Classical Numismatics Discussion
  Welcome Guest. Please login or register. 10% Off Store-Wide Sale Until 2 April!!! Explore Our Website And Find Joy In The History, Numismatics, Art, Mythology, And Geography Of Coins!!! Expert Authentication - Accurate Descriptions - Reasonable Prices - Coins From Under $10 To Museum Quality Rarities Welcome Guest. Please login or register. 10% Off Store-Wide Sale Until 2 April!!! Explore Our Website And Find Joy In The History, Numismatics, Art, Mythology, And Geography Of Coins!!! Support Our Efforts To Serve The Classical Numismatics Community - Shop At Forum Ancient Coins

New & Reduced


Author Topic: Roman prize urns  (Read 12494 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline ecoli

  • Caesar
  • ****
  • Posts: 1122
  • Every coin is sacred, every coin is great.
Roman prize urns
« on: June 02, 2006, 11:27:48 am »
[BROKEN IMAGE LINK REMOVED BY ADMIN - PLEASE UPLOAD PHOTOS]

Are there any archeological finds that coorespond to the representations on the coins such as above?

Thanks

Offline slokind

  • Tribuna Plebis Perpetua
  • Procurator Monetae
  • Caesar
  • *****
  • Posts: 6654
  • Art is an experimental science
    • An Art Historian's Numismatics Studies
Re: Roman prize urns
« Reply #1 on: June 04, 2006, 02:41:41 am »
I am sure that there are votive reliefs from gymnasia and the like, as well as the mosaic that Nigel mentioned (e-mail sent with attachment), besides the coins.  When I run across them, I'll send them to you (if I didn't just see them in provincial museums).  Pat L.

Offline Jochen

  • Tribunus Plebis Perpetuus
  • Procurator Monetae
  • Caesar
  • *****
  • Posts: 12278
  • Omnes vulnerant, ultima necat.
Re: Roman prize urns
« Reply #2 on: June 04, 2006, 08:45:32 am »
Hi!

These items are sometimes called price-urns sometimes price-crowns! Until now I haven't  understood the difference. Anyone who does know an explanation?

Best regards

Offline slokind

  • Tribuna Plebis Perpetua
  • Procurator Monetae
  • Caesar
  • *****
  • Posts: 6654
  • Art is an experimental science
    • An Art Historian's Numismatics Studies
Re: Roman prize urns
« Reply #3 on: June 04, 2006, 03:26:42 pm »
I'll add more if I find more.  Pat
http://ccat.sas.upenn.edu/bmcr/2003/2003-09-45.html
http://www.csun.edu/~hcfll004/sportbib.html
http://www.highbeam.com/library/docfree.asp?DOCID=1G1:135466460&ctrlInfo=Round20%3AMode20b%3ADocG%3AResult&ao=
Well, there's a lot of repetition.  But if you can find one book or article of his actually on Games, you doubtless will find the earlier bibliography, such as Robert, in it.  Besides, Nigel told me that Robert came out in time for RIC to get it right--which volume, I don't know.

Offline ecoli

  • Caesar
  • ****
  • Posts: 1122
  • Every coin is sacred, every coin is great.
Re: Roman prize urns
« Reply #4 on: June 04, 2006, 04:16:08 pm »
Thank you for all the effort.


Offline Jochen

  • Tribunus Plebis Perpetuus
  • Procurator Monetae
  • Caesar
  • *****
  • Posts: 12278
  • Omnes vulnerant, ultima necat.
Re: Roman prize urns
« Reply #5 on: June 04, 2006, 05:43:26 pm »
Thank you, Pat! And much to read!

Best regards

Offline curtislclay

  • Tribunus Plebis Perpetuus
  • Procurator Monetae
  • Caesar
  • *****
  • Posts: 11155
Re: Roman prize urns
« Reply #6 on: June 06, 2006, 02:10:31 pm »
    According to Regling, AMNG I.2, p. 635, note 3, the fundamental article, demonstating that these objects which had previousy been called prize urns are in fact prize crowns, is by Dressel in Zeitschrift für Numismatik 24, pp. 35 ff.

    I haven't read the article, but imagine that one of the main arguments must have been the types that show victorious athletes crowning themselves with precisely the objects in question!

