Emperors of Rome - A (Chronological) Portrait Gallery

[Rand]

Poor little Leo II deserves mentioning in the transition from Leo I to Zeno.

 

Jean Elsen & ses Fils S.A. Auction 98. 13/12/2008. 

Ex. Sotheby’s. An Important Private Collection of Byzantine Coins. 02/11/1998

 

 

[lrbguy]

I'm not qualified to proctor any of this, bu t I do want to ask, where does recognition of Odovacar and the split reign of Zeno fit in?

Under the original plan, I believe today is the day for Zeno.  Does that "cover" the Vandalic takeover in the west?

[Pellinore]

Excellent work, that schedule looks good, though you won't see much of me, except until around half June. And after mid-September we can carry on with the Holy Roman Empire (don't have any of those Emperors, either).

Here's another larger AE of Leo, the reverse is rather bad and I think the obverse text might have been tooled. Still, this is a Salus or Virtus type, isn't it?

2852. AE20 Leo I (457-474), Constantinopolis. Obv. Draped, diademed and cuirassed bust r. Rev. Leo standing right, holding labarum and globe, left foot on captive. 20 mm, 4.60 gr. 

[O-Towner]

1 hour ago, lrbguy said:

I'm not qualified to proctor any of this, bu t I do want to ask, where does recognition of Odovacar and the split reign of Zeno fit in?

Under the original plan, I believe today is the day for Zeno.  Does that "cover" the Vandalic takeover in the west?

As I've stated earlier I believe the addition of Vandallic (and other type) coins fit perfectly in this forum. It's not like there's going to be a lot of posts, and many late Roman guys just consider these an addenda to their collection.

[John Conduitt]

35 minutes ago, O-Towner said:

As I've stated earlier I believe the addition of Vandallic (and other type) coins fit perfectly in this forum. It's not like there's going to be a lot of posts, and many late Roman guys just consider these an addenda to their collection.

Yes I think medieval could go from after the Vandals etc. From 450-750 I'm not sure how much can be attributed to a specific ruler. A lot is in the name of other rulers or just anonymous.

[mc9]

Zeno :

This time a coin with a hole in it, but i love his young looking portrait, and 2 coins with the same monogram, but the first piece has a small S at the top left, the second a D to the right of the monogram?

D N ZENO PERP AVG : pearl-diademed, draped and cuirassed bust right
VICTORIA AVGVSTORVM // CONOB : Victory advancing to front, head left, holding wreath in right hand and globus cruciger in left; star in right field
AV Tremissis, Constantinople, AD 476-491, . RIC 919

D N ZENO P F AVG : Pearl-diademed, draped and cuirassed bust right
Monogram ( number 1 )of Zeno within wreath;
Nummus , second reign, A.D. 476-491., Cf. RIC 958 ( Thessalonica ) or RIC 964 ( Nicomedia )

D N ZENO P F AVG : Pearl-diademed, draped and cuirassed bust right
Monogram ( number 1 )of Zeno within wreath;
Nummus , second reign, A.D. 476-491., Cf. RIC 958 ( Thessalonica ) or RIC 964 ( Nicomedia )

 

[Ancient Coin Hunter]

12 hours ago, Severus Alexander said:

As the switch to Anastasius and the Byzantine sub-forum is rapidly approaching, and I believe I'm taking over from @CPK with thread Caesar duties, I figured I'd better put a schedule together.  Here's a draft, comments and corrections are most welcome!!  Absent comments, this is what you'll be stuck with. 😄 (I guess I should probably solicit comments from the Byzantine subforum too, since new people will probably be joining the fun.  Tomorrow I'll try to remember to do that.)

I like the suggestion that we also continue with the migration period/successor kingdoms in the medieval forum, though I assume it wouldn't have so much of a focus on portraits.  Anyone want to volunteer for thread Caesar duties for that? @O-Towner? @John Conduitt? @ValiantKnight?

Byzantine draft schedule, part 1:

Part 2:

Hard to believe @Severus Alexander but the schedule runs all the way to NFL season and or the end of MLB if you are into that sort of thing. Go Byzantium!

[O-Towner]

Zeno Ae : Uncertain mint (10mm, 1.0gms)

Obv: D N ZENO AVG; Helmeted bust right

Rev: ZE - NO; Emperor, nimbate, standing facing holding long cross and cross on globe

Ref: RIC 951

Zeno Ae : Constantinople mint (13mm, 1.3gms)

Obv: D N ZENO SE AVG; Diademed bust right

Rev: SE - CN; Victory advancing left holding wreath and dragging captive, staurogram in left field

Ref: RIC 949

 

Edited May 30, 2023 by O-Towner

[lrbguy]

ZENO

These examples have mostly illegible obverses, but the monograms on the reverses are able to be identified for type.  Two distinct monogram types are represented here, type 1 and type 4.

Zeno (2nd reign)    AE4     8x9mm       Thessalonika (RIC X 958) or [Nicomedia RIC X 964]
Obv: illegible  diademed bust facing r.
Zeno Monogram ( number 1 ) within wreath;

 

 

Zeno (2nd reign)  AE4 9mm  Cyzicus (RIC X 965) or Constantinople (RIC X 961 or 963)
Obv: mostly illegible  pearl-diademed bust facing r.
Zeno Monogram ( number 4 ) within wreath;

 

 

 

Edited May 30, 2023 by lrbguy
added a couple of RIC numbers.

