| Vol. |
№ |
Province |
Region |
City |
Issue |
Dating |
Magistrates |
Denomination |
Person(s) |
Obv. inscription |
Obv. design |
Rev. inscription |
Rev. design |
Reference |
Note |
Internal note |
Coin Number |
Museum |
Inventory Number |
Bibliography |
Weight |
Diameter |
Axis |
Quantity |
Obv. die |
Rev. die |
Obv. cmks |
Rev. cmks |
Note |
Obv. img |
Rev. img |
Plate |
Uri |
link |
| I |
5401 |
Uncertain
|
Uncertain
|
Uncertain
|
No portrait (Latin legends)
|
|
|
Æ (14 mm)
|
|
|
female head, right
|
C.COSC.CAR
|
unclear type (rose?)
|
FITA 243
|
The legend was read C. Car., C. Cos. by Grant, but the punctuation is clear. Grant attributed the coin to Rhodes (and as evidence for a transient and otherwise unknown colony there) because of the rev. type which does look like a rose, but the attribution does not seem very likely. The coin is closely linked, by style and name, with 5402, which Grant attributed to Cyrenaica.
|
Axis: 3 or 9
|
1
|
P
|
|
|
3.95
|
14
|
|
1
|
|
|
|
|
|
no |
no |
no |
https://gallica.bnf.fr/ark:/12148/btv1b8482929g
|
[show]
[edit]
|
| I |
5401 |
Uncertain
|
Uncertain
|
Uncertain
|
No portrait (Latin legends)
|
|
|
Æ (14 mm)
|
|
|
female head, right
|
C.COSC.CAR
|
unclear type (rose?)
|
FITA 243
|
The legend was read C. Car., C. Cos. by Grant, but the punctuation is clear. Grant attributed the coin to Rhodes (and as evidence for a transient and otherwise unknown colony there) because of the rev. type which does look like a rose, but the attribution does not seem very likely. The coin is closely linked, by style and name, with 5402, which Grant attributed to Cyrenaica.
|
Axis: 3 or 9
|
2
|
P
|
|
|
3.48
|
14
|
|
1
|
|
|
|
|
|
no |
no |
yes |
https://gallica.bnf.fr/ark:/12148/btv1b84829304
|
[show]
[edit]
|
| I |
5401 |
Uncertain
|
Uncertain
|
Uncertain
|
No portrait (Latin legends)
|
|
|
Æ (14 mm)
|
|
|
female head, right
|
C.COSC.CAR
|
unclear type (rose?)
|
FITA 243
|
The legend was read C. Car., C. Cos. by Grant, but the punctuation is clear. Grant attributed the coin to Rhodes (and as evidence for a transient and otherwise unknown colony there) because of the rev. type which does look like a rose, but the attribution does not seem very likely. The coin is closely linked, by style and name, with 5402, which Grant attributed to Cyrenaica.
|
Axis: 3 or 9
|
3
|
G
|
|
Hunter III, p. 736, no. 45, pl. cii, 24
|
2.27
|
14
|
|
1
|
|
|
|
|
|
no |
no |
no |
|
[show]
[edit]
|
| I |
5402 |
Uncertain
|
Uncertain
|
Uncertain
|
No portrait (Latin legends)
|
|
|
Æ (15 mm)
|
|
|
female head, right
|
P.COSCON
|
unclear type
|
FITA 260
|
The rev. type was identified by Grant as a silphium plant. The coin was therefore attributed to Cyrenaica and the existence of a fleeting colony adduced. This attribution was rejected by Buttrey (see p. 227). The coin is closely related to 5401. C. Stannard, ‘Overstrikes and imitative coinages in central Italy in the late Republic’, in A. Burnett et al., Coins of Macedonia and Rome. Essays in Honour of Charles Hersh (London, 1998), pp. 209-29, at p. 217 no. 38 identifies the undertype as a quadrans of Rome. This implies an origin from the western part of the Roman world, if not indeed somewhere in central Italy.
|
Axis: 12 or 6 / Western Empire mint - central Italy.
|
1
|
P
|
|
|
5.24
|
15
|
|
1
|
|
|
|
|
|
no |
no |
yes |
https://gallica.bnf.fr/ark:/12148/btv1b8482931j
|
[show]
[edit]
|
| I |
5402 |
Uncertain
|
Uncertain
|
Uncertain
|
No portrait (Latin legends)
|
|
|
Æ (15 mm)
|
|
|
female head, right
|
P.COSCON
|
unclear type
|
FITA 260
|
The rev. type was identified by Grant as a silphium plant. The coin was therefore attributed to Cyrenaica and the existence of a fleeting colony adduced. This attribution was rejected by Buttrey (see p. 227). The coin is closely related to 5401. C. Stannard, ‘Overstrikes and imitative coinages in central Italy in the late Republic’, in A. Burnett et al., Coins of Macedonia and Rome. Essays in Honour of Charles Hersh (London, 1998), pp. 209-29, at p. 217 no. 38 identifies the undertype as a quadrans of Rome. This implies an origin from the western part of the Roman world, if not indeed somewhere in central Italy.
|
Axis: 12 or 6 / Western Empire mint - central Italy.
|
2
|
|
|
Private coll., Paris
|
3.41
|
15
|
|
1
|
|
|
|
|
struck over?
|
no |
no |
no |
|
[show]
[edit]
|
| I |
5403 |
Uncertain
|
Uncertain
|
Uncertain
|
No portrait (Latin legends)
|
|
|
Æ (14 mm)
|
|
TADI
|
veiled female head bound with stephane
|
MARI
|
unclear type throne with axe (?) underneath
|
FITA 234
|
Grant's attribution to Malta is just a guess; he used the coin to posit the existence of a colony there. The date of the coins (which are probably genuine) is also uncertain. The names are no use in indicating an attribution; even in this catalogue alone, Tadii are known at Utica and Cnossus, and Marii at Babba and in Spain (Calagurris and Turiaso).
|
Axis: 3 or 6
|
1
|
L
|
1843,0712.32
|
FITA, pl. VII, 25
|
2.61
|
14
|
|
1
|
|
|
|
|
|
no |
no |
no |
https://www.britishmuseum.org/collection/object/C_1843-0712-32
|
[show]
[edit]
|
| I |
5403 |
Uncertain
|
Uncertain
|
Uncertain
|
No portrait (Latin legends)
|
|
|
Æ (14 mm)
|
|
TADI
|
veiled female head bound with stephane
|
MARI
|
unclear type throne with axe (?) underneath
|
FITA 234
|
Grant's attribution to Malta is just a guess; he used the coin to posit the existence of a colony there. The date of the coins (which are probably genuine) is also uncertain. The names are no use in indicating an attribution; even in this catalogue alone, Tadii are known at Utica and Cnossus, and Marii at Babba and in Spain (Calagurris and Turiaso).
|
Axis: 3 or 6
|
2
|
P
|
1980/267
|
|
2.6
|
14
|
|
1
|
|
|
|
|
|
no |
no |
yes |
https://gallica.bnf.fr/ark:/12148/btv1b8482932z
|
[show]
[edit]
|
| I |
5403 |
Uncertain
|
Uncertain
|
Uncertain
|
No portrait (Latin legends)
|
|
|
Æ (14 mm)
|
|
TADI
|
veiled female head bound with stephane
|
MARI
|
unclear type throne with axe (?) underneath
|
FITA 234
|
Grant's attribution to Malta is just a guess; he used the coin to posit the existence of a colony there. The date of the coins (which are probably genuine) is also uncertain. The names are no use in indicating an attribution; even in this catalogue alone, Tadii are known at Utica and Cnossus, and Marii at Babba and in Spain (Calagurris and Turiaso).
|
Axis: 3 or 6
|
3
|
Mu
|
under uncertain coins
|
|
2.51
|
14
|
|
1
|
|
|
|
|
|
no |
no |
no |
|
[show]
[edit]
|
| I |
5404 |
Uncertain
|
Uncertain
|
Uncertain
|
No portrait (Latin legends)
|
|
Lucius Licinius ; Marcus Laecanius |
Æ (14 mm)
|
|
|
head of Hercules, right
|
M LAE L LICI AED
|
inscription in wreath
|
Mi. Supp. 5, 393, no. 692
|
Mionnet read the name of the second aedilis as BLICVS, but the reading L.LIC(inius) seems more likely. No ethnic is visible on the coin, but the style, the size of the coin, the fact that it is signed by aediles and the probable provenance from Asia Minor (as it was acquired by Cousinéry) might point towards Parium in the Triumviral period. -- the reverse legend is now clear on coin 2: M LAE L LICI AED
|
|
1
|
P
|
914
|
Cousinéry 1821
|
1.33
|
12
|
12
|
1
|
|
|
|
|
|
no |
no |
no |
https://gallica.bnf.fr/ark:/12148/btv1b8482933c
|
[show]
[edit]
|
| I |
5404 |
Uncertain
|
Uncertain
|
Uncertain
|
No portrait (Latin legends)
|
|
Lucius Licinius ; Marcus Laecanius |
Æ (14 mm)
|
|
|
head of Hercules, right
|
M LAE L LICI AED
|
inscription in wreath
|
Mi. Supp. 5, 393, no. 692
|
Mionnet read the name of the second aedilis as BLICVS, but the reading L.LIC(inius) seems more likely. No ethnic is visible on the coin, but the style, the size of the coin, the fact that it is signed by aediles and the probable provenance from Asia Minor (as it was acquired by Cousinéry) might point towards Parium in the Triumviral period. -- the reverse legend is now clear on coin 2: M LAE L LICI AED
|
|
2
|
|
|
Agora Auctions Numismatic 67, 20 June 2017, lot 186
|
1.87
|
13.7
|
1
|
1
|
|
|
|
|
|
no |
no |
yes |
https://www.coinarchives.com/a/openlink.php?l=1101683|2194|186|ad97374b300d2629f2400a2f03770495
|
[show]
[edit]
|
| I |
5404 |
Uncertain
|
Uncertain
|
Uncertain
|
No portrait (Latin legends)
|
|
Lucius Licinius ; Marcus Laecanius |
Æ (14 mm)
|
|
|
head of Hercules, right
|
M LAE L LICI AED
|
inscription in wreath
|
Mi. Supp. 5, 393, no. 692
|
Mionnet read the name of the second aedilis as BLICVS, but the reading L.LIC(inius) seems more likely. No ethnic is visible on the coin, but the style, the size of the coin, the fact that it is signed by aediles and the probable provenance from Asia Minor (as it was acquired by Cousinéry) might point towards Parium in the Triumviral period. -- the reverse legend is now clear on coin 2: M LAE L LICI AED
|
|
3
|
|
|
N&N London EA 45, 16–17 Mar. 2024, lot 592
|
1.71
|
13
|
|
1
|
|
|
|
|
|
no |
no |
no |
https://www.biddr.com/auctions/nnlondon/browse?a=4378&l=5191114
|
[show]
[edit]
|
| I |
5405 |
Uncertain
|
Uncertain
|
Uncertain
|
No portrait (Latin legends)
|
|
Lucius Ant— |
Æ (14 mm)
|
|
C I P[ ]
|
female head, right
|
[ ] VICI ANT AED
|
star of eight rays
|
|
Original comment: "The provenance of this unique coin is unknown. The size and the signature of aediles may point towards Parium (2253–9); but the regular ethnic of Parium is CGIP, not GIP[ , which might indicate an African mint like Colonia Iulia Pia Paterna (p. 194), where quattuorviri signed an emission under Augustus (760). Coin 2, same dies as 5405/1, but better preserved. The obverse legend seems indeed to read C.I.P.P, the last P being smaller, which points to Paterna (or Parium?)." The reverse legend can now be read as VICI.{ANT}.{AE}D. The letter after VIC was read as L in RPC I, but I seems preferable.
|
|
1
|
P
|
2008/469
|
JSW coll.
|
2
|
12
|
|
1
|
5660
|
5661
|
|
|
|
no |
no |
no |
https://gallica.bnf.fr/ark:/12148/btv1b10323736q
|
[show]
[edit]
|
| I |
5405 |
Uncertain
|
Uncertain
|
Uncertain
|
No portrait (Latin legends)
|
|
Lucius Ant— |
Æ (14 mm)
|
|
C I P[ ]
|
female head, right
|
[ ] VICI ANT AED
|
star of eight rays
|
|
Original comment: "The provenance of this unique coin is unknown. The size and the signature of aediles may point towards Parium (2253–9); but the regular ethnic of Parium is CGIP, not GIP[ , which might indicate an African mint like Colonia Iulia Pia Paterna (p. 194), where quattuorviri signed an emission under Augustus (760). Coin 2, same dies as 5405/1, but better preserved. The obverse legend seems indeed to read C.I.P.P, the last P being smaller, which points to Paterna (or Parium?)." The reverse legend can now be read as VICI.{ANT}.{AE}D. The letter after VIC was read as L in RPC I, but I seems preferable.
|
|
2
|
|
|
CNG stock 2010, ex Righetti coll.
|
2.12
|
14
|
|
1
|
5660
|
5661
|
|
|
|
no |
no |
yes |
|
[show]
[edit]
|
| I |
5406 |
Uncertain
|
Uncertain
|
Uncertain
|
No portrait (Greek legend)
|
|
|
Æ (13 mm)
|
|
ΧΑΛΚΟΥΣ
|
|
ΕΤ ϚΚ
|
anchor
|
BMC Agrippa II, 62
|
Hill in BMC pointed out that the attribution to Agrippa II and even Judaea was not certain. ΧΑΛΚΟΥΣ occurs on the Neronian coinage of Antioch (4302), and Howgego proposed a re-attribution there (GIC 58, n. 32; the suggestion that the date might have been ϚΚ[P] is, however, wrong). This seems plausible, and the obvious occasion is in the reign of Augustus, where the same date formula occurs (year 26 = 6/5 BC).
|
|
1
|
L
|
|
BMC 62
|
1.46
|
13
|
12
|
1
|
|
|
|
|
|
no |
no |
no |
|
[show]
[edit]
|
| I |
5406 |
Uncertain
|
Uncertain
|
Uncertain
|
No portrait (Greek legend)
|
|
|
Æ (13 mm)
|
|
ΧΑΛΚΟΥΣ
|
|
ΕΤ ϚΚ
|
anchor
|
BMC Agrippa II, 62
|
Hill in BMC pointed out that the attribution to Agrippa II and even Judaea was not certain. ΧΑΛΚΟΥΣ occurs on the Neronian coinage of Antioch (4302), and Howgego proposed a re-attribution there (GIC 58, n. 32; the suggestion that the date might have been ϚΚ[P] is, however, wrong). This seems plausible, and the obvious occasion is in the reign of Augustus, where the same date formula occurs (year 26 = 6/5 BC).
|
|
2
|
G
|
|
Hunter 224, no. 9
|
1.78
|
13
|
12
|
1
|
|
|
|
|
|
no |
no |
no |
|
[show]
[edit]
|
| I |
5406 |
Uncertain
|
Uncertain
|
Uncertain
|
No portrait (Greek legend)
|
|
|
Æ (13 mm)
|
|
ΧΑΛΚΟΥΣ
|
|
ΕΤ ϚΚ
|
anchor
|
BMC Agrippa II, 62
|
Hill in BMC pointed out that the attribution to Agrippa II and even Judaea was not certain. ΧΑΛΚΟΥΣ occurs on the Neronian coinage of Antioch (4302), and Howgego proposed a re-attribution there (GIC 58, n. 32; the suggestion that the date might have been ϚΚ[P] is, however, wrong). This seems plausible, and the obvious occasion is in the reign of Augustus, where the same date formula occurs (year 26 = 6/5 BC).
