Two interesting coin moulds of Aurelian

This week I attended, through the benefit of the internet, the annual Joseph Eckhel memorial lecture held by the Department of Numismatics and Monetary History in the University of Vienna. The speaker was Markus Peter who spoke on A Numismatic Parallel World: Imitation and Forgery in the Roman World.

In the lecture one part touched on the casting of Severan Roman denarii in the mid third century, presumably because they were circulating at a premium if the evidence of antoniniani overstruck on Severan coins during the reigns of Trajan Decius, Volusian etc is anything to go by.

The casting process has produced many remnant clay moulds across the empire and they were stacked to produce coins in bulk so have impressed designs on both faces on many pieces.

Corseul mould

One intriguing mould that I was already aware of from my studies combined an impression of a Rome mint denarius of Julia Domna on one side and an antoninianus of Aurelian from the Milan mint (emission 2 or 3, c.271-3 AD) on the other. This demonstrates that the manufacturing of these copies was continuing in the 270s and probably later. It was found in Corseul, Nantes, north-east France, and is deposited in the Nantes museum.

Newstead mould

A mould shown that I was not previously aware of. This mould was found at Newstead, Roxburghshire (Roman Trimontium) around 1940. On one side, an impression of a Rome denarius of Caracalla and on the other, again a reverse of an antoninianus of Aurelian from Milan. 

Newstead mould top, Corseul mould bottom

What is really curious is that although the overall impressed out line is a little different, the coin used to make the impression is struck from the same dies as the Corseul mould, and may even be the same coin if the irregularity in the edge in the 5 o’clock position, circled in red, is anything to go by.

Is this just coincidence or are we, perhaps, dealing with a more systematic, organized production of moulds? One should not then assume official sanction, even if the Newstead mould was found in an area of military occupation.

References

Aubin, G; “Les moules monetaires de Corseul (Cotes d’Armor) et la date de fabrication des faux deniers en Gaule”, Gallia 47, 1990, pp 257-63

Holmes, N M McQ, and Hunter, F; “Roman counterfeiters’ moulds from Scotland”, Proc Soc Antiq Scot 131, 2001, pp 167-76

Edmund Halley and the coins of Vaballathus

The 17th century saw a blossoming of learning. Unlike today the fields of interest were broad and people with an interest in physical science would also study natural sciences as well as history. The well to do would frequently embark on a grand tour of Europe and beyond to enhance their education. 

An example of this is Edmund Halley (1656-1742) best known today as an astronomer, mathematician and physicist. In 1691 he journeyed to the remains of Palmyra, located in modern Syria with three companions, Abednego Seller, Edward Bernard and Thomas Smith as part of a larger expedition led by William Halifax. It was at this time that Halley faced the animosity of the Astronomer Royal, John Flamsteed, and the Anglican Church questioned his religious views, largely on the grounds that he had doubted the Earth's age as given in the Bible.

He recorded his Palmyrene visit in the Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London in 1695, where he writes something on Vaballathus and the coins he produced. He wrote (sic),

“In this appears also the great Utility of Coins to illustrate Matters of History: for by them alone ‘tis made out there was such a Prince as Waballathus, Vopiscus singly mentioning him by the name Balbatus: And from the same Coins it appears, that Odenathus had the Title of Augustus four years and Waballathus six at least; and that the First Year of Aurelian was the fourth of Waballathus.”

Tetradrachm, Alexandria, Vaballathus 4/Aurelian 1, Milne 4303

Two combinations of Vaballathus and Aurelian tetradrachm years are recorded in RPC, Vaballathus 4/Aurelian 1, and Vaballathus 5/ Aurelian 2. The later sole coins of Vaballathus are only recorded as year 5, so it is unclear where Halley gets six years from.

Halley also cites the coins of Antioch of Roman type that pair the busts of Aurelian and Vaballathus, although he follows Jean Hardouin’s reading of his titles as VCRIMDOR (VICE CAESARIS RECTOR IMPERII ORIENTIS), instead of VCRIMDR (VIR CLARISSIMUS REX IMPERATOR DUX ROMANORUM).

Antoninianus, Antioch, officina 7, RIC (Aurelian 381)

An architectural provincial coin type from Gythium

Septimius Severus, Gythium in Laconia, AE 21mm, unpublished but not unknown

Buildings and monuments as ancient coin types are an interest of mine. Pausanias, writing in the late second century, is a very helpful resource. The Description of Greece is the only extant work of his and is split into ten books. He describes, in detail, the features of the cities and culture of mainland Greece.

