Two Gallienus medallions

I have, in my research collection, a couple of plaster casts of small medallion specimens from the Ashmolean Museum in Oxford from the time of Gallienus.

The first specimen, approximately 23mm in diameter, is from the joint reign of Gallienus with his father, Valerian. The obverse  is CONCORDIA AVGVSTORVM, laureate and cuirassed bust of Gallienus to right, facing a laureate and draped bust of Valerian I. The reverse is LIBERALITAS AVGG I, two emperors seated left on a platform, behind them is the praetorian prefect and an attendant, in front Liberalitas holding tessera and a cornucopia, plus also a citizen on the stairs, MIR 329d. The issue dates to autumn AD 253 and commemorates a donativa paid on their entry into Rome.

The second specimen, oversize flan approximately 26mm across, dates to AD 264, during the sole reign of Gallienus (MIR 563a, Rome mint, 8th emission). The type is only known from specimens struck in bronze, although, it is a period when a range of base metal strikes from dies intended for the production of gold pieces and so the Oxford piece may be from the dies produced for a four aurei piece that is now lost.

The legend on the obverse is unusual in that it read GALLIENVM AVG P R, the accusative tense, roughly translated as the Roman people thank Gallienus. This is paired with OB CONSERVATIONEM SALVTIS, Salus walking right feeding a serpent in arms. It is from the period when Gallienus had turned his military campaign towards Postumus in the West and the early successes were providing security for the Roman state, a situation that would not last as Gallienus suffered a thigh wound in one encounter that precipitated a tactical withdrawal.

I do lament the passing of the times when institutions would either prepare casts for you, or even let you take your own. It is, I think, a reflection on the ease of digital photography but there is still something to be said for having a physical object.

A Tarentine pun

I'm not a collector of larger Greek silver coins but I do have one stater of Tarentum in Calabria, southern Italy. I acquired it because of the punning image of the lion mark on one side and the magistrate's name, Leon, on the other.

The only reference I have is Evans' 1888 Numismatic Chronicle paper on the Horsemen of Tarentum that places the coin in his eighth series, c.272-235 BC (series VIII, type B, coin 3). The period is one of an alliance with Rome that apparently resulted in a large volume of coins being produced. As Evans comments,

“The abundance of these late types is a speaking proof that the enforced alliance with Rome had not, at least after the first excesses of the occupation, sensibly impaired the material prosperity of the Tarentines. Their condition was in all probability more flourishing than it had been in the time of what Livy describes as their "miserable servitude" under Pyrrhus' governor. The types and symbols of some of the didrachms. of this Period supply us, indeed, with a remarkable piece of evidence tending to prove that the Tarentine commerce was still in a position to dominate some of the South Italian markets.”

A unique denarius of Maximianus I

Maximianus, denarius, Hercules at rest, Ticinum mint, c.290 AD, the anticipated defeat of Carausius (?), RIC -

I have in my trays a seemingly unique denarius of Maximianus I from the mint of Ticinum. Although this coin is unmarked on the reverse another unique denarius, struck from the same obverse die, but with a different reverse type, carries the mark SMT in the exergue.

The obverse features a laureate, left facing bust of Maximianus, wearing imperial mantle and holding an eagle-tipped sceptre. The legend is MAXIMIANVS AVG CONS III, the third consulship being celebrated in AD 290.

The reverse combines the legend HERCVLI CONSERVATORI with a representation of Hercules, leaning on his club, draped in the skin of the Nemean lion and with his right arm placed behind his back. The image is interpreted as Hercules at rest having completed his labours.

Maximianus, antoninianus, Hercules at rest, Lugdunum mint, Bastien's 2nd issue, c. spring-summer 286 AD, the completion of the campaign against the Bagaudae(?), RIC 437

There are parallels in the coinage struck for Maximianus at Lugdunum in the early part of his reign, through to Bastien’s 5th issue, terminating late 289. During this time the Dyarchy are closely associated with Jupiter (Diocletianus) and Hercules (Maximianus) on the coinage and in the contemporary written record. After this date the coin types no longer emphasize this allusion.

Maximianus, antoninianus, Hercules wrestling the Nemean lion, Lugdunum mint, Bastien's 5th issue, c. late 287 to late 289 AD, the ongoing campaign against Carausius(?), RIC 454

The move away from the Hercules reverses for Maximianus is probably linked to the defeat of Maximianus by the forces of Carausius in the military campaign that is anticipated in the panegyric delivered to Maximianus on the occasion of the celebration of the foundation of Rome on 21 April 289.

Gouges on Roman republican coins

Denarius, TI CLAUD TI.F AP.N, c.79 BC, Crawford 383, with two distinct gouges, one broad, the other less so, across the horses on the reverse

Examining Roman republican coinage, besides the frequent bankers marks applied during the coins life in circulation, other marks and gouges can be observed. The initial reaction is to dismiss the apparent damage as being from careless use, or strikes while in the ground from spade or plough, but this is not often the case.

In 1993 Clive Stannard published a paper that linked these marks to being done in the mint. The scooped gouges showed signs of catch marks where the tool responsible had juddered in its application. By studying the Cosa hoard and the holdings of various institutions, including the British Museum, the Ashmolean Museum, the ANS collection and significant private holdings, he concluded that, because of the uniformity of the mark and the judder lines, the marks were deliberately made to adjust, in fact reduce, the weight of the coinage. 

