Anyone up for a game of coin UNO?

[John Conduitt]

Nero

Nero Denarius, 65

Rome. Silver, 2.78g. Laureate bust right; NERO CAESAR AVGVSTVS. VESTA above dome hexastyle temple with statue of Vesta inside (RIC I, 62). Found Norfolk before 2001.

[CPK]

Link: Laureate bust

[John Conduitt]

Victoria

Victoria ‘Bun Head’ Penny, 1865

London. Bronze, 31mm, 9.38g. Laureate and draped bust (2nd portrait); VICTORIA D:G:BRITT:REG:F:D:; toothed border. Redesigned Britannia seated with shield, holding trident, facing right; ONE PENNY; date in exergue (KM 749).

[Roman Collector]

Left-facing empress with a bun hairstyle on a 31 mm bronze coin.

Faustina II, AD 147-175.
Roman orichalcum sestertius, 25.21 g, 31.2 mm, 12 h.
Rome, autumn AD 154-December AD 155.
Obv: FAVSTINA AVG PII AVG FIL, bare-headed and draped bust, left, with Beckmann Type 5 coiffure.
Rev: S C, Diana, draped, standing front, head left, holding out arrow in right hand and resting left on bow, set on ground.
Refs: RIC –; BMCRE –; Cohen 208; Strack 1325 (Paris); RCV –; Banti (Paris) 114.

Note: Also known from a specimen in Nomos Obelos Web Auction 7, lot 347, 7 September 2019, and from a specimen in the collection of Curtis Clay. This coin is an obverse die-match to the Nomos example, but a die break has developed above the empress's chignon. Curtis Clay's specimen was struck with a different obverse die.

Edited June 1, 2023 by Roman Collector

[John Conduitt]

Faustina II

Faustina II Denarius, 145-161

Rome. Silver, 18mm, 2.68g. Bust of Faustina the Younger, band of pearls round head, hair waived and coiled on back of head, draped, right; FAVSTINAE AVG PII AVG FIL. Venus, draped, standing left, holding apple in right hand and rudder set on dove, in left; VENVS (RIC III, Antoninus Pius 515A (denarius)). Found Rossington, near Doncaster, South Yorkshire. Portable Antiquities Scheme: SWYOR-D8E6A8.

[expat]

Link; Venus

GENS NAEVIA. Denarius (Serratus) Ar. 3.89g/19mm. 79 BC Auxiliary workshop of Rome. (FFC 937; Crawford 382/1b). Obv: Diademed head of Venus right, S.C behind, dotted border. Rev: Victory in triga to the right, with one horse looking backwards. Control marker L, above. C NAE BALB in exergue, dotted border.

[Prieure de Sion]

Link: 

Quote

Republican Denarius

 

 

 

Decimus Iunius Brutus Albinus

Denarius of the Roman Republic Period 48 BC; Material: Silver; Diameter: 17mm; Weight: 3.87g; Mint: Rome; Reference: Crawford RRC 450/2; Obverse: Head of Pietas right, wearing an earring and necklace. The inscription reads: PIETAS for Pietas (Piety); Reverse: Winged caduceus held between clasped hands. The inscription reads: ALBINVS BRVTI F for Albinus Brutus Filius ([Decimus Junius Brutus] Albinus, son of Brutus).

  

 

Decimus Junius Brutus was the son of Decimus Junius Brutus, consul in 77 BC. He was adopted by Aulus Postumius Albinus and changed his name to Decimus Postumius Albinus. He first served under Caesar in Gaul, especially against Vercingetorix in 52 BC. He commanded the fleet blockading Marseilles in 49 BC. He was promised the government of Cisalpine with the praetorship for 44 BC and the consulship for 42 BC. Nevertheless, he was involved in the assassination of Caesar on the Ides of March (15 March 44 BC). Decimus Postumius Albinius went to the Cisalpine to raise an army for the Senate. He found himself locked in Mutina and blocked by Mark Antony. He was saved by the intervention of Hirtius and Pansa, the two consuls of 43 BC, who died during the fight, and then Octavian. Antony retreated to Transalpine Gaul, pursued by Decimus Postumius Albinius who had been given supreme command of the Republican armies. The veterans of Caesar's armies refused to fight Antony's troops and made a pact with the enemy. Betrayed, Decimus Postumius Albinius was finally captured by a Gallic chief who executed him, following the orders of Mark Antony. The head of Pietas resembles the head of Liberty on the denarius of Marcus Junius Brutus, minted in 54 BC.

