Jump to content

Recommended Posts

  • Benefactor
1 hour ago, Spaniard said:

Very nice looking coin Donna..

Lovely portrait interpretations..

I'm no expert but the patina looks quite thick and just in front of Severus's beard there looks to be the remnants of a dimple?...Reverse again on the cloth just below the naval of Tyche?

Thank you! I see what you mean, and I think you're right.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Benefactor
4 hours ago, DonnaML said:

A new Roman Provincial with confronted busts arrived yesterday, to go with the four I already had and posted above in this thread. I bought this one from yet another new dealer on VCoins, which I wouldn't ordinarily do, but in this case I confirmed the stated provenance before I made the purchase.

I really like these coins with confronted busts: they're among the few types of Provincial coins for which the obverses almost always are more interesting than the reverses.

Septimius Severus and Julia Domna, AE Pentassarion [5 Assaria], AD 209-211, Marcianopolis, Moesia Inferior [now Devnya, Bulgaria]; Flavius Ulpianus, Consular Legate for Moesia Inferior from 209-212 (see https://www.wikiwand.com/de/Liste_der_Statthalter_von_Niederm%C3%B6sien). Obv. Confronted busts of Septimius Severus, laureate, draped, and cuirassed, right, and Julia Domna, draped, left; around, ΑΥ Κ Λ ΣΕΠΤ ΣΕΥΗΡΟΣ ΙΟΥΛΙΑ [ = Imperator Caesar Lucius Septimius Severus Julia]; cont. in exergue in two lines, ΔΟΜΝΑ |  ΣΕΒ [ = Domna Augusta] / Rev. Tyche standing left wearing modius, holding cornucopiae in left arm and rudder with right hand; around, YΦΛ ΟΥΛΠΙΑΝΟΥ MΑΡΚΙΑΝΟΠΟΛΙΤΩΝ [ = Flavius Ulpianou Markianopoleiton]; E [mark of value for “5”] in left field. 28 mm., 10.79 g.  AMNG I/I 601, obv. leg. var. [Pick, Behrendt, Die antiken Münzen von Dacien und Moesien, Die antiken Münzen Nord-Griechenlands Vol. I/I  (Berlin, 1898) at p. 210; available at https://archive.org/details/p1dieantikenmn01akaduoft/page/210/mode/2up?view=theater]; Hristova & Jekov 6.15.35.4 [Nina Hristova & Gospodin Jekov, The Local Coinage of the Roman Empire - Moesia Inferior, I - III c. A.D., MARCIANOPOLIS  (Blagoevgrad, Bulgaria 2006)]; Varbanov (Eng.) Vol. I, 868 [Ivan Varbanov, Greek Imperial Coins And Their Values, Volume I: Dacia, Moesia Superior & Moesia Inferior (English Edition) (Bourgas, Bulgaria, 2005)]; Moushmov 411 (rev. ill. Pl. X No. 29) [see http://www.wildwinds.com/coins/moushmov/markianopolis.html for English translation of catalog portion of H. Moushmov, Ancient Coins of the Balkan Peninsula (1912); see http://www.wildwinds.com/coins/moushmov/plates/large/X.jpg for reproduction of Pl. X]. Purchased July 2022 from YOTHR (Yoshua Three Coins), Herrenberg, Germany; ex Gorny & Mosch Giessener Münzhandlung, Online Auction 268, 29.03.2022, Lot 4308.

image.jpeg.9f5aaf656b77d1a4124029411c728098.jpeg

 

I should add as a "PS" that although I have seen catalog citations for this type both to David Sear's Greek Imperial Coins No. 2123, and to BMC 3 Thrace, etc., I checked both citations and neither is correct: although the cited coins are indeed from Marcianopolis, and the reverses depicting Tyche have designs identical to the one on the reverse of my coin, the obverses portray Septimius Severus alone, without Julia Domna. So, definitely not the same type. My type is not listed in either book.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, DonnaML said:

I should add as a "PS" that although I have seen catalog citations for this type both to David Sear's Greek Imperial Coins No. 2123, and to BMC 3 Thrace, etc., I checked both citations and neither is correct: although the cited coins are indeed from Marcianopolis, and the reverses depicting Tyche have designs identical to the one on the reverse of my coin, the obverses portray Septimius Severus alone, without Julia Domna. So, definitely not the same type. My type is not listed in either book.

