Valerian I and the mint of Viminacium

[Tejas]

In AD 253 Publius Licinius Valerianus became Emperor, following the deaths of both Trebonianus Gallus and the usurper Aemilianus. While all major mints produced imperial coins with the image of Valerian, I personally think that the first emission of the mint of Viminacium in Moesia Superior (modern-day Serbia) produced among the finest portraits of Valerian.

Below are three coins of this early issue from Viminacium from my collection. I think the dies may have been engraved by the same engraver. An interesting feature of this first emission is that the name of the emperor is not in the usual nominative case “Valerianus”, but in the dative case “Valeriano”. This was changed in the subsequent emissions:

 

No. 1:

Obv.: IMP P LIC VALERIANO AVG

Rev. VIRTVS AVG

Weight: 4.14 g.

 

No. 2

Obv.: IMP P LIC VALERIANO AVG

Rev.: FIDES MILITVM

Weight: 4.06 g.

 

No. 3

Obv.: IMP P LIC VALERIANO AVG

Rev.: VICTORIA GERMANICA

Weight: 3.95 g.

 

I would be interested to see:

1.       Other coins of Valerian’s first emission at Viminacium

2.       Coins with similar portraits that may have been engraved by the same engraver.

 

Edited December 16, 2024 by Tejas

[mc9]

I have 1 Valerianus I coin from Viminacium , saldly with a weak reverse :

Obv.: IMP P LIC VALERIANO AVG ; radiate and drapped bust right

Rev.: VICTORIA GERMANICA ; Victory standing left, holding wreath and right hand on shield. Captive at foot

21,37 mm ; 3,51 gr, RIC 5a nr 264 ; Viminacium mint

[John Conduitt]

In RIC this is listed as Viminacium, but I don't know how they got to that, since there is no mintmark. This isn't from the first emission ("Valerianus") and the portrait is not what you'd call good. An example from Albert-Ludwigs-University Freiburg is worse. RIC says Viminacium "struck aurei and antoniniani with widespread and unpleasing portraits. It closed in 255 or 256 without having used mintmarks." They're presumably talking about these later coins. Goodness knows what happened to the earlier engraver.

Valerian I Antoninianus, 254-255

Viminacium. Billon, 22mm, 4.33g. Radiate draped Bust right; IMP C P LIC VALERIANVS AVG. Saturn standing right holding scythe; AETERNITATI AVGG (RIC V, 210). Purportedly from the Bristol (Somerset) II Hoard 1996.

Edited December 16, 2024 by John Conduitt

[Tejas]

Interesting. I know the bust type very well. RIC attributes them to Viminacium and Goebl to Antioch.

Below is an example from my collection:

Obv: IMP C P LIC VALERIANVS AVG

Rev.: PIETATI AVGG

Mint: Antioch (or Viminacium?)

 

RIC 219A Viminacium; Goebl 1563a Antioch; Sear 9956.

Edited December 16, 2024 by Tejas

[Nerosmyfavorite68]

Very nice!  I've always wanted one, of good style.  What search terms would I use (for an early one) on a place like vcoins?  Different references attribute them to different places.

[Tejas]

I would look out for the dative legend VALERIANO and the portrait style for Viminacium. According to my research, this first emission included only the three reverse types above. However, other mints also produced coins for Valerian in good style. Below are three coins from Rome from my collection. Two with clean shaven portraits and one on which Valerian is sporting a beard, which is quite rare for coins from Rome:

Edited December 17, 2024 by Tejas

[Tejas]

20 hours ago, John Conduitt said:

In RIC this is listed as Viminacium, but I don't know how they got to that, since there is no mintmark. This isn't from the first emission ("Valerianus") and the portrait is not what you'd call good. An example from Albert-Ludwigs-University Freiburg is worse. RIC says Viminacium "struck aurei and antoniniani with widespread and unpleasing portraits. It closed in 255 or 256 without having used mintmarks." They're presumably talking about these later coins. Goodness knows what happened to the earlier engraver.