    I believe that everyone who has read the article accepts Dressel's conclusion.  Those who persist with the erroneous "urns" are merely copying the error from earlier works and are unaware of Dressel's correction!
Curtis Clay

Offline slokind

  • Tribuna Plebis Perpetua
  • Procurator Monetae
  • Caesar
  • *****
  • Posts: 6654
  • Art is an experimental science
    • An Art Historian's Numismatics Studies
Re: Roman prize urns
« Reply #7 on: June 06, 2006, 03:24:32 pm »
Yes, it is the contemporary images of young athletes placing the oblate objects on their heads that I remember having seen somewhere, mosaics or votive reliefs from gymnasia.  What I'm curious about (and Nigel Kennell did not address that question) is how far back this shape goes.  Pat L.

Offline Dapsul

  • Caesar
  • ****
  • Posts: 505
Re: Roman prize urns
« Reply #8 on: June 07, 2006, 09:50:22 am »
Here is an exhausting article (in German) about those crowns: http://homepage.univie.ac.at/elisabeth.trinkl/forum/forum0300/14specht.htm

Offline ecoli

  • Caesar
  • ****
  • Posts: 1122
  • Every coin is sacred, every coin is great.
Re: Roman prize urns
« Reply #9 on: June 07, 2006, 12:33:42 pm »
wonderful!(at least pictures)

Alas, the one year of German I received in college is not enough  :'(

Offline slokind

  • Tribuna Plebis Perpetua
  • Procurator Monetae
  • Caesar
  • *****
  • Posts: 6654
  • Art is an experimental science
    • An Art Historian's Numismatics Studies
Re: Roman prize urns
« Reply #10 on: June 07, 2006, 03:47:41 pm »
One year of German should suffice to harvest from the footnotes and to read the titles of the pictures!  Also, with practice, it is enough to build on.  Pat L.

Offline Jochen

  • Tribunus Plebis Perpetuus
  • Procurator Monetae
  • Caesar
  • *****
  • Posts: 12278
  • Omnes vulnerant, ultima necat.
Re: Roman prize urns
« Reply #11 on: June 07, 2006, 03:57:03 pm »
Hi Dapsul!

Many thanks for that interesting link!

Best regards

Offline curtislclay

  • Tribunus Plebis Perpetuus
  • Procurator Monetae
  • Caesar
  • *****
  • Posts: 11155
Re: Roman prize urns
« Reply #12 on: June 07, 2006, 04:23:05 pm »
Dapsul,

      Thanks for the link to the interesting article by Edith Specht, whom I happen to know personally from my years in Vienna.

      She argues, quite convincingly I think, that the objects in question are not elaborate crowns as Dressel proposed, but baskets meant to hold prize objects for the victors, such as fine tunics.

      Among her points:  (1) Dressel said palm stems quite often protrude from the BOTTOM of the "crowns", therefore they were open at the bottom and can't be urns.  But Specht found only a single coin type showing this peculiarity, for Valerian at Thyateira, so it is exceptional rather than the rule.

      (2) Coin types, e.g. her Fig. 4, sometimes show both one of the "crown/urns" in question AND a normal wreath.  So the "crown/urn" must be different from the standard victor's crown/wreath!

      (3) The same point emerges from the mosaic depiction, her Fig. 6: the victor, crowned with a normal wreath and holding a palm, is holding one of the large "crown/urns" in his r. hand!

      Her conclusion: it's time to abandon Dressel's term, prize crowns, and to call the object in question either "brabeion", the Greek term for prizes at games, or simply "prize basket".

Curtis Clay

Offline wandigeaux (1940 - 2010)

  • Deceased Member
  • Caesar
  • ****
  • Posts: 873
Re: Roman prize urns
« Reply #13 on: June 07, 2006, 06:19:53 pm »
Specht makes a very convincing case, and I have always thought that these things looked like wickerwork.  In regard to point one, I have a AE31 for Gallienus from Thessalonica that shows on the very clearly on the reverse a purse, two "baskets" with palm leaves boldly protruding an equal amount top and bottom, and a jug.  Also, the agonistic coins of Neocaesaria frequently show a "basket" with a very spiky aspect (rather like the head of a  "Morgenstern" mace) that does not look to be woven (is that still a word? was it ever?)  Sorry, I have no way to image these things, but perhaps someone will be familiar with the type.  Regards, George Spradling
Hwaet!
"The pump don't work 'cuz the Vandals took the handle" - St. Augustine
GET THE HELL OFF MY LAWN!!
(1940 - 2010)