His entry for Gythium, the port of Sparta, in Laconia includes this passage:

Book III, 21, 9 "....and the gates (of the city wall) here are called Kastorides (sacred to Castor)" 

Reproduced on the coinage for the city we find one particular reverse type that reflects this, the Dioscuri, Castor and Pollux, with their horses, an obvious reference to the city gate. It may be depicting a statuary group, or perhaps a relief, on or adjacent the gate.

This is one of a number of reverses that can be linked to features of Gythium referenced in Pausanias. The city only appears to have struck coins during the period 202-205 AD, on the basis of the known portrait styles of Caracalla and Geta, along with the presence of issues of Plautilla. It is not surprising that Gythium adopted the use of local architectural types to express their own civic identity.

The reason for the burst of production, not just at Gythium, but all over the Pelopennese, is uncertain. One suggestion is that the local base metal coinage spike because of the tailing off in the production of aes and the favouring of silver from the central mint in Rome necessitating the production of local small denominations to meet the economic needs.

Two statues with a numismatic interest

Clearing photographs from my phone memory I came across a couple of pictures of statues with a numismatic interest linked to the industrial revolution.

The first picture is of James Watt, the steam engine pioneer. It's located in City Square in Leeds. 

The second is from Centenary Square, Birmingham and shows James Watt, Matthew Boulton and William Murdoch.

James Watt provided the steam power for Boulton's factory for stamping buttons. The steam power was also used by Boulton in a new venture to drive the presses to make coins. Murdoch was an engineer and devised a linkage, unsuccessful as it happens, to transfer power from a steam engine to coinage press.

Penny and two pence pieces, at a weight of one and two ounces, were made at Boulton's Soho mint in Birmingham with a very distinctive rim that earned them the nickname "cartwheels".

All the pieces are dated 1797 and have a rather crude feel. Later products from the mint are much more refined pieces, such as this 1808 10 cash piece made for the East India Company for use in Madras.

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. 

Dr Mead's Allectus indiscretion **updated**

On 16 January 1750, almost exactly 276 years ago, the Reverend William Stukeley wrote to his old friend Maurice Johnson lamenting the gift of the unique Carausius “Oriuna” denarius to King Louis XV of France, as well as a gold aureus of Allectus. The relevant part of the letter is below, reproducing the spelling and punctuation used:

“Dr Mead had 2 gold Allectus’s; more than any body else had. he gave one to the French king. Not content with this indescretion, he sent him an unique silver coyn of Carausius; on the reverse, his wife ORIVNA AUGUSTA, & this without so much as a drawing taken of it.”

Dr Richard Mead was the doctor who attended Queen Anne on her deathbed and was the court physician to King George II until his death in 1754.

I have already posted, in 2022, about the Allectus aureus that was included in the subsequent sale of Mead’s coin collection:

The provenance of an aureus of Allectus in the BM

Is it possible to identify the aureus given to the French king?

Presumably the royal collection is now in the Bibliotheque National in Paris and, assuming it wasn’t previously exchange or sold, it should be found there. Andrew Burnett lists a total of 24 known aurei of Allectus in his 1984 BNJ paper. Of those there are four that are identified as being in the Paris collection but only two, coins 3 and 19 have recorded provenance s that could potentially fit. Both have the reverse of SPES AVG and are the only recorded Allectus aurei with this reverse.

This is where we now have a problem as both of these coins were stolen in the 1831 robbery and are now lost.

We do, however, have a record of both coins in the Monumenta Historica Britannia by Petrie (1848) where they were represented from previous engravings on the plates. These are also reproduced by Burnett an his plate of Allectan aurei. 

Checking Sam Moorhead's recent revision of RIC for Carausius and Allectus draws a blank on which of the two coins it might be the gifted coin to the French king by Mead. Similarly Shiel, Webb and Cohen, although acknowledging the existence of these coins, all fail to identify the Mead provenance of one of them. 

The main difference between the two aurei is in the obverse titles, number 3 being ALLECTVS PF AVG, whereas 19 is IMP C ALLECTVS PF AVG. We must go back to Kennedy's second monograph on Oriuna from 1756 and there, on page 11, we have the answer to the question as to which coin was from Mead. He tells us that the coin reading ALLECTVS PF AVG, coin 3, is the specimen that came from Mead. 

The loss of both known types of SPES AVG aureus of Allectus is a pity and does, indeed, stem from Mead's indiscretion. 

References

Burnett, A, "The coinage of Allectus" BNJ 54 (1984)

Kennedy, J, Further Observations on Carausius (1756)

Moorhead, S, Roman Imperial Coinage V.5 (2025)

Petrie, H, Monumenta Historica Britannia (1848)

Shiel, N, The Episode of Carausius and Allectus (1977)

Webb, P, "The coinage of Allectus" NC 6 (1906)