|
|
RPC 2277 Titus [Agrippa II]
|
Æ24, 10.77g
Caesarea Paneas mint, 85-86 AD
Obv: ΑΥΤΟΚ(Ρ) ΤΙΤΟϹ - ΚΑΙϹΑΡ ϹΕΒΑϹ; Head of Titus, laureate, r.
Rev: ΕΤΟ-ΚϚ ΒΑ / ΑΓΡΙ-ΠΠΑ; Nike standing, r., holding wreath and palm, in field, star (off flan)
RPC 2277 (7 spec.). Hendin 1284a.
Acquired from Zuzim, October 2021.
Agrippa II sporadically struck coinage for the Flavian dynasty throughout his long reign. The coins circulated within his kingdom (Northern Palestine) and were likely coined at Caesaera Panesa, although the mint is not certain (Hendin places it at Caesarea Maritima). Confusingly, Agrippa's mint(s) employed two different dating eras for his coinage - one starting in 56 and the second in 60 or 61. This middle bronze struck in the name of Titus is dated regnal year 26 by the second era and was produced posthumously(?) in either 85 or 86 AD under Domitian. RPC sums up the problem - 'The present chronology adopts the date of AD 60/1 for year 1 of the era used by Agrippa II, which solves a number of issues but gives the problem of having large number of issues of posthumous coinage for Vespasian and Titus.' There is no easy solution to the chronology puzzle and for now we have to assume this coin was struck posthumously under Domitian for Titus and lacking any reference to his divine status.
It must be noted that David Hendin does not adopt this chronology and instead dates the series from the first era, although he places the start in 49 rather than 56, based on the Kushnir-Stein chronology. If that is the case this coin would date to 74-75 AD.
|
|
![RPC 2277 Titus [Agrippa II]
Æ24, 10.77g
Caesarea Paneas mint, 85-86 AD
Obv: ΑΥΤΟΚ(Ρ) ΤΙΤΟϹ - ΚΑΙϹΑΡ ϹΕΒΑϹ; Head of Titus, laureate, r.
Rev: ΕΤΟ-ΚϚ ΒΑ / ΑΓΡΙ-ΠΠΑ; Nike standing, r., holding wreath and palm, in field, star (off flan)
RPC 2277 (7 spec.). Hendin 1284a.
Acquired from Zuzim, October 2021.
Agrippa II sporadically struck coinage for the Flavian dynasty throughout his long reign. The coins circulated within his kingdom (Northern Palestine) and were likely coined at Caesaera Panesa, although the mint is not certain (Hendin places it at Caesarea Maritima). Confusingly, Agrippa's mint(s) employed two different dating eras for his coinage - one starting in 56 and the second in 60 or 61. This middle bronze struck in the name of Titus is dated regnal year 26 by the second era and was produced posthumously(?) in either 85 or 86 AD under Domitian. RPC sums up the problem - 'The present chronology adopts the date of AD 60/1 for year 1 of the era used by Agrippa II, which solves a number of issues but gives the problem of having large number of issues of posthumous coinage for Vespasian and Titus.' There is no easy solution to the chronology puzzle and for now we have to assume this coin was struck posthumously under Domitian for Titus and lacking any reference to his divine status.
It must be noted that David Hendin does not adopt this chronology and instead dates the series from the first era, although he places the start in 49 rather than 56, based on the Kushnir-Stein chronology. If that is the case this coin would date to 74-75 AD.](albums/userpics/11162/RPC2277.jpg "RPC 2277 Titus [Agrippa II]
Æ24, 10.77g
Caesarea Paneas mint, 85-86 AD
Obv: ΑΥΤΟΚ(Ρ) ΤΙΤΟϹ - ΚΑΙϹΑΡ ϹΕΒΑϹ; Head of Titus, laureate, r.
Rev: ΕΤΟ-ΚϚ ΒΑ / ΑΓΡΙ-ΠΠΑ; Nike standing, r., holding wreath and palm, in field, star (off flan)
RPC 2277 (7 spec.). Hendin 1284a.
Acquired from Zuzim, October 2021.
Agrippa II sporadically struck coinage for the Flavian dynasty throughout his long reign. The coins circulated within his kingdom (Northern Palestine) and were likely coined at Caesaera Panesa, although the mint is not certain (Hendin places it at Caesarea Maritima). Confusingly, Agrippa's mint(s) employed two different dating eras for his coinage - one starting in 56 and the second in 60 or 61. This middle bronze struck in the name of Titus is dated regnal year 26 by the second era and was produced posthumously(?) in either 85 or 86 AD under Domitian. RPC sums up the problem - 'The present chronology adopts the date of AD 60/1 for year 1 of the era used by Agrippa II, which solves a number of issues but gives the problem of having large number of issues of posthumous coinage for Vespasian and Titus.' There is no easy solution to the chronology puzzle and for now we have to assume this coin was struck posthumously under Domitian for Titus and lacking any reference to his divine status.
It must be noted that David Hendin does not adopt this chronology and instead dates the series from the first era, although he places the start in 49 rather than 56, based on the Kushnir-Stein chronology. If that is the case this coin would date to 74-75 AD.")
