| Image search results - "staff" |
Deutsches Reich
Preussen
Königreich
Wilhelm II. (1888-1918)
2 Mark 1901
Münzstätte: Berlin
Anlässlich des 200jährigen Bestehen des Königreiches
Vorderseite: "+FRIEDRICH.I.1701. WILHELM.II.1901." um gestaffelte Brustbilder (nach links), das vordere mit gekröntem Adler auf Helm
Rückseite: "DEUTSCHES REICH 1901 / * ZWEI MARK *" um Krone über Adler mit Wappenschild auf Brusthöhe
Rand geriffelt
feine Kratzer, Vorzüglich / Stempelglanz
Silber (900/1000)
11,1g
Durchmesser ca. 28mm
AKS # 136
Jaeger # 105 _2998Antonivs Protti
|
|
Antoninianus
Obv:– IMP C M AVR PROBVS AVG, Radiate cuirassed bust right
Rev:– LAETITIA AVG, Laetitia standing left holding wreath and staff
Minted in Lugdunum (IIII) Emission 2, 2nd Phase Officina 4. November to December A.D. 276
Reference(s) – Cohen 324. Bastien 173 (3). RIC 31 Bust Type F (C)
3.64 gms, 22.74 mm. 0 degrees maridvnvm
|
|
Philip I Æ Sestertius. Rome, AD 244-249. IMP M IVL PHILIPPVS AVG, laureate, draped and cuirassed bust to right / AETERNITAS AVGG, elephant advancing to left, guided by driver seated on back, holding staff and goad;GS in exergue. RIC IV 167a; C. 18; Banti 7-8. 20.36g, 28mm, 1h. Interesting error. paul1888
|
|
Roman provincial Gordian III AE24 Asklepius
Gordian III AE19 of Deultum, Thrace.,
Obv: Gordian III right, rev: Asklepios standing front, looking left, leaning on serpent-entwined staff.
23.5mm.,7.98g. paul1888
|
|
JUSTINIAN I, AU Solidus, struck 545 - 565 at ConstantinopleObverse: D N IVSTINIANVS P P AVG. Cuirassed facing bust of Justinian I wearing plumed helmet and diadem from which two pearls depend on either side. Holding globus cruciger in his right hand and shield, adorned with rider galloping right, in his left.
Reverse: VICTORIA AVGGG A. Victory in the guise of an Angel standing facing holding long staff topped with staurogram in right hand and globus cruciger in left, eight pointed star in right field; in exergue CONOB. (The letter after AVGGG in the legend indicates the number of the officina, the A indicating the first officina on this coin).
Slightly clipped
Diameter: 20mm | Weight: 4.08gms | Die Axis: 6
SBCV: 140 | DOC: 9a
*Alex
|
|
PHILIP II as Caesar. AE Tetradrachm struck AD 246 at AlexandriaObverse: M IOV ΦIΛIΠΠOC K CEB. Bare headed and draped bust of Philip II facing right.
Reverse: No legend. Asklepios standing facing left, sacrificing over flaming and garlanded altar out of patera held in his right hand and holding staff, around which a serpent coils, in his left; in left field, LΓ (= regnal year 3 0f Philip I = A.D.245 - 246).
Diameter: 23mm | Weight: 11.9gms | Die Axis: 12
Not in GICV
VERY RARE
*Alex
|
|
3 Trajan DeciusTrajan Decius
AR Antoninianus
IMP C M Q TRAIANVS DECIVS AVG, radiate, draped, & cuirassed bust right / DACIA, Dacia standing left, holding draco standard or vertical staff surmounted by ass's head.
RIC 12b, RSC 16.
Holed for jewelry - loop gone.Sosius
|
|
Λ (or possibly Δ)CILICIA. Adana (?). Elagabalus. Æ 34. A.D. 218-222. Obv: AVKMAVPANTΩNEINOCCEΓ (or similar), Î -Î on either side of portrait. Laureate, draped and cuirassed bust right; countermark on head. Rev: AΔAN-EΩN (?). Zeus seated left on throne, holding staff in left hand and patera right hand, right arm extended. Ref: BMC -. Axis: 165°. Weight: 22.31 g. CM: Λ (or possibly Δ) in circular punch, 5 mm. Howgego -. Note: Deeply recessed countermark. Collection Automan.Automan
|
|
ROME
PB Tessera (20mm, 4.24 g, 12h)
Bacchus standing right, holding thrysus; panther to right(?)
AVG
Cf. Rostovtsev 92 (smaller)
The obverse might alternately depict Diana with a stag, but she is not generally shown holding a staff.Ardatirion
|
|
IONIA, Ephesos.
PB Tessera (15mm, 1.58 g)
Aesculapius standing left, leaning on staff entwined with snakes
Blank
Gülbay & Kireç 3 (same dies) corr. (Aesculapius, not Eirene)
Ardatirion
|
|
IONIA, Ephesos
PB Tessera (16mm, 3.46 g)
Hygeia, standing right, holding serpent, and Aesculapeius, standing left, resting serpent-entwined staff on ground
Blank
Gülbay & Kireç –Ardatirion
|
|
EGYPT, Aphroditopolis
PB Tessera (15mm, 3.02 g, 4 h)
Old man standing right, leaning on staff (Anchises?)
Aphrodite seated facing on rock, head right, raising arms to cover breast
Milne 5320-4; Dattari (Savio) 11851-2; Köln -
Assuming that the types of Aphroditopolis uniformly bear relation to the goddess, the elderly male figure on the obverse presents an enigma. Perhaps the man is Anchises, the father of Aeneas. While he was certainly younger during his dalliances with Aphrodite, the artist could presumably have been influenced by the Virgilian image of an elderly man.Ardatirion
|
|
RIC.86 Postumus: antoninianus (Salvs Avg)Postumus, Gallic emperor (usurper) (260-269)
Antoninianus: Salvs Avg (4th emission, 1st phase, 266, Trèves)
Billon (100 ‰), 3.46 g, diameter 18-21 mm, die axis 7h
A/ IMP C POSTVMVS P F AVG; radiate, draped and cuirassed bust right
R/ SALV-S AVG; Esculape standing, facing, looking left, leaning on a staff on which a snake is wrapped. At foot, a globe on the right
EG.70
|
|
"C" Denarius, Crawford 107/1a - My favorite CoinDenomination: Denarius
Era: c. 209-208 BC
Metal: AR
Obverse: Helmeted head of Roma r. with splayed visor; “X” behind; Border of dots
Reverse: Dioscuri r.; Above, “C”; in linear frame, “ROMA”.
Mint: Etruia(?)
Weight: 4.44 gm.
Reference: Crawford 107/1a
Provenance: NAC 61; 25-OCT-2011, Privately purchased by RBW from CNG in 1989
Comments: This is one of my favorite coins. It is not high grade, neither the obverse nor the reverse is well centered. The dioscuri are really just blobs, and this coin would be overlooked in any sale but the NAC 61 sale of RBW’s finest and rarest coins, perhaps the greatest Roman Republican auction of our generation. Nevertheless, the coin has a lovely tone and a style that is very characteristic of this issue which is quite rare.
Unique to this variety and the related staff issue, are the braided locks extending from the helmet to the hair binding. The stars are simple dots above the dioscuri, and ROMA is cut into the die with very large letters with a very fine line tool. There has been much speculation on the significance of the “C” insignia, but few with any real merit.
|
|
"C" denarius, RRC 107/1b (var)Denomination: Denarius
Era: C. 209-208 BC
Metal: AR
Obverse: Helmeted head of Roma R,; X behind. Border of dots
Reverse: Dioscuri on horseback right, each holding spear, star above each head; "C" above; ROMA in 3-line frame.
Mint: Uncertain (Etruria?)
Weight: 4.36 g
Reference: RRC 107/1b (var)*
Provenance: NAC 125, Lot 372
Ex De Nicola Fixed price list June 1967, 229.
*This variety is not seen in the RRC plates, but it is depicted and differentiated in Grueber. (See Grueber II p. 188, #186, Plate LXXXIV 8.). Style only seen on 107 ("C"), not on 106 (staff). Crawford doesn't speculate on the meaning of the "C", or whether it is a mintmark or a moneyer's symbol. Sydenham notes that the bronze coins with C are sometimes overstruck on Sardinian coins, suggesting a mint in Sardinia. Grueber speculates that the C is a minmark for Canusium.
|
|
"C", larger head, Denarius, Crawford 107/1bDenomination: Denarius
Era: c. 209-208 BC
Metal: AR
Obverse: Helmeted head of Roma r. with splayed visor; “X” behind; Border of dots
Reverse: Dioscuri r.; above, “C” symbol; in linear frame, “ROMA”.
Mint: Etruria(?)
Weight: 4.32 gm.
Reference: Crawford 107/1b
Provenance: Naville auction, 7-MAY-2017
Comments:
This type with a “C” symbol is of the same fundamental style as the staff symbol 106/3c. presumably both issues from the same mint. The type is somewhat scarce, but the most common of the three other “C” sub-varieties.
Near complete on a large flan, GVF.
|
|
(0138) ANTONINUS PIUS138 - 161 AD
AE 19.6 X 21 mm; 4.64 g
struck ca. 144-158
O: [ΑV ΤΙ ΑΙ ΑΔΡ ΑΝΤΩΝ]ƐΙΝΟС laureate head of Antoninus Pius, r.
R: ƐΠΙ СΤΡ ΚοV[ΑΡΤοV ΤΟ Β ΠƐΡΓ(Α)] Asclepius standing, facing, head, l., holding serpent-staff
Conventus of Pergamum; RPC 3192 temp.;cf. Weisser 580, Cop 482-3, BMC 280
laney
|
|
(0177) COMMODUS -- PHILIPPOPOLISÆ19 3.89 g
177-192 AD
O: Radiate, draped and cuirassed(?) bust right
R: Asklepios standing right, holding serpent staff, right hand on hip. Possibly unpublished, cf. Varbanov 985 var.
