Dear Alex S2,
Meepzorp, Altamura, George X, and Board,
Identifying the
countermarked coin first can be instrumental in uncovering the identit(ies) of the
countermark(s). This is not always possible, of course, but with your coin, Alex, I believe it hails from Syrian
Antioch and was struck under
Augustus. For the specific
type, the possibilities seem to be:
https://rpc.ashmus.ox.ac.uk/coins/1/4247ahttps://rpc.ashmus.ox.ac.uk/coins/1/4247bOn Alex's coin, the outline of the emperor's
head, plus the first two letters of "
IMP," can be seen on the
side with the two
countermarks. On the
reverse, one of the groups of laurel leaves has miraculously survived the three
countermarks and the ravages of time (seen at 12:00 in the photo). My Augustan
attribution (and preference for
RPC I 4247b) is based on the shape of said leaves and some of the evidence to follow.
Now for the
countermarks themselves. The
thunderbolt stamp appears to be
Howgego 472, known on the following Antiochene coin
types of
Claudius:
https://rpc.ashmus.ox.ac.uk/coins/1/4277https://rpc.ashmus.ox.ac.uk/coins/1/4280 From
Howgego's
work, he notes that "since it is paired on one coin with
cmk 736 (FVLM), it is almost certain to be a
countermark of
XII Fulminata. This is supported by its
presence in the
Brunk hoard, which contained 13 coins with other
countermarks of the legion."
As for the punch with kufic-like lettering, it is most likely
Howgego 695, known again on Anticohene coins, but this time of
Augustus:
https://rpc.ashmus.ox.ac.uk/coins/1/4247bhttps://rpc.ashmus.ox.ac.uk/coins/1/4264From
Howgego, we have these lengthy comments (comparatively speaking) on the
countermark:
"Some of the
countermarks were mistakenly
engraved in mirror image, e.g.
Brunk 117. 'Manou' alternated with 'Abgar' (
cmk 696) as the name of the
head of the royal line of Edessa, see E.
Babelon, '
Numismatique d' Edesse en Mesopotamie',
Melanges numismatiques vol.2, 1893, pp.209-96, especially p.240 (pl.3). It is uncertain which Manou is represented, but the
countermark is probably to be dated before AD 115-16 because it was overstamped by
cmks 725 and 736 (q.v.; and see p.18). The
countermark thus adds to the sparse evidence for the development of Syriac at Edessa (for which see F. Millar, 'Paul of
Samosata,
Zenobia and
Aurelian: the
church, local culture and political allegiance in third-century
Syria',
JRS 61 (1971), 1-17, at 3, with the references given there)."
Countermark #3 on Alex's coin is likely later than its two companions as it slightly cuts into
Howgego 695, but by how much is
still uncertain to me. I initially thought the
bust looked a
bit like
Geta, and perhaps it is, but nothing in
Howgego has matched so far. I will try to let the board know if I stumble on anything of further interest.
That is all for tonight.
Best regards,
Mark Fox
Michigan