| Image search results - "bridge" |
THOMAS ROTHERHAM, ARCHBISHOP OF YORK
Thomas Rotherham, also known as Thomas (Scot) de Rotherham, was an English cleric and statesman. He served as bishop of several dioceses, most notably as Archbishop of York and, on two occasions as Lord Chancellor. Rotherham was educated at King's College, Cambridge, he graduated as a Bachelor of Divinity and became a Fellow of his college where he lectured on Grammar, Theology, and Philosophy. After his ordination as a priest, he became a prebendary of Lincoln in 1462 and then of Salisbury in 1465. He moved on to powerful positions in the Church, being appointed as Bishop of Rochester in 1468, Bishop of Lincoln in 1472, and then Archbishop of York in 1480, a position he held until his death in 1500.
In 1467, King Edward IV appointed Rotherham as Keeper of the Privy Seal. He was sent as ambassador to France in 1468 and as joint ambassador to Burgundy in 1471, and in 1475 was entrusted with the office of Lord Chancellor. When Edward IV died in April 1483, Rotherham was one of the celebrants of the funeral mass on 20th April 1483 and immediately after Edward's death he sided with the dowager queen, Elizabeth Woodville, in her attempt to deprive Richard, Duke of Gloucester of his role as Lord Protector of her son, the new King Edward V. When Elizabeth sought sanctuary after Richard had taken charge of the king, Rotherham released the Great Seal to her (though he later recovered it and handed it over to Thomas Bourchier, the Archbishop of Canterbury).
Rotherham's mishandling of the seal was perceived as indicative of questionable loyalty and led to his dismissal as Lord Chancellor. He was replaced by John Russell, who earlier had also been his successor as Bishop of Lincoln. On 13th June 1483, Rotherham was charged with being involved in a conspiracy between Lord Hastings and the Woodvilles against Richard and imprisoned in the Tower of London, but he was released a few weeks later, around the middle of July, after Richard's coronation as King Richard III. Rotherham was re-instated as Chancellor in 1485, however he was dismissed shortly afterwards by Henry VII and retired from public work.
Rotherham died of the plague in Cawood near York on 29th May 1500. His remains were transferred to a magnificent marble tomb in York Minster in 1506.*Alex
|
|
1st Century BC - 1st Century CE, IRON AGE BRITAIN, Tribe: Catuvellauni, AE Unit, Struck c.25BC – 10CE at Verlamion (St. Albans) under TasciovanusObverse: Bearded head facing right; VER anti-clockwise in front.
Reverse: Horse with sea horse tail facing left; pellet in ring, and trefoil motif above; VER below.
Diameter: 15.2mm | Weight: 1.97gms | Axis: 3h
SPINK: 243 | BMC 1714-21 | ABC 2658
RARE
CATUVELLAUNI
The Catuvellauni were an Iron Age Celtic tribe in Britain before the Roman conquest, attested by inscriptions into the 4th century. They are mentioned by Cassius Dio, who implies that they led the resistance against the conquest in 43CE. They appear as one of the “Civitates” of Roman Britain in Ptolemy's “Geography” in the 2nd century, occupying the town of Verlamion (Roman Verulamium, modern St.Albans) and the surrounding areas of Hertfordshire, Bedfordshire and southern Cambridgeshire. Their territory was bordered to the north by the Iceni and Corieltauvi, to the east by the Trinovantes, to the west by the Dobunni and to the south by the Atrebates, Regni and Cantii.
TASCIOVANUS
Tasciovanus appears to have become king of the Catuvellauni around 20 BC, before the Roman conquest of Britain. Ruling from Verlamion (St.Albans), for a brief period around 15–10 BC, he issued coins from Camulodunum (Colchester), apparently supplanting Addedomarus of the Trinovantes, but it appears that following the arrival of Augustus in Gaul he withdrew and again issued his coins from Verlamion.
Tasciovanus was the first Catuvellaunian king to issue inscribed coins, bearing “VER”, mint marks for Verlamion. He was also the first to renew hostilities towards the Trinovantes, flouting the long-standing agreement between Caesar and his own grandfather Cassivellaunus.
Tasciovanus died around AD 9 and was succeeded by his son Cunobelinus, who ruled primarily from Camulodunum.
CLICK ON MAP BELOW TO ENLARGE IT
*Alex
|
|
Crispus RIC VII 69 Thessalonica, 319 CEObverse: IVL CRIS-PVS NOB C, laureate and cuirassed bust right.
Reverse: VIRT EXERC, Sol raising right hand and holding globe in left, standing in center of plan of roman camp.
TS dot E dot in ex. Thessalonica mint
19.53mm., 2.2g. rare
The true meaning of this reverse type has never been fully deciphered. The latest theory being the X shaped pattern represents Constantine's vision before the battle of Milvainbridge. This does not seem likely since the type is known on coins of Licinius a pagan and Constantine's enemy
sold 4-2018
NORMAN K
|
|
Henry VII (1485- 1509 A.D.)AR Half Groat
O: ҺЄnRIC’ × VII’ × DI’ × GRΛ × RЄX × ΛGL’, crowned bust right.
R: POSVI × DЄV’ × Λ DIVTO Є’ × mЄV’ ×, coat-of-arms over long cross fourchée; two keys below.
York Mint; under Archbishop Christopher Bainbridge Struck 1504-1509. IM: Rose
19mm
1.46g
SCBI 23 (Ashmolean), 964; North 1751/1; SCBC 2262Mat
|
|
(0306) MAXENTIUS (USURPER)306 - 312 AD
struck 309 AD
AE FOLLIS 24.5 mm 5.78 g
O: IMP C MAXENTIVS PF AVG, LAUR BUST R
R: AETERNITAS AVG N, DIOSCURI STANDING FACING EACH OTHER, WITH STAR ABOVE EACH HEAD, HOLDING HORSES BY BRIDLES, SHE-WOLF AND TWINS BELOW
MOSTB IN EXE
(usurper, killed by Constantine I at Battle of the Milvian Bridge)
OSTIA
RIC (VI) 16
(ex G.Clark) laney
|
|
(0306) MAXENTIUS (USURPER)306 - 312 AD
struck 309 AD
AE FOLLIS 24.5 mm 5.78 g
O: IMP C MAXENTIVS PF AVG, LAUR BUST R
R: AETERNITAS AVG N, DIOSCURI STANDING FACING EACH OTHER, WITH STAR ABOVE EACH HEAD, HOLDING HORSES BY BRIDLES, SHE-WOLF AND TWINS BELOW
MOSTB IN EXE
(usurper, killed by Constantine I at Battle of the Milvian Bridge)
OSTIA
RIC (VI) 16laney
|
|
(0306) MAXENTIUS (USURPER)/DIOSCURI AND SHE-WOLF WITH TWINSAE FOLLIS 24.5 mm 5.78 g
306 - 12 AD; STRUCK 309 AD
O: IMP C MAXENTIVS PF AVG
LAUR BUST R
R: AETERNITAS AVG N
DIOSCURI STANDING FACING EACH OTHER, WITH STAR ABOVE EACH HEAD, HOLDING HORSES BY BRIDLES, SHE-WOLF AND TWINS BELOW
MOSTB IN EXE
(usurper, killed by Constantine I at Battle of the Milvian Bridge)
OSTIA
RIC (VI) 16
(ex G.Clark)laney
|
|
0001 Sasanian Empire Khusro II -- Year 2 -- BishapurObv: Pahlavi script legend: to the l. on two lines reading down leftward and outward is GDH/'pzwt (xwarrah abzūd) and to the r. on one line reading down is hwslwd (Husraw) = Khusro has increased the royal glory; frontal bust facing r. of bearded Khusro II with a hair globe drawn to the back of the neck, crown with three merlons and attached to the top of the crown cap are wings (group of pellets within the base) with an attached crescent and star, double pearl diadem with three ribbons behind, earring made up of three dots, neckline edged with a row of pearls, both shoulders decorated with a crescent and star, double row of pearls from shoulders to breast, two dots on the breast, star in upper l. field, star and crescent in upper r. field, two dotted rims with a star on a crescent at 3h, 6h, and 9h.
Rev: Pahlavi script legend: to the l. reading down is year tlyn of Khusro II's reign and to the r. reading down is the mint mark BYSh = year 2 of Khusro II's reign, Bishapur; fire altar with a base consisting of two slabs and a shaft with two ribbons pointing upwards to the r. and l. of the shaft with four altar slabs on top and flames consisting of four tiers rendered as four then three then two then one upward stroke, star to the l. and crescent to the r. of the top two tiers, to the l. and r. of the altar are two frontal facing attendants each holding a sword pointing downwards with the r. hand over the l. hand and wearing a rounded cap, three dotted rims with a star on a crescent at 3h, 6h, 9h, and 12h.
Denomination: silver drachm; Mint: Bishapur; Date: year 2, 591 - 592 AD; Weight: 4.12g; Diameter: 29mm; Die axis: 90º; References, for example: Göbl II/2; SNS Iran 580 and 581 (same mint and regnal year).
Regnal year 2 saw major changes to the coinage of Khusro II. First, the defeat of Wahrām Chōbēn (Wahrām VI) brought to an end the interruption of Khusro II's xwarrah and so wings representing Vərəθraγna/Verethragna (Avestan), Wahrām (Middle Persian), Bahrām (Persian), i.e. the god or personification of victory, were added to Khusro II's crown. Second, for the first time in Sasanian coinage the ideogram GDH (xwarrah) is added to the legend (obverse). Third, on the reverse six pointed stars are added to the crescent moons outside of the three dotted rims at 3h, 6h, 9h, and 12h. Six pointed stars can be considered representations of the sun (see Gariboldi 2010 pp. 36ff and the sources referenced in footnote 71, p. 37).
See Daryaee (1997) for an interesting study of the religious and political iconography on the coinage of Khusro II*. He argues that Khusro II implemented iconographic changes in regnal year 2 (591 - 592 AD) as a direct result of suppressing the rebellion (with the assistance of the Byzantine Emperor Maurice) of the brilliant general Wahrām Chōbēn (Wahrām VI) in 591 AD. Further iconographic changes were carried out in regnal year 11 (600 - 601 AD) in response to the final defeat in 600 AD of the 10 year rule/rebellion of Wistahm**, his uncle (as the brother-in-law of his father Ohrmazd IV) and former staunch supporter.
*The study cannot be intended to be complete. For example, there is no discussion of the legend 'pd that appeared, beginning in the 12th regnal year but not present for all subsequent years or at all mints, in the second quadrant outside of the rims on the obverse. Gariboldi 2010 (p.64) translates the legend as "good", "excellent", "wonderful" while Göbl 1983 (p. 331) translates it as "praise".
**There is some debate about when Wistahm was finally eliminated. Daryaee, following Paruck 1924, relies on (purported?) numismatic evidence that the last coin minted in his name was for year 10. Therefore Daryaee states that 600 AD was the year of elimination (Daryaee 1997, p. 53 n. 38. Also see Daryaee 2009, p. 33 n. 166 for a slightly more tepid assertion). Frye 1984 implies a 10 year rule for Wistahm, stating that "it was not until 601 that the rule of Chosroes [Khusro] was restored over all of the empire..." (p. 336). Göbl SN, however, states that 10 years of reign are said to be represented, although personally he had only seen coins of years 2 through 7 (p. 53). Thus Wistahm's years in SN's Table XI are listed as "591/2 - 597?" Malek 1993 also lists Wistahm's years as 591/2 - 97 (p. 237).
Provenance: Ex Stephen Album Rare Coins Auction 36, January 25, 2020
Photo Credit: Stephen Album Rare Coins
Sources
Daryaee, Touraj. 'The Use of Religio-Political Propaganda on Coins of Xusrō II." The Journal of the American Numismatics (1989-), vol. 9 (1997): 41-53.
Daryaee, Touraj. Sasanian Persia: The Rise And Fall Of An Empire. London: I. B. Tauris, 2009.
Frye, Richard. The History of Ancient Iran. Munich: C.H. Beck’sche Verlagsbuchhandlung, 1984.
Gariboldi, Andrea. Sasanian Coinage and History: The Civic Numismatic Collection of Milan. Costa Mesa: Mazda Publishers, 2010.
Göbl, Robert. Sasanian Numismatics. Braunschweig: Klinkhardt and Biermann, 1971.
Göbl 1983: Yarshater, Ehsan, ed. The Cambridge History of Iran, vol. 3 (1), The Seleucid, Parthian and Sasanian Periods. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1983: 322 - 336.
Malek, Hodge. "A Survey of Research on Sasanian Numismatics." The Numismatic Chronicle (1966-), vol. 153 (1993): 227 - 269.
Paruck, F.D.J. Sasanian Coins. Bombay: 1924.
SNS Iran: Akbarzadeh, Daryoosh and Nikolaus Schindel. Sylloge Nummorum Sasanidarum Iran A Late Sasanian Hoard from Orumiyeh. Wien: Österreichischen Akademie Der Wissenschaften, 2017.
Tracy Aiello
|
|
0002 Sasanian Empire Khusro II -- Year 5 -- CtesiphonObv: Pahlavi script legend: to the l. on two lines reading down leftward and outward is GDH/'pzwt (xwarrah abzūd) and to the r. on one line reading down is hwslwd (Husraw) = Khusro has increased the royal glory; frontal bust facing r. of bearded Khusro II with a hair globe drawn to the back of the neck, crown with three merlons and attached to the top of the crown cap are wings (lines within the base, wings open) with an attached crescent and star, double pearl diadem with three ribbons behind, earring made up of three dots, neckline edged with a row of pearls, both shoulders decorated with a crescent and star, double row of pearls from shoulders to breast, two dots on the breast, star in upper l. field, star and crescent in upper r. field, two dotted rims with a star on a crescent at 3h, 6h, and 9h.
Rev: Pahlavi script legend: to the l. reading down is year ḥwmŝ‵ of Khusro II's reign and to the r. reading down is the mint mark WYHC = year 5 of Khusro II's reign, Ctesiphon; fire altar with a base consisting of two slabs and a shaft with two ribbons pointing upwards to the r. and l. of the shaft with four altar slabs on top and flames consisting of four tiers rendered as four then three then two then one upward stroke, star to the l. and crescent to the r. of the top two tiers, to the l. and r. of the altar are two frontal facing attendants each holding a sword pointing downwards with the r. hand over the l. hand and wearing a rounded cap, three dotted rims with a star on a crescent at 3h, 6h, 9h, and 12h.
Denomination: silver drachm; Mint: Ctesiphon;1 Date: year 5, 594 - 595 AD; Weight: 4.10g; Diameter: 31.34mm; Die axis: 90º; References, for example: Göbl II/2.
Notes:
1See Schindel (2005) pp. 296 - 299 for an argument identifying the Pahlavi mint signature WYHC with Ctesipon.
See Daryaee (1997) for an interesting study of the religious and political iconography on the coinage of Khusro II*. He argues that Khusro II implemented iconographic changes in regnal year 2 (591 - 592 AD) as a direct result of suppressing the rebellion (with the assistance of the Byzantine Emperor Maurice) of the brilliant general Wahrām Chōbēn (Wahrām VI) in 591 AD. Further iconographic changes were carried out in regnal year 11 (600 - 601 AD) in response to the final defeat in 600 AD of the 10 year rule/rebellion of Wistahm**, his uncle (as the brother-in-law of his father Ohrmazd IV) and former staunch supporter.
*The study cannot be intended to be complete. For example, there is no discussion of the legend 'pd that appeared, beginning in the 12th regnal year but not present for all subsequent years or at all mints, in the second quadrant outside of the rims on the obverse. Gariboldi 2010 (p.64) translates the legend as "good", "excellent", "wonderful' while Göbl 1983 (p. 331) translates it as "praise".
**There is some debate about when Wistahm was finally eliminated. Daryaee, following Paruck 1924, relies on (purported?) numismatic evidence that the last coin minted in his name was for year 10. Therefore Daryaee states that 600 AD was the year of elimination (Daryaee 1997, p. 53 n. 38. Also see Daryaee 2009, p. 33 n. 166 for a slightly more tepid assertion). Frye 1984 implies a 10 year rule for Wistahm, stating that "it was not until 601 that the rule of Chosroes [Khusro] was restored over all of the empire..." (p. 336). Göbl SN, however, states that 10 years of reign are said to be represented, although personally he had only seen coins of years 2 through 7 (p. 53). Thus Wistahm's years in SN's Table XI are listed as "591/2 - 597?" Malek 1993 also lists Wistahm's years as 591/2 - 97 (p. 237).
Provenance: Ex Marc R. Breitsprecher, Classical Numismatist October 2, 2018.
Photo Credit: Marc R. Breitsprecher, Classical Numismatist
Sources
Daryaee, Touraj. "The Use of Religio-Political Propaganda on Coins of Xusrō II." The Journal of the American Numismatics (1989-), vol. 9 (1997): 41-53.
Daryaee, Touraj. Sasanian Persia: The Rise And Fall Of An Empire. London: I. B. Tauris, 2009.
Frye, Richard. The History of Ancient Iran. Munich: C.H. Beck'sche Verlagsbuchhandlung, 1984.
Gariboldi, Andrea. Sasanian Coinage and History: The Civic Numismatic Collection of Milan. Costa Mesa: Mazda Publishers, 2010.
Göbl, Robert. Sasanian Numismatics. Braunschweig: Klinkhardt and Biermann, 1971.
Göbl 1983: Yarshater, Ehsan, ed. The Cambridge History of Iran, vol. 3 (1), The Seleucid, Parthian and Sasanian Periods. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1983: 322 - 336.
Malek, Hodge. "A Survey of Research on Sasanian Numismatics." The Numismatic Chronicle (1966-), vol. 153 (1993): 227 - 269.
Paruck, F.D.J. Sasanian Coins. Bombay: 1924.
Schindel, Nickolaus. "Sasanian Mint Abbreviations: The Evidence of Style." The Numismatic Chronicle (1966-), vol. 165 (2005): 287 - 299.Tracy Aiello
|
|
0003 Sasanian Empire Khusro II -- Year 35 -- CtesiphonObv: Pahlavi script legend: to the l. on two lines reading down leftward and outward (with the first word extending through the inner rim) is GDH/'pzwt (xwarrah abzūd) and to the r. on one line reading down is hwslwd (Husraw) = Khusro has increased the royal glory; frontal bust facing r. of bearded Khusro II with a hair globe drawn to the back of the neck, crown with three merlons and attached to the top of the crown cap are wings (lines within the base, wings open) with an attached crescent and star, double pearl diadem with three ribbons behind, earring made up of three dots, neckline edged with a row of pearls, both shoulders decorated with a crescent and star, double row of pearls from shoulders to breast, two dots on the breast, star in upper l. field and star and crescent in upper r. field both extending through the inner rim, two dotted rims with a star on a crescent at 3h, 6h, and 9h.
Rev: Pahlavi script legend: to the l. reading down is year pncsyh of Khusro II's reign and to the r. reading down is the mint mark WYHC = year 35 of Khusro II's reign, Ctesiphon; fire altar with a base consisting of two slabs and a shaft with two ribbons pointing upwards to the r. and l. of the shaft with four altar slabs on top and flames consisting of four tiers rendered as four then three then two then one upward stroke, star to the l. and crescent to the r. of the top two tiers, to the l. and r. of the altar are two frontal facing attendants each holding a sword pointing downwards with the r. hand over the l. hand and wearing a crescent cap, three dotted rims with a star on a crescent at 3h, 6h, 9h, and 12h.
Denomination: silver drachm; Mint: Ctesiphon;1 Date: year 35, 624 - 625 AD; Weight: 4.11g; Diameter: 32.6mm; Die axis: 90º; References, for example: Göbl II/3.
Notes:
1See Schindel (2005) pp. 296 - 299 for an argument identifying the Pahlavi mint signature WYHC with Ctesipon.
