pains and industry outdid the best natural orators. . . . Besides, the people were pleased with his courteous and unpretending salutations and greetings, for he never met any citizen however humble and low, but he returned him his salute by name. He was looked upon as a man well-read in history, and pretty well versed in Aristotle's philosophy. . . . Crassus was killed by a Parthian, called Pomaxathres; others say by a different man, and that Pomaxathres only cut off his head and right hand after he had fallen. But this is conjecture rather than certain knowledge, for those that were by had not leisure to observe particulars. . . .Blindado
|
|
1ab_2 Marcus Licinius CrassusFormed First Triumvirate with Caesar and Pompey in 60 BC, killed at Carrhae in Parthia in 53 BC.
Denarius, minted by son, P Licinius Crassus, ca 54 BC.
Bust of Venus, right, SC behind
Amazon with horse, P CRASSVS MF.
Seaby, Licinia 18
These coins were probably minted to pay Crassus' army for the invasion of Parthia, which led to its destruction. My synthesis of reviewing 90 examples of this issue revealed a female warrior wearing a soft felt Scythian cap with ear flaps (visible in this example); a fabric garment with a decorated skirt to the knees; probably trousers; an ornate war belt; a baldric; a cape, animal skin, or shoulder cord on attached to the left shoulder; and decorated calf-high boots. She matches the historically confirmed garb of the real amazons—Scythian horsewomen—and of course holds her steed. The horse’s tack is consistent with archeological discoveries of tack in use by Scythians and Romans.
Adrienne Mayor writes that amazon imagery on Greek vases suddenly appeared in 575-550 BC, initially depicting them in Greek-style armor. By the end of the century, as the Greeks learned more through direct and indirect contact with Scythians, they began to appear wearing archeologically confirmed Scythian-Sarmatian-Thracian patterned attire. (Adrienne Mayor, The Amazons: Lives and Legends of Warrior Women Across the Ancient World, Princeton, Princeton University Press, 2014, 199-200). To this, artists added their own creative ideas regarding colors, fabric patterns, and decorations. “They dressed the warrior women in body-hugging ‘unitards’ or tunics, short chitons or belted dresses, sometimes over leggings or trousers. . . . In paintings and sculpture, pointed or soft Scythian caps with earflaps or ties (kidaris) soon replaced the Greek helmets, and the women wear a variety of belts, baldrics (diagonal straps), corselets, shoulder cords or bands, and crisscrossing leather straps attached to belt loops like those worn by the archer huntress Artemis. . . . Amazon footgear included soft leather moccasin-like shoes, calf-high boots (endromides), or taller laced boots (embades) with scallops or flaps and lined with felt or fur.” (Mayor, 202)
The artists apparently had detailed knowledge of gear used by real Scythian horsewomen to equip their imagined Amazons. “Archeological discoveries of well-preserved sets of clothing confirm that real horsewomen of ancient Scythian lands dressed much as did those described in Greek texts and illustrated in Scythian and Greek artwork.” (Mayor, 203)
Blindado
|
|
1ap Claudius41-54
As
Bare head, left, TI CLAVDIVS CAESAR AVG P M TR P IMP
Libertas, LIBERTAS AVGVSTA SC
RIC 97
According to Suetonius: Claudius was born at Lugdunum (Lyon) on the 1st of August 10BC in the consulship of Iullus Antonius and Fabius Africanus, on the day when the very first altar to Augustus was dedicated there, the child being given the name Tiberius Claudius Drusus. When his elder brother Germanicus was adopted into the Julian family (in 4 AD), he added the name Germanicus also. He lost his father when still an infant (in 9 BC), and throughout his childhood and youth was severely afflicted by various stubborn ailments so that his mind and body lacked vigour, and even when he attained his majority he was not considered capable of a public or private career.
Nevertheless, he applied himself to liberal studies from his earliest youth, and often published examples of his proficiency in each area, though even so he was excluded from public office and failed to inspire any brighter hopes for his future. His mother Antonia the Younger often condemned him as an unfinished freak of Nature, and when accusing someone of stupidity would say: ‘He’s a bigger fool than my son Claudius.’ His grandmother Augusta (Livia) always treated him with utter contempt, and rarely even spoke to him, admonishing him, when she chose to do so, in brief harsh missives, or via her messengers. When his sister Livilla heard the prophecy that he would be Emperor some day, she prayed openly and loudly that Rome might be spared so cruel and unmerited a fate.
Having spent the larger part of his life in such circumstances, he became emperor at the age of fifty (in AD41) by a remarkable stroke of fate. Caligula’s assassins had dispersed the crowd on the pretext that the Emperor wished for solitude, and Claudius, shut out with the rest, retired to a room called the Hermaeum, but shortly afterwards, terrified by news of the murder, crept off to a nearby balcony and hid behind the door-curtains. A Guard, who was wandering about the Palace at random, spotting a pair of feet beneath the curtain where Claudius was cowering, dragged the man out to identify him, and as Claudius fell to the ground in fear, recognised him, and acclaimed him Emperor.
Eutropius summarizes: His reign was of no striking character; he acted, in many respects, with gentleness and moderation, in some with cruelty and folly. He made war upon Britain, which no Roman since Julius Caesar had visited; and, having reduced it through the agency of Cnaeus Sentius and Aulus Plautius, illustrious and noble men, he celebrated a magnificent triumph. Certain islands also, called the Orcades, situated in the ocean, beyond Britain, he added to the Roman empire, and gave his son the name of Britannicus. . . . He lived to the age of sixty-four, and reigned fourteen years; and after his death was consecrated3 and deified.
This was the first "good" coin I ever bought and therefore marks the begiining of an addiction.Blindado
|
|
1bg AeliusCaesar, 136-138
As
Bare head, right, AELIVS CAESAR
Pannonia standing and holding a standard, PANNONIA SC
RIC 1071
According to the Historia Augusta (note: scholars view this biography in the text as among those particularly suspect regarding veracity): Aelius Verus was adopted by Hadrian at the time when, as we have previously said, the Emperor's health was beginning to fail and he was forced to take thought for the succession. He was at once made praetor and appointed military and civil governor of the provinces of Pannonia ; afterwards he was created [in AD 136] consul, and then, because he had been chosen to succeed to the imperial power, he was named for a second consulship. . . . [I]n the province to which he had been appointed he was by no means a failure ; for he carried on a campaign with
success, or rather, with good fortune, and achieved the reputation, if not of a pre-eminent, at least of an
average, commander.
Verus had, however, such wretched health that Hadrian immediately regretted the adoption, and since he often considered others as possible successors, he might have removed him altogether from the imperial family had Verus chanced to live longer. . . .
Verus was a man of joyous life and well versed in letters, and he was endeared to Hadrian, as the malicious say, rather by his beauty than by his character. In the palace his stay was but a short one; in his private life, though there was little to be commended, yet there was little to be blamed. Furthermore, he was considerate of his family, well-dressed, elegant in appearance, a man of regal beauty, with a countenance that commanded respect, a speaker of unusual eloquence, deft at writing verse, and, moreover, not altogether a failure in public life.
This sad little flan looks a bit tubercular, like the subject of the portrait.Blindado
|
|
1ep Valentinian364-375
AE3
Pearl diademed, draped, cuirassed bust right , D N VALENTINIANVS P F AVG
Emperor in military dress, advancing right, head left, holding labarum, dragging captive behind him. No fieldmarks. Mintmark: dot GSISC, GLORIA ROMANORVM
RIC 5a
According to Zosimus: Several discussions were held among the soldiers and their officers, and various persons were nominated. At length Sallustius, the prefect of the court, was unanimously elected. He excused himself on the pretext of his advanced age, which disabled him from being of service in the present critical circumstances. They then desired that his son might be emperor in lieu of himself. But his son he told them was too young, and from that as well as other causes unable to sustain the weight of an imperial diadem. They thus failed in their wish to appoint so distinguished a person, who was the most worthy of the age. They therefore elected Valentinian, a native of Cibalis in Pannonia. He was an excellent soldier, but extremely illiterate. They sent for him, he being then at some distance: and the state was not long without a ruler. Upon his arrival at the army, at Nicaea in Bithynia, he assumed the imperial authority, and proceeded forward. . . .