|
|
3
|
|
|
Auctiones 24, 1994, lot 348 = Kölner Münzkabinett 32, 1982, lot 198
|
1.8
|
|
|
1
|
|
|
|
|
|
no |
no |
no |
|
[show]
[edit]
|
| I |
5406 |
Uncertain
|
Uncertain
|
Uncertain
|
No portrait (Greek legend)
|
|
|
Æ (13 mm)
|
|
ΧΑΛΚΟΥΣ
|
|
ΕΤ ϚΚ
|
anchor
|
BMC Agrippa II, 62
|
Hill in BMC pointed out that the attribution to Agrippa II and even Judaea was not certain. ΧΑΛΚΟΥΣ occurs on the Neronian coinage of Antioch (4302), and Howgego proposed a re-attribution there (GIC 58, n. 32; the suggestion that the date might have been ϚΚ[P] is, however, wrong). This seems plausible, and the obvious occasion is in the reign of Augustus, where the same date formula occurs (year 26 = 6/5 BC).
|
|
4
|
|
|
CGT coll. = Naumann 48, 20 Nov. 2016, lot 342
|
2.6
|
15
|
12
|
1
|
|
|
|
|
|
no |
no |
no |
|
[show]
[edit]
|
| I |
5406 |
Uncertain
|
Uncertain
|
Uncertain
|
No portrait (Greek legend)
|
|
|
Æ (13 mm)
|
|
ΧΑΛΚΟΥΣ
|
|
ΕΤ ϚΚ
|
anchor
|
BMC Agrippa II, 62
|
Hill in BMC pointed out that the attribution to Agrippa II and even Judaea was not certain. ΧΑΛΚΟΥΣ occurs on the Neronian coinage of Antioch (4302), and Howgego proposed a re-attribution there (GIC 58, n. 32; the suggestion that the date might have been ϚΚ[P] is, however, wrong). This seems plausible, and the obvious occasion is in the reign of Augustus, where the same date formula occurs (year 26 = 6/5 BC).
|
|
5
|
|
|
CNG EA 530, 4 Jan. 2023, lot 526
|
1.88
|
13
|
12
|
1
|
|
|
|
|
|
no |
no |
no |
https://www.coinarchives.com/a/openlink.php?l=2145179|5144|526|09324fb6dab3958422435110c011ffe1
|
[show]
[edit]
|
| I |
5406 |
Uncertain
|
Uncertain
|
Uncertain
|
No portrait (Greek legend)
|
|
|
Æ (13 mm)
|
|
ΧΑΛΚΟΥΣ
|
|
ΕΤ ϚΚ
|
anchor
|
BMC Agrippa II, 62
|
Hill in BMC pointed out that the attribution to Agrippa II and even Judaea was not certain. ΧΑΛΚΟΥΣ occurs on the Neronian coinage of Antioch (4302), and Howgego proposed a re-attribution there (GIC 58, n. 32; the suggestion that the date might have been ϚΚ[P] is, however, wrong). This seems plausible, and the obvious occasion is in the reign of Augustus, where the same date formula occurs (year 26 = 6/5 BC).
|
|
6
|
|
|
priv Coll H.I. (ex Bucephalus 25, 15 Sep. 2023, lot 626)
|
2.02
|
13.4
|
12
|
1
|
|
|
|
|
|
no |
no |
yes |
https://www.biddr.com/auctions/bucephalusnumismatic/browse?a=3797&l=4399490
|
[show]
[edit]
|
| I |
5407 |
Uncertain
|
Uncertain
|
Uncertain
|
|
|
Marcus Feridius |
Æ (25 mm)
|
Julius Caesar |
CAESAR IMP DICT COS
|
diademed head of Caesar, right
|
IVL [GEM] M [F]E[R]IDIVS IIVIR EX D D
|
Athena (?) holding Victory, left
|
|
The reading of the rev. legend is not certain. But if it is accepted, this coin might provide the missing link with the coins signed by the proconsul M. Rutilus (3517) as a duovir with the name Feridius figures on both series. This would prove that the foundation of the Colonia Iulia Gemina indeed occurred in the Triumviral period, as stated by Grant, FITA 238.
|
|
1
|
Tübingen
|
|
SNG 4741
|
13.82
|
25
|
12
|
1
|
|
|
|
|
|
no |
no |
yes |
|
[show]
[edit]
|
| I |
5408 |
Uncertain
|
Uncertain
|
Uncertain
|
|
|
|
Æ (23 mm)
|
Julius Caesar |
[ ] IVLIVS
|
diademed head of Caesar, right
|
[ ] DIVI F (?)
|
bare head of Augustus, left
|
|
This unique coin is difficult to interpret. It might have been struck under Augustus, but might be later as well (second century). No ethnic is legible, but this is probably due to the poor state of conservation of the coin. A mint in Asia Minor seems the most likely guess. This coin has a general resemblance to 5434.
|
|
1
|
|
|
JSW coll.
|
10.01
|
23
|
6
|
1
|
|
|
|
|
|
no |
no |
yes |
|
[show]
[edit]
|
| I |
5409 |
Uncertain
|
Uncertain
|
Uncertain
|
Coinage with Q
|
|
|
Bronze (26 mm)
|
Augustus |
|
bare head, right
|
Q
|
fiscus, sella quaestor and hasta
|
AMNG 226–7; FITA 13–19
|
On the identity of obv., see RPC I, p. 715. It has been thought that this issue is related to the coinage of the uncertain Cilician colony signed PRINCEPS FELIX (4082-3), as the portrait on both issues seems similar. Therefore, as the Princeps Felix portrait is considered here as Octavian/ Augustus, the same identification has been adopted for the Q coinage. These coins have in the past been considered as Macedonian, due to the reverse typology on 5409-10, which is similar to that found on the Aesillas coinage. But the hasta, which is an emblem of imperium, the money chest and the quaestor's chair of office are objects which symbolise the authority of Roman officials and they are found elsewhere, e.g., on the coinage of Pupius Rufus (919-23). They certainly denote a rank of quaestor propraetore (FITA, p. 16), as the spear could not be used normally by a quaestor who did not possess imperium. Grant assigned the Q issue to M. Acilius in 45/44 BC and supposed that he was the governor of Macedonia during the last year of Caesar's life. But that is just a guess. It should be noted that no specimen has turned up in Macedonia, but that two were bought in Beirut by H. Seyrig (5409/2-3). Therefore a Syrian origin was suggested in RPC I. Since the publication of RPC, four specimens have been recorded in Amasya Museum (S. Ireland, Greek, Roman and Byzantine Coins in the Amasya Museum (London, 2000), p. 53 nos. 2096-9). These, in addition to the two in Samsun and Amasra, indicate beyond any real doubt that the Q coins emanate from somewhere in northern Turkey. One halved piece was also found at Burgas, Bulgaria.
|
Axis: 12 or 6. Northern Turkey origin?
|
1
|
L
|
1980,0403.1
|
|
16.38
|
|
|
1
|
|
|
|
|
|
no |
no |
no |
|
[show]
[edit]
|
| I |
5409 |
Uncertain
|
Uncertain
|
Uncertain
|
Coinage with Q
|
|
|
Bronze (26 mm)
|
Augustus |
|
bare head, right
|
Q
|
fiscus, sella quaestor and hasta
|
AMNG 226–7; FITA 13–19
|
On the identity of obv., see RPC I, p. 715. It has been thought that this issue is related to the coinage of the uncertain Cilician colony signed PRINCEPS FELIX (4082-3), as the portrait on both issues seems similar. Therefore, as the Princeps Felix portrait is considered here as Octavian/ Augustus, the same identification has been adopted for the Q coinage. These coins have in the past been considered as Macedonian, due to the reverse typology on 5409-10, which is similar to that found on the Aesillas coinage. But the hasta, which is an emblem of imperium, the money chest and the quaestor's chair of office are objects which symbolise the authority of Roman officials and they are found elsewhere, e.g., on the coinage of Pupius Rufus (919-23). They certainly denote a rank of quaestor propraetore (FITA, p. 16), as the spear could not be used normally by a quaestor who did not possess imperium. Grant assigned the Q issue to M. Acilius in 45/44 BC and supposed that he was the governor of Macedonia during the last year of Caesar's life. But that is just a guess. It should be noted that no specimen has turned up in Macedonia, but that two were bought in Beirut by H. Seyrig (5409/2-3). Therefore a Syrian origin was suggested in RPC I. Since the publication of RPC, four specimens have been recorded in Amasya Museum (S. Ireland, Greek, Roman and Byzantine Coins in the Amasya Museum (London, 2000), p. 53 nos. 2096-9). These, in addition to the two in Samsun and Amasra, indicate beyond any real doubt that the Q coins emanate from somewhere in northern Turkey. One halved piece was also found at Burgas, Bulgaria.
|
Axis: 12 or 6. Northern Turkey origin?
|
2
|
P
|
Y 28658/2
|
|
18.31
|
|
|
1
|
|
|
|
|
Neutron absorption analyses
|
no |
no |
no |
https://gallica.bnf.fr/ark:/12148/btv1b85635189
|
[show]
[edit]
|
| I |
5409 |
Uncertain
|
Uncertain
|
Uncertain
|
Coinage with Q
|
|
|
Bronze (26 mm)
|
Augustus |
|
bare head, right
|
Q
|
fiscus, sella quaestor and hasta
|
AMNG 226–7; FITA 13–19
|
On the identity of obv., see RPC I, p. 715. It has been thought that this issue is related to the coinage of the uncertain Cilician colony signed PRINCEPS FELIX (4082-3), as the portrait on both issues seems similar. Therefore, as the Princeps Felix portrait is considered here as Octavian/ Augustus, the same identification has been adopted for the Q coinage. These coins have in the past been considered as Macedonian, due to the reverse typology on 5409-10, which is similar to that found on the Aesillas coinage. But the hasta, which is an emblem of imperium, the money chest and the quaestor's chair of office are objects which symbolise the authority of Roman officials and they are found elsewhere, e.g., on the coinage of Pupius Rufus (919-23). They certainly denote a rank of quaestor propraetore (FITA, p. 16), as the spear could not be used normally by a quaestor who did not possess imperium. Grant assigned the Q issue to M. Acilius in 45/44 BC and supposed that he was the governor of Macedonia during the last year of Caesar's life. But that is just a guess. It should be noted that no specimen has turned up in Macedonia, but that two were bought in Beirut by H. Seyrig (5409/2-3). Therefore a Syrian origin was suggested in RPC I. Since the publication of RPC, four specimens have been recorded in Amasya Museum (S. Ireland, Greek, Roman and Byzantine Coins in the Amasya Museum (London, 2000), p. 53 nos. 2096-9). These, in addition to the two in Samsun and Amasra, indicate beyond any real doubt that the Q coins emanate from somewhere in northern Turkey. One halved piece was also found at Burgas, Bulgaria.
|
Axis: 12 or 6. Northern Turkey origin?
|
3
|
P
|
Y 28658/3
|
|
20.98
|
|
|
1
|
|
|
|
|
Neutron absorption analyses
|
no |
no |
no |
https://gallica.bnf.fr/ark:/12148/btv1b8563519q
|
[show]
[edit]
|
| I |
5409 |
Uncertain
|
Uncertain
|
Uncertain
|
Coinage with Q
|
|
|
Bronze (26 mm)
|
Augustus |
|
bare head, right
|
Q
|
fiscus, sella quaestor and hasta
|
AMNG 226–7; FITA 13–19
|
On the identity of obv., see RPC I, p. 715. It has been thought that this issue is related to the coinage of the uncertain Cilician colony signed PRINCEPS FELIX (4082-3), as the portrait on both issues seems similar. Therefore, as the Princeps Felix portrait is considered here as Octavian/ Augustus, the same identification has been adopted for the Q coinage. These coins have in the past been considered as Macedonian, due to the reverse typology on 5409-10, which is similar to that found on the Aesillas coinage. But the hasta, which is an emblem of imperium, the money chest and the quaestor's chair of office are objects which symbolise the authority of Roman officials and they are found elsewhere, e.g., on the coinage of Pupius Rufus (919-23). They certainly denote a rank of quaestor propraetore (FITA, p. 16), as the spear could not be used normally by a quaestor who did not possess imperium. Grant assigned the Q issue to M. Acilius in 45/44 BC and supposed that he was the governor of Macedonia during the last year of Caesar's life. But that is just a guess. It should be noted that no specimen has turned up in Macedonia, but that two were bought in Beirut by H. Seyrig (5409/2-3). Therefore a Syrian origin was suggested in RPC I. Since the publication of RPC, four specimens have been recorded in Amasya Museum (S. Ireland, Greek, Roman and Byzantine Coins in the Amasya Museum (London, 2000), p. 53 nos. 2096-9). These, in addition to the two in Samsun and Amasra, indicate beyond any real doubt that the Q coins emanate from somewhere in northern Turkey. One halved piece was also found at Burgas, Bulgaria.
|
Axis: 12 or 6. Northern Turkey origin?
|
4
|
P
|
|
|
16.16
|
|
|
1
|
|
|
|
|
Neutron absorption analyses
|
no |
no |
no |
https://gallica.bnf.fr/ark:/12148/btv1b8563520c
|
[show]
[edit]
|
| I |
5409 |
Uncertain
|
Uncertain
|
Uncertain
|
Coinage with Q
|
|
|
Bronze (26 mm)
|
Augustus |
|
bare head, right
|
Q
|
fiscus, sella quaestor and hasta
|
AMNG 226–7; FITA 13–19
|
On the identity of obv., see RPC I, p. 715. It has been thought that this issue is related to the coinage of the uncertain Cilician colony signed PRINCEPS FELIX (4082-3), as the portrait on both issues seems similar. Therefore, as the Princeps Felix portrait is considered here as Octavian/ Augustus, the same identification has been adopted for the Q coinage. These coins have in the past been considered as Macedonian, due to the reverse typology on 5409-10, which is similar to that found on the Aesillas coinage. But the hasta, which is an emblem of imperium, the money chest and the quaestor's chair of office are objects which symbolise the authority of Roman officials and they are found elsewhere, e.g., on the coinage of Pupius Rufus (919-23). They certainly denote a rank of quaestor propraetore (FITA, p. 16), as the spear could not be used normally by a quaestor who did not possess imperium. Grant assigned the Q issue to M. Acilius in 45/44 BC and supposed that he was the governor of Macedonia during the last year of Caesar's life. But that is just a guess. It should be noted that no specimen has turned up in Macedonia, but that two were bought in Beirut by H. Seyrig (5409/2-3). Therefore a Syrian origin was suggested in RPC I. Since the publication of RPC, four specimens have been recorded in Amasya Museum (S. Ireland, Greek, Roman and Byzantine Coins in the Amasya Museum (London, 2000), p. 53 nos. 2096-9). These, in addition to the two in Samsun and Amasra, indicate beyond any real doubt that the Q coins emanate from somewhere in northern Turkey. One halved piece was also found at Burgas, Bulgaria.