There some Variations from Marcianopolis of Septimius Severus and Julia Domna - with always different deities.

For Example with Serapis:
http://www.coinproject.com/coin_detail.php?coin=239057 

Or with Apollo:
http://www.coinproject.com/coin_detail.php?coin=239038

One var. example with your coin is in the BMC:
https://www.britishmuseum.org/collection/object/C_1898-1005-29

Some pieces in the shops you can find - but not so good as yours:
https://www.ebay.com/itm/323360536159 

 

But I see there is a mistake - your coin is Varbanov 868 (not Varbanov 854) - you can find it on wildwinds:
https://www.wildwinds.com/coins/greece/moesia/markianopolis/t.html

image.png.0f34417b6915d1115a965b37696bde02.png

There are many variations - one like Moushmov 411

image.png.a0a91048ee550eacfe66175a615142d2.png

 

But the classifications are usually only a rough classification in the provinces. The stamp cutters in the provinces - especially as far as Antiochia, Nicopolis or Marcianopolis are concerned - were, let's say, very creative. 

In the legends alone, there are so many variations, abbreviations that sometimes consisted of three, sometimes of only two letters (AVT or only AV for Autokrator) and that for the same type. Not to mention all the spelling mistakes. Therefore, there are often so many variations of the same type - that one often cannot say - this is exactly this catalogue number. 

 

 

Edited by YOTHR
  • Like 7
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Confronted busts of Vitellius Germanicus and Vitellia

 

normal_R_667_Vitellius.jpg.91e9fa5e74e2342584bae9aa28930057.jpg

Vitellius
Denarius, Rome, AD 69
Obv.: A VITELLIVS GERM IMP AVGVST TR P, laureate head right
Rev.: LIBERI IMP GERM AVG, confronted draped busts of Vitellius' son (on left) and daughter (thought to have been named Vitellius Germanicus and Vitellia)
Ag, 3.090g, 18.1mm, 180o
Ref.: RIC² 103, RSC II 2, BMCRE I 29, BnF III 62

  • Like 11
Link to comment
Share on other sites

- Bronze coin (AE Pentassarion) minted at Moesia Inferior, Marcianopolis, Legate PontiusFurius Pontianus during the reign of MACRINUS between June/Aug 217 – Nov/Dec 217 A.D. Obv. ΑΝΤ Κ ΟΠΕΛ CΕV ΜΑΚΡΕΙΝΟC Κ Μ ΟΠΕ ΑΝΤΩΝΕΙΝΟC. Confronted heads of Macrinus right, laureate, and Diadumenian left, bare. Rev. VΠ ΠΟΝΤΙΑΝΟV ΜΑΡΚΙΑΝΟΠΟΛΙΤΩΝ, Athena wearing helmet and aegis, standing left, holding owl and inverted spear; E in right field. Refs: AMNG I 734v.; Hristova & Jekov 6.24.4.7; Varbanov 1170a; BMC 30v.; Moushmov 537; Wiczay 2148v.

image.png.023edca903af971497f3c5f5a014532a.pngimage.png.f9a7deb548f983b15c34af13f0700d7d.png

  • Like 6
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...
  • Benefactor

A sixth Roman Provincial coin with confronted busts on the obverse arrived in the mail yesterday from Austria. If anyone has any thoughts on the issues I raise in the two footnotes, they are welcome!