See Daryaee (1997) for an interesting study of the religious and political iconography on the coinage of Khusro II*. He argues that Khusro II implemented iconographic changes in regnal year 2 (591 - 592 AD) as a direct result of suppressing the rebellion (with the assistance of the Byzantine Emperor Maurice) of the brilliant general Wahrām Chōbēn (Wahrām VI) in 591 AD. Further iconographic changes were carried out in regnal year 11 (600 - 601 AD) in response to the final defeat in 600 AD of the 10 year rule/rebellion of Wistahm**, his uncle (as the brother-in-law of his father Ohrmazd IV) and former staunch supporter.
*The study cannot be intended to be complete. For example, there is no discussion of the legend 'pd that appeared, beginning in the 12th regnal year but not present for all subsequent years or at all mints, in the second quadrant outside of the rims on the obverse. Gariboldi 2010 (p.64) translates the legend as "good", "excellent", "wonderful" while Göbl 1983 (p. 331) translates it as "praise".
**There is some debate about when Wistahm was finally eliminated. Daryaee, following Paruck 1924, relies on (purported?) numismatic evidence that the last coin minted in his name was for year 10. Therefore Daryaee states that 600 AD was the year of elimination (Daryaee 1997, p. 53 n. 38. Also see Daryaee 2009, p. 33 n. 166 for a slightly more tepid assertion). Frye 1984 implies a 10 year rule for Wistahm, stating that "it was not until 601 that the rule of Chosroes [Khusro] was restored over all of the empire..." (p. 336). Göbl SN, however, states that 10 years of reign are said to be represented, although personally he had only seen coins of years 2 through 7 (p. 53). Thus Wistahm's years in SN's Table XI are listed as "591/2 - 597?" Malek 1993 also lists Wistahm's years as 591/2 - 97 (p. 237).
Provenance: Ex Forum Ancient Coins June 8, 2018, from the Jyrki Muona Collection; Ex CNG e-auction 59 (26 Feb 2003), lot 77; Ex CNG e-auction 57 (4 Apr 2001), lot 47.
Photo Credit: Forum Ancient Coins
Sources
Daryaee, Touraj. "The Use of Religio-Political Propaganda on Coins of Xusrō II." The Journal of the American Numismatics (1989-), vol. 9 (1997): 41-53.
Daryaee, Touraj. Sasanian Persia: The Rise And Fall Of An Empire. London: I. B. Tauris, 2009.
Frye, Richard. The History of Ancient Iran. Munich: C.H. Beck'sche Verlagsbuchhandlung, 1984.
Gariboldi, Andrea. Sasanian Coinage and History: The Civic Numismatic Collection of Milan. Costa Mesa: Mazda Publishers, 2010.
Göbl, Robert. Sasanian Numismatics. Braunschweig: Klinkhardt and Biermann, 1971.
Göbl 1983: Yarshater, Ehsan, ed. The Cambridge History of Iran, vol. 3 (1), The Seleucid, Parthian and Sasanian Periods. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1983: 322 - 336.
Malek, Hodge. "A Survey of Research on Sasanian Numismatics." The Numismatic Chronicle (1966-), vol. 153 (1993): 227 - 269.
Paruck, F.D.J. Sasanian Coins. Bombay: 1924.
Schindel, Nickolaus. "Sasanian Mint Abbreviations: The Evidence of Style." The Numismatic Chronicle (1966-), vol. 165 (2005): 287 - 299.Tracy Aiello
|
|
016 Olav HaraldssonPenny of Olav III "Kyrre" Haraldsson, king of Norway 1067-1093
Mint: Unknown
Schive III:23
NM.13
Olav "Kyrre" or "the peaceful", was the son of Harald Hardrade, the famous Viking chieftan who died in England at the Battle of Stamford Bridge in 1066. Olav's reign was a relatively peaceful one for this turbulent age, giving him his nickname.
Ex- Oslo Myntgalleri auction 36 (lot 309), CJ SimensenSt. George's Collection
|
|
058. Maxentius, 306-312. AE Follis.Obv. Laureate head right IMP C MAXENTIVS PF AVG
Rev. Roma seated left holding sceptre and globe, within hexastyle temple with wreath within pediment CONSEERV VRB SVAE, RES below.
Rome Mint, 310-11. 24.5mm, 5.98g.
RIC 258. LordBest
|
|
081a. MaxentiusSon of Maximianus. Along with Constantine, passed over for rank of Caesar when Diocletian and Maximianus abdicated. Proclaimed emperor by soldiers in Rome in 306. Galerius refused to recognize this. Severus marched on Rome, but was defeated by Maxentius. Maxentius later defeated Galerius. Lost battle of Milvian Bridge to Constantine in 312, and drowned while trying to escape.lawrence c
|
|
|
101. NervaNerva
Nerva is credited with beginning the practice of adopting his heir rather than selecting a blood relative. Nerva's reign was more concerned with the continuation of an existing political system than with the birth of a new age. Indeed, his economic policies, his relationship with the senate, and the men whom he chose to govern and to offer him advice all show signs of Flavian influence. In many respects, Nerva was the right man at the right time. His immediate accession following Domitian's murder prevented anarchy and civil war, while his age, poor health and moderate views were perfect attributes for a government that offered a bridge between Domitian's stormy reign and the emperorships of the stable rulers to follow.
Denarius. IMP NERVA CAES AVG P M TR POT II, laureate head right / COS III PATER PATRAE, ladle, sprinkler, jug & lituus. RSC 51. ecoli
|
|
1066 - 1087, William I (the Conqueror), AR Penny, Struck 1083 - 1086 at Wallingford, EnglandObverse: + PILLELM REX. Crowned, moustached, facing bust of William I, his right arm across chest holding short sceptre topped with cross over his left shoulder.
Reverse: + IEGLPINE ON PALI. ( Æthelwine on Wallingford) Large cross pattée within circle, each angle within cross holding an annulet, each annulet containing a letter which spells out the word PAXS, all within outer circle.
PAXS type (crown 1)
Diameter: 20mm | Weight: 1.1gms | Die Axis: 6h
Spink: 1257 | North 848 | BMC 8
Dark, almost black, tone
Scarce
This coin, part of William's last coinage issue, was struck during the period that his famous Domesday book was being compiled. The issue may have continued to be struck for a short time into the reign of William I's successor, his son William Rufus, who reigned as William II.
William I, known as 'the Conqueror', was born at Falaise in 1027, son of Robert, Duke of Normandy and a girl called Herleve. Following the death, in 1066, of Edward the Confessor, who was childless, the English throne was seized by the powerful Earl Harold Godwinson who claimed, without corroboration, that Edward had named him as his successor on his deathbed. William, Duke of Normandy, a distant relative of Edward, also claimed that Edward had named him as successor to the throne during a period when Harold was in exile.
William invaded England, landing at Pevensey, meeting Harold who, after defeating an invading Norwegian force in the north, had had to make a forced march south from Stamford Bridge. Harold was defeated at the battle of Hastings on 14th October 1066. This battle is commemorated by the famous Bayeux Tapestry.
After his victory at Hastings William marched to London and was crowned in Westminster Abbey on Christmas Day 1066, according to the ancient English rite. Aldred, archbishop of York performed the ceremony.
William moved quickly to exert control over England, he introduced measures which included the imposition of the Forest Law, setting aside large tracts of land for hunting by the aristocracy.
William constructed numerous castles, including the Tower of London, to maintain order but, despite this, the years following his conquest saw a number of rebellions, all of which were brutally repressed. The social impact of these reprisals was huge because by the time of the Domesday survey in 1085-6 the vast majority of land not directly owned by William was controlled by Norman tenants.
After 1072 William spent the majority of his time in France, where he died. William I's death was the result of him being flung from his horse during fighting at the seige of Mantes. He died of his injuries, around a week later, at St. Gervais priory outside Rouen on the 8th or the 9th of September, 1087. William was buried at St Stephen's church in Caen, though even his funeral was not without its problems because, when his body was being interred, the tomb was found to be too small and William's embalmed remains were damaged when attendants were forced to squeeze them into the space.*Alex
|
|
1093Carausius 287-93AD
Antoninianus
Obv “IMP CARAVSIVS PF AVG”
Radiate, draped and cuirassed bust right
Rev “SALVS AVG”
Salus standing left feeding serpent rising from altar
London mint?
-/-//BRI
RIC 1093
The BRI coins are rare, Shiel (1977) listed only seven in total of both reverse types. This coin is a reverse die duplicate of Shiel 6, a specimen from the F Baldwin collection, the whereabouts are unknown today and was not in the 1969 sale of his collection, a cast of which is in the Fitzwilliam Museum, Cambridge. It appears to be a new obverse die for the series.
More information on the "BRI" coins of Carausius can be found here.mauseus
|
|
1272 - 1307, EDWARD I, AR Farthing, Struck 1279 - 1299 at London, EnglandObverse: + EDWARDVS REX. Crowned bust of Edward I facing within circle of pellets. Cross pattée in legend.
Reverse: LONDONIENSIS. Long cross dividing legend into quarters, trefoil in each quarter of inner circle.
Undated Farthing, Class 3c
Diameter: 13mm | Weight: 0.42gms | Die Axis: 2h
SPINK: 1445
This is an early issue farthing with the reverse legend “LONDONIENSIS” which was later replaced by the ubiquitous legend “CIVITAS LONDON” for the London mint. Edward I began a major recoinage in 1279 which consisted not only of pennies, but new round half-pennies and farthings as well, and also introduced a new denomination, the fourpenny piece called the "Groat".
Edward I was King of England from 1272 - 1307. He was the eldest surviving son of Henry III and Eleanor of Provence. The contests between his father and the barons led by Simon de Montfort called Edward early into active life when he restored the royal authority within months by defeating and killing de Montfort at the battle of Evesham in 1265. He then proceeded to Palestine, where no conquest of any importance was achieved. After further campaigns in Italy and France he returned to England on his father's death and was crowned at Westminster Abbey in 1274.
Edward was popular because he identified himself with the growing tide of nationalism sweeping the country, displayed later in his persecution and banishment of the Jews which was the culmination of many years of anti-semitism in England.
Edward now turned his attention to the west and so, following a revolt in the Principality of Wales against English influence, Edward commenced a war which ended in the annexation of the Principality to the English Crown in 1283. He secured his conquest by building nine castles to watch over it and created his eldest son, Edward the Prince of Wales in 1301.
Edward's great ambition, however, was to gain possession of Scotland, but the death of Margaret, the Maid of Norway, who was to have been married to Edward's son, for a time frustrated the king's designs. However the sudden death of the King of Scotland, Alexander III, and the contested succession soon gave him the opportunity to intervene. He was invited by the Scots to arbitrate and choose between the thirteen competitors for the Scottish throne. Edward's choice, John Balliol, who he conceived as his puppet, was persuaded to do homage for his crown to Edward at Newcastle but was then forced to throw off Edward's overlordship by the indignation of the Scottish people. An alliance between the French and the Scots now followed, and Edward, then at war with the French king over possession of Gascony, was compelled to march his army north. Edward invaded Scotland in 1296 and devastated the country, which earned him the sobriquet 'Hammer of the Scots'. It was at this time that the symbolic Stone of Destiny was removed from Scone. Edward's influence had tainted Balliol's reign and the Scottish nobility deposed him and appointed a council of twelve to rule instead. Balliol abdicated and was eventually sent to France where he retired into obscurity, taking no more part in politics. Scotland was then left without a monarch until the accession of Robert the Bruce in 1306.
Meanwhile Edward assumed the administration of the country. However the following summer a new opposition to Edward took place under William Wallace whose successes, notably at Stirling Bridge, forced Edward to return to Scotland with an army of 100,000 men. Although he defeated Wallace's army at Falkirk, and Wallace himself was betrayed, Edward's unjust and barbaric execution of him as a traitor in London made Wallace a national hero in Scotland, and resistance to England became paramount among the people. All Edward's efforts to reduce the country to obedience were unravelling, and after the crowning of Robert Bruce, Earl of Carrick, as Robert I of Scotland in 1306 an enraged Edward assembled another army and marched yet again against the Scots. However, Edward only reached Burgh-on-Sands, a village near Carlisle, when he died. His body was taken back to London and he was buried at Westminster Abbey.
Edward I was married twice: to Eleanor of Castile, by whom he had sixteen children, and Margaret of France by whom he had three. Twelve memorials to his first wife stood between Nottingham and London to mark the journey taken by her funeral cortege. Three of those memorials, known as "Eleanor Crosses", can still be seen today.*Alex
|
|
1272 - 1307, EDWARD I, AR Penny, Struck 1305 - 1306 at London, EnglandObverse: + EDWAR ANGL DNS HYB. Crowned bust of Edward I facing within circle of pellets. Cross pattée in legend.
Reverse: CIVITAS LONDON. Long cross dividing legend into quarters, trefoil in each quarter of inner circle.
Undated Penny, type 10cf1
Diameter: 18.5mm | Weight: 1.2gms | Die Axis: 9h
SPINK: 1410
Edward I began a major recoinage in 1279 which consisted not only of pennies and new round half-pennies and farthings, but also introduced a new denomination, a fourpenny piece called the "Groat".
Edward I was King of England from 1272 - 1307. He was the eldest surviving son of Henry III and Eleanor of Provence. The contests between his father and the barons led by Simon de Montfort called Edward early into active life when he restored the royal authority within months by defeating and killing de Montfort at the battle of Evesham in 1265. He then proceeded to Palestine, where no conquest of any importance was achieved. After further campaigns in Italy and France he returned to England on his father's death and was crowned at Westminster Abbey in 1274.
Edward was popular because he identified himself with the growing tide of nationalism sweeping the country, displayed later in his persecution and banishment of the Jews which was the culmination of many years of anti-semitism in England.
Edward now turned his attention to the west and so, following a revolt in the Principality of Wales against English influence, Edward commenced a war which ended in the annexation of the Principality to the English Crown in 1283. He secured his conquest by building nine castles to watch over it and created his eldest son, Edward the Prince of Wales in 1301.
Edward's great ambition, however, was to gain possession of Scotland, but the death of Margaret, the Maid of Norway, who was to have been married to Edward's son, for a time frustrated the king's designs. However the sudden death of the King of Scotland, Alexander III, and the contested succession soon gave him the opportunity to intervene. He was invited by the Scots to arbitrate and choose between the thirteen competitors for the Scottish throne. Edward's choice, John Balliol, who he conceived as his puppet, was persuaded to do homage for his crown to Edward at Newcastle but was then forced to throw off Edward's overlordship by the indignation of the Scottish people. An alliance between the French and the Scots now followed, and Edward, then at war with the French king over possession of Gascony, was compelled to march his army north. Edward invaded Scotland in 1296 and devastated the country, which earned him the sobriquet 'Hammer of the Scots'. It was at this time that the symbolic Stone of Destiny was removed from Scone. Edward's influence had tainted Balliol's reign and the Scottish nobility deposed him and appointed a council of twelve to rule instead. Balliol abdicated and was eventually sent to France where he retired into obscurity, taking no more part in politics. Scotland was then left without a monarch until the accession of Robert the Bruce in 1306.
Meanwhile Edward assumed the administration of the country. However the following summer a new opposition to Edward took place under William Wallace whose successes, notably at Stirling Bridge, forced Edward to return to Scotland with an army of 100,000 men. Although he defeated Wallace's army at Falkirk, and Wallace himself was betrayed, Edward's unjust and barbaric execution of him as a traitor in London made Wallace a national hero in Scotland, and resistance to England became paramount among the people. All Edward's efforts to reduce the country to obedience were unravelling, and after the crowning of Robert Bruce, Earl of Carrick, as Robert I of Scotland in 1306 an enraged Edward assembled another army and marched yet again against the Scots. However, Edward only reached Burgh-on-Sands, a village near Carlisle, when he died. His body was taken back to London and he was buried at Westminster Abbey.
Edward I was married twice: to Eleanor of Castile, by whom he had sixteen children, and Margaret of France by whom he had three. Twelve memorials to his first wife stood between Nottingham and London to mark the journey taken by her funeral cortege. Three of those memorials, known as "Eleanor Crosses", can still be seen today.*Alex
|
|
1307 - 1327, EDWARD II, AR Penny, Struck 1307 at Bury St. Edmunds, EnglandObverse: + EDWAR R ANGL DNS hYB. Crowned and draped bust of Edward II facing within circle of pellets. Cross pattee in legend.
Reverse: VILL SCI EDMVNDI. Long cross dividing legend into quarters, trefoil in each quarter of inner circle.
Diameter: 19mm | Weight: 1.37gms | Die Axis: 12h
Class 11c penny with angular backs to C and E's in legends.
Rare mint
SPINK: 1465
Edward II was born on 25 April 1284, the fourth son of Edward I of England and when Edward I died in July 1307 Edward II became king because his three elder brothers were already dead. Edward II was the first English prince to hold the title prince of Wales, which was bestowed on him by his father in 1301.
Unfortunately Edward II had few of the qualities that made a successful medieval king. He surrounded himself with favourites, the best known being Piers Gaveston who he recalled from exile, Edward I having banished him to France due to his bad influence on his son. Furthermore, Edward II gave Gaveston the earldom of Cornwall, a title which had previously only been conferred on royalty.
Opposition to the king and his favourite began almost immediately, and in 1311 the nobles issued the 'Ordinances', in an attempt to limit royal control of finance and appointments. Gaveston was twice exiled at the demand of the barons, only for him to return to England shortly afterwards. However, in 1312, he was captured by the barons and executed.
In 1314, Edward invaded Scotland where he was decisively defeated by Robert the Bruce at Bannockburn. So bad was this for Edward's rule that by the following year parts of England had fallen into anarchy and power was in the hands of the barons headed by Edward's cousin Thomas of Lancaster, who had virtually made himself the real ruler of England.
By 1318, Edward and Lancaster had been partly reconciled, but the king now had two new favourites, Hugh le Despenser and his son. When Edward supported the two Despensers' ambitions in Wales the barons banished both father and son. This prompted Edward to fight back and he defeated Lancaster at Boroughbridge in March 1322, Lancaster was executed him and the Despensers were called back to Edward's court.
But now, Edward's wife, Isabella of France, emerged as a focus of opposition. In 1325, she was sent on a diplomatic mission to France where she met and became the mistress of Roger Mortimer, an exiled opponent of Edward. In September 1326, Isabella and Mortimer invaded England. There was virtually no resistance and the Despensers were captured and executed. Defeated, Edward was made to renounce the throne in favour of his son Edward who was crowned Edward III in January 1327.
Edward II was imprisoned at Berkeley Castle and later murdered there.*Alex
|
|
1307 - 1327, EDWARD II, AR Penny, Struck 1311 - 1316 at Durham, EnglandObverse: + EDWAR ANGL DNS hYB. Crowned and draped bust of Edward II facing within circle of pellets. Cross pattee in legend.
Reverse: CIVITAS DVNELM. Long cross, the upper limb of which is in the form of a bishop's crozier, dividing legend into quarters, trefoil in each quarter of inner circle.
Diameter: 18mm | Weight: 1.2gms | Die Axis: 7h
Rare
SPINK: 1469
Undated Penny, Class 11a, struck under Bishop Kellawe. Bishop Kellawe was enthroned as Bishop of Durham in 1311 but he died in 1316 so this coin was struck during the five years between those two dates. These coins were sometimes called "poker pennies" because the shape of the crozier on the reverse is reminiscent of an old iron fireside poker. It's an unfortunate nickname considering the reputed manner of the King's death.
Edward II was born on 25 April 1284, the fourth son of Edward I of England and when Edward I died in July 1307 Edward II became king because his three elder brothers were already dead. Edward II was the first English prince to hold the title prince of Wales, which was bestowed on him by his father in 1301.
Unfortunately Edward II had few of the qualities that made a successful medieval king. He surrounded himself with favourites, the best known being Piers Gaveston who he recalled from exile, Edward I having banished him to France due to his bad influence on his son. Furthermore, Edward II gave Gaveston the earldom of Cornwall, a title which had previously only been conferred on royalty.