|
Axis: 12 or 6. Northern Turkey origin?
|
5
|
B
|
18217866, I-B
|
|
22.2
|
26
|
12
|
1
|
|
|
|
|
|
no |
no |
no |
https://ikmk.smb.museum/object?id=18217866
|
[show]
[edit]
|
| I |
5409 |
Uncertain
|
Uncertain
|
Uncertain
|
Coinage with Q
|
|
|
Bronze (26 mm)
|
Augustus |
|
bare head, right
|
Q
|
fiscus, sella quaestor and hasta
|
AMNG 226–7; FITA 13–19
|
On the identity of obv., see RPC I, p. 715. It has been thought that this issue is related to the coinage of the uncertain Cilician colony signed PRINCEPS FELIX (4082-3), as the portrait on both issues seems similar. Therefore, as the Princeps Felix portrait is considered here as Octavian/ Augustus, the same identification has been adopted for the Q coinage. These coins have in the past been considered as Macedonian, due to the reverse typology on 5409-10, which is similar to that found on the Aesillas coinage. But the hasta, which is an emblem of imperium, the money chest and the quaestor's chair of office are objects which symbolise the authority of Roman officials and they are found elsewhere, e.g., on the coinage of Pupius Rufus (919-23). They certainly denote a rank of quaestor propraetore (FITA, p. 16), as the spear could not be used normally by a quaestor who did not possess imperium. Grant assigned the Q issue to M. Acilius in 45/44 BC and supposed that he was the governor of Macedonia during the last year of Caesar's life. But that is just a guess. It should be noted that no specimen has turned up in Macedonia, but that two were bought in Beirut by H. Seyrig (5409/2-3). Therefore a Syrian origin was suggested in RPC I. Since the publication of RPC, four specimens have been recorded in Amasya Museum (S. Ireland, Greek, Roman and Byzantine Coins in the Amasya Museum (London, 2000), p. 53 nos. 2096-9). These, in addition to the two in Samsun and Amasra, indicate beyond any real doubt that the Q coins emanate from somewhere in northern Turkey. One halved piece was also found at Burgas, Bulgaria.
|
Axis: 12 or 6. Northern Turkey origin?
|
6
|
B
|
18217860, 322/1876
|
FITA pl. II, 3
|
21.74
|
30
|
6
|
1
|
|
|
|
|
|
no |
no |
no |
https://ikmk.smb.museum/object?id=18217860
|
[show]
[edit]
|
| I |
5409 |
Uncertain
|
Uncertain
|
Uncertain
|
Coinage with Q
|
|
|
Bronze (26 mm)
|
Augustus |
|
bare head, right
|
Q
|
fiscus, sella quaestor and hasta
|
AMNG 226–7; FITA 13–19
|
On the identity of obv., see RPC I, p. 715. It has been thought that this issue is related to the coinage of the uncertain Cilician colony signed PRINCEPS FELIX (4082-3), as the portrait on both issues seems similar. Therefore, as the Princeps Felix portrait is considered here as Octavian/ Augustus, the same identification has been adopted for the Q coinage. These coins have in the past been considered as Macedonian, due to the reverse typology on 5409-10, which is similar to that found on the Aesillas coinage. But the hasta, which is an emblem of imperium, the money chest and the quaestor's chair of office are objects which symbolise the authority of Roman officials and they are found elsewhere, e.g., on the coinage of Pupius Rufus (919-23). They certainly denote a rank of quaestor propraetore (FITA, p. 16), as the spear could not be used normally by a quaestor who did not possess imperium. Grant assigned the Q issue to M. Acilius in 45/44 BC and supposed that he was the governor of Macedonia during the last year of Caesar's life. But that is just a guess. It should be noted that no specimen has turned up in Macedonia, but that two were bought in Beirut by H. Seyrig (5409/2-3). Therefore a Syrian origin was suggested in RPC I. Since the publication of RPC, four specimens have been recorded in Amasya Museum (S. Ireland, Greek, Roman and Byzantine Coins in the Amasya Museum (London, 2000), p. 53 nos. 2096-9). These, in addition to the two in Samsun and Amasra, indicate beyond any real doubt that the Q coins emanate from somewhere in northern Turkey. One halved piece was also found at Burgas, Bulgaria.
|
Axis: 12 or 6. Northern Turkey origin?
|
7
|
B
|
18217875, 527/1912
|
Egger, Prowe coll., 2 June 1912, lot 473
|
18.65
|
26
|
11
|
1
|
|
|
|
|
|
no |
no |
no |
https://ikmk.smb.museum/object?id=18217875
|
[show]
[edit]
|
| I |
5409 |
Uncertain
|
Uncertain
|
Uncertain
|
Coinage with Q
|
|
|
Bronze (26 mm)
|
Augustus |
|
bare head, right
|
Q
|
fiscus, sella quaestor and hasta
|
AMNG 226–7; FITA 13–19
|
On the identity of obv., see RPC I, p. 715. It has been thought that this issue is related to the coinage of the uncertain Cilician colony signed PRINCEPS FELIX (4082-3), as the portrait on both issues seems similar. Therefore, as the Princeps Felix portrait is considered here as Octavian/ Augustus, the same identification has been adopted for the Q coinage. These coins have in the past been considered as Macedonian, due to the reverse typology on 5409-10, which is similar to that found on the Aesillas coinage. But the hasta, which is an emblem of imperium, the money chest and the quaestor's chair of office are objects which symbolise the authority of Roman officials and they are found elsewhere, e.g., on the coinage of Pupius Rufus (919-23). They certainly denote a rank of quaestor propraetore (FITA, p. 16), as the spear could not be used normally by a quaestor who did not possess imperium. Grant assigned the Q issue to M. Acilius in 45/44 BC and supposed that he was the governor of Macedonia during the last year of Caesar's life. But that is just a guess. It should be noted that no specimen has turned up in Macedonia, but that two were bought in Beirut by H. Seyrig (5409/2-3). Therefore a Syrian origin was suggested in RPC I. Since the publication of RPC, four specimens have been recorded in Amasya Museum (S. Ireland, Greek, Roman and Byzantine Coins in the Amasya Museum (London, 2000), p. 53 nos. 2096-9). These, in addition to the two in Samsun and Amasra, indicate beyond any real doubt that the Q coins emanate from somewhere in northern Turkey. One halved piece was also found at Burgas, Bulgaria.
|
Axis: 12 or 6. Northern Turkey origin?
|
8
|
O
|
|
|
17.59
|
|
|
1
|
|
|
|
|
|
no |
no |
no |
|
[show]
[edit]
|
| I |
5409 |
Uncertain
|
Uncertain
|
Uncertain
|
Coinage with Q
|
|
|
Bronze (26 mm)
|
Augustus |
|
bare head, right
|
Q
|
fiscus, sella quaestor and hasta
|
AMNG 226–7; FITA 13–19
|
On the identity of obv., see RPC I, p. 715. It has been thought that this issue is related to the coinage of the uncertain Cilician colony signed PRINCEPS FELIX (4082-3), as the portrait on both issues seems similar. Therefore, as the Princeps Felix portrait is considered here as Octavian/ Augustus, the same identification has been adopted for the Q coinage. These coins have in the past been considered as Macedonian, due to the reverse typology on 5409-10, which is similar to that found on the Aesillas coinage. But the hasta, which is an emblem of imperium, the money chest and the quaestor's chair of office are objects which symbolise the authority of Roman officials and they are found elsewhere, e.g., on the coinage of Pupius Rufus (919-23). They certainly denote a rank of quaestor propraetore (FITA, p. 16), as the spear could not be used normally by a quaestor who did not possess imperium. Grant assigned the Q issue to M. Acilius in 45/44 BC and supposed that he was the governor of Macedonia during the last year of Caesar's life. But that is just a guess. It should be noted that no specimen has turned up in Macedonia, but that two were bought in Beirut by H. Seyrig (5409/2-3). Therefore a Syrian origin was suggested in RPC I. Since the publication of RPC, four specimens have been recorded in Amasya Museum (S. Ireland, Greek, Roman and Byzantine Coins in the Amasya Museum (London, 2000), p. 53 nos. 2096-9). These, in addition to the two in Samsun and Amasra, indicate beyond any real doubt that the Q coins emanate from somewhere in northern Turkey. One halved piece was also found at Burgas, Bulgaria.
|
Axis: 12 or 6. Northern Turkey origin?
|
9
|
Bern
|
3768
|
|
18.8
|
|
|
1
|
|
|
|
|
|
no |
no |
no |
|
[show]
[edit]
|
| I |
5409 |
Uncertain
|
Uncertain
|
Uncertain
|
Coinage with Q
|
|
|
Bronze (26 mm)
|
Augustus |
|
bare head, right
|
Q
|
fiscus, sella quaestor and hasta
|
AMNG 226–7; FITA 13–19
|
On the identity of obv., see RPC I, p. 715. It has been thought that this issue is related to the coinage of the uncertain Cilician colony signed PRINCEPS FELIX (4082-3), as the portrait on both issues seems similar. Therefore, as the Princeps Felix portrait is considered here as Octavian/ Augustus, the same identification has been adopted for the Q coinage. These coins have in the past been considered as Macedonian, due to the reverse typology on 5409-10, which is similar to that found on the Aesillas coinage. But the hasta, which is an emblem of imperium, the money chest and the quaestor's chair of office are objects which symbolise the authority of Roman officials and they are found elsewhere, e.g., on the coinage of Pupius Rufus (919-23). They certainly denote a rank of quaestor propraetore (FITA, p. 16), as the spear could not be used normally by a quaestor who did not possess imperium. Grant assigned the Q issue to M. Acilius in 45/44 BC and supposed that he was the governor of Macedonia during the last year of Caesar's life. But that is just a guess. It should be noted that no specimen has turned up in Macedonia, but that two were bought in Beirut by H. Seyrig (5409/2-3). Therefore a Syrian origin was suggested in RPC I. Since the publication of RPC, four specimens have been recorded in Amasya Museum (S. Ireland, Greek, Roman and Byzantine Coins in the Amasya Museum (London, 2000), p. 53 nos. 2096-9). These, in addition to the two in Samsun and Amasra, indicate beyond any real doubt that the Q coins emanate from somewhere in northern Turkey. One halved piece was also found at Burgas, Bulgaria.
|
Axis: 12 or 6. Northern Turkey origin?
|
10
|
C
|
|
|
15.91
|
|
|
1
|
|
|
|
|
|
no |
no |
no |
|
[show]
[edit]
|
| I |
5409 |
Uncertain
|
Uncertain
|
Uncertain
|
Coinage with Q
|
|
|
Bronze (26 mm)
|
Augustus |
|
bare head, right
|
Q
|
fiscus, sella quaestor and hasta
|
AMNG 226–7; FITA 13–19
|
On the identity of obv., see RPC I, p. 715. It has been thought that this issue is related to the coinage of the uncertain Cilician colony signed PRINCEPS FELIX (4082-3), as the portrait on both issues seems similar. Therefore, as the Princeps Felix portrait is considered here as Octavian/ Augustus, the same identification has been adopted for the Q coinage. These coins have in the past been considered as Macedonian, due to the reverse typology on 5409-10, which is similar to that found on the Aesillas coinage. But the hasta, which is an emblem of imperium, the money chest and the quaestor's chair of office are objects which symbolise the authority of Roman officials and they are found elsewhere, e.g., on the coinage of Pupius Rufus (919-23). They certainly denote a rank of quaestor propraetore (FITA, p. 16), as the spear could not be used normally by a quaestor who did not possess imperium. Grant assigned the Q issue to M. Acilius in 45/44 BC and supposed that he was the governor of Macedonia during the last year of Caesar's life. But that is just a guess. It should be noted that no specimen has turned up in Macedonia, but that two were bought in Beirut by H. Seyrig (5409/2-3). Therefore a Syrian origin was suggested in RPC I. Since the publication of RPC, four specimens have been recorded in Amasya Museum (S. Ireland, Greek, Roman and Byzantine Coins in the Amasya Museum (London, 2000), p. 53 nos. 2096-9). These, in addition to the two in Samsun and Amasra, indicate beyond any real doubt that the Q coins emanate from somewhere in northern Turkey. One halved piece was also found at Burgas, Bulgaria.
|
Axis: 12 or 6. Northern Turkey origin?
|
11
|
NY
|
|
|
19.86
|
|
|
1
|
|
|
|
|
|
no |
no |
no |
|
[show]
[edit]
|
| I |
5409 |
Uncertain
|
Uncertain
|
Uncertain
|
Coinage with Q
|
|
|
Bronze (26 mm)
|
Augustus |
|
bare head, right
|
Q
|
fiscus, sella quaestor and hasta
|
AMNG 226–7; FITA 13–19
|
On the identity of obv., see RPC I, p. 715. It has been thought that this issue is related to the coinage of the uncertain Cilician colony signed PRINCEPS FELIX (4082-3), as the portrait on both issues seems similar. Therefore, as the Princeps Felix portrait is considered here as Octavian/ Augustus, the same identification has been adopted for the Q coinage. These coins have in the past been considered as Macedonian, due to the reverse typology on 5409-10, which is similar to that found on the Aesillas coinage. But the hasta, which is an emblem of imperium, the money chest and the quaestor's chair of office are objects which symbolise the authority of Roman officials and they are found elsewhere, e.g., on the coinage of Pupius Rufus (919-23). They certainly denote a rank of quaestor propraetore (FITA, p. 16), as the spear could not be used normally by a quaestor who did not possess imperium. Grant assigned the Q issue to M. Acilius in 45/44 BC and supposed that he was the governor of Macedonia during the last year of Caesar's life. But that is just a guess. It should be noted that no specimen has turned up in Macedonia, but that two were bought in Beirut by H. Seyrig (5409/2-3). Therefore a Syrian origin was suggested in RPC I. Since the publication of RPC, four specimens have been recorded in Amasya Museum (S. Ireland, Greek, Roman and Byzantine Coins in the Amasya Museum (London, 2000), p. 53 nos. 2096-9). These, in addition to the two in Samsun and Amasra, indicate beyond any real doubt that the Q coins emanate from somewhere in northern Turkey. One halved piece was also found at Burgas, Bulgaria.
|
Axis: 12 or 6. Northern Turkey origin?
|
12
|
NY
|
|
|
19.3
|
|
|
1
|
|
|
|
|
|
no |
no |
no |
|
[show]
[edit]
|
| I |
5409 |
Uncertain
|
Uncertain
|
Uncertain
|
Coinage with Q
|
|
|
Bronze (26 mm)
|
Augustus |
|
bare head, right
|
Q
|
fiscus, sella quaestor and hasta
|
AMNG 226–7; FITA 13–19
|
On the identity of obv., see RPC I, p. 715. It has been thought that this issue is related to the coinage of the uncertain Cilician colony signed PRINCEPS FELIX (4082-3), as the portrait on both issues seems similar. Therefore, as the Princeps Felix portrait is considered here as Octavian/ Augustus, the same identification has been adopted for the Q coinage. These coins have in the past been considered as Macedonian, due to the reverse typology on 5409-10, which is similar to that found on the Aesillas coinage. But the hasta, which is an emblem of imperium, the money chest and the quaestor's chair of office are objects which symbolise the authority of Roman officials and they are found elsewhere, e.g., on the coinage of Pupius Rufus (919-23). They certainly denote a rank of quaestor propraetore (FITA, p. 16), as the spear could not be used normally by a quaestor who did not possess imperium. Grant assigned the Q issue to M. Acilius in 45/44 BC and supposed that he was the governor of Macedonia during the last year of Caesar's life. But that is just a guess. It should be noted that no specimen has turned up in Macedonia, but that two were bought in Beirut by H. Seyrig (5409/2-3). Therefore a Syrian origin was suggested in RPC I. Since the publication of RPC, four specimens have been recorded in Amasya Museum (S. Ireland, Greek, Roman and Byzantine Coins in the Amasya Museum (London, 2000), p. 53 nos. 2096-9). These, in addition to the two in Samsun and Amasra, indicate beyond any real doubt that the Q coins emanate from somewhere in northern Turkey. One halved piece was also found at Burgas, Bulgaria.