Denarius, C POBLICI Q F, c.80 BC, Crawford 380, with narrow gouge in right reverse field

He then had to consider whether they were made al peso (reduce the individual weight of a specimen) or al marco (to increase the total number of coins made from a defined weight of metal). Through the use of statistical analyses he concluded that the marks were applied to heavier specimens in a batch of production, candidate coins likely picked by hand, to provide silver to remelt to correct the required number of coins produced for a given weight of metal.

This these gouges are referred to Stannard al marco marks.

Stannard, C. "The adjustment al marco of the weight of Roman republican denarii blanks by gouging" in Metallurgy in Numismatics 3 (London, 1993), pp 45-70

Oriuna

I got a "bucket list" coin in late 2024. It's a Carausius antoninianus of the RSR mint with the legend FORTVNA AVG (ex Malcolm Lyne collection).

The coin type, with a female figure in a wreath on the reverse, was the subject of great academic debate in the 18th century when, because of the misreading of the unique silver laureate of the type, it was interpreted as Oriuna on the reverse, the supposed wife of Carausius. All the known specimens, the unique silver laureate and the handful of billon radiates, are all seemingly from the same reverse die.

Maurice Johnson's doubt about the reading of Oriuna

I keep threatening to finish a longer piece about Oriuna and the argument that raged amongst the antiquarians but have so far been thwarted by either lack of time or opening up new rich veins of research. I hopefully will get chance to finish it this next twelve months. In the mean time here's my web page on Oriuna coins:

The Oriuna coins.

Two third century statues as coin types

In the book Monuments of Ancient Rome as Coin Type by P V Hill he speculates that the accusative case, rarely used for coin reverses, suggests that in those instances the reference is to a statue. A note in Zapiski Numizmatyczne XV, 2020, explores that hypothesis.

Julia Domna, AE sestertius, IVNONEM SC, RIC 585b

Taking the examples of the CEREREM and IVNONEM reverses of Julia Domna as a case in point the paper examines wider literary and epigraphical conventions. It concluded that a verb, perhaps posuit (erected), consecravit (consecrated) or dedicavit (dedicated) is unwritten on the coin reverses, but would have been understood, when combined with the accusative. This, the above sestertius of Domna has a representation on the reverse of a statue to Juno, accompanied by a small peacock, although it has been noted that there are versions with the peacock's head to both the left and the right.

Gordian III, AE sestertius, MARTEM PROPVGNATOREM SC, RIC 333

The MARTEM PROPVGNATOREM reverse of Gordian III from his 5th Rome emission (c.243-4 AD) is a further example cited and should be interpreted as Gordian dedicating (etc.) a statue of Mars the defender. The timing of this issue is interesting. It may be associated with the campaign of Gordian in the East that set off in 243 to counter the army of the Sasanid ruler Shapur I. Before setting out on it is documented that Gordian arranged for the doors of the Temple of Janus in Rome to be opened, indicating that the state was at war and, according to legend, when opened the doors of the Temple let forth a deluge of water to protect the citizens from attackers in a last desperate measure. The invocation of Mars the defender, with the dedication of a new statue or shrine at this time, would be appropriate.

Link to the paper:

Awianowicz, B, "CEREREM and IVNONEM. Why the Accusative Case?", Zapiski Numizmatyczne XV, 2020, P. 137-44

A Carausius coin at the Field of the Cloth of Gold

Sir Thomas More

Sir Thomas More, the Tudor politician, was also a coin collector. In 1518 he was corresponding with Bude, complimenting him greatly on his renowned numismatic work, De asse et partibus euis (1514).

In 1520 he was a member of the entourage that travelled with King Henry VIII to the continent in order to attend the Field of the Cloth of Gold. It is recorded that amongst the belongings that he took with him was his coin collection, a not inconsiderable collection of 200 gold coins and 600 silver. That it was a collection and not just a record of the currency he took with him is evident from an anecdote connected to the trip. 

The Peutinger Table focusing on Rome

More met with the German humanist Konrad Peutinger (1465-1547), the emperor Maximilian I’s archaeological advisor and perhaps most well known for his association with the Peutinger Table, a medieval copy, c.1200 of a late antique (5th century?) map of the Roman road network. 

As part of the meeting More offered Peutinger the opportunity to add any coins from his own collection. Peutinger only accepted one coin and the meeting is recorded as a note in his copy of Polydore Vergil’s Anglicae historiae, libri XXVI (1734). He wrote:

“....... there also then was the ambassador of the English King, Thomas More, who showed me 200 gold and 600 silver coins, and wanted that I should take from them what I wanted. But I saw none, which I did not previously have, except a coin of Carausius, which at my request he gave to me in the presence of the Spanish Juan Luis Vives with the inscription IMP CARAVSIVS PF AVG/FELICITAS AVG HSR/ on the one side his portrait/ on the other a ship with men etc.“

The reported mint mark, HSR, could either be a mis-reading of RSR. There is another possibility and that is that it is a slightly blundered die on this early Carausius coin, for example, SRS is a recorded variant for the mark. Furthermore in a later notebook Peutinger corrects the mint mark reading to RSR. 

FELICITA AVG RSR denarius from plate XXIII of William Stukeley's Medallic History of Carausius. The reverse legend is a slightly contracted form compared to the More, Peutinger specimen

The Peutinger collection remained intact for about 170 years, getting dispersed after the demise of his last male heir in 1718. Although we do not know where More’s coin is now, and there are also no known engravings of it, Sam Morehead has included in the new RIC V.5, where it is recorded as RIC (2nd ed’n) 90. Peutinger’s description is taken as being robust enough to justify the inclusion.