I have now to state, that while Valentinian was on his journey towards Constantinople, he was seized with a distemper, which increased his natural choleric temper to a degree of cruelty, and even to madness, so that he falsely suspected his sickness to proceed from some charm or poison which Julian's friends had prepared for him through malice. Accusations to that effect were drawn up against some distinguished persons, which were set aside by the discretion of Sallustius, who still was prefect of the court. After his distemper abated, he proceeded from Nicaea to Constantinople. The army and his friends in that city advised him to choose an associate in the empire, that if occasion should require, he might have some one to assist him, and prevent their again suffering as at the death of Julian. He complied with their advice, and after consideration, selected his brother Valens, whom he thought most likely to prove faithful to him. He declared him associate in the empire. . . . Affairs being thus disposed, Valentinian deemed it most prudent to place the east as far as Egypt, Bithynia, and Thrace, under the care of his brother, and to take charge of Illyricum himself. From thence he designed to proceed to Italy, and to retain in his own possession all the cities in that country, and the countries beyond the Alps, with Spain, Britain, and Africa. The empire being thus divided, Valentinian began to govern more rigorously, correcting the faults of the magistrates. He was very severe in the collection of the imposts, and particularly in observing that the soldiers were duly paid. . . .
Meantime the Barbarians beyond the Rhine, who while Julian lived held the Roman name in terror, and were contented to remain quiet in their own territories, as soon as they heard of his death, immediately marched out of their own country, and prepared for a war with the Romans. Valentinian. on bring informed of this, made a proper disposition of his forces, and placed suitable garrisons in all the towns along the Rhine. Valentinian was enabled to make these arrangements by his experience in military affairs. . . . [T] he emperor Valentinian, having favourably disposed the affairs of Germany, made provisions for the future security of the Celtic nations. . . . Valentinian was now attacked by a disease which nearly cost him his life. Upon his recovery the countries requested him to appoint a successor, lest at his decease the commonwealth should be in danger. To this the emperor consented, and declared his son Gratian emperor and his associate in the government, although he was then very young, and not yet capable of the management of affairs. . . .
Valentinian, thinking he had sufficiently secured himself from a German war, acted towards his subjects with great severity, exacting from them exorbitant tributes, such as they had never before paid; under pretence that the military expenditure compelled him to have recourse to the public. Having thus acquired universal hatred, he became still more severe; nor would he enquire into the conduct of the magistrates, but was envious of all whe had the reputation of leading a blameless life. . . . For this cause, the Africans, who could not endure the excessive avarice of the person who held the military command in Mauritania, gave the purple robe to Firmus, and proclaimed him emperor. This doubtless gave much uneasiness to Valentinian, who immediately commanded some legions from the stations in Pannonia and Moesia, to embark for Africa. On this the Sarmatians and the Quadi, who had long entertained a hatred for Celestius, the governor of those countries, availing themselves, of the opportunity afforded by the departure of the legions for Africa, invaded the Pannonians and Moesians. . . . .
Valentinian, roused by the intelligence of these events, marched from Celtica into Illyricum, for the purpose of opposing the Quadi and the Sarmatians, and consigned the command of his forces to Merobaudes, who was a person of the greatest military experience. The winter continuing unusually late, the Quadi sent ambassadors to him with insolent and unbecoming messages. These so exasperated the emperor, that through the violence of his rage, the blood flowed from his head into his mouth, and suffocated him. He thus died after having resided in Illyricum nearly nine months, and after a reign of twelve years.Blindado
|
|
2009-Austria - CarnuntumAn altar column was found next to the Heidentor. I added the text of this column.berserker
|
|
2009-Austria - CarnuntumTombstone for centurion Titus Calidius displaying his horse and armor, found in Carnuntum.
The text: T(itus) Calidius / P(ublii filius) Cam(ilia tribu) Sever(us)/ eq(ues) item optio/ decur(io) coh(ortis) I Alpin(orum) / item (centurio) leg(ionis) XV Apoll(inaris) / annor(um) LVIII stip(endorium) XXXIIII / h(ic) s(itus) e(est) / Q(uintus) Calidius fratri / posuitberserker
|
|
37-41 AD - AUGUSTUS memorial Æ dupondius - struck under Caligula obv: DIVVS AVGVSTVS (radiate head of Augustus left), dividing S C
rev: CONSENSV SENAT ET EQ ORDIN P Q R (laureate & togate statue of Gaius Caligula seated left on curule chair, holding branch)
ref: RIC I 56 (Gaius); BMCRE 88; C.87 (at Augustus-as struck Tiberius-4 frcs). BMC90
mint: Rome
15.80gms, 29mm
Rare
In reverse the whole text: CONSENSV. SENATus ET EQuestris ORDINis Populi Que Romani. This coin probably features an image of an actual statue of the Caligula. Dio Cassius notes, that the Senate ordered a guard to keep watch at each of Caligula's statues. (Dio Cassius LIX.26). Just a few coin has S-C on the obverse, like this.berserker
|
|
379/1. Procilia - denarius (80 BC)AR Denarius (Rome, 80 BC)
O/ Laureate head of Jupiter right; S C downwards behind.
R/ Juno Sospita standing right, holding shield and hurling spear; snake before; L PROCILI/F downwards behind.
3.57g
Crawford 379/1 (104 obverse dies/116 reverse dies)
* Lucius Procilius:
The life of Procilius is sparsely known. Besides, he is the only recorded member of the gens Procilia for the Republic and the lack of a cognomen further indicates a humble origin. Dictionaries often record two different Procilius (a historian and a politician), but they were possibly the same person. Since there are 35 years between this denarius and the dated events of Procilius' life, the moneyer could have been the father of the politician and historian.
Regarding Procilius the historian, none of his writings has survived, even as fragments, but he is quoted by Varro about the origin of the Lacus Curtius on the Forum (Latin Language, v. 148), Pliny the Elder on a text related to Pompey (Natural History, viii. 2), and Cicero alludes that he wrote on Greek constitutions (Atticus, ii. 2). The scope of his works must have therefore been quite extensive. In the aforementioned letter, Cicero shows his dislike for Procilius, which is perhaps related to Procilius' political role.
Indeed, in other letters, Cicero mentions that Procilius was also a Tribune of the Plebs in 56, and that he was allied to Gaius Porcius Cato (Cato the Younger's cousin) and Marcus Nonius Sufenas, also Tribunes that year. They supported Publius Clodius Pulcher, Tribune in 59 and Aedile in 56, who -- as Tribune -- had banned Cicero from Rome for his repression of the Catiline Conspiracy, hence the animosity of Cicero towards Procilius. In 56, Pulcher and the three tribunes, including Procilius, prevented the elections from taking place, in order to force an interregnum, so that Crassus and Pompey could be chosen consuls for 55 (Cassius Dio, Roman History, xxxix. 27-33).
They used violence and bribery to prevent this election and were therefore sued. Cato and Sufenas were acquitted, but Procilius was found guilty on 4 July 54 (Cicero, Atticus, iv. 15). Apparently, he was not condemned for the complete illegality of his deeds, but because he had killed a man in his house; and Cicero complains that 22 judges on 49 still wanted to absolve him. In the following letter to Atticus (ii. 16), Cicero adds that there are rumors about Sufenas and his judges, possibly about corruption, but does not give more details.
