I love ostrogothic coins, here's a couple of new pieces

[balmora90]

A couple of new (coincidentally all 3 belong to Athalaric) coins that i added to my small collection . I really love the late roman/migration period. Some of you guys here really love this period as well

[panzerman]

Nice!!!!!

I also love this period!

Here are some of mine

AV Tremessis ND

Wittigis 534-42

 

AV Solidus ND

Athalarich 528-34

[balmora90]

Outstanding tremissis of Wittigis i can already see a lot of mint luster, definitely struck from fresh dies!

 

Very nice solidus of Athalaric as well, i like them a lot as they often appear with thicker portraits and struck in higher relief with more artistic detail unlike usual solidi of Justinian (even the early issues) that are often struck softly and with incomplete details

[Tejas]

Great coins shown here!

The tremissis in the name of Justinian is fantastic, but I think there is a distinct possibility that it post-dates Witiges' reign (536-540) and that it was minted when Rome was under the rule of the East Romans.

Three reasons:

1.  the globus cruciger in the hand of Victory shows an actual globus. During the reign of Theoderic, the globus was reduced or completely omitted, leaving only a (floating) cross above Victory's hand. Metlich offers a constitutional reason for that, saying that only the Emperor could claim global power as indicated by the globus, while Theoderic claimed only regional power. 

2. The coin was minted in Rome, which fell into the hands of the East Romans in December 536. Witigis was procclaimed king in November 536. Hence, there was only very little (if any) time to mint coins during the reign of Witigis in Rome.

3. the style is more akin to the tremisses and solidi minted by the Romans in Rome after the city had fallen into their hands in AD 536. The fall of the city apparently resulted in changes to the mint personnel, which introduced a distinctively new style at the Roman mint.

Below is a coin from my collection, which falls into the same category:

 

Justinian I after the fall of Rome in December 536

Obv.: D N IVSTINI - ANVS P F AVC

Rev. VICTORIA AVCVSTORVM

In Exergue: COMOB in exergue.

Mint: Rome

Measurements: 1.45 g. 

 

Edited January 15 by Tejas

[Tejas]

For comparison, below is a tremissis in the name of Justinian, which was minted during the reign of Athalaric, Theodahat, or possibly Wittigis (if the latter issued gold coins in Rome during the few days in Nov./Dec. 536 when he had control of the city). However, there is also a possibility that the coin was issued in Ravenna.

Note in particular the stylistic difference to the two tremisses above. Note also the fact that the globus cruciger is completely missing the globus, which is typical for Gothic tremisses of that period.

Obv.: DN IVSTINI ANVS PF AVC 

Rev.:  ..VICTORIA AVGVSTORVM

In exergue: COMOB

 

Edited January 14 by Tejas

[Tejas]

Here is my most recent acquisition.

Ostrogothic Italy, Theoderic (493-526). AV Tremissis. Pseudo-Imperial Coinage. In the name of Anastasius I. Rome mint, c. 491-518 AD.

Obv. DN ANASTA – SIVS PF AVG

Rev. VICTORIA AVGVSTORVMT

Exergue: COMOB

Note the letter T at the end of the reverse legend. This T most likely refers to Theoderic. Hence, the coin was issued before the Anastasius-Theoderic agreement of 497, which resulted in the removal of all references to Theoderic on gold coins. The coin is very rare. @Rand kindly informed me that he is aware of only 5 specimens, of which only 2 are in private hands.

Metlich 13a.

 

[balmora90]

Great tremissis Tejas, i had my limits set a bit below but that's more than worth for this Theoderic!

[panzerman]

Beauty Tejas! Very distinct portrait.

[balmora90]

Didn't really think i could add some new coins to my ostrogothic collection so quick, but boy! it's technically NOT ostrogothic (i.e Odoacer predates Theoderic) but because these are virtually the same bunch of coins that were offered on Roma last year (and supposedly from so called "Mare Nostrum Hoard" - RIP to this, don't think Vecchi can ever release anything releated now) i couldn't resist getting them for only a fraction of what they were offered last time. I don't think they should be labeled "extremely rare" anymore - i have seen a bunch of new die types since then, but it's still not something you can find on every auction

 

1. MIGRATIONARY. PSEUDO-IMPERIAL. Odoacer.
Gold Solidus, AD 476-489. Rome.
In the name of Zeno. Obv: D N ZENO PERP F AVG, pearl-diademed, helmeted and cuirassed bust facing slightly right, holding spear and shield decorated with horseman motif. Rev: VICTORIA AVGGG :, Victory standing facing, head left, holding long jewelled cross; star in right field, COMOB in exergue.