Valerian I Antoninianus, 254-255

Viminacium. Billon, 22mm, 4.33g. Radiate draped Bust right; IMP C P LIC VALERIANVS AVG. Saturn standing right holding scythe; AETERNITATI AVGG (RIC V, 210). Purportedly from the Bristol (Somerset) II Hoard 1996.

If the coin above was minted at Viminacium, it would have to be a later emission. The first emission shows the title AVG for Augustus instead of AVGG for Augusti. The first emission of Rome used AVGG, because Valerian's first action as emperor was to proclaim his son Gallienus as co-emperor. Below is an example of the first emission of Rome from my collection. At Viminacium the information about the elevation of Gallienus seems to have arrived with some delay and was reflected only in the later emissions.

 

[Ursus]

I have a single Valerian from Viminacium that is your type no. 3. I bought it for the dative case and the Germanic reference on the reverse. Its obverse has unfortunately seen quite some wear, but in general I agree with you on the quality of the portraits on this emission.

Valerian I, Roman Empire, AR/BI antoninian, 253 AD, Viminacium mint. Obv: IMP P LIC VALERIANO AVG; bust of Valerian I, radiate, draped, cuirassed r. Rev: VICTORIA GERMANICA Victory standing l. holding palm and resting r. hand on shield; at feet, captive. 21mm, 4.08g. Ref: RIC V Valerian 264 (for Milan); MIR 36, 793d.

[seth77]

The coinage of 'Viminacium' has a lot of references to the army and to a victory against Germans. Most of the coinage was struck c. 253-5 while Gallienus was undertaking campaigns on the Danube, including in Pannonia, Moesia Superior and Dacia. That is probably the reason for this regional Imperial coinage and this is likely the victory that the coins refer to. 

Here is a second issue in 254, following again the regular legend of the AE provincials:


IMP VALERIANVS P AVG
CONCOR EXERC

[Molag Bal]

The dies for the early issues at Viminacium are really nice. Later on they can become a little weirdly stylized but I like them anyways. Someone I haven't yet managed to get any antoniniani from the first emission but I do have an as, a rare denomination for the mint, perhaps used to supplement what must have been the large number of provincial "sestertii" that I would think were still circulating in the area.

Valerian I, 253-260. As (Copper, 29 mm, 5.80 g, 1 h), Viminacium, 254-255. IMP VALERIANVS P AVG Laureate, draped and cuirassed bust of Valerian I to right, seen from behind. Rev. TEMPORVM FELICITAS Felicitas standing front, head to left, holding long caduceus in her right hand and cornucopiae in her left. Cohen -. MIR -. RIC -. Apparently unpublished. Minor deposits and with light cleaning scratches, otherwise, about very fine.

[seth77]

3 hours ago, Molag Bal said:

The dies for the early issues at Viminacium are really nice. Later on they can become a little weirdly stylized but I like them anyways. Someone I haven't yet managed to get any antoniniani from the first emission but I do have an as, a rare denomination for the mint, perhaps used to supplement what must have been the large number of provincial "sestertii" that I would think were still circulating in the area.

Valerian I, 253-260. As (Copper, 29 mm, 5.80 g, 1 h), Viminacium, 254-255. IMP VALERIANVS P AVG Laureate, draped and cuirassed bust of Valerian I to right, seen from behind. Rev. TEMPORVM FELICITAS Felicitas standing front, head to left, holding long caduceus in her right hand and cornucopiae in her left. Cohen -. MIR -. RIC -. Apparently unpublished. Minor deposits and with light cleaning scratches, otherwise, about very fine.

To me the existence of base metal issues complementing the billon is a hint that maybe Viminacium is not the minting place of this operation. It is certainly related to the minting operation that did the dies for the Viminacium coinage and very likely the PROVINCIA DACIA too, but the fact that they needed to have a full range of denominations of Imperial origin presumably at a mint that was already very successful not just locally but regionally -- Viminacium and PD are known to have traveled up to Raetia -- should raise some question marks. Drawing a parallel, you don't see base metal Imperial issues at Antioch or Laodicea or Emesa, all of them sources of both local coinage and silver Imperial coinage at times. And you don't see them because the local economy already had its own base metal coin, it didn't need an extra system added on top of what the local markets were already using.