kevikens

Any chance they are from a later period, say Napoleonic?

Now that is the kind of coin that would tempt me to collect from this period, museum quality.

Thanks, Donna. The book is The Roman Empire in Crisis 248-260 by Paul N. Pearson, Pen and Sword Military, 2022. I got my copy from Amazon but I think Thrift Books is carrying it as well. I have read all of the Harry Sidebottom novels. Harry is eminently readable. Pearson also wrote a book on Maximinus (Maximinus Thrax:from Common Soldier to Emperor of Rome) which I no longer have. I think it came out in 2016. I was surprised to find out that Ballista may very well have been a historical character and not figment of imagination and Pearson writes about him in both of his books. I also can recommend another 2019 publication by Pen and Sword, The Reign of Emperor Gallienus, the Apogee of Roman Cavalry. It is a translation of the author, Ilka Syvanne, and does not quite read as well as other books but it is well illustrated and covers a period not well documented as others. It came out 2019 and I purchased it from Thrift Books. I'll order that new Sidebottom book shortly. Thanks again for the pleasant response.

I have been reading a book on the mid Third Century of the Roman Empire by an author who has pointed out the period from ca. 240-260 AD was a period that saw the Empire rapidly begin to go to pieces and only by fortune and some genuine perseverance were the Roman Emperors and the citizens of Rome, barely, able to survive and, to a certain degree, recover from heavy losses and reestablish some degree of stability, enabling the Empire to survive another some two centuries longer. But like Waterloo, it was a close run thing. The author describes the heavy death toll from the Plague of Cyprian, possibly a form of Ebola, and a constant hammering of the borders by the Goths and the Persians in the East, and by aggressive, incipient tribal alliances by the Western Germanic tribes. It may be possible to get an idea of what was going on by examining the coinage of that period. It should not be difficult to find examples of Roman coinage from the time period as the coinage was abundant, and often did not circulate much before being taken from circulation and was quite commonly hidden in hoards for protection against loss to these enemies of Rome. For us today as collectors that means the coins of this period are quite affordable, often in very fine condition. Our period begins with the Empire being ruled by Philip I the Arab and began pretty well in the mid 240's AD. The emperor had a son as Caesar and later co Augustus and Rome was about to celebrate the Secular Games and these games for our year 248 was the one thousandth year, A.U.C. from the founding of Rome. Happy Days are here. The coinage reflects this as the silver content of the antonianus, the double denarius, was between 43%and 47% (according to Harl p. 130). Not bad as when Caracalla first issued this denomination it was at just a tad above 50% The large sestertius coin was still common and of good style and weight. The style was quite good as well. These are attractive coins. Unfortunately for Rome's rulers issuing attractive coins was down the list of important achievements. Emperors were expected to lead their forces in person and that meant trouble, often lethal trouble. Phillip was killed in battle (by the Usurper Trajan Decius) as was Phillip II, his son. Decius was killed two years later fighting Goths and his successors, and a whole slew of would be contenders, lasted little longer. And while the Goths and a resurgent Persia battered the Empire, the Plague of Cyprian carried off, gruesomely if the accounts are accurate, something like 30%-40% of the population. Valerian and his son Gallienus came to the throne in 253 AD and for a short while the Empire seemed to stabilize. That was undercut by the decisions of both Decius and Valerian to launch a full throated war on the Christians. The last thing Rome needed was internal domestic uproar but that is what it got. And then it got worse. Valerian was defeated and captured by the Persians and Gallienus had to handle intrusions along the Rhine as well as a new spate of usurpers, seemingly everywhere. For those interested in the happenings of this period a cursory summary can be found in Sear's Roman Coins, Vol III and for those who want go into depth you might want to try Paul N. Pearson's, The Roman Empire in Crisis 248-260, an excellent read and quite well illustrated with contemporary coins. And now my coins; first are several coins of Phillip the Arab , his empress, Otacilia Severa (both double denarii of about 4.9 grams, a copper As of the emperor, then a sestertius and double denarius of his son, Phillip II. After that come two coins of Trajan Decius, a Syrian tetradrachma of 11 grams and an Alexandrian tetradrachma of the same weight. Next a double denarius of Trebonianus weighing 3.0 grams and about 35% fineness of silver. Next a double denarius of Valerian of about 18% fineness . Then, a double denarius of Gallienus, soon to be on his own, of about the same fineness and weight as his father's . Next is a bronze sestertius now becoming a scarce issue,as its weight in bronze made it about the same intrinsic value as the supposed more valuable double denarius. Next a really so debased double denarius of Gallienus that it has barely any silvering at all. Next to last is a double denarius of one of the contenders that Gallienus had to contend with, Postumus, whose double denarii had more silver and looked a lot better than the coins of the supposed real emperor , Gallienus. Postumus even issued a heavy double sestertius to add more insult. So, perhaps readers can take a look at their own coins of this period and see and post what you can find of these Coin.