Opposition to the king and his favourite began almost immediately, and in 1311 the nobles issued the 'Ordinances', in an attempt to limit royal control of finance and appointments. Gaveston was twice exiled at the demand of the barons, only for him to return to England shortly afterwards. However, in 1312, he was captured by the barons and executed.
In 1314, Edward invaded Scotland where he was decisively defeated by Robert the Bruce at Bannockburn. So bad was this for Edward's rule that by the following year parts of England had fallen into anarchy and power was in the hands of the barons headed by Edward's cousin Thomas of Lancaster, who had virtually made himself the real ruler of England.
By 1318, Edward and Lancaster had been partly reconciled, but the king now had two new favourites, Hugh le Despenser and his son. When Edward supported the two Despensers' ambitions in Wales the barons banished both father and son. This prompted Edward to fight back and he defeated Lancaster at Boroughbridge in March 1322, Lancaster was executed him and the Despensers were called back to Edward's court.
But now, Edward's wife, Isabella of France, emerged as a focus of opposition. In 1325, she was sent on a diplomatic mission to France where she met and became the mistress of Roger Mortimer, an exiled opponent of Edward. In September 1326, Isabella and Mortimer invaded England. There was virtually no resistance and the Despensers were captured and executed. Defeated, Edward was made to renounce the throne in favour of his son Edward who was crowned Edward III in January 1327.
Edward II was imprisoned at Berkeley Castle and later murdered there.
*Alex
|
|
1307a, Maxentius, February 307 - 28 October 312 A.D.Bronze follis, RIC 163, aEF, Rome mint, 5.712g, 25.6mm, 0o, summer 307 A.D.; obverse MAXENTIVS P F AVG, laureate head right; reverse CONSERVATO-RES VRB SVAE, Roma holding globe and scepter, seated in hexastyle temple, RT in ex; rare. Ex FORVM; Ex Maridvnvm
De Imperatoribus Romanis : An Online Encyclopedia of Roman Rulers and their Families
Maxentius (306-312 A.D.)
Michael DiMaio, Jr.
Salve Regina University
Marcus Aurelius Valerius Maxentius, more commonly known as Maxentius, was the child of the Emperor Maximianus Herculius and the Syrian, Eutropia; he was born ca. 278 A.D. After Galerius' appointment to the rank of Caesar on 1 March 293, Maxentius married Galerius' daughter Valeria Maximilla, who bore him a son named Romulus and another son whose name is unknown. Due to his haughty nature and bad disposition, Maxentius could seldom agree with his father or his father-in-law; Galerius' and Maximianus Herculius' aversion to Maxentius prevented the young man from becoming a Caesar in 305. Little else is known of Maxentius' private life prior to his accession and, although there is some evidence that it was spent in idleness, he did become a Senator.
On 28 October 306 Maxentius was acclaimed emperor, although he was politically astute enough not to use the title Augustus; like the Emperor Augustus, he called himself princeps. It was not until the summer of 307 that he started using the title Augustus and started offending other claimants to the imperial throne. He was enthroned by the plebs and the Praetorians. At the time of his acclamation Maxentius was at a public villa on the Via Labicana. He strengthened his position with promises of riches for those who helped him obtain his objective. He forced his father Maximianus Herculius to affirm his son's acclamation in order to give his regime a facade of legitimacy. His realm included Italy, Africa, Sardinia, and Corsica. As soon as Galerius learned about the acclamation of Herculius' son, he dispatched the Emperor Severus to quell the rebellion. With the help of his father and Severus' own troops, Maxentius' took his enemy prisoner.
When Severus died, Galerius was determined to avenge his death. In the early summer of 307 the Augustus invaded Italy; he advanced to the south and encamped at Interamna near the Tiber. His attempt to besiege the city was abortive because his army was not large enough to encompass the city's fortifications. Negotiations between Maxentius and Galerius broke down when the emperor discovered that the usurper was trying to win over his troops. Galerius' troops were open to Maxentius' promises because they were fighting a civil war between members of the same family; some of the soldiers went over to the enemy. Not trusting his own troops, Galerius withdrew. During its retreat, Galerius' army ravaged the Italian countryside as it was returning to its original base. If it was not enough that Maxentius had to deal with the havoc created by the ineffectual invasions of Severus and Galerius, he also had to deal with his father's attempts to regain the throne between 308 and 310. When Maximianus Herculius was unable to regain power by pushing his son off his throne, he attempted to win over Constantine to his cause. When this plan failed, he tried to win Diocletian over to his side at Carnuntum in October and November 308. Frustrated at every turn, Herculius returned to his son-in-law Constantine's side in Gaul where he died in 310, having been implicated in a plot against his son-in-law. Maxentius' control of the situation was weakened by the revolt of L. Domitius Alexander in 308. Although the revolt only lasted until the end of 309, it drastically cut the size of the grain supply availble for Rome. Maxentius' rule collapsed when he died on 27 October 312 in an engagement he had with the Emperor Constantine at the Milvian Bridge after the latter had invaded his realm.
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
|
|
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
|
|
1403a,1, Constantine I (the Great), 307-337 A.D.Constantine I (the Great), 307-337 A.D. Bronze AE 3, RIC 16, C -, VF, 2.854g, 19.1mm, 180o, Constantinople mint, 327 A.D. Obverse: CONSTANTI-NVS MAX AVG, rosette diademed head right; Reverse: GLORIA EXERCITVS, Soldier standing left, head right, resting left hand on shield and holding inverted spear in right, G in left field, CONS in exergue; very rare (R3).
The Emperor Constantine I was effectively the sole ruler of the Roman world between 324 and 337 A.D.; his reign was perhaps one of the most crucial of all the emperors in determining the future course of western civilization. By beginning the process of making Christianity the religious foundation of his realm, he set the religious course for the future of Europe which remains in place to this very day. Because he replaced Rome with Constantinople as the center of imperial power, he made it clear that the city of Rome was no longer the center of power and he also set the stage for the Middle Ages. His philosophical view of monarchy, largely spelled out in some of the works of Eusebius of Caesarea, became the foundation for the concept of the divine right of kings which prevailed in Europe.
Constantine was not a "Christian convert" in any traditional sense. He was not baptized until close to death, and while that was not an uncommon practice, the mention of Christ in his speeches and decrees is conspicuous by its absence. Eusebius, Church historian and Constantine biographer, is responsible for much of the valorization of Constantine as the Christian Emperor. The somnambulant "sign" in which Constantine was to become victor at the Milvian Bridge is, not so surprisingly, revealed to posterity long after the "fact." Throughout his reign, Constantine continues to portray himself on coins as a sun god (Freeman, Charles. Egypt, Greece and Rome: Civilizations of the Ancient Mediterranean; Second Edition. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2004. 582). Above all, Constantine was a pragmatist. It would be cynical to egregiously disavow his commitment to Christianity, but it would be equally wrong to think that he would allow Christianity to meddle in the governance of his empire. As he reputedly told a group of bishops, "You are bishops of those within the church, but I am perhaps a bishop appointed by God of those outside." Whatever the motives for his decision to support Christianity, Christianity benefitted from the arrangement. So, too, did Constantine. It was a match made in heaven.
J. P. Fitzgerald, Jr.
For perhaps the best Constantine The Great site on the web, see Victor Clark's Constantine The Great Coins: http://www.constantinethegreatcoins.com/ Cleisthenes
|
|
1403b, Constantine I (the Great), early 307 - 22 May 337 A.D.Constantine the Great, early 307 - 22 May 337 A.D., Bronze AE 3, RIC 137, VF, Constantinople mint, 1.476g, 16.4mm, 180o, 336 - 337 A.D. Obverse: CONSTANTI-NVS MAX AVG, laurel and rosette-diademed, draped and cuirassed bust right; Reverse: GLOR-IA EXERC-ITVS, two soldiers, each holding spear and shield on ground, flanking standard, CONS[ ] in exergue. Ex FORVM.
The Emperor Constantine I was effectively the sole ruler of the Roman world between 324 and 337 A.D.; his reign was perhaps one of the most crucial of all the emperors in determining the future course of western civilization. By beginning the process of making Christianity the religious foundation of his realm, he set the religious course for the future of Europe which remains in place to this very day. Because he replaced Rome with Constantinople as the center of imperial power, he made it clear that the city of Rome was no longer the center of power and he also set the stage for the Middle Ages. His philosophical view of monarchy, largely spelled out in some of the works of Eusebius of Caesarea, became the foundation for the concept of the divine right of kings which prevailed in Europe.
Constantine was not a "Christian convert" in any traditional sense. He was not baptized until close to death, and while that was not an uncommon practice, the mention of Christ in his speeches and decrees is conspicuous by its absence. Eusebius, Church historian and Constantine biographer, is responsible for much of the valorization of Constantine as the Christian Emperor. The somnambulant "sign" in which Constantine was to become victor at the Milvian Bridge is, not so surprisingly, revealed to posterity long after the "fact." Throughout his reign, Constantine continues to portray himself on coins as a sun god (Freeman, Charles. Egypt, Greece and Rome: Civilizations of the Ancient Mediterranean; Second Edition. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2004. 582). Above all, Constantine was a pragmatist. It would be cynical to egregiously disavow his commitment to Christianity, but it would be equally wrong to think that he would allow Christianity to meddle in the governance of his empire. As he reputedly told a group of bishops, "You are bishops of those within the church, but I am perhaps a bishop appointed by God of those outside." Whatever the motives for his decision to support Christianity, Christianity benefitted from the arrangement. So, too, did Constantine. It was a match made in heaven.
J. P. Fitzgerald, Jr.
For perhaps the best Constantine The Great site on the web, see Victor Clark's Constantine The Great Coins: http://www.constantinethegreatcoins.com/ Cleisthenes
|
|
1403c, Constantine I (the Great), early 307 - 22 May 337 A.D.Bronze AE 3, RIC VII 35, choice aEF, Constantinople mint, 3.336g, 20.0mm, 180o, 328 A.D.; Obverse: CONSTANTI-NVS MAX AVG, laurel and rosette diademed, draped and cuirassed bust right; Reverse: CONSTANTINI-ANA DAFNE, Victory seated left on cippus, head right, palm frond in each hand, trophy and captive before, CONS in exergue, B left; scarce. Ex FORVM.
"The information about Constantine's campaign across [the Danube] is obscure and untrustworthy. The question, therefore, of what he achieved by this enterprise was, and is, subject to contradictory interpretations. On the one hand, the Panegyrists claimed that he had repeated the triumphs of Trajan. On the other, his own nephew, Julian the Apostate, spoke for many when he expressed the view that this second 'conquest' of Dacia was incomplete and extremely brief . . . monetary commemoration was accorded to the building, at about the same time [AD 328], of the river frontier fortress of Constantiniana Dafne (Spantov, near Oltenita) . . ." (Grant, Michael. The Emperor Constantine. London: Phoenix, 1998. 58-9).
The Emperor Constantine I was effectively the sole ruler of the Roman world between 324 and 337 A.D.; his reign was perhaps one of the most crucial of all the emperors in determining the future course of western civilization. By beginning the process of making Christianity the religious foundation of his realm, he set the religious course for the future of Europe which remains in place to this very day. Because he replaced Rome with Constantinople as the center of imperial power, he made it clear that the city of Rome was no longer the center of power and he also set the stage for the Middle Ages. His philosophical view of monarchy, largely spelled out in some of the works of Eusebius of Caesarea, became the foundation for the concept of the divine right of kings which prevailed in Europe.
Constantine was not a "Christian convert" in any traditional sense. He was not baptized until close to death, and while that was not an uncommon practice, the mention of Christ in his speeches and decrees is conspicuous by its absence. Eusebius, Church historian and Constantine biographer, is responsible for much of the valorization of Constantine as the Christian Emperor. The somnambulant "sign" in which Constantine was to become victor at the Milvian Bridge is, not so surprisingly, revealed to posterity long after the "fact." Throughout his reign, Constantine continues to portray himself on coins as a sun god (Freeman, Charles. Egypt, Greece and Rome: Civilizations of the Ancient Mediterranean; Second Edition. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2004. 582). Above all, Constantine was a pragmatist. It would be cynical to egregiously disavow his commitment to Christianity, but it would be equally wrong to think that he would allow Christianity to meddle in the governance of his empire. As he reputedly told a group of bishops, "You are bishops of those within the church, but I am perhaps a bishop appointed by God of those outside." Whatever the motives for his decision to support Christianity, Christianity benefitted from the arrangement. So, too, did Constantine. It was a match made in heaven.
J. P. Fitzgerald, Jr.
For perhaps the best Constantine The Great site on the web, see Victor Clark's Constantine The Great Coins: http://www.constantinethegreatcoins.com/Cleisthenes
|
|
1403d, Constantine I (the Great), early 307 - 22 May 337 A.D. (Cyzicus)Constantine the Great, early 307 - 22 May 337 A.D. Bronze AE 3, RIC 199, gVF, corrosion, Cyzicus, 1.402g, 16.2mm, 0o, 336 - 337 A.D. Obverse: CONSTANTI-NVS MAX AVG, laurel and rosette-diademed, draped and cuirassed bust right; Reverse: GLOR-IA EXERC-ITVS•, two soldiers, each holding spear and shield on ground, flanking standard, SMKA in exergue.
The Emperor Constantine I was effectively the sole ruler of the Roman world between 324 and 337 A.D.; his reign was perhaps one of the most crucial of all the emperors in determining the future course of western civilization. By beginning the process of making Christianity the religious foundation of his realm, he set the religious course for the future of Europe which remains in place to this very day. Because he replaced Rome with Constantinople as the center of imperial power, he made it clear that the city of Rome was no longer the center of power and he also set the stage for the Middle Ages. His philosophical view of monarchy, largely spelled out in some of the works of Eusebius of Caesarea, became the foundation for the concept of the divine right of kings which prevailed in Europe.
Constantine was not a "Christian convert" in any traditional sense. He was not baptized until close to death, and while that was not an uncommon practice, the mention of Christ in his speeches and decrees is conspicuous by its absence. Eusebius, Church historian and Constantine biographer, is responsible for much of the valorization of Constantine as the Christian Emperor. The somnambulant "sign" in which Constantine was to become victor at the Milvian Bridge is, not so surprisingly, revealed to posterity long after the "fact." Throughout his reign, Constantine continues to portray himself on coins as a sun god (Freeman, Charles. Egypt, Greece and Rome: Civilizations of the Ancient Mediterranean; Second Edition. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2004. 582). Above all, Constantine was a pragmatist. It would be cynical to egregiously disavow his commitment to Christianity, but it would be equally wrong to think that he would allow Christianity to meddle in the governance of his empire. As he reputedly told a group of bishops, "You are bishops of those within the church, but I am perhaps a bishop appointed by God of those outside." Whatever the motives for his decision to support Christianity, Christianity benefitted from the arrangement. So, too, did Constantine. It was a match made in heaven.
J. P. Fitzgerald, Jr.
For perhaps the best Constantine The Great site on the web, see Victor Clark's Constantine The Great Coins: http://www.constantinethegreatcoins.com/ Cleisthenes
|
|
1403e, Constantine I (the Great), early 307 - 22 May 337 A.D. (Heraclea)Constantine the Great, Bronze AE 3, RIC 69, VF, Heraclea, 3.38g, 19.0mm, 180o, 325 - 326 A.D. Obverse: CONSTAN-TINVS AVG, laureate head right; Reverse: D N CONSTANTINI MAX AVG, VOT XXX in wreath, SMHD in exergue.
The Emperor Constantine I was effectively the sole ruler of the Roman world between 324 and 337 A.D.; his reign was perhaps one of the most crucial of all the emperors in determining the future course of western civilization. By beginning the process of making Christianity the religious foundation of his realm, he set the religious course for the future of Europe which remains in place to this very day. Because he replaced Rome with Constantinople as the center of imperial power, he made it clear that the city of Rome was no longer the center of power and he also set the stage for the Middle Ages. His philosophical view of monarchy, largely spelled out in some of the works of Eusebius of Caesarea, became the foundation for the concept of the divine right of kings which prevailed in Europe.
Constantine was not a "Christian convert" in any traditional sense. He was not baptized until close to death, and while that was not an uncommon practice, the mention of Christ in his speeches and decrees is conspicuous by its absence. Eusebius, Church historian and Constantine biographer, is responsible for much of the valorization of Constantine as the Christian Emperor. The somnambulant "sign" in which Constantine was to become victor at the Milvian Bridge is, not so surprisingly, revealed to posterity long after the "fact." Throughout his reign, Constantine continues to portray himself on coins as a sun god (Freeman, Charles. Egypt, Greece and Rome: Civilizations of the Ancient Mediterranean; Second Edition. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2004. 582). Above all, Constantine was a pragmatist. It would be cynical to egregiously disavow his commitment to Christianity, but it would be equally wrong to think that he would allow Christianity to meddle in the governance of his empire. As he reputedly told a group of bishops, "You are bishops of those within the church, but I am perhaps a bishop appointed by God of those outside." Whatever the motives for his decision to support Christianity, Christianity benefitted from the arrangement. So, too, did Constantine. It was a match made in heaven.
J. P. Fitzgerald, Jr.
For perhaps the best Constantine The Great site on the web, see Victor Clark's Constantine The Great Coins: http://www.constantinethegreatcoins.com/ Cleisthenes
|
|
1403f, Constantine I (the Great), early 307 - 22 May 337 A.D. (Heraclea)Bronze follis, RIC 5, F/aF, 3.513g, 20.4mm, 180o, Heraclea mint, 313 A.D.; obverse IMP C FL VAL CONSTANTINVS P F AVG, laureate head right; reverse IOVI CONSER-VATORI AVGG, Jupiter standing left holding Victory and scepter, eagle with wreath in beek at feet, B in right field, SMHT in exergue.
The Emperor Constantine I was effectively the sole ruler of the Roman world between 324 and 337 A.D.; his reign was perhaps one of the most crucial of all the emperors in determining the future course of western civilization. By beginning the process of making Christianity the religious foundation of his realm, he set the religious course for the future of Europe which remains in place to this very day. Because he replaced Rome with Constantinople as the center of imperial power, he made it clear that the city of Rome was no longer the center of power and he also set the stage for the Middle Ages. His philosophical view of monarchy, largely spelled out in some of the works of Eusebius of Caesarea, became the foundation for the concept of the divine right of kings which prevailed in Europe.
Constantine was not a "Christian convert" in any traditional sense. He was not baptized until close to death, and while that was not an uncommon practice, the mention of Christ in his speeches and decrees is conspicuous by its absence. Eusebius, Church historian and Constantine biographer, is responsible for much of the valorization of Constantine as the Christian Emperor. The somnambulant "sign" in which Constantine was to become victor at the Milvian Bridge is, not so surprisingly, revealed to posterity long after the "fact." Throughout his reign, Constantine continues to portray himself on coins as a sun god (Freeman, Charles. Egypt, Greece and Rome: Civilizations of the Ancient Mediterranean; Second Edition. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2004. 582). Above all, Constantine was a pragmatist. It would be cynical to egregiously disavow his commitment to Christianity, but it would be equally wrong to think that he would allow Christianity to meddle in the governance of his empire. As he reputedly told a group of bishops, "You are bishops of those within the church, but I am perhaps a bishop appointed by God of those outside." Whatever the motives for his decision to support Christianity, Christianity benefitted from the arrangement. So, too, did Constantine. It was a match made in heaven.
J. P. Fitzgerald, Jr.
For perhaps the best Constantine The Great site on the web, see Victor Clark's Constantine The Great Coins: http://www.constantinethegreatcoins.com/ Cleisthenes
|
|
1403g, Constantine I (the Great), early 307 - 22 May 337 A.D. (Nicomedia)Constantine the Great, early 307 - 22 May 337 A.D. Bronze follis, RIC 12, aVF, Nicomedia mint, 2.760g, 22.0mm, 0o, 313 - 317 A.D. Obverse: IMP C FL VAL CONSTANTINVS P F AVG, laureate head right; Reverse: IOVI CONS-ERVATORI, Jupiter standing left holding Victory on globe and scepter, eagle with wreath in beak left, G right, SMN in exergue; scarce.