 

 

Edited June 1, 2023 by Prieure de Sion

[DonnaML]

Link: Pietas.

Roman Republic, Q. Caecilius Metellus Pius, AR Denarius, 81 BCE. Obv. Head of Pietas right, wearing diadem; below chin, stork standing right / Rev. Elephant standing left, wearing bell around neck; in exergue, Q•C•M•P•I [Q. Caecilius Metellus Imperator]. Crawford 374/1, RSC I Caecilia 43, Sear RCV I 301 (ill.), Sydenham 750, BMCRR Spain 43. 18 mm., 3.9 g.*

*See Sear RCV I at p. 128: “The issuer strikes as imperator in Northern Italy where he was campaigning on behalf of Sulla. The following year he was to be the dictator’s colleague in the consulship.” See also Crawford Vol. I p. 390: “This issue was produced by Q. Caecilius Metellus Pius, serving as a Sullan commander in the fight against Carrinas, Norbanus and Carbo. The obverse type [of Pietas] . . . alludes to his cognomen, acquired for his part in securing the restoration from exile of his father Q. Caecilius Metellus Numidicus.” The stork depicted in front of Pietas “is an emblem of family piety and an occasional adjunct of the goddess.” Jones, John Melville, A Dictionary of Ancient Roman Coins (London, Seaby, 1990) p. 243, under entry for Pietas.  (Apparently, the Romans believed that the stork demonstrated family loyalty by returning to the same nest every year, and that it took care of its parents in old age.)  
Crawford also states at Vol. I p. 390 that “[t]he reverse type of an elephant recalls the capture of Hasdrubal’s elephants by L. Caecilius Metellus in 251 [BCE]” (also commemorated by an elephant denarius of C. Caecilius Metellus Caprarius in 125 BCE; Crawford 269/1, RSC I Caecilia 14) (see the elephant denarius of Q. Caecilius Metellus Pius Scipio issued in 47-46 BCE; Crawford 459/1, RSC I Caecilia 47). The family was known for its opposition to Caesar.
 

[John Conduitt]

Pietas.

Theodora Nummus, 337-340

Treveri. Bronze, 15mm, 1.10g. Laureate bust right, wearing plain mantle and necklace, hair elaborately dressed; F L MAX THEODORA AVG; Pietas facing, head right, holding an Infant; PIETAS ROMANA; mintmark TRP (RIC VIII, 43). Found in Essex, Portable Antiquities Scheme: ESS-7EC00E.

Edited June 1, 2023 by John Conduitt

[Edessa]

Nummus

Constantine I 'the Great', AD 307-337. BI Nummus (19mm, 3.66g, 12h). Antioch mint, struck AD 329-330. Obv: CONSTANTINVS AVG: Rosette-diademed head to right. Rev: PROVIDENTIAE AVGG; Camp gate with no doors and two turrets; star above, SMANTA in exergue. Ref: RIC VII 78. Ex CNG, January 2011. Ex Roma e106 (16 Feb 2023), Lot 1231.

[John Conduitt]

Campgate

Constantius II Follis, 324-325

Londinium. Bronze, 20mm. 2.99g. Laureate, draped, and cuirassed bust left; FL IVL CONSTANTIVS NOB C. Campgate with two turrets; star above; PROVIDENTIAE CAESS; mintmark PLON (RIC VII, 298).

[GinoLR]

Link : Constantius II

Constantius II, Antioch, AE3

Obv.: D N CONSTAN-TIVS P F AVG, pearl-diademed head right

Rev.: VOT / XX / MVLT / XXX within a wreath, exergue S M AN A

RIC VIII Antioch 113

[John Conduitt]

VOT XX

Licinius II as Caesar Follis, 317-324

Trier. Bronze, 19x20mm, 2.77g. Radiate, draped, and cuirassed bust right; LICINIVS-IVN NOB C. Standard inscribed VOT/XX between two captives; VIRTVS EXERCIT; mintmark dot PTR in exergue ([RIC VII, 272). From the Martock (Somerset) Hoard 2012.