The use of Juno Sospita refers to the town of Lanuvium, where she was worshiped, probably the hometown of Procilius.
Joss
|
|
4) Antony and Octavian DenariusMark Antony and Octavian
AR Denarius, 2.97g
Ephesus, spring/summer, 41 BC
M ANT IMP AVG III VIR R P C M BARBAT Q P (MP and AV in monogram), Bare hd of Mark Antony right / CAESAR IMP PONT III VIR R P C, Bare head of Octavian right
Sear 1504
This series of coins commemorates the establishment of the second Triumvirate of November 43 B.C. between Antony, Octavian and Lepidus. Both sides bear the inscription "III VIR R P C", meaning "One of Three Men for the Regulation of the Republic. Within a few years Antony would depart Italy for the Eastern provinces.
The moneyer for this coin is M. Barbatius Pollio who was also a Questor in 41 BC. Barbatius bears the title of "Quaestor pro praetore" abbreviated to QP a distinction shared by his colleague L. Gelllius.
Photo and text credit goes to FORVM member Jay GT4, from whom I purchased the coin in 2011. Thanks, Jay!
RM0034Sosius
|
|
406. GaleriusChristians had lived in peace during most of the rule of Diocletian. The persecutions that began with an edict of February 24, 303, were credited by Christians to the influence of Galerius. Christian houses of assembly were destroyed, for fear of sedition in secret gatherings.
Detail of the Arch of Galerius in Thessaloniki.In 305, on the abdication of Diocletian and Maximian, he at once assumed the title of Augustus, with Constantius his former colleague, and having procured the promotion to the rank of Caesar of Flavius Valerius Severus, a faithful servant, and (Maximinus II Daia), his nephew, he hoped on the death of Constantius to become sole master of the Roman world. Having Constantius' son Constantine as guest at Galerius' court in the east helped to secure his position.
His schemes, however, were defeated by the sudden elevation of Constantine at Eboracum (York) upon the death of his father, and by the action of Maximianus and his son Maxentius, who were declared co-Augusti in Italy.
After an unsuccessful invasion of Italy in 307, he elevated his friend Licinius to the rank of Augustus, and moderating his ambition, he retired to the city Felix Romuliana (near present day Gamzigrada,Serbia/Montenegro)built by him to honor his mother Romula, and devoted the few remaining years of his life "to the enjoyment of pleasure and to the execution of some works of public utility."
It was at the instance of Galerius that the last edicts of persecution against the Christians were published, beginning on February 24, 303, and this policy of repression was maintained by him until the appearance of the general edict of toleration, issued from Nicomedia in April 311, apparently during his last bout of illness, in his own name and in those of Licinius and Constantine. Lactantius gives the text of the edict in his moralized chronicle of the bad ends to which all the persecutors came, De Mortibus Persecutorum ("On the Deaths of the Persecutors", chapters 34, 35). This marked the end of official persecution of Christians.
Galerius as Caesar, 305-311AD. GENIO POPVLI ROMANI reverse type with Genius standing left holding scales and cornucopiaecoli
|
|
6447 EGYPT, Alexandria Hadrian Nome Obol 126-27 AD Opet standingReference.
Emmett 1265; RPC III, 6447/7; Dattari 6313. Dattari-Savio Pl. 305, 292 (this coin)
Issue Menelaite
Obv. ΑΥΤ ΚΑΙ ΤΡΑΙ ΑΔΡΙΑ СΕΒ
Laureate head of Hadrian, r., drapery on l. shoulder
Rev. ΜΕΝΕΛΑΙ, L ΙΑ
Opet standing, facing, head l., holding long reed in l. hand, Harpocrates with lower body of a crocodile, l., in r. hand.
5.14 gr
20 mm
12h
Note.
From the Dattari collection.
Opet (Apet, Ipet, Ipy) was a benign hippopotamus goddess known as a protective and nourishing deity. Her name seems to mean 'harem' or 'favored place'. Our first reference to her comes from the Pyramid Texts, where the king asks that he may nurse at her breast so that he would "neither thirst nor hunger...forever". Afterwards, she is called "mistress of magical protection" in funerary papyri. Under the epithet 'the great Opet', she is fused to some extent with Taweret, 'the great one', but she never completely losses all of her independent characteristics, irregardless of the fact that many modern texts completely assimilate her with Taweretokidoki
|
|
703b, Tiberius, 19 August 14 - 16 March 37 A.D., Hierapolis, PhrygiaBronze AE 16, RPC I 2966 (1 specimen), F, Phrygia, Hierapolis, 3.300g, 15.6mm, 0o; Obverse: TIBEPIOC KAISAR, laureate head right; Reverse: IERAPOLEITWN ZOSIMOS [...], Apollo Archegetes (Lairbenos) standing left, playing lyre; reverse countermarked with star of six rays, in oval punch, 2.5 x 3.5 mm, Howgego 445 (3 pcs, 1 of which from this magistrate); dark patina; very rare. Ex FORVM.
De Imperatoribus Romanis: An Online Encyclopedia of Roman Rulers and their Families
TIBERIUS (A.D. 14-37)
Garrett G. Fagan
Pennsylvania State University
The reign of Tiberius Claudius Nero (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. His reign abounds in contradictions. Despite his keen intelligence, he allowed himself to come under the influence of unscrupulous men who, as much as any actions of his own, ensured that Tiberius's posthumous reputation would be unfavorable; despite his vast military experience, he oversaw the conquest of no new region for the empire; and despite his administrative abilities he showed such reluctance in running the state as to retire entirely from Rome and live out his last years in isolation on the island of Capri. His reign represents, as it were, the adolescence of the Principate as an institution. Like any adolescence, it proved a difficult time.
. . . .
It is all but inevitable that any historical assessment of Tiberius will quickly devolve into a historiographical assessment of Tacitus. So masterful is Tacitus's portrayal of his subject, and so influential has it been ever since, that in all modern treatments of Tiberius, in attempting to get at the man, must address the issue of Tacitus's historiographical methods, his sources, and his rhetoric. The subject is too vast to address here, but some points are salient. Tacitus's methods, especially his use of innuendo and inference to convey notions that are essentially editorial glosses, makes taking his portrayal of Tiberius at face value inadvisable. Further, his belief in the immutable character of people -- that one's character is innate at birth and cannot be changed, although it can be disguised -- prevents him from investigating the possibility that Tiberius evolved and developed over his lifetime and during his reign. Instead, Tacitus's portrayal is one of peeling back layers of dissimulation to reach the "real" Tiberius lurking underneath.
Overall, Tiberius's reign can be said to show the boons and banes of rule by one man, especially a man as dark, awkward, and isolated as Tiberius. For the people of the provinces, it was a peaceful and well-ordered time. Governors behaved themselves, and there were no destructive or expensive wars. In the domestic sphere, however, the concentration of power in one person made all the greater the threat of misbehavior by ambitious satellites like Sejanus or foolish friends like Piso. Furthermore, if the emperor wished to remain aloof from the mechanics of power, he could do so. Administrators, who depended on him for their directions, could operate without his immediate supervision, but their dealings with a man like Sejanus could lead to disaster if that man fell from grace. As a result, although he was not a tyrant himself, 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 complete article please refer to http://www.roman-emperors.org/tiberius.htm]
By Garrett G. Fagan, Pennsylvania State University.
Published: De Imperatoribus Romanis: An Online Encyclopedia of Roman Rulers and their Families http://www.roman-emperors.org/startup.htm. Used by permission.