The Emperor Constantine I was effectively the sole ruler of the Roman world between 324 and 337 A.D.; his reign was perhaps one of the most crucial of all the emperors in determining the future course of western civilization. By beginning the process of making Christianity the religious foundation of his realm, he set the religious course for the future of Europe which remains in place to this very day. Because he replaced Rome with Constantinople as the center of imperial power, he made it clear that the city of Rome was no longer the center of power and he also set the stage for the Middle Ages. His philosophical view of monarchy, largely spelled out in some of the works of Eusebius of Caesarea, became the foundation for the concept of the divine right of kings which prevailed in Europe.
Constantine was not a "Christian convert" in any traditional sense. He was not baptized until close to death, and while that was not an uncommon practice, the mention of Christ in his speeches and decrees is conspicuous by its absence. Eusebius, Church historian and Constantine biographer, is responsible for much of the valorization of Constantine as the Christian Emperor. The somnambulant "sign" in which Constantine was to become victor at the Milvian Bridge is, not so surprisingly, revealed to posterity long after the "fact." Throughout his reign, Constantine continues to portray himself on coins as a sun god (Freeman, Charles. Egypt, Greece and Rome: Civilizations of the Ancient Mediterranean; Second Edition. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2004. 582). Above all, Constantine was a pragmatist. It would be cynical to egregiously disavow his commitment to Christianity, but it would be equally wrong to think that he would allow Christianity to meddle in the governance of his empire. As he reputedly told a group of bishops, "You are bishops of those within the church, but I am perhaps a bishop appointed by God of those outside." Whatever the motives for his decision to support Christianity, Christianity benefitted from the arrangement. So, too, did Constantine. It was a match made in heaven.
J. P. Fitzgerald, Jr.
For perhaps the best Constantine The Great site on the web, see Victor Clark's Constantine The Great Coins: http://www.constantinethegreatcoins.com/ Cleisthenes
|
|
1403h, Constantine I (the Great), early 307 - 22 May 337 A.D. (Siscia)Bronze follis, RIC 232b, gVF, Siscia, 3.87g, 23.8mm, 180o, early 313 A.D. Obverse: IMP CONSTANTINVS 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.
The Emperor Constantine I was effectively the sole ruler of the Roman world between 324 and 337 A.D.; his reign was perhaps one of the most crucial of all the emperors in determining the future course of western civilization. By beginning the process of making Christianity the religious foundation of his realm, he set the religious course for the future of Europe which remains in place to this very day. Because he replaced Rome with Constantinople as the center of imperial power, he made it clear that the city of Rome was no longer the center of power and he also set the stage for the Middle Ages. His philosophical view of monarchy, largely spelled out in some of the works of Eusebius of Caesarea, became the foundation for the concept of the divine right of kings which prevailed in Europe.
Constantine was not a "Christian convert" in any traditional sense. He was not baptized until close to death, and while that was not an uncommon practice, the mention of Christ in his speeches and decrees is conspicuous by its absence. Eusebius, Church historian and Constantine biographer, is responsible for much of the valorization of Constantine as the Christian Emperor. The somnambulant "sign" in which Constantine was to become victor at the Milvian Bridge is, not so surprisingly, revealed to posterity long after the "fact." Throughout his reign, Constantine continues to portray himself on coins as a sun god (Freeman, Charles. Egypt, Greece and Rome: Civilizations of the Ancient Mediterranean; Second Edition. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2004. 582). Above all, Constantine was a pragmatist. It would be cynical to egregiously disavow his commitment to Christianity, but it would be equally wrong to think that he would allow Christianity to meddle in the governance of his empire. As he reputedly told a group of bishops, "You are bishops of those within the church, but I am perhaps a bishop appointed by God of those outside." Whatever the motives for his decision to support Christianity, Christianity benefitted from the arrangement. So, too, did Constantine. It was a match made in heaven.
J. P. Fitzgerald, Jr.
For perhaps the best Constantine The Great site on the web, see Victor Clark's Constantine The Great Coins: http://www.constantinethegreatcoins.com/ Cleisthenes
|
|
1403i, Constantine I (the Great), early 307 - 22 May 337 A.D. (Siscia)Silvered AE 3, RIC 214, VF, Siscia mint, 3.187g, 19.3mm, 0o, 328 - 329 A.D.
Obverse: CONSTAN-TINVS AVG, laureate head right; Reverse PROVIDEN-TIAE AVGG, campgate with two turrets, star above, ASIS and double crescent in exergue.
Flavius Valerius Constantinus, Constantine the Great, was the son of Helena and the First Tetrarchic ruler Constantius I. Constantine is most famous for his conversion to Christianity and the battle of the Milvian Bridge where he defeated emperor Maxentius. It is reputed that before the battle, he saw the words "In Hoc Signo Victor Eris" (By this sign you shall conquer) emblazoned on the sun around the Chi Rho, the symbol of Christianity. Other sources claim the vision came to Constantine I in a dream. The story continues that after placing this Christogram on the shields of his army, he defeated his opponent and thus ruled the empire through divine providence. Constantine I also shifted the capital of the empire to Constantinople, establishing the foundation for an Empire that would last another 1000 years. He died in 337 and his sons divided the Roman territories.
The Emperor Constantine I was effectively the sole ruler of the Roman world between 324 and 337 A.D.; his reign was perhaps one of the most crucial of all the emperors in determining the future course of western civilization. By beginning the process of making Christianity the religious foundation of his realm, he set the religious course for the future of Europe which remains in place to this very day. Because he replaced Rome with Constantinople as the center of imperial power, he made it clear that the city of Rome was no longer the center of power, and he also set the stage for the Middle Ages. His philosophical view of monarchy, largely spelled out in some of the works of Eusebius of Caesarea, became the foundation for the concept of the divine right of kings which prevailed in Europe.
Constantine was not a "Christian convert" in any traditional sense. He was not baptized until close to death, and while that was not an uncommon practice, the mention of Christ in his speeches and decrees is conspicuous by its absence. Eusebius, Church historian and Constantine biographer, is responsible for much of the valorization of Constantine as the Christian Emperor. The somnambulant "sign" in which Constantine was to become victor at the Milvian Bridge is, not so surprisingly, revealed to posterity long after the "fact." Throughout his reign, Constantine continues to portray himself on coins as a sun god (Freeman, Charles. Egypt, Greece and Rome: Civilizations of the Ancient Mediterranean; Second Edition. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2004. 582). Above all, Constantine was a pragmatist. It would be cynical to egregiously disavow his commitment to Christianity, but it would be equally wrong to think that he would allow Christianity to meddle in the governance of his empire. As he reputedly told a group of bishops, "You are bishops of those within the church, but I am perhaps a bishop appointed by God of those outside." Whatever the motives for his decision to support Christianity, Christianity benefitted from the arrangement. So, too, did Constantine. It was a match made in heaven.
J. P. Fitzgerald, Jr.
For perhaps the best Constantine The Great site on the web, see Victor Clark's Constantine The Great Coins: http://www.constantinethegreatcoins.com/ Cleisthenes
|
|
1403j, Constantine I (the Great), early 307 - 22 May 337 A.D. (Thessalonica)Bronze AE 3, RIC 153, VF, Thessalonica mint, 2.955g, 19.7mm, 0o, 326 - 328 A.D. Obverse: CONSTAN-TINVS AVG, laureate head right; Reverse: PROVIDEN-TIAE AVGG, campgate with two turrets, star above, dot right, SMTSG in exergue.
Flavius Valerius Constantinus, Constantine the Great, was the son of Helena and the First Tetrarchic ruler Constantius I. Constantine is most famous for his conversion to Christianity and the battle of the Milvian Bridge where he defeated emperor Maxentius. It is reputed that before the battle, he saw the words "In Hoc Signo Victor Eris" (By this sign you shall conquer) emblazoned on the sun around the Chi Rho, the symbol of Christianity. Other sources claim the vision came to Constantine I in a dream. The story continues that after placing this Christogram on the shields of his army, he defeated his opponent and thus ruled the empire through divine providence. Constantine I also shifted the capital of the empire to Constantinople, establishing the foundation for an Empire that would last another 1000 years. He died in 337 and his sons divided the Roman territories.
The Emperor Constantine I was effectively the sole ruler of the Roman world between 324 and 337 A.D.; his reign was perhaps one of the most crucial of all the emperors in determining the future course of western civilization. By beginning the process of making Christianity the religious foundation of his realm, he set the religious course for the future of Europe which remains in place to this very day. Because he replaced Rome with Constantinople as the center of imperial power, he made it clear that the city of Rome was no longer the center of power, and he also set the stage for the Middle Ages. His philosophical view of monarchy, largely spelled out in some of the works of Eusebius of Caesarea, became the foundation for the concept of the divine right of kings which prevailed in Europe.
Constantine was not a "Christian convert" in any traditional sense. He was not baptized until close to death, and while that was not an uncommon practice, the mention of Christ in his speeches and decrees is conspicuous by its absence. Eusebius, Church historian and Constantine biographer, is responsible for much of the valorization of Constantine as the Christian Emperor. The somnambulant "sign" in which Constantine was to become victor at the Milvian Bridge is, not so surprisingly, revealed to posterity long after the "fact." Throughout his reign, Constantine continues to portray himself on coins as a sun god (Freeman, Charles. Egypt, Greece and Rome: Civilizations of the Ancient Mediterranean; Second Edition. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2004. 582). Above all, Constantine was a pragmatist. It would be cynical to egregiously disavow his commitment to Christianity, but it would be equally wrong to think that he would allow Christianity to meddle in the governance of his empire. As he reputedly told a group of bishops, "You are bishops of those within the church, but I am perhaps a bishop appointed by God of those outside." Whatever the motives for his decision to support Christianity, Christianity benefitted from the arrangement. So, too, did Constantine. It was a match made in heaven.
J. P. Fitzgerald, Jr.
For perhaps the best Constantine The Great site on the web, see Victor Clark's Constantine The Great Coins: http://www.constantinethegreatcoins.com/
Cleisthenes
|
|
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
|
|
170 - Constantius II - AE2 - RIC VIII Amiens 48AE2
Obv:– D N CONSTANTIVS P F AVG, Pearl diademed, draped & cuirassed bust right, A behind bust
Rev:– FEL TEMP REPARATIO, Helmeted soldier left, shield on left arm, spearing falling horseman; shield at ground to right. Horseman turns to face the soldier, and reaches his left arm up towards him. He is bare headed
Minted in Amiens (//AMB). 353 AD.
Reference:- RIC VIII Amiens 48 (C)
Ex John Casey Collection
22 mm, 5.08g
John was employed at Durham between 1972 and 2000, retiring as Reader in Archaeology. He was a well-known Romanist and numismatics scholar who undertook excavations at the Roman forts of Brecon Gaer (nr Aberyscir) and Segontium (Gwynedd), the Roman town of Venta Silurum (Caerwent), the Roman temple at Lydney (Gloucestershire) and the Greta Bridge vicus in County Durham.
His books included Coins and the Archaeologist (1974, 2nd ed. 1988), The end of Roman Britain (1979), Roman coinage in Britain (1980), Understanding Ancient Coins (1986). He was the author of numerous articles on Roman coinage and hoards, including the finds from Piercebridge.maridvnvm
|
|
1727. Leopold I: Reconstruction Of The Bridge In The Forest Of Haye. Obv: Leopold to right, in peruke, wearing armor and the Order of the Golden Fleece LEOPOLDVS. I. D.G. DVX. LOT. BAR. REX. IER
Rev: A traveling horseman going over bridge toward Abundance in countryside. In background landscape a herm of Mercury PROVIDENTIA. PRINCIPIS
Exergue: VIAE. MVNITAE MDCCXXVII Signed: SV.
AE64mm. Ref: Forrer V, p. 309, #6; Slg. Florange 171; Molinari 40/120; Europese Penningen # 1739
Leopold Joseph Charles (Leopold I) (1679-1729), Duke of Lorraine and Bar (1697), was the son of Charles V, Duke of Lorraine and Bar. This medal commemorates further the many reconstruction projects that Leopold I, Duke of Lorraine and Bar, fostered during his reign, in this case, the reconstruction of the bridge in the forest of Haye. The reverse alludes to the fact that the bridge increased commerce (Mercury) in Lorraine and led to more abundance for its inhabitants.
A herm, referred to in this medal, is a statue consisting of the head of the Greek god Hermes mounded on a square stone post. Hermes is the god of commerce, invention, cunning and theft, who also serves as messenger and herald for the other gods.
LordBest
|
|
1793 AE Farthing, London, Middlesex.Obverse: Ic • NEWTON. Bare headed bust of Isaac Newton facing left.
Reverse: FARTHING. Britannia, helmeted and draped, facing left seated on globe, shield at her side, holding olive-branch in her extended right hand and spear in her left; in exergue, 1793.
Edge: “Plain".
Diameter : 21mm
Dalton & Hamer : 1160 | Cobwright : I.0010/F.0050 (listed as an evasion piece)
The die engraver for this token was most likely Thomas Wyon but the manufacturer is uncertain.
Sir Isaac Newton (1642-1727), was an English physicist and mathematician who is widely recognised as one of the most influential scientists of all time and as a key figure in the scientific revolution. Newton shares credit with Gottfried Leibniz for the invention of calculus and also made seminal contributions to optics. He built the first practical reflecting telescope and developed a theory of colour based on the observation that a prism decomposes white light into the many colours of the visible spectrum.
Newton's “Principia” formulated the laws of motion and universal gravitation, which came to dominate scientists' view of the physical universe for the next three centuries.
Newton was a fellow of Trinity College and a Professor of Mathematics at the University of Cambridge. Unusually for a member of the Cambridge faculty of the day, he refused to take holy orders in the Church of England, perhaps because he privately rejected the doctrine of the Trinity.
In his later life, Newton became president of the Royal Society and became Warden of the Royal Mint in 1696. He became Master of the Royal Mint in 1699 and was very instrumental in developing techniques to try and prevent the counterfeiting of English coinage.*Alex
|
|
1794 - III GrossiGalicia & Lodomeria - Galician Poland
Obv: MONET AER EXERCIT CAES REG - Crowned double headed Russian eagle,
small shield on breast, above crossed flags.
Rev: III GROSSI POL - Value, Date above sprigs.
Size: 26mm; 9.97gms
This coin was minted in 1794 during the 2nd partition of Poland,
it seems that General Kosciusko, of Poland,(Later of the Kosciusko Bridge fame),
after assisting the Continental army during the American revolution,
went back to Poland and became a nationalist and didn't like the terms of 2nd partition.
He led a revolt of the Polish army and peasants in 1794, known as the "Kosciusko uprising",
against the Austrians, who were taking over Galicia, as per terms of the 2nd partition.
This coin was minted, by Austria, for the Austrian army,
for purchases what was still Polish Galicia. Later to become Austrian Galicia.
It was made specifically for Galicia in 1794,
the year Galicia stopped being Polish and was acquired by Austria.
To me this coin represents the beginning of Austrian Galicia
and the reason I am Austrian and not Polish.
Please advise of corrections to this brief history.
Brian L
|
|
1795 AE Halfpenny, Cambridgeshire County.Obverse: INDUSTRY HAS IT’S SURE REWARD. Thirty-four bees swarming around a beehive set on a table.
Reverse: RULE BRITANNIA. Britannia facing left, seated on globe, her right hand holding spear, her left arm holding laurel-branch and resting on shield at her side; in exergue, 1795.
Edge: “BERSHAM BRADLEY WILLEY SNEDSHILL".
Diameter: 29mm
Dalton & Hamer: 14
SCARCE
The diesinker for this token was Thomas Wyon and it was manufactured by Peter Kempson at his works in Birmingham.
The edge inscription is a list of the four places where this token could be redeemed
Bersham was a small village now in the suburbs of the county borough of Wrexham. The village holds special importance for economic historians because it was one of the cradles of the Industrial Revolution. This is the place where British iron making began in 1670, where smelting iron ore with coke began in 1721, and where John Wilkinson, a pioneer of the Industrial Revolution, set up shop in 1761. For many years the area was one of the most important iron manufacturing centres in the world. The Bersham Ironworks Museum tells the story of the man who, among other things, bored cannon for the American War of Independence and cylinders for James Watt's revolutionary steam engine.
Bradley was a small hamlet in rural Shropshire, England. It was one of the old townships of Much Wenlock parish, where it was treated as a single township with the neighbouring township of Wyke (having a total of eight taxpayers in 1524). From the late 18th century the small settlement was eclipsed by new cottages built at Farley to the south-west.
Willey was a small parish on the edge of the east Shropshire coalfield, east of Much Wenlock. At various times coal and ironstone were mined and iron was smelted and worked on streams bordering the parish, but the industrial activity was not on a scale that altered the parish's essentially rural character. In the mid 19th century Willey was said to be a 'simple, prosperous village, almost feudal in its customs'.
Snedshill was situated on the Shropshire coalfield which developed rapidly during the second half of the 18th century when mining and ironmaking were established. In 1780 John Wilkinson built two new blast furnaces at Snedshill. The ironworks were brought into the Lilleshall Co in 1807. It closed in 1830, but soon reopened as a forge to make wrought iron. In 1855 a new Snedhill Bar Iron Co was founded and the firm rapidly became established as one of the country's leading wrought iron makers.*Alex
|
|
1795 Yorkshire, York, Halfpenny Conder Token, D&H 63O:View of a cathedral. Ex : YORK . 1795.
R: View of a castle and drawbridge. CLIFFORD'S TOWER A.D. 1100.
E: YORK BUILT A. M . 1223. CATHEDRAL REBUILT A.D. 1075.
Dalton & Hamer as Yorkshire 63, 9.6gm, 27mm.
Extremely Fine (Sheldon AU58).Ancient Aussie
|
|
1811 AE HALFPENNY, Norwich, Norfolk.Obverse: NORWICH MDCCCXI. The arms of Norwich consisting of a heraldic shield containing a three towered castle above a lion passant.
Reverse: NEWTON SILVERSMTH AND JEWELLER. Britannia standing facing right, holding spear and shield, behind her, at her side, lion walking right.
Edge: Centre grained.
Diameter: 27mm
Davis 26 | Withers 923
Issued by Francis Newton, a silversmith and Jeweller in Norwich. This is possibly the same Francis Newton (or a close relative) who, in a circular to bankers, was declared bankrupt by solicitors Messrs Bignold, Pulley and Mawe of New Bridge Street, at a meeting in the Rampant Horse Inn, Norwich on 5th August, 1835.
Norwich is situated on the River Wensum and is the regional administrative centre and county town of Norfolk. During the 11th century, Norwich was the largest city in England after London, and one of the most important places in the kingdom. Until the Industrial Revolution, Norwich was the capital of the most populous county in the country and vied with Bristol as England's second city.*Alex
|
|
1813 AE Penny Token. Flint, Flintshire.Obverse: FLINT LEAD WORKS. View of the lead works, smoking away in full production; 1813 below in exergue.
Reverse: ONE POUND NOTE FOR 240 TOKENS • around ONE PENNY TOKEN in centre.
Edge: Centre Grained.
Diameter 34mm | Die Axis 6
Withers: 1313 | Davis: 12
SCARCE
The dies for this token were engraved by Thomas Halliday. The manufacturer of the token is unknown but it would in all probability have been struck in Birmingham. It was issued by George Roskell at the Flint Lead Works in Flintshire.
The Flint Lead Smelting Works was the only issuer of tokens in North Wales in the 19th century. The company produced lead from ore obtained from mines on the nearby Halkyn mountain. George Roskell (1777-1847) of Garstang, Lancashire, came to Flintshire as a shareholder in the Milwr Mine, and later became the senior partner in the Flint Smelting Works. In 1805, he married Mary Ann, only child of James Potts of Stokyn, near Holywell. His eldest son, George Potts Roskell succeeded to the Stokyn estate. In 1852 the Flint Lead Works became absorbed in the more extensive Alkali Works of Muspratt Bros. and Huntley, which by 1885 was one of the largest chemical works in Britain.