[expat]

Licinius

RIC VII, SISCIA [after 11], LICINIUS I, UNLISTED OBVERSE LEGEND
OBVERSE IMP[L]ICINIV[S]AVG [IMP LICINIVS AVG]; head r., laur. REVERSE IOVICON-SERVATORI [IOVI CONSERVATORI]; Jupiter stg. l., chlamys across l. shoulder, leaning on sceptre, Victory on globe in r. hand; eagle with wreath to l. B in right field. SIS in exergue.
NOT IN RIC UNLISTED OBVERSE LEGEND. Not attested for this issue. RIC lists only longer obv. legends: IMP LIC LICINIVS P F AVG and IMP LICINIVS P F AVG (p. 422). Coin should be listed after SISCIA 11
20.3mm, 2.53gr

 

[John Conduitt]

Jupiter

Claudius II Gothicus Antoninianus, 268-270

Rome. Billon, 18mm, 3.31g. Bust of Claudius Gothicus, radiate, cuirassed, right; IMP C CLAVDIVS AVG. Jupiter, nude except for cloak around shoulders, standing left, holding thunderbolt in right hand and sceptre in left hand; IOVI VICTORI; N in right field (RIC V, 54). Found Royston, Hertfordshire.

[expat]

Thunderbolt

 

[John Conduitt]

Winged things.

Roman Imperial Quadrans, 81-161

Rome. Bronze, 13mm, 2.88g. Winged petasus. Winged caduceus; SC in field (RIC II, 32). Found near Rudston, Bridlington, East Yorkshire.

[DonnaML]

Link: caduceus.

Hadrian, Billon Tetradrachm, Year 3 (118/119 AD), Alexandria, Egypt Mint. Obv. Laureate head right, drapery on left shoulder, AYT KAIC TPAIANOC -AΔΡΙΑNOC ϹƐΒ (clockwise from 5:00) / Rev. Serpent Agathodaemon standing erect right, crowned with pschent/skhent [the double crown of Upper and Lower Egypt] , tongue protruding, with coils enfolding caduceus to left and stalks of corn to right; L - Γ (Year 3) across fields. RPC [Roman Provincial Coinage] Vol. III 5149 (2015); RPC III Online at https://rpc.ashmus.ox.ac.uk/coins/3/5149; Emmett 803.3; BMC 16 Alexandria 665 (at p. 79) (1892) [ill. as RPC Vol. III 5149, specimen 2]; K&G 32.68 (at p. 118); Dattari (Savio) 1541; Milne 918 at p. 25 [ill. as RPC Vol. III 5149, specimen 13] [Milne, J.G., Catalogue of Alexandrian Coins (Oxford 1933, reprint with supplement by Colin M. Kraay, 1971)]; Geissen 764 [ill. as RPC Vol. III 5149, specimen 18]. 24 mm., 13.81 g., 12 h.* Purchased from http://www.cgb.fr July 2021, ex. Collection of Aymé Cornu (1926-2020).** [Footnotes omitted.]

[CPK]

First time posting this coin! I got it a while ago as a "consolation" prize after missing a much-desired auction lot by a hair's breadth. THIS THING IS HUGE! Large, thick, nearly a sixth of a pound of bronze - how many of these could someone comfortably carry and use in commerce?!

It's also a slightly more rare and unusual drachm type for Ptolemy II (and also somewhat overweight), listed as "R2" by cgb.fr.

It's one of my favorite coins (of course!) and my first Ptolemaic coin too.

Link - ex cgb.fr and minted in Alexandria, Egypt

 

[Broucheion]

Hi All,

Link: Ptolemy

From Wikepedia: "Ptolemy of Mauretania (Greek: Πτολεμαῖος, Ptolemaîos; Latin: Gaius Iulius Ptolemaeus;^[ 13 x 9 BC–AD 40) was the last Roman client king and ruler of Mauretania for Rome. He was the son of Juba II, the king of Numidia and a member of the Berber Massyles tribe, as well as a descendant of the Ptolemaic dynasty via his mother Cleopatra Selene II."