Philip II, as Caesar, AE Pentassarion [5 Assaria], 247-249 AD, Moesia Inferior, Marcianopolis [now Devnya, Bulgaria] Mint. Obv. Confronted busts of Philip II, bareheaded, draped and cuirassed, right, seen from behind, and Serapis, crowned with modius, draped, left; Μ ΙΟΥΛΙΟϹ ΦΙΛΙΠΠΟϹ ΚΑΙ - ϹΑΡ ΑΥΓ around,  with “ϹΑΡ ΑΥΓ” in exergue [ = “Marcus Iulius Philippus Caesar Augusti filius”]* / Rev. Bearded, crowned[?] serpent [often identified as the Oracle Serpent Glykon but possibly the Serpent Agathodaemon]** standing erect left in multiple coils; ΜΑΡ-ΚΙΑΝΟΠΟΛΕΙ-ΤΩΝ around, with “ΤΩΝ” in exergue; “E” [ = 5 Assaria] in right field. 27 mm., 14.70 g. RPC [Roman Provincial Coinage] VIII Online 27865 [temporary ID number] (see https://rpc.ashmus.ox.ac.uk/type/27865);  AMNG I/I 1216 [Pick, Behrendt, Die antiken Münzen von Dacien und Moesien, Die antiken Münzen Nord-Griechenlands Vol. I/I  (Berlin, 1898) at p. 327]; Varbanov 2101 [Varbanov, Ivan, Greek Imperial Coins And Their Values, Volume I: Dacia, Moesia Superior & Moesia Inferior (English Edition) (Bourgas, Bulgaria, 2005)]. Purchased Sep 2022 from Numidas (Lukas Kalchhauser), Vienna Austria; ex Numismatik Lanz München, Auction 120, 18 May 2004, Lot 494.  [Note that the actual coin is a considerably darker green than this dealer's photo.] 

image.jpeg.1b2d8cfc54db3de5c1986b8710abd514.jpeg

*Translation taken from RPC VIII Online 27865. Note that the same type also exists with the slightly different obverse legend Μ ΙΟΥΛΙΟ ΦΙΛΙΠΠΟ ΚΑΙΑΡ [ = “Marcus Iulius Philippus Caesar”], i.e., without the “ΑΥΓ” for “AVG.” See RPC VIII Online 27863 at https://rpc.ashmus.ox.ac.uk/type/27873. Query whether the addition of the “ΑΥΓ” to the obverse legend on my type could possibly indicate that it was issued after the elevation of Philip II to Augustus by his father ca. AD 248, or whether that would have resulted in the Greek equivalent of AVGG, and the elimination of the “Caesar” altogether?

 **Dealers (such as the dealer who sold me this coin) often identify the coiled, bearded serpent on the reverse of this and similar Roman Provincial types as the bearded, human-headed, and/or fish-tailed Serpent God Glykon, for whom a popular cult was invented in the 2nd Century AD by the Greek prophet Alexander of Abonoteichos, who claimed that Glykon (apparently manifested by a hand puppet) was an incarnation of Asklepios. See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Glycon (with the illustrations including a photo of RPC VIII Online 27863; see first fn.). See also the discussions of Glykon and coins portraying him at, e.g., https://www.cointalk.com/threads/an-interesting-representation-of-glykon.383315/; https://www.cointalk.com/threads/new-coins-featuring-glycon-the-sock-puppet-god.396206/#post-8331188; https://www.cointalk.com/threads/glykon-the-snake-cult-of-alexander-of-abounoteichos.333661/.  However, neither RPC nor Pick identifies the serpent on this and similar types as being Glykon (I don’t have access to Varbanov); nor did Lanz in selling this coin in 2004. Moreover, the serpent on my coin has neither a humanoid head nor a fish tail (unlike some other numismatic representations of Glykon). Nor  does the coin have any depiction of or reference to Asklepios. Therefore, the possibility remains that the serpent on this type could have been intended or perceived as the Serpent Agathodaemon, particularly given the association of the Agathodaemon with Serapis. See my thread discussing the Agathodaemon at https://www.cointalk.com/threads/finally-an-agathodaemon.383883/#post-7780217, including the following quotation from an article entitled “The Agathos Daimon in Greco-Egyptian Religion,” by João Pedro Feliciano, at https://www.academia.edu/27115429/The_Agathos_Daimon_in_Greco-Egyptian_religion:

 “[T]he Agathos Daimon (Greek: agathos daimôn; also agathodaimôn), the ‘good spirit,’ [was] a typically serpentine deity who originated as a genius loci in traditional Greek religion, and was also invoked during banquets. A variant of this deity was Zeus Meilichios (invoked in Orphic Hymn 73, to Zeus as the Daimon), an old serpentine aspect of Zeus associated with fortune. Roman religion had a cognate genius figure as well, evidenced by the traditional snakes found on Roman domestic shrines and lararia. The origins of the guardian serpent archetype may be traced to the fact that snakes could protect a house from vermin, such as rodents, and consequently became associated with guardian spirits early on; this notion of the beneficent ‘house snake’ is found in several different cultures.. . . . [Lengthy discussion of development of surrounding mythology omitted.] 

A rich number of statues and bas-reliefs of Agathodaimon have survived, through which we can obtain a fairly accurate picture of his attributes. In the available corpus of material, Agathodaimon is primarily depicted as a serpent (bearded in most instances), or as a snake with a human head, that of Serapis with whom he was associated (as a result of either of their common solar aspects, or the fact that Serapis was a form of Zeus, and thus as Meilichios, was an aspect or variant of Agathos Daimon). His serpentine form is occasionally depicted as that of a cobra, but most of the time it is a viper-like animal.” (Emphasis added.)

Edited by DonnaML
  • Like 11
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Nice coin and write up- Learned something about the bearded serpent.

 

Another "confronted bust" from Marcianopolis 

 

normal_Gordianus_III_4.jpg.d829a9ebf89ddb0d6725d62260772755.jpg

Gordianus III with Tranquillina
Moesia Inferior, Markianopolis
AD 238-244
Obv.: AVT K M ANT ΓOPΔIANOC AVΓ CE TPANKIΛΛEINA, Confronted draped busts of Gordian III and Tranquillina.
Rev.: YΠ TEPTYΛΛIANOY MAPKIANOΠIΛITΩN, Temple with cult statue of Tyche; E in left field.
AE, 11.75g, 26.6mm
Ref.: Varbanov 2059

 

  • Like 8
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I bought this one some time back as a just liked the portraits.

AE27
Obv:- AY K M AY ANTWNINOC AY K P CEP, GETAC in exergue, laureate, draped, and cuirassed bust of Caracalla right confronting laureate and draped bust of Geta left;
Rev:- Y FL OYLPIANOY MAPKIANOPOLITWN, Concordia standing slightly left, patera in right hand, cornucopia in left hand, E (mark of value) lower left;
Minted in Markianopolis (Devnya, Bulgaria). Consular Legate Flavius Ulpianus, 210 - 211 A.D
Reference:– Varbanov (Engl.) 1083

27.33 mm. 11.74 gms. 0 degrees

GI_066n_img.jpg

  • Like 8
  • Heart Eyes 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Benefactor

I don't know if jb_depew is a member here. But on Coin Talk, in May of this year, at https://www.cointalk.com/threads/new-coins-featuring-glycon-the-sock-puppet-god.396206/ , he posted a coin from Moesia Inferior that's almost identical to mine in every respect, except that it bears the name of Tomis rather than Marcianopolis, and that it lacks the "E" on the reverse signifying the pentassarion denomination (even though the size is almost the same as mine):

image.jpeg.0d28ed6751f6b460c9894bada3122569.jpeg

The type is RPC VIII 28162 (temp. ID); see https://rpc.ashmus.ox.ac.uk/type/28162 .