Hierapolis in History
Usually said to be founded by Eumenes II, king of Pergamum (197-159 BC), Hierapolis may actually have been established closer to the 4th century BC by the Seleucid kings.
The name of the city may derive from Hiera, the wife of Telephus (son of Hercules and grandson of Zeus), the mythical founder of Pergamum. Or it may have been called the "sacred city" because of the temples located at the site. (The name Pamukkale is sometimes used just to refer to the white terraces, but the modern name of the whole area is also Pamukkale.)
With Colossae and Laodicea, Hierapolis became part of the tri-city area of the Lycus River valley. Hierapolis was located across the river from the other two cities and was noted for its textiles, especially wool. The city was also famous for its purple dye, made from the juice of the madder root.
The hot springs at Hierapolis (which still attract visitors today) were believed to have healing properties, and people came to the city to bathe in the rich mineral waters in order to cure various ailments.
Hierapolis was dedicated to Apollo Lairbenos, who was said to have founded the city. The Temple of Apollo that survives in ruins today dates from the 3rd century AD, but its foundations date from the Hellenistic period.
Also worshipped at Hierapolis was Pluto, god of the underworld, probably in relation to the hot gases released by the earth (see the Plutonium, below). The chief religious festival of ancient Hierapolis was the Letoia, in honor of the the goddess Leto, a Greek form of the Mother Goddess. The goddess was honoured with orgiastic rites.
Hierapolis was ceded to Rome in 133 BC along with the rest of the Pergamene kingdom, and became part of the Roman province of Asia. The city was destroyed by an earthquake in 60 AD but rebuilt, and it reached its peak in the 2nd and 3rd centuries AD.
Famous natives of Hierapolis include the Stoic philosopher Epictetus (c.55-c.135 AD) and the philosopher and rhetorician Antipater. Emperor Septimus hired Antipater to tutor his sons Caracalla and Geta, who became emperors themselves.
Hierapolis had a significant Jewish population in ancient times, as evidence by numerous inscriptions on tombs and elsewhere in the city. Some of the Jews are named as members of the various craft guilds of the city. This was probably the basis for the Christian conversion of some residents of Hierapolis, recorded in Colossians 4:13.
In the 5th century, several churches as well as a large martyrium dedicated to St. Philip (see "In the Bible," below) were built in Hierapolis. The city fell into decline in the 6th century, and the site became partially submerged under water and deposits of travertine. It was finally abandoned in 1334 after an earthquake. Excavations began to uncover Hierapolis in the 19th century.
Hierapolis in the Bible
Hierapolis is mentioned only once in the Bible, when St. Paul praises Epaphras, a Christian from Colossae, in his letter to the Colossians. Paul writes that Epaphras "has worked hard for you and for those in Laodicea and in Hierapolis" (Colossians 4:12-13). Epaphras was probably the founder of the Christian community at Hierapolis.
Ancient tradition also associates Hierapolis with a biblical figure, reporting that Philip died in Hierapolis around 80 AD. However, it is not clear which Philip is menat. It could be Philip the Apostle, one of the original 12 disciples, who is said to have been martyred by upside-down crucifixion (Acts of Philip) or by being hung upside down by his ankles from a tree.
Or Philip could be Philip the Evangelist, a later disciple who helped with administrative matters and had four virgin-prophetess daughters (Acts 6:1-7; 21:8-9). Early traditions say this Philip was buried in Hierapolis along with his virgin daughters, but confusingly call him "Philip the Apostle"! In any case, it seems a prominent person mentioned in Acts did die in Hierapolis.
Sacred Destinations - Hierapolis-Pamukkale
Edited by J. P. Fitzgerald, Jr.Cleisthenes
|
|
708a, OthoOtho (69 A.D.)
John Donahue
College of William and Mary
Introduction
In January 69 Otho led a successful coup to overthrow the emperor Galba. Upon advancing to the throne, he hoped to conciliate his adversaries and restore political stability to the Empire. These ambitions were never to be realized. Instead, our sources portray a leader never fully able to win political confidence at Rome or to overcome military anarchy abroad. As a result, he was defeated in battle by the forces of Vitellius, his successor, and took his own life at the conclusion of the conflict. His principate lasted only eight weeks.
Early Life and Career
Marcus Salvius Otho was born at Ferentium on 28 April 32 A. D. His grandfather, also named Marcus Salvius Otho, was a senator who did not advance beyond the rank of praetor. Lucius Otho, his father, was consul in 33 and a trusted administrator under the emperors Tiberius, Gaius and Claudius. His mother, Albia Terentia, was likely to have been nobly born as well. The cognomen "Otho" was Etruscan in origin, and the fact that it can be traced to three successive generations of this family perhaps reflects a desire to maintain a part of the Etruscan tradition that formed the family's background.
Otho is recorded as being extravagant and wild as a youth - a favorite pastime involved roving about at night to snare drunkards in a blanket. Such behavior earned floggings from his father, whose frequent absences from home on imperial business suggest little in the way of a stabilizing parental influence in Otho's formative years. These traits apparently persisted: Suetonius records that Otho and Nero became close friends because of the similarity of their characters; and Plutarch relates that the young man was so extravagant that he sometimes chided Nero about his meanness, and even outdid the emperor in reckless spending.
Most intriguing in this context is Otho's involvement with Nero's mistress, Poppaea Sabina, the greatest beauty of her day. A relationship between the two is widely cited in the ancient sources, but the story differs in essential details from one account to the next. As a result, it is impossible to establish who seduced whom, whether Otho ever married Poppaea, and whether his posting to Lusitania by Nero should be understood as a "banishment" for his part in this affair. About the only reliable detail to emerge is that Otho did indeed become governor of Lusitania in 59, and that he assumed the post as a quaestor, a rank below that of praetor or consul, the minimum usually required for the office. From here he would launch his initial thrust towards the imperial throne.
Overthrow of Galba
Nero's suicide in June 68 marked the end of the Julio-Claudian dynasty and opened up the principate to the prerogatives of the military beyond Rome. First to emerge was Servius Sulpicius Galba, governor of Hispania Tarraconensis, who had been encouraged to revolt by the praetorians and especially by Nymphidius Sabinus, the corrupt and scheming praetorian prefect at Rome. By this time Otho had been in Spain for close to ten years. His record seems to have been a good one, marked by capable administration and an unwillingness to enrich himself at the expense of the province. At the same time, perhaps seeing this as his best chance to improve his own circumstances, he supported the insurrection as vigorously as possible, even sending Galba all of his gold and his best table servants. At the same time, he made it a point to win the favor of every soldier he came in contact with, most notably the members of the praetorian guard who had come to Spain to accompany Galba to Rome. Galba set out from Spain in July, formally assuming the emperorship shortly thereafter. Otho accompanied him on the journey.
Galba had been in Rome little more than two months when on 1 January 69 the troops in Upper Germany refused to declare allegiance to him and instead followed the men stationed in Lower Germany in proclaiming their commander, Aulus Vitellius, as the new ruler. To show that he was still in charge Galba adopted his own successor, Lucius Calpurnius Piso Frugi Licinianus, an aristocrat completely without administrative or military experience. The choice meant little to the remote armies, the praetorians or the senate and particularly angered Otho, who had hoped to succeed Galba. Otho quickly organized a conspiracy among the praetorians with promise of a material reward, and on 15 January 69 they declared him emperor and publicly killed Galba; Piso, dragged from hiding in the temple of Vesta, was also butchered. On that same evening a powerless senate awarded Otho the imperial titles.