Thrace, Philippopolislaney
|
|
(0177) COMMODUS--NIKOPOLIS AD ISTRUM177 - 192 AD
AE 28 mm; 10.89 g
O: Laureate head of Commodus right
R: Hygieia standing, r., feeding serpent from patera; to r., Asclepius standing, facing, head, l., holding serpent-staff
Moesia Inferior, Nicopolis ad Istrum; AMNG 1234
laney
|
|
(0198) CARACALLA198 - 217 AD
AE 17mm 2.92g
O: LAUR HEAD R
R: SERPENT ENTWINED ON STAFF OF ASKLEPIOS
THRACE, HADRIANOPOLIS
VARBANOV (BULG.) 1825 laney
|
|
(0198) CARACALLA198 - 217 AD
AE 16.5 mm, 2.72 g
O: Laureate head right
R: TPAIANOΠOΛEITΩN Serpent entwined staff
Thrace, Trajanopolis; Varbanov 2850laney
|
|
(0218) ELAGABALUS218 - 222 AD
AE 16.5mm 1.73g
O: LAUR BUST R
R: SERPENT ENTWINED ON STAFF OF ASKLEPIOS, HEAD L
MARKIANOPOLIS, MOESIA INFERIOR laney
|
|
(0238) GORDIAN III238 - 244 AD
AE 27 mm, 10.98 g
O: Laureate, draped and cuirassed bust of Gordian III, facing bust of Serapis. (confronted busts)
R: Asklepios standing facing, head left, holding serpent-entwined staff; E in right field
Moesia Inferior, Markianopolis; cf Varbanov 1954 var.laney
|
|
(0238) GORDIAN III238 - 244 AD
AE 28 mm, 10.65 g
O: Laureate, draped and cuirassed bust of Gordian III, facing bust of Serapis. (confronted busts)
R: Asklepios standing facing, head left, holding serpent-entwined staff; E in right field
Moesia Inferior, Markianopolis; cf Varbanov 1954 var.laney
|
|
(0238) GORDIAN III -- MARKIANOPOLIS238 - 244 AD
AE 27 mm 13.54 g
O: M ANT GORDIANOS AVG
LAUR DR CUIR BUST OF GORDIAN R, FACING DR BUST OF SERAPIS WEARING KALATHOS L (confronted busts)
R: VII MHNOFILOV MARKIANOPOLITWN AESKLEPIOS STANDING L HOLDING SNAKE-ENTWINED STAFF. E IN LEFT FIELD
MARKIANOPOLIS (LEGATE TULLIUS MENOPHILUS)
MOUSHMOV 789; Hristova/Jekov No. 6.37.20.3laney
|
|
(0238) GORDIAN III--Odessos238 - 244 AD
AE 27 mm, 10.71 g
O: Laureate, draped and cuirassed bust of Gordian right vis-a-vis draped bust of Serapis left, wearing Kalathos and holding cornucopia. (confronted busts)
R: Asklepios standing facing, head left, holding serpent-entwined staff; E in right field.
Moesia Inferior, Odessos mint; Varbanov 4462 var.laney
|
|
(0244) PHILIP I (THE ARAB)244-249 AD
AE 21.5 mm, 6.78 g
IMP M IVL PHILIPPVS AVG, laureate, draped bust right.
COL F L PAC DEVLT, Nemesis standing left holding scales
and staff, wheel at foot.
Thrace, Dueltum
Moushmov 3779.laney
|
|
(06) NERO--COUNTERMARKED54 - 68 AD
AE 19 mm 3.02 g
Phrygia, Akmoneia (probably L. Servenius Capito and his wife Iulia Severa. Struck circa 65 AD).
O: draped bust right; countermark: Asklepios holding snake-encircled staff
R: Zeus seated left, holding patera and sceptre
cf SNG von Aulock 3375 (same countermark).laney
|
|
(09) VITELLIUS69 AD
AR Denarius 17 mm, 3.00 g
O: A VITELLIVS GERM IMP AVG TR P, laureate head right
R: LIBERTAS RESTITVTA, Libertas standing facing, head right, holding pileus and long staff.
Rome; RIC 105; RSC 47
ex. Roma Numismatics auctionlaney
|
|
*SOLD*Licinius II AE
Attribution: RIC VII 30, Alexandria
Date: AD 321-324
Obverse: DN VAL LICIN LICINIVS NOB C, helmeted and cuirassed bust r., holding shield,
spear over shoulder
Reverse: IOVI CONSERVATORI, Jupiter stg. l.; chlamys over l. shoulder, Victory in r. hand, staff in l., eagle w/ wreath in beak at feet, bound captive behind, X w/ 12 ½ denarii communes mark below, SMALA in exergue
Size: 18 mmNoah
|
|
005p Tiberius (14-37 A.D.), Phrygia, Laodicea ad Lycum, Asia (conventus of Cibyra), RPC I 2901, AE-18, -/-//--, ΠYΘHΣ ΠYΘOY/ΛAOΔIKEΩN, Zeus Laodiceus standing left, #1 005p Tiberius (14-37 A.D.), Phrygia, Laodicea ad Lycum, Asia (conventus of Cibyra), RPC I 2901, AE-18, -/-//--, ΠYΘHΣ ΠYΘOY/ΛAOΔIKEΩN, Zeus Laodiceus standing left, #1
avers: ΣEBAΣTOΣ, Bare head of Tiberius right.
reverse: ΠYΘHΣ ΠYΘOY/ΛAOΔIKEΩN, Zeus Laodiceus standing, left, with eagle and staff, to left and right pilei with star. (Magistrate: Pythes Pythou (without title)).
exergue: -/-//--, diameter: 18,0-18,5mm, weight: 6,14 g, axes: 11h,
mint: City: Laodicea ad Lycum, Region: Phrygia, Province: Asia (conventus of Cibyra), date: 35-36 A.D., Magistrate: Pythes Pythou (without title),
ref: RPC I 2901, AMC 1402, SNG Cop 550, BMC Phrygia p. 301, 138 (Augustus!),
16 Specimens
Q-001quadrans
|
|
015b03. PlotinaPlotina. LYDIA. Hyrcanis. Plotina Ae. 16mm, 3.27 g. Obv: ΠΛΩΤΙΝΑ ϹΕΒΑϹΤΗ. Draped bust right. Rev: ΥΡΚΑΝΩΝ. Serpent-staff. RPC III 1954 (2 specimens); GRPC 31. Naumann Auction 138, lot 324. RPC plate coin.lawrence c
|
|
020b03. LucillaAE Sestertius. 30mm, 25.26 g. Obv: LVCILLAE AVG ANTONINI AVG F, draped bust right. Rev: VENVS S-C, Venus standing left, holding apple and staff. RIC 1766.lawrence c
|
|
026 Nerva (96-98 A.D.), RIC II 019, Rome, AR-Denarius, -/-//--, LIBERTAS PVBLICA, Libertas standing left, #1026 Nerva (96-98 A.D.), RIC II 019, Rome, AR-Denarius, -/-//--, LIBERTAS PVBLICA, Libertas standing left, #1
avers: IMP NERVA CAES AVG P M TR P COS III P P, Laureate head right.
reverse: LIBERTAS PVBLICA, Libertas standing left, holding cap and staff.
exergue: -/-//--, diameter: 17,5-18,5mm, weight:3,28g, axis: 6h,
mint: Rome, date: A.D., ref: RIC II 19, p-, C-,
Q-001quadrans
|
|
026 Nerva (96-98 A.D.), RIC II 019, Rome, AR-Denarius, -/-//--, LIBERTAS PVBLICA, Libertas standing left, #2026 Nerva (96-98 A.D.), RIC II 019, Rome, AR-Denarius, -/-//--, LIBERTAS PVBLICA, Libertas standing left, #2
avers: IMP NERVA CAES AVG P M TR P COS III P P, Laureate head right.
reverse: LIBERTAS PVBLICA, Libertas standing left, holding cap and staff.
exergue: -/-//--, diameter: 17-18mm, weight:3,36g, axis: 6h,
mint: Rome, date: A.D., ref: RIC II 19, p-, C-,
Q-002quadrans
|
|
030 - Vespasian Denarius - RIC ???Obv:- IMP CAESAR VESPASIANVS AVG TR P, Laureate head right
Rev:- LIBERTAS [PVBLICA], Libertas standing left, holding pileus and staff
Minted in Uncertain mint in Spain. A.D. 70-71
References:- Cohen -. RIC II ???
SOLDmaridvnvm
|
|
0345 Justin II, 565-578AV solidus, 20.8mm, 4.4g, aVF
Struck at Constantinople
DN IVSTI-NVS PP AVC, helmeted and cuirassed bust of Justin facing, holding globe surmounted by Victory, and shield / VICTORI-A AVCCC H, angel standing facing, holding long staff and globus cruciger; star in right field, CONOB in exg
Sear 345
Private saleLawrence W
|
|
035 Antoninus Pius (138-161 A.D.), RIC III 0886, Rome, AE-Sestertius, S/C//--, SALVS AVG COS IIII, Salus standing left,035 Antoninus Pius (138-161 A.D.), RIC III 0886, Rome, AE-Sestertius, S/C//--, SALVS AVG COS IIII, Salus standing left,
avers: ANTONINVS AVG PIVS P P TR P XV, Laureate head right.
reverse: SALVS AVG COS IIII, Salus standing left feeding serpent arising from altar, and leaning on staff, S-C across the field.
exergue: S/C//--, diameter: 30,0-32,5mm, weight: 21,53g, axis: 5h,
mint: Rome, date: 151-152 A.D., ref: RIC III 886,
Q-001quadrans
|
|
036. Trajan Decius, 249-251AD. AE Sestertius. AE Sestertius. Rome mint.
Obv. Laureate and cuirassed bust right, seen from behind IMP C M Q TRAIANVS DECIVS AVG
Rev. Dacia, wearing robe reaching feet, standing left holding vertical staff topped with a wolf's head DACIA SC.
RIC p. 135, 112b; C 18, , 18.398g, 22.4mm. gVF
LordBest
|
|
040a06. Trajan DeciusÆ Sestertius (29mm, 1h). Rome mint, 1st officina. 2nd-3rd emissions. Laureate and cuirassed bust right / Dacia standing left, holding staff surmounted by dragon's head. RIC IV 112a. Die shift. From the Robert W. Bartlett Bequest Sold for the Benefit of the ANS. Ex Berk BBS 19 (30 March 1982), lot 327. CNG Keystone Auction 4, Lot 241.lawrence c
|
|
040a07. Trajan DeciusAntoninianus, RSC IV 16, RIC IV 12(b), Hunter III 7, SRCV III 9368. Rome mint, weight 3.970g, maximum diameter 22.4mm, c. 250 - 251 A.D.; obverse IMP C M Q TRAIANVS DECIVS AVG, radiate, draped, and cuirassed bust right, from behind; reverse DACIA, Dacia standing half left, wearing robe reaching feet, staff topped with the head of Draco in right hand. A FORUM coin.lawrence c
|
|
041a Commodus (166-180 A.D. as Caesar, 180-192 A.D. as Augustus), RIC III 0626 (M.Aurel.), Rome, AR-denarius, TR POT II COS, Salus standing left,041a Commodus (166-180 A.D. as Caesar, 180-192 A.D. as Augustus), RIC III 0626 (M.Aurel.), Rome, AR-denarius, TR POT II COS, Salus standing left,
avers:- IMP-CAES-L-AVREL-COMMODVS-GERM-SARM, Laureate draped bust right.
revers:- TR-POT-II-COS, Salus standing left, feeding serpent held in arms, & holding staff.
exrg: -/-//--, diameter: 17,5-18 mm, weight: 3,04 g, axis: 11 h ,
mint: Rome, date: 177 A.D., ref: RIC-III-626 (Marc.Aurel.), p-264,
Q-001quadrans
|
|
041bp Commodus (166-180 A.D. as Caesar, 180-192 A.D. as Augustus), Mysia, Pergamon, Weisser 1110, Diodorus, strategus, EΠI CTRΑ-ΔIOΔOPΩV_ΠEPΓAMH/ΝΩN, Asclepius seated left, 041bp Commodus (166-180 A.D. as Caesar, 180-192 A.D. as Augustus), Mysia, Pergamon, Weisser 1110, Diodorus, strategus, Asia: Conventus of Pergamum; Mysia, EΠI-CTRΑ-ΔIOΔOPΩV_ΠEPΓAMH/ΝΩN, Asclepius seated left, holding patera feeding serpent,
avers:- AV-KA-AVP-ΚΟMOΔOC, Laureate, draped and cuirassed bust right.
revers:- EΠI-CTRΑ-ΔIOΔOPΩV_ΠEPΓAMH/ΝΩN, Asclepius seated, left, feeding serpent from patera, holding staff.
exe: -/-//--, diameter: 30mm, weight: 11,24g, axis: 6h,
mint: Pergamum; Asia: Conventus of Pergamum; Mysia, date: 182-184 A.D., ref: Weisser 1110,
Q-001quadrans
|
|
044 - Hadrian Drachm - Pontos, AmisosSilver drachm
Obv:- AVT KAI TPA ADPIANOC CEB P P VP G, Laureate bust left
Rev:- AMICOV ELEVQEPA-C ETOVC PXE, Demeter standing left holding corn ears & branched staff
Pontos, Amisos. Dated Year 166 of Amisos = 133-134 AD.