The town of Flint has its origins in the turbulent times of Edward I in the13th century when he invaded Wales for the complete subjugation of the Welsh princes and the people of Wales. Edward I picked the only suitable spot on the marshy shore, where an outcrop of rock jutted out some fifty yards into the river, on which to build the castle and town of Flint. The castle was built on the rock and joined by a drawbridge to the town. The town was built in the form of a Roman encampment, with a double ditch and earthen banks crowned by timber ramparts and four regular gates.*Alex
|
|
1813 AE Penny, Stockton-on-Tees, County Durham.Obverse: CHRISTOPHER & JENNETT * STOCKTON *, incuse letters on a raised rim. View of the bridge over the Tees being crossed by several small figures including a rider on horse, rowing boat containing two figures in river below; in field above, TEES; in field below, 1813.
Reverse: BRITANNIA * ONE PENNY TOKEN *, incuse letters on a raised rim. Britannia seated facing left on shield, holding olive branch and trident, small ship in left background at her feet.
Edge: Centre-grained.
Diameter 34mm | Weight 19.7gms
Davis:6 | Withers:1109
The die engraver for this token was Peter Wyon. It was issued by Robert Christopher & Thomas Jennett who were booksellers and printers in Stockton, they were also the Stockton agents for the Sun Fire Office.
Jennett was Christopher's apprentice and on the completion of his indentures, he was taken into partnership. Matching the high standards of his companion, Jennett became well known and much respected, growing to be a man of power and influence. He became a magistrate and was mayor of Stockton three times.
The bridge shown on this token was the first bridge to serve the growing town of Stockton, it was a five arch stone bridge which was completed in 1769. Before the existence of the bridge at this location, the only way of crossing the Tees was by the Bishop’s Ferry. The bridge was subject to rent to the Bishop of Durham and the costs of building it had to be repaid, so a system of tolls was charged. These were supposed to be abolished as soon as the debt was cleared, but they remained in place until, in 1819, the local people took the law into their own hands, throwing two of the bridge gates into the river and burning the third gate in the High Street. Although the bridge was good news for Stockton’s business, it had a devastating impact on Yarm. As ships were growing in size at this time, the building of the bridge prevented many ships reaching Yarm because they were unable to navigate further up the river. This only heightened shipping in Stockton and affirmed its place as the main port on the Tees before the 1800s. The bridge also halted Yarm’s shipbuilding industry and, since Stockton was unaffected, yards sprang up east of the bridge towards the sea. By 1876 the old bridge was inadequate and in 1881 work was begun on a new bridge. This new bridge, named the ‘Victoria Bridge’ in recognition of Queen Victoria, was opened in 1887 and the old stone bridge was demolished.*Alex
|
|
1857. Sir William Chambers and Somerset House. Taylor 52a.Obv. Bust of William chambers to right. CHAMBERS 1725-1796 Signed B WYON AFTER WESTMACOTT
Rev. Elevation of Somerset House to the Strand, featuring nine bayed entrance block. SOMERSET HOUSE 1781 SIR WILLIAM CHAMBERS RA ARCHITECT. Signed B WYON. Edge inscription: ART UNION OF LONDON 1857.
AE55. Taylor 52a.
Issued as one of the Art Union series. The medal gives an incorrect date of birth to chambers, 725 as opposed to 1723. The portrait is based on a bust displayed at the Royal Academy in 1797 by Sir Richard Westmacott, this is now in Sir John Soanes museum.
Built under an act of 1775, as a great new administrative centre to house official and academic bodies. Designed by Sir William Chambers, the Surveyor- General, and completed in the nineteenth century by Sir Robert Smirke (eastern extension to Kings College) and Sir James Pennethorne (western extension to Waterloo Bridge). Chambers decided on a central courtyard, approached through a block of narrow frontage, which was to house the learned societies, including the Royal Academy and Society of Antiquaries. It is the Strand façade of this entrance block which is shown on the medal, it was complete by 1781 and incorporated sculpture by fellow Academicians Bacon, Carlini and Wilton.LordBest
|
|
1885 Morgan Silver DollarUSA, Morgan Silver Dollar, 1885, Breen 5581, SCWC KM 110, BU, edge milled, weight 26.73g (ASW 0.7734oz), composition 0.9 Ag, 0.1 Cu, diameter 38.1mm, thickness 2.4mm, die axis 180°, Philadelphia, PA mint, 1885; obverse E • PLURIBUS • UNUM (Out of Many, One) arcing above and 1885 arcing below flanked by thirteen stars (seven left, six right), laureate and diademed Liberty head left, wearing Phrygian cap encircled by diadem inscribed LIBERTY, cotton and wheat wreath above diadem, tiny M incuse on truncation for engraver George T. Morgan, toothed border surrounding; reverse UNITED-STATES OF-AMERICA arcing above and * ONE DOLLAR * arcing below, ℑ𝔫 𝔊𝔬𝔡 𝔴𝔢 𝔱𝔯𝔲𝔰𝔱 in one line over bald eagle standing facing, head left, wings spread, clutching olive branch in right talon, three arrows in left, within half-circle laurel wreath tied with bow at base, tiny M incuse in left bow loop for engraver George T. Morgan, toothed border surrounding; from the Roger Belmar Collection; ex Cambridgeshire Coins (12 Dec 2021); £55.00.Serendipity
|
|
1903-O Morgan Silver DollarUSA, Morgan Silver Dollar, 1903-O, Breen 5696, SCWC KM 110, BU, edge milled, weight 26.73g (ASW 0.7734oz), composition 0.9 Ag, 0.1 Cu, diameter 38.1mm, thickness 2.4mm, die axis 180°, New Orleans, LA mint, 1903; obverse E • PLURIBUS • UNUM (Out of Many, One) arcing above and 1903 arcing below flanked by thirteen stars (seven left, six right), laureate and diademed Liberty head left, wearing Phrygian cap encircled by diadem inscribed LIBERTY, cotton and wheat wreath above diadem, tiny M incuse on truncation for engraver George T. Morgan, toothed border surrounding; reverse UNITED-STATES OF-AMERICA arcing above and * ONE DOLLAR * arcing below, ℑ𝔫 𝔊𝔬𝔡 𝔴𝔢 𝔱𝔯𝔲𝔰𝔱 in one line over bald eagle standing facing, head left, wings spread, clutching olive branch in right talon, three arrows in left, within half-circle laurel wreath tied with bow at base, tiny M incuse in left bow loop for engraver George T. Morgan, mint mark O below bow over DO bottom centre, toothed border surrounding; from the Roger Belmar Collection; ex Cambridgeshire Coins (6 Jul 2020); scarce; £325.00.Serendipity
|
|
1ab Conquest of JudeaA. Plautius, moneyer
c. 54 BC
Denarius
Turreted head of Cybele, A PLAVTIVS before, AED CVR SC behind
Bacchius kneels right with camel at his side, extending olive branch, BACCHIVS in ex., IVDAEVS in right
Seaby, Plautia 13
The reverse appears to Pompey's conquest of Judaea in 63 BC.
Josephus recorded of Pompey's conquest of Jerusalem: And when he was come to the city, he looked about where he might make his attack; for he saw the walls were so firm, that it would be hard to overcome them; and that the valley before the walls was terrible; and that the temple, which was within that valley, was itself encompassed with a very strong wall, insomuch that if the city were taken, that temple would be a second place of refuge for the enemy to retire to. . . . Aristobulus's party was worsted, and retired into the temple, and cut off the communication between the temple and the city, by breaking down the bridge that joined them together, and prepared to make an opposition to the utmost; but as the others had received the Romans into the city, and had delivered up the palace to him, Pompey sent Piso, one of his great officers, into that palace with an army, who distributed a garrison about the city, because he could not persuade any one of those that had fled to the temple to come to terms of accommodation; he then disposed all things that were round about them so as might favor their attacks, as having Hyrcanus's party very ready to afford them both counsel and assistance. . . . But Pompey himself filled up the ditch that was oil the north side of the temple, and the entire valley also, the army itself being obliged to carry the materials for that purpose. And indeed it was a hard thing to fill up that valley, by reason of its immense depth, especially as the Jews used all the means possible to repel them from their superior situation; nor had the Romans succeeded in their endeavors, had not Pompey taken notice of the seventh days, on which the Jews abstain from all sorts of work on a religious account, and raised his bank, but restrained his soldiers from fighting on those days; for the Jews only acted defensively on sabbath days. Blindado
|
|
1af Julius Caesar Wages Civil WarJulius Caesar
Denarius
49-48 BC
Elephant right, trampling on serpent [probably], CAESAR in ex
Simpulum, sprinkler, axe and priest's hat
Evidently a military issue, no agreement exists on the meaning of the coin's imagery (See a related thread on of the Classical Numismatic Discussion.)
Seaby 49
Given the chance that the coin was minted to pay Caesar's armies in the civil war, here is a description of the beginning, according to Suetonius: He then overtook his advanced guard at the River Rubicon, which formed the boundary between Gaul and Italy. There he paused for a while and, realising the magnitude of the step he was taking, turned to his staff, to remark: ‘We could turn back, even now; but once over that little bridge, and it will all come down to a fight.’ . . . As he stood there, undecided, he received a sign. A being of marvellous stature and beauty appeared suddenly, seated nearby, and playing on a reed pipe. A knot of shepherds gathered to listen, but when a crowd of his soldiers, including some of the trumpeters, broke ranks to join them, the apparition snatched a trumpet from one of them, ran to the river, and sounding the call to arms blew a thunderous blast, and crossed to the far side. At this, Caesar exclaimed: ‘Let us follow the summons, of the gods’ sign and our enemy’s injustice. The die is cast.’ And crossing with the army, he welcomed the tribunes of the people, who had fled to him from Rome. Then, in tears, he addressed the troops and, ripping open the breast of his tunic, asked for their loyalty. Blindado
|
|
1dy Maximinus II309-313
Quarter Follis
Laureate head, right, MAXIMINVS NOB C
Genius standing left, naked except for modius on head & chlamys over shoulder, holding patera & cornucopiae, SIS in ex, GENIO POPVLI ROMANI.
RIC 170b
According to Eutropius: Galerius, a man of excellent moral character, and skilful in military affairs, finding that Italy, by Constantius's permission, was put under his government, created two Caesars, MAXIMIN, whom he appointed over the east, and SEVERUS, to whom he committed Italy. He himself resided in Illyricum. . . . LICINIUS, a native of Dacia, was made emperor by Galerius, to whom he was known by old companionship, and recommended by his vigorous efforts and services in the war which he had conducted against Narseus. The death of Galerius followed immediately afterwards. The empire was then held by the four new emperors, Constantine and Maxentius, sons of emperors, Licinius and Maximian, sons of undistinguished men. Constantine, however, in the fifth year of his reign, commenced a civil war with Maxentius, routed his forces in several battles, and at last overthrew Maxentius himself (when he was spreading death among the nobility by every possible kind of cruelty,4) at the Milvian bridge, and made himself master of Italy. Not long after, too, Maximin, after commencing hostilities against Licinius in the east, anticipated the destruction that was falling upon him by an accidental death at Tarsus. Blindado
|
|
1dz Maxentius306-312
Follis
Laureate head, right, MAXENTIVS P F AVG
Roma in temple, CONSERVATORES VRB SVAE
RIC 194a
Eutropius reports: But after the death of Constantius, CONSTANTINE, his son by a wife of obscure birth, was made emperor in Britain, and succeeded his father as a most desirable ruler. In the meantime the praetorian guards at Rome, having risen in insurrection, declared MAXENTIUS, the son of Maximian Herculius, who lived in the Villa Publica not far from the city, emperor. At the news of this proceeding, Maximian, filled with hopes of regaining the imperial dignity, which he had not willingly resigned, hurried to Rome from Lucania. . . , and stimulated Diocletian by letters to resume the authority that he had laid down, letters which Diocletian utterly disregarded. Severus Caesar, being despatched to Rome by Galerius to suppress the rising of the guards and Maxentius, arrived there with his army, but, as he was laying siege to the city, was deserted through the treachery of his soldiers.
The power of Maxentius was thus increased, and his government established. Severus, taking to flight, was killed at Ravenna. Maximian Herculius, attempting afterwards, in an assembly of the army, to divest his son Maxentius of his power, met with nothing but mutiny and reproaches from the soldiery. . . .
At this time LICINIUS, a native of Dacia, was made emperor by Galerius, to whom he was known by old companionship, and recommended by his vigorous efforts and services in the war which he had conducted against Narseus. The death of Galerius followed immediately afterwards. The empire was then held by the four new emperors, Constantine and Maxentius, sons of emperors, Licinius and Maximian, sons of undistinguished men. Constantine, however, in the fifth year of his reign, commenced a civil war with Maxentius, routed his forces in several battles, and at last overthrew Maxentius himself (when he was spreading death among the nobility by every possible kind of cruelty,) at the Milvian bridge, and made himself master of Italy. Blindado
|
|
1ef CrispusCaesar 317-326
AE3, Thessalonica
Laureate, draped & cuirassed bust, right, D N FL IVL CRISPVS NOB CAES
Victory advancing left, holding wreath and palm, VICTORIA CAESS NN. Mintmark dot TS dot epsilon dot.
Zosimus recorded Crispus' elevation to Caesar: "Constantine, having taken Cibalis, and Sirmium, and all the towns that Licinius had abandoned, sent five thousand men in pursuit of him. But as these were ignorant of the course he had taken, they could not overtake him. Constantine however, having rebuilt the bridge over the Saus, which Licinius had broken down, was with his army almost at his heels. Having entered Thrace, he arrived at the plain where Licinius lay encamped. On the night of his arrival there he marshalled his army, and gave orders for his soldiers to be ready for battle by day-break. As soon as it was light, Licinius, perceiving Constantine with his army, drew up his forces also, having been joined by Valens, whom he styled Caesar, after the battle of Cibalis. When the armies engaged, they first fought with bows at a distance ; but when their arrows were spent, they began to use their javelins, and poignards. Thus the battle continued very obstinately for a considerable time, until those whom Constantine had sent in pursuit of Licinius descended from an eminence upon the armies while they were engaged. These wheeled round the hill |46 before they arrived at them, deeming it best to join their own party from the higher ground, and to encompass the enemy. The troops of Licinius, being aware of them, courageously withstood against them all, so that many thousands were slain on both sides, and the advantage was equal, till the signal was given for both to retire. Next day they agreed on a truce, and entered into an alliance with each other, on condition that Constantine should possess Illyricum and all the nations westward, and that Licinius should have Thrace and the east; but that Valens, whom Licinius had made Caesar, should be put to death, because be was said to be the author of all the mischief which had happened. Having done this, and sworn on both sides to observe the conditions, Constantine conferred the rank and title of Caesar on Crispus, his son by a concubine called Minervina, who was as yet but a youth, and on Constantine, who was born but a few days before at Arelatum. At the same time Licinianus, the son of Licinius, who was twenty months of age, was declared Caesar, Thus ended the second war."
According to Zonaras, "By a concubine he also had another son, called Crispus, older than his other sons, who distinguished himself often in the war against Licinius. His stepmother Fausta, being erotically obsessed with him, since she did not find him compliant, denounced him to his father as being in love with her and as having often attempted to use force against her. Hence, Crispus was condemned to death by his father, who had been persuaded by his spouse."
Constantine had his son strangled to death in Pula.
RIC 62Blindado
|
|
1es Gratian367-383
AE3
Pearl-diademed, draped and cuirassed bust right, D N GRATIANVS P F AVG
Gratian standing right, holding labarum with Chi-rho on banner, and holding captive by hair, GLORIA ROMANORVM; Q to left, K over P to right, DSISCR in ex.
RIC 14c
Zosimus reports: [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. . . .
When the affairs of the empire were reduced to this low condition, Victor, who commanded the Roman cavalry, escaping the danger with some of his troops, entered Macedon and Thessaly. From thence he proceeded into Moesia and Pannonia, and informed Gratian, who was then in that quarter, of what had occurred, and of the loss of the emperor [Valens] and his army. Gratian received the intelligence without uneasiness, and was little grieved at the death of his uncle, a disagreement having existed between them. Finding himself unable to manage affairs, Thrace being ravaged by the Barbarians, as were likewise Pannonia and Moesia, and the towns upon the Rhine being infested by the neighbouring Barbarians without controul, he chose for his associate in the empire, Theodosius, who was a native of a town called Cauca, in the part of Spain called Hispania Callaecia, and who possessed great knowledge and experience of military affairs. Having given him the government of Thrace and the eastern provinces, Gratian himself proceeded to the west of Gaul, in order, if possible, to compose affairs in that quarter. . . .
While the affairs of Thrace were, thus situated, those of Gratian were in great perplexity. Having accepted the counsel of those courtiers who usually corrupt the manners of princes, he gave a reception to some fugitives called Alani, whom he not only introduced into his army, but honoured with valuable presents, and confided to them his most important secrets, esteeming his own soldiers of little value. This produced among his soldiers a violent hatred against him, which being gradually inflamed and augmented incited in them a disposition for innovation, and most particulary in that part of them which was in Britain, since they were the most resolute and vindictive. In this spirit they were encouraged by Maximus, a Spaniard, who had been the fellow-soldier of Theodosius in Britain. He was offended that Theodosius should be thought worthy of being made emperor, while he himself had no honourable employment. He therefore cherished the animosity of the soldiers towards the emperor. They were thus easily induced to revolt and to declare Maximus emperor. Having presented to him the purple robe and the diadem, they sailed to the mouth of the Rhine. As the German army, and all who were in that quarter approved of the election, Gratian prepared to contend against Maximus, with a considerable part of the army which still adhered to him. When the armies met, there were only slight skirmishes for five days; until Gratian, |115 perceiving that the Mauritanian cavalry first deserted from him and declared Maximus Augustus, and afterwards that the remainder of his troops by degrees espoused the cause of his antagonist, relinquished all hope, and fled with three hundred horse to the Alps. Finding those regions without defence, he proceeded towards Rhaetia, Noricum, Pannonia, and the Upper Moesia. When Maximus was informed of his route, he was not negligent of the opportunity, but detached Andragathius, commander of the cavalry, who was his faithful adherent, in pursuit of Gratian. This officer followed him with so great speed, that he overtook him when he was passing the bridge at Sigidunus, and put him to death. Blindado
|
|
1ew Magnus Maximus383-388
AE2
Diademed, draped & cuirassed bust right, D N MAG MAXIMVS P F AVG
Emperor standing left, raising kneeling female; mintmarks PCON, SCON and TCON known, REPARATIO REIPVB
RIC 26a
Zosimus reports: While the affairs of Thrace were, thus situated, those of Gratian were in great perplexity. Having accepted the counsel of those courtiers who usually corrupt the manners of princes, he gave a reception to some fugitives called Alani, whom he not only introduced into his army, but honoured with valuable presents, and confided to them his most important secrets, esteeming his own soldiers of little value. This produced among his soldiers a violent hatred against him, which being gradually inflamed and augmented incited in them a disposition for innovation, and most particulary in that part of them which was in Britain, since they were the most resolute and vindictive. In this spirit they were encouraged by Maximus, a Spaniard, who had been the fellow-soldier of Theodosius in Britain. He was offended that Theodosius should be thought worthy of being made emperor, while he himself had no honourable employment. He therefore cherished the animosity of the soldiers towards the emperor. They were thus easily induced to revolt and to declare Maximus emperor. Having presented to him the purple robe and the diadem, they sailed to the mouth of the Rhine. As the German army, and all who were in that quarter approved of the election, Gratian prepared to contend against Maximus, with a considerable part of the army which still adhered to him. When the armies met, there were only slight skirmishes for five days; until Gratian, |115 perceiving that the Mauritanian cavalry first deserted from him and declared Maximus Augustus, and afterwards that the remainder of his troops by degrees espoused the cause of his antagonist, relinquished all hope, and fled with three hundred horse to the Alps. Finding those regions without defence, he proceeded towards Rhaetia, Noricum, Pannonia, and the Upper Moesia. When Maximus was informed of his route, he was not negligent of the opportunity, but detached Andragathius, commander of the cavalry, who was his faithful adherent, in pursuit of Gratian. This officer followed him with so great speed, that he overtook him when he was passing the bridge at Sigidunus, and put him to death. . . .
