seth77

This type for Gallienus at Antioch marked PXV is fast becoming one of my favorite types for the era: AE20mm 4.18g, billon antoninian, Antioch mint, seventh issue 267. GALLIENVS AVG; radiate, draped cuirassed bust right seen from back AETERNITAS AVG; Saturn veiled, draped standing right, holding scythe PXV in exe. RIC 606 (Mediolanum), Gobl (MIR) 1662k (Antioch), Elks 'Hoard A' p. 108 (Cyzicus) I had an entry on CT about this type, from which I will add here: The relatively few specimens recorded in the studied hoard by Elks (3 specs) is by no means an indication of rarity of the type. The series is copious in trade and in collections, but it seems that this particular representation is often overlooked although it's very interesting and singular in Roman coinage. Saturn is the Roman alias of the earlier Cronos (Khronos from the Orphic Protogonos theogony) and is well known for two things (besides starring in Children of the Corn in the 1980s): 1. castrating his father Uranus with that scythe and 2. devouring his own children (so that they won't do him the way he did his pops). As one of the earlier gods and 'king of the Titans' he was the god of Time -- as an unstoppable and all-devouring force of the Cosmos, a chaotic and extremely destructive force. The legend AETERNITAS AVG is also interesting in this context, as it shows the taming of the original fearful character of Cronos from the overseer of chaos, destruction and decay to the symbol of the eternal Cosmos. Why is this iconography so rare in coinage? I think that not many emperors would have considered advertising a tie to such a dark and archaic character as Saturn, especially since the Roman tradition already had a representation of eternity -- the goddess Aeternitas. Besides that, Saturn did not convey the filial piety that Roman morals enforced, and the attitude Gallienus took after his father's capture by the Persians in 260 might have struck some as rather funny in the context. But what I think is the case here with the pairing of Saturn and the AETERNITAS AVG legend, is to hint at Gallienus as the master of all the turbulence and chaos that was happening at the time during the military crisis -- the defeat and capture of his father, the usurpations, the Gallo-Roman Empire, the death of his son -- and still here was Gallienus, holding tribunincian powers for the 15th time. He had been riding the waves for what seemed like an eternity, all things considered. And another one just dropped from Fedex, with some consistent silvering still showing in its uncleaned state: AE20x18mm 3.03g

Ambianum for Constantius II FH Trier for Constantius II on improper flan FH Trier for Constantius II Galley-Phoenix

Sure, I will tell you what I use: - first the invaluable online resource of Ana Serrano that is the Imperatrix catalog: https://wearenumismatics.com/imperatrix/ (in my notes I have erroneously said that it belonged to Manuel Mozo Monroy, I have since corrected the notes) - the articles of Manuel Mozo Monroy especially from Revista numismatica Hecate and OMNI - the articles of A. Roma Valdes, especially Marcas de control en las emisiones monetarias Aragonesas y Navarras con anteoridad a 1134 in Hecate 4 - M. Ibanez Artica - La Moneda en Navarra - Anna M. Balaguer - Historia de la moneda dels comtats catalans - O.G. Farres - Las Primitivas Accunaciones Navarras y Aragoneses in NVMISMA 14

A dinero bienpeinao ca. 1190 to July 1212, of a type prior to the battle of Las Navas of Alfonso VIII "el de Las Navas/el Noble" -- this was probably the most vast mintage of war money during the Reconquista: AR18mm, 0.7g, dinero vellon "bienpeinao" ANFVS REX; Head to left + ● TOLLETA; Cross with stars in quarters 1 and 4. A. Burgos (80) #21, Cayon (98) #920 (as Alfonso I "El Batallador"), A. Roma #194 (secundo estilo - secundo subgrupo); Ana Serrano Imperatrix Tipo 32. The minting of this coinage was started to finance Alfonso's campaigns during the Reconquista, but the type was in use and was struck time and again (immobilized) until the middle of the 13th century. This specimen appears to be one of the itinerant war mint issues, minted before the battle of Las Navas (July 1212). They were minted in vast quantities and in declining billon quality and style and by 1207/17 the type starts being called 'pepion'. A large quantity was minted just prior and soon after the campaign that lead to the battle of Alarcos (July 1195) and another vast minting process took place on campaign to Las Navas in 1211-12.

I have a crack problem right now. A flan crack problem.