The obverse legend, like the one on my coin, adds the ΑΥΓ [AVG] to Philip's KAICAP title. Also like my coin, the bearded serpent on the reverse lacks a fish tail, the coin lacks any reference to Asklepios, and RPC simply identifies the reverse design as "coiled serpent left, with beard" rather than as Glykon. So the coin raises the same identification issues as mine, explained above.

@Roman Collector, do you have any opinion on these issues?

Edited by DonnaML
  • Like 7
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, DonnaML said:

I don't know if jb_depew is a member here. But on Coin Talk, in May of this year, at https://www.cointalk.com/threads/new-coins-featuring-glycon-the-sock-puppet-god.396206/ , he posted a coin from Moesia Inferior that's almost identical to mine in every respect, except that it bears the name of Tomis rather than Marcianopolis, and that it lacks the "E" on the reverse signifying the pentassarion denomination (even though the size is almost the same as mine):

image.jpeg.0d28ed6751f6b460c9894bada3122569.jpeg

The type is RPC VIII 28162 (temp. ID); see https://rpc.ashmus.ox.ac.uk/type/28162 .

The obverse legend, like the one on my coin, adds the ΑΥΓ [AVG] to Philip's KAICAP title. Also like my coin, the bearded serpent on the reverse lacks a fish tail, the coin lacks any reference to Asklepios, and RPC simply identifies the reverse design as "coiled serpent left, with beard" rather than as Glykon. So the coin raises the same identification issues as mine, explained above.

@Roman Collector, do you have any opinion on these issues?

I am strongly of the opinion that the issues of the third century from the Black Sea region were struck either with dies that were prepared in a central location and then shipped to local mints or were struck at a central location and then distributed to each city. There are too many mules of obverses intended for one city with reverses intended for another to indicate otherwise. This minting practice transcended political boundaries, for we see mules combining dies of Moesia Inferior with those of Thrace.

Although these Black Sea cities often indicated the denomination of the coins with a Greek letter, that isn't always the case. I believe the large confronted bust denomination indicated the pentassarion denomination unless otherwise noted with a Δ< (4-1/2).

I think there are some features of coiled serpent reverses that indicate Glykon in particular: a nimbus around the serpent's head (indicating divinity), a fish-tail, or references to Asklepios. In the absence of these primary attributes, it's hard to argue the figure isn't just a snake.

Edited by Roman Collector
  • Like 3
  • Mind blown 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

image.png.79451be22d17788529478b4741eeea76.png

image.png.3fc28c63fc045e3b6d80e2ff86708e74.png

 

Caracalla and Geta GIC 2716 Obv: AV K M AV ANTONINOC AV K ? CE? GETAC
Laureate, cuirassed and draped busts of Caracalla & Geta facing.
(Sear GIC 2716v / Moushmov 469)
Rev: V F? OV??IANOV-MAPKIANO?O?[ITON?]
Tyche standing left with rudder and cornucopia. E in left field.

I purchased this as a curiosity in consideration of the fact that Caracalla murdered his brother and ordered the Senate to issue a "damnatio memoriae"

It appeared ironic to me that they would appear on the same coin given the enmity that existed between them.

 

  • Like 11
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Benefactor
9 hours ago, Roman Collector said:

I am strongly of the opinion that the issues of the third century from the Black Sea region were struck either with dies that were prepared in a central location and then shipped to local mints or were struck at a central location and then distributed to each city. There are too many mules of obverses intended for one city with reverses intended for another to indicate otherwise. This minting practice transcended political boundaries, for we see mules combining dies of Moesia Inferior with those of Thrace.

Although these Black Sea cities often indicated the denomination of the coins with a Greek letter, that isn't always the case. I believe the large confronted bust denomination indicated the pentassarion denomination unless otherwise noted with a Δ< (4-1/2

I think there are some features of coiled serpent reverses that indicate Glykon in particular: a nimbus around the serpent's head (indicating divinity), a fish-tail, or references to Asklepios. In the absence of these primary attributes, it's hard to argue the figure isn't just a snake.