|
Axis: 12 or 6. Northern Turkey origin?
|
13
|
Parma
|
|
|
20.65
|
|
|
1
|
|
|
|
|
|
no |
no |
no |
|
[show]
[edit]
|
| I |
5409 |
Uncertain
|
Uncertain
|
Uncertain
|
Coinage with Q
|
|
|
Bronze (26 mm)
|
Augustus |
|
bare head, right
|
Q
|
fiscus, sella quaestor and hasta
|
AMNG 226–7; FITA 13–19
|
On the identity of obv., see RPC I, p. 715. It has been thought that this issue is related to the coinage of the uncertain Cilician colony signed PRINCEPS FELIX (4082-3), as the portrait on both issues seems similar. Therefore, as the Princeps Felix portrait is considered here as Octavian/ Augustus, the same identification has been adopted for the Q coinage. These coins have in the past been considered as Macedonian, due to the reverse typology on 5409-10, which is similar to that found on the Aesillas coinage. But the hasta, which is an emblem of imperium, the money chest and the quaestor's chair of office are objects which symbolise the authority of Roman officials and they are found elsewhere, e.g., on the coinage of Pupius Rufus (919-23). They certainly denote a rank of quaestor propraetore (FITA, p. 16), as the spear could not be used normally by a quaestor who did not possess imperium. Grant assigned the Q issue to M. Acilius in 45/44 BC and supposed that he was the governor of Macedonia during the last year of Caesar's life. But that is just a guess. It should be noted that no specimen has turned up in Macedonia, but that two were bought in Beirut by H. Seyrig (5409/2-3). Therefore a Syrian origin was suggested in RPC I. Since the publication of RPC, four specimens have been recorded in Amasya Museum (S. Ireland, Greek, Roman and Byzantine Coins in the Amasya Museum (London, 2000), p. 53 nos. 2096-9). These, in addition to the two in Samsun and Amasra, indicate beyond any real doubt that the Q coins emanate from somewhere in northern Turkey. One halved piece was also found at Burgas, Bulgaria.
|
Axis: 12 or 6. Northern Turkey origin?
|
14
|
McGill
|
|
|
20.58
|
|
|
1
|
|
|
|
|
|
no |
no |
no |
|
[show]
[edit]
|
| I |
5409 |
Uncertain
|
Uncertain
|
Uncertain
|
Coinage with Q
|
|
|
Bronze (26 mm)
|
Augustus |
|
bare head, right
|
Q
|
fiscus, sella quaestor and hasta
|
AMNG 226–7; FITA 13–19
|
On the identity of obv., see RPC I, p. 715. It has been thought that this issue is related to the coinage of the uncertain Cilician colony signed PRINCEPS FELIX (4082-3), as the portrait on both issues seems similar. Therefore, as the Princeps Felix portrait is considered here as Octavian/ Augustus, the same identification has been adopted for the Q coinage. These coins have in the past been considered as Macedonian, due to the reverse typology on 5409-10, which is similar to that found on the Aesillas coinage. But the hasta, which is an emblem of imperium, the money chest and the quaestor's chair of office are objects which symbolise the authority of Roman officials and they are found elsewhere, e.g., on the coinage of Pupius Rufus (919-23). They certainly denote a rank of quaestor propraetore (FITA, p. 16), as the spear could not be used normally by a quaestor who did not possess imperium. Grant assigned the Q issue to M. Acilius in 45/44 BC and supposed that he was the governor of Macedonia during the last year of Caesar's life. But that is just a guess. It should be noted that no specimen has turned up in Macedonia, but that two were bought in Beirut by H. Seyrig (5409/2-3). Therefore a Syrian origin was suggested in RPC I. Since the publication of RPC, four specimens have been recorded in Amasya Museum (S. Ireland, Greek, Roman and Byzantine Coins in the Amasya Museum (London, 2000), p. 53 nos. 2096-9). These, in addition to the two in Samsun and Amasra, indicate beyond any real doubt that the Q coins emanate from somewhere in northern Turkey. One halved piece was also found at Burgas, Bulgaria.
|
Axis: 12 or 6. Northern Turkey origin?
|
15
|
McGill
|
|
|
19.32
|
|
|
1
|
|
|
|
|
|
no |
no |
no |
|
[show]
[edit]
|
| I |
5409 |
Uncertain
|
Uncertain
|
Uncertain
|
Coinage with Q
|
|
|
Bronze (26 mm)
|
Augustus |
|
bare head, right
|
Q
|
fiscus, sella quaestor and hasta
|
AMNG 226–7; FITA 13–19
|
On the identity of obv., see RPC I, p. 715. It has been thought that this issue is related to the coinage of the uncertain Cilician colony signed PRINCEPS FELIX (4082-3), as the portrait on both issues seems similar. Therefore, as the Princeps Felix portrait is considered here as Octavian/ Augustus, the same identification has been adopted for the Q coinage. These coins have in the past been considered as Macedonian, due to the reverse typology on 5409-10, which is similar to that found on the Aesillas coinage. But the hasta, which is an emblem of imperium, the money chest and the quaestor's chair of office are objects which symbolise the authority of Roman officials and they are found elsewhere, e.g., on the coinage of Pupius Rufus (919-23). They certainly denote a rank of quaestor propraetore (FITA, p. 16), as the spear could not be used normally by a quaestor who did not possess imperium. Grant assigned the Q issue to M. Acilius in 45/44 BC and supposed that he was the governor of Macedonia during the last year of Caesar's life. But that is just a guess. It should be noted that no specimen has turned up in Macedonia, but that two were bought in Beirut by H. Seyrig (5409/2-3). Therefore a Syrian origin was suggested in RPC I. Since the publication of RPC, four specimens have been recorded in Amasya Museum (S. Ireland, Greek, Roman and Byzantine Coins in the Amasya Museum (London, 2000), p. 53 nos. 2096-9). These, in addition to the two in Samsun and Amasra, indicate beyond any real doubt that the Q coins emanate from somewhere in northern Turkey. One halved piece was also found at Burgas, Bulgaria.
|
Axis: 12 or 6. Northern Turkey origin?
|
16
|
|
|
Thiollier coll.
|
20.38
|
|
|
1
|
|
|
|
|
|
no |
no |
no |
|
[show]
[edit]
|
| I |
5409 |
Uncertain
|
Uncertain
|
Uncertain
|
Coinage with Q
|
|
|
Bronze (26 mm)
|
Augustus |
|
bare head, right
|
Q
|
fiscus, sella quaestor and hasta
|
AMNG 226–7; FITA 13–19
|
On the identity of obv., see RPC I, p. 715. It has been thought that this issue is related to the coinage of the uncertain Cilician colony signed PRINCEPS FELIX (4082-3), as the portrait on both issues seems similar. Therefore, as the Princeps Felix portrait is considered here as Octavian/ Augustus, the same identification has been adopted for the Q coinage. These coins have in the past been considered as Macedonian, due to the reverse typology on 5409-10, which is similar to that found on the Aesillas coinage. But the hasta, which is an emblem of imperium, the money chest and the quaestor's chair of office are objects which symbolise the authority of Roman officials and they are found elsewhere, e.g., on the coinage of Pupius Rufus (919-23). They certainly denote a rank of quaestor propraetore (FITA, p. 16), as the spear could not be used normally by a quaestor who did not possess imperium. Grant assigned the Q issue to M. Acilius in 45/44 BC and supposed that he was the governor of Macedonia during the last year of Caesar's life. But that is just a guess. It should be noted that no specimen has turned up in Macedonia, but that two were bought in Beirut by H. Seyrig (5409/2-3). Therefore a Syrian origin was suggested in RPC I. Since the publication of RPC, four specimens have been recorded in Amasya Museum (S. Ireland, Greek, Roman and Byzantine Coins in the Amasya Museum (London, 2000), p. 53 nos. 2096-9). These, in addition to the two in Samsun and Amasra, indicate beyond any real doubt that the Q coins emanate from somewhere in northern Turkey. One halved piece was also found at Burgas, Bulgaria.
|
Axis: 12 or 6. Northern Turkey origin?
|
17
|
|
|
Thiollier coll.
|
17.19
|
|
|
1
|
|
|
|
|
|
no |
no |
no |
|
[show]
[edit]
|
| I |
5409 |
Uncertain
|
Uncertain
|
Uncertain
|
Coinage with Q
|
|
|
Bronze (26 mm)
|
Augustus |
|
bare head, right
|
Q
|
fiscus, sella quaestor and hasta
|
AMNG 226–7; FITA 13–19
|
On the identity of obv., see RPC I, p. 715. It has been thought that this issue is related to the coinage of the uncertain Cilician colony signed PRINCEPS FELIX (4082-3), as the portrait on both issues seems similar. Therefore, as the Princeps Felix portrait is considered here as Octavian/ Augustus, the same identification has been adopted for the Q coinage. These coins have in the past been considered as Macedonian, due to the reverse typology on 5409-10, which is similar to that found on the Aesillas coinage. But the hasta, which is an emblem of imperium, the money chest and the quaestor's chair of office are objects which symbolise the authority of Roman officials and they are found elsewhere, e.g., on the coinage of Pupius Rufus (919-23). They certainly denote a rank of quaestor propraetore (FITA, p. 16), as the spear could not be used normally by a quaestor who did not possess imperium. Grant assigned the Q issue to M. Acilius in 45/44 BC and supposed that he was the governor of Macedonia during the last year of Caesar's life. But that is just a guess. It should be noted that no specimen has turned up in Macedonia, but that two were bought in Beirut by H. Seyrig (5409/2-3). Therefore a Syrian origin was suggested in RPC I. Since the publication of RPC, four specimens have been recorded in Amasya Museum (S. Ireland, Greek, Roman and Byzantine Coins in the Amasya Museum (London, 2000), p. 53 nos. 2096-9). These, in addition to the two in Samsun and Amasra, indicate beyond any real doubt that the Q coins emanate from somewhere in northern Turkey. One halved piece was also found at Burgas, Bulgaria.
|
Axis: 12 or 6. Northern Turkey origin?
|
18
|
|
|
RW
|
21.62
|
|
|
1
|
|
|
|
|
|
no |
no |
no |
|
[show]
[edit]
|
| I |
5409 |
Uncertain
|
Uncertain
|
Uncertain
|
Coinage with Q
|
|
|
Bronze (26 mm)
|
Augustus |
|
bare head, right
|
Q
|
fiscus, sella quaestor and hasta
|
AMNG 226–7; FITA 13–19
|
On the identity of obv., see RPC I, p. 715. It has been thought that this issue is related to the coinage of the uncertain Cilician colony signed PRINCEPS FELIX (4082-3), as the portrait on both issues seems similar. Therefore, as the Princeps Felix portrait is considered here as Octavian/ Augustus, the same identification has been adopted for the Q coinage. These coins have in the past been considered as Macedonian, due to the reverse typology on 5409-10, which is similar to that found on the Aesillas coinage. But the hasta, which is an emblem of imperium, the money chest and the quaestor's chair of office are objects which symbolise the authority of Roman officials and they are found elsewhere, e.g., on the coinage of Pupius Rufus (919-23). They certainly denote a rank of quaestor propraetore (FITA, p. 16), as the spear could not be used normally by a quaestor who did not possess imperium. Grant assigned the Q issue to M. Acilius in 45/44 BC and supposed that he was the governor of Macedonia during the last year of Caesar's life. But that is just a guess. It should be noted that no specimen has turned up in Macedonia, but that two were bought in Beirut by H. Seyrig (5409/2-3). Therefore a Syrian origin was suggested in RPC I. Since the publication of RPC, four specimens have been recorded in Amasya Museum (S. Ireland, Greek, Roman and Byzantine Coins in the Amasya Museum (London, 2000), p. 53 nos. 2096-9). These, in addition to the two in Samsun and Amasra, indicate beyond any real doubt that the Q coins emanate from somewhere in northern Turkey. One halved piece was also found at Burgas, Bulgaria.
|
Axis: 12 or 6. Northern Turkey origin?
|
19
|
|
|
RW
|
19.15
|
|
|
1
|
|
|
|
|
|
no |
no |
no |
|
[show]
[edit]
|
| I |
5409 |
Uncertain
|
Uncertain
|
Uncertain
|
Coinage with Q
|
|
|
Bronze (26 mm)
|
Augustus |
|
bare head, right
|
Q
|
fiscus, sella quaestor and hasta
|
AMNG 226–7; FITA 13–19
|
On the identity of obv., see RPC I, p. 715. It has been thought that this issue is related to the coinage of the uncertain Cilician colony signed PRINCEPS FELIX (4082-3), as the portrait on both issues seems similar. Therefore, as the Princeps Felix portrait is considered here as Octavian/ Augustus, the same identification has been adopted for the Q coinage. These coins have in the past been considered as Macedonian, due to the reverse typology on 5409-10, which is similar to that found on the Aesillas coinage. But the hasta, which is an emblem of imperium, the money chest and the quaestor's chair of office are objects which symbolise the authority of Roman officials and they are found elsewhere, e.g., on the coinage of Pupius Rufus (919-23). They certainly denote a rank of quaestor propraetore (FITA, p. 16), as the spear could not be used normally by a quaestor who did not possess imperium. Grant assigned the Q issue to M. Acilius in 45/44 BC and supposed that he was the governor of Macedonia during the last year of Caesar's life. But that is just a guess. It should be noted that no specimen has turned up in Macedonia, but that two were bought in Beirut by H. Seyrig (5409/2-3). Therefore a Syrian origin was suggested in RPC I. Since the publication of RPC, four specimens have been recorded in Amasya Museum (S. Ireland, Greek, Roman and Byzantine Coins in the Amasya Museum (London, 2000), p. 53 nos. 2096-9). These, in addition to the two in Samsun and Amasra, indicate beyond any real doubt that the Q coins emanate from somewhere in northern Turkey. One halved piece was also found at Burgas, Bulgaria.
|
Axis: 12 or 6. Northern Turkey origin?