PTOLEMY OF MAURITANIA
SPAIN, CARTHAGO NOVA, Ca 17/18 CE (see comments)
Æ Semis

Size:  20x21 mm
Weight: 5.51 g
Die Axis: 10:00
Broucheion Collection R-2016-01-31.001

OBV: Augustus bare head facing right. Legend reading counter clockwise from 5:00 position: AVGVSTVS - DIVI F. Border not visible.
REV: Legend reading counter clockwise from 5:00 position: C LAETILIVS APALVS II V Q. Within diadem (without crescent and lotus): REX/PTOL in two lines within diadem. Diadem without lotus and crescent. Dotted border.
Refs: RPC I 172; SNG Copenhagen 494; Mazard-0514; Burgos 590; NAH 996; Vives 131-135, Beltrán 30, GMI 167; L. MULLER-0207 (Numismatique de l'Afrique Ancienne, Copenhagen, 1862); Charrier-0327 (1912).

Comments: Fernando López Sánchez 2012 (The Coinage of Carthago Nova and the Roman Fleet of Misenum: Imperial Triumphs and Local Deductiones) : "The RPC1 172/173 coin issues are similar in many ways to the RPC1 169 series, though of course on this occasion it was Ptolemy, and not Juba II, who was being celebrated as a Mauritanian king (Fig. 21). The name Ptolemy, as rex, appears inside a wreath on the reverse of the coin, mirroring the way that the name Augustus, as emperor, appears on the obverse. In contrast to RPC1 169, there is in this issue no precise indication as to whether Ptolemy was named duumvir quinquennalis, or any correlation on obverse or reverse between the Roman lustral symbols and the African-Egyptian ones of the Mauritanian kingdom (which only appear, minimised, in RPC1 172/180). It may therefore be concluded that the authority responsible for these issues was Juba II and not the new royal prince. These coins seem to have appeared immediately ater the presentation of Ptolemy as the successor of Juba II in Caesarea in 5 AD, a hypothesis backed up by most of the scholars interested in these coin issues. If RPC1 172-173 was indeed coined straight ater 5 AD, then it could also be related to the celebration in 6/7 AD of the joint victory of C. Lentulus Cossus and Juba II in Africa, which in turn also explains why the Mauritanian monarchy was at the time interested in Carthago Nova as a settlement town for veterans. Besides, coin series like RPC1 160 seem to have accompanied the settlement of a contingent of soldiers in Carthago Nova, and the character of these coins, even more than in the case of RPC1 172/173, point towards a deductio of former Mauritanian auxiliaries.

Out of the three possible time periods for the Carthago Nova series analysed here (5-7, 17/18, and 23/24 AD), 17/18 AD provides the best match for the quinquennial issues of RPC1 169. In 23/24 AD, Juba was already dead or on the point of dying and in this context the RPC1 172-174 series appears to it in well with the presentation of the new princeps, who became rex in 5 AD. The years of 23/24 AD, the transition period in between the kings Juba II and Ptolomy then appear as the only serious proposal for the coin issues RPC1 157, as no Mauritanian royal symbols or Mauritanian names are visible on them. He reverse of this coin type is identical to that of Juba II’s triumphal series (Victoria with palm branch and wreath) except that it includes complete Roman signa on the obverse. For this reason, it is possible that on this occasion the veteran deductio did not include any Mauritanian auxiliaries."

- Broucheion

 

Edited June 3, 2023 by Broucheion

[Sulla80]

Link: Berber Massylians

Kings of Numidia, Massinissa (203-148 BC) or his son, Micipsa (148-118 BC), Æ 26mm

Obv: Laureate and bearded head to left

Rev: Horse galloping to left; pellet below

Ref: MAA 18a; Mazzard 50; SNG Copenhagen 505

 

[Dafydd]

Link Janus

Obverse: Laureate and bearded head of Janus; I above.
Reverse: NA/SO in two lines within laurel-wreath.

 Struck by the Quaestor Naso-

HGC 2, 1690. Uncertain mint in Sicily, late 2nd century BC. 5,3 g - 22,5 mm

[John Conduitt]

Two heads.

Tasciovanus 1st Coinage Unit, 25-20BC
Verlamion. Bronze, 16mm, 1.85g. Conjoined bearded heads right, elaborate hair arranged in two rows of crescents; VER(I) in front. Ram left, pellets and rosettes in front and below, rosette flanked by two pellets above; TA(SC) above (Spink 242; ABC 2655; VA 1705-01 ‘Trinovantian M’).

[DonnaML]

Link: Ram.