Thank you, @Roman Collector. What you say makes a lot of sense. I think dealers often make the Glykon attribution for marketing purposes. More scholarly reference works like RPC tend to be more careful.

I also agree that it doesn't make sense to think that the die engravers in all these cities were completely separate. The designs are too similar.

Do you think the addition of the "AVG" to the "Caesar" in Philip II's title on some coins in Moesia Inferior means anything beyond 'son of the Augustus," as RPC states? Could it possibly signify his own elevation to Augustus?

Edited by DonnaML
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 9/9/2022 at 1:34 AM, DonnaML said:

A sixth Roman Provincial coin with confronted busts on the obverse arrived in the mail yesterday from Austria. If anyone has any thoughts on the issues I raise in the two footnotes, they are welcome!

Philip II, as Caesar, AE Pentassarion [5 Assaria], 247-249 AD, Moesia Inferior, Marcianopolis [now Devnya, Bulgaria] Mint. Obv. Confronted busts of Philip II, bareheaded, draped and cuirassed, right, seen from behind, and Serapis, crowned with modius, draped, left; Μ ΙΟΥΛΙΟϹ ΦΙΛΙΠΠΟϹ ΚΑΙ - ϹΑΡ ΑΥΓ around,  with “ϹΑΡ ΑΥΓ” in exergue [ = “Marcus Iulius Philippus Caesar Augusti filius”]* / Rev. Bearded, crowned[?] serpent [often identified as the Oracle Serpent Glykon but possibly the Serpent Agathodaemon]** standing erect left in multiple coils; ΜΑΡ-ΚΙΑΝΟΠΟΛΕΙ-ΤΩΝ around, with “ΤΩΝ” in exergue; “E” [ = 5 Assaria] in right field. 27 mm., 14.70 g. RPC [Roman Provincial Coinage] VIII Online 27865 [temporary ID number] (see https://rpc.ashmus.ox.ac.uk/type/27865);  AMNG I/I 1216 [Pick, Behrendt, Die antiken Münzen von Dacien und Moesien, Die antiken Münzen Nord-Griechenlands Vol. I/I  (Berlin, 1898) at p. 327]; Varbanov 2101 [Varbanov, Ivan, Greek Imperial Coins And Their Values, Volume I: Dacia, Moesia Superior & Moesia Inferior (English Edition) (Bourgas, Bulgaria, 2005)]. Purchased Sep 2022 from Numidas (Lukas Kalchhauser), Vienna Austria; ex Numismatik Lanz München, Auction 120, 18 May 2004, Lot 494.  [Note that the actual coin is a considerably darker green than this dealer's photo.] 

image.jpeg.1b2d8cfc54db3de5c1986b8710abd514.jpeg

*Translation taken from RPC VIII Online 27865. Note that the same type also exists with the slightly different obverse legend Μ ΙΟΥΛΙΟ ΦΙΛΙΠΠΟ ΚΑΙΑΡ [ = “Marcus Iulius Philippus Caesar”], i.e., without the “ΑΥΓ” for “AVG.” See RPC VIII Online 27863 at https://rpc.ashmus.ox.ac.uk/type/27873. Query whether the addition of the “ΑΥΓ” to the obverse legend on my type could possibly indicate that it was issued after the elevation of Philip II to Augustus by his father ca. AD 248, or whether that would have resulted in the Greek equivalent of AVGG, and the elimination of the “Caesar” altogether?