The reign of Gratian being thus terminated, Maximus, who now considered himself firmly fixed in the empire, sent an embassy to the emperor Theodosius, not to intreat pardon for his treatment of Gratian, but rather to increase his provocations. The person employed in this mission was the imperial chamberlain (for Maximus would not suffer an eunuch to preside in his court), a prudent person, with whom he had been familiarly acquainted from his infancy. The purport of his mission was to propose to Theodosius a treaty of amity, and of alliance, against all enemies who should make war on the Romans, and on refusal, to declare against him open hostility. Upon this, Theodosius admitted Maximus to a share in the empire, and in the honour of his statues and his imperial title. . . .
Affairs being thus situated in the east, in Thrace, and in Illyricum, Maximus, who deemed his appointments inferior to his merits, being only governor of the countries formerly under Gratian, projected how to depose the young Valentinian from the empire, if possible totally, but should he fail in the whole, to secure at least some part. . . . he immediately entered Italy without; resistance, and marched to Aquileia. . . .
Theodosius, having passed through Pannonia and the defiles of the Appennines, attacked unawares the forces of Maximus before they were prepared for him. A part of his army, having pursued them with the utmost speed, forced their way through the gates of Aquileia, the guards being too few to resist them. Maximus was torn from his imperial throne while in the act of distributing money to his soldiers, and being stripped of his imperial robes, was brought to Theodosius, who, having in reproach enumerated some of his crimes against the commonwealth, delivered him to the common executioner to receive due punishment. Such was the end of Maximus and of his usurpation. Having fraudulently overcome Valentinian, he imagined that he should with ease subdue the whole Roman empire. Theodosius, having heard, that when Maximus came from beyond the Alps he left his son Victor, whom he had dignified with the title of Caesar, he immediately sent for his general, named Arbogastes, who deprived the youth both of his dignity and life. Blindado
|
|
2.94 Constantine: Constantinople.AE3, 328 - 329, Constantinople mint.
Obverse: CONSTANTINVS MAX AVG / Diademed bust of Constantine.
Reverse: CONSTANTINIANA DAFNE / Victory seated, holding palm branch, in each hand, trophy and kneeling captive in front. B in left field.
Mint mark: CONS*
3.39 gm., 20 mm.
RIC #38; LRBC #1002; Sear #16192.
The traditional interpretation of this reverse type is that it commemorates the building of a fortress and bridge over the River Danube at Dafne (now called Oltenita, Romania). A different interpretation is more allegorical. Since this is the first coinage from the mint of a new Christian city, it is appropriate that it shows Constantine (represented by Victory/Dafne) turning away from the old gods (the captive and standard) to Christianity (palm branches).Callimachus
|
|
2009-Germany - RegensburgThe Danube at Regensburg with the famous old bridge. This is one of the oldest bridge in Europe, it stay where probably the Pertinax-led Legios crossed over the river on the built ponton bridge and fought against the Marcomanns a millenium earlier.berserker
|
|
22426 Gallienus/River God Bridge AE36Obv: AVT K ΠΓAΛΛIHNOC
Radiate, helmeted, and cuirassed bust left, holding spear and shield.
Rev: ANTIOXЄΩN
Bridge spanning the Maeandrus river; gateway to bridge to left, surmounted by stork standing right; on parapet, river-god Maeandrus reclining left, holding reed and cornucopia.
Mint: Antioch ad Maeandrum, Caria. 36.7mm 16.9g
SNG München 92; SNG von Aulock 2430
Blayne W
|
|
25. Danelaw: Vikings of East Anglia: St Edmund Memorial Coinage.Penny, ca 890-905.
Obverse: +SC EADMVN RI / Large A with small crosses on each side.
Reverse: +DAEMOND MOTI / Large cross.
Moneyer: Daemond.
1.29 gm., 18 mm.
North #483; Seaby #960.
There are over 60 moneyers with Germanic or Norse names found on the St Edmund coins in the Cuerdale Hoard (c. 905). This number suggests there were quite a few mints producing this coinage. Several of the moneyers are also found on coinage of Edward the Elder and Athelstan from other parts of the country. This suggests that this issue, although in the name of the martyred East Anglian king, extended beyond East Anglia, and perhaps continued until East Anglia was regained by the English in 917-18. For more information, see A New History of the Royal Mint by Christopher E. Challis (Cambridge University Press, 1992).Callimachus
|
|
307. AemilianMarcus Aemilius Aemilianus was born about AD 207 either on the island of Jerba in Africa, or somewhere in Mauretania.
His career saw him becoming senator and reaching the office of consul. In AD 252 he then became governor of Lower Moesia.
In the spring of AD 253 the Goths broke the treaty made with the emperor Trebonianus Gallus. Aemilian quickly drove them out of Moesia and then, crossed the Danube crushing the Gothic forces.
In a time when Rome suffered continuous setbacks his unexpected triumph made him an outstanding leader in the eyes of his men. So, in July or August AD 253 Aemilian was proclaimed emperor by his troops. The new emperor didn't waste time. Immediately he marched his troops into Italy, rapidly moving on Rome. Only fifty miles north of the capital, at Interamna, they were were approached by the much inferior army of unprepared emperor Gallus and with his son and co-emperor Volusianus. Their troops however, realizing themselves dead if they were sent to fight Aemilian's much larger and more experienced Danubian forces, turned on them and killed them, leaving Aemilian sole emperor.
The senate, having only recently declared Aemilian a public enemy under Gallus, immediately confirmed him as emperor and Aemilian's wife Gaia Cornelia Supera was made Augusta.
All the empire now lay at Aemilian's feet, but for one big problem. Publius Licinius Valerianus, called to aid by the late Trebonianus Gallus, was marching toward Rome. His emperor might have been dead, but his usurper was still alive, giving Valerian all the reasons needed to carry on towards the capital. In fact the soldiers of his Rhine armies now declared him emperor in place of Aemilian.
As Aemilian now moved north to face his challenger history repeated itself. His own soldiers not wanting to fight a army they thought superior to their own, turned on him near Spoletium and stabbed him to death (October AD 253). The bridge where he died was afterwards known as the pons sanguinarius, the 'bridge of blood'.
Aemilian had ruled for only 88 days.
Aemilian AR Antonininus. 253 AD. IMP AEMILIANVS PIVS FEL AVG, radiate draped bust right / VIRTVS AVG, Virtus standing left, foot on helmet, holding branch & spear. RSC 60. RIC 12. Ex-WCNCecoli
|
|
35-52 - LUCIO VERO Co-Emperador con Marco Aurelio (161 - 169 D.C.)ANTIOQUIA en Orontes - Seleucis y Pieria - Siria
AE 22 mm 11.6 gr
Anv: ”AVT KΛ AVPHΛ OVHPOC CEB” – Cabeza laureada viendo a derecha.
Rev: ”S C” - IB debajo, todo dentro de una guirnalda.
Acuñada: 161 – 169 D.C.
Referencias: SNG Cambridge #5891 - RPC I #7152 - BN Paris #550 - SNG II #3001 - McAllee #10 - Mionnet V #443.mdelvalle
|
|
35. Constantius II / Hoc Signo. . .Maiorina (larger AE 2), Mar. - Dec. 350, Siscia mint.
Obverse: DN CONSTANTIVS P F AVG / Diademed bust of Constantius II; A behind bust, star in front.
Reverse: HOC SIGNO VICTOR ERIS / Emperor standing, in military dress, holding standard with ChiRho, and spear. To the right stands Victory crowning him with a wreath and holding a palm branch. A in left field.
Mint mark: . ASIS*
5.55 gm., 22.5 mm.
RIC # 291; LRBC #1177; Sear #18203.
The reverse type on this coin refers to the vision Constantine the Great had before the Battle of the Milvian Bridge in 312. He saw a cross and the words HOC SIGNO VICTOR ERIS, which translate "By this sign you will be victorious."
Vetranio used this reverse type on coins minted in his name and the name of Constantius II during the 9 months he was emperor. RIC says, "This . . . evocation of the vision of Constantine before his victory over Magnentius is the clearest possible indication of Vetranio's loyalty to Constantius, and his expectation of the latter's triumph (over Magnentius)." (RIC VII, p. 344-45.)
On Roman coins, if an emperor is depicted on the reverse, it is usually the emperor whose name and portrait appears on the obverse of the coin. On this particular coin, it would not be out of place to have Constantius II represented on the reverse, especially because the coin was issued in advance of a coming battle with a pagan usurper (Magnentius). However, given the reverse legend, it is thought by many that the emperor depicted on this reverse is Constantine the Great himself.Callimachus
|
|
408. MaxentiusMarcus Aurelius Valerius Maxentius, more commonly known as Maxentius, was the child of the Emperor Maximianus Herculius and the Syrian Eutropia; he was born ca. 278 A.D. After Galerius' appointment to the rank of Caesar on 1 March 293, Maxentius married Galerius' daughter Valeria Maximilla, who bore him a son named Romulus and another son whose name is unknown. Due to his haughty nature and bad disposition, Maxentius could seldom agree with his father or his father-in-law; Galerius' and Maximianus Herculius' aversion to Maxentius prevented the young man from becoming a Caesar in 305. Little else is known of Maxentius' private life prior to his accession and, alth ough there is some evidence that it was spent in idleness, he did become a Senator.
On 28 October 306 Maxentius was acclaimed emperor, although he was politcally astute enough not to use the title Augustus; like the Emperor Augustus, he called himself princeps. It was not until the summer of 307 that he started usi ng the title Augustus and started offending other claimants to the imperial throne. He was enthroned by the plebs and the Praetorians. At the time of his acclamation Maxentius was at a public villa on the Via Labicana. He strengthened his position with promises of riches for those who helped him obtain his objective. He forced his father Maximianus Herculius to affirm his son's acclamation in order to give his regime a facade of legitimacy. His realm included Italy, Africa, Sardinia, and Corsica. As soon as Galerius learned about the acclamation of Herculius' son, he dispatched the Emperor Severus to quell the rebellion. With the help of his father and Severus' own troops, Maxentius' took his enemy prisoner.
When Severus died, Galerius was determined to avenge his death. In the early summer of 307 the Augustus invaded Italy; he advanced to the south and encamped at Interamna near the Tiber. His attempt to besiege the city was abortive because his army was not large enough to encompass the city's fortifications. Negotiations between Maxentius and Galerius broke down when the emperor discovered that the usurper was trying to win over his troops. Galerius' troops were open to Maxentius' promises because they were fighting a civil war between members of the same family; some of the soldiers went over to the enemy. Not trusting his own troops, Galerius withdrew. During its retreat, Galerius' army ravaged the Italian countryside as it was returning to its original base. If it was not enough that Maxentius had to deal with the havoc created by the ineffectual invasions of Severus and Galerius, he also had to deal with his father's attempts to regain the throne between 308 and 310. When Maximianus Herculius was unable to regain power by pushing his son off his throne, he attempted to win over Constantine to his cause. When this plan failed, he tried to win Diocletian over to his side at Carnuntum in October and November 308. Frustrated at every turn, Herculius returned to his son-in-law Constantine's side in Gaul where he died in 310, having been implicated in a plot against his son-in-law. Maxentius' control of the situation was weakened by the revolt of L. Domitius Alexander in 308. Although the revolt only lasted until the end of 309, it drastically cut the size of the grain supply availble for Rome. Maxentius' rule collapsed when he died on 27 October 312 in an engagement he had with the Emperor Constantine at the Milvian Bridge after the latter had invaded his realm.
Maxentius Follis. Ostia mint. IMP C MAXENTIVS P F AVG, laureate head right / AETE-RNITAS A-VGN, Castor and Pollux standing facing each other, each leaning on sceptre and holding bridled horse. ecoli
|
|
501. Constantine I London BEATA TRANQVILLITASLondon
Londinium was established as a town by the Romans after the invasion of 43 AD led by the Emperor Claudius. Archaeological excavation (undertaken by the Department of Urban Archaeology of the Museum of London now called MOLAS) since the 1970s has also failed to unearth any convincing traces of major settlement before c.50 — so ideas about Londinium being a military foundation around the Fort that protected London Bridge are now largely discounted.
The name Londinium is thought to be pre-Roman in origin although there is no consensus on what it means. One suggestion is that it derived from a personal name meaning 'fierce'. However, recent research by Richard Coates has suggested that the name derives from pre-Celtic Old European — Plowonida — from 2 roots, "plew" and "nejd", meaning something like "the flowing river" or "the wide flowing river". Londinium therefore means "the settlement on the wide river". He suggests that the river was called the Thames up river where it was narrower, and Plowonida down river where it was too wide to ford. For a discussion on the legends of London and Plowonida see [1]. The story of the settlement being named after Lud is considered unlikely.
Archaeologists now believe that London was founded as a civilian settlement by 50 AD. A wooden drain by the side of the main roman road excavated at No 1 Poultry has been dated to 47 which is likely to be the foundation date.
Ten years later, Londinium was sacked by the Iceni lead by the British queen Boudica. Excavation has revealed extensive evidence of destruction by fire at this date, and recently a military compound has been discovered in the City of London which may have been the headquarters of the Roman fight back against the British uprising.
The city recovered after perhaps 10 years, and reached its population height by about 120 AD, with a population of around 60,000. London became the capital of Roman Britain (Britannia) (previously the capital was the older, nearby town of Colchester). Thereafter began a slow decline; however, habitation and associated building work did not cease. By 375 London was a small wealthy community protected by completed defences. By 410 Roman occupation officially came to an end, with the citizens being ordered to look after their own defenses. By the middle of the 5th century the Roman city was practically abandoned.
RIC VII London 271 R2
ecoli
|
|
704a, Caligula, 16 March 37 - 24 January 41 A.D.Caligula, 37 - 41 AD, Ionia, Smyrna. AE 17mm. Klose, Smyrna 27a. RPC 2473. 2.89 gm. Fine. Menophanes, Aviola, Procos, 37-38 AD. Obverse: AION, laureate head right; Reverse: Nike holding wreath right. Ex Tom Vossen.
De Imperatoribus Romanis: An Online Encyclopedia of Roman Rulers and their Families
GAIUS (CALIGULA) (A.D. 37-41)
Garrett G. Fagan
Pennsylvania State University
Gaius Caesar Augustus Germanicus (Caligula) was born on 31 August, A.D. 12, probably at the Julio-Claudian resort of Antium (modern Anzio), the third of six children born to Augustus's adopted grandson, Germanicus, and Augustus's granddaughter, Agrippina. Caligula was the Roman Emperor between A.D. 37-41). Unfortunately, his is the most poorly documented reign of the Julio-Claudian dynasty. The literary sources for these four years are meager, frequently anecdotal, and universally hostile.[[1]] As a result, not only are many of the events of the reign unclear, but Gaius himself appears more as a caricature than a real person, a crazed megalomaniac given to capricious cruelty. Although some headway can be made in disentangling truth from embellishment, the true character of the youthful emperor will forever elude us.
As a baby he accompanied his parents on military campaigns in the north and was shown to the troops wearing a miniature soldier's outfit, including the hob-nailed sandal called caliga, whence the nickname by which posterity remembers him. His childhood was not a happy one, spent amid an atmosphere of paranoia, suspicion, and murder. Instability within the Julio-Claudian house, generated by uncertainty over the succession, led to a series of personal tragedies.
When Tiberius died on 16 March A.D. 37, Gaius was in a perfect position to assume power, despite the obstacle of Tiberius's will, which named him and his cousin Tiberius Gemellus joint heirs. (Gemellus's life was shortened considerably by this bequest, since Gaius ordered him killed within a matter of months.) Backed by the Praetorian Prefect Q. Sutorius Macro, Gaius asserted his dominance. He had Tiberius's will declared null and void on grounds of insanity, accepted the powers of the Principate as conferred by the Senate, and entered Rome on 28 March amid scenes of wild rejoicing. His first acts were generous in spirit: he paid Tiberius's bequests and gave a cash bonus to the Praetorian Guard, the first recorded donativum to troops in imperial history.
The ancient sources are practically unanimous as to the cause of Gaius's downfall: he was insane. The writers differ as to how this condition came about, but all agree that after his good start Gaius began to behave in an openly autocratic manner, even a crazed one. The sources describe his incestuous relations with his sisters, laughable military campaigns in the north, the building of a pontoon bridge across the Bay at Baiae, and the plan to make his horse a consul. Their unanimous hostility renders their testimony suspect, especially since Gaius's reported behavior fits remarkably well with that of the ancient tyrant, a literary type enshrined in Greco-Roman tradition centuries before his reign. Further, the only eye-witness account of Gaius's behavior, Philo's Embassy to Gaius, offers little evidence of outright insanity, despite the antagonism of the author, whom Gaius treated with the utmost disrespect.
The conspiracy that ended Gaius's life was hatched among the officers of the Praetorian Guard, apparently for purely personal reasons. It appears also to have had the support of some senators and an imperial freedman. As with conspiracies in general, there are suspicions that the plot was more broad-based than the sources intimate, and it may even have enjoyed the support of the next emperor Claudius, but these propositions are not provable on available evidence. On 24 January A.D. 41 the praetorian tribune Cassius Chaerea and other guardsmen caught Gaius alone in a secluded palace corridor and cut him down. He was 28 years old and had ruled three years and ten months.
Whatever damage Tiberius's later years had done to the carefully crafted political edifice created by Augustus, Gaius multiplied it a hundredfold. When he came to power in A.D. 37 Gaius had no administrative experience beyond his honorary quaestorship, and had spent an unhappy early life far from the public eye. He appears, once in power, to have realized the boundless scope of his authority and acted accordingly. For the elite, this situation proved intolerable and ensured the blackening of Caligula's name in the historical record they would dictate. The sensational and hostile nature of that record, however, should in no way trivialize Gaius's importance. His reign highlighted an inherent weakness in the Augustan Principate, now openly revealed for what it was -- a raw monarchy in which only the self-discipline of the incumbent acted as a restraint on his behavior. That the only means of retiring the wayward princes was murder marked another important revelation: Roman emperors could not relinquish their powers without simultaneously relinquishing their lives.
Copyright © 1997, Garrett G. Fagan.
Published: De Imperatoribus Romanis: An Online Encyclopedia of Roman Rulers and their Families http://www.roman-emperors.org/startup.htm. Used by permission.
Ancient Smyrna
The 5,000 year-old city of Izmir is one of the oldest cities of the Mediterranean basin. The original city was established in the third millennium BC (at present day Bayraklı), at which time it shared with Troy the most advanced culture in Anatolia.
Greek settlement is attested by the presence of pottery dating from about 1000 BC. In the first millennium BC Izmir, then known as Smyrna, ranked as one of the most important cities of the Ionian Federation. During this period, it is believed that the epic poet Homer resided here.
Lydian conquest of the city around 600 BC brought this golden age to an end. Smyrna was little more than a village throughout the Lydian and subsequent sixth century BC Persian rule. In the fourth century BC a new city was built on the slopes of Mt. Pagos (Kadifekale) during the reign of Alexander the Great. Smyrna's Roman period, beginning in the first century BC, was its second great era.
In the first century AD, Smyrna became one of the earliest centers of Christianity and it was one of the Seven Churches of Revelation. Both Revelation and the Martyrdom of Polycarp indicate the existence of a Jewish community in Smyrna as early as the 1st and 2nd centuries AD. The letter to the church at Smyrna in Revelation indicates that the Christians were spiritually "rich" and apparently in conflict with the Jews (2:9).
The origins of the Christian community there, which was established in the 1st century, are unknown. Ignatius of Antioch stopped at Smyrna on his way to martyrdom in Rome in 107 AD, and he sent a letter back to the Christians there from later in his journey. Smyrna's bishop, Polycarp, was burned at the stake in Smyrna's stadium around 156 AD.