References:- cf SGI 1139, cf SNGvA 80. BMC Greek, pg. 22 Pontus 91. J.H. Nordbo, Imperial Silver Coinage of Amisus, 131/2-137/8 AD, Studies...Thomsen, p. 168, Year 166=133/4 AD, specimens 102-113maridvnvm
|
|
048 Clodius Albinus (193-196 A.D. Caesar, 195-196 A.D. Augustus ), Rome, RIC IV-I 002, AR-Denarius, COS II, Aesculapius standing left, Rare! #1048 Clodius Albinus (193-196 A.D. Caesar, 195-196 A.D. Augustus ), Rome, RIC IV-I 002, AR-Denarius, COS II, Aesculapius standing left, Rare! #1
avers: D CLOD SEPT ALBIN CAES, Bare head right.
reverse: COS II, Aesculapius standing left, naked to the waist, feeding serpent climbing up staff.
exergue: -/-//--, diameter: 16,0-17,8mm, weight: 3,24g, axis: 5h ,
mint: Rome, date: 195 A.D.,
ref: RIC IV-I 2, p-44, RSC 9, BMC 88, Sear 6140,
Q-001quadrans
|
|
050p Julia Domna (170-217 A.D.), Lydia, Bagis, Lindgen A716A., AE-23, Hygeia and Asklepios, #1050p Julia Domna (170-217 A.D.), Lydia, Bagis, Lindgen A716A., AE-23, Hygeia and Asklepios, #1
avers: ΙΟΥ ΔΟ ΜΝΑ CΕΒΑ, Draped bust right.
reverse: ΕΠΙ ACKΛEΠIAΔOΥ ΑΡX A B /BAΓHNΩN, Hygeia, on left, standing right, holding serpent, facing Asklepios, on right, standing standing left, leaning on serpent-entwined staff.
exergue: -/-//HNΩN, diameter: 22,5-23,5 mm, weight: 5,69g, axis: 6h,
mint: Lydia, Bagis, date: A.D.,
ref: Lindgen A716A., BMC p. 37, 31 var. (legend), SNG KOP 27 49(1), Lindgren and Kovács A716A (same dies),
Q-001quadrans
|
|
051 Caracalla (196-198 A.D. Caesar, 198-217 A.D. Augustus ), Rome, RIC IV-I 251, AR-Denarius, P M TR P XVIII COS IIII P P, Aesculapius standing front, #1051 Caracalla (196-198 A.D. Caesar, 198-217 A.D. Augustus ), Rome, RIC IV-I 251, AR-Denarius, P M TR P XVIII COS IIII P P, Aesculapius standing front, #1
avers: ANTONINVS PIVS AVG GERM, Laureate head right.
reverse: P M TR P XVIII COS IIII P P, Aesculapius standing front, head left, leaning on serpent-entwined staff left.
exergue: -/-//--, diameter: 18,5-19,5mm, weight: 2,77g, axis: 0h,
mint: Rome, date: 215 A.D.,
ref: RIC IV-I 251, p-248, RSC 302, BMC 103,
Q-001quadrans
|
|
051 Caracalla (196-198 A.D. Caesar, 198-217 A.D. Augustus ), Rome, RIC IV-I 554a, AE-As, S/C//--, P M TR P XVIII COS IIII P P, Aesculapius standing facing, Scarce! #1051 Caracalla (196-198 A.D. Caesar, 198-217 A.D. Augustus ), Rome, RIC IV-I 554a, AE-As, S/C//--, P M TR P XVIII COS IIII P P, Aesculapius standing facing, Scarce! #1
avers: ANTONINVS PIVS AVG GERM, Laureate head right.
reverse: P M TR P XVIII COS IIII P P, Aesculapius standing facing, holding serpent entwined staff, Telesphorus at foot left, globe at foot right.
exergue: S/C//--, diameter: mm, weight: g, axis: h,
mint: Rome, date: 215 A.D.,
ref: RIC IV-I 554a, p-, C-, Scarce!
Q-001quadrans
|
|
051p Caracalla (196-198 A.D. Caesar, 198-217 A.D. Augustus ), Lydia, Thyateira, SNG KOP 28 612(1), AE-20, ΘVATEI PHNΩN, Asclepius standing, #1051p Caracalla (196-198 A.D. Caesar, 198-217 A.D. Augustus ), Lydia, Thyateira, SNG KOP 28 612(1), AE-20, ΘVATEI PHNΩN, Asclepius standing, #1
avers: ANTΩ NEINOC, Laureate, draped and cuirassed bust right.
reverse: ΘVATEI PHNΩN, Asclepius standing facing, head left, holding serpent entwined staff.
exergue: -/-//--, diameter: 20,0mm, weight: 3,46g, axis: 6h,
mint: Lydia, Thyateira, date: 198-217 A.D.,
ref: SNG TUEBINGEN 3857(1) / COLL Y(1), SLG WEBER 6934(1), SNG KOP 28 612(1),
Q-001quadrans
|
|
051p Caracalla (196-198 A.D. Caesar, 198-217 A.D. Augustus ), Thrace, Serdica, Varbanov III. 2189, AE-28, OYΛΠIAC CEPΔIKHC, Asklepios standing front, #1051p Caracalla (196-198 A.D. Caesar, 198-217 A.D. Augustus ), Thrace, Serdica, Varbanov III. 2189, AE-28, OYΛΠIAC CEPΔIKHC, Asklepios standing front, #1
avers: AYT K M AVP CEY ANTΩNEINOC, Laureate head right (Ve).
reverse: OYΛΠIAC CEPΔIKHC, Asklepios standing front, looking left, leaning on a serpent-entwined staff.
exergue: -/-//--, diameter: 28,0mm, weight: 17,71g, axis:7h,
mint: Thrace, Serdica, date: A.D.,
ref: Varbanov(Engl.,2007) III. 2189 (Ve),
Q-001quadrans
|
|
051p Caracalla (196-198 A.D. Caesar, 198-217 A.D. Augustus ), Thrace, Serdica, Varbanov III. 2191, AE-29, OYΛΠIAC CEPΔIKHC, Asklepios standing front, #1051p Caracalla (196-198 A.D. Caesar, 198-217 A.D. Augustus ), Thrace, Serdica, Varbanov III. 2191, AE-29, OYΛΠIAC CEPΔIKHC, Asklepios standing front, #1
avers: AYT K M AVP CEY ANTΩNEINOC, Laureate draped and cuirassed bust right (Vl).
reverse: OYΛΠIAC CEPΔIKHC, Asklepios standing front, looking left, leaning on a serpent-entwined staff.
exergue: -/-//--, diameter: 28,5-29,5mm, weight: 17,90g, axis:1h,
mint: Thrace, Serdica, date: A.D.,
ref: Varbanov(Engl.,2007) III. 2191 (Vl),
Q-001quadrans
|
|
052a21. PostumusAR Antoninianus. Cologne mint. 266 AD. Obv: IMP C POSTVMVS P F AVG, radiate, draped and cuirassed bust right. Rev: SALVS AVG, Aesculapius standing right, head left, with right hand leaning on serpent-entwined staff, globe at feet. RIC 86, 326; Elmer 415; Cunetio 2435; Sear 10985.lawrence c
|
|
053p Geta (209-211 A.D.), Moesia, Markianopolis, Hristova/Jekov (2014) 06.22.01.04, AE-17, MARKIANOΠOLITΩN, Eagle standing right, #1053p Geta (209-211 A.D.), Moesia, Markianopolis, Hristova/Jekov (2014) 06.22.01.04, AE-17, MARKIANOΠOLITΩN, Eagle standing right, #1
avers: Λ CEΠ ΓETAC, Bust of younger Geta, draped and cuirassed(?), bare-headed, right.
reverse: MARKIANOΠOLITΩN, Eagle with closed wings standing right on staff, head with wreath in beaks left.
exergue: -/-//--, diameter: 17mm, weight: g, axis: h,
mint: Moesia, Markianopolis, date: Geta as Caesar, 198-209 A.D.,
ref: a) AMNG I/1, 697 (1 Ex., Wien)
b) Varbanov (engl.) 1105 corr. (cites AMNG 697, but writes head r.)
c) Hristova/Jekov (2012) No. 6.22.1.4 (same dies)
d) not in Pfeiffer (2013)
Q-001quadrans
|
|
053p Geta (209-211 A.D.), Moesia, Nicopolis Ad Istrum, HrHJ (2012) 08.22.46.03, AE-17, NIKOΠOΛITΩN ΠPOC I, Front of tetrastyle temple, #1053p Geta (209-211 A.D.), Moesia, Nicopolis Ad Istrum, HrHJ (2012) 08.22.46.03, AE-17, NIKOΠOΛITΩN ΠPOC I, Front of tetrastyle temple, #1
avers: Λ•AVP•KA ΓETAC, Bare-headed and draped off the younger Geta right.
reverse: ΝΙΚOΠO ΛΙTΩN ΠPOC I, Front of tetrastyle temple, within statue of Asklepios with snake staff.
exergue: -/-//ΠPOC I, diameter: 16,0-18,0mm, weight: 3,52g, axis:7h,
mint: Moesia, Nicopolis Ad Istrum, date: 198-209 A.D.,
ref: HrHJ (2012) 08.22.46.03,
Q-001quadrans
|
|
060a LICINIUS IEMPEROR: Licinius I
DENOMINATION: AE3 Radiate
OBVERSE: IMP C VAL LICIN LICINIVS PF AVG, radiate cuirassed bust right
REVERSE: IOVI CONSERVATORI, Jupiter standing half left, holding Victory on globe and eagle tipped staff, eagle at foot left with a wreath in its beak, captive seated to right with head left, X over III in field.
EXERGUE: SMHГ
DATE: 321-324 AD
MINT: Heraclea
WEIGHT: 2.42 g
RIC: VII Heraclea 52Barnaba6
|
|
0618 Focas, 602-610AV solidus, 21.3mm, 4.41g, VF
Struck 603-607 at Constatinople
ON FOCAS PERP AVC, Draped and cuirassed bust facing, wearing crown without pendilia, and holding globus cruciger / VICTORI - A AVCC B, Angel standing facing, holding in right hand long staff surmounted by Rho, and in left hand globus cruciger. CON OB in exg.
Ex: Glenn W. Woods
Sear 618; DO 5b.2Lawrence W
|
|
0620 Focus, 602-610AV solidus, 22.8mm, 4.49g, EF
Struck 607-610 at Constantinople
DN FOCAS PERP AVG, draped and cuirassed bust facing, wearing crown and holding globus cruciger / VICTORIA [AVGU] I, Angel standing facing, holding staff surmounted with Rho and globus cruciger; CONOB in exg. Unusual double strike.