Offline curtislclay

  • Tribunus Plebis Perpetuus
  • Procurator Monetae
  • Caesar
  • *****
  • Posts: 11155
Re: Roman prize urns
« Reply #14 on: June 07, 2006, 08:26:01 pm »
     It seems that E. Specht may have been overhasty in rejecting Dressel's point about palm stems protruding from the bottom of the crown/urn.

     Touratsoglou's monograph on Thessalonica confirms George S.'s observation: palm stems protruding downwards are clearly visible on Touratsoglou's rev. dies R 10-11 of Valerian I, R 18 and 22-23 of Gallienus, and R 9-10 and 13 of Salonina.  This seems to be powerful evidence that the crown/urn LACKED a solid bottom at Thessalonica c. 255 AD!

     Moreover, if it was a basket containing prizes, why does the victor hold the crown/urn TIPPED SIDEWAYS, which would allow the putative prizes to fall out, in the mosaic, Specht's Fig. 6?  As Specht herself says, the "basket" here appears to be empty, and the victor is allowing it to revolve around his hand like a ferris wheel, but is that a likely way to treat a prize basket?

     Considering these points, I am inclined to think that the crown/urn did lack a bottom, and was itself a prize, not just a basket containing prizes as Specht suggests.  This would fit with the fact that the coins often label the crown/urn with the name of the games, e.g. PVThIA at Thessalonica.  However, as Specht shows, this crown/urn was certainly different from the normal wreaths which continued to be awarded to victors at games.

     George, couldn't you contrive to show us an image of your coin?  Touratsoglou, pl. 45, R 18, knew just one coin, ex Mabbott Collection and rather beat up, which I think might correspond to yours, or yours might be entirely new!
Curtis Clay

Offline wandigeaux (1940 - 2010)

  • Deceased Member
  • Caesar
  • ****
  • Posts: 873
Re: Roman prize urns
« Reply #15 on: June 08, 2006, 01:10:32 am »
My imaging capability went belly up two operating systems ago, otherwise everybody would be swamped with questions and examples from me.  I checked the dealer from whom I bought this, who does maintain images of his sold items, but not in this case.

Since you have access to Touratsoglou, perhaps if I describe this piece  in more detail, it would help.

Flan is 30-31mm, devices are 28mm within a beaded borderObv. radiate bust left, shield left shoulder, spear forward in right, seems to have no beard and looks rather like Valerian more than Gallienus to me.  The bust is probably armored, but the shield pretty much covers the body.  Inscription is  AVT._KAI.PO.LI.EG.GALLIH (hard to read any more, I think this is it).

Rev. As described before, Inscription QECCALONIKHMHTPKOLBNE

This is a very delightful coin in very pleasant condition (certainly nice vf), I wish I knew more about it, and I wish I could show it off!  Regards, George S
Hwaet!
"The pump don't work 'cuz the Vandals took the handle" - St. Augustine
GET THE HELL OFF MY LAWN!!
(1940 - 2010)

Offline whitetd49

  • Procurator Caesaris
  • Caesar
  • ****
  • Posts: 1540
  • FEL TEMP REPARATIO
    • Coins of the Severan Dynasty at Stobi
Re: Roman prize urns
« Reply #16 on: June 08, 2006, 08:29:05 am »
Hello!  Without a picture to confirm, it appears that your coin (matching legends and devices) is Touratsoglou 37 (First Emission), dies V2, R18 - zwei Preiskronen, je mit einem Palmzweig darin, im Feld oben und unten (?).  He cites a single specimen, AE 30.  At VF, yours is the better specimen!  The obverse die also occurs with the reverses:  Apollo with Kabir (R5), prize table (R7), and Nike with Kabir (R14) - one specimen each.
If you watch long enough, even a treefrog is interesting.  Umberto Eco
https://www.forumancientcoins.com/gallery/index.php?cat=10349

Offline Tiathena

  • Procurator Caesaris
  • Caesar
  • ****
  • Posts: 1131
  • Nullum magnum ingenium sine mixtura dementiae fuit
Re: Roman prize urns
« Reply #17 on: June 08, 2006, 10:09:01 am »
 
    I’ve read this thread several times now, and it just becomes more fascinating with each reading.
 