 **Dealers (such as the dealer who sold me this coin) often identify the coiled, bearded serpent on the reverse of this and similar Roman Provincial types as the bearded, human-headed, and/or fish-tailed Serpent God Glykon, for whom a popular cult was invented in the 2nd Century AD by the Greek prophet Alexander of Abonoteichos, who claimed that Glykon (apparently manifested by a hand puppet) was an incarnation of Asklepios. See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Glycon (with the illustrations including a photo of RPC VIII Online 27863; see first fn.). See also the discussions of Glykon and coins portraying him at, e.g., https://www.cointalk.com/threads/an-interesting-representation-of-glykon.383315/; https://www.cointalk.com/threads/new-coins-featuring-glycon-the-sock-puppet-god.396206/#post-8331188; https://www.cointalk.com/threads/glykon-the-snake-cult-of-alexander-of-abounoteichos.333661/.  However, neither RPC nor Pick identifies the serpent on this and similar types as being Glykon (I don’t have access to Varbanov); nor did Lanz in selling this coin in 2004. Moreover, the serpent on my coin has neither a humanoid head nor a fish tail (unlike some other numismatic representations of Glykon). Nor  does the coin have any depiction of or reference to Asklepios. Therefore, the possibility remains that the serpent on this type could have been intended or perceived as the Serpent Agathodaemon, particularly given the association of the Agathodaemon with Serapis. See my thread discussing the Agathodaemon at https://www.cointalk.com/threads/finally-an-agathodaemon.383883/#post-7780217, including the following quotation from an article entitled “The Agathos Daimon in Greco-Egyptian Religion,” by João Pedro Feliciano, at https://www.academia.edu/27115429/The_Agathos_Daimon_in_Greco-Egyptian_religion:

 “[T]he Agathos Daimon (Greek: agathos daimôn; also agathodaimôn), the ‘good spirit,’ [was] a typically serpentine deity who originated as a genius loci in traditional Greek religion, and was also invoked during banquets. A variant of this deity was Zeus Meilichios (invoked in Orphic Hymn 73, to Zeus as the Daimon), an old serpentine aspect of Zeus associated with fortune. Roman religion had a cognate genius figure as well, evidenced by the traditional snakes found on Roman domestic shrines and lararia. The origins of the guardian serpent archetype may be traced to the fact that snakes could protect a house from vermin, such as rodents, and consequently became associated with guardian spirits early on; this notion of the beneficent ‘house snake’ is found in several different cultures.. . . . [Lengthy discussion of development of surrounding mythology omitted.] 

A rich number of statues and bas-reliefs of Agathodaimon have survived, through which we can obtain a fairly accurate picture of his attributes. In the available corpus of material, Agathodaimon is primarily depicted as a serpent (bearded in most instances), or as a snake with a human head, that of Serapis with whom he was associated (as a result of either of their common solar aspects, or the fact that Serapis was a form of Zeus, and thus as Meilichios, was an aspect or variant of Agathos Daimon). His serpentine form is occasionally depicted as that of a cobra, but most of the time it is a viper-like animal.” (Emphasis added.)

I have observed 3 different representations of serpents on Moesian and Thracian coinage:

1. the coiled serpent climbing a staff or a tripod/cup, that is certainly a reference to Asklepios
2. the crowned and bearded serpent that is otherwise just a serpent and not a hybrid creature, such as on the 2 coins you posted from Marcianopolis and Tomis, that is possibly the Agathodaimon -- local cults of Serapis are known on the Black Sea shore, at the very least where there were Alexandrine associations (Tomis, Markianopolis, perhaps Odessos?)
3. the Glykon, with human/lion features at the head level (with or without halo), with long hair, with a fish tail and or a bushy tail -- this is a rather distinctive serpent but as the features are somewhat subtle, we need a high quality specimen to observe them; I have seen such specimens from Pautalia, Augusta Traiana and Hadrianopolis.

The Tomis specimen you posted is very suggestive, as it shows a totally different serpent than the Glykon statue that existed for a local cult of Glykon at least since 180. So two things seem to be at play here: 1. the die cutters did not see the statue as they were not working from Tomis and 2. they did not intend to depict Glykon. Based on this I think that there is a clear possibility that that crowned and bearded serpent is not intended to be Glykon. But was the distinction as important for the very diverse citizenry of the poleis at the Black Sea in the 3rd century? I suspect not, and I also suspect that a degree of ambiguity was favored by the local elite who ordered these coinages.