Sear 620; Hahn 9
Lawrence W
|
|
0620v Focas, 602-610Gold solidus, 22.29mm, 4.48g, brilliant, Mint State
Struck c. 607-610 at Constantinople
d N FOCAS PERP AV, crowned, draped and cuirased bust facing, holding globus cruciger in raised right hand / VICTORIA AVGU E, angel standing facing, holding long staff surmounted by chi-rho monogram in right hand and orb surmounted by cross (globus cruciger) in left; CONOB in exg.
Certificate of Authenticity by David R. Sear, ACCS
Ex: Glenn W. Woods; Leu Auction 75, Zurich, 25-27 October 1999, lot 1629
cf. Sear 620; DOC 10e 1-5; MIB 9; Wroth (BMC) 10; Tolstoi 8; Ratto 1181 - all with obverse legend ending AVGLawrence W
|
|
0621 Focas, 602-610AV solidus, 21.1mm, 4.4g, Nice VF
Struck at Constantinople 609-610
dNN FOCAS PERP AVC, Draped and cuirassed bust facing, wearing crown and holding globus cruciger / VICTORIA AVGU I, Angel standing facing, holding staff surmounted with Rho and globus cruciger. CON OB in exg, N inner right field.
Ex: Glenn W. Woods
Sear 621; DO 11c.3Lawrence W
|
|
066 - Caracalla - RIC 514Dupondius
Obv:– ANTONINVS PIVS AVG BRIT, Radiate head right
Rev:– PROVIDENTIAE DEORVM / S - C, Providentia standing left holding staff and wand over globe
Minted in Rome.
Reference:– Cohen 534. BMC 254. Hill 1347. RIC 514maridvnvm
|
|
072 Trajan Decius. AR antoninianusobv: IMP C MQ TRAIANVS DECIVS AVG rad. drp. bust r.
rev: DACIA Dacia std. l. holding vertical staff with ass's headhill132
|
|
072p Gordianus-III. (238-244 A.D.), Moesia, Nicopolis Ad Istrum, HrHJ 08.36.35.10, AE-27, VΠ CAB MOΔECTOV NIKOΠOΛEIT(ΩN) (ΠP)OC-I C/T/P/O N, Nemesis-Aequitas standing left, #1072p Gordianus-III. (238-244 A.D.), Moesia, Nicopolis Ad Istrum, HrHJ 08.36.35.10, AE-27, VΠ CAB MOΔECTOV NIKOΠOΛEIT(ΩN) (ΠP)OC-I C/T/P/O N, Nemesis-Aequitas standing left, #1
avers:- AVT•K•Μ•ΑΝΤΩ-ΓΟΡΔΙΑΝΟC, Laureate, draped and cuirassed bust right, seen from the rear.
revers:- VΠ-CAB-MOΔECTOV-NI-KOΠOΛEIT(ΩN)-(ΠP)OC-I_C/T/P/O_N, Nemesis-Aequitas holding a staff in left arm and in right-hand scales, at her feet the wheel.
exe: -/C/T/P/O//N, diameter: 27mm, weight: g, axis: h,
mint: Moesia, Nicopolis Ad Istrum, Sabinius Modestus 241-244 A.D., date: 241-244 A.D., ref: Hristova/Hoeft/Jekov 08.36.35.10,
Q-001quadrans
|
|
0731 Hadrian Denarius Roma 124-27 AD HerculesReference.
Strack 155; RIC II, 149d; C331; RIC III, 731
Bust A2
Obv. HADRIANVS AVGVSTVS
Laureate head, drapery
Rev. COS III
Hercules, naked, seated right on a cuirass, holding club resting on shields, and distaff
2.9 gr
18 mm
hokidoki
|
|
079 Traianus Decius (249-251 A.D.), RIC IV-III 0012b, Rome, AR-Antoninianus, DACIA, Dacia standing left, #1079 Traianus Decius (249-251 A.D.), RIC IV-III 0012b, Rome, AR-Antoninianus, DACIA, Dacia standing left, #1
avers:- IMP C M Q TRAIANVS DECIVS AVG, radiate, draped, & cuirassed bust right
revers:- DACIA, Dacia standing left, holding draco standard or vertical staff surmounted by ass's head.
exe: -/-//--, diameter: 22-24mm, weight: 4,76g, axis: h,
mint: Rome, date: , ref: RIC IV-III 12b, RSC 16,
Q-001quadrans
|
|
079 Traianus Decius (249-251 A.D.), RIC IV-III 0012b, Rome, AR-Antoninianus, DACIA, Dacia standing left, #3079 Traianus Decius (249-251 A.D.), RIC IV-III 0012b, Rome, AR-Antoninianus, DACIA, Dacia standing left, #3
avers:- IMP C M Q TRAIANVS DECIVS AVG, radiate, draped, & cuirassed bust right
revers:- DACIA, Dacia standing left, holding draco standard or vertical staff surmounted by ass's head.
exe: -/-//--, diameter: 21-22mm, weight: 3,57g, axis: 0h,
mint: Roma, date: , ref: RIC IV-III 12b, RSC 16,
Q-003quadrans
|
|
08. Maurice TiberiusAV Solidus (21mm, 4.41 g, 7h). Constantinople mint, 7th officina. Struck 583-602 AD.
O: Helmeted, draped, and cuirassed facing bust, holding globus cruciger
R: Angel standing facing, holding long staff surmounted by staurogram and globus cruciger; Z//CONOB. DOC 5g; MIBE 6; SB 478. VF, small dig on reverse.
Ex CNG
Sosius
|
|
096 - Trajan Decius Antoninianus - RIC 012bObv:– IMP C M Q TRAIANVS DECIVS AVG, Radiate, draped and cuirassed bust right
Rev:– DACIA, Dacia, wearing robe reaching feet, standing left, holding vertical staff with ass’s head
Minted in Rome.
Reference:– RIC 12b. RSC 16maridvnvm
|
|
098 Postumus (260-269 A.D.), Trier, RIC V-II 326, AE-Antoninianus, SALVS AVG, Aesculapius standing facing, head left, #1098 Postumus (260-269 A.D.), Trier, RIC V-II 326, AE-Antoninianus, SALVS AVG, Aesculapius standing facing, head left, #1
avers: IMP C POSTVMVS P F AVG, Radiate, draped and cuirassed bust right.
reverse: SALVS AVG, Aesculapius standing facing, head left, leaning on a serpent-entwined staff, globe at feet.
exergue: -/-//--, diameter: 19,5-22,5mm, weight: 3,61g, axes: 6h,
mint: Trier, date: 260-269 A.D.,
ref: RIC V-II 326, RSC 336a, Sear 10985,
Q-001quadrans
|
|
0aa Caius MariusC. Fundanius, moneyer
101-91 BC
Denarius
Helmeted head of Roma right, control-mark C behind
"Triumphator" (Marius) in quadriga right, holding laurel-branch and staff; a rider sits on near horse, holding laurel-branch, Q above, C FVNDAN in exergue
The reverse shows Marius as triumphator in the quadriga. He holds sceptre and laurel branch. On one of the horses rides his son. The children of the triumphator were - according to tradition - allowed to share the triumph of their father. The Q above refers to the office as quaestor the mintmaster held while minting these coins. FORVM Ancient Coins says of a similar piece, "The reverse refers to Marius triumph after victories over the Cimbri and Teutones. The rider on the near horse is Marius's son, at that time eight years old." Andrew McCabe comments, "The Triumphator on the Fundania denarius is usually taken to be Marius, with his young son on horseback. This would make it the first Roman coin to explicitly portray a living Roman politician. "
Seaby Fundania 1
Marius rose from common origins to become the First Man in Rome. Plutarch in his Life writes: There is a likeness of Marius in stone at Ravenna, in Gaul, which I myself saw quite corresponding with that roughness of character that is ascribed to him. Being naturally valiant and warlike, and more acquainted also with the discipline of the camp than of the city, he could not moderate his passion when in authority. . . . He was born of parents altogether obscure and indigent, who supported themselves by their daily labour; his father of the same name with himself, his mother called Fulcinia. He had spent a considerable part of his life before he saw and tasted the pleasures of the city; having passed previously in Cirrhaeaton, a village of the territory of Arpinum, a life, compared with city delicacies, rude and unrefined, yet temperate, and conformable to the ancient Roman severity. He first served as a soldier in the war against the Celtiberians, when Scipio Africanus besieged Numantia; where he signalized himself to his general by courage far above his comrades, and particularly by his cheerfully complying with Scipio's reformation of his army, being almost ruined by pleasures and luxury. It is stated, too, that he encountered and vanquished an enemy in single combat, in his general's sight. In consequence of all this he had several honours conferred upon him; and once when at an entertainment a question arose about commanders, and one of the company (whether really desirous to know, or only in complaisance) asked Scipio where the Romans, after him, should obtain such another general, Scipio, gently clapping Marius on the shoulder as he sat next him, replied, "Here, perhaps. . . ."
The consul Caecilius Metellus, being declared general in the war against Jugurtha in Africa took with him Marius for lieutenant; where, eager himself to do great deeds and services that would get him distinction, he did not, like others, consult Metellus's glory and the serving his interest, and attributing his honour of lieutenancy not to Metellus, but to fortune, which had presented him with a proper opportunity and theatre of great actions, he exerted his utmost courage. . . . Marius thus employed, and thus winning the affections of the soldiers, before long filled both Africa and Rome with his fame, and some, too, wrote home from the army that the war with Africa would never be brought to a conclusion unless they chose Caius Marius consul. . . .He was elected triumphantly, and at once proceeded to levy soldiers contrary both to law and custom, enlisting slaves and poor people; whereas former commanders never accepted of such, but bestowed arms, like other favours, as a matter of distinction, on persons who had the proper qualification, a man's property being thus a sort of security for his good behavior. . . .
[In Marius' fourth consulship,] The enemy dividing themselves into two parts, the Cimbri arranged to go against Catulus higher up through the country of the Norici, and to force that passage; the Teutones and Ambrones to march against Marius by the seaside through Liguria. . . . The Romans, pursuing them, slew and took prisoners above one hundred thousand, and possessing themselves of their spoil, tents, and carriages, voted all that was not purloined to Marius's share, which, though so magnificent a present, yet was generally thought less than his conduct deserved in so great a danger. . . . After the battle, Marius chose out from amongst the barbarians' spoils and arms those that were whole and handsome, and that would make the greatest show in his triumph; the rest he heaped upon a large pile, and offered a very splendid sacrifice. Whilst the army stood round about with their arms and garlands, himself attired (as the fashion is on such occasions) in the purple-bordered robe, and taking a lighted torch, and with both hands lifting it up towards heaven, he was then going to put it to the pile, when some friends were espied with all haste coming towards him on horseback. Upon which every one remained in silence and expectation. They, upon their coming up, leapt off and saluted Marius, bringing him the news of his fifth consulship, and delivered him letters to that effect. This gave the addition of no small joy to the solemnity; and while the soldiers clashed their arms and shouted, the officers again crowned Marius with a laurel wreath, and he thus set fire to the pile, and finished his sacrifice. Blindado
|
|
1 tessera roman Cohen 53AE tessera
2.42 g, 16.4 mm, 7 h.
Obv. A.P.P.F within wreath.
Rev. Staff surmounted by small head left (Augustus?).