   This may present as a naïve or – worse, presumptuous question, but …
 
  I can’t help wondering whether the approach to this question ‘crown/urn’ based solely on visual representations may not in some measure thwart-itself through what seems to be the grand presupposition; namely, that it must be one or the other and that we have a sound appreciation of what each the one and the other in fact are.
 
  Could not there also be possibility that we in fact don’t really know exactly what it is in either variant – neither the type of crown nor the type of prize basket?
  If so, might we not concede as well then that for what we know, there may have been some type of object – perhaps possible in both forms, with and without a closed ‘bottom,’ which may not have even been an ‘award’ or ‘trophy’ of any kind for any victory won; perhaps – for example, an object of a type produced and provided by an adoring public and presented in advance to a ‘favored’ athlete.  Perhaps one intended and expected to be perishable and briefly-kept – a type of mock crown, or a mock container for prizes (which would make it simultaneously both an unofficial type of prize and prize container)..?  Perhaps, depictions of which whether in bass relief, mosaic, engraved dies or other, are meant to represent some heightened, joyous moment of anticipation, promise of good contest(s) and hopeful victory, etc… (?)
  I offer this merely as a concept, in no way putting it forward as a possible explanation.  I mean only suggest that perhaps there are other possibilities which seem unmentioned by Dressel or Specht, or at the least, which have not been mentioned here as yet.
  Surely though, there are thousands of such sorts of practices of which we know nothing, or which there may be some mention in some obscure, arcane source only waiting to be discovered and connected to some other dots?
 
  I’m really just asking and wondering aloud here, as I so often do.
  Thinking of course, that while fascinating and no doubt of inestimable value to press the interrogation regarding the crown –vs- urn dualism, might it not be quite as useful to remain open and not give ourselves to any notion that it must of necessity be one or the other?
 
  One of the first & most profound lessons I learned here at FORVM was taught to me by Curtis Clay – that, when contemplating the images, devices, iconography or other aspects of an ancient coin, sometimes the best and only thing we can really do is to remain Apollonian in the enthusiasm of our desire to know and understand what a certain thing ‘is’ or ‘means’ or ‘represents,’ and to be truthful with ourselves in admitting we simply don’t know – yet.

 
   Best,
   Tia
 
Facilius per partes in cognitionem totius adducimur.  ~ Seneca
My Gallery

Offline curtislclay

  • Tribunus Plebis Perpetuus
  • Procurator Monetae
  • Caesar
  • *****
  • Posts: 11155
Re: Roman prize urns
« Reply #18 on: June 08, 2006, 11:55:35 am »
George,

       As whitetd49 says, your coin seems to correspond to the Mabbott specimen catalogued by Touratsoglou, p. 309, no. 67. 

       On the illustrated rev. of that specimen the two crown/urns with palm stems sticking out both above and below are reasonably clear, but the purse and pitcher that you report are obscured: "uncertain objects above and below", as Touratsoglou states.

       Do you perhaps have a friend who could produce an image of the coin for you to post?

Tia,

      To state my opinion more clearly: WE DO NOT KNOW WHAT THE CROWN/URN WAS!

       It was definitely NOT a crown meant to be set on the victor's head, as Specht's points 2-3 above prove. 

       Nor, apparently, was it either an urn or a prize basket containing valuable objects, because of the palm stems protruding below it on some coins, and because of the way the victor holds it in the mosaic.

       We cannot doubt, however, that it was some sort of prize presented to victors at games.  Its appearance on coins and in mosaics suggests that it was woven together like a basket, as Specht and George S. suggest.

Yours,

Curtis Clay
Curtis Clay

Offline wandigeaux (1940 - 2010)

  • Deceased Member
  • Caesar
  • ****
  • Posts: 873
Re: Roman prize urns
« Reply #19 on: June 08, 2006, 07:03:41 pm »
Many thanks to whitetd49 and Curtis.  I will try to conjure up an image (there is a local photography club I might insinuate myself into), but it will take some time.