 

2. MIGRATIONARY. PSEUDO-IMPERIAL. Odoacer.
Gold Solidus, AD 476-489. Rome.
In the name of Zeno. Obv: D N ZENO PERP AVG, pearl-diademed, helmeted and cuirassed bust facing, holding spear and shield decorated with horseman motif. Rev: VICTORIA AVGGG Γ, Victory standing facing, head left, holding long jewelled cross; star in right field, COMOB in exergue.

 

Quite shocking no one even hit a single  bid on those - like i said i remember they were quite contested last year on Roma and i had to make a hard pass. Now they "Return" to me in a bizzare, clearly unexpected fashion. I find the second one particularly interesting. Lacam now attributes VICTORIA AVGGG Γ reverse to Theoderic, however there might be some die mix? Zeno busts on Odoacer coins are quite distinguishable afterall...

[Tejas]

Great solidi, you got a real bargain.

 

[panzerman]

I have no idea if thgis is Visigothic or Ostrogothic

Trmissis in name of Marcianus

[Tejas]

In my opinion, this tremissis of Marcianus cannot be assigned to the Visigoths and certainly not to the Ostrogoths. It is one of the many different imitations that were produced throughout the Roman Empire without us being able to say exactly by whom or for what purpose. 

[Rand]

Congratulations balmora90! Very interesting coins and very good price.

[Tejas]

Here is something really nerdy. Some years ago, I translated the Hildebrandslied into Gothic. The Hildebrandslied is the only Germanic heroic epos that has survived. It was written down in the Saxon monastry of Fulda in around 820, but the story is set in the 480s during the conflict between Theoderic and Odovacer, who are both named in the poem. At the time,  Zeno was emperor and some of the coins above were struck during his reign under the authority of Odovacer.

The epos may have started out in Gothic, was transmitted to the Langobards and from the Langobards to the Bavarians. It does include Old Bavarian and Old Saxon elements, but, as I said, the original may have been in Gothic, so I thought it might be interesting to see how this looked. So if anybody is interested here is my attempt: 

(99+) Das Hildebrandslied mit einer Übersetzung ins Gotische von Dr. Dirk Faltin (Zürich, 2006

 

PS: The text is in German. The table gives first the Old High German original, second the Gothic translation and third the modern German translation. I created both, the Gothic and the modern German translations.

Edited Sunday at 06:50 PM by Tejas

[Rand]

Thank you for sharing, @Tejas. Quite impressive to have such linguistic skills!

It sheds some light on the historical context, a possible conflict of Odovacer and Theodoric long before the Italian wars (although the conflict could have been between Odavacer and Hildebrand himself), long military service without communication with the family or bringing the family, attempt to return to the homeland after the service. This all is relevant to numismatics.

I have just read Wikipedia, as my Gothic is a bit rusty.

Why is the story considered set in 480th rather than in ealry 490th after the completion of Italian wars? It would make more sense. Hildebrand was not a deserter. He was combat-ready thus was not returning due to the failing health.

Where was Hildebrand's homeland? The refuge from Odovacer impies it was within the Odovacer's domain of power. This makes the Lombardian links more doubtful. Area around Fulda is outside Odovacer's realm.

 

[Tejas]

I was a bit careless when I said 480s. I meant anytime during the conflict between Theoderic and Odovacer. So early 490s is absolutely plausible. 

The poem really takes you back to this period, especially if you read it in Old High German or Gothic. For example, in verse 33, Hildebrand takes off some golden armrings to give them to his son Hadubrand. In verse 34 it says (according to my Gothic translation) "kaisarahriggans gitanans, swe imma þans þiudans gaf", which means "Imperial rings (or perhaps better 'rings made from imperial gold', like those as the king has given him." This suggests that Germanic people melted down imperial gold (solidi) to make them into rings, which could be worn and if necessary used as gift or for payment. 

Hadubrand, of course, is cautious and says the famous words (according to my Gothic translation) verse 37: "miþ gaisa skal manna gibos andniman, uzds wiþra uzd." which means "you shall receive gifts with the spear - spearpoint against spearpoint". Hadubrand goes on to call Hildebrand "an old Hun", suggesting that the term Hun was used derogatively at the time.

Below is a segment of such a gold ring, which was cut in pieces in antiquity. The piece was found in western Ukraine and almost certainly belonged to a Gothic or Sarmatian warrior. There is a paper (Quast, Dieter "Ein kleiner Goldhort der jüngeren römischen Kaiserzeit aus Cernivci (ehem. Czernowitz/Cernauti) in der westlichen Ukraine nebst einigen Anmerkungen zu goldenen Kolbenarmringen, in Forschungen zu Spätantike und Mittelalter 2 "Macht des Goldes, Gold der Macht", 171-185) which discusses these rings. Interestingly, the legend is probably a mark of value and not a name (SIL(iquae?) VI NV...). One of the ring fragments shown by Quast shows the inscription SIL IIII O...