[Severus Alexander]

My best Zeno (Nicomedia):

And I can add a Basiliscus, a gold semissis:

[mc9]

My last post in Roman portraits :

Aelia Zenonis

A ZENONIS : Pearl-diademed and draped bust right
Monogram of Aelia Zenonis.
Nummus, Constantinopolis, A.D.476, RIC 1018

 

[lrbguy]

May I request your assistance?

Since we are just at the end of the Roman listings and tomorrow will begin the Byzantine listings, perhaps this is the best place for me to ask for help with an item I cannot quite decipher.  

It is a 7x8mm AE coin weighing 0.63 grams.  The reverse bears a clear strike of part of a monogram, which was apparently sized for a larger module.  The form of the monogram suggests a reverse for Marcian, but I could not rule out a coin of Odovcar if such a thing could exist in bronze.  

If the monogram is on the reverse, then the real problem with this coin concerns how we are to understand the obverse.  The image is very far from the usual bust of an issuer.  In the orientation I have given here it could be a highly schematic humanoid representation, but I am very skeptical of that. Then again, since it is not uncommon to find schematic representations of figures in scenes on these late coin reverses, could this be a detail of that sort?  But for what? And how then would we account for a monogram on the opposite side?

Those of you more familiar with the schematics of late, late Roman or Vandalic coinage may know of some pattern(s) that might shed a bit of light on this, and I would appreciate your input here.

What is this thing?

Edited May 31, 2023 by lrbguy
fixed a couple of numbers

[O-Towner]

1 hour ago, lrbguy said:

May I request your assistance?

Since we are just at the end of the Roman listings and tomorrow will begin the Byzantine listings, perhaps this is the best place for me to ask for help with an item I cannot quite decipher.  

It is a 7x8mm AE coin weighing 0.63 grams.  The reverse bears a clear strike of part of a monogram, which was apparently sized for a larger module.  The form of the monogram suggests a reverse for Marcian, but I could not rule out a coin of Odovcar if such a thing could exist in bronze.  

If the monogram is on the reverse, then the real problem with this coin concerns how we are to understand the obverse.  The image is very far from the usual bust of an issuer.  In the orientation I have given here it could be a highly schematic humanoid representation, but I am very skeptical of that. Then again, since it is not uncommon to find schematic representations of figures in scenes on these late coin reverses, could this be a detail of that sort?  But for what? And how then would we account for a monogram on the opposite side?

Those of you more familiar with the schematics of late, late Roman or Vandalic coinage may know of some pattern(s) that might shed a bit of light on this, and I would appreciate your input here.

What is this thing?

It's a Justin II Ae nummus from Carthage. Ref: SB 282 (Justinian I)

[Severus Alexander]

@O-Towner beat me to it!  Here's another example (not my coin):

Very neat item, and rather scarce!

[O-Towner]

And since we decided to show some post Zeno coins I'll start with this one:

Odovacar (476 - 493 AD) Ae : Ravenna mint (10.4mm, 0.8gms)

Obv: (ODO)-VAC; Bare-headed and cuirassed bust right

Rev: Monogram of Odovacar

Ref: RIC X 3502

[lrbguy]

18 hours ago, O-Towner said:

It's a Justin II Ae nummus from Carthage. Ref: SB 282 (Justinian I)

 

17 hours ago, Severus Alexander said:

@O-Towner beat me to it!  Here's another example (not my coin):

Very neat item, and rather scarce!

Thanks a lot you two!! Never would I have found that on my own.  Not being a collector of the Byzantine I don't work with the tools you used, such as the reference "SB" whatever that is (though I do have the first volume of the Dumbarton Oaks collection writeup).  I am impressed that what I showed actually correlates to what you showed.  Now for the remaining question, Is the schematic rendering on the obverse of my coin merely due to deterioration, or is it a fundamentally simpler rendering of what you show in greater detail?  I see all the elements there, but they are seriously flat on my piece.  Worn to an outline, perhaps, or more schematic out of the gate?

[O-Towner]

53 minutes ago, lrbguy said:

Thanks a lot you two!! Never would I have found that on my own.  Not being a collector of the Byzantine I don't work with the tools you used, such as the reference "SB" whatever that is (though I do have the first volume of the Dumbarton Oaks collection writeup).  I am impressed that what I showed actually correlates to what you showed.  Now for the remaining question, Is the schematic rendering on the obverse of my coin merely due to deterioration, or is it a fundamentally simpler rendering of what you show in greater detail?  I see all the elements there, but they are seriously flat on my piece.  Worn to an outline, perhaps, or more schematic out of the gate?

SB = Sear Byzantine which is the reference book most of us Byzantine guys go to first. This coin is shown as Justinian in Sear but for some reason it has now shifted to Justin II in other references. Kind of weird since Justinian had denominations with A (1 nummus). B (2 nummi) and so on. Yours is very typical of most examples, rough and struck somewhat off-center.