|
20
|
|
|
RW
|
18.25
|
|
|
1
|
|
|
|
|
|
no |
no |
no |
|
[show]
[edit]
|
| I |
5409 |
Uncertain
|
Uncertain
|
Uncertain
|
Coinage with Q
|
|
|
Bronze (26 mm)
|
Augustus |
|
bare head, right
|
Q
|
fiscus, sella quaestor and hasta
|
AMNG 226–7; FITA 13–19
|
On the identity of obv., see RPC I, p. 715. It has been thought that this issue is related to the coinage of the uncertain Cilician colony signed PRINCEPS FELIX (4082-3), as the portrait on both issues seems similar. Therefore, as the Princeps Felix portrait is considered here as Octavian/ Augustus, the same identification has been adopted for the Q coinage. These coins have in the past been considered as Macedonian, due to the reverse typology on 5409-10, which is similar to that found on the Aesillas coinage. But the hasta, which is an emblem of imperium, the money chest and the quaestor's chair of office are objects which symbolise the authority of Roman officials and they are found elsewhere, e.g., on the coinage of Pupius Rufus (919-23). They certainly denote a rank of quaestor propraetore (FITA, p. 16), as the spear could not be used normally by a quaestor who did not possess imperium. Grant assigned the Q issue to M. Acilius in 45/44 BC and supposed that he was the governor of Macedonia during the last year of Caesar's life. But that is just a guess. It should be noted that no specimen has turned up in Macedonia, but that two were bought in Beirut by H. Seyrig (5409/2-3). Therefore a Syrian origin was suggested in RPC I. Since the publication of RPC, four specimens have been recorded in Amasya Museum (S. Ireland, Greek, Roman and Byzantine Coins in the Amasya Museum (London, 2000), p. 53 nos. 2096-9). These, in addition to the two in Samsun and Amasra, indicate beyond any real doubt that the Q coins emanate from somewhere in northern Turkey. One halved piece was also found at Burgas, Bulgaria.
|
Axis: 12 or 6. Northern Turkey origin?
|
21
|
|
|
Private coll., Paris = CNG Triton XI, 8 Jan. 2008, lot 504
|
17.94
|
25
|
12
|
1
|
|
|
|
|
Neutron absorption analyses
|
no |
no |
yes |
https://www.coinarchives.com/a/openlink.php?l=201608|265|504|a2a36c30f41bf7b46c9bf8ad02e03fd2
|
[show]
[edit]
|
| I |
5409 |
Uncertain
|
Uncertain
|
Uncertain
|
Coinage with Q
|
|
|
Bronze (26 mm)
|
Augustus |
|
bare head, right
|
Q
|
fiscus, sella quaestor and hasta
|
AMNG 226–7; FITA 13–19
|
On the identity of obv., see RPC I, p. 715. It has been thought that this issue is related to the coinage of the uncertain Cilician colony signed PRINCEPS FELIX (4082-3), as the portrait on both issues seems similar. Therefore, as the Princeps Felix portrait is considered here as Octavian/ Augustus, the same identification has been adopted for the Q coinage. These coins have in the past been considered as Macedonian, due to the reverse typology on 5409-10, which is similar to that found on the Aesillas coinage. But the hasta, which is an emblem of imperium, the money chest and the quaestor's chair of office are objects which symbolise the authority of Roman officials and they are found elsewhere, e.g., on the coinage of Pupius Rufus (919-23). They certainly denote a rank of quaestor propraetore (FITA, p. 16), as the spear could not be used normally by a quaestor who did not possess imperium. Grant assigned the Q issue to M. Acilius in 45/44 BC and supposed that he was the governor of Macedonia during the last year of Caesar's life. But that is just a guess. It should be noted that no specimen has turned up in Macedonia, but that two were bought in Beirut by H. Seyrig (5409/2-3). Therefore a Syrian origin was suggested in RPC I. Since the publication of RPC, four specimens have been recorded in Amasya Museum (S. Ireland, Greek, Roman and Byzantine Coins in the Amasya Museum (London, 2000), p. 53 nos. 2096-9). These, in addition to the two in Samsun and Amasra, indicate beyond any real doubt that the Q coins emanate from somewhere in northern Turkey. One halved piece was also found at Burgas, Bulgaria.
|
Axis: 12 or 6. Northern Turkey origin?
|
22
|
|
|
Collection Heynen 101
|
20.65
|
|
|
1
|
|
|
|
|
|
no |
no |
no |
|
[show]
[edit]
|
| I |
5409 |
Uncertain
|
Uncertain
|
Uncertain
|
Coinage with Q
|
|
|
Bronze (26 mm)
|
Augustus |
|
bare head, right
|
Q
|
fiscus, sella quaestor and hasta
|
AMNG 226–7; FITA 13–19
|
On the identity of obv., see RPC I, p. 715. It has been thought that this issue is related to the coinage of the uncertain Cilician colony signed PRINCEPS FELIX (4082-3), as the portrait on both issues seems similar. Therefore, as the Princeps Felix portrait is considered here as Octavian/ Augustus, the same identification has been adopted for the Q coinage. These coins have in the past been considered as Macedonian, due to the reverse typology on 5409-10, which is similar to that found on the Aesillas coinage. But the hasta, which is an emblem of imperium, the money chest and the quaestor's chair of office are objects which symbolise the authority of Roman officials and they are found elsewhere, e.g., on the coinage of Pupius Rufus (919-23). They certainly denote a rank of quaestor propraetore (FITA, p. 16), as the spear could not be used normally by a quaestor who did not possess imperium. Grant assigned the Q issue to M. Acilius in 45/44 BC and supposed that he was the governor of Macedonia during the last year of Caesar's life. But that is just a guess. It should be noted that no specimen has turned up in Macedonia, but that two were bought in Beirut by H. Seyrig (5409/2-3). Therefore a Syrian origin was suggested in RPC I. Since the publication of RPC, four specimens have been recorded in Amasya Museum (S. Ireland, Greek, Roman and Byzantine Coins in the Amasya Museum (London, 2000), p. 53 nos. 2096-9). These, in addition to the two in Samsun and Amasra, indicate beyond any real doubt that the Q coins emanate from somewhere in northern Turkey. One halved piece was also found at Burgas, Bulgaria.
|
Axis: 12 or 6. Northern Turkey origin?
|
23
|
|
|
Auctiones AG, June 1975, lot 82
|
16
|
|
|
1
|
|
|
|
|
|
no |
no |
no |
|
[show]
[edit]
|
| I |
5409 |
Uncertain
|
Uncertain
|
Uncertain
|
Coinage with Q
|
|
|
Bronze (26 mm)
|
Augustus |
|
bare head, right
|
Q
|
fiscus, sella quaestor and hasta
|
AMNG 226–7; FITA 13–19
|
On the identity of obv., see RPC I, p. 715. It has been thought that this issue is related to the coinage of the uncertain Cilician colony signed PRINCEPS FELIX (4082-3), as the portrait on both issues seems similar. Therefore, as the Princeps Felix portrait is considered here as Octavian/ Augustus, the same identification has been adopted for the Q coinage. These coins have in the past been considered as Macedonian, due to the reverse typology on 5409-10, which is similar to that found on the Aesillas coinage. But the hasta, which is an emblem of imperium, the money chest and the quaestor's chair of office are objects which symbolise the authority of Roman officials and they are found elsewhere, e.g., on the coinage of Pupius Rufus (919-23). They certainly denote a rank of quaestor propraetore (FITA, p. 16), as the spear could not be used normally by a quaestor who did not possess imperium. Grant assigned the Q issue to M. Acilius in 45/44 BC and supposed that he was the governor of Macedonia during the last year of Caesar's life. But that is just a guess. It should be noted that no specimen has turned up in Macedonia, but that two were bought in Beirut by H. Seyrig (5409/2-3). Therefore a Syrian origin was suggested in RPC I. Since the publication of RPC, four specimens have been recorded in Amasya Museum (S. Ireland, Greek, Roman and Byzantine Coins in the Amasya Museum (London, 2000), p. 53 nos. 2096-9). These, in addition to the two in Samsun and Amasra, indicate beyond any real doubt that the Q coins emanate from somewhere in northern Turkey. One halved piece was also found at Burgas, Bulgaria.
|
Axis: 12 or 6. Northern Turkey origin?
|
24
|
|
|
Sternberg XI, 1981, lot 565 = Cahn 60, 1928, lot 1316
|
18.36
|
|
|
1
|
|
|
|
|
|
no |
no |
no |
|
[show]
[edit]
|
| I |
5409 |
Uncertain
|
Uncertain
|
Uncertain
|
Coinage with Q
|
|
|
Bronze (26 mm)
|
Augustus |
|
bare head, right
|
Q
|
fiscus, sella quaestor and hasta
|
AMNG 226–7; FITA 13–19
|
On the identity of obv., see RPC I, p. 715. It has been thought that this issue is related to the coinage of the uncertain Cilician colony signed PRINCEPS FELIX (4082-3), as the portrait on both issues seems similar. Therefore, as the Princeps Felix portrait is considered here as Octavian/ Augustus, the same identification has been adopted for the Q coinage. These coins have in the past been considered as Macedonian, due to the reverse typology on 5409-10, which is similar to that found on the Aesillas coinage. But the hasta, which is an emblem of imperium, the money chest and the quaestor's chair of office are objects which symbolise the authority of Roman officials and they are found elsewhere, e.g., on the coinage of Pupius Rufus (919-23). They certainly denote a rank of quaestor propraetore (FITA, p. 16), as the spear could not be used normally by a quaestor who did not possess imperium. Grant assigned the Q issue to M. Acilius in 45/44 BC and supposed that he was the governor of Macedonia during the last year of Caesar's life. But that is just a guess. It should be noted that no specimen has turned up in Macedonia, but that two were bought in Beirut by H. Seyrig (5409/2-3). Therefore a Syrian origin was suggested in RPC I. Since the publication of RPC, four specimens have been recorded in Amasya Museum (S. Ireland, Greek, Roman and Byzantine Coins in the Amasya Museum (London, 2000), p. 53 nos. 2096-9). These, in addition to the two in Samsun and Amasra, indicate beyond any real doubt that the Q coins emanate from somewhere in northern Turkey. One halved piece was also found at Burgas, Bulgaria.
|
Axis: 12 or 6. Northern Turkey origin?
|
25
|
|
|
Crédit Suisse Bern 1, 22 Apr. 1983, lot 273
|
19.37
|
|
|
1
|
|
|
|
|
|
no |
no |
no |
|
[show]
[edit]
|
| I |
5409 |
Uncertain
|
Uncertain
|
Uncertain
|
Coinage with Q
|
|
|
Bronze (26 mm)
|
Augustus |
|
bare head, right
|
Q
|
fiscus, sella quaestor and hasta
|
AMNG 226–7; FITA 13–19
|
On the identity of obv., see RPC I, p. 715. It has been thought that this issue is related to the coinage of the uncertain Cilician colony signed PRINCEPS FELIX (4082-3), as the portrait on both issues seems similar. Therefore, as the Princeps Felix portrait is considered here as Octavian/ Augustus, the same identification has been adopted for the Q coinage. These coins have in the past been considered as Macedonian, due to the reverse typology on 5409-10, which is similar to that found on the Aesillas coinage. But the hasta, which is an emblem of imperium, the money chest and the quaestor's chair of office are objects which symbolise the authority of Roman officials and they are found elsewhere, e.g., on the coinage of Pupius Rufus (919-23). They certainly denote a rank of quaestor propraetore (FITA, p. 16), as the spear could not be used normally by a quaestor who did not possess imperium. Grant assigned the Q issue to M. Acilius in 45/44 BC and supposed that he was the governor of Macedonia during the last year of Caesar's life. But that is just a guess. It should be noted that no specimen has turned up in Macedonia, but that two were bought in Beirut by H. Seyrig (5409/2-3). Therefore a Syrian origin was suggested in RPC I. Since the publication of RPC, four specimens have been recorded in Amasya Museum (S. Ireland, Greek, Roman and Byzantine Coins in the Amasya Museum (London, 2000), p. 53 nos. 2096-9). These, in addition to the two in Samsun and Amasra, indicate beyond any real doubt that the Q coins emanate from somewhere in northern Turkey. One halved piece was also found at Burgas, Bulgaria.
|
Axis: 12 or 6. Northern Turkey origin?
|
26
|
|
|
G. Hirsch 156, 1987, lot 413
|
19.05
|
|
|
1
|
|
|
|
|
|
no |
no |
no |
|
[show]
[edit]
|
| I |
5409 |
Uncertain
|
Uncertain
|
Uncertain
|
Coinage with Q
|
|
|
Bronze (26 mm)
|
Augustus |
|
bare head, right
|
Q
|
fiscus, sella quaestor and hasta
|
AMNG 226–7; FITA 13–19
|
On the identity of obv., see RPC I, p. 715. It has been thought that this issue is related to the coinage of the uncertain Cilician colony signed PRINCEPS FELIX (4082-3), as the portrait on both issues seems similar. Therefore, as the Princeps Felix portrait is considered here as Octavian/ Augustus, the same identification has been adopted for the Q coinage. These coins have in the past been considered as Macedonian, due to the reverse typology on 5409-10, which is similar to that found on the Aesillas coinage. But the hasta, which is an emblem of imperium, the money chest and the quaestor's chair of office are objects which symbolise the authority of Roman officials and they are found elsewhere, e.g., on the coinage of Pupius Rufus (919-23). They certainly denote a rank of quaestor propraetore (FITA, p. 16), as the spear could not be used normally by a quaestor who did not possess imperium. Grant assigned the Q issue to M. Acilius in 45/44 BC and supposed that he was the governor of Macedonia during the last year of Caesar's life. But that is just a guess. It should be noted that no specimen has turned up in Macedonia, but that two were bought in Beirut by H. Seyrig (5409/2-3). Therefore a Syrian origin was suggested in RPC I. Since the publication of RPC, four specimens have been recorded in Amasya Museum (S. Ireland, Greek, Roman and Byzantine Coins in the Amasya Museum (London, 2000), p. 53 nos. 2096-9). These, in addition to the two in Samsun and Amasra, indicate beyond any real doubt that the Q coins emanate from somewhere in northern Turkey. One halved piece was also found at Burgas, Bulgaria.
|
Axis: 12 or 6. Northern Turkey origin?
|
27
|
Samsun
|
|
|
|
|
|
1
|
|
|
|
|
|
no |
no |
no |
|
[show]
[edit]
|
| I |
5409 |
Uncertain
|
Uncertain
|
Uncertain
|
Coinage with Q
|
|
|
Bronze (26 mm)
|
Augustus |
|
bare head, right
|
Q
|
fiscus, sella quaestor and hasta
|
AMNG 226–7; FITA 13–19
|
On the identity of obv., see RPC I, p. 715. It has been thought that this issue is related to the coinage of the uncertain Cilician colony signed PRINCEPS FELIX (4082-3), as the portrait on both issues seems similar. Therefore, as the Princeps Felix portrait is considered here as Octavian/ Augustus, the same identification has been adopted for the Q coinage. These coins have in the past been considered as Macedonian, due to the reverse typology on 5409-10, which is similar to that found on the Aesillas coinage. But the hasta, which is an emblem of imperium, the money chest and the quaestor's chair of office are objects which symbolise the authority of Roman officials and they are found elsewhere, e.g., on the coinage of Pupius Rufus (919-23). They certainly denote a rank of quaestor propraetore (FITA, p. 16), as the spear could not be used normally by a quaestor who did not possess imperium. Grant assigned the Q issue to M. Acilius in 45/44 BC and supposed that he was the governor of Macedonia during the last year of Caesar's life. But that is just a guess. It should be noted that no specimen has turned up in Macedonia, but that two were bought in Beirut by H. Seyrig (5409/2-3). Therefore a Syrian origin was suggested in RPC I. Since the publication of RPC, four specimens have been recorded in Amasya Museum (S. Ireland, Greek, Roman and Byzantine Coins in the Amasya Museum (London, 2000), p. 53 nos. 2096-9). These, in addition to the two in Samsun and Amasra, indicate beyond any real doubt that the Q coins emanate from somewhere in northern Turkey. One halved piece was also found at Burgas, Bulgaria.