Throughout history gold coins, frequently hoarded, infrequently spent, remained out of circulation for some time only to reappear much later when someone needed that most stable store of value, a gold coin. During WW II Napoleonic gold coins, kept hidden by a family for several generations reemerged from hiding and saved who knows how many lives, winding up in the pockets of soldiers or officials who looked the other way. If some of them were later killed those coins might have more recently been "refound" in a context that made it look like Napoleonic 20 franc gold coins were circulating in Siberia or Norway in 1945, which in a narrow context was actually the case. Bottom line: gold coinage from an earlier period might not have been deposited in the place it was found at or near the time the coin was minted but was an earlier gold coin kept around for some rainy day purpose and reintroduced into circulation at a much later time. The context of the coin's finding is essential to its proper time of deposit. The 1955 wheat cent I dropped last week down a sewer grate does not means there was a sewer grate there in 1956.

I am reminded of something that a professor of theology said to us seminarians about writing and preaching sermons. Every priest is entitled to make three doctrinal mistakes amounting to heresies in every sermon. There is so much to know just to collect these coins intelligently that I am willing to cut a break for some major bloopers to anyone brave enough to write a book or give a talk on the subject with no wish to consigning their utterance or books to perdition.

When one collects the coins of the Triumvirs on a budget one learns to take what you can get and not quibble about condition. Here are three "budget" coins of three of the Triumvirs. The first, the denarius on top is of Julius Caesar. Not only is heavily worn, it was probably not well struck either. Also, although a portrait coin of Caesar, it is also a posthumous issue. Notice that the inscription calls him DIVI IVLI, his proper name and title after his death. It was probably minted ca, 41 BC. Still, it is a portrait coin of the then deified ruler. It is Sear 1428 (2nd version). The coin on the left, bottom is a denarius of Caesar's right hand man, Mark Antony, who was a member of the Second of the Triumvirates'. it is better shape and better struck with Sol on the reverse and the designation III VIR. it is Sear 1468. The third coin is well worn, poorly struck denarius of Sextus Pompey, from the period of the Second Triumvirate. Again, this is posthumous issue by his son but showing his now deceased father, Gnaeus Pompey, the famous one from the First Triumvirate. This coin was issued just before Sextus was killed in battle and may explain the condition of the coin. It circulated for some time and is very worn. It also appears to be heavily debased and I have wondered if it might have been a fourree, however its weight of 3.75 is good and it may have acquired some of its darkness from heavy wear and debased silver from a ruler with his back to the wall when he issued it. Surprisingly, the actual image of Pompey is quite good. It came from the Rindge Collection. It is Sear 1392. Not the most beautiful coins on the block, but when collecting these guys, again, you take what you can get.

About $300. It circulated for some time before being lost or buried

Looks just like a museum display. Nice work.

I think we all find these commemorative issues to be interesting. It's worth thinking of the motives for those emperors who did issue them. The As of Agrippa I have here was issued by Caligula. Was it designed to link him to some aspect of the reign of Augustus? Did the two share some kind of connection Caligula wanted to be associated with? The two coins, one a silver drachma of the Caesarea mint showing Drusus, and the other, the commemorative As of Drusus under discussion may have been issued by Tiberius in sorrow for his loss. The As of Germanicus was also issued by Caligula and here it is obvious he wants to honor and associate himself with his father. Any other speculation on why these commemorative coins were minted? Here below are the obverses of the four coins I mentioned. The one on the upper left is the As of Drusus from the OP. Sear 1794. The coin on the upper right is the Agrippa As issued by Caligula with Neptune on its reverse. it is Sear 1812. On the lower left is a scarcer piece of Drusus , a silver drachma of Caesarea (Cappadichia) with Tiberius on the reverse side, issued about 33/34. It is Seaby's Roman silver coins, number 3, p.2 no legend example. At 3.41 grams and with Tiberius on the other side I have seen this coin as a possible candidate for the Biblical tribute penny, especially as it was issued from an eastern mint. The fourth coin, another commemorative As was issued by Caligula ca. 38AD and it may have been issued by Caligula as an example of filial piety.

The reverse looks very much like the back of the hemi-drachmas issue by Caesarea, the one in Cappadocia, Victory advancing left.

My submission is of an emperor whose images sometimes, really do capture who he was. This is an image that Shelley might have had in mind when he wrote of an emperor from an antique land, "whose frown and wrinkled lip and sneer of cold command...". Certainly Caracalla seems to have had frequent bouts of wrinkled lips and sneers of cold command. The coin is a tetradrachm of the mint of Sidon, a scarcer mint coin, and is Sear, Greek Imperial coins 2679.

Superb images of an emperor not often found with great images.

I have the book as well. You are correct. It makes a fine companion to any other books on Byzantine coinage and the coinage of the surrounding states.