Roman Republic, L. Rustius, AR Denarius, 76 BCE (Crawford) [or 74-72 BCE], Rome Mint. Obv. Head of young Mars (or Minerva, see fn.) right, wearing crested helmet, S•C downwards behind helmet; beneath chin, * [= XVI; mark of value] / Rev. Ram standing to right; L•RVSTI in exergue. Crawford 389/1; RSC Rustia 1 (ill. p. 85); BMCRR I Rome 3271; Sear RCV I 320 (ill. p. 132); RBW Collection 1423 (ill. p. 293); Harlan, RRM I Ch. 17 at pp. 104-108 [Michael Harlan, Roman Republican Moneyers and their Coins, 81 BCE-64 BCE (Vol. I) (2012)]. 
18 mm., 3.87 g., 5 h. Purchased from Roma Numismatics Ltd, Auction XXV, 22 Sep 2022, Lot 706 [obv. identified as Mars]; from Andrew McCabe Collection (collector’s ticket included), ex Tauler & Fau, Auction 95, 2 Nov 2021, Lot 194 [obv. identified as Mars] (Poinssot sale).*

 *Moneyer The moneyer, Lucius Rustius, is “not otherwise known,” but was “perhaps from Antium” (Crawford Vol. I p. 404), a coastal city in Latium 61 km. south of Rome. He may have been the grandfather or otherwise an ancestor of Quintus Rustius, the named moneyer for an Augustus denarius (RIC I 322) with an obverse depicting the jugate busts of Fortuna Victrix and Fortuna Felix – for whom a two-fold cult existed at Antium -- set on a bar with ram's head finials. (See Harlan RRM I p. 106; see also BMCRR I p. 398 n. 2, suggesting that the ram’s presence on both types indicates that it was associated with the family as a symbol or crest).  

Date of Issue : Crawford’s proposed date of 76 BCE is based on his interpretation of hoard evidence (particularly the type’s presence in the Roncofreddo hoard; see Crawford I p. 82). However, see C. Hersh and A. Walker, “The Mesagne Hoard,” ANSMN [American Numismatic Society Museum Notes] 29 (1984) (Table 2), dating L. Rustius’s issue to 74 BCE, which is the authors’ new terminus date for the Roncofreddo hoard. Harlan also rejects the 76 BCE date and assigns this moneyer to an even later date, 72 BCE, for the reasons stated at RRM I p. 104, including the unlikelihood of an “S•C” issue in 76 or 75 given that Rome was hard-pressed for cash in those years, unable to send adequate funds to support the war in Spain and failing to meet other important needs.

Identity of Obverse Head (Young Mars or Minerva): The various authorities are seriously divided on the identity of the deity portrayed on the obverse. See, e.g.: Crawford 389/1 [Minerva]; RSC Rustia 1 (ill. p. 85) [young Mars]; BMCRR I Rome 3271 [young Mars]; Sear RCV I 320 (ill. p. 132) [young Mars]; RBW Collection 1423 (ill. p. 293) [Minerva]; Harlan, RRM I Ch. 17 at pp. 104-108 [Minerva] [Michael Harlan, Roman Republican Moneyers and their Coins, 81 BCE-64 BCE (Vol. I) (2012)]; Farney pp. 284-285 [Minerva] [Gary D. Farney, Ethnic Identity and Aristocratic Competition in Republican Rome (Cambridge U. Press, 2007) (cited pp. available on Google Books)]; Liv Mariah Yarrow blog [Mars; see https://livyarrow.org/2022/09/23/mars-not-roma-again/#comment-7939]; Hollstein pp. 36-38 (Mars) [William Hollstein, Die stadtrömische Münzprägung der Jahre 78–50 v. Chr., Zwischen Politischer Aktualität und Familienthematik: Kommentar und Bibliographie (Quellen und Forschungen zur Antiken Welt XIV) (Munich 1993)].