|
Axis: 12 or 6. Northern Turkey origin?
|
28
|
Amasra
|
|
S. Ireland - S. Atessogullari, in R. Ashton (ed.), Studies in Ancient Coinage from Turkey (London, 1996), p. 123, n0. 113.
|
|
|
|
1
|
|
|
|
|
probably a local find
|
no |
no |
no |
|
[show]
[edit]
|
| I |
5409 |
Uncertain
|
Uncertain
|
Uncertain
|
Coinage with Q
|
|
|
Bronze (26 mm)
|
Augustus |
|
bare head, right
|
Q
|
fiscus, sella quaestor and hasta
|
AMNG 226–7; FITA 13–19
|
On the identity of obv., see RPC I, p. 715. It has been thought that this issue is related to the coinage of the uncertain Cilician colony signed PRINCEPS FELIX (4082-3), as the portrait on both issues seems similar. Therefore, as the Princeps Felix portrait is considered here as Octavian/ Augustus, the same identification has been adopted for the Q coinage. These coins have in the past been considered as Macedonian, due to the reverse typology on 5409-10, which is similar to that found on the Aesillas coinage. But the hasta, which is an emblem of imperium, the money chest and the quaestor's chair of office are objects which symbolise the authority of Roman officials and they are found elsewhere, e.g., on the coinage of Pupius Rufus (919-23). They certainly denote a rank of quaestor propraetore (FITA, p. 16), as the spear could not be used normally by a quaestor who did not possess imperium. Grant assigned the Q issue to M. Acilius in 45/44 BC and supposed that he was the governor of Macedonia during the last year of Caesar's life. But that is just a guess. It should be noted that no specimen has turned up in Macedonia, but that two were bought in Beirut by H. Seyrig (5409/2-3). Therefore a Syrian origin was suggested in RPC I. Since the publication of RPC, four specimens have been recorded in Amasya Museum (S. Ireland, Greek, Roman and Byzantine Coins in the Amasya Museum (London, 2000), p. 53 nos. 2096-9). These, in addition to the two in Samsun and Amasra, indicate beyond any real doubt that the Q coins emanate from somewhere in northern Turkey. One halved piece was also found at Burgas, Bulgaria.
|
Axis: 12 or 6. Northern Turkey origin?
|
29
|
|
|
CNG MBS 75, 23 May 2007, lot 833 = H. Schulman, Mabbott coll. I, 6 June 1969, lot 387 = Malter 34, 13 Dec. 1986, lot 341
|
27.24
|
28
|
11
|
1
|
|
|
|
|
|
no |
no |
no |
https://www.coinarchives.com/a/openlink.php?l=179063|227|833|03e4d9ee77685c8f8618b30f6253dc01
|
[show]
[edit]
|
| I |
5409 |
Uncertain
|
Uncertain
|
Uncertain
|
Coinage with Q
|
|
|
Bronze (26 mm)
|
Augustus |
|
bare head, right
|
Q
|
fiscus, sella quaestor and hasta
|
AMNG 226–7; FITA 13–19
|
On the identity of obv., see RPC I, p. 715. It has been thought that this issue is related to the coinage of the uncertain Cilician colony signed PRINCEPS FELIX (4082-3), as the portrait on both issues seems similar. Therefore, as the Princeps Felix portrait is considered here as Octavian/ Augustus, the same identification has been adopted for the Q coinage. These coins have in the past been considered as Macedonian, due to the reverse typology on 5409-10, which is similar to that found on the Aesillas coinage. But the hasta, which is an emblem of imperium, the money chest and the quaestor's chair of office are objects which symbolise the authority of Roman officials and they are found elsewhere, e.g., on the coinage of Pupius Rufus (919-23). They certainly denote a rank of quaestor propraetore (FITA, p. 16), as the spear could not be used normally by a quaestor who did not possess imperium. Grant assigned the Q issue to M. Acilius in 45/44 BC and supposed that he was the governor of Macedonia during the last year of Caesar's life. But that is just a guess. It should be noted that no specimen has turned up in Macedonia, but that two were bought in Beirut by H. Seyrig (5409/2-3). Therefore a Syrian origin was suggested in RPC I. Since the publication of RPC, four specimens have been recorded in Amasya Museum (S. Ireland, Greek, Roman and Byzantine Coins in the Amasya Museum (London, 2000), p. 53 nos. 2096-9). These, in addition to the two in Samsun and Amasra, indicate beyond any real doubt that the Q coins emanate from somewhere in northern Turkey. One halved piece was also found at Burgas, Bulgaria.
|
Axis: 12 or 6. Northern Turkey origin?
|
30
|
Amasya
|
2096
|
|
16.52
|
|
|
1
|
|
|
|
|
|
no |
no |
no |
|
[show]
[edit]
|
| I |
5409 |
Uncertain
|
Uncertain
|
Uncertain
|
Coinage with Q
|
|
|
Bronze (26 mm)
|
Augustus |
|
bare head, right
|
Q
|
fiscus, sella quaestor and hasta
|
AMNG 226–7; FITA 13–19
|
On the identity of obv., see RPC I, p. 715. It has been thought that this issue is related to the coinage of the uncertain Cilician colony signed PRINCEPS FELIX (4082-3), as the portrait on both issues seems similar. Therefore, as the Princeps Felix portrait is considered here as Octavian/ Augustus, the same identification has been adopted for the Q coinage. These coins have in the past been considered as Macedonian, due to the reverse typology on 5409-10, which is similar to that found on the Aesillas coinage. But the hasta, which is an emblem of imperium, the money chest and the quaestor's chair of office are objects which symbolise the authority of Roman officials and they are found elsewhere, e.g., on the coinage of Pupius Rufus (919-23). They certainly denote a rank of quaestor propraetore (FITA, p. 16), as the spear could not be used normally by a quaestor who did not possess imperium. Grant assigned the Q issue to M. Acilius in 45/44 BC and supposed that he was the governor of Macedonia during the last year of Caesar's life. But that is just a guess. It should be noted that no specimen has turned up in Macedonia, but that two were bought in Beirut by H. Seyrig (5409/2-3). Therefore a Syrian origin was suggested in RPC I. Since the publication of RPC, four specimens have been recorded in Amasya Museum (S. Ireland, Greek, Roman and Byzantine Coins in the Amasya Museum (London, 2000), p. 53 nos. 2096-9). These, in addition to the two in Samsun and Amasra, indicate beyond any real doubt that the Q coins emanate from somewhere in northern Turkey. One halved piece was also found at Burgas, Bulgaria.
|
Axis: 12 or 6. Northern Turkey origin?
|
31
|
Amasya
|
2097
|
|
18.23
|
|
|
1
|
|
|
|
|
|
no |
no |
no |
|
[show]
[edit]
|
| I |
5409 |
Uncertain
|
Uncertain
|
Uncertain
|
Coinage with Q
|
|
|
Bronze (26 mm)
|
Augustus |
|
bare head, right
|
Q
|
fiscus, sella quaestor and hasta
|
AMNG 226–7; FITA 13–19
|
On the identity of obv., see RPC I, p. 715. It has been thought that this issue is related to the coinage of the uncertain Cilician colony signed PRINCEPS FELIX (4082-3), as the portrait on both issues seems similar. Therefore, as the Princeps Felix portrait is considered here as Octavian/ Augustus, the same identification has been adopted for the Q coinage. These coins have in the past been considered as Macedonian, due to the reverse typology on 5409-10, which is similar to that found on the Aesillas coinage. But the hasta, which is an emblem of imperium, the money chest and the quaestor's chair of office are objects which symbolise the authority of Roman officials and they are found elsewhere, e.g., on the coinage of Pupius Rufus (919-23). They certainly denote a rank of quaestor propraetore (FITA, p. 16), as the spear could not be used normally by a quaestor who did not possess imperium. Grant assigned the Q issue to M. Acilius in 45/44 BC and supposed that he was the governor of Macedonia during the last year of Caesar's life. But that is just a guess. It should be noted that no specimen has turned up in Macedonia, but that two were bought in Beirut by H. Seyrig (5409/2-3). Therefore a Syrian origin was suggested in RPC I. Since the publication of RPC, four specimens have been recorded in Amasya Museum (S. Ireland, Greek, Roman and Byzantine Coins in the Amasya Museum (London, 2000), p. 53 nos. 2096-9). These, in addition to the two in Samsun and Amasra, indicate beyond any real doubt that the Q coins emanate from somewhere in northern Turkey. One halved piece was also found at Burgas, Bulgaria.
|
Axis: 12 or 6. Northern Turkey origin?
|
32
|
Amasya
|
2098
|
|
16.17
|
|
|
1
|
|
|
|
|
|
no |
no |
no |
|
[show]
[edit]
|
| I |
5409 |
Uncertain
|
Uncertain
|
Uncertain
|
Coinage with Q
|
|
|
Bronze (26 mm)
|
Augustus |
|
bare head, right
|
Q
|
fiscus, sella quaestor and hasta
|
AMNG 226–7; FITA 13–19
|
On the identity of obv., see RPC I, p. 715. It has been thought that this issue is related to the coinage of the uncertain Cilician colony signed PRINCEPS FELIX (4082-3), as the portrait on both issues seems similar. Therefore, as the Princeps Felix portrait is considered here as Octavian/ Augustus, the same identification has been adopted for the Q coinage. These coins have in the past been considered as Macedonian, due to the reverse typology on 5409-10, which is similar to that found on the Aesillas coinage. But the hasta, which is an emblem of imperium, the money chest and the quaestor's chair of office are objects which symbolise the authority of Roman officials and they are found elsewhere, e.g., on the coinage of Pupius Rufus (919-23). They certainly denote a rank of quaestor propraetore (FITA, p. 16), as the spear could not be used normally by a quaestor who did not possess imperium. Grant assigned the Q issue to M. Acilius in 45/44 BC and supposed that he was the governor of Macedonia during the last year of Caesar's life. But that is just a guess. It should be noted that no specimen has turned up in Macedonia, but that two were bought in Beirut by H. Seyrig (5409/2-3). Therefore a Syrian origin was suggested in RPC I. Since the publication of RPC, four specimens have been recorded in Amasya Museum (S. Ireland, Greek, Roman and Byzantine Coins in the Amasya Museum (London, 2000), p. 53 nos. 2096-9). These, in addition to the two in Samsun and Amasra, indicate beyond any real doubt that the Q coins emanate from somewhere in northern Turkey. One halved piece was also found at Burgas, Bulgaria.
|
Axis: 12 or 6. Northern Turkey origin?
|
33
|
|
|
See Coin Archives
|
|
|
|
42
|
|
|
|
|
|
no |
no |
no |
|
[show]
[edit]
|
| I |
5409 |
Uncertain
|
Uncertain
|
Uncertain
|
Coinage with Q
|
|
|
Bronze (26 mm)
|
Augustus |
|
bare head, right
|
Q
|
fiscus, sella quaestor and hasta
|
AMNG 226–7; FITA 13–19
|
On the identity of obv., see RPC I, p. 715. It has been thought that this issue is related to the coinage of the uncertain Cilician colony signed PRINCEPS FELIX (4082-3), as the portrait on both issues seems similar. Therefore, as the Princeps Felix portrait is considered here as Octavian/ Augustus, the same identification has been adopted for the Q coinage. These coins have in the past been considered as Macedonian, due to the reverse typology on 5409-10, which is similar to that found on the Aesillas coinage. But the hasta, which is an emblem of imperium, the money chest and the quaestor's chair of office are objects which symbolise the authority of Roman officials and they are found elsewhere, e.g., on the coinage of Pupius Rufus (919-23). They certainly denote a rank of quaestor propraetore (FITA, p. 16), as the spear could not be used normally by a quaestor who did not possess imperium. Grant assigned the Q issue to M. Acilius in 45/44 BC and supposed that he was the governor of Macedonia during the last year of Caesar's life. But that is just a guess. It should be noted that no specimen has turned up in Macedonia, but that two were bought in Beirut by H. Seyrig (5409/2-3). Therefore a Syrian origin was suggested in RPC I. Since the publication of RPC, four specimens have been recorded in Amasya Museum (S. Ireland, Greek, Roman and Byzantine Coins in the Amasya Museum (London, 2000), p. 53 nos. 2096-9). These, in addition to the two in Samsun and Amasra, indicate beyond any real doubt that the Q coins emanate from somewhere in northern Turkey. One halved piece was also found at Burgas, Bulgaria.
|
Axis: 12 or 6. Northern Turkey origin?
|
75
|
|
|
halved piece from Aquae Calidae (Burgas, Bulgaria). SeeE.I.Paunov, From Koiné to Romanitas: TheNumismatic Evidence for the Roman Expansion and Settlement in Bulgaria inAntiquity (Moesia and Thrace, c. 146 BC – AD 98/117), unpublished PhDthesis, Cardiff University, p. 394
|
|
|
|
1
|
|
|
|
|
|
no |
no |
no |
|
[show]
[edit]
|
| I |
5409 |
Uncertain
|
Uncertain
|
Uncertain
|
Coinage with Q
|
|
|
Bronze (26 mm)
|
Augustus |
|
bare head, right
|
Q
|
fiscus, sella quaestor and hasta
|
AMNG 226–7; FITA 13–19
|
On the identity of obv., see RPC I, p. 715. It has been thought that this issue is related to the coinage of the uncertain Cilician colony signed PRINCEPS FELIX (4082-3), as the portrait on both issues seems similar. Therefore, as the Princeps Felix portrait is considered here as Octavian/ Augustus, the same identification has been adopted for the Q coinage. These coins have in the past been considered as Macedonian, due to the reverse typology on 5409-10, which is similar to that found on the Aesillas coinage. But the hasta, which is an emblem of imperium, the money chest and the quaestor's chair of office are objects which symbolise the authority of Roman officials and they are found elsewhere, e.g., on the coinage of Pupius Rufus (919-23). They certainly denote a rank of quaestor propraetore (FITA, p. 16), as the spear could not be used normally by a quaestor who did not possess imperium. Grant assigned the Q issue to M. Acilius in 45/44 BC and supposed that he was the governor of Macedonia during the last year of Caesar's life. But that is just a guess. It should be noted that no specimen has turned up in Macedonia, but that two were bought in Beirut by H. Seyrig (5409/2-3). Therefore a Syrian origin was suggested in RPC I. Since the publication of RPC, four specimens have been recorded in Amasya Museum (S. Ireland, Greek, Roman and Byzantine Coins in the Amasya Museum (London, 2000), p. 53 nos. 2096-9). These, in addition to the two in Samsun and Amasra, indicate beyond any real doubt that the Q coins emanate from somewhere in northern Turkey. One halved piece was also found at Burgas, Bulgaria.
|
Axis: 12 or 6. Northern Turkey origin?