 

PS Just to clarify, I'm not a linguist or anything like this. For a German speaker Gothic is not too hard. A lot of things are similar, especially the vocabulary. It is just that they expressed thinks so differently in terms of grammar and sentence structure. According to Wittgenstein, language determines how we think, and I can tell you that the Goths thought very differently from us today.

Edited Sunday at 09:14 PM by Tejas

[Rand]

Thank you, @Tejas This is very interesting and helpful for considerations and our discussions of the coins in the period!

It is interesting if the rings played a role of money. They could have been cut to share the gold rather than facilitate transactions.

Hopefully more old scripts are found in German churches and more coins and golden artifacts are found in the ground to complete the historico-numismatic puzzle.

[Tejas]

Regarding your question about Hildebrand's homeland. This is hard to say. The poem says that he went to the east to join Theoderic, who's people are called the "East people". Also, the poem mentions seafarers on the "wentilseo", which can be translated as the "sea of the Vandals", i.e. the Mediterranean at the time. Others translate "wentilseo" as the "world sea", but I cannot really see why. 

In general, the precise place and time does not really matter in a poem like this. Some scholars argue that Hildebrand, his father Heribrand and his son Hadubrand were Langobards and that a Langobardic hero was mixed in with the war between Theoderic and Odovacer. 

Btw, the poem breaks off when Hildebrand and Hadubrand are locked in combat, but later versions leave no doubt that Hildebrand kills his son and ends in great misery, as is typical for these Germanic tales (cf. the Nibelungenlied).

 

 

Edited Sunday at 09:58 PM by Tejas

[Rand]

A sad story. The Hildebrand will be remembered as a veteran general who helped Theodoric to beat Odovacer. 

I do not expect you to agree, but the tale adds to my speculations that my avatar coin could be Langobardic based on the style transitions to some Justinian tremisses and later typical Langobardic coins.

I would love to see it as a coin minted by Hildebrand after return to his homeland, using gold from the rings rejected by his son.

[balmora90]

Great Story @Tejas i didn't think showing a couple of ostrogothic coins would draw so many collectors and experts from this period. 

Does anybody here have some separate topic where i can browse your collections ?

[Tejas]

About your avatar-coin @Rand, could you show us the reverse as well? I have never seen a tremissis in the name of Anastasius being attributed to the Langobards. However, the first decades of Langobardic rule in Italy are very murky and I agree the style of the bust would fit well with this period from AD 568 to 600.

The idea why Hildebrand is sometimes thought to have been a Langobard is based on the observation that the name component „-brand“ is not attested among Goths, but well attested among Langobards, especially those of the Bavarian dynasty, with names like Ansbrand, Liutbrand etc. However, I find this to be a weak argument. „Brand“ is one of the many words for (sword-) blade and I would be surprised if it was not used by the Goths, even if we don‘t have an example. And of course, one Ostrogothic king was called Hildebad.

[Tejas]

8 hours ago, balmora90 said:

Great Story @Tejas i didn't think showing a couple of ostrogothic coins would draw so many collectors and experts from this period. 

Does anybody here have some separate topic where i can browse your collections ?

There are a few people in this forum who are passionate about the coins of Goths, Vandals and the like. 

https://www.colleconline.com/de/collections/2281/tejas552

 

 

[Rand]

Here it is. Following our previous discussion I retract the possibility of it being Gepidic linked to Langobards through the latter capturing Sirmium. The 'new theory' is that it was minted by Langobards in their land, contemporary to the Anastasian reign and well before the Langobards moved to Italy.

The 'theory' is very weak.

I still, bielive this small series was minted ouside East Roman Emprire but in East Europe (based on a find in Eastern Ukraine). The style is too good to be handcrafted outside an establishment mint though.

[Tejas]

My theory, or better my hypothesis, would be that your tremissis was minted in Sirmium in the 490s, when the city was ruled by Trasaric. I know, I have previously held the view that the Gepids didn‘t mint any gold, which I still believe to be true for the period from ca. 535 to 565.

However, I also did not believe that the Gepids struck any coins before 504. Now, I know for sure that they did (my article proving this is under review at the Royal Numismatic Society) and I think it is possible that they also produced a small number of gold coins. I have to study this a bid further, but I think there is a Half-Siliqua, now re-assigned to this period, which is stylistically related to your coin.

Edited Monday at 01:34 PM by Tejas

[Rand]

I gladly retract my retraction. Sirmium would be the right mint to produce such coins. I am looking forward for reading you paper when published.

We shall find another orphaned coin to complete Hilderbrand's story.

While Gepidic gold is a on the table, this unique solidus from National Museum in Berlin might complete the Trasaric's coin sereis(?)

http://ikmk.smb.museum/object?lang=en&id=18201535