Otho's Principate in Rome
It is not possible to reconstruct a detailed chronology of Otho's brief eight and a half weeks as princeps in Rome (15 January-15 March). Even so, Galba's quick demise had surely impressed upon Otho the need to conciliate various groups. As a result, he continued his indulgence of the praetorian guard but he also tried to win over the senate by following a strict constitutionalist line and by generally keeping the designations for the consulship made by Nero and Galba. In the provinces, despite limited evidence, there are some indications that he tried to compensate for Galba's stinginess by being more generous with grants of citizenship. In short, Otho was eager not to offend anyone.
Problems remained, however. The praetorians had to be continually placated and they were always suspicious of the senate. On the other hand, the senate itself, along with the people, remained deeply disturbed at the manner of Otho's coming to power and his willingness to be associated with Nero. These suspicions and fears were most evident in the praetorian outbreak at Rome. Briefly, Otho had decided to move from Ostia to Rome a cohort of Roman citizens in order to replace some of Rome's garrison, much of which was to be utilized for the showdown with Vitellius. He ordered that weapons be moved from the praetorian camp in Rome by ship to Ostia at night so that the garrison replacements would be properly armed and made to look as soldierly as possible when they marched into the city. Thinking that a senatorial counter-coup against Otho was underway, the praetorians stormed the imperial palace to confirm the emperor's safety, with the result that they terrified Otho and his senatorial dinner guests. Although the praetorians' fears were eventually calmed and they were given a substantial cash payment, the incident dramatically underscored the unease at Rome in the early months of 69.
Otho's Offensive against Vitellius
Meanwhile, in the Rhineland, preparations for a march on Rome by the military legions that had declared for Vitellius were far advanced. Hampered by poor intelligence gathering in Gaul and Germany and having failed to negotiate a settlement with Vitellius in early 69, Otho finally summoned to Italy his forces for a counterattack against the invading Vitellian army. His support consisted of the four legions of Pannonia and Dalmatia, the three legions of Moesia and his own imperial retinue of about 9,000. Vitellius' own troops numbered some 30,000, while those of his two marshals, Aulus Caecina Alienus and Fabius Valens, were between 15,000 and 20,000 each.
Otho's strategy was to make a quick diversionary strike in order to allow time for his own forces to assemble in Italy before engaging the enemy. The strategy worked, as the diversionary army, comprised of urban cohorts, praetorians and marines all from Rome or nearby, was successful in Narbonese Gaul in latter March. An advance guard sent to hold the line on the Po River until the Danubian legions arrived also enjoyed initial success. Otho himself arrived at Bedriacum in northern Italy about 10 April for a strategy session with his commanders. The main concern was that the Vitellians were building a bridge across the Po in order to drive southward towards the Apennines and eventually to Rome. Otho decided to counter by ordering a substantial part of his main force to advance from Bedriacum and establish a new base close enough to the new Vitellian bridge to interrupt its completion. While en route, the Othonian forces, strung out along the via Postumia amid baggage and supply trains, were attacked by Caecina and Valens near Cremona on 14 April. The clash, know as the Battle of Bedriacum, resulted in the defeat of the Othonian forces, their retreat cut off by the river behind them. Otho himself, meanwhile, was not present, but had gone to Brixellum with a considerable force of infantry and cavalry in order to impede any Vitellian units that had managed to cross the Po.
The plan had backfired. Otho's strategy of obtaining victory while avoiding any major battles had proven too risky. Realizing perhaps that a new round of fighting would have involved not only a significant re-grouping of his existing troops but also a potentially bloody civil war at Rome, if Vitellius' troops reached the capital, Otho decided that enough blood had been shed. Two weeks shy of his thirty-seventh birthday, on 16 April 69, he took his own life.
Assessment
To be sure, Otho remains an enigma - part profligate Neronian wastrel and part conscientious military commander willing to give his life for the good of the state. Our sources are at a loss to explain the paradox. Perhaps, like Petronius, he saw it was safer to appear a profligate in Nero's court? In the final analysis, Otho proved to be an organized and efficient military commander, who appealed more to the soldier than to the civilian. He also seems to have been a capable governor, with administrative talents that recalled those of his father. Nevertheless, his violent overthrow of Galba, the lingering doubts that it raised about his character, and his unsuccessful offensive against Vitellius are all vivid reminders of the turbulence that plagued the Roman world between the reigns of Nero and Vespasian. Regrettably, the scenario would play itself out one more time before peace and stability returned to the empire.
Copyright (C) 1999, John Donahue
Edited by J.P.Fitzgerald, Jr.
Cleisthenes
|
|
7276 Nikomedes IV, Philopator, 94-74 BCSilver tetradrachm, 36.4mm, 15.51g, Nice VF
Diademed head of Nikomedes II right / BAΣIΛEΩΣ EΠIΦANOYΣ NIKOMHΔOY, Zeus standing left, crowning King's name with wreath in right, and holding sceptre in left hand. Eagle on thunderbolt inner left field, monogram and date (BIΣ =year 212 or 87/6 BC) below. Extremely rare date.
Ex: Forvm Ancient Coins; Wayne G. Sayles
Sear 7276; BMC Pontus, pg 213, 6v; SNG Cop 651v; SNG Von Aulock 266v
Note (courtesy Joe Sermarini): In 88 BC, Mithradates destroyed Nikomedes' army forcing him to flee to Italy. His throne was not restored until Rome defeated Mithradates in 84 BC Waddington, [RG], pp. 217-8, notes, "it is difficult to explain the very rare coins that bear the dates IC, AIC, BIC. These dates correspond to 89/8 to 87/6 BC...; but between mid-88 and the end of 83, the whole of Bithynia was in the hands of Mithradates Eupator. We are forced to conjecture (no text says so) that during this period several fortified places in Bithynia remained faithful to the legitimate king and continued to strike coins in his name."Lawrence W
|
|
AE provincial, Saitta, Lydia (Sidas Kaleh, Turkey), Senate/River-God (mid-2nd to early 3d century AD) IЄΡA - [CYNKΛHTOC], bare-headed youthful draped bust of Senate right / CAIT[THNΩN] + [ЄPMOC] in exergue, River-God Hermos reclining left, holding reed and cornucopiae, resting arm on urn (hydria) from which waters flow.
Ó” (base metal yellow, orichalcum?), 22 mm, 5.68 g, die axis 6.5h (coin alignment)
It is difficult to read the name of the river. I think that ЄPMOC is more likely, but VΛΛΟС is also possible, representing the other important local river, Hyllos.
Possible catalog references are BMC Lydia 25 (or 26-27?), SNG Copenhagen 398, SNG München 439.
For the Hyllos reverse, Leypold 1153.
To emphasize the autonomy of certain Hellenistic polises, even under the Roman rule they sometimes used allegorical figures of Senate or Demos on obverses of their coins instead of imperial portraits. Saitta was issuing similar-looking coins with busts of emperors and their family as well, but in this issue the town Senate is honoured as the ruler. IЄΡA CYNKΛHTOC = Holy Senate. CAITTHNΩN = Saitta, ЄPMOC = Hermos, the name of the river and its god.
River-Gods or Potamoi (Ποταμοί) were the gods of the rivers and streams of the earth, all sons of the great earth-encirling river Okeanos (Oceanus) and his wife Tethys. Their sisters were the Okeanides (Oceanids), goddesses of small streams, clouds and rain, and their daughters were the Naiades, nymphs of springs and fountains. A River-God was depicted in one of three forms: as a man-headed bull; a bull-horned man with the tail of a serpentine-fish in place of legs; or as a reclining man with an arm resting upon a pitcher pouring water, which we see in this case. The addition of cornucopia symbolizes the blessings that a particular river bestows on those who live near it.
