Coinmaster

Yet another great topic, thanks and congrats!

I wish it was pension-time for me, so I could stay whole days on this forum..!

What an amazing coin, congrats!!

6 hours ago, Ursus said:

Obv. crowned bust of king facing, branch to l.

Great coin! I'm very curious about the symbolic meaning of the branch in relation to Frederick II. Online I read multiple explanations, like the symbol of peace, as the tree of live or as: 'In the Tree of Jesse, and other kindred symbolic trees, the branches 
have significance only as part of the greater whole and with reference to 
Christ.'

What do you think?

Unfortunately I didn't won a lotery recently, otherwise I knew what to do with the money: buy all the incredible coins in this catalogue!

Well, I just downloaded the catalogue for future reference. Perhaps it's of use to some other coin friends:
https://leunumismatik.com/en/catalogue/44

How interesting: 

https://www.academia.edu/107518707/MFRP_81_Ein_seltener_Denar_des_Postumus_mit_Hercules_Erumantinus_aus_Andernach

1 hour ago, Heliodromus said:

Most likely ... there's no way to know for sure unless a written source would be discovered confirming it!

I'm not sure that field marks, in general, were always intended to be understood by the public. It seems they are better just considered as issue-differentialing marks chosen by the mint that sometimes had an obvious meaning, and sometimes not ... No doubt the contemporary public had an advantage over us in guessing these, but I'm sure that in some cases they'd have been just as unsure as we are!

The T-F (or F-T) and S-F marks seem to be among the more obvious given how common these feel-good phrases (TEMPORVM FELICITAS, SAECVLI FELICITAS) were as coin legends in this era. Constantine himself used both legends, and of course there's the FEL TEMP REPARATIO series a bit later.

For T-F there's the additional clue that on Constantine's early SOLI type we see T-F (London, Trier) being used alongside F-T (Lyons), which suggests a similar meaning (not that the mints were always so coordinated in terms of field marks). The phrases TEMPORVM FELICITAS (T-F) and FELICITAS TEMPORVM (F-T) both mean the same thing and both were used as legends, so this certainly supports this.

 

Again many thanks for this explanation! This seems indeed logical.
I was just browsing through some coins online and - how about that - just found one where the reverse most likely is from the same die engraver, don't you think?
(source: https://www.vcoins.com/en/stores/london_ancient_coins/89/product/constantine_i_307337__follis__treveri__r_sol/1650436/Default.aspx)
 

15 hours ago, Steppenfool said:

I think the bottom of the F is missing in your TF, it doesn't look curvy enough to be intended to be a C. I think the going theory is that it means TEMPORVM FELICITAS,  "happy times". I could be wrong though.

Thank you as well @Steppenfool, I couldn't find where the TF stands for (even ChatGTP couldn't provide me with an answer), so I'm curious if this is indeed TEMPORVM FELICITAS?

15 hours ago, Heliodromus said:

The correct attribution is RIC VII Trier 132, dating to 317 AD.

Many thanks @Heliodromus! I didn't know this coin type is split between RIC VI and VII (more heavy and older versus lighter and younger). For those interested the below info.

How interesting and congrats with this acquisition!

Is anyone doing research on these coins? I believe the RICs are slowly updated via Spink Books.

Hello my dear coin friends,
I'm happy to share my latest acquisition. I must say it wasn't cheap, but I kind of fell in love with it, you know the drill & thrill.

According the auction info:

Quote

Constantine I, 307/310-337. Follis (Bronze, 20 mm, 3.61 g, 1 h), Treveri, 2nd officina (B), 317-318. IMP CONSTANTINVS AVG Laureate and cuirassed bust of Constantine I to right. Rev. SOLI INVICTO COMITI / T-F/BTR Sol standing facing, head left, raising hand and holding globe in left. RIC 159. Attractive brown patina and perfectly centered. Good extremely fine.

For this RIC-number I found this similar coin: https://www.acsearch.info/search.html?id=6632557 

The coin corresponds however with RIC VI-876 (310-313), AE2.
See also this example: https://www.acsearch.info/search.html?id=5867689 and https://numismatics.org/ocre/id/ric.6.tri.876.