Here's a rather peculiar PAX AETERNA spec (the regular RIC Temp #940) on a very wide flan 23mm and with a distinctly short and thin lettering. This was also a Brian Bucklan buy of ca. 8 years ago for these exact reasons.

I wonder if this would also fit: AE3 18mm 2.65g "centenionalis" minted at Arelate ca. 375. DN GRATIANVS AVGG AVG, pearl-diademed, draped & cuirassed, bust r. (unusually elongated to the right), possibly die flaw or consular bust r. GLORIA NO - VI SAECVLI, emperor standing facing, head left, holding labarum in right hand and resting left hand on shield. TCON in exe. RIC IX Arelate 15var. xiv (c) If the unique obverse legend AVGG AVG has been interpreted as "Augustus Gener Augusti" in honor of his wedding to Constantia in 375, the reverse legend GLORIA NOVI SAECVLI seems to also be a nod to the Constantius II era with its FEL TEMP REPARATIO.

I think that 'Asian mint' was conclusively attributed to Antioch by Gobl in Moneta Imperii Romani (36, 43, 44). Prior discussions, like the one I mentioned in OP by Elks tried to identify all Asian coinage as Cyzicus. Antioch was supposedly under Sassanian occupation after the defeat of Valerian in 260, but by 262 or thereabouts the city was ruled by Odenathus in the name of Gallienus. The further campaigns of Odenathus against the Persians could be perhaps correlated with some high output of coinage at Antioch -- minted by Odenathus in the name of Gallienus but by his own authority and his own reverses (?) until about 264 at the earliest. My view is that any periodical articles regarding this era will round what is already known from Gobl, Sear and Estiot-Mairat.

At Smyrna there were many types minted, many rare to very rare (so the actual output of each type might have actually been low), but by the time the minting operation moves to Cyzicus, sometime probably early in 269, there are fewer types and the output grows steadily. Actually the whole 268 SPQR series that goes from Gallienus to Claudius II seems to be a rather experimental phase, fluctuating in terms of output and reverse types. The series "normalizes" once at Cyzicus and once three reverse types seem to be favored for a regular production: FORTVNA REDVX, PAX AETERNA and VICTORIAE GOTHIC around mid 269. If you look for a SPQR of Claudius II, chances are these three types will be what you first see. There is also an interesting coupling around the theme of Fortuna -- FORTVNA AVG at Smyrna with the goddess with cornucopia and patera next to small altar in late 268 and then FORTVNA REDVX at Cyzicus with the goddess holding cornucopia and rudder in mid 269 (Fortuna returning). This pairing might be significant and as such, its significance might explain why this type became a regular issue by mid 269.

My main interests were for many many years late Roman Empire and feudal coinage. In the last couple of years I have discovered how similar the idea of Greek provincial coinage was to the feudal coinage that appeared after the decentralization of Charlemagne's empire in the late 9th to the 10th century. Here is L. Servenius Capito and his wife Iulia Severa, Capito was archon of Akmoneia in 65AD during the reign of Nero and he minted for Nero and 'civic issues' for 'Roma at Akmoneia': Coin is clear yellow brass (or orichalcum).

