Faustina Friday – Q&A

[Roman Collector]

Friday felicitations, fellow Faustina fanatics! As I previously posted, I don't have enough new coins to write FF on a weekly basis, so it'll be an ad hoc thing (stay tuned, though). 

Today I have no new acquisitions to share, but I thought I'd like to make a thread for questions. If you have a question about anything related to Faustina I or II, please ask and I'll do my best to answer!

 

[JAZ Numismatics]

I'm always curious as to why a collector picks a particular concentration. What is it about the Faustina coinage that appealed to you so strongly?

[ominus1]

33 minutes ago, JAZ Numismatics said:

I'm always curious as to why a collector picks a particular concentration. What is it about the Faustina coinage that appealed to you so strongly?

 

 

imagessig (1).jfif

Edited November 8, 2024 by ominus1

[Ryro]

Their husband's were two of the best emperors Rome ever had. So, why did both the Faustinas names get run through the mud by the sources as having slept with gladiators, soldiers, and even being accused of prostitution??

[JulianIX]

Faustina the Elder, 100-140; 
Æ Sestertius, 32mm, 23.28g, 12h, posthumous issue struck under Antoninus Pius  in Rome, 142;
DIVA AVGVSTA FAVSTINA, veiled draped bust right / effigy of Faustina holding torch and corn-ears in a car drawn by two elephants with riders, EX·S·C in exergue; RIC 1140. 

[Marsyas Mike]

Well, it is a testament to all those past Faustina Fridays you've posted @Roman Collector that I don't really have any questions - you keep answering them.  And for that I thank you.  Your posts have certainly improved my attributions. 

So thank you, again, RC.  And please keep up the good work.  

To demonstrate my RC-enhanced attributions (which I hope I didn't botch here 😌 ), here is one of my purchases from earlier this year, with the stuff I write for the flip insert (these go to four inserts sometimes!) - note the RC notations:

Faustina II             Æ Sestertius (c. 170-174 A.D.) See notes Rome Mint FAVSTINA AVGVSTA, bare-headed, draped bust, right (Beckmann Type 10 hairstyle). / MATRI MAGNAE | SC in exergue | Cybele seated right holding drum on left knee; lions seated at left and right of throne (27.58 grams / 31 x 28 mm) eBay Jan. 2024  $37.02

RIC III Marcus Aurelius 1663; BMCRE 932-935; Cohen 169. RIC/OCRE:  161-176 A.D. CNG:  circa AD 170-175/6. RC (NF):  (c. 170-174 A.D.)

Provenance:  Originally sold: Heidelberger Münzhandlung Herbert Grün e.K. Auction 81; Lot 2402; 10.05.2021 Est. € 75 Catalog is online; see page 63.

Die-Match Obverse:  British Museum Museum number: R.14316 C&M catalogue number: RE4 (534) (933) (534) BMCRE 933, p.534 (OCRE example)

Notes: "Dating the coin is difficult. Beckmann’s die-linkage study of the  aurei of Faustina II demonstrate this  reverse type to be the first to use the Type 10 hairstyle, which was introduced sometime after the death of  Lucius Verus in 169 CE. It may have been (for) the birth of Faustina's last child, a daughter, Vibia Aurelia Sabina, born 170 or 171 CE. This reverse type appears to have been issued before the introduction of  the MATER CASTRORVM issues in the latter half of 174 CE." RC NF

[mcwyler]

I'm a newcomer to FF - hitherto I've not had any Faustinas to shout about, any day of the week. 
But I've recently acquired a denarius that may be common but it really is quite nice in hand with a lovely tone and good detail on the bust.  Hammered for €32, so I'm a happy bunny.

RIC 394a. 3.45g, 17mm.

[-monolith-]

Here is a very interesting cast bronze (Limes) denarius from my collection:

 

[seth77]

An opportunity to add this AETERNITAS as with my favorite veiled bust:

[Roman Collector]

9 hours ago, JAZ Numismatics said:

I'm always curious as to why a collector picks a particular concentration. What is it about the Faustina coinage that appealed to you so strongly?