|
76
|
|
|
NSB Web Auction 11, 19 Feb. 2022, lot 1164
|
14.7
|
28.2
|
|
1
|
|
|
GIC — (star (or rosette) with six rays) |
|
|
no |
no |
no |
|
[show]
[edit]
|
| I |
5409 |
Uncertain
|
Uncertain
|
Uncertain
|
Coinage with Q
|
|
|
Bronze (26 mm)
|
Augustus |
|
bare head, right
|
Q
|
fiscus, sella quaestor and hasta
|
AMNG 226–7; FITA 13–19
|
On the identity of obv., see RPC I, p. 715. It has been thought that this issue is related to the coinage of the uncertain Cilician colony signed PRINCEPS FELIX (4082-3), as the portrait on both issues seems similar. Therefore, as the Princeps Felix portrait is considered here as Octavian/ Augustus, the same identification has been adopted for the Q coinage. These coins have in the past been considered as Macedonian, due to the reverse typology on 5409-10, which is similar to that found on the Aesillas coinage. But the hasta, which is an emblem of imperium, the money chest and the quaestor's chair of office are objects which symbolise the authority of Roman officials and they are found elsewhere, e.g., on the coinage of Pupius Rufus (919-23). They certainly denote a rank of quaestor propraetore (FITA, p. 16), as the spear could not be used normally by a quaestor who did not possess imperium. Grant assigned the Q issue to M. Acilius in 45/44 BC and supposed that he was the governor of Macedonia during the last year of Caesar's life. But that is just a guess. It should be noted that no specimen has turned up in Macedonia, but that two were bought in Beirut by H. Seyrig (5409/2-3). Therefore a Syrian origin was suggested in RPC I. Since the publication of RPC, four specimens have been recorded in Amasya Museum (S. Ireland, Greek, Roman and Byzantine Coins in the Amasya Museum (London, 2000), p. 53 nos. 2096-9). These, in addition to the two in Samsun and Amasra, indicate beyond any real doubt that the Q coins emanate from somewhere in northern Turkey. One halved piece was also found at Burgas, Bulgaria.
|
Axis: 12 or 6. Northern Turkey origin?
|
77
|
Boston
|
66.906
|
|
17.92
|
28.5
|
12
|
1
|
|
|
|
|
|
no |
no |
no |
https://collections.mfa.org/objects/261515
|
[show]
[edit]
|
| I |
5409 |
Uncertain
|
Uncertain
|
Uncertain
|
Coinage with Q
|
|
|
Bronze (26 mm)
|
Augustus |
|
bare head, right
|
Q
|
fiscus, sella quaestor and hasta
|
AMNG 226–7; FITA 13–19
|
On the identity of obv., see RPC I, p. 715. It has been thought that this issue is related to the coinage of the uncertain Cilician colony signed PRINCEPS FELIX (4082-3), as the portrait on both issues seems similar. Therefore, as the Princeps Felix portrait is considered here as Octavian/ Augustus, the same identification has been adopted for the Q coinage. These coins have in the past been considered as Macedonian, due to the reverse typology on 5409-10, which is similar to that found on the Aesillas coinage. But the hasta, which is an emblem of imperium, the money chest and the quaestor's chair of office are objects which symbolise the authority of Roman officials and they are found elsewhere, e.g., on the coinage of Pupius Rufus (919-23). They certainly denote a rank of quaestor propraetore (FITA, p. 16), as the spear could not be used normally by a quaestor who did not possess imperium. Grant assigned the Q issue to M. Acilius in 45/44 BC and supposed that he was the governor of Macedonia during the last year of Caesar's life. But that is just a guess. It should be noted that no specimen has turned up in Macedonia, but that two were bought in Beirut by H. Seyrig (5409/2-3). Therefore a Syrian origin was suggested in RPC I. Since the publication of RPC, four specimens have been recorded in Amasya Museum (S. Ireland, Greek, Roman and Byzantine Coins in the Amasya Museum (London, 2000), p. 53 nos. 2096-9). These, in addition to the two in Samsun and Amasra, indicate beyond any real doubt that the Q coins emanate from somewhere in northern Turkey. One halved piece was also found at Burgas, Bulgaria.
|
Axis: 12 or 6. Northern Turkey origin?
|
78
|
|
|
Eid Mar Auctions 1, 16 Dec. 2023, lot 185
|
15.95
|
26.8
|
|
1
|
|
|
GIC — (female head r.) |
|
|
no |
no |
no |
https://www.biddr.com/auctions/eidmarauctions/browse?a=4101&l=4842878
|
[show]
[edit]
|
| I |
5410 |
Uncertain
|
Uncertain
|
Uncertain
|
Coinage with Q
|
|
|
Brass (20 mm)
|
Augustus |
|
bare head, right
|
Q
|
fiscus, sella quaestor and hasta
|
AMNG 228; FITA 13–19
|
For discussion, see 5409 = https://rpc.ashmus.ox.ac.uk/type/27029.
|
|
1
|
L
|
1908,0803.2
|
PCG VII.B.5
|
9.36
|
|
|
1
|
|
|
|
|
|
no |
no |
no |
https://www.britishmuseum.org/collection/object/C_1908-0803-2
|
[show]
[edit]
|
| I |
5410 |
Uncertain
|
Uncertain
|
Uncertain
|
Coinage with Q
|
|
|
Brass (20 mm)
|
Augustus |
|
bare head, right
|
Q
|
fiscus, sella quaestor and hasta
|
AMNG 228; FITA 13–19
|
For discussion, see 5409 = https://rpc.ashmus.ox.ac.uk/type/27029.
|
|
2
|
P
|
121
|
|
8.37
|
|
|
1
|
|
|
|
|
Neutron absorption analyses
|
no |
no |
no |
|
[show]
[edit]
|
| I |
5410 |
Uncertain
|
Uncertain
|
Uncertain
|
Coinage with Q
|
|
|
Brass (20 mm)
|
Augustus |
|
bare head, right
|
Q
|
fiscus, sella quaestor and hasta
|
AMNG 228; FITA 13–19
|
For discussion, see 5409 = https://rpc.ashmus.ox.ac.uk/type/27029.
|
|
3
|
B
|
18217870, Löbb
|
AMNG, pl. III, 7
|
8.76
|
20
|
12
|
1
|
|
|
|
|
|
no |
no |
no |
https://ikmk.smb.museum/object?id=18217870
|
[show]
[edit]
|
| I |
5410 |
Uncertain
|
Uncertain
|
Uncertain
|
Coinage with Q
|
|
|
Brass (20 mm)
|
Augustus |
|
bare head, right
|
Q
|
fiscus, sella quaestor and hasta
|
AMNG 228; FITA 13–19
|
For discussion, see 5409 = https://rpc.ashmus.ox.ac.uk/type/27029.
|
|
4
|
B
|
18217872, Knobelsdorf
|
|
6.7
|
19
|
11
|
1
|
|
|
|
|
|
no |
no |
no |
https://ikmk.smb.museum/object?id=18217872
|
[show]
[edit]
|
| I |
5410 |
Uncertain
|
Uncertain
|
Uncertain
|
Coinage with Q
|
|
|
Brass (20 mm)
|
Augustus |
|
bare head, right
|
Q
|
fiscus, sella quaestor and hasta
|
AMNG 228; FITA 13–19
|
For discussion, see 5409 = https://rpc.ashmus.ox.ac.uk/type/27029.
|
|
5
|
C
|
|
|
|
|
|
1
|
|
|
|
|
|
no |
no |
no |
|
[show]
[edit]
|
| I |
5410 |
Uncertain
|
Uncertain
|
Uncertain
|
Coinage with Q
|
|
|
Brass (20 mm)
|
Augustus |
|
bare head, right
|
Q
|
fiscus, sella quaestor and hasta
|
AMNG 228; FITA 13–19
|
For discussion, see 5409 = https://rpc.ashmus.ox.ac.uk/type/27029.
|
|
6
|
Gotha
|
(previously known as deposited Munich)
|
|
7.25
|
|
|
1
|
|
|
|
|
|
no |
no |
no |
|
[show]
[edit]
|
| I |
5410 |
Uncertain
|
Uncertain
|
Uncertain
|
Coinage with Q
|
|
|
Brass (20 mm)
|
Augustus |
|
bare head, right
|
Q
|
fiscus, sella quaestor and hasta
|
AMNG 228; FITA 13–19
|
For discussion, see 5409 = https://rpc.ashmus.ox.ac.uk/type/27029.
|
|
7
|
|
|
Private coll., Paris = J. Schulman 265, 1976, lot 498 = CNG MBS 78, 14 May 2008, lot 1398
|
8.1
|
20
|
12
|
1
|
|
|
|
|
Neutron absorption analyses
|
no |
no |
no |
https://www.coinarchives.com/a/openlink.php?l=213623|293|1398|57abde229a5f3f8bb69e329483415591
|
[show]
[edit]
|
| I |
5410 |
Uncertain
|
Uncertain
|
Uncertain
|
Coinage with Q
|
|
|
Brass (20 mm)
|
Augustus |
|
bare head, right
|
Q
|
fiscus, sella quaestor and hasta
|
AMNG 228; FITA 13–19
|
For discussion, see 5409 = https://rpc.ashmus.ox.ac.uk/type/27029.
|
|
8
|
|
|
RW
|
6.92
|
|
|
1
|
|
|
|
|
|
no |
no |
no |
|
[show]
[edit]
|
| I |
5410 |
Uncertain
|
Uncertain
|
Uncertain
|
Coinage with Q
|
|
|
Brass (20 mm)
|
Augustus |
|
bare head, right
|
Q
|
fiscus, sella quaestor and hasta
|
AMNG 228; FITA 13–19
|
For discussion, see 5409 = https://rpc.ashmus.ox.ac.uk/type/27029.
|
|
9
|
|
|
RW
|
7.79
|
|
|
1
|
|
|
|
|
|
no |
no |
no |
|
[show]
[edit]
|
| I |
5410 |
Uncertain
|
Uncertain
|
Uncertain
|
Coinage with Q
|
|
|
Brass (20 mm)
|
Augustus |
|
bare head, right
|
Q
|
fiscus, sella quaestor and hasta
|
AMNG 228; FITA 13–19
|
For discussion, see 5409 = https://rpc.ashmus.ox.ac.uk/type/27029.
|
|
10
|
|
|
RW
|
6.72
|
|
|
1
|
|
|
|
|
|
no |
no |
no |
|
[show]
[edit]
|
| I |
5410 |
Uncertain
|
Uncertain
|
Uncertain
|
Coinage with Q
|
|
|
Brass (20 mm)
|
Augustus |
|
bare head, right
|
Q
|
fiscus, sella quaestor and hasta
|
AMNG 228; FITA 13–19
|
For discussion, see 5409 = https://rpc.ashmus.ox.ac.uk/type/27029.
|
|
11
|
|
|
Collection Thiollier
|
5.71
|
|
|
1
|
|
|
|
|
|
no |
no |
no |
|
[show]
[edit]
|
| I |
5410 |
Uncertain
|
Uncertain
|
Uncertain
|
Coinage with Q
|
|
|
Brass (20 mm)
|
Augustus |
|
bare head, right
|
Q
|
fiscus, sella quaestor and hasta
|
AMNG 228; FITA 13–19
|
For discussion, see 5409 = https://rpc.ashmus.ox.ac.uk/type/27029.
|
|
12
|
|
|
Auctiones AG 13, 1983, lot 177 = Egger 40, 1912, lot 474 = Hess-Leu 28, 1965, lot 163 = CNG Triton V, 15 Jan. 2002, lot 521
|
6.82
|
20
|
|
1
|
|
|
|
|
|
no |
no |
yes |
https://www.coinarchives.com/a/openlink.php?l=5638|8|521|5d8c6ee0d8964e66a3225458f981522d
|
[show]
[edit]
|
| I |
5410 |
Uncertain
|
Uncertain
|
Uncertain
|
Coinage with Q
|
|
|
Brass (20 mm)
|
Augustus |
|
bare head, right
|
Q
|
fiscus, sella quaestor and hasta
|
AMNG 228; FITA 13–19
|
For discussion, see 5409 = https://rpc.ashmus.ox.ac.uk/type/27029.
|
|
13
|
|
|
Sternberg XII, 1982, lot 526
|
7.7
|
|
|
1
|
|
|
|
|
|
no |
no |
no |
|
[show]
[edit]
|
| I |
5410 |
Uncertain
|
Uncertain
|
Uncertain
|
Coinage with Q
|
|
|
Brass (20 mm)
|
Augustus |
|
bare head, right
|
Q
|
fiscus, sella quaestor and hasta
|
AMNG 228; FITA 13–19
|
For discussion, see 5409 = https://rpc.ashmus.ox.ac.uk/type/27029.
|
|
14
|
|
|
Collection Lafaille
|
6.79
|
|
|
1
|
|
|
|
|
|
no |
no |
no |
|
[show]
[edit]
|
| I |
5410 |
Uncertain
|
Uncertain
|
Uncertain
|
Coinage with Q
|
|
|
Brass (20 mm)
|
Augustus |
|
bare head, right
|
Q
|
fiscus, sella quaestor and hasta
|
AMNG 228; FITA 13–19
|
For discussion, see 5409 = https://rpc.ashmus.ox.ac.uk/type/27029.
|
|
15
|
|
|
RBW
|
7.58
|
|
|
1
|
|
|
GIC — (star (or rosette) with six rays) |
|
|
no |
no |
no |
|
[show]
[edit]
|
| I |
5410 |
Uncertain
|
Uncertain
|
Uncertain
|
Coinage with Q
|
|
|
Brass (20 mm)
|
Augustus |
|
bare head, right
|
Q
|
fiscus, sella quaestor and hasta
|
AMNG 228; FITA 13–19
|
For discussion, see 5409 = https://rpc.ashmus.ox.ac.uk/type/27029.
|
|
16
|
|
|
CNG 51, 15 Sept. 1999, lot 959 = Freeman & Sear MBS 17, 15 Dec. 2009, lot 163
|
8.18
|
19.4
|
|
1
|
|
|
|
|
In the CNG sale, it was suggested that this and RPC I, 4082-3 portray Sosius, quaestor in 39BC, because of the similarity of the countermark to GIC 434. But the likely attribution of the Q coins to northern Turkey makes this difficult, and the countemrarks seem different.
|
no |
no |
no |
https://www.coinarchives.com/a/openlink.php?l=1188955|2372|959|f5d189f28c408be55307e6a1b225a131
|
[show]
[edit]
|
| I |
5410 |
Uncertain
|
Uncertain
|
Uncertain
|
Coinage with Q
|
|
|
Brass (20 mm)
|
Augustus |
|
bare head, right
|
Q
|
fiscus, sella quaestor and hasta
|
AMNG 228; FITA 13–19
|
For discussion, see 5409 = https://rpc.ashmus.ox.ac.uk/type/27029.
|
|
17
|
|
|
RBW
|
8.6
|
20
|
|
1
|
|
|
GIC — (star (or rosette) with six rays) |
|
|
no |
no |
no |
|
[show]
[edit]
|
| I |
5410 |
Uncertain
|
Uncertain
|
Uncertain
|
Coinage with Q
|
|
|
Brass (20 mm)
|
Augustus |
|
bare head, right
|
Q
|
fiscus, sella quaestor and hasta
|
AMNG 228; FITA 13–19
|
For discussion, see 5409 = https://rpc.ashmus.ox.ac.uk/type/27029.