  • Like 4
  • Yes 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, sunir caM said:

You have all seen my Glykon coin of Macrinus before.

1093808153_1182501.jpg.d4d1a3a617e64e2fbb483ed0dad0ad1f.jpg

 

My Glykon only has the Halo though from Seth's list, the head looks snakelike & no tail details.

I also think I see a hint of hair on its head and the head is of a different shape, plus the posture is very similar to the known statue of Glykon at Tomis. If you compare your serpent there with the one on Donna's 2 specimens above there is clear distinction. But beyond that, I think this is one of the instances of ambiguity that I was referring to above. Someone using this pentassaria in Moesia Inferior would see in this representation something that would have been relatable to his own religious inclinations -- this is a Glykon-like representation that appeals to worshipers of Asklepios proper and probably Serapis too.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Benefactor
6 hours ago, seth77 said:

I have observed 3 different representations of serpents on Moesian and Thracian coinage:

1. the coiled serpent climbing a staff or a tripod/cup, that is certainly a reference to Asklepios
2. the crowned and bearded serpent that is otherwise just a serpent and not a hybrid creature, such as on the 2 coins you posted from Marcianopolis and Tomis, that is possibly the Agathodaimon -- local cults of Serapis are known on the Black Sea shore, at the very least where there were Alexandrine associations (Tomis, Markianopolis, perhaps Odessos?)
3. the Glykon, with human/lion features at the head level (with or without halo), with long hair, with a fish tail and or a bushy tail -- this is a rather distinctive serpent but as the features are somewhat subtle, we need a high quality specimen to observe them; I have seen such specimens from Pautalia, Augusta Traiana and Hadrianopolis.

The Tomis specimen you posted is very suggestive, as it shows a totally different serpent than the Glykon statue that existed for a local cult of Glykon at least since 180. So two things seem to be at play here: 1. the die cutters did not see the statue as they were not working from Tomis and 2. they did not intend to depict Glykon. Based on this I think that there is a clear possibility that that crowned and bearded serpent is not intended to be Glykon. But was the distinction as important for the very diverse citizenry of the poleis at the Black Sea in the 3rd century? I suspect not, and I also suspect that a degree of ambiguity was favored by the local elite who ordered these coinages.

Thank you. I'm glad you agree about the association I mentioned between Serapis and the Agathodaemon. People sometimes forget that although Serapis was invented in Egypt under the Ptolemies, his worship spread far beyond Egypt. And the idea of a benevolent snake was deeply rooted in Greco-Roman culture, and I'm sure other cultures, as well. I do wish dealers weren't so eager to identify any serpent on a Roman Provincial coin from Moesia or Thrace as Glykon.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, DonnaML said:

Thank you. I'm glad you agree about the association I mentioned between Serapis and the Agathodaemon. People sometimes forget that although Serapis was invented in Egypt under the Ptolemies, his worship spread far beyond Egypt. And the idea of a benevolent snake was deeply rooted in Greco-Roman culture, and I'm sure other cultures, as well. I do wish dealers weren't so eager to identify any serpent on a Roman Provincial coin from Moesia or Thrace as Glykon.

If dealers were just after a perceived value of exotic identities, Agathodaimon on the Black Sea would probably be worth more than Glykon. I think that more than anything else there is an unwillingness (or lack of time) to do the proper numismatic research. I for one prefer the neutral description 'coiled serpent to right/left' -- someone who goes after certain serpents surely knows what he/she actually wants, regardless of what the dealer says in his write-up.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Here is one of my favorite Serapis and serpent reverses: the posture looks Glykon and was likely inspired by the Glykon cult statue but the features are not of a Glykon. It's also from Dionysopolis, a city that might have had an Alexandrine presence but not strong enough to warrant an association and/or temples dedicated to the like of Isis and Serapis (as it was the case at Tomis and Markianopolis).

 

2681292_1648399991.jpg

Edited by seth77
  • Like 7
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...