That's a very reasonable question. I had reached a point where I was bored with my general, "one of each emperor" collection and it was becoming progressively difficult to obtain some of the shorter-lived emperors and empresses, such as Didius Julianus, Gordian I and II, Aemilian, etc. I decided to take a deeper dive into certain areas, and have collected at various times the City Commemoratives of Constantine, Prutot of the Roman Procurators of Judea, Coins from the seven cities in Asia of Revelation, coins with Venus reverses, coins with Fecunditas reverses, Julia Mamaea, Gordian III and Tranquillina facing-bust provincials, and the Gallienus zoo series. I made a lot of progress on coins of Trebonianus Gallus and Volusian and started a collection of the denarii of Nerva, but I was looking for an area that would take me longer to complete and about which there was incomplete scholarship. I thought about Claudius II, but Finn Johannessen was actively pursuing that and publishing his findings, and I didn't think I'd have much to contribute to the scholarship in that area. And I think he's boring. I also thought about doing more with Gallienus -- because his coins are plentiful and generally inexpensive -- but they're generally ugly. Most of them looked awful the day they left the mint.

I already had a fair amount of Faustina I and II coins from my Fecunditas and Venus collections and thought they might make for a fruitful collection because there were far more reverse types and varieties than the Trebonianus and other collections, but not so many that it would be impossible to aim for completeness. Moreover, their coins aren't in particular demand by other collectors and are generally affordable except for a few popular reverse types. It seemed an interesting, affordable, challenging, but doable specialty.

Then there was the issue of scholarship. There was scholarly disagreement about the dating of the coins and the purpose behind each issue. There was enough knowledge to where I didn't have to reinvent the wheel, but there were a lot of gaps in our knowledge of Faustina's coins. Around the time I decided to take a deep dive into their coinage, several works of scholarship were published that provided a framework for me to build upon. Barbara Levick published her biography of Faustina I and II. Klaus Fittschen published his article on the hairstyles of Faustina II and a proposed chronology. Wolfgang Szaivert published his volume for MIR on the coins of Marcus Aurelius, Lucius Verus, and Commodus, in which he proposed a chronology for the coins thought to have been issued under Marcus Aurelius for Faustina II. Shortly thereafter, Paul Dinsdale began his work on the Antonine coinage as a whole, and Martin Beckmann published his die-linkage study of the coins of Faustina I. Curtis Clay had published articles and posts over at Forum Ancient Coins and he was kind enough to provide me with his hand-written notes taken for these, with a chronology of Faustina's obverse inscriptions and hairstyles based upon an analysis of the Reka Devnia hoard. Roxane Gauthier-Dussart published meaningful work in her doctoral dissertation of the coinage of Antoninus Pius and her photographs of the Antonine coinage in the Bibliotheque nationale de France are invaluable. 

I found it fascinating to do die-studies of my own and construct a chronology of the various reverse types, trying to reconcile the existing scholarship and refine the dates. I was making a lot of progress when Beckmann finally published his die-studies of the aurei of Faustina II, which confirmed much of what I and Curtis Clay had deduced independently, and, in many cases, allowed me to reconstruct an absolute chronology primarily based upon obverse inscriptions, but supplemented by hairstyle, which is a bit more loosy-goosy because the mint sometimes issued coins with two hairstyles at the same time. Beckmann's scholarship is limited to the aurei; I feel that I have made very meaningful discoveries about the silver and bronze issues to supplement his work. Most recently, Jean LaCourt published his work on the sestertii of Antoninus Pius, which is helpful but often his conclusions about dating are at odds with mine.

It has been a fun specialty -- I imagine it will take another five years or so to complete -- and I feel I have been able to make meaningful contributions to scholarship along the way. I have had very meaningful discussions with Paul Dinsdale, Richard Abdy, and Curtis Clay about the coinage of the Faustinas. I have also reached out to Roxane Gauthier-Dussart and Martin Beckmann, but have had no responses from either. I don't think they are aloof; I think I simply don't have up-to-date contact information for them.

[Roman Collector]

9 hours ago, Ryro said:

Their husband's were two of the best emperors Rome ever had. So, why did both the Faustinas names get run through the mud by the sources as having slept with gladiators, soldiers, and even being accused of prostitution??

That's unfortunate because none of that is likely to have been true.