 Without going into the full details of the various arguments, I believe most of them can best be categorized as variously based on appearance, astrology, geography, and combinations thereof. Having read them all, I lean rather strongly towards the “young Mars” interpretation, partly for rather simple appearance-based reasons (despite my rejection of the idea that the obverse figure on the Q. Lutatius Cerco denarius could be identified as Mars or Roma on the basis of unsupported pronouncements as to whether the face is more “masculine” or “feminine”). Here, by contrast, the appearance-based reasons are more concrete. First, in response to my question to Liv Mariah Yarrow about the obverse deity on this type, on her 22 September 2022 blog post entitled “Mars, not Roma (again)” (see citation above) – a post identifying at least seven Roman Republican types that she believes Crawford misidentified as Roma rather than Mars, and characterizing the issue as a “blind spot” for Crawford (id.) – she responded with respect to the L. Rustius type “Mars 100% I see Mars. The hair is too short to be Minerva.” Although of course I cannot assert that there are no exceptions, it’s certainly the case that helmeted portrayals of Minerva (and Roma as well) on Roman Republican coins usually show noticeably longer hair flowing out in back from beneath their helmets than the portrayal on this type shows, or is shown on portrayals of Mars in general. See, e.g., the 158 examples of Republican portraits of Minerva yielded by a search of CRRO (http://numismatics.org/crro/), including only a handful of denarii, specifically Crawford 328, 348/3, 465/5, and 494/38 -- all of them depicting Minerva with much longer hair than the obverse figure on this type.

Even more persuasively, as pointed out by William Hollstein, op. cit., at p. 37, “die weitaus größere Zahl der Rustius-Denare einen Kopf mit ausgeprägtem Adamsapfel, so daß er eher als der des Mars angesehen werden muß” [translated by DeepL as “by far the greater number of Rustius denarii have a head with a pronounced Adam's apple, so that it must be regarded rather as that of Mars”]. This characterization appears entirely accurate to me: the obverse deity on my own specimen certainly appears to have a prominent adam’s apple, and so do most of the figures on the examples listed on acsearch; the most recently sold specimens can be seen at  https://www.acsearch.info/image.html?id=10323504 and https://www.acsearch.info/image.html?id=10323505. On the other hand, I detect no adam’s apples on any of the Minerva portraits cited above!

None of the astrological, geographical, or other arguments changes my opinion. First, as to astrology, there are arguments that actually favor a Mars identification. See, e.g., BMCRR I p. 398 n. 2, pointing out that the ram, as depicted on the reverse of this type, was, in its manifestation as Aries, “the emblem of the month of March, which, before the time of Julius Caesar, was the first in the Roman calendar. This would establish a connection between the obverse and reverse types” given that March was, of course, named after Mars. Even assuming the absence of any etymological connection between Aries (the ram) and Ares (Mars) – and there does not appear to be one – the association between Mars (March) and Aries remains.   

Crawford, on the other hand, supports his identification of the obverse portrait as Minerva by stating that the “constellation aries was the astrological ‘house of Minerva’ and a ram was doubtless chosen as reverse type to complement the head of Minerva on the obverse” (citing Mommsen). See also Hollstein, op. cit. at p. 37 n. 8 (“Minerva galt als Schutzgottheit des Sternbildes aries [Minerva was considered the tutelary deity of the constellation aries] (vgl. Manil. 2,439: Lanigemm Pallas, Taurum Cytherea tuetur; und Servo Aen. 11,259”).  But even if that is the case, see the Antoninus Pius Zodiac series of drachms from Roman Alexandria, which accompanies the reverse depiction of Aries the ram (Emmett 1461.8) with a portrait of Ares (Mars) – not of Athena/Minerva. Nor am I aware of other Roman Republican (or indeed Imperial or Provincial) coins pairing Minerva/Athena with a ram. (Cf. Crawford 123/1-3, 550/3b [pairing rams’ heads with Roma, Janus, Saturn, and Venus].) However, it is unnecessary to determine the usual astrological meaning – if any -- of rams on Roman coinage, given the apparent association (see above) between the gens Rustia and the ram as a family symbol or crest. The zodiac may well be entirely irrelevant. See also Harlan RRM I at p. 105-106, stating that “there is no way to distinguish between [the] two [zodiacal] interpretations and neither offers anything special,” pointing instead to the Augustan Q. Rustius coin cited above and the possible association of the Rustii with the ram and the town of Antium, where the gens may have originated. 