The care that the Thessalonica reverse takes in showing the protruding palm branches (rather bulky objects) would indicate this was not happenstance, but, by way of idle speculation, it is possible that these objects had a mesh or open work bottom though which a branch could protrude, and yet make it possible to put objects inside (in the mosaic of the victory lap illustrated by Specht, one of the companions of the brabeion toting victor has a robe over his shoulder and is carrying a jug; could these be prizes once contained in the object?).   To further pollute the stream of scholarship, the coin of Valerian from Aphrodisias illustrated by Specht seems to show an object protruding from the bottom of the brabeion on the left and through the prize table itself, showing that such tables in Aphrodisias in the 250's had NO TOPS!

Apologies, George S
Hwaet!
"The pump don't work 'cuz the Vandals took the handle" - St. Augustine
GET THE HELL OFF MY LAWN!!
(1940 - 2010)

Offline curtislclay

  • Tribunus Plebis Perpetuus
  • Procurator Monetae
  • Caesar
  • *****
  • Posts: 11155
Re: Roman prize urns
« Reply #20 on: June 08, 2006, 07:48:06 pm »
George,
     
        Good points, that the bottom might be a net, though which palm stems could protrude, and that the attendant in the mosaic might be carrying prizes from the basket.

        At Aprhodisias, since the two palms definitely extend below the table, they apparently have to be understood as standing BEHIND the table and the baskets, not in the baskets.  The lower extensions of the palms are much clearer in MacDonald's illustration of the same rev. die, Coinage of Aphrodisias, pl. XXV, R465.

        Other depictions of palms standing behind the table and basket at AphrodisiasMacDonald pl. XXII, R427-8; pl. XXIV, R452.
Curtis Clay

Offline wandigeaux (1940 - 2010)

  • Deceased Member
  • Caesar
  • ****
  • Posts: 873
Re: Roman prize urns
« Reply #21 on: June 08, 2006, 08:20:28 pm »
So much for my paper on antigravity in the ancient world.  GS
Hwaet!
"The pump don't work 'cuz the Vandals took the handle" - St. Augustine
GET THE HELL OFF MY LAWN!!
(1940 - 2010)

Offline wandigeaux (1940 - 2010)

  • Deceased Member
  • Caesar
  • ****
  • Posts: 873
Re: Roman prize urns
« Reply #22 on: June 12, 2007, 07:18:38 pm »
I think I finally might be able to post an image of this (a year late):
Hwaet!
"The pump don't work 'cuz the Vandals took the handle" - St. Augustine
GET THE HELL OFF MY LAWN!!
(1940 - 2010)

Offline Arminius

  • Procurator Caesaris
  • Caesar
  • ****
  • Posts: 2405
  • carpe diem
    • Arminius-Numismatics
Re: Roman prize urns
« Reply #23 on: January 24, 2009, 08:53:27 am »
To reactivate this fine thread - a Salonina from Thessalonica that fits the actual theory.

Æ22 (22 mm / 7,80 g),
Obv.: [KOP]NH CA-ΛΩNINA AYΓ , draped bust of Salonina right.
Rev.: ΘECCΑΛΟΝ - [ΙKH MHTPO K]O / ΠYΘIA (on the brabeion) , brabeion = Greek prize basket, meant to hold prize objects for the victors (also called "prize crown" "prize urn") with palm protruding an equal amount top and bottom. The coin labels the brabeion with the name of the games, ΠYΘIA at Thessalonica.
Moushmov 6888 .

(Maybe someone with access to Touratsoglou can provide more details about this one.)

rgds.

Offline wandigeaux (1940 - 2010)

  • Deceased Member
  • Caesar
  • ****
  • Posts: 873
Re: Roman prize urns
« Reply #24 on: February 05, 2009, 04:24:16 pm »
I find myself looking for this thread every once in a while, and it contains some nice links; perhaps it could be moved to the Classical Numismatics board?  Respectfully submitted, George Spradling
Hwaet!
"The pump don't work 'cuz the Vandals took the handle" - St. Augustine
GET THE HELL OFF MY LAWN!!
(1940 - 2010)

 

All coins are guaranteed for eternity