Saitta or Saittae (Σαίτται, Ptolemy 5.2.21: ΣÎτται, Σάετται) was a polis in eastern Lydia (aka Maeonia), in the rivers' triangle between the upper Hyllus (modern Demirci Çayı, c. 12 km to the west) and the Hermus or Hermos (modern Gediz Nehri, c. 20 km to the south). In Roman imperial times it belonged to the "conventus" of Sardis in the Roman province of Asia (conventus was a territorial unit of a Roman province, mostly for judicial purposes).
Now its ruins are known now as Sidas Kaleh or Sidaskale in Turkey, near the village of Ä°çikler (Ä°cikler Mahallesi, 45900 Demirci/Manisa). They were never excavated, so are little known or cared for. Ruins of a stadium and a theatre survive, together with remains of some temples and tombs.
Not much is known about it. It was a regional centre for the production of textiles. In 124 AD the town was probably visited by emperor Hadrianus. During the Roman period the cult of the moon god MÄ“n Axiottenus was very popular in the city. Because of its reference to "angels" (both literally as the Greek word and by their function as god's messengers) it was possibly close to the more general Asia Minor cult of Theos Hypsistos, Θεος ὕψιστος, "the highest god" (200 BC – 400 AD), which in turn was perhaps related to the gentile following of the Second Temple in Jerusalem.
Known Roman provincial coins issued by this city feature portraits of emperors from Hadrian to Gallienus, thus covering the period from 117 to 268 AD, with the peak around the Severan dynasty. The semi-autonomous issues are usually dated from mid-2nd to mid-3d century AD.
Later Saittae was the seat of a Byzantine bishopric. Bishop Limenius signed the Chalcedon Creed, while Bishop Amachius spoke at the Council of Chalcedon. Although an Islamic area now, Saittae remains a titular see of the Roman Catholic Church.Yurii P
|
|
AE Spearhead #26Mesopotamia
Late third millennium BC
31.6 cm (12.4”)
Cf. Guillaume Gernez ("Histoire des lances tripartites à soie au Proche-Orient" from "HIMA, Revue internationale d'Histoire Militaire Ancienne"), 2016, Fig. 9, Type C. The form of the bottom left spearhead illustrated for Type C's (Fig. 9) is a very close match to "Spearhead #26," above. The illustration is cited in HIMA as being from Müller-Karpe 2004, pl. 102.1525 and 46.779.
According to Gernez, this type is “…known throughout Mesopotamia from the beginning of DA III to Ur (grave PG 580)…and seems to have been adopted during the second half the third millennium in northern Syria at Tell Brak, Tell Chuera, Til Barsip, Ebla and as far as Cilicia (Soli).” The entire text from pp. 159-160 in HIMA, in French, is presented below:
"Cette variante aurait pu appartenir à la catégorie des piques, étant donnée la forme très pointue de la lame, mais elles sont conceptuellement et morphologiquement apparentées aux lances tripartites. Les lames sont en moyenne 10 fois plus longues que larges. Leur section est rhomboïdale, et celle de la tige est octogonale, hexagonale ou circulaire. Certaines comportent de légers décors : une lance d’Ur a par exemple une tige parcourue de 8 fins reliefs longitudinaux.
"Ces lances sont connues à travers la Mésopotamie dès le début du DA III à Ur (tombe PG 580), Fara, Kirkuk et semblent adoptées au cours de la seconde moitié du IIIe mill. en Syrie du nord à Tell Brak, Tell Chuera, Til Barsip, Ebla et jusqu’en Cilicie (Soli)."
Gernez's reference in the first paragraph to the "légers décors" is intriguing. That sentence translates as "Some have light decorations: a spear of Ur, for example, has a stem traversed by 8 fine longitudinal reliefs." My example, above, has eight incised longitudinal lines on the stem, creating corresponding raised bars between them. Gernez's description seems to match.
Description:
Elongated blade with rhomboidal cross-section, circular cross-section through stem, square through tang, incised decoration on stem and shoulders.Kamnaskires
|
|
Agrippa- AnepigraphicAgrippa – 63- 12 BC, Military commander and friend of Augustus
Obverse:
Head left wearing a rostral crown.
M.(Marcus) AGRIPPA L.F. (Lucius Filius = son of Lucius) COS. III (Consul for the third time.)
M:Marcus
L.F: Lucius Filius = son of Lucius
COS. III: Consul for the third time
Agrippa he wears a crown on his head which is decorated by prows of (war)ships, a so-called 'rostral crown' probably given to him to honour him as a fleetcommander during the battle of Actium, the decisiove battle in which Octavian defeated Marc Antony and Cleopatra.
Reverse:
S—C, Senatus Consulto
The reverse is 'anepigraphic' without text, apart from S.C. (Senatus Consulto = by approval of the Senate) Neptune holds a trident and has a dolphin on his outstretched hand. Neptune too is a reference to the sea and Agrippa's nautical carreer.
Domination: AS, Copper, 29 mm
Mint: Rome. This AS of Agrippa is struck under Caligula.
AGRIPPA
63 - 12 BC
Roman General
Agrippa was the companion of Octavian by the time Caesar was murdered in 44 BC. Agrippa was Octavian's most brilliant military commander. He defeated Pompeius in two naval battles and was responsible for for Octavian's victory over Mark Antony. When Octavian became emperor under the name Augustus Agrippa was second only to the emperor in authority. He suppressed rebellions, founded colonies and built an extensive road-network throughout the Roman empire.
Peter Wissing
|
|
Alexander Jannaeus Hendin 474Minted By: Alexander Jannaeus
In the name of: Alexander Jannaeus
Reference: Hendin 474
Obverse description: Within wreath, the Hebrew text “Jonathan the high priest and council of the Jews”
Obverse legend: Yehonatan HaKohen Gadol V'Ḥaver HaYehudim
Reverse description: Double cornucopiae, ribbons around, pomegranate between horns.
Year: Undated, between 103-76 BCE.
Its interesting that Gadol (high [priest], lit. "big") it spelled with a vav (GDOL), and not just GDL, like its commonly writen. Also, the vav in gadol usually occurs on prutot of Aristobulus.
Text is:
NOHY
GHNT
VHVLOD
YHRAarmale
|
|
Alexander Jannaeus, Hasmonean AE PrutahAncient Greek, Alexander Jannaeus, Hasmonean AE Prutah, (103-76 BC), 2.6g, 15.59mm
Obverse: "Yehonatan the High Priest & the Council of the Jews", Five lines of Hebrew text within wreath.
𐤉𐤄𐤅
𐤍𐤕𐤍𐤄𐤊
𐤄𐤍𐤄𐤂𐤃𐤋
𐤉𐤇𐤁𐤓𐤄
𐤅𐤄𐤃𐤃𐤌
Reverse: Two joined cornucopias, ribbons on each side, pomegranate between, all within dotted circle border.
Reference: Hendin 1145 (473)
Gil-galad
|
|
Alexander Jannaeus, Hasmonean AE Prutah, (103-76 BC)Ancient Greek, Alexander Jannaeus, Hasmonean AE Prutah, (103-76 BC)
Obverse: "Yehonatan the High Priest of the Jews", Three lines of Paleo-Hebrew text within wreath.
𐤉𐤄𐤅
𐤇𐤍𐤍𐤄𐤊
𐤍𐤋𐤉𐤇𐤍
Reverse: Two joined cornucopias, ribbons on each side, pomegranate between, all within dotted circle border. Three unknown characters right.
Reference: Hendin 1139 var
Ex: Holyland Ancient Coins Corporation - Musa Ali
Gil-galad
|
|
Alexander Jannaeus, Hasmonean AE Prutah, (103-76 BC)Ancient Greek, Alexander Jannaeus, Hasmonean AE Prutah, (103-76 BC)
Obverse: "Yehonatan the High Priest & the Council of the Jews", Five lines of Hebrew text within wreath, top line off flan.