7 hours ago, Marsyas Mike said:

Well, it is a testament to all those past Faustina Fridays you've posted @Roman Collector that I don't really have any questions - you keep answering them.  And for that I thank you.  Your posts have certainly improved my attributions. 

So thank you, again, RC.  And please keep up the good work.  

To demonstrate my RC-enhanced attributions (which I hope I didn't botch here 😌 ), here is one of my purchases from earlier this year, with the stuff I write for the flip insert (these go to four inserts sometimes!) - note the RC notations:

Faustina II             Æ Sestertius (c. 170-174 A.D.) See notes Rome Mint FAVSTINA AVGVSTA, bare-headed, draped bust, right (Beckmann Type 10 hairstyle). / MATRI MAGNAE | SC in exergue | Cybele seated right holding drum on left knee; lions seated at left and right of throne (27.58 grams / 31 x 28 mm) eBay Jan. 2024  $37.02

RIC III Marcus Aurelius 1663; BMCRE 932-935; Cohen 169. RIC/OCRE:  161-176 A.D. CNG:  circa AD 170-175/6. RC (NF):  (c. 170-174 A.D.)

Provenance:  Originally sold: Heidelberger Münzhandlung Herbert Grün e.K. Auction 81; Lot 2402; 10.05.2021 Est. € 75 Catalog is online; see page 63.

Die-Match Obverse:  British Museum Museum number: R.14316 C&M catalogue number: RE4 (534) (933) (534) BMCRE 933, p.534 (OCRE example)

Notes: "Dating the coin is difficult. Beckmann’s die-linkage study of the  aurei of Faustina II demonstrate this  reverse type to be the first to use the Type 10 hairstyle, which was introduced sometime after the death of  Lucius Verus in 169 CE. It may have been (for) the birth of Faustina's last child, a daughter, Vibia Aurelia Sabina, born 170 or 171 CE. This reverse type appears to have been issued before the introduction of  the MATER CASTRORVM issues in the latter half of 174 CE." RC NF

Thank you so much for the kind words and for your interest in Faustina Friday. It makes me happy to know that you find them so helpful.

6 hours ago, mcwyler said:

I'm a newcomer to FF - hitherto I've not had any Faustinas to shout about, any day of the week. 
But I've recently acquired a denarius that may be common but it really is quite nice in hand with a lovely tone and good detail on the bust.  Hammered for €32, so I'm a happy bunny.

RIC 394a. 3.45g, 17mm.

That is indeed a lovely specimen of that denarius. You may find this article and this article interesting. 

5 hours ago, -monolith- said:

Here is a very interesting cast bronze (Limes) denarius from my collection:

 

That's cool! I find limes denarii fascinating. That's a nice example.

5 hours ago, seth77 said:

An opportunity to add this AETERNITAS as with my favorite veiled bust:

I too enjoy that Providentia type. You might like this installment of FF. 

[Sulla80]

Hi @Roman Collector, Happy Faustina Friday.  I could use your help confirming or correcting my thinking that this is Beckmann's portrait type 1 from Dec 147-Mar 149 and this is the later portrait - 1b ?

Thanks!

[Roman Collector]

4 minutes ago, Sulla80 said:

Hi @Roman Collector, Happy Faustina Friday.  I could use your help confirming or correcting my thinking that this is Beckmann's portrait type 1 from Dec 147-Mar 149 and this is the later portrait - 1b ?

Thanks!

I personally do not distinguish between the type 1a and type 1b portraits, because they fall on a spectrum and there are many "sort of type 1a and sort of type 1b" specimens and I don't think it represents anything other than the work of different die engravers. But if I had to choose, I'd say yours is 1a: the braid is adjacent to the coils of the chignon (bun) at the back of the head. Moreover, there are four coils in the chignon, whereas the type 1b usually has only three. 

Here's a type 1b:

[Sulla80]

12 minutes ago, Roman Collector said:

I personally do not distinguish between the type 1a and type 1b portraits, because they fall on a spectrum and there are many "sort of type 1a and sort of type 1b" specimens and I don't think it represents anything other than the work of different die engravers. But if I had to choose, I'd say yours is 1a: the braid is adjacent to the coils of the chignon (bun) at the back of the head. Moreover, there are four coils in the chignon, whereas the type 1b usually has only three.

Thanks!