However, Harlan then proceeds to propose a highly convoluted theory leading him to conclude that the obverse figure was intended to depict Minerva after all. See Harlan RRM I at pp. 106-108. Without recounting every element of the theory, it is based, among other things, on the importance of sheep to the Antium region, the mythical founding of Antium by a son of Ulysses and Circe, the fact that less than 50 km. from Antium there was a mountain with a temple to Circe and an altar to Minerva, and a town displaying a bowl that had supposedly belonged to Ulysses, the supposed fact that the ram depicted on the coin may have called to mind Ulysses’ adventure with the Cyclops (involving an escape by Ulysses and his men tied to the underbellies of sheep, including a large ram), the existence of an ancient tourist attraction 80 km. south of Antium presented as the Cyclops’ cave, and the status of Minerva as Ulysses’ counselor and protector. Id.  The theory is not only convoluted but farfetched, in my opinion, and fails to account for “Minerva’s” unusual short hair and adam’s apple. As well as the absence of any unambiguous reference on the coin, pictorial or otherwise, to Ulysses or the Odyssey. 

Finally, Gary D. Farney, in his book cited above, relies on Crawford’s Minerva identification and suggests that it is supported by an ancient gem (cited as Richter [1971] no. 105) (not illustrated) depicting Minerva riding a ram. He concludes that the ram depictions on both types issued by the Rustius gens “‘may be regarded as a badge or crest of the family,’ possibly connected with some sort of devotion the family had for Minerva.” Farney p. 285 (citation omitted). For the reasons outlined above, and without knowing more about the gem Farney mentions, I am not persuaded. 

Use of S•C [Senatus Consultum] See Crawford Vol. II pp. 606-609 for a discussion of the use of “S C” on approximately 40 Republican issues including this one, concluding that it “seems probable, though not absolutely certain, that routine coinage, although authorized by the Senate, bore no special mark and that only when an issue was separately authorized during the year” was it marked with an “S•C” or an “Ex S•C.” Specifically, Crawford notes at p. 608 that “by far the greatest concentration of these issues falls between 80 and 51. The early part of the period is known to be one of recurrent financial crises . . . and it is possible that the financial administration of the Roman Republic was in this period conducted on such a hand-to-mouth basis that the Senate was frequently unable or unwilling to decide at the beginning of the year how much coinage should be struck; instead it had recourse to specially authorized issues during the year.” 

Presence of Mark of Value The denarius mark of value * ( = XVI asses) appears on the obverse of this type for the first time since approximately 107 BCE, except for the so-called “restored” issues (Crawford 369-371) from ca. 82-80. See Harlan RRM I p. 104. It was also the last appearance of the mark on any denarius. See BMCRR I p. 398 n. 2. Grueber states that its appearance here was “purely accidental” (id.), and Crawford views it as “merely an archaism” (Crawford I p. 404). Harlan, however, suggests that the * mark as used here may have signified an office title rather than a mark of value, supposedly adopted from the use of a similar mark in the title CVR•*•FL [curator for minting denarii, with the mark standing for denarii] found on the reverse of Crawford 393/1b, issued by Cn. Lentulus in either 76-75 BCE [Crawford] or 74-73 BCE [Harlan]. See Harlan RRM I pp. 104-105. This interpretation requires accepting Harlan’s dating of the L. Rustius issue to 72 BCE, after Cn. Lentulus, and identifying L. Rustius as the moneyer who took over from Lentulus and picked up the * from the title CVR•*•FL. Id.

Edited June 3, 2023 by DonnaML

[Prieure de Sion]

Link: 

58 minutes ago, DonnaML said:

S C

 

Imperator Caesar Nerva Traianus Augustus
Sestertius of the Roman Imperial Period 115/117 AD; Material: AE Bronze; Diameter: 33mm; Weight: 29.66g; Mint: Rome; Reference: RIC II Trajan 658; Provenance: Künker Numismatics Osnabrück, Germany

Obverse: Bust of Trajan, laureate, draped, right. The Inscription reads: IMP CAES NER TRAIANO OPTIMO AVG DAC GER DAC P M TR P COS VI P P for Imperator, Caesar, Nervae Traiano Optimo, Augustus, Dacicus, Germanicus, Dacicus, Pontifex Maximus, Tribunicia Potestate, Consul Sextum, Pater Patriae (Imperator, Caesar, Nerva Trajan, the best Augustus, conqueror of the Dacians, conqueror of the Germans, conqueror of the Dacians, high priest, holder of tribunician power, consul for the sixth time, father of the nation)

Reverse: Trajan, in military dress, seated right on high platform on left, by him stand two officers; in front of him stand an officer and four soldiers whom he is haranguing; behind in background, three standards. The Inscription reads: IMPERATOR VIIII S C for Imperator Nonum, Senatus Consultum (Imperator for the ninth time. Decree of the senate).