YHW
NTNHK
HNHGDLW
HBRHY
HDDM
𐤉𐤄𐤅
𐤍𐤕𐤍𐤄𐤊
𐤄𐤍𐤄𐤂𐤃𐤋
𐤉𐤇𐤁𐤓𐤄
𐤅𐤄𐤃𐤃𐤌
Reverse: Two joined cornucopias, ribbons on each side, pomegranate between, all within dotted circle border.
Reference: Hendin 1145 (473)
Ex: Tom Mullally
Gil-galad
|
|
Alexander Jannaeus, Hasmonean AE Prutah, 103-76 BCAncient Greek, Alexander Jannaeus, Hasmonean AE Prutah, (103-76 BC)
Obverse: "Yehonatan the High Priest & the Council of the Jews", Five lines of Hebrew text within wreath, top line off flan.
YHW
NTNHK
HNHGDLW
HBRHY
HDDM
𐤉𐤄𐤅
𐤍𐤕𐤍𐤄𐤊
𐤄𐤍𐤄𐤂𐤃𐤋
𐤉𐤇𐤁𐤓𐤄
𐤅𐤄𐤃𐤃𐤌
Reverse: Two joined cornucopias, ribbons on each side, pomegranate between, all within dotted circle border.
Reference: Hendin 1145 (473)
Ex: Tom Mullally
Gil-galad
|
|
Alfonso I of Aragon, 1104-1134 AD.Billon dinero of Toledo. Obverse: Head left encircled by text. Reverse: Cross pattee with pierced stars in first and fourth quarters, encircled by text.Celticaire
|
|
AnatolBelSaruhan (?) Beylik (1300-1410)
Unknown arabic text.
AE 11mm, MangirBelisarius
|
|
Antestius Denarius, 146 BCE, Dog Running (Water Spaniel w/ "Lion Cut"?)Roman Republic. C. Antestius AR Denarius (3.81g, 19mm). Rome, 146 BCE.
Obv: C•ANTESTI (ANTE ligate) to l. Head of Roma right, X below.
Rev: ROMA in ex. Dioscuri, each holding spear, riding r.; dog running r., both fore-feet raised.
Ref: Antestia 1; Crawford 219/1e; BMCRR Rome 859.
See also: Giulio DeFlorio's page on this type, hosted by FORVM: [LINK].
Prov: Ex-Artemide Aste srl e-Auction 11 (26 Jan 2020), Lot 236
Notes: Although hounds were also popular on Greek coinage, Roman Republican denarii provide more varied depictions of the breeds and contexts of dogs in their society. This issue is notable for illustrating what might be described today as a “lion cut,” popular for poodles and other water dogs.
This dog has been identified as a proto-poodle, or water spaniel of some sort – a working dog. The “lion cut” permits buoyancy and warmth as the dog retrieves fowl from water. A similar breed, similarly groomed, is portrayed by Caesius (Cr. 298/1), but in a distinctly domestic setting, hinting that, already in antiquity, canine coiffure may have been as much about fashion as function.Curtis JJ
|
|
Antoninianus; SAECVLARES AVGG, elk walking left, III in ex. RIC 224Philip II Antoninianus. 248 AD. IMP PHILIPVS AVG, radiate, draped & cuirassed bust right / SAECVLARES AVGG, elk walking left, III in ex. RIC 224, RSC 72, Sear RCV III: 9275. Sear points out that many sources have mistakenly identified the animal as a common goat and that the elk (Alces alces) is the most suitable candidate in the context of showing exotic animals in the arena to celebrate the 1000 anniversary of Rome’s founding.Podiceps
|
|
Antoninus PiusSilver Denarius
Roman Imperial - The Principate
Antoninus Pius
Rome mint, 157 - 158 A.D.
Fine, obverse text partially off flan
17.0 mm / 2.991 g / 0°
Obverse: "ANTONINVS AVG PIVS P P IMP II", laureate head right.
Reverse: "TR POT XXI COS IIII", Annona standing right with rudder and modius with corn ears, foot on prow to right.
RIC 275. RSC 1039.
MyID: 020BTenthGen
|
|
Antoninus PiusSilver Denarius
Roman Imperial - The Principate
Antoninus Pius
Rome mint, 158-159 AD.
2.43 g / 17.5 mm / 180°
Obverse: "ANTONINVS AVG PIVS P P TR P XXII", Laureate head right.
Reverse: "AED DIVI AVG REST" "COS IIII" below, octostyle temple of Divus Augustus and Livia with statues inside. (Rev text looks more like ADE)
RIC 284.
MyID: 065DTenthGen
|
|
Arcadius (RIC 18b, Coin #462)RIC 18b (C), AE4, Heraclea, 378 - 383 AD
OBV: D N ARCADIVS P F AVG; Pearl-diademed, draped and cuirassed bust right.
REV: VOT V (SMHA); Text within wreath.
SIZE: 13.5mm 1.40gMaynardGee
|
|
Aretas IV and Shaqilat (1)obverse: juggate busts of Aretas and Shaqilat
reverse: crossed cornucopiae. Aramaic text meaning Aretas/Shaqilatvacationchick
|
|
Aretas IV and Shaqilat (2)obverse: Aretas and Shaqilat juggate busts
reverse: crossed cornucopiae. aramaic text meaning Aretas/Shaqilatvacationchick
|
|
Artaxerxes II drachmSilver drachm issued by Artaxerxes II. Obverse shows Artaxerxes in profile facing left with decorated tunic, torque and crown. Geometric mark behind bust. Reverse shows a standing figure facing left holding a staff up to a fire altar. Aramaic text above the image reads "Araxsir, king, son [of] Darev, king." Issued 405/4–359/8 BCE. Received October 1, 2022. Purchased from FORVM.Adrian H
|
|
AugustusAugustus (15 BCE),
Laureate head of Augustus, right/The letters SC surrounded by text.
Legend: CAESAR AVGVSTVS TRIBVNIC POTEST/CN PISO CN F III VIR AAAFF
Minted by Gnaeus Piso
AE AsBelisarius
|
|
Aurelian Bronze Antonianus, Siscia 272-274 ADOBV: IMP AURELIANUS PF AVG, Radiate, draped and Cuirassed bust (Type A) rt.
REV: CONCORDIA MILITUM; Aurelian standing right clasps hands with Concordia standing left; S* in Exergue
RIC 216 is perhaps the most common type from Siscia but it covers a wide variety of styles including this dramatic portrait design. The template is exactly the same for other examples of this coin (for example in Wildwinds) and I think must all have been done by the same engraver. A beautiful design with many different textures.daverino
|
|
Aurelian- Concordia MilitumAurelian, August or September 270 - October or November 275 A.D.
Obverse:
Radiate and cuirassed bust right
IMP AVRELIANVS AVG
IMP: Imperator, leader of the army
AVRELIANVS: Aurelian
AVG: Augustus, emperor
Reverse
CONCORD • MILIT, Accordance with the army
CONCORD • : Accordance
MILIT: Army
The dot in legend appears on the specimen illustrated by Göbl. Göbl 276a3 (2). He says "Moneta Comitatentis (later in Byzantium), 2nd. Emission"
He dates that to middle of 272. Göbl's concordance is -> Göbl (MiR 47) 276 = RIC 391 = Rohde 119, 120
Aurelian standing right, holding sceptre and clasping hand of Concordia standing left.