Byzantine rule came in the fourth century and lasted until the Seljuk conquest in 11th century. In 1415, under Sultan Mehmed Çelebi, Smyrna became part of the Ottoman Empire.
The city earned its fame as one of the most important port cities of the world during the 17th to 19th centuries. The majority of its population were Greek but merchants of various origins (especially Greek, French, Italian, Dutch, Armenian, Sephardi and Jewish) transformed the city into a cosmopolitan portal of trade. During this period, the city was famous for its own brand of music (Smyrneika) as well as its wide range of products it exported to Europe (Smyrna/Sultana raisins, dried figs, carpets, etc.).
Today, Izmir is Turkey's third largest city and is nicknamed "the pearl of Aegean." It is widely regarded as the most Westernized city of Turkey in terms of values, ideology, gender roles, and lifestyle.
© 2005-08 Sacred Destinations. All rights reserved.
http://www.sacred-destinations.com/turkey/izmir-history.htm
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
|
|
710a, Vespasian, 1 July 69 - 24 June 79 A.D.Silver denarius, RIC II, 10, aVF, 3.5 g, 18mm, Rome mint, 69-71 AD; Obverse: IMP CAESA[R] VESPASIANV[S AV]G - Laureate head right; Reverse: COS ITER [T]R POT - Pax seated left holding branch and caduceus. Ex Imperial Coins.
De Imperatoribus Romanis:
An Online Encyclopedia of Roman Rulers and their Families
Titus Flavius Vespasianus (A.D. 69-79)
John Donahue
College of William and Mary
Introduction
Titus Flavius Vespasianus (b. A.D. 9, d. A.D. 79, emperor A.D. 69-79) restored peace and stability to an empire in disarray following the death of Nero in A.D. 68. In the process he established the Flavian dynasty as the legitimate successor to the Imperial throne. Although we lack many details about the events and chronology of his reign, Vespasian provided practical leadership and a return to stable government - accomplishments which, when combined with his other achievements, make his emperorship particularly notable within the history of the Principate.
Early Life and Career
Vespasian was born at Falacrina near Sabine Reate on 17 November, A.D. 9, the son of T. Flavius Sabinus, a successful tax collector and banker, and Vespasia Polla. Both parents were of equestrian status. Few details of his first fifteen years survive, yet it appears that his father and mother were often away from home on business for long periods. As a result, Vespasian's early education became the responsibility of his paternal grandmother, Tertulla. [[1]] In about A.D. 25 Vespasian assumed the toga virilis and later accepted the wearing of the latus clavus, and with it the senatorial path that his older brother, T. Flavius Sabinus, had already chosen. [[2]] Although many of the particulars are lacking, the posts typically occupied by one intent upon a senatorial career soon followed: a military tribunate in Thrace, perhaps for three or four years; a quaestorship in Crete-Cyrene; and the offices of aedile and praetor, successively, under the emperor Gaius. [[3]]
It was during this period that Vespasian married Flavia Domitilla. Daughter of a treasury clerk and former mistress of an African knight, Flavia lacked the social standing and family connections that the politically ambitious usually sought through marriage. In any case, the couple produced three children, a daughter, also named Flavia Domitilla, and two sons, the future emperors Titus and Domitian . Flavia did not live to witness her husband's emperorship and after her death Vespasian returned to his former mistress Caenis, who had been secretary to Antonia (daughter of Marc Antony and mother of Claudius). Caenis apparently exerted considerable influence over Vespasian, prompting Suetonius to assert that she remained his wife in all but name, even after he became emperor. [[4]]
Following the assassination of Gaius on 24 January, A.D. 41, Vespasian advanced rapidly, thanks in large part to the new princeps Claudius, whose favor the Flavians had wisely secured with that of Antonia, the mother of Germanicus, and of Claudius' freedmen, especially Narcissus. [[5]] The emperor soon dispatched Vespasian to Argentoratum (Strasbourg) as legatus legionis II Augustae, apparently to prepare the legion for the invasion of Britain. Vespasian first appeared at the battle of Medway in A.D. 43, and soon thereafter led his legion across the south of England, where he engaged the enemy thirty times in battle, subdued two tribes, and conquered the Isle of Wight. According to Suetonius, these operations were conducted partly under Claudius and partly under Vespasian's commander, Aulus Plautius. Vespasian's contributions, however, did not go unnoticed; he received the ornamenta triumphalia and two priesthoods from Claudius for his exploits in Britain. [[6]]
By the end of A.D. 51 Vespasian had reached the consulship, the pinnacle of a political career at Rome. For reasons that remain obscure he withdrew from political life at this point, only to return when chosen proconsul of Africa about A.D. 63-64. His subsequent administration of the province was marked by severity and parsimony, earning him a reputation for being scrupulous but unpopular. [[7]] Upon completion of his term, Vespasian returned to Rome where, as a senior senator, he became a man of influence in the emperor Nero's court. [[8]] Important enough to be included on Nero's tour of Greece in A.D. 66-67, Vespasian soon found himself in the vicinity of increasing political turbulence in the East. The situation would prove pivotal in advancing his career.
Judaea and the Accession to Power
In response to rioting in Caesarea and Jerusalem that had led to the slaughter in the latter city of Jewish leaders and Roman soldiers, Nero granted to Vespasian in A.D. 66 a special command in the East with the objective of settling the revolt in Judaea. By spring A.D. 67, with 60,000 legionaries, auxiliaries, and allies under his control, Vespasian set out to subdue Galilee and then to cut off Jerusalem. Success was quick and decisive. By October all of Galilee had been pacified and plans for the strategic encirclement of Jerusalem were soon formed. [[9]] Meanwhile, at the other end of the empire, the revolts of Gaius Iulius Vindex, governor of Gallia Lugdunensis, and Servius Sulpicius Galba , governor of Hispania Tarraconensis, had brought Nero's reign to the brink of collapse. The emperor committed suicide in June, A.D. 68, thereby ensuring chaos for the next eighteen months, as first Galba and then Marcus Salvius Otho and Aulus Vitellius acceded to power. Each lacked broad-based military and senatorial support; each would be violently deposed in turn. [[10]]
Still occupied with plans against Jerusalem, Vespasian swore allegiance to each emperor. Shortly after Vitellius assumed power in spring, A.D. 69, however, Vespasian met on the border of Judaea and Syria with Gaius Licinius Mucianus, governor of Syria, and after a series of private and public consultations, the two decided to revolt. [[11]] On July 1, at the urging of Tiberius Alexander, prefect of Egypt, the legions of Alexandria declared for Vespasian, as did the legions of Judaea two days later. By August all of Syria and the Danube legions had done likewise. Vespasian next dispatched Mucianus to Italy with 20,000 troops, while he set out from Syria to Alexandria in order to control grain shipments for the purpose of starving Italy into submission. [[12]] The siege of Jerusalem he placed in the hands of his son Titus.
Meanwhile, the Danubian legions, unwilling to wait for Mucianus' arrival, began their march against Vitellius ' forces. The latter army, suffering from a lack of discipline and training, and unaccustomed to the heat of Rome, was defeated at Cremona in late October. [[13]] By mid-December the Flavian forces had reached Carsulae, 95 kilometers north of Rome on the Flaminian Road, where the Vitellians, with no further hope of reinforcements, soon surrendered. At Rome, unable to persuade his followers to accept terms for his abdication, Vitellius was in peril. On the morning of December 20 the Flavian army entered Rome. By that afternoon, the emperor was dead. [[14]]
Tacitus records that by December 22, A.D. 69, Vespasian had been given all the honors and privileges usually granted to emperors. Even so, the issue remains unclear, owing largely to a surviving fragment of an enabling law, the lex de imperio Vespasiani, which conferred powers, privileges, and exemptions, most with Julio-Claudian precedents, on the new emperor. Whether the fragment represents a typical granting of imperial powers that has uniquely survived in Vespasian's case, or is an attempt to limit or expand such powers, remains difficult to know. In any case, the lex sanctioned all that Vespasian had done up to its passing and gave him authority to act as he saw fit on behalf of the Roman people. [[15]]
What does seem clear is that Vespasian felt the need to legitimize his new reign with vigor. He zealously publicized the number of divine omens that predicted his accession and at every opportunity he accumulated multiple consulships and imperial salutations. He also actively promoted the principle of dynastic succession, insisting that the emperorship would fall to his son. The initiative was fulfilled when Titus succeeded his father in A.D. 79.[[16]]
Emperorship
Upon his arrival in Rome in late summer, A.D. 70, Vespasian faced the daunting task of restoring a city and a government ravaged by the recent civil wars. Although many particulars are missing, a portrait nevertheles emerges of a ruler conscientiously committed to the methodical renewal of both city and empire. Concerning Rome itself, the emperor encouraged rebuilding on vacated lots, restored the Capitol (burned in A.D. 69), and also began work on several new buildings: a temple to the deified Claudius on the Caelian Hill, a project designed to identify Vespasian as a legitimate heir to the Julio-Claudians, while distancing himself from Nero ; a temple of Peace near the Forum; and the magnificent Colosseum (Flavian Amphitheatre), located on the site of the lake of Nero 's Golden House. [[17]]
Claiming that he needed forty thousand million sesterces for these projects and for others aimed at putting the state on more secure footing, Vespasian is said to have revoked various imperial immunities, manipulated the supply of certain commodities to inflate their price, and increased provincial taxation. [[18]] The measures are consistent with his characterization in the sources as both obdurate and avaricious. There were occasional political problems as well: Helvidius Priscus, an advocate of senatorial independence and a critic of the Flavian regime from the start, was exiled after A.D. 75 and later executed; Marcellus Eprius and A. Alienus Caecina were condemned by Titus for conspiracy, the former committing suicide, the latter executed in A.D. 79.
As Suetonius claims, however, in financial matters Vespasian always put revenues to the best possible advantage, regardless of their source. Tacitus, too, offers a generally favorable assessment, citing Vespasian as the first man to improve after becoming emperor. [[19]] Thus do we find the princeps offering subventions to senators not possessing the property qualifications of their rank, restoring many cities throughout the empire, and granting state salaries for the first time to teachers of Latin and Greek rhetoric. To enhance Roman economic and social life even further, he encouraged theatrical productions by building a new stage for the Theatre of Marcellus, and he also put on lavish state dinners to assist the food trades. [[20]]
In other matters the emperor displayed similar concern. He restored the depleted ranks of the senatorial and equestrian orders with eligible Italian and provincial candidates and reduced the backlog of pending court cases at Rome. Vespasian also re-established discipline in the army, while punishing or dismissing large numbers of Vitellius ' men. [[21]]
Beyond Rome, the emperor increased the number of legions in the East and continued the process of imperial expansion by the annexation of northern England, the pacification of Wales, and by advances into Scotland and southwest Germany between the Rhine and the Danube. Vespasian also conferred rights on communities abroad, especially in Spain, where the granting of Latin rights to all native communities contributed to the rapid Romanization of that province during the Imperial period. [[22]]
Death and Assessment
In contrast to his immediate imperial predecessors, Vespasian died peacefully - at Aquae Cutiliae near his birthplace in Sabine country on 23 June, A.D. 79, after contracting a brief illness. The occasion is said to have inspired his deathbed quip: "Oh my, I must be turning into a god!" [[23]] In fact, public deification did follow his death, as did his internment in the Mausoleum of Augustus alongside the Julio-Claudians.
A man of strict military discipline and simple tastes, Vespasian proved to be a conscientious and generally tolerant administrator. More importantly, following the upheavals of A.D. 68-69, his reign was welcome for its general tranquility and restoration of peace. In Vespasian Rome found a leader who made no great breaks with tradition, yet his ability ro rebuild the empire and especially his willingness to expand the composition of the governing class helped to establish a positive working model for the "good emperors" of the second century.
Bibliography
Since the scholarship on Vespasian is more comprehensive than can be treated here, the works listed below are main accounts or bear directly upon issues discussed in the entry above. A comprehensive modern anglophone study of this emperor is yet to be produced.
Atti congresso internazionale di studi Flaviani, 2 vols. Rieti, 1983.
Atti congresso internazionale di studi Vespasianei, 2 vols. Rieti, 1981.
Bosworth, A.B. "Vespasian and the Provinces: Some Problems of the Early 70s A.D." Athenaeum 51 (1973): 49-78.
Brunt, P. A. "Lex de imperio Vespasiani." JRS (67) 1977: 95-116.
D'Espèrey, S. Franchet. "Vespasien, Titus et la littérature." ANRW II.32.5: 3048-3086.
Dudley, D. and Webster, G. The Roman Conquest of Britain. London, 1965.
Gonzalez, J. "The Lex Irnitana: A New Copy of the Flavian Municipal Law." JRS 76 (1986): 147-243.
Grant, M. The Roman Emperors: A Biographical Guide to the Rulers of Rome, 31 B.C. - A.D. 476. New York, 1985.
Homo, L. Vespasien, l'Empereur du bons sens (69-79 ap. J.-C.). Paris, 1949.
Levi, M.A. "I Flavi." ANRW II.2: 177-207.
McCrum, M. and Woodhead, A. G. Select Documents of the Principates of the Flavian Emperors Including the Year of the Revolution. Cambridge, 1966.
Nicols, John. Vespasian and the Partes Flavianae. Wiesbaden, 1978.
Scarre, C. Chronicle of the Roman Emperors. The Reign-by-Reign Record of the Rulers of Imperial Rome. London, 1995.
Suddington, D. B. The Development of the Roman Auxiliary Forces from Caesar to Vespasian, 49 B.C. - A.D. 79. Harare: U. of Zimbabwe, 1982.
Syme, R. Tacitus. Oxford, 1958.
Wardel, David. "Vespasian, Helvidius Priscus and the Restoration of the Capitol." Historia 45 (1996): 208-222.
Wellesley, K. The Long Year: A.D. 69. Bristol, 1989, 2nd ed.
Notes
[[1]] Suet. Vesp. 2.1. Suetonius remains the major source but see also Tac. Hist. 2-5; Cass. Dio 65; Joseph. BJ 3-4.
[[2]] Suetonius (Vesp. 2.1) claims that Vespasian did not accept the latus clavus, the broad striped toga worn by one aspiring to a senatorial career, immediately. The delay, however, was perhaps no more than three years. See J. Nicols, Vespasian and the Partes Flavianae (Wiesbaden, 1978), 2.
[[3]] Military tribunate and quaestorship: Suet. Vesp. 2.3; aedileship: ibid., 5.3, in which Gaius, furious that Vespasian had not kept the streets clean, as was his duty, ordered some soldiers to load him with filth;,they complied by stuffing his toga with as much as it could hold. See also Dio 59.12.2-3; praetorship: Suet. Vesp. 2.3, in which Vespasian is depicted as one of Gaius' leading adulators, an account consistent with Tacitus' portrayal (Hist 1.50.4; 2.5.1) of his early career. For a more complete discussion of these posts and attendant problems of dating, see Nicols, Vespasian, 2-7.
[[4]] Marriage and Caenis: Suet. Vesp. 3; Cass. Dio 65.14.
[[5]] Nicols, Vespasian, 12-39.
[[6]] Suet. Vesp. 4.1 For additional details on Vespasian's exploits in Britain, see D. Dudley and G. Webster, The Roman Conquest of Britain (London, 1965), 55 ff., 98.
[[7]] Concerning Vespasian's years between his consulship and proconsulship, see Suet. Vesp. 4.2 and Nicols, Vespasian, 9. On his unpopularity in Africa, see Suet. Vesp. 4.3, an account of a riot at Hadrumentum, where he was once pelted with turnips. In recording that Africa supported Vitellius in A.D. 69, Tacitus too suggests popular dissatisfaction with Vespasian's proconsulship. See Hist. 2.97.2.
[[8]] This despite the fact that the sources record two rebukes of Vespasian, one for extorting money from a young man seeking career advancement (Suet. Vesp. 4.3), the other for either leaving the room or dozing off during one of the emperor's recitals (Suet. Vesp. 4.4 and 14, which places the transgression in Greece; Tac. (Ann. 16.5.3), who makes Rome and the Quinquennial Games of A.D. 65 the setting; A. Braithwaite, C. Suetoni Tranquilli Divus Vespasianus, Oxford, 1927, 30, who argues for both Greece and Rome).
[[9]] Subjugation of Galilee: Joseph. BJ 3.65-4.106; siege of Jerusalem: ibid., 4.366-376, 414.
[[10]] Revolt of Vindex: Suet. Nero 40; Tac. Ann. 14.4; revolt of Galba: Suet. Galba 10; Plut. Galba, 4-5; suicide of Nero: Suet. Nero 49; Cass. Dio 63.29.2. For the most complete account of the period between Nero's death and the accession of Vespasian, see K. Wellesley, The Long Year: A.D. 69, 2nd. ed. (Bristol, 1989).
[[11]] Tac. Hist. 2.76.
[[12]] Troops in support of Vespasian: Suet. Vit. 15; Mucianus and his forces: Tac. Hist. 2.83; Vespasian and grain shipments: Joseph. BJ 4.605 ff.; see also Tac. Hist. 3.48, on Vespasian's possible plan to shut off grain shipments to Italy from Carthage as well.
[[13]] On Vitellius' army and its lack of discipline, see Tac. Hist. 2.93-94; illness of army: ibid., 2.99.1; Cremona: ibid., 3.32-33.
[[14]] On Vitellius' last days, see Tac. Hist. 3.68-81. On the complicated issue of Vitellius' death date, see L. Holzapfel, "Römische Kaiserdaten," Klio 13 (1913): 301.
[[15]] Honors, etc. Tac. Hist. 4.3. For more on the lex de imperio Vespasiani, see P. A. Brunt, "Lex de imperio Vespasiani," JRS (67) 1977: 95-116.
[[16]] Omens: Suet. Vesp. 5; consulships and honors: ibid., 8; succession of sons: ibid., 25.
[[17]] On Vespasian's restoration of Rome, see Suet. Vesp. 9; Cass. Dio 65.10; D. Wardel, "Vespasian, Helvidius Priscus and the Restoration of the Capitol," Historia 45 (1996): 208-222.
[[18]] Suet. Vesp. 16.
[[19]] Ibid.; Tac. Hist. 1.50.
[[20]] Suet. Vesp. 17-19.
[[21]] Ibid., 8-10.
[[22]] On Vespasian's exploits in Britain, see esp. Tac., Agricola, eds. R. M. Ogilvie and I. A. Richmond (1967), and W. S. Hanson, Agricola and the Conquest of the North (1987); on the granting of Latin rights in Spain, see, e.g., J. Gonzalez, "The Lex Irnitana: a New Copy of the Flavian Municipal Law." JRS 76 (1986): 147-243.
[[23]] For this witticism and other anecdotes concerning Vespasian's sense of humor, see Suet. Vesp. 23.
Copyright (C) 1998, John Donahue. Published on De Imperatoribus Romanis, an Online Encyplopedia of Roman Rulers and their Families.
http://www.roman-emperors.org/vespasia.htm
Used by permission.
Edited by J. P. Fitzgerald, Jr.
Cleisthenes
|
|
A.D. 1016-1035 - Cnut - Quatrefoil PennyObv:- CNVT REX ANGLORVM, Crowned bust left within quatrefoil
Rev:- CNIHT MO GRAI, Quatrefoil with pellet at apex of each cusp, long cross voided, each limb terminating in three crescents
Minted in Cambridge (GRAI) by moneyer Cnit (CNIHT) A.D. 1017-1023
Reference:- North 781maridvnvm
|
|
A121B-40 - Acuñaciones Conmemorativas Roma - ConstantinoplaAE4 Fracción = 1/2 ó 1/3 Centenional? 14 mm 1.5 gr.
Anv: "POP ROMANVS" - Busto de joven laureado (quizás Genio del Pueblo Romano), vistiendo toga y con una cornucopia detrás, viendo a Izquierda.
Rev: "ANEPIGRAFA" (Sin Leyenda) - Puente sobre un Rio, se cree que es el puente de Milvian. "CONS/Z" en el campo centro
Acuñada 330 D.C.