Only after acquiring the coin I took a better look and noticed some aspects. Sol is standing on the left leg, instead of right. Also sol has a straight arm instead of a bent arm. And how about the letters ‘VI’ between hand and head (I couldn't find online a similar example)? Plus sol has a beautiful cloak, don't you think? In all, an interesting variant in beautiful condition, don't you agree?
A question I have is about the mint mark. I read TC instead of TF, is this correct?

Further readings:
https://www.constantinethegreatcoins.com/
https://www.lateromanbronzecoinforum.com/index.php
And the publication: ‘Constantine the Great, the coins speak’, Victor Clark, page 18.
 

It seems quite impossible to find a decent Tetricus II coin, so I'm happy with this one I recently acquired.

Tetricus II, Caesar. 273-274 AD. AE Antoninianus (2.36 gm, 18mm). Colonia Agrippinensis mint. Struck 273/4 AD. Obv.: [C P]IV ESV TETRICVS CAES, , radiate, draped and cuirassed bust right. Rev.: SPES AVG[G], Spes advancing left, holding flower in right hand and raising skirt with left. RIC 270; AGK 9a. gVF.

Fun to read the last sentence about the 'ratty coin', haha! 

Quote

Son of Tetricus I. He shared in the pardon of his father and is said to have later been given the position of Senator in which he served with distinction. He may also have been promoted to the rank of co-augustus shortly before the two capitulated to Aurelian. The evidence rests on a coin or two featuring his portrait (distinguished by the lack of beard as opposed to his father 's portrait) bearing a legend ending in AVG. 
 
What goes for Tetricus I goes for II as well. The interesting point to ponder is whether he made it to emperor or stayed Caesar until his father 's abdication. One could make an argument that the title was conferred shortly before based on the few coins of his with AVGs in their legends. Or perhaps this was all due to the general apathy towards the dies in their preparation. Either way, historians of the day say nothing of the subject and consider it enough to state that they both surrendered to Aurelian. 
 
Just about the only coins for Tetricus (either Tetricus) will be the Antoninianus. Initially, under Caracalla and until around the early 250 's, these coins were silver coins about twice the size of the old Denarius. But by the time the Tetricus pair are making them they have shrunk to the size of a Denarius, often smaller and thinner, and made of a metal that quickly turned black or dark brown. 
 
For this reason it will be nearly impossible to find a Tetricus that still looks white and "new". Even more challenging will be to find one whose both sides retain sharp details. Typically, the reverse die was used til worn nearly flat. 
 
So forgetting about those nonexistent gem coins one is left more often than not with a thin, black, ratty coin with a worn reverse. Price for these, thankfully, should be only a few dollars.

(source)

Some more info: here.
 

This is such a great coin and definitely on my wish list! I really hope it's a genuine one, and not a fake. I recommend that you ask Ilya Prokopov about this coin, and send him the images (ilya.prokopov@gmail.com). Either way, fake or not, it's a great joy to look at this coin type. And to share my inner feelings, I hope this picture brings a smile on your face. 😉 

Hmm, always interesting, thanks for sharing.

I think the coin is fine. The point could be a punch mark (as it's not centered and has a ring). If fouree, I'd expect more corrosion and a much lighter weight.

A laser alblation could give the answer.

Today I bought this one of Tetricus:
Tetricus I (270-273), AE Antoninianus (19x21 mm, 2,30 g), Cologne. IMP TETRICVS PF AVG; radiate and cuir. bust r. LAETITIA AVG N; Laetitia standing l. holding wreath and anchor.
If I'm not mistaken this is: RIC 90; Mairat 907 (p.373+827); issue 5, c. early – mid 272 (p.94); Elmer 786.
Laetitia isn't shown at best, but I couldn't refuse this nice portrait combined with an affordable prize (20,- Euro). In hand much better!

About Laetitia: 

Quote

Laetitia, deriving from the root word laeta, meaning "happy", "glad", "lucky", "successful", "prosperous", "luxurious", "lush", or "abounding", was a minor Roman goddess of gaiety. Her name was used to mean happiness with prosperity and abundance. She is usually shown with greenery to depict the abundance of seasonal decorations that many sites would include. Wreaths of flowers or leaves are commonly worn at festivals or holy rituals, similarly Laetitia would be shown wearing a garland to mean celebration. She was sometimes depicted on Roman coinage with an anchor, as a representation of stability, or, like Fortuna, a ship's rudder symbolizing her guiding one to good fortune or prosperity.