Domination: Bronze, size 23 mm
Mint: Cyzicus Γ (3.rd Officina), scarce or RIC V/1, 391; unattributed mint. It is Cohen 25. It could be RIC V/1, 342. I can't tell the difference! The description in RIC is the same for both types. Moneta Comitatensis, but it may be obsolete in any case.
Comment: In Estiot, Monnaies de l'Empire romain, vol.II, it is #987, pl.31; atelier Balkanique. The portrait on the obverse looks very strange. It is strange in the sense that there are very odd pictorial trends in the portraiture of Aurelian, but within the context it's not that unusual.
Peter Wissing
|
|
B 010 Phocas (602-610 A.D.), SB 0657, -/NIKOB, AE-Follis (40 Nummia), Nicomedia, Year I, B 010 Phocas (602-610 A.D.), SB 0657, -/NIKOB, AE-Follis (40 Nummia), Nicomedia, Year I,
avers:- Om FO(CA INPER AV or similar) but instead of this have confused overstrucked text, Phocas on left, holding cross on globe and Leontia, nimbate, on right, holding sceptre topped by cross, standing, cross between their heads .
revers:- "m" ANNO/I, Large m, ANNO to left, cross above, regnal year (I) to right; (no letter below), mintmark NIKOB,
exergo: ANNO/I//NIKOB, diameter: 29,5mm, weight:12,84g, axis:6h,
mint:Nicomedia, date: 602? A.D., ref: Sear 0657, p-147; DOC 53b; MIBE 68
Q-001quadrans
|
|
Baal or Zeus (Interpretatio Graecia) on Cilician Stater of Satrap MazaiosCirca 361-334 B.C. AR Stater (10.88g, 24mm, 5h). cf. SNG Levant-106; SNG Paris-. Obverse Baal of Tarsos enthroned left, head facing, holding club, bunch of grapes, wheat ear, and eagle in right hand, lotus-headed scepter in left hand, B’LTRZ (Baaltarz) in Aramaic behind, M below throne, all within a circle of dots. Reverse lion bringing down bull, attacking with teeth and claws, MZDI (Mazdai) in Aramaic above, unlisted ankh symbol, wheat ear below, all within a circle of dots. Sharply struck on an excellent metal with areas of flat strikes on high points. Choice superb EF/EF. Toned, lustrous.
Ex Ponterio and Associates Sale No. 84, November 1996, lot 141. Ex Stacks Bowers and Ponterio Sale No. 172, November 2012, lot 11680. Ex Pars Coins.
The depiction of Phoenician-Canaanite god Baal on Cilician coinage suggests the preeminence of his cult in Tarsos. He is shown enthroned, most probably on Mount Zaphon. The symbols corn-ear/barley and grapes suggest Baal’s capacity as a god involved in the seasonal cycles of life and death, or a more specific reference to Cilicia’s fertile plains. The iconography of this late coinage is also a syncretic mixture of other cultures, including Greek. The treatment of the god’s body gives us a hint of the extent of influence of Hellenic culture exerted in Eastern Asia Minor long before Alexander’s conquest, and it is said that Baal could be equated with Zeus in the Greek context. After the conquest of Alexander III of the East, Mazaios was appointed governor of Babylon. The new coinage of Alexander was strongly influenced by Mazaios’ pre-Alexandrine coinage (the Zeus Aetophoros commonly found on the reverses of his tetradrachmai is a direct descendant of this). The reverse depicts the City’s Emblem and clearly has an underlying meaning now lost to us. Some say it symbolizes the victory of Day over Night, while others suggest military conquest and subjugation of the enemies by the Persian Empire. Marvin Tameanko has persuasively argued (see Celator, Jan. 1995, pp. 6-11) that the kneeling bull (without the lion) is symbolic of Zeus, as attested on scores of later Greek and Roman coins; and the lion is symbolic of the supreme god Baal of the Cilicians. This concludes the lion-over-bull motif on this coin delivers a message that is blatantly direct and simple, if the argument put forward is to be believed.
Jason T
|
|
Babylon: Nebuchadnezzar II (ca. 6th Century BCE) Brick Tablet (Walker 102, 7-line Type)Brick impressed with seven lines of cuneiform text:
𒀭𒀝𒆪𒁺𒌫𒊑𒌶 (Nebuchadnezzar (II))
𒈗 𒆍𒀭𒊏𒆠 (King of Babylon)
𒍝𒉌𒅔 𒂍𒊕𒅍 (provider of Esagila)
𒅇 𒂍𒍣𒁕 (and Ezida)
𒌉𒍑 𒀀𒊭𒊑𒁺 (foremost seed)
𒊭 𒀭𒀝𒌉𒍑𒌶 (of Nabopolassar,)
𒈗 𒁀𒁉𒇻𒆠 𒀀𒈾𒆪 (King of Babylon, am I)
Quant.Geek
|
|
Baltimore and Ohio Railroad Company Centennial Medal, 1927Text from the original information card:
"This medal is issued on the one hundredth birthday of the Baltimore & Ohio Railroad Company to commemorate not merely an important milestone in its own history but the rounding out of a century of a definite American railroad achievement.
The Baltimore & Ohio was the first American railroad to operate its line for the public handling of passengers and freight. This was early in 1830. In all the one hundred years of its life it has changed neither its corporate name, its charter, nor its fundamental organization.
The obverse of the medal depicts one of the most modern trains of the Baltimore & Ohio - The Capitol Limited or The National Limited - drawn by one of the largest and most modern passenger locomotives built. The Spirit of Transportation guides the locomotive in its onward flight. [Inscription: ONE HUNDRED YEARS - SAFETY STRENGTH SPEED.]
The reverse shows the Tom Thumb, designed by Alderman Peter Cooper of New York and the first steam locomotive to be built in the United States, even though it was never put into practical service. [Inscription: THE BALTIMORE AND OHIO RAILROAD COMPANY 1827 - 1927.]
Mr. Hans Schuler, director of the Maryland Institute in Baltimore, is the sculptor who designed the medal and it was reproduced direct from his models by the Medallic Art Company of New York City."Matt Inglima
|
|
Barbarous Imitation, AE-3, VICTORIA LAETAE PRINC PERP type, #04Barbarous Imitation, AE-3, VICTORIA LAETAE PRINC PERP type, #04
avers:- Confusing text, Laureate, helmeted, cuirassed bust left.
revers:- Confusing text, Two Victories standing, facing each other, together holding shield reading VOT/PR on cippus.
exerg: -/-// -o-, diameter: 15-17mm, weight:3,09g, axis: h,
mint: ???, date: , ref: ,
Q-004quadrans
|
|
Barbarous Imitation, AE-3, VICTORIA LAETAE PRINC PERP type, #05Barbarous Imitation, AE-3, VICTORIA LAETAE PRINC PERP type, #05
avers:- Confusing text, Laureate, helmeted, cuirassed bust right.
revers:- Confusing text, Two Victories standing, facing each other, together holding shield reading VOT/PR on cippus.
exerg: -/-// I S, diameter: 15-17mm, weight:2,27g, axis: h,
mint: Siscia, date: , ref: ,
Q-005quadrans
|
|
Barbarous Imitation, AE-3, VICTORIA LAETAE PRINC PERP type, #06Barbarous Imitation, AE-3, VICTORIA LAETAE PRINC PERP type, #06
avers:- Confusing text, Laureate, helmeted, cuirassed bust right.
revers:- Confusing text, Two Victories standing, facing each other, together holding shield reading VOT/PR on cippus.
exerg: -/-// Confusing text, diameter: 15-16mm, weight:2,88g, axis: h,
mint: Siscia, date: , ref: ,
Q-006quadrans
|
|
| 386 files on 5 page(s) |
1 |
 |
|
|
|