IIINSTRMENTA, LATIN FOR "TOOLS" ,IMPLEMENTS THAT DO WORK. Today we look for images of tools on ancient coins (or the tools themselves). Both the Ancient Greeks and Romans developed a sophisticated technology, tools that let them do work, in the sense as work is defined in physics. Today many are amazed at how modern some of their tools seem and what the Ancients were able to do with them. So, let's see how many Ancient coins we can find that have some of the technology on this topic. To help with this, think of some of the technology they had (spinning cloth, splitting wood, forming pottery, plowing a field, making coins erecting a structure). You get the idea. I would like to ask that posters not include weapons here, tools designed to wage war. Not that warfare and weapons are not a good topic, but I'd like to keep this on tools as we normally think of tools and work. Weapons are a topic all their own and can be offered separately with many, many examples to choose from. I have on this page four example of "instruments" on coins and one actual artifact, a key (clavis) a tool for opening locks from the early Imperial period. The first coin shows a wheel (rota) that enables vehicles to move, or in the case of the potters' wheel , rotate a spindle that holds the clay being shaped. It is Sear 157. The next denarius shows Vulcan with one of the tools of the metal worker, tongs (forceps) for moving hot pieces of metal (like heated coin planchets). It is Sear 191. The small hemi drachma of Pontus, early Fourth Century BC, illustrates the anchor (ancora, same in both Latin and Greek). It is, of course, a tool designed to keep a vessel from drifting. It is Greek Sear 1655. The last coin, a big follis of Galerius, shows balance scales (libra) for weighing objects. it is Sear 3711. So, let's see what coins, or actual objects if you have them, that illustrate an aspect of work technology from that period. Now, go find some work, ancient work.

The Venetian ducat was so popular it was imitated by other medieval states. This one was put out by the Duke of Milan who had somehow acquired an interest in the Greek (Byzantine) island of Chios as a Crusader state occupation around the year 1430. It weighs just under 3.5 grams and as they were locally struck (not in Milan) they are somewhat below the expertise of the Milan Mint. From the color of the gold I also suspect some admixture of silver in the coin. It may have been issued in the name of Filipo Maria Visconti. The somewhat crude inscription reads as something like S PETRUS DVX D ME DIOLAN and SIT T:XRE QTV REGIS ISTE DUC. It may be Goldberg 3989.

I have posed my "hockey puck" next to a Ptolemaic tetradrachm of Ptolemy II to illustrate something else about these big, huge drachmas (mine weighs 73.5 grams). They are actually something unusual in anybody's system of coinage, an attempt to give bronze coinage an intrinsic metal value equal to its government stated value. Most bronze coinage is a subsidiary coinage whose metal value is usually worth quite a bit less that its government sanctioned value. It is usually a token coinage. In Roman Imperial times (or the US in its coinage history) the value of the copper of 16 assess or 100 cents did not equal the silver value of a silver denarius or in the US a silver dollar. The large, hockey puck drachmas of the Third Century BC Egypt actually had, at a silver to bronze ratio of 1:20, a bronze value of 1/4 of the Ptolemaic tetradrachm at about 14.1 grams of silver. Readers with access to a copy of Metcalf's Oxford Handbook of Greek and Roman coinage, pp.216-223 can read about this aspect of coinage. If nothing else it will bring home to readers the difficulty of making small change out of bullion precious metals, such as the absolutely tiny silver coinage of the Greeks before they turned to lesser valued metal for their subsidiary coinage. Even in older US coinage it was pretty easy to drop and lose a silver three cent piece. The same with the old English silver penny. Of course it also illustrates the difficulty of trying to make larger value coins out of lesser valued metals if one tries to make them actually the intrinsic value of what they represent. Not surprisingly this happened in Egypt as well. By the reign of Ptolemy VI the bronze drachma was reduced to a token weight of ca, 23 grams and remained at that weight for some time before dropping further.

I have an image here of an unidentified Alexandrian tetradrachm of about 250AD. I only have the obverse up here (the reverse is the common standing eagle and date L A , regnal year 1). The previous owner had it as one of Trebonianus Gallus but I have my doubts. His tetras are found only as year 3 coins. Looking at just the image I would have said Trajan Decius or maybe Valerian but I cannot make out the lettering. Any help in an exact ID much appreciated. Thanks

It is interesting that Gibbon in his all encompassing history of Rome's demise has the ROMAN empire going right up to 1453 and he was writing this in the mid 1770's.. I have read somewhere I cannot recall that as the occupants of Constantinople were lurching to oblivion in the mid 15th Century, that they themselves began to emphasize their "Greekness". If this is true, perhaps even they came to recognize that calling themselves Romans no longer made much sense. In my own teaching of history I used the term Eastern Roman Empire up to Justinian and sometimes to Heraclius, but after the Aranbconquests I introduced my students to the term Byzantine but always stressing that this term, Byzantine, has been a relatively late and artificial convention. Perhaps, oddly enough, I also use this distinction in the arrangement of my numismatic material.

Nice selection. Maybe you can start a combo. I wonder what it would sound like with a band each member playing one of these.

I wonder how many of us have coins with musical instruments on them and don't know it?

Geeze, great coins being submitted but I am getting nervous about a thread where the lyres seem to be in the majority.

Nice selection of coins.

Who is that on your coin?