I have decided to actually go ahead and add my posts from CT here, hopefully they will be helpful to more like-minded folk and perhaps who knows, spark some debates and/or new ideas for research and collecting. I will try to add them perhaps at the rate of one per day as to not clog the threads and push newer threads to the back. Some of them will have added information and notes which did not appear in the original postings. Here is my latest feudal coinage, which is an interesting apparition. The 'Duchy of Nitra' was established by the Arpadian dynasty as an appanage for the heirs of the Kingdom of Hungary starting around 1046, when Andrew I recognized the independent rule in Kabar and Slavic areas of eastern Moravia of Duke Bela, who had been ruling autonomously possibly since 1042. The territory allotted constituted 'tercia pars regni' -- a third of the kingdom -- and was ruled after Bela by the heirs presumptive of the Crown until 1108, when it was annexed under the king's rule. Parts of the duchy also had a border defense function -- the western parts towards Moravia and in the south-eastern Csanad-Cenad area -- and acted as a defensive margraviate for central Pannonia, extending from Nitra in the West to Bihar area in the Est and to the Cenad-Mures-Tisza area in the Southeast. The exact shape and borders of the ducal territories is still a subject of historical dispute. The Duchy ca. 11th century is in dark blue. Magnus became Duke together with his brothers Ladislaus (the future Saint Ladislaus) and Lampert after the death of Bela and the accession to the throne of Solomon with Holy Roman Empire help in 1063. He seems to have kept direct control over the western portions of the Duchy centered around Nitra, while the eastern portions were ceded to his brothers. In 1074 the three dukes expelled Solomon and Magnus became King of Hungary, taking the name Geza I. On his ducal coinage he is named Magnus, Duke in Pannonia, ruling thus under his baptismal name. Magnus as Duke in Pannonia (1064-1074) AR18mm 0.88g silver denar, mint of Nitra or Esztergom, ca. 1064. + D.VX MVGNΛS; small cross with wedges in quarters + P A N O N A I; crosslet with wedges in quarters Huszar 18 The coinage of the period, although feudal, was of good quality and used extensively in the Duchy and beyond. Considering that neither Ladislaus nor Lampert minted any coinage as dukes, the only mint operating in this period was likely Nitra (Hungarian researchers like Gyöngyössy, Tóth-Kiss, Kovács consider the more likely mint as Esztergom), which seems to have only coined for Magnus. This specimen is heavy for the series and in almost uncirculated condition, making it rather rare. A bit about the mint -- There is not much information regarding a minting operation at Nitra for Duke Magnus at this time, so most Hungarian numismatists contend that the coinage was struck at Esztergom. This is where the Hungarian coinage was initiated ca. 1018-20 for Stephen I (I. Istvan 997/1000-1038) but that was the Royal coinage, while the ducal coinage, although widespread, was a feudal operation (there is no question of the distinction that was made clearly on the legend which names Magnus as 'Duke in Pannonia' not to be confused with the King). Nonetheless, the style of the engraving and the lettering indicate that it was a product of the Esztergom mint, or at the very least of die cutters from Esztergom. The module and weight also keep with the standard of the early denars of King Stephen, which is probably what made this coin preferred and hoarded.

It's a double die-match:

Great examples everyone, keep'em coming. At first I thought to keep Cyzicus for another separate topic but the series SPQR keeps these two mints Smyrna and Cyzicus so closely connected that it certainly belongs here. @Severus Alexander raises a very interesting point regarding the different style of some of the Macriani radiates which I have not considered. My opinion would be that most Imperial coinage in the 260s has a "familiar" look. In fact this is probably what inspired Elks when studying his Asian hoards to attribute them all to Cyzicus. RIC V is useless for keeping track of mints -- distinctly Eastern output is assigned to Mediolanum and 'Asian mint' becomes an all-encompassing attribution for everything and anything. Samosata (and the presumed secondary mint?) were closed after the defeat of the Macriani by Odenathus, who was the de facto ruler of the East for much of the 260s. He certainly minted in the name of Gallienus in Antioch -- some series very likely outside of Rome's directions and orders -- to finance his Persian campaigns. Identifying these series minted by Odenathus might make an interesting research and it's something I consider pursuing.

I'm gonna do a 'political' reply and say Slava Ukraini 😼

An Asian(?) mint -- Magnesia(?) for Michael VIII S2289 DOC 129 Class XXIX (Constantinople): An Epirote inspiration at Thessalonica ca. 1235/6 or 1237 for Manuel of the Komnenodoukai or Michael II of Epiros S2182: An Asian "provincial" coinage from Magnesia(?) and/or Philadelphia(?) either for Andronikos II with Michael IX (ca. 1300) or Michael IX with Andronikos III (post 1315) S2464:

The beardless Julian II siliquae are prior to his reform of 362, when he introduced his own AE and AR types. So basically from ca. 360 to 362, Julian struck the continuation of Constantius II coinage, showing Julian's vows for his quinquennalia to decennalia. Plus, the earlier coinage is from the West, where Julian's power base stood and from where he started eastward on the Rhine and Danube towards a final clash with Constantius in 361, probably minted for this exact purpose: to finance his campaign. The bearded Julian, being post-362 (probably minted in 363 while Julian was in Antioch preparing for his Persian campaign) is of a brand new series that broke away with the types of Constantius II. The vows have also changed, from V - X to X - XX.

The thing is that what I found extremely interesting in feudal coinage -- especially from areas like Berry or Languedoc for instance --, the high degree of variation and diversity in polities and types I have found lately in Roman "provincial" coinage. Imperial coinage from the Late Empire has always been an interest and the Eastern coinage of Gallienus and onward has a quality that is usually lacking in Europe up until Aurelian operates his reform around 274. It's weird that nobody added anything to this thread considering that these coins -- maybe apart from the SPQR series -- are not really rare.