Many thanks to all! I see some mighty lions and @DonnaML is of course years ahead of me with her wonderful series. Interesting to read about the cippus, that's what I like about this forum: everyday a numismatic knowledge snack comes by! 🤗

Also of interest are the double G (AVGG). As I understood, these revers to the two Augusti: Philip I and his son Philip II. Plus of interest:

Quote

Although the dates are uncertain, the Ludi Saeculares , the centennial games celebrating the anniversary of Rome’s foundation, were first celebrated in either the mid-4th or the mid-3rd century B.C. The games should have been celebrated in the early 40s B.C., but at the time Caesar had cast his die, crossing the Rubicon and bringing to the Roman world two long decades of civil war and upheaval. After the wars and once firmly established in power, in 17 B.C. Augustus revived the ancient Tarentine games as the Ludi Saeculares , allowing future emperors who wished to hold the games two different dating cycles from which to choose.

(source:  https://www.acsearch.info/search.html?id=3359272)

I just bought my first celebration-coin, so it's time for a party! 😉

Philip I (248), RIC 24.

For further reading, see this article in Coin World from David Vagi (with thanks to @DonnaML! https://www.coinworld.com/news/precious-metals/coins-games-mark-roman-millennium.html and the below excellent topic from @curtislclay which I quoted (hope that's ok, if not I'll remove of course).

I guess it will take me a while before I can expend my collection with the more decent examples from this interesting series. But surely you all can make me happy with some nice pictures from your collections? As this is a party, please join!

What interest me is the question why these specific animals where shown on the coins. As Vagi stated: 

Quote

Philip I depicted five animals on his coinage, the most impressive being the lion. It was an age-old symbol of royalty and power, which would have been especially familiar to Philip since his family hailed from a rather remote part of the Near East.

The she-wolf could be symbol for the start of Rome, etc. About the hippo Vagi says: 

Quote

The most common reverse type for the coins of Otacilia Severa is the hippopotamus, a creature that must have delighted the audiences in Rome. Why it was dedicated only to her (just as the European elk was exclusive to her son) is not recorded.

It seems to me this was no coincidence, as a hippo was symbol for fertility, prosperity, rebirth, and regeneration. So an excellent symbol for the (female) spouse of Philip and hope for the future (as the times were troubled). What are your thoughts about this?
 

Quote

Some twenty years ago I undertook a die study of the sestertii of the last three issues of Philip's reign, and was able to establish what in my opinion is beyond dispute their correct order. Each issue included six reverse types, four for Philip I and one each for Philip II and Otacilia Severa. Each type was struck in about equal volume in the main denomination, that is in antoniniani. The types of Issue 4a, the first stage of Issue 4, were for Philip I AETERNITAS AVGG Elephant, SAECVLVM NOVVM Temple, SAECVLARES AVGG Column, and FIDES EXERCITVS Four standards; for Philip II LIBERALITAS AVGG III Emperors seated; and for Otacilia PIETAS AVGVSTAE standing. These six types must have been introduced in January 248, since the only dated type of the preceding Issue 3 had just made it into 248 before ending and ceding to Issue 4: P M TR P V COS III P P Felicitas standing, a scarce and obviously short-lived type that was represented in the large Dorchester hoard by only five antoniniani. The AETERNITAS AVGG Elephant type, then, was introduced in January 248, at the same time as SAECVLVM NOVVM Temple and SAECVLARES AVGG Column. Since these two companion types obviously referred in advance to the Saecular Games that were to be celebrated in spring or summer 248, it seems likely that the Elephant type too was chosen with reference to those upcoming Saecular Games. In Issue 4b, only three new types were introduced, all for Philip I: FIDES EXERCITVS standing to replace his Four Standards type with the same legend, and FORTVNA REDVX seated and FELICITAS IMPP in wreath to replace AETERNITAS AVGG Elephant and SAECVLVM NOVVM Temple. The other three types of Issue 4a continued to be struck unchanged alongside the new types until the end of Issue 4: SAECVLARES Column for Philip I and the Liberalitas and Pietas types of Philip II and Otacilia respectively. Two issues remain, whose composition is self-evident: Issue 5 with reverse legend SAECVLARES AVGG, the well known animal reverse types, and a Latin numeral for each type, numerals I-II and V-VI for Philip I, III for Philip II, and IIII for Otacilia Issue 6 carried on the numerals, but changed them to Greek letters, and introduced six new reverse types and legends: for Philip I TR P V Mars standing, TRANQVILLITAS AVGG standing, VIRTVS AVGG Emperors on horseback, and NOBILITAS AVGG standing, with letters A, B, E, and S respectively; for Philip II VIRTVS AVGG Mars advancing with letter Γ; and for Otacilia PIETAS AVGG sacrificing with letter Δ. But what was the sequence of these final two issues? It seems likely that the Animal types, always with legend SAECVLARES AVGG, must have followed directly on Issue 4, which had already used that same legend with the COS III on column reverse type; and this supposition is proved beyond reasonable doubt by die links on the corresponding sestertii and by the shortening of the braid extending up the back of Otacilia's head, which proves that PIETAS AVGG Δ of Issue 6 must have been her latest reverse type: compare the shortened braid of RIC pl. 7.17 with the longer braid of her two earlier issues, RIC pl. 7.16 (Issue 5) and pl. 7.18 (Issue 4). Thus a conclusion is reached that no one could have expected: Philip's Rome-mint coinage must have ended before he became TR P VI on 10 December 248 or 1 January 249, since the TR P V Mars type of his final issue (Issue 6) never advanced to TR P VI. I think the only likely explanation is that Philip I with his son and wife must have made an expedition to the East late in 248, perhaps to deal with usurpers; note the VIRTVS AVGG Emperors on horseback type of his Issue 6. While he was absent, before the end of 248, his successor Trajan Decius must have seized Rome and of course ended Philip's coinage from that mint. In 249 Philip was able to maintain himself in the East, while Decius ruled in Rome and the West, until Philip decided to march against the usurper and was defeated and slain by him in a battle at Beroea in Macedonia in c. September 249, shortly after his Alexandrian coinage registered the beginning of his seventh regnal year on 28 August 249. (Cited from: https://www.cointalk.com/threads/animals-on-philip-i-coins-including-saecvlares-avgg-coins.355236/page-3)