 

Edited June 1, 2023 by O-Towner

[mc9]

@O-Towner

As requested

I start with Athalaric :

No text obverse : Diademed, draped and cuirassed bust right
Monogram of Athalaric within wreath..
Nummus, A.D. 526-534, Rome, Demo 176ff

Same as before, but different wildeman head and text on obverse( i don't know what )

 

 

Edited June 1, 2023 by mc9

[mc9]

Baduila :

no obverse text : Diademed, draped, and cuirassed bust right
Baduila monogram within wreath
Nummus, Rome, A.D. 541-552, MEC 1, 163

 

[mc9]

And the last one in the Roman forum : The others are for the Byzantine sectoin.

Gelimer : Thisone could have kind of hat on

no text on obverse : Diademed, draped, and cuirassed bust right
Gelimer monogram within wreath
Æ Nummus, Carthage, A.D530-534, BMC Vandals 4-6

 

[CPK]

AND WITH THAT, I suppose this Portrait thread is completed! 😮🥳👏

Many, many thanks to @Severus Alexander for helping to organize the schedule, for all who provided feedback and suggestions, and, most of all, to all who participated! It has been a ton of fun seeing the incredible portraits posted, to be able to watch as artistic styles shifted and changed over the Empire's history. To me, one of the most appealing aspects of a coin - especially Roman - is a finely engraved portrait, and we have been given a rare and world-class gallery of the finest in Roman numismatic portraiture over the last 6 months. Once again, thanks to all for sharing! 

 

NOW I would like to open the thread up for all those who may have missed posting earlier - please feel free to play catch-up and continue to post any of your favorite Roman Emperor portrait coins which you may have missed!

[O-Towner]

I'll throw in a couple more Ostrogothic issues:

Theodoric (493 - 518 AD) AR Quarter Siliqua in the name of Anastasius (10.0mm, 0.6gms)

Obv: D N ANAST-AS.. AG (or similar); Bust of Theodoric right

Rev: Monogram of Theodoric in wreath, cross above

Ref: BMC Vandals 23

Athalaric (526 - 534 AD) Ae Decanummium (17.3mm, 2.7gms)

Obv: INVICTA ROMA; Helmeted bust of Roma right

Rev: DN ATHAL-ARICVS; Athalaric standing facing, head right, holding spear and shield S - C to either side, X (denomination) to left

Ref: BMC 69

 

 

[Severus Alexander]

Hey @O-Towner, I happened upon a coin that might shed some light on your cool Pulcheria/Eudocia/Eudoxia conundrum coin, as discussed above:

On 5/24/2023 at 9:30 PM, Severus Alexander said:

I lean towards Eudocia based on the portrait style... at least it matches her portraits better on acsearch results: Pulcheria (ignore the crappy fake from Emporium Shamburg) and Eudocia.  For the latter, here's a CNG example from 2005:

Here's the coin:

(Acsearch link to the listing.)  As you can see, the legend is a close match to your coin, without being a die match.  (Your coin again, for those following along:

CNG attributes theirs to Eudoxia, but I don't think that's right.  Eudoxia's coins very consistently have a clear AEL EVDO to the left of the bust, and it's awfully difficult to find that in either theirs or yours.  On their coin, the somewhat ambiguous letter before the V looks rather like a P, whereas yours seems more E-ish. (I wonder if removing some of the dirt there might help.) In any case, I'm now inclined to read your coin as "AL PVLCERIA" on the basis of the CNG coin, for which this legend seems the only decent fit.  Of course that means an abbreviation or misspelling of Pulcheria's name – missing the "E" in AEL and the "H" in Pulcheria – but that's not too unexpected on these junky 5th century products!  And RIC notes that the DOC example for Eudocia begins "AL", so we have at least one example of that mistake/abbreviation.

BTW, do you think there's a star in the reverse left field?

I'm glad seeing this CNG coin twigged my memory and I hope these reflections are helpful!  I'd love to land a Pulcheria, as she's one of the only historically important personalities I'm missing from my entire Roman-Byzantine collection. Jealous, I am! 😁

[O-Towner]

@Severus Alexander

Thanks for the research! Much appreciated. I didn't mention in the original post another reason which pushed it over the edge to Pulcheria for me is the break in the obverse legend. AEL (or maybe just AE) EVDOCIA AVG has 12 (or 13) letters and each of these types I've seen shows the obverse  legend break at the O. A coin of Pulcheria with an equivalent legend would be AE PVLCHERIA AVG which has 14 letters and for this an even legend break would be after the H, which is what you see on my coin. Just one more subtle difference.

[Severus Alexander]

38 minutes ago, O-Towner said:

A coin of Pulcheria with an equivalent legend would be AE PVLCHERIA AVG which has 14 letters and for this an even legend break would be after the H, which is what you see on my coin.

Yes, that could be an H... I was seeing it as an E, especially on the CNG coin. Interestingly, that letter on the CNG coin closely resembles what should be a P on yours. Such magnificent engraving! 😆

In any case, the betting surely has to be very strongly in favour of Pulcheria at this point. 👍