Cohen 53. Aleph
|
|
10. PhocasPHOCAS
602-610 AD
AV Solidus (22mm, 4.49 g, 6h). Constantinople mint, 1st officina. Struck 604-607.
Crowned, draped, and cuirassed bust facing, holding globus cruciger / Angel standing facing, holding staff surmounted by staurogram and globus cruciger; A//CONOB. DOC 5a; MIBE 7; SB 618. EF.
Ex-CNG 10/2013Sosius
|
|
112 Probus (276-282 A.D.), Lugdunum, RIC V-II 031.2.4.B.A., -/-//IIII, LAETITIA AVGVSTI, AE-Ant., Laetitia standing left, #1112 Probus (276-282 A.D.), Lugdunum, RIC V-II 031.2.4.B.A., -/-//IIII, LAETITIA AVGVSTI, AE-Ant., Laetitia standing left, #1
avers: IMP C M AVR PROBVS AVG, Radiate, cuirassed bust right. (B-F),
reverse: LAETITIA AVGVSTI, Laetitia standing left, holding wreath and anchor, or staff. (A)
exergue: -/-//IIII, diameter: 21-22,5mm, weight: 4,25g, axis: 7h,
mint: Lugdunum, 2nd. em., 4th. off., date: 276 A.D.,
ref: RIC V-II 031.2.4.B.A., p-23, C-329, Bastien 172, HO-270,
Q-001quadrans
|
|
122 - Claudius II Gothicus Ant. - RIC 054Obv:– IMP C CLAVDIVS AVG, Radiate, cuirassed bust right
Rev:– IOVI VICTORI, Jupiter standing left, holding staff and thunderbolt
Minted in Rome
Reference:– RIC 54maridvnvm
|
|
132 - Probus - RIC 031 - Bust Type FObv:– IMP C M AVR PROBVS AVG, Radiate cuirassed bust right
Rev:– LAETITIA AVGVSTI, Laetitia standing left holding wreath and staff
Minted in Lugdunum (IIII) Emission 3 Officina 4. Minted Start A.D. 277
Reference:– Cohen 329. Bastien 182 (29). RIC 31 Bust Type F
Weight 3.20g. 23.52mm. 180 degrees
Nearly fully silvered.
Clashed die resulting in obverse profile being seen on the reverse.
Possibly Minted in Lugdunum (IIII) Emission 2, 2nd Phase Officina 4. November to December A.D. 276. Bastien 172 (28) maridvnvm
|
|
132 - Probus - RIC 031 - Bust Type FObv:– IMP C M AVR PROBVS AVG, Radiate cuirassed bust right
Rev:– LAETITIA AVGVSTI, Laetitia standing left holding wreath and staff
Minted in Lugdunum (IIII) Emission 3 Officina 4. Minted Start A.D. 277
Reference:– Cohen 329. Bastien 182 (29). RIC 31 Bust Type F
Fully silvered, Uneven strike.
4.02 gms, 22.25mm. 180 degreesmaridvnvm
|
|
132 - Probus - RIC 031 - Bust Type F (Lugdunum) (IIII)Obv:– IMP C M AVR PROBVS AVG, Radiate, cuirassed bust right
Rev:– LAETITIA AVGVSTI, Laetitia standing left holding wreath and staff
Mint – Lugdunum (IIII in exe) Emission 3 Officina 4. Start A.D. 277
Reference:– Cohen 329. Bastien 182. RIC 31 Bust Type F
Weight 3.36g. 22.14mm. 180 degreesmaridvnvm
|
|
132 - Probus - RIC 031 - Bust Type F (Lugdunum) (IIII)Obv:– IMP C M AVR PROBVS AVG, Radiate, cuirassed bust right
Rev:– LAETITIA AVGVSTI, Laetitia standing left holding wreath and staff
Mint – Lugdunum (IIII in exe) Emission 3 Officina 4. Start A.D. 277
Reference:– Cohen 329. Bastien 182. RIC 31 Bust Type F
Weight 4.51g. 22.40mm. 0 degrees
Ex Langtoft hoardmaridvnvm
|
|
132 - Probus - RIC 032 - Bust Type F (Lugdunum) (IIII)Obv:– IMP C PROBVS • P • F • AVG, Radiate, cuirassed bust right.
Rev:– LAETITIA AVGVSTI, Laetitia standing left holding wreath and staff.
Minted in Lugdunum (IIII in exe) Emission 4 Officina 4. Mid to End December A.D. 277
Reference:– Cohen 328. Bastien 198. RIC 32 Bust type F.
3.06 gms maridvnvm
|
|
132 - Probus - RIC 838 - Bust Type H (Serdica) (* / KAΔ)Obv:– IMP C M AVR PROBVS P F AVG, Radiate bust left in imperial mantle, holding sceptre surmounted by eagle
Rev:– CLEMENTIA TEMP, Emperor standing right, holding eagle tipped sceptre, receiving globe from Jupiter, holding staff, standing left.
Minted in Serdica (* in centre field, KAΔ in exe) Emission 2, Officina 4. A.D. 276 A.D.
Reference:– RIC 838 Bust type H maridvnvm
|
|
132 - Probus - RIC 838-839 - Bust Type G (buckler) (Serdica) (* / KA•Γ•) Obv:– IMP C M AVR PROBVS AVG, Radiate, helmeted, cuirassed bust left holding spear and buckler
Rev:– CLEMENTIA TEMP, Emperor standing right, holding eagle tipped sceptre, receiving globe from Jupiter, holding staff, standing left.
Minted in Serdica (* in centre field, KA•Î“• in exe) Emission 2, Officina 3. A.D. 276 A.D.
Reference:– Unlisted in RIC but would appear between RIC 838 and RIC 839 maridvnvm
|
|
137 - Carinus - RIC V part II Lugdunum 223 Bust Type CObv:– IMP C M AVR CARINVS AVG, Radiate, draped, cuirassed bust right
Rev:– VIRTVS AVGG, Virtus standing right, holding staff and parazonium, foot on helmet
Minted in Lugdunum (_|A / LVG), Emission 7, Officina 1. early A.D. 284
Reference:– RIC 223 Bust type C. Cohen 173. Bastien 577 (9 examples cited)
Ex Vel Garnett Collectionmaridvnvm
|
|
137 - Carinus - RIC V part II Lugdunum 223 Bust Type CObv:– IMP C M AVR CARINVS AVG, Radiate, draped, cuirassed bust right
Rev:– VIRTVS AVGG, Virtus standing right, holding staff and parazonium, foot on helmet
Minted in Lugdunum (_|A (clogged) / LVG), Emission 7, Officina 1. early A.D. 284
Reference:– RIC 223 Bust type C. Cohen 173. Bastien 577 (9 examples cited)maridvnvm
|
|
1409a, Julian II "the Philosopher," February 360 - 26 June 363 A.D.Julian II, A.D. 360-363; RIC 167; VF; 2.7g, 20mm; Constantinople mint; Obverse: DN FL CL IVLIANVS P F AVG, helmeted & cuirassed bust right, holding spear & shield; Reverse: VOT X MVLT XX in four lines within wreath; CONSPB in exergue; Attractive green patina. Ex Nemesis.
De Imperatoribus Romanis,
An Online Encyclopedia of Roman Emperors
Julian the Apostate (360-363 A.D.)
Walter E. Roberts, Emory University
Michael DiMaio, Jr., Salve Regina University
Introduction
The emperor Flavius Claudius Julianus reigned from 360 to 26 June 363, when he was killed fighting against the Persians. Despite his short rule, his emperorship was pivotal in the development of the history of the later Roman empire. This essay is not meant to be a comprehensive look at the various issues central to the reign of Julian and the history of the later empire. Rather, this short work is meant to be a brief history and introduction for the general reader. Julian was the last direct descendent of the Constantinian line to ascend to the purple, and it is one of history's great ironies that he was the last non-Christian emperor. As such, he has been vilified by most Christian sources, beginning with John Chrysostom and Gregory Nazianzus in the later fourth century. This tradition was picked up by the fifth century Eusebian continuators Sozomen, Socrates Scholasticus, and Theodoret and passed on to scholars down through the 20th century. Most contemporary sources, however, paint a much more balanced picture of Julian and his reign. The adoption of Christianity by emperors and society, while still a vital concern, was but one of several issues that concerned Julian.
It is fortunate that extensive writings from Julian himself exist, which help interpret his reign in the light of contemporary evidence. Still extant are some letters, several panegyrics, and a few satires. Other contemporary sources include the soldier Ammianus Marcellinus' history, correspondence between Julian and Libanius of Antioch, several panegyrics, laws from the Theodosian Code, inscriptions, and coinage. These sources show Julian's emphasis on restoration. He saw himself as the restorer of the traditional values of Roman society. Of course much of this was rhetoric, meant to defend Julian against charges that he was a usurper. At the same time this theme of restoration was central to all emperors of the fourth century. Julian thought that he was the one emperor who could regain what was viewed as the lost glory of the Roman empire. To achieve this goal he courted select groups of social elites to get across his message of restoration. This was the way that emperors functioned in the fourth century. By choosing whom to include in the sharing of power, they sought to shape society.
Early Life
Julian was born at Constantinople in 331. His father was Julius Constantius, half-brother of the emperor Constantine through Constantius Chlorus, and his mother was Basilina, Julius' second wife. Julian had two half-brothers via Julius' first marriage. One of these was Gallus, who played a major role in Julian's life. Julian appeared destined for a bright future via his father's connection to the Constantinian house. After many years of tense relations with his three half-brothers, Constantine seemed to have welcomed them into the fold of the imperial family. From 333 to 335, Constantine conferred a series of honors upon his three half-siblings, including appointing Julius Constantius as one of the consuls for 335. Julian's mother was equally distinguished. Ammianus related that she was from a noble family. This is supported by Libanius, who claimed that she was the daughter of Julius Julianus, a Praetorian Prefect under Licinius, who was such a model of administrative virtue that he was pardoned and honored by Constantine.
Despite the fact that his mother died shortly after giving birth to him, Julian experienced an idyllic early childhood. This ended when Constantius II conducted a purge of many of his relatives shortly after Constantine's death in 337, particularly targeting the families of Constantine's half-brothers. ulian and Gallus were spared, probably due to their young age. Julian was put under the care of Mardonius, a Scythian eunuch who had tutored his mother, in 339, and was raised in the Greek philosophical tradition, and probably lived in Nicomedia. Ammianus also supplied the fact that while in Nicomedia, Julian was cared for by the local bishop Eusebius, of whom the future emperor was a distant relation. Julian was educated by some of the most famous names in grammar and rhetoric in the Greek world at that time, including Nicocles and Hecebolius. In 344 Constantius II sent Julian and Gallus to Macellum in Cappadocia, where they remained for six years. In 351, Gallus was made Caesar by Constantius II and Julian was allowed to return to Nicomedia, where he studied under Aedesius, Eusebius, and Chrysanthius, all famed philosophers, and was exposed to the Neo-Platonism that would become such a prominent part of his life. But Julian was most proud of the time he spent studying under Maximus of Ephesus, a noted Neo-Platonic philospher and theurgist. It was Maximus who completed Julian's full-scale conversion to Neo-Platonism. Later, when he was Caesar, Julian told of how he put letters from this philosopher under his pillows so that he would continue to absorb wisdom while he slept, and while campaigning on the Rhine, he sent his speeches to Maximus for approval before letting others hear them. When Gallus was executed in 354 for treason by Constantius II, Julian was summoned to Italy and essentially kept under house arrest at Comum, near Milan, for seven months before Constantius' wife Eusebia convinced the emperor that Julian posed no threat. This allowed Julian to return to Greece and continue his life as a scholar where he studied under the Neo-Platonist Priscus. Julian's life of scholarly pursuit, however, ended abruptly when he was summoned to the imperial court and made Caesar by Constantius II on 6 November 355.
