Pius Pietas RIC 1090 questions

[Diederik]

One of my special fields of collecting are the earliest coins of Antoninus Pius as Caesar and young emperor.
In RIC the bronze coins with a Pietas reverse are listed as sestertii and asses. Curtis Clay informed me that all Pietas 'medium bronzes' to coin a Cohen phrase, are indeed dupondii. This is proven by the colour of the metal and the somewhat above average weight in comparison to asses. The series of Antoninus as Caesar (under Hadrian) invariably show a bare head, which is sometimes draped, Pietas sacrificing over an altar, holding a box (round or square) of perfumes(?). Pietas is described standing left or right.
The two pictures  are of dupondii RIC 1090 Pius bareheaded to the right/Pietas standing right,
and RIC 1091 Pius bareheaded to the right (RIC gives 'draped') /Pietas standing left.
In my humble opinion Pietas is not standing left, but standing front (you don't see the lower arm, but only the box).
I would appreciate your ideas about this subject.


Frans

[curtislclay]

Frans,

Your first coin shows the typical "standing l." pose:  body frontal, weight on r. leg, head l.  Some authors describe this as "standing front, head l.", but most say simply "standing l.", or, for the same pose in mirror image, "standing r."

The SECOND coin is the exception: standing r., but body seen from side not from front.  We should find some term for distinguishing this pose from the normal "Standing r./l." of the first coin!

These Pietas dupondii of Antoninus as Caesar are all rare.  I recall your second coin coming up for sale recently; I passed because I already had one from the same dies, now in Oxford.  I'll check the dies of your first coin against my casts tonight.

[Diederik]

Thank you for passing, Curtis! I got it at a very reasonable price! (for a Piusfiliac, that is )
The only other example from that series with Pietas standing right is this sestertius, with the very same pose (the only one?)

Frans

[Diederik]

A recent aquisition of RIC 1083

Frans

[curtislclay]

Frans,

Your first dup. may show an interesting new die combination. 

Obv. die appears to be one I know in the later COS DES II issue, and then, muled, with PONT MAX TR POT COS, Pax standing.

Rev. die is the same as an Oxford coin from my coll., there coupled with a different obv. die, which itself passes from the COS issue to COS DES II.

There is nothing like plaster casts to verify die links!  I would like to take up your kind offer to send me plaster casts of your large and extremely interesting coll. of coins of Pius in 138-9!

I am therefore posting here in Forvm, under Coin Photography, instructions for making plaster casts!

Regards,

Curtis

[Diederik]

Dear Curtis,

interesting news you bring!
The mule story confirms your idea that the DES II addition was not thought necessary and that therefore COS and COS DES II coins could be contemporaneous, doesn' t it? Your Pax reverse would be 519?  (I don't own one)
I will try and be a zealous student of the ancient art of plastercasting - looks fun!
Moreover I am making an Excel document describing my Pius coins WITH pictures. As soon as that work is done, I'll send you a copy.

kind regards,


Frans

[curtislclay]

The Pax dupondius has rev. as RIC 519, PONT MAX TR POT COS, but obv. as Caesar, IMP T AELIVS CAESAR ANTONINVS.

I have seen two spec. of this dupondius, from the same die pair, one of which was formerly in my coll. ex the Lanz/Graz 1974 middle bronze sale, and is now in Oxford.  Strack p. 315 reports a third spec. in Bologna that I have not seen.

I think such mules were unintentional, so don't really confirm my theory.  In 138 the mint called Antoninus first COS followed by COS DES II as Caesar, then, as Augustus, first COS DES II, then COS, finally COS DES II again.  My theory is that the reversion to COS in the second issue as Augustus is just a matter of mint style, and doesn't mean that the emperor had dropped the title COS DES II and no longer intended to assume a second consulship in 139.  The accidental reuse of some old COS DES II rev. dies during this COS period (a couple such sestertii are known, and I recently acquired a dupondius of this sort too) doesn't really affect the argument.

The Pietas standing r. type of your dupondius and sestertius above always depicted her from the side.  This pose was required by the fact that her right hand had to be shown extended over the altar.

Your new RIC 1083 above is from a rev. die not represented among my casts, which however are very far from a complete collection of the accessible material.  I may know the obv. die in a different combination, but am not 100% sure.  Again a plaster cast, if you can sent one, will allow me to decide the question!