Eh, considering that I have 0 replies on my first thread here, I'm actually reconsidering doing any kind of moving at this point.

This is quite interesting, especially the question regarding when the 'western' style coinage -- the basilikon and its submultiples -- started. For one because I thought that the question is more or less clear from Ramon Muntaner who attributes the types (or at least the basilikon) to 1304 in direct connection with the need by Andronikos to pay the Catalan Company for its support in the Asian campaigns. The coinage itself reflects the purpose, with its similarity to the 'matapan' of Venice, which by 1300 had already become the most coveted coinage in the Meditteranean and as such, the most imitated.

THE CATE AND DOGE SHENANIGANS VOL. 1

Since you invited me here, I wonder what do you think, should I copy my posts from CT here too?

My avatar is a grinning cat that is up to some shenanigans.

Hi everybody, I have just joined this new venue at the invitation of VGO DUCKS and I think I'm going to use this occasion to focus on my rekindled love for the Late Empire and a newfound love for Eastern local coinage or "provincial" coinage. I will probably also add from time to time content on feudal coinage, which is what I was mainly posting on CT, but this area has been less and less available lately, during this year or so. The late Gallienus imperial coinage in the East is rather distinct style-wise and billon-wise, the PXV series from Antioch in 267 enjoying 80-120/1000 in silver title, quite high for the period (K.J.J. Elks - The Eastern Mints of Valerian and Gallienus: The Evidence of Two New Hoards from Western Turkey NC Vol. 15 (1975) pp. 91-109 p. 109), especially if one compares it to what was going on in the European mints at the time. These two coins that will open this thread come from the same lot, a ca. 60EUR small lot of 15 late Romans, mostly pre and post-reform radiates. The Claudius II radiate comes from Brian Bucklan. AE20mm 2.41g, billon antoninian, Antioch mint, seventh issue 267. GALLIENVS AVG; radiate, draped cuirassed bust right seen from back SOLI INVICTO; Sol standing facing, head left, extending arm and holding globe PXV in exe. RIC 611F (Mediolanum), Gobl (MIR) 1663i (Antioch), Elks 'Hoard A' p. 108 (Cyzicus) AE21x20mm, 3.12g, antoninianus, Smyrna mint, ca. early to mid or perhaps just the summer of 268. GALLIENVS AVG; Bust right, radiate, cuirassed and draped, seen from rear VENER VICTRIX; Venus standing left, leaning on sheld right, holding long scepter diagonally and helmet left SPQR in exe. RIC V-1 660, Gobl (MIR) 1537 The SPQR specimen particularly is interesting, because it is possibly the first emission at Smyrna (according to Gysen - A propos des ateliers de Smyrne et de Cyzique que sous Claude II le Gothique' CENB 36, no. 2 (1999), pp29-41 and Mairat - L'ouverture de l'atelier imperial de Cyzique sous le regne de Claude II le Gothique RN (2007)) after the mint turned from local "provincial" mint to Imperial mint, sometime in the first part of 268. The SPQR series for Gallienus is scarcer than the subsequent series for Claudius II, implying possibly a shorter minting period very close to Gallienus' death. Claudius continues the SPQR marking and some of the types introduced by Gallienus until the mint is moved, probably around early 269. AE21mm, 3.58g, antoninianus, 2nd Phase of minting at Smyrna, end of 268 - early 269. IMP C M AVR CLAVDIVS AVG; Bust right, radiate, cuirassed and draped with paludamentum, seen from rear; • underneath bust ROMAE AE - TERNAE; Roma std l., shield leaning against throne, holding Victory on globe in r. hand and spear in l. hand. SPQR in exe. RIC V-1 241, RIC Online #836 Notes: Part of SPQR series, this coin was minted before the mint operation moved to Cyzicus. 7 specimens recorded by Estiot in Ric Temp, but others are known. The type was carried over from Gallienus, which makes this specimen one of the early emissions for Claudius, although very likely NOT the earliest -- note the long obverse legend that names the emperor as C M AVR CLAVDIVS AVG and not the simpler Gallienus-style CLAVDIVS AVG that was used in September 268. I'm going to use this thread to pile on specimens from these two mints -- with the addition of Cyzicus for Claudius II after January 269. Everyone who wants to participate is highly welcome and appreciated.

Kept in a paper envelope inside a plastic holder between ca. 2015 and 2021.