Julian as Caesar
Constantius II realized an essential truth of the empire that had been evident since the time of the Tetrarchy--the empire was too big to be ruled effectively by one man. Julian was pressed into service as Caesar, or subordinate emperor, because an imperial presence was needed in the west, in particular in the Gallic provinces. Julian, due to the emperor's earlier purges, was the only viable candidate of the imperial family left who could act as Caesar. Constantius enjoined Julian with the task of restoring order along the Rhine frontier. A few days after he was made Caesar, Julian was married to Constantius' sister Helena in order to cement the alliance between the two men. On 1 December 355, Julian journeyed north, and in Augusta Taurinorum he learned that Alamannic raiders had destroyed Colonia Agrippina. He then proceeded to Vienne where he spent the winter. At Vienne, he learned that Augustudunum was also under siege, but was being held by a veteran garrison. He made this his first priority, and arrived there on 24 June 356. When he had assured himself that the city was in no immediate danger, he journeyed to Augusta Treverorum via Autessioduram, and from there to Durocortorum where he rendezvoused with his army. Julian had the army stage a series of punitive strikes around the Dieuse region, and then he moved them towards the Argentoratum/Mongontiacum region when word of barbarian incursions reached him.
From there, Julian moved on to Colonia Agrippina, and negotiated a peace with the local barbarian leaders who had assaulted the city. He then wintered at Senonae. He spent the early part of the campaigning season of 357 fighting off besiegers at Senonae, and then conducting operations around Lugdunum and Tres Tabernae. Later that summer, he encountered his watershed moment as a military general. Ammianus went into great detail about Julian's victory over seven rogue Alamannic chieftains near Argentoratum, and Julian himself bragged about it in his later writing. After this battle, the soldiers acclaimed Julian Augustus, but he rejected this title. After mounting a series of follow-up raids into Alamannic territory, he retired to winter quarters at Lutetia, and on the way defeated some Frankish raiders in the Mosa region. Julian considered this campaign one of the major events of his time as Caesar.
Julian began his 358 military campaigns early, hoping to catch the barbarians by surprise. His first target was the Franks in the northern Rhine region. He then proceeded to restore some forts in the Mosa region, but his soldiers threatened to mutiny because they were on short rations and had not been paid their donative since Julian had become Caesar. After he soothed his soldiers, Julian spent the rest of the summer negotiating a peace with various Alamannic leaders in the mid and lower Rhine areas, and retired to winter quarters at Lutetia. In 359, he prepared once again to carry out a series of punitive expeditions against the Alamanni in the Rhine region who were still hostile to the Roman presence. In preparation, the Caesar repopulated seven previously destroyed cities and set them up as supply bases and staging areas. This was done with the help of the people with whom Julian had negotiated a peace the year before. Julian then had a detachment of lightly armed soldiers cross the Rhine near Mogontiacum and conduct a guerilla strike against several chieftains. As a result of these campaigns, Julian was able to negotiate a peace with all but a handful of the Alamannic leaders, and he retired to winter quarters at Lutetia.
Of course, Julian did more than act as a general during his time as Caesar. According to Ammianus, Julian was an able administrator who took steps to correct the injustices of Constantius' appointees. Ammianus related the story of how Julian prevented Florentius, the Praetorian Prefect of Gaul, from raising taxes, and also how Julian actually took over as governor for the province of Belgica Secunda. Hilary, bishop of Poitiers, supported Ammianus' basic assessment of Julian in this regard when he reported that Julian was an able representative of the emperor to the Gallic provincials. There is also epigraphic evidence to support Julian's popularity amongst the provincial elites. An inscription found near Beneventum in Apulia reads:
"To Flavius Claudius Julianus, most noble and sanctified Caesar, from the caring Tocius Maximus, vir clarissimus, for the care of the res publica from Beneventum".
Tocius Maximus, as a vir clarissimus, was at the highest point in the social spectrum and was a leader in his local community. This inscription shows that Julian was successful in establishing a positive image amongst provincial elites while he was Caesar.
Julian Augustus
In early 360, Constantius, driven by jealousy of Julian's success, stripped Julian of many troops and officers, ostensibly because the emperor needed them for his upcoming campaign against the Persians. One of the legions ordered east, the Petulantes, did not want to leave Gaul because the majority of the soldiers in the unit were from this region. As a result they mutinied and hailed Julian as Augustus at Lutetia. Julian refused this acclamation as he had done at Argentoratum earlier, but the soldiers would have none of his denial. They raised him on a shield and adorned him with a neck chain, which had formerly been the possession of the standard-bearer of the Petulantes and symbolized a royal diadem. Julian appeared reluctantly to acquiesce to their wishes, and promised a generous donative. The exact date of his acclamation is unknown, but most scholars put it in February or March. Julian himself supported Ammianus' picture of a jealous Constantius. In his Letter to the Athenians, a document constructed to answer charges that he was a usurper, Julian stated that from the start he, as Caesar, had been meant as a figurehead to the soldiers and provincials. The real power he claimed lay with the generals and officials already present in Gaul. In fact, according to Julian, the generals were charged with watching him as much as the enemy. His account of the actual acclamation closely followed what Ammianus told us, but he stressed even more his reluctance to take power. Julian claimed that he did so only after praying to Zeus for guidance.
Fearing the reaction of Constantius, Julian sent a letter to his fellow emperor justifying the events at Lutetia and trying to arrange a peaceful solution. This letter berated Constantius for forcing the troops in Gaul into an untenable situation. Ammianus stated that Julian's letter blamed Constantius' decision to transfer Gallic legions east as the reason for the soldiers' rebellion. Julian once again asserted that he was an unwilling participant who was only following the desire of the soldiers. In both of these basic accounts Ammianus and Julian are playing upon the theme of restoration. Implicit in their version of Julian's acclamation is the argument that Constantius was unfit to rule. The soldiers were the vehicle of the gods' will. The Letter to the Athenians is full of references to the fact that Julian was assuming the mantle of Augustus at the instigation of the gods. Ammianus summed up this position nicely when he related the story of how, when Julian was agonizing over whether to accept the soldiers' acclamation, he had a dream in which he was visited by the Genius (guardian spirit) of the Roman state. The Genius told Julian that it had often tried to bestow high honors upon Julian but had been rebuffed. Now, the Genius went on to say, was Julian's final chance to take the power that was rightfully his. If the Caesar refused this chance, the Genius would depart forever, and both Julian and the state would rue Julian's rejection. Julian himself wrote a letter to his friend Maximus of Ephesus in November of 361 detailing his thoughts on his proclamation. In this letter, Julian stated that the soldiers proclaimed him Augustus against his will. Julian, however, defended his accession, saying that the gods willed it and that he had treated his enemies with clemency and justice. He went on to say that he led the troops in propitiating the traditional deities, because the gods commanded him to return to the traditional rites, and would reward him if he fulfilled this duty.
During 360 an uneasy peace simmered between the two emperors. Julian spent the 360 campaigning season continuing his efforts to restore order along the Rhine, while Constantius continued operations against the Persians. Julian wintered in Vienne, and celebrated his Quinquennalia. It was at this time that his wife Helena died, and he sent her remains to Rome for a proper burial at his family villa on the Via Nomentana where the body of her sister was entombed. The uneasy peace held through the summer of 361, but Julian concentrated his military operations around harassing the Alamannic chieftain Vadomarius and his allies, who had concluded a peace treaty with Constantius some years earlier. By the end of the summer, Julian decided to put an end to the waiting and gathered his army to march east against Constantius. The empire teetered on the brink of another civil war. Constantius had spent the summer negotiating with the Persians and making preparations for possible military action against his cousin. When he was assured that the Persians would not attack, he summoned his army and sallied forth to meet Julian. As the armies drew inexorably closer to one another, the empire was saved from another bloody civil war when Constantius died unexpectedly of natural causes on 3 November near the town of Mopsucrenae in Cilicia, naming Julian -- the sources say-- as his legitimate successor.
Julian was in Dacia when he learned of his cousin's death. He made his way through Thrace and came to Constantinople on 11 December 361 where Julian honored the emperor with the funeral rites appropriate for a man of his station. Julian immediately set about putting his supporters in positions of power and trimming the imperial bureaucracy, which had become extremely overstaffed during Constantius' reign. Cooks and barbers had increased during the late emperor's reign and Julian expelled them from his court. Ammianus gave a mixed assessment of how the new emperor handled the followers of Constantius. Traditionally, emperors were supposed to show clemency to the supporters of a defeated enemy. Julian, however, gave some men over to death to appease the army. Ammianus used the case of Ursulus, Constantius' comes sacrum largitionum, to illustrate his point. Ursulus had actually tried to acquire money for the Gallic troops when Julian had first been appointed Caesar, but he had also made a disparaging remark about the ineffectiveness of the army after the battle of Amida. The soldiers remembered this, and when Julian became sole Augustus, they demanded Ursulus' head. Julian obliged, much to the disapproval of Ammianus. This seems to be a case of Julian courting the favor of the military leadership, and is indicative of a pattern in which Julian courted the goodwill of various societal elites to legitimize his position as emperor.
Another case in point is the officials who made up the imperial bureaucracy. Many of them were subjected to trial and punishment. To achieve this goal, during the last weeks of December 361 Julian assembled a military tribunal at Chalcedon, empanelling six judges to try the cases. The president of the tribunal was Salutius, just promoted to the rank of Praetorian Prefect; the five other members were Mamertinus, the orator, and four general officers: Jovinus, Agilo, Nevitta, and Arbetio. Relative to the proceedings of the tribunal, Ammianus noted that the judges, " . . . oversaw the cases more vehemently than was right or fair, with the exception of a few . . .." Ammianus' account of Julian's attempt at reform of the imperial bureaucracy is supported by legal evidence from the Theodosian Code. A series of laws sent to Mamertinus, Julian's appointee as Praetorian Prefect in Italy, Illyricum, and Africa, illustrate this point nicely. On 6 June 362, Mamertinus received a law that prohibited provincial governors from bypassing the Vicars when giving their reports to the Prefect. Traditionally, Vicars were given civil authority over a group of provinces, and were in theory meant to serve as a middle step between governors and Prefects. This law suggests that the Vicars were being left out, at least in Illyricum. Julian issued another edict to Mamertinus on 22 February 362 to stop abuse of the public post by governors. According to this law, only Mamertinus could issue post warrants, but the Vicars were given twelve blank warrants to be used as they saw fit, and each governor was given two. Continuing the trend of bureaucratic reform, Julian also imposed penalties on governors who purposefully delayed appeals in court cases they had heard. The emperor also established a new official to weigh solidi used in official government transactions to combat coin clipping.