How exciting Donna!

Good luck with the sale and all the best with your health as well!

Nice coin, congrats!

Just contacted Simon, another great article is on it's way.

For those interested, see also:

https://cambridge.academia.edu/SimonCoupland

I know the person who build this website. Let me know if you want to contact him. 👍🏻

Aha! Yes, these coins and the history is most interesting. Perhaps this site is helpful: https://www.mittelaltermuenzen.com/the-coins. 👍🏻

Very nice! The sceptre is a lily sceptre. One of the two people on the reverse is a bishop (who?). The other one seems not the emperor as he wears no crown. So who is this and what is the image telling? Some kind of pact, alliance or treaty?

'In the 3rd century B.C. it is recorded that Wu Ti of the Ch'in dynasty received 1,000 strings of jade-money carved into rings (...). Rings of bronze succeed to rings of stone, and appear to have been in use very early.'

Source: A. Hingston Quiggin, A survey of primitive money (Florida 1991), p. 241.

Very interesting book about the 'The Beginnings of Currency'! I almost forgot I have this book on the shelve..! ☺️

I am an archeologist myself, but not familiar with these Chinese objects. However, I think it's important to understand that past societies could have had different believe systems than in the present. Money was used in different ways as we now do in many societies. They could have had multiple meanings or values at the same time, even social, spiritual or religious. This is also the case with certain 12th century coins in Europe. As I understand the jade objects were appreciated as objects of value and were exhanged when someone was defeated and were put in graves. That's not 'money' as when buying a bread at the bakery, but it had value and other properties that are often related to monetary objects (it can be exchanged, counted, stored, is hard to come by, can be transported, does not spoil, etc.). The same as specific shells or glass beads in post medieval times (they were also used for juwelry) or certain axes in bronze age with high tin alloy (these were not suited for chopping wood, but are considered as high prestige and ceremonial objects and possibly exchanged as wedding gifts between tribes).

Very interesting, thanks for sharing. I think the objects could have had multiple values, meanings or purposes. Perhaps pending on the context or situation.

I didn't read a suggestion the jade objects had (also) a monetary function. It seems another culture did make use of donut shaped stones for money: https://www.bbc.com/travel/article/20180502-the-tiny-island-with-human-sized-money.

38 minutes ago, Ocatarinetabellatchitchix said:

Very nice and sharp strike Coinmaster. Just a little detail in the attribution: your coin is Mairat 876, not 466.

 

Many thanks!