Ceca: Constantinopla (Off.7ma.)
Rareza: C3 ?
Referencias: RIC Vol.VIII (Constantinople) #21 Pag.448 - Cohen Vol.VII #1 Pag.332 - DVM #4 Pag.292 - Salgado MRBI Vol.III #8315.a. Pag.175 - Sear RCTV (1988) #3900mdelvalle
|
|
AE Sword #01Northwestern Iran, Talish area
1200-800 BC
45.5cm (18”)
Cf. Muscarella (Bronze and Iron, Ancient Near Eastern Artifacts in the Metropolitan Museum of Art), Fig. 165 (page 99)
Cf. Watson (Luristan Bronzes in Birmingham Museum and Art Gallery), Fig. 16, #54 (page 24)
Description:
Tapering ribbed blade, round shoulders, rat-tail tang, tip missing and end bent (possibly a deliberate act in antiquity).
From an old Cambridge collectionKamnaskires
|
|
Anonymous commemorative, 340 ADAnonymous
AE 4 13mm
Constantinople, 330 AD
POP ROMANVS
laureate and draped bust left, cornucopia on shoulder
CONS B
bridge over river
RIC VIII 21
Ex CNGArdatirion
|
|
ANTIQUITIES, Roman, Bronze applique of female head, c.150 A.D.Solid cast, heavy applique, in the form of a female head.
It was said to have been found outside Piercebridge Roman Fort.
Height: 2 1/9 inches.
Piercebridge Roman Fort (possibly originally known as Morbium or Vinovium) is a scheduled ancient monument situated in the village of Piercebridge on the banks of the River Tees in County Durham, England.
|
|
Antoninus Pius - Zeugma138-161 AD
laureate head right
ΑΥΤΟ ΚΑΙ ΤΙΤ ΑΙΛ ΑΔΡΙΑ__ΑΝΤωΝΙΝΟϹ ϹE[Β] [EΥ]
temple on rocky hilltop, steps or colonnades on either side; ponton bridge in front?
ΖEΥ_ΓΜΑ_ΤEωΝ
Ϛ
RPC IV.3, 8532 (temporary); BMC 8–11, Cop 28
7,0g 19,5mm
ex DemosJ. B.
|
|
Arcadius, RIC IX, Cyzicus 26(c)Arcadius AD 383-408
AE - AE 4, 1.40g, 14.0mm
Cyzicus 3. officina 28 Aug. 388-15 May 392
obv. D N ARCADIVS P F AVG
pearl-diademed, draped and cuirassed bust right
rev. SALVS REI - PVBLICAE
Victory advancing left, holding trophy over r. shoulder, dragging
captive with l.
field: l. cross-Rho
ex. SMK Gamma
RIC IX, Cyzicus 26(c); S.4; LRBC. 2578
EF
added to www.wildwinds.com
from Forum Ancient Coins, thanks!
CROSS-RHO, or TAU-RHO, is an early Christian symbol. Probably it is the sign described by Lactantius which Constantine I put on the shields of his soldiers at the Milvian bridge. It is an abbreviation of the Greek 'stauros', meaning 'cross', therefore called often 'staurogram'.Jochen
|
|
Archbishop of Canterbury, CeolnothStruck c.865-868AD Kent, Canterbury mint. AR Penny 1.20g Ceolnoth Group III. Floriated Cross type. Obv tonsured bust facing, breaking inner circle 'ARCHIEP- CEOLNOD'; Rev 'BIARNRED MONETA' (Moneyer Beornraed) around, in inner circle a floriated cross. S.895? (Group III) N.247.
There are 58 recorded coins of Ceolnoth at the SCBI/EMC but only 3 coins of this moneyer for him. He also struck 6 more recorded coins for Alfred, Edward the Elder and some Danish imitative Alfred coins from East Anglia. This actual type is not listed in the corpus. However, a fragment at the British Museum, see BNJ28 CE Blunt 'A new coin of Ceolnoth' and JJ North plate III/9, is likely the same. Infact, I believe these coins are of the same dies and moneyer. Blunt & North describe 'LD' in the fragmented moneyer legend though it is likely 'ED' with the top half of the 'E' missing at the break. The Floriated Cross design is also found on coins of Aethelberht for the moneyers Dudda and Oshere but only 4 on database (N.621). In superb condition, a single find from the Driffield area in Yorkshire. This coin is potentially the only complete specimum and should be considered a great rarity. It is now recorded in the 2011 'The Coinage of Southern England' by Rory Naismith, Volume 1 Plate 65 C218.2b.
Gareth Williams at the British Museum kindly commented:
'I agree with your reading of the coin, and think that it is probably from the same dies as our fragment 1947, 14-4, 6, as you suggest, although it's difficult to be absolutely certain - the angle of the D on the reverse in particular looks slightly different, but that may just be the lighting on the photograph'
Rory Naismith from the Fitzwilliam Museum in Cambridge is studying the period for his PhD dissertation. He kindly commented as below:
'The Ceolnoth in particular is quite spectacular: not only is it, as you say, the only known whole floreate cross penny of Ceolnoth, but it is also a stunning coin of considerable historical importance. There is some reason to believe that it was found as part of a small hoard comprising at least three floreate cross pennies, the other two both being of Aethelberht by the moneyer Dudda. One is unfortunately only a small fragment, but the other is beautifully preserved. As the only known hoard of floreate cross coins, this is understandably a find of some significance, although it is odd to find it deposited so far north. A trawl through the BM and as many other catalogues and find records as I could find turned up only a total of nineteen floreate cross pennies, including yours, struck by seven moneyers. It was probably a lot larger than this meagre record seems to suggest: were it not for the large Dorking hoard of 1817 the preceding Inscribed Cross phase would be almost as little-known, and many moneyers who produced this type reappeared in the Lunettes coinage, so they may well have continued over the intervening period as well'.
The initial coinage of Group III has as the reverse motif a cross crosslet with pellets in the angles [coin 1, illustrated above]. Those of Ceolnoth are of good style and feature a neater tonsured bust of the archbishop possibly wearing his pallium. Those of Aethelwulf for the same period, Phase II at Canterbury, tend to have a rather crude right facing bust with thick lettering in the legend - although a few are of better style. Not all of Aethelwulf's coins of this type have pellets in the angles of the cross crosslet. This type was struck until c.852, when it was replaced by a coinage that was to become standard at Canterbury throughout the remainder of Aethelwulf's reign and the majority of the reign of his son Aethelberht. The Inscribed Cross coinage, struck only by Ceolnoth and the two aforementioned kings, have an identical reverse with a large voided cross that contains the moneyers name within and in the angles. Comparitively large numbers of these coins survive and they have been the subject of much study with regard to dating, reduced silver content and so on. Toward the end of his reign, c.854, Aethelberht minted a new coinage mirrored by Ceolnoth, the extremely rare Floriate Cross issue. These coins as would be expected have a large floriated cross on the reverse and had a very limited striking - perhaps as little as a year. Less than ten examples survive today for the king and archbishop. Illustrated below is the only known complete example of the Floriate Cross type of archbishop Ceolnoth.
AlexB
|
|
Armour - Buckle - for Breastplate from Kalkriese-type Lorica SegmentataArmour buckle for Lorica Segmentata armour.
On the Kalkriese type of Lorica Segmentata this type of buckle was used to fasten together breastplates.
It was attached to a long-is leather strap which was riveted to the breastplate.
This type of buckle was not used on the later Corbridge or Newstead types of Lorica Segmentata
(which used the hinged buckle and the turn key (respectively) to fasten their breastplates.
The Kalkriese type was used from Late 1st century BC to mid-1st century AD,
especially the Augustan to Tiberian eras.
References:
Bishop, Lorica Segmentata I, figures 4.1, 4.3 and 10.1.
Thomas, Lorica Segmentata II, type Ai, fig. 1, # 3, 20, 29, 30, etc.
Ivcevic, Roman Military Equipment from Gardun Croatia, fig. I, # 13-14.SC
|
|
Armour - Buckle with Articulated Plate - For Breastplate from Corbridge-type Lorica SegmentataUnique buckle and plate type that was only used on Roman Lorica Segmentata armour.
It was used on all versions of the Corbridge-type (A to C) to fasten together the breastplates.
It played the same function as the plain D-buckle on the Kalkriese type and the turn keys on the Newstead type.
The Corbridge-type is dated to the mid-1st to mid-2nd century AD,
especially the Claudian to Traianic/Hadrianic eras.
References:
Bishop, Lorica Segmentata I, figure 5.1, 5.4, 5.6 b, 5.9, 5.10, 10.1.
Thomas, Lorica Segmentata II, figure 5, # 1, 4 and 7.
This example matches type Aiii with finds at Vindonissa, Cirnchester and, in an almost exact match, Kaiseraugst Germany (dated to 50 AD). SC
|
|
Armour - Hinged strap or buckle plates for Corbridge-type Lorica SegmentataThese two pieces are part of Corbridge-type Lorica Segmentata armour.
These hinged fittings are likely either broken parts of a hinged buckle or strap hinges.
Hinged buckles, like the one portrayed in the gallery, were used to fasten the breastplates together.
Strap-hinges were similar, consisting of two plates hinged together, but lacked the buckle.
They were used to attach the plain leather strap (with the holes) to the other breastplate.
The Corbridge-type is dated to the mid-1st to mid-2nd century AD,
especially the Claudian to Traianic/Hadrianic eras.
References:
Thomas, Lorica Segmentata II, hinged fittings, type Cii,
Top: fig. 23, # 8, 23, 32, 49, 52, etc. and fig. 24, # 78, 83 and 86.
Bottom: fig. 23, # 6, 17, 37, 61 and fig. 24, # 91-94.SC
|
|
Armour - Lobate Hinge from Corbridge-type Lorica SegmentataThis bronze lobate-form hinge was used to fasten lorica segmentata shoulder plates together.
It was used on the Corbridge-type lorica segmentata. The earlier Kalkriese-type used a more-squared sub-lobate hinge while the later Newstead-type used a much larger hinge.
Traces of iron from the armour plate can be seen on the reverse.
Early/mid-1st to mid-2nd century AD.
References:
Bishop, Lorica Segmentata I, fig. 5.1, 5.4, 5.5, 5.6, 10.1.
Thomas, Lorica Segmentata II, type Fiv, fig. 48, # 15, 20, 40, 43, etc.
Ar Arma!, Augusta Raurica (Kaiseraugst) Switzerland, # 253.
Xantener Berichte 16, fig. 193, # 16, Serbia.
SC
|
|
Armour - Tie Loop - plain type from Corbridge- or Newstead-type Lorica SegmentataVertical fastener or Tie loop from Corbridge or Newstead-type Lorica Segmentata armour.
Plain design.
Mid-1st to mid-2nd century AD.
References:
Bishop, Lorica Segmentata I, fig. 5.6, 5.9, 5.10, 5.14, and 6.8.
Thomas, Lorica Segmentata II, type Gi, fig. 56, # 16 + 21.SC
|
|
Armour - Tie Loop for Corbridge- or Newstead-type Lorica SegmentataVertical fastener or Tie loop from Corbridge or Newstead-type Lorica Segmentata armour.
Mid-1st to mid-2nd century AD.
References:
Bishop, Lorica Segmentata I, fig. 5.6, 5.9, 5.10, 5.14, and 6.8.
Thomas, Lorica Segmentata II, type Gi, fig. 56, # 3-8, 12-15, + 19.
Xantener Berichte 16, fig. 193, # 18, Bugenae Serbia.
Feugère, Gaule Méridionale 19, fig. 21, # 206, circa 50-75 AD.SC
|
|
Armour - two Turn Keys for Lorica Squamata and Newstead-type Lorica Segmentata BreastplatesTwo types of turn keys for the breastplates from Roman lorica squamata (scale armour) or lorica segmentata.
These true keys were used for fasteneing the breastplates on lorica squamata (scale armour) as well as the upper breastplates on Newstead-type lorica segmentata armour.
Roman lorica squamata scale armour had two small pectoral plates which were slightly overlapped until the rectangular holes lined up. This type of turn key was then inserted through the two holes and turned locking the plates together. The pectoral plates were fastened with one or two such keys each.
A pair were similarly used for lorica segmentata breastplates on the Newstead-type in the same role as the single buckle on the Kalkriese-type and the articulated buckle on the Corbridge-type.
These come in two main variants. The first has a T-shape, the second has a spade shape. Both are contemporary.
These examples came from near Carnuntum.
Mid-2nd to mid-3rd century AD.
References:
Upper example:
Dura Europos report 7, page 121, # 426-429, 431.
Bishop, Lorica Segmentata I, fig. 6.1, 6.2, 6.11
Lower example:
Caerleon Canabae report, fig. 94, # 204.
Dura Europos report 7, page 121, # 420-425, 430.
One examples was found at Manching, Germany still attached to the lorica squamata plates.SC
|
|
Asia Minor, Caria, Antiochia ad Maeandrum, Gallienus, BridgeGallienus
Caria, Antiochia ad Maeandrum
AE 35
Obv.: ΑΥ Κ Π ΓΑΛΛΙΗΝΟΣ, Radiate, helmeted, and cuirassed bust left, holding spear and shield.
Rev.: ΑΝΤΙΟΧΕΩΝ, Bridge spanning the Maeandrus river; gateway to bridge to left, surmounted by stork standing right; on parapet, river-god Maeandrus reclining left, holding reed and cornucopia.
AE, 22.11g, 35.4mm
Ref.: SNG von Aulock 2430
Ex H.D. Rauch
Ex Pecunem Gitbud&Naumann auction 11, Lot 412
shanxi
|
|
Attica, Athens. (Circa 454-449 BC)AR Tetradrachm
25 mm, 17.20 g
This is a transitional Owl tetradrachm that bridges the early classical owls (minted from 478-454) with the subsequent mass classical (standardized) coinage, which really got going in the early 440s BC to finance Pericles' building projects like the Parthenon and then later the Peloponnesian War (431-404 BC) vs. Sparta. The 454 date is critical in that it was the year that Athens moved the treasury of the Delian league (confederation of Greek states led by Athens to defend against the Persian threat) from Delos to Athens.
This coin shares many attributes of Starr V early classical coinage (465-454 BC). On the obverse, the olive leaves on Athena's helmet connect to her diadem with small stems (which disappear in the mass coinage). In addition, the palmette leaves on Athena's helmet are smaller, less decorative, and more realistic. Finally, Athena is smiling (she starts to frown as the war with Sparta goes badly) and is more beautifully depicted than in the more hastily produced mass coinage.
On the reverse, like with the Starr V coins, the incuse is quite noticeable and the AOE (short for AOENAION, or "Of the Athenians") is written in smaller letters (they are much bigger in the mass coinage). Also, the owl is stouter, has smaller eyes, and his head is at an angle rather than parallel to the ground like all later issues.
The only difference between the Starr V owls and this example is in the owl's tail - in Starr V it ends with three small feathers. On this coin and all subsequent coinage the owl's tail ends in a single prong. Given all the other similarities to Starr V it is likely this coin was minted soon after the Treasury's move from Delos to Athens - perhaps 454/453.Nathan P
|
|
BHM 0710. The Duke of Gloucester elected Chancellor of Cambridge University, 1811.Obv. Draped, cuirassed bust of the Duke of Gloucester right, H R H WILLIAM FREDERICK DUKE OF GLOUCESTER
Rev. Inscription within closed wreath of laurel and roses ELECTED MARCH 26 INSTALLED JUNE 29 MDCCCXI, around: CHANCELLOR OF THE UNIVERSITY OF CAMBRIDGE.
WM48. BHM 710.
William Frederick, second Duke of Gloucester (1776—1834), son of William Henry the first Duke, and Maria, Dowager Countess of Waldegrave. The second Duke served as colonel of the 1st foot-guards in Flanders in 1794 and was promoted to Major-General in 1795. His advancement continued, finally being promoted Field-Marshal in 1816. He was appointed Privy Councillor in 1806 and Governor of Portsmouth in 1827. -from British Historical Medals 1760-1960, Volume I, pp. 173
LordBest
|
|
BRIDGE, Commemorative struck under Constantine ICommemorative RIC VIII, Constantinopolis 21
Constantine I AD 306 - 337
AE - AE 4
Constantinopolis 4th officina AD 330
obv. POP ROMANVS
draped, laureate head of a young Roman l., cornucopiae over r. shoulder
rev. (no legend)
Bridge with two towers and pylons below, over river
CONS/Epsilon above
RIC VIII, Constaninopolis 21; C.1; LRBC.1066
about VF/EF
Belongs to the special issue for the dedication of Constantinopolis AD 330 under Constantine I. The bridge may be the famous Milvian bridge, where Maxentius was defeated by Constantine I AD 312. For more information look at www.beastcoins.com/Architecture/Bridges/Bridges.htm
Jochen
|
|
Britannicus SestertiusObv: TI CLAVDIVS CAESAR AVG F BRITANNICVS - Bare headed and draped bust left
Rev. S C - Mars advancing left, holding spear and shield.
Year: 50-54 AD
Material: AE
Weight: 24.05g
Ref: Cohen 2
Notes: Extremely rare; authenticity verified by Fitzwilliam Museum (Cambridge) experts.oa
|
|
Buckles - for Sword BeltTwo non-hinged buckles for Roman sword belts (balteus or cingulum).
The example on the left dates to the mid-2nd to mid-3rd century AD.
The one on right to the mid-1st to early 2nd century AD.
References for the left hand version:
Roman Military Equipment 2nd edition, figure 124, #11 from Corbridge UK, dated to the 3rd century.
JRMES 17, 2006, page 147 + 149.
The Dura Europos report notes similar finds dating to 200-250 AD from Syria, Germany, Serbia, Romania, UK and Spain.
The Ashmolean Museum collection notes an example found in a Sarmatian grave in Kertch, Crimea.
References for the right hand version:
Roman Military Equipment, 1st edition, figure 97, #15 from Hod Hill, UK, dated to the 1st century AD.
Redzic, Viminacium, #6, Type Iv3, circa 100-150 AD.
SC
|
|
CariaAE 37mm
Antiochia ad Maeandrum, Caria
Obv: ΑΥ Κ Π ΓΑΛΛΙΗΝΟΣ
Radiate, helmeted, and cuirassed bust left, holding spear and shield
Rev: ΑΝΤΙΟΧΕΩΝ
Bridge spanning the Maeandrus river; gateway to bridge to left, surmounted by stork standing right; on parapet, river-god Maeandrus reclining left, holding reed and cornucopia
SNG von Aulock 2430mauseus
|
|
CARIA, Antiochia ad Maeandrum. GallienusCARIA, Antiochia ad Maeandrum. Gallienus. AD 253-268. Æ (36mm, 14.97 g, 12h). Radiate, helmeted, and cuirassed bust left, holding spear and shield / Bridge spanning the Maeandrus river, with gateway surmounted by stork on left; to right, river-god Maeandrus reclining left, holding reed and cornucopia, and male figure standing left, holding walking stick(?). SNG München 92 var. (obv. legend, no figure to right of Maeandrus); SNG von Aulock 2431 var. (rev. signed by magistrate); McClean 8450 var. (no figure to right of Maeandrus); SNG Copenhagen –; Künker 288, lot 819. VF, earthen green patina, irregular flan. Rare variant.
ecoli
|
|
CARIA. Antiochia ad Maeandrum. Gallienus, 253-268CARIA. Antiochia ad Maeandrum. Gallienus, 253-268. Hexassarion (?) (Bronze, 30 mm, 13.65 g, 6 h). AY•K•Î •Î“AΛ[ΛIHNOC] Radiate, helmeted, draped and cuirassed bust of Gallienus to left, holding spear and shield. Rev. ANT[IOXЄΩN] Bridge of six arches spanning the Maeander, with gateway to left and river-god Maeander reclining left on bridge, holding reed. BMC 57. SNG von Aulock 2430.Ancient Aussie
|
|
|
|
|