For Julian, reigning in the abuses of imperial bureaucrats was one step in restoring the prestige of the office of emperor. Because he could not affect all elements of society personally, Julian, like other Neo-Flavian emperors, decided to concentrate on select groups of societal elites as intercessors between himself and the general populace. One of these groups was the imperial bureaucracy. Julian made it very clear that imperial officials were intercessors in a very real sense in a letter to Alypius, Vicar of Britain. In this letter, sent from Gaul sometime before 361, the emperor praises Alypius for his use of "mildness and moderation with courage and force" in his rule of the provincials. Such virtues were characteristic of the emperors, and it was good that Alypius is representing Julian in this way. Julian courted the army because it put him in power. Another group he sought to include in his rule was the traditional Senatorial aristocracy. One of his first appointments as consul was Claudius Mamertinus, a Gallic Senator and rhetorician. Mamertinus' speech in praise of Julian delivered at Constantinople in January of 362 is preserved. In this speech, Claudius presented his consular selection as inaugurating a new golden age and Julian as the restorer of the empire founded by Augustus. The image Mamertinus gave of his own consulate inaugurating a new golden age is not merely formulaic. The comparison of Julian to Augustus has very real, if implicit, relevance to Claudius' situation. Claudius emphasized the imperial period as the true age of renewal. Augustus ushered in a new era with his formation of a partnership between the emperor and the Senate based upon a series of honors and offices bestowed upon the Senate in return for their role as intercessor between emperor and populace. It was this system that Julian was restoring, and the consulate was one concrete example of this bond. To be chosen as a consul by the emperor, who himself had been divinely mandated, was a divine honor. In addition to being named consul, Mamertinus went on to hold several offices under Julian, including the Prefecture of Italy, Illyricum, and Africa. Similarly, inscriptional evidence illustrates a link between municipal elites and Julian during his time as Caesar, something which continued after he became emperor. One concrete example comes from the municipal senate of Aceruntia in Apulia, which established a monument on which Julian is styled as "Repairer of the World."
Julian seems to have given up actual Christian belief before his acclamation as emperor and was a practitioner of more traditional Greco-Roman religious beliefs, in particular, a follower of certain late antique Platonist philosophers who were especially adept at theurgy as was noted earlier. In fact Julian himself spoke of his conversion to Neo-Platonism in a letter to the Alexandrians written in 363. He stated that he had abandoned Christianity when he was twenty years old and been an adherent of the traditional Greco-Roman deities for the twelve years prior to writing this letter.
(For the complete text of this article see: http://www.roman-emperors.org/julian.htm)
Julian’s Persian Campaign
The exact goals Julian had for his ill-fated Persian campaign were never clear. The Sassanid Persians, and before them the Parthians, had been a traditional enemy from the time of the Late Republic, and indeed Constantius had been conducting a war against them before Julian's accession forced the former to forge an uneasy peace. Julian, however, had no concrete reason to reopen hostilities in the east. Socrates Scholasticus attributed Julian's motives to imitation of Alexander the Great, but perhaps the real reason lay in his need to gather the support of the army. Despite his acclamation by the Gallic legions, relations between Julian and the top military officers was uneasy at best. A war against the Persians would have brought prestige and power both to Julian and the army.
Julian set out on his fateful campaign on 5 March 363. Using his trademark strategy of striking quickly and where least expected, he moved his army through Heirapolis and from there speedily across the Euphrates and into the province of Mesopotamia, where he stopped at the town of Batnae. His plan was to eventually return through Armenia and winter in Tarsus. Once in Mesopotamia, Julian was faced with the decision of whether to travel south through the province of Babylonia or cross the Tigris into Assyria, and he eventually decided to move south through Babylonia and turn west into Assyria at a later date. By 27 March, he had the bulk of his army across the Euphrates, and had also arranged a flotilla to guard his supply line along the mighty river. He then left his generals Procopius and Sebastianus to help Arsacius, the king of Armenia and a Roman client, to guard the northern Tigris line. It was also during this time that he received the surrender of many prominent local leaders who had nominally supported the Persians. These men supplied Julian with money and troops for further military action against their former masters. Julian decided to turn south into Babylonia and proceeded along the Euphrates, coming to the fortress of Cercusium at the junction of the Abora and Euphrates Rivers around the first of April, and from there he took his army west to a region called Zaitha near the abandoned town of Dura where they visited the tomb of the emperor Gordian which was in the area. On April 7 he set out from there into the heart of Babylonia and towards Assyria.
Ammianus then stated that Julian and his army crossed into Assyria, which on the face of things appears very confusing. Julian still seems to be operating within the province of Babylonia between the Tigris and Euphrates rivers. The confusion is alleviated when one realizes that,for Ammianus, the region of Assyria encompassed the provinces of Babylonia and Assyria. On their march, Julian's forces took the fortress of Anatha, received the surrender and support of several more local princes, and ravaged the countryside of Assyria between the rivers. As the army continued south, they came across the fortresses Thilutha and Achaiachala, but these places were too well defended and Julian decided to leave them alone. Further south were the cities Diacira and Ozogardana, which the Roman forces sacked and burned. Soon, Julian came to Pirisabora and a brief siege ensued, but the city fell and was also looted and destroyed. It was also at this time that the Roman army met its first systematic resistance from the Persians. As the Romans penetrated further south and west, the local inhabitants began to flood their route. Nevertheless, the Roman forces pressed on and came to Maiozamalcha, a sizable city not far from Ctesiphon. After a short siege, this city too fell to Julian. Inexorably, Julian's forces zeroed in on Ctesiphon, but as they drew closer, the Persian resistance grew fiercer, with guerilla raids whittling at Julian's men and supplies. A sizable force of the army was lost and the emperor himself was almost killed taking a fort a few miles from the target city.
Finally, the army approached Ctesiphon following a canal that linked the Tigris and Euphrates. It soon became apparent after a few preliminary skirmishes that a protracted siege would be necessary to take this important city. Many of his generals, however, thought that pursuing this course of action would be foolish. Julian reluctantly agreed, but became enraged by this failure and ordered his fleet to be burned as he decided to march through the province of Assyria. Julian had planned for his army to live off the land, but the Persians employed a scorched-earth policy. When it became apparent that his army would perish (because his supplies were beginning to dwindle) from starvation and the heat if he continued his campaign, and also in the face of superior numbers of the enemy, Julian ordered a retreat on 16 June. As the Roman army retreated, they were constantly harassed by guerilla strikes. It was during one of these raids that Julian got caught up in the fighting and took a spear to his abdomen. Mortally wounded he was carried to his tent, where, after conferring with some of his officers, he died. The date was 26 June 363.
Conclusion
Thus an ignominious end for a man came about who had hoped to restore the glory of the Roman empire during his reign as emperor. Due to his intense hatred of Christianity, the opinion of posterity has not been kind to Julian. The contemporary opinion, however, was overall positive. The evidence shows that Julian was a complex ruler with a definite agenda to use traditional social institutions in order to revive what he saw as a collapsing empire. In the final assessment, he was not so different from any of the other emperors of the fourth century. He was a man grasping desperately to hang on to a Greco-Roman conception of leadership that was undergoing a subtle yet profound change.
Copyright (C) 2002, Walter E. Roberts and Michael DiMaio, Jr. Used by permission.
In reality, Julian worked to promote culture and philosophy in any manifestation. He tried to reduce taxes and the public debts of municipalities; he augmented administrative decentralisation; he promoted a campaign of austerity to reduce public expenditure (setting himself as the example). He reformed the postal service and eliminated the powerful secret police.
by Federico Morando; JULIAN II, The Apostate, See the Julian II Page on NumisWiki
Flavius Claudius Iulianus was born in 331 or maybe 332 A.D. in Constantinople. He ruled the Western Empire as Caesar from 355 to 360 and was hailed Augustus by his legions in Lutetia (Paris) in 360. Julian was a gifted administrator and military strategist. Famed as the last pagan emperor, his reinstatement of the pagan religion earned him the moniker "the Apostate." As evidenced by his brilliant writing, some of which has survived to the present day, the title "the Philosopher" may have been more appropriate. He died from wounds suffered during the Persian campaign of 363 A.D. Joseph Sermarini, FORVM.
Edited by J. P. Fitzgerald, Jr.
Cleisthenes
|
|
1501s, Valentinian I, 25 February 364 - 17 November 375 A.D. (Siscia)Valentinian I, 25 February 364 - 17 November 375 A.D., Bronze AE 3, S 4103, VF, Siscia mint, 2.012g, 18.7mm, 180o, 24 Aug 367 - 17 Nov 375 A.D.obverse D N VALENTINI-ANVS P F AVG, pearl-diademed, draped and cuirassed bust right; reverse SECVRITAS - REIPVBLICAE, Victory advancing left, wreath in right and palm in left, symbols in fields, mintmark in exergue.
De Imperatoribus Romanis, An Online Encyclopedia of the Roman Emperors and their Families
Valentinian I (364-375 AD.)
Walter E. Roberts, Emory University
Valentinian was one of Rome's last great warrior emperors. Flavius Valentinianus, was born in A.D. 321 at Cibalis (modern Vinkovci) in southern Pannonia. His father Gratian was a soldier renowned for his strength and wrestling skills. Gratian had an illustrious career in the army, rising from staff officer to tribune, to comes Africae, and finally [i/comes Britanniae.
The emperor Jovian died on 17 February 364, apparently of natural causes, on the border between Bithynia and Galatia. The army marched on to Nicaea, the nearest city of any consequence, and a meeting of civil and military officials was convened to choose a new emperor. The assembly finally agreed upon Valentinian.
On 26 February 364, Valentinian accepted the office offered to him. As he prepared to make his accession speech, the soldiers threatened to riot, apparently uncertain as to where his loyalties lay. Valentinian reassured them that the army was his greatest priority. Furthermore, to prevent a crisis of succession if he should die prematurely, he agreed to pick a co-Augustus. According to Ammianus, the soldiers were astounded by Valentinian’s bold demeanor and his willingness to assume the imperial authority. His decision to elect a fellow-emperor could also be construed as a move to appease any opposition among the civilian officials in the eastern portion of the empire. By agreeing to appoint a co-ruler, he assured the eastern officials that someone with imperial authority would remain in the east to protect their interests. After promoting his brother Valens to the rank of tribune and putting him in charge of the royal stables on March 1, Valentinian selected Valens as co-Augustus at Constantinople on 28 March 364, though this was done over the objections of Dagalaifus. Ammianus makes it clear, however, that Valens was clearly subordinate to his brother.
Ammianus and Zosimus as well as modern scholars praise Valentinian for his military accomplishments. He is generally credited with keeping the Roman empire from crumbling away by “. . . reversing the generally waning confidence in the army and imperial defense . . ..” Several other aspects of Valentinian's reign also set the course of Roman history for the next century.
Valentinian deliberately polarized Roman society, subordinating the civilian population to the military. The military order took over the old prestige of the senatorial nobility. The imperial court, which was becoming more and more of a military court, became a vehicle for social mobility. There were new ideas of nobility, which was increasingly provincial in character. By this it is meant that the imperial court, not the Senate, was the seat of nobility, and most of these new nobles came from the provinces. With the erosion of the old nobility, the stage was set for the ascendancy of Christianity. Ammianus makes it clear that actions such as these were part of a systematic plan by Valentinian to erode the power and prestige of the senatorial aristocracy. Several pieces of extant legislation seem to confirm Ammianus’ allegations that Valentinian was eroding senatorial prestige.
Valentinian's reign affords valuable insights into late Roman society, civilian as well as military. First, there was a growing fracture between the eastern and western portions of the empire. Valentinian was the last emperor to really concentrate his resources on the west. Valens was clearly in an inferior position in the partnership. Second, there was a growing polarization of society, both Christian versus pagan, and civil versus military. Finally there was a growing regionalism in the west, driven by heavy taxation and the inability of Valentinian to fully exercise military authority in all areas of the west. All of these trends would continue over the next century, profoundly reshaping the Roman empire and western Europe.
By Walter E. Roberts, Emory University
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
|
|
1501s, Valentinian I, 25 February 364 - 17 November 375 A.D. (Siscia)Valentinian I, 25 February 364 - 17 November 375 A.D. Bronze AE 3, RIC 5(a) ii, VF, Siscia, 1.905g, 19.3mm, 0o, 25 Feb 364 - 24 Aug 367 A.D. Obverse: D N VALENTINI-ANVS P F AVG, pearl-diademed, draped and cuirassed bust right; Reverse: GLORIA RO-MANORVM, Emperor dragging captive with right, labarum (chi-rho standard) in left, •GSISC in exergue.
De Imperatoribus Romanis, An Online Encyclopedia of the Roman Emperors and their Families
Valentinian I (364-375 AD.)
Walter E. Roberts, Emory University
Valentinian was one of Rome's last great warrior emperors. Flavius Valentinianus, was born in A.D. 321 at Cibalis (modern Vinkovci) in southern Pannonia. His father Gratian was a soldier renowned for his strength and wrestling skills. Gratian had an illustrious career in the army, rising from staff officer to tribune, to comes Africae, and finally [i/comes Britanniae.
The emperor Jovian died on 17 February 364, apparently of natural causes, on the border between Bithynia and Galatia. The army marched on to Nicaea, the nearest city of any consequence, and a meeting of civil and military officials was convened to choose a new emperor. The assembly finally agreed upon Valentinian.
On 26 February 364, Valentinian accepted the office offered to him. As he prepared to make his accession speech, the soldiers threatened to riot, apparently uncertain as to where his loyalties lay. Valentinian reassured them that the army was his greatest priority. Furthermore, to prevent a crisis of succession if he should die prematurely, he agreed to pick a co-Augustus. According to Ammianus, the soldiers were astounded by Valentinian’s bold demeanor and his willingness to assume the imperial authority. His decision to elect a fellow-emperor could also be construed as a move to appease any opposition among the civilian officials in the eastern portion of the empire. By agreeing to appoint a co-ruler, he assured the eastern officials that someone with imperial authority would remain in the east to protect their interests. After promoting his brother Valens to the rank of tribune and putting him in charge of the royal stables on March 1, Valentinian selected Valens as co-Augustus at Constantinople on 28 March 364, though this was done over the objections of Dagalaifus. Ammianus makes it clear, however, that Valens was clearly subordinate to his brother.
Ammianus and Zosimus as well as modern scholars praise Valentinian for his military accomplishments. He is generally credited with keeping the Roman empire from crumbling away by “. . . reversing the generally waning confidence in the army and imperial defense . . ..” Several other aspects of Valentinian's reign also set the course of Roman history for the next century.
Valentinian deliberately polarized Roman society, subordinating the civilian population to the military. The military order took over the old prestige of the senatorial nobility. The imperial court, which was becoming more and more of a military court, became a vehicle for social mobility. There were new ideas of nobility, which was increasingly provincial in character. By this it is meant that the imperial court, not the Senate, was the seat of nobility, and most of these new nobles came from the provinces. With the erosion of the old nobility, the stage was set for the ascendancy of Christianity. Ammianus makes it clear that actions such as these were part of a systematic plan by Valentinian to erode the power and prestige of the senatorial aristocracy. Several pieces of extant legislation seem to confirm Ammianus’ allegations that Valentinian was eroding senatorial prestige.
Valentinian's reign affords valuable insights into late Roman society, civilian as well as military. First, there was a growing fracture between the eastern and western portions of the empire. Valentinian was the last emperor to really concentrate his resources on the west. Valens was clearly in an inferior position in the partnership. Second, there was a growing polarization of society, both Christian versus pagan, and civil versus military. Finally there was a growing regionalism in the west, driven by heavy taxation and the inability of Valentinian to fully exercise military authority in all areas of the west. All of these trends would continue over the next century, profoundly reshaping the Roman empire and western Europe.
By Walter E. Roberts, Emory University
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
|
|
1502c, Valens, 28 March 364 - 9 August 378 A.D. (Cyzikus)Bronze AE 3, S 4118, 2.42g, 16.5mm, 180o,Cyzikus, F/F, obverse D N VALENS P F AVG, pearl-diademed, draped and cuirassed bust right; reverse SECVRITAS REIPVBLICAE, Victory advancing left, wreath in right, palm frond in left, SMK L(?) in exergue. Ex FORVM.
De Imperatoribus Romanis, An Online Encyclopedia of the Roman Emperors and their Families
Valens (365-369 AD.)
Noel Linski, University of Colorado
Valens was the brother of Valentinian I. On March 28, 364, precisely one month after his accession by Roman reckoning, Valentinian appointed his brother Flavius Valens co-emperor at the Hebdomon, the first in a long line of emperors proclaimed there. Themistius was present and later recounted the occasion in his Or. 6. After only two months of co-rulership, the two departed from Constantinople for their native Illyricum. Outside Naissus, in Moesia, they divided their administrative staff between them and at Sirmium they did the same with their mobile forces. Valens was to rule the east, from Thrace in the North and Cyrenaica in the South eastward to the Persian frontier. Valentinian ruled the west. They did not spend long in Sirmium. By late August 365 Valentinian had moved on toward Milan, where he resided for the following year before moving on to Trier, which remained his capital until 375. Similarly, Valens was back in Constantinople by December 364.and he was declared Augustus in 364 A.D. He was given command of the Eastern provinces, where he spent much of his time campaigning against the Goths and Persians.
In 376 A.D., Valens allowed Gothic tribes, who were being driven forward by the Huns to settle in the Danube provinces. The Goths were so badly treated by the Romans that they rebelled. Valens marched against the confederated barbarian army, and on August 9, 378, the two forces met at Adrianople. Although negotiations were attempted, these broke down when a Roman unit sallied forth and carried both sides into battle. The Romans held their own early on but were crushed by the surprise arrival of Greuthungi cavalry which split their ranks.
In one historical account, Valens was wounded in battle but escaped to a nearby farmstead where he was burned to death in a tower by Gothic marauders. The fourth century A.D. Roman historian Ammianus Marcellinus does not seem to concur with this story. Regardless, when the battle was over Valens' body was never recovered, 10,000 roman soldiers lay dead and the perception of Roman military invincibility was destroyed.
Adrianople was the most significant event in Valens' career. Though he displayed some talent as an administrator, Valens' persecutions of Nicene Christians and pagan philosophers, his halting efforts at military achievement and his obtuse personality rendered him a less than glorious emperor. To have died in so inglorious a battle has thus come to be regarded as the nadir of an unfortunate career. This is especially true because of the profound consequences of Valens' defeat.
Adrianople spelled the beginning of the end for Roman territorial integrity in the late empire and this fact was recognized even by contemporaries. The Roman historian Ammianus (325-391 AD) understood that it was the worst defeat in Roman history since Cannae. Rufinus (340–410 CE), monk, historian, and theologian; called it "the beginning of evils for the Roman empire then and thereafter."
Noel Lenski, University of Colorado
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
|
|
1502h, Valens, 364-378 A.D. (Heraclea)Valens, 364-378 A.D., Heraclea mint, VF, Chi-Rho standard reverse.
De Imperatoribus Romanis, An Online Encyclopedia of the Roman Emperors and their Families
Valens (365-369 AD.)
Noel Linski, University of Colorado
Valens was the brother of Valentinian I. On March 28, 364, precisely one month after his accession by Roman reckoning, Valentinian appointed his brother Flavius Valens co-emperor at the Hebdomon, the first in a long line of emperors proclaimed there. Themistius was present and later recounted the occasion in his Or. 6. After only two months of co-rulership, the two departed from Constantinople for their native Illyricum. Outside Naissus, in Moesia, they divided their administrative staff between them and at Sirmium they did the same with their mobile forces. Valens was to rule the east, from Thrace in the North and Cyrenaica in the South eastward to the Persian frontier. Valentinian ruled the west. They did not spend long in Sirmium. By late August 365 Valentinian had moved on toward Milan, where he resided for the following year before moving on to Trier, which remained his capital until 375. Similarly, Valens was back in Constantinople by December 364.and he was declared Augustus in 364 A.D. He was given command of the Eastern provinces, where he spent much of his time campaigning against the Goths and Persians.
In 376 A.D., Valens allowed Gothic tribes, who were being driven forward by the Huns to settle in the Danube provinces. The Goths were so badly treated by the Romans that they rebelled. Valens marched against the confederated barbarian army, and on August 9, 378, the two forces met at Adrianople. Although negotiations were attempted, these broke down when a Roman unit sallied forth and carried both sides into battle. The Romans held their own early on but were crushed by the surprise arrival of Greuthungi cavalry which split their ranks.
In one historical account, Valens was wounded in battle but escaped to a nearby farmstead where he was burned to death in a tower by Gothic marauders. The fourth century A.D. Roman historian Ammianus Marcellinus does not seem to concur with this story. Regardless, when the battle was over Valens' body was never recovered, 10,000 roman soldiers lay dead and the perception of Roman military invincibility had been destroyed.
Adrianople was the most significant event in Valens' career. Though he displayed some talent as an administrator, Valens' persecutions of Nicene Christians and pagan philosophers, his halting efforts at military achievement and his obtuse personality rendered him a less than glorious emperor. To have died in so inglorious a battle has thus come to be regarded as the nadir of an unfortunate career. This is especially true because of the profound consequences of Valens' defeat.
Adrianople spelled the beginning of the end for Roman territorial integrity in the late empire and this fact was recognized even by contemporaries. The Roman historian Ammianus (325-391 AD) understood that it was the worst defeat in Roman history since Cannae. Rufinus (340–410 CE), monk, historian, and theologian; called it "the beginning of evils for the Roman empire then and thereafter."
Noel Lenski, University of Colorado
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
|
|
1617 MYSIA, Hadriani ad Olympum Hadrian, Asclepius standingReference.
RPC III, 1617; von Fritze 511/2
Obv. AΥT KΑΙ ΤΡΑΙΑN ΑΔΡΙΑΝΟС CЄB.
Laureate, draped bust right with paludamentum, seen from rear.
Rev. ΑΔΡΙΑΝΩΝ ΠΡΟC ΟΛVΝΠΩ.
Asclepius standing facing, head left, leaning upon serpent-entwined staff.
21.07 gr
31 mm
6hokidoki
|
|
161aFaustina junior
AE sestertius
Obv "FAVSTINA AVGVSTA"
Diademed and draped bust right
Rev "FECVNDITAS SC"
Fecunditas standing right holding staff and child
Rome mint
RIC 1638mauseus
|
|
161aFaustina junior
AE as
Obv "FAVSTINA AVGVSTA"
Diademed and draped bust right
Rev "LAETITIA SC"
Laetitia standing left holding staff and wreath
Rome mint
RIC 1656mauseus
|
|
| 1027 files on 12 page(s) |
1 |
 |
|
|
|
|
|