|
|
18
|
|
|
M&M GmbH 12, 10 Apr. 2003, lot 141
|
6.59
|
22
|
|
1
|
|
|
|
|
|
no |
no |
no |
https://www.coinarchives.com/a/openlink.php?l=44466|48|141|d8de81eff6dfe582a05bc6981879f01a
|
[show]
[edit]
|
| I |
5410 |
Uncertain
|
Uncertain
|
Uncertain
|
Coinage with Q
|
|
|
Brass (20 mm)
|
Augustus |
|
bare head, right
|
Q
|
fiscus, sella quaestor and hasta
|
AMNG 228; FITA 13–19
|
For discussion, see 5409 = https://rpc.ashmus.ox.ac.uk/type/27029.
|
|
19
|
|
|
Hauck & Aufhäuser 20, 16 Oct. 2007, lot 244
|
7.45
|
20
|
|
1
|
|
|
GIC — (star (or rosette) with six rays) |
|
|
no |
no |
no |
https://www.coinarchives.com/a/openlink.php?l=367292|664|244|49cf43ca2ab25a642da5ac001f94506d
|
[show]
[edit]
|
| I |
5410 |
Uncertain
|
Uncertain
|
Uncertain
|
Coinage with Q
|
|
|
Brass (20 mm)
|
Augustus |
|
bare head, right
|
Q
|
fiscus, sella quaestor and hasta
|
AMNG 228; FITA 13–19
|
For discussion, see 5409 = https://rpc.ashmus.ox.ac.uk/type/27029.
|
|
20
|
|
|
Gemini X, 13 Jan. 2013, lot 423
|
6.84
|
20
|
11
|
1
|
|
|
|
|
|
no |
no |
no |
https://www.coinarchives.com/a/openlink.php?l=555326|994|423|63c74d048f8cdf45c260eb4152f11f7a
|
[show]
[edit]
|
| I |
5410 |
Uncertain
|
Uncertain
|
Uncertain
|
Coinage with Q
|
|
|
Brass (20 mm)
|
Augustus |
|
bare head, right
|
Q
|
fiscus, sella quaestor and hasta
|
AMNG 228; FITA 13–19
|
For discussion, see 5409 = https://rpc.ashmus.ox.ac.uk/type/27029.
|
|
21
|
|
|
Rauch 94, 9 Apr. 2014, lot 700
|
6.97
|
20
|
|
1
|
|
|
|
|
|
no |
no |
no |
https://www.coinarchives.com/a/openlink.php?l=651967|1197|700|f08907a0a72c019ab3120b24289cbd32
|
[show]
[edit]
|
| I |
5410 |
Uncertain
|
Uncertain
|
Uncertain
|
Coinage with Q
|
|
|
Brass (20 mm)
|
Augustus |
|
bare head, right
|
Q
|
fiscus, sella quaestor and hasta
|
AMNG 228; FITA 13–19
|
For discussion, see 5409 = https://rpc.ashmus.ox.ac.uk/type/27029.
|
|
22
|
|
|
Pecunem Gitbud & Naumann 18, 1 June 2014, lot 459
|
8.01
|
19.2
|
|
1
|
|
|
|
|
|
no |
no |
no |
https://www.coinarchives.com/a/openlink.php?l=680878|1254|459|aedc4af850a916b9e1cc7142c3ce26b3
|
[show]
[edit]
|
| I |
5410 |
Uncertain
|
Uncertain
|
Uncertain
|
Coinage with Q
|
|
|
Brass (20 mm)
|
Augustus |
|
bare head, right
|
Q
|
fiscus, sella quaestor and hasta
|
AMNG 228; FITA 13–19
|
For discussion, see 5409 = https://rpc.ashmus.ox.ac.uk/type/27029.
|
|
23
|
|
|
Jacquier 39, 12 Sept. 2014, lot 310
|
7.5
|
20
|
|
1
|
|
|
|
|
|
no |
no |
no |
https://www.coinarchives.com/a/openlink.php?l=718817|1329|310|f300b0eaa110b14e9afa37a0c5490ccb
|
[show]
[edit]
|
| I |
5410 |
Uncertain
|
Uncertain
|
Uncertain
|
Coinage with Q
|
|
|
Brass (20 mm)
|
Augustus |
|
bare head, right
|
Q
|
fiscus, sella quaestor and hasta
|
AMNG 228; FITA 13–19
|
For discussion, see 5409 = https://rpc.ashmus.ox.ac.uk/type/27029.
|
|
24
|
|
|
Lanz 159, 8 Dec. 2014, lot 316
|
7.57
|
20
|
|
1
|
|
|
|
|
|
no |
no |
no |
https://www.coinarchives.com/a/openlink.php?l=748846|1393|316|2cd9a5ab822fd699aa24694e4c0137a0
|
[show]
[edit]
|
| I |
5410 |
Uncertain
|
Uncertain
|
Uncertain
|
Coinage with Q
|
|
|
Brass (20 mm)
|
Augustus |
|
bare head, right
|
Q
|
fiscus, sella quaestor and hasta
|
AMNG 228; FITA 13–19
|
For discussion, see 5409 = https://rpc.ashmus.ox.ac.uk/type/27029.
|
|
25
|
|
|
Rauch 96, 10 Dec. 2014, lot 256
|
7.29
|
20.1
|
|
1
|
|
|
|
|
|
no |
no |
no |
https://www.coinarchives.com/a/openlink.php?l=736593|1369|256|5934e1996ddf51cc7ad6e3e11dcaa658
|
[show]
[edit]
|
| I |
5410 |
Uncertain
|
Uncertain
|
Uncertain
|
Coinage with Q
|
|
|
Brass (20 mm)
|
Augustus |
|
bare head, right
|
Q
|
fiscus, sella quaestor and hasta
|
AMNG 228; FITA 13–19
|
For discussion, see 5409 = https://rpc.ashmus.ox.ac.uk/type/27029.
|
|
26
|
|
|
CNG EA 351, 20 May 2015, lot 562
|
7.56
|
20.1
|
12
|
1
|
|
|
|
|
|
no |
no |
no |
https://www.coinarchives.com/a/openlink.php?l=780455|1454|562|cd46e0d563e6bac220f2700ed71d4d39
|
[show]
[edit]
|
| I |
5410 |
Uncertain
|
Uncertain
|
Uncertain
|
Coinage with Q
|
|
|
Brass (20 mm)
|
Augustus |
|
bare head, right
|
Q
|
fiscus, sella quaestor and hasta
|
AMNG 228; FITA 13–19
|
For discussion, see 5409 = https://rpc.ashmus.ox.ac.uk/type/27029.
|
|
27
|
Amasya
|
2099
|
|
7.8
|
|
|
1
|
|
|
|
|
|
no |
no |
no |
|
[show]
[edit]
|
| I |
5410 |
Uncertain
|
Uncertain
|
Uncertain
|
Coinage with Q
|
|
|
Brass (20 mm)
|
Augustus |
|
bare head, right
|
Q
|
fiscus, sella quaestor and hasta
|
AMNG 228; FITA 13–19
|
For discussion, see 5409 = https://rpc.ashmus.ox.ac.uk/type/27029.
|
|
28
|
|
|
Pecunem Numismatik Naumann 39, 3 Jan. 2016, lot 535 (catalogued as RPC 5409)
|
7.29
|
21
|
|
1
|
|
|
|
|
|
no |
no |
no |
https://www.coinarchives.com/a/openlink.php?l=848070|1594|535|32a0de99cf3de8b15f0866760e2beefa
|
[show]
[edit]
|
| I |
5410 |
Uncertain
|
Uncertain
|
Uncertain
|
Coinage with Q
|
|
|
Brass (20 mm)
|
Augustus |
|
bare head, right
|
Q
|
fiscus, sella quaestor and hasta
|
AMNG 228; FITA 13–19
|
For discussion, see 5409 = https://rpc.ashmus.ox.ac.uk/type/27029.
|
|
29
|
|
|
Roma Numismatics EA 23, 9 Jan. 2016, lot 268 (catalogued as RPC 5409)
|
7.85
|
18.2
|
1
|
1
|
|
|
|
|
|
no |
no |
no |
https://www.coinarchives.com/a/openlink.php?l=851611|1600|268|68905a008c6816193201e69b43a0563d
|
[show]
[edit]
|
| I |
5410 |
Uncertain
|
Uncertain
|
Uncertain
|
Coinage with Q
|
|
|
Brass (20 mm)
|
Augustus |
|
bare head, right
|
Q
|
fiscus, sella quaestor and hasta
|
AMNG 228; FITA 13–19
|
For discussion, see 5409 = https://rpc.ashmus.ox.ac.uk/type/27029.
|
|
30
|
|
|
Pecunem Numismatik Naumann 40, 7 Feb. 2016, lot 383 (catalogued as RPC 5409)
|
8.68
|
22.3
|
|
1
|
|
|
|
|
|
no |
no |
no |
https://www.coinarchives.com/a/openlink.php?l=857038|1613|383|d4aaefa2268bd3602382e8a729695aa7
|
[show]
[edit]
|
| I |
5410 |
Uncertain
|
Uncertain
|
Uncertain
|
Coinage with Q
|
|
|
Brass (20 mm)
|
Augustus |
|
bare head, right
|
Q
|
fiscus, sella quaestor and hasta
|
AMNG 228; FITA 13–19
|
For discussion, see 5409 = https://rpc.ashmus.ox.ac.uk/type/27029.
|
|
31
|
|
|
Nomos obolos 5, 26 June 2016, lot 515 (catalogued as RPC 5409)
|
8.3
|
20.1
|
|
1
|
|
|
|
|
|
no |
no |
no |
https://www.coinarchives.com/a/openlink.php?l=903970|1711|515|7e070118dffa4cc26d6c67b864fde4c3
|
[show]
[edit]
|
| I |
5410 |
Uncertain
|
Uncertain
|
Uncertain
|
Coinage with Q
|
|
|
Brass (20 mm)
|
Augustus |
|
bare head, right
|
Q
|
fiscus, sella quaestor and hasta
|
AMNG 228; FITA 13–19
|
For discussion, see 5409 = https://rpc.ashmus.ox.ac.uk/type/27029.
|
|
32
|
|
|
Rauch 101, 19 Apr. 2016, lot 1417 = Rauch 95, 30 Sept. 2014, lot 324
|
7.83
|
20
|
|
1
|
|
|
|
|
|
no |
no |
no |
https://www.coinarchives.com/a/openlink.php?l=884075|1669|1417|4e12e8dce2f24686d78758270ff9e7d6
|
[show]
[edit]
|
| I |
5410 |
Uncertain
|
Uncertain
|
Uncertain
|
Coinage with Q
|
|
|
Brass (20 mm)
|
Augustus |
|
bare head, right
|
Q
|
fiscus, sella quaestor and hasta
|
AMNG 228; FITA 13–19
|
For discussion, see 5409 = https://rpc.ashmus.ox.ac.uk/type/27029.
|
|
33
|
|
|
Savoca Numismatik 8 Blue, 14 June 2018, lot 667
|
8.31
|
20
|
|
1
|
|
|
GIC — (star (or rosette) with six rays) |
|
|
no |
no |
no |
|
[show]
[edit]
|
| I |
5410 |
Uncertain
|
Uncertain
|
Uncertain
|
Coinage with Q
|
|
|
Brass (20 mm)
|
Augustus |
|
bare head, right
|
Q
|
fiscus, sella quaestor and hasta
|
AMNG 228; FITA 13–19
|
For discussion, see 5409 = https://rpc.ashmus.ox.ac.uk/type/27029.
|
|
34
|
|
|
CGT coll. = Biga EA 8, 20 Feb. 2022, lot 332
|
8.34
|
19
|
12
|
1
|
|
|
GIC — (star (or rosette) with six rays) |
|
|
no |
no |
no |
|
[show]
[edit]
|
| I |
5410 |
Uncertain
|
Uncertain
|
Uncertain
|
Coinage with Q
|
|
|
Brass (20 mm)
|
Augustus |
|
bare head, right
|
Q
|
fiscus, sella quaestor and hasta
|
AMNG 228; FITA 13–19
|
For discussion, see 5409 = https://rpc.ashmus.ox.ac.uk/type/27029.
|
|
35
|
|
|
Rex Numismatics Rex Budget 2, 14 Oct. 2023, lot 541
|
8.07
|
21.5
|
|
1
|
|
|
GIC — (star (or rosette) with six rays); GIC — (uncertain in circular punch); GIC — (head r. (?) (on neck)) |
|
the uncertain cmk is c 6.5mm in diameter
|
no |
no |
no |
https://www.biddr.com/auctions/rexnumis/browse?a=3929&l=4612798
|
[show]
[edit]
|
| I |
5411 |
Uncertain
|
Uncertain
|
Uncertain
|
Coinage with Q
|
|
|
Brass (20 mm)
|
Augustus |
|
bare head, right
|
Q
|
prow right
|
FITA 13–19
|
For discussion, see https://rpc.ashmus.ox.ac.uk/type/27029.
|
|
1
|
Mu
|
|
|
4.63
|
|
|
1
|
|
|
|
|
|
no |
no |
no |
|
[show]
[edit]
|
| I |
5411 |
Uncertain
|
Uncertain
|
Uncertain
|
Coinage with Q
|
|
|
Brass (20 mm)
|
Augustus |
|
bare head, right
|
Q
|
prow right
|
FITA 13–19
|
For discussion, see https://rpc.ashmus.ox.ac.uk/type/27029.
|
|
2
|
Istanbul
|
|
FITA, pl. II, 2 (rev.)
|
|
|
|
1
|
|
|
|
|
|
no |
no |
no |
|
[show]
[edit]
|
| I |
5411 |
Uncertain
|
Uncertain
|
Uncertain
|
Coinage with Q
|
|
|
Brass (20 mm)
|
Augustus |
|
bare head, right
|
Q
|
prow right
|
FITA 13–19
|
For discussion, see https://rpc.ashmus.ox.ac.uk/type/27029.
|
|
3
|
Stuttgart
|
MK 1998/91
|
|
2.95
|
|
|
1
|
|
|
|
|
|
no |
no |
no |
|
[show]
[edit]
|
| I |
5411 |
Uncertain
|
Uncertain
|
Uncertain
|
Coinage with Q
|
|
|
Brass (20 mm)
|
Augustus |
|
bare head, right
|
Q
|
prow right
|
FITA 13–19
|
For discussion, see https://rpc.ashmus.ox.ac.uk/type/27029.
|
|
4
|
|
|
Rauch 94, 9 Apr. 2014, lot 701
|
6.72
|
20
|
|
1
|
|
|
|
|
|
no |
no |
no |
https://www.coinarchives.com/a/openlink.php?l=651968|1197|701|8cb7eab1b080e1ac8708c764ea261a8e
|
[show]
[edit]
|
| I |
5411 |
Uncertain
|
Uncertain
|
Uncertain
|
Coinage with Q
|
|
|
Brass (20 mm)
|
Augustus |
|
bare head, right
|
Q
|
prow right
|
FITA 13–19
|
For discussion, see https://rpc.ashmus.ox.ac.uk/type/27029.
|
|
5
|
|
|
CNG EA 325, 23 Apr. 2014, lot 405
|
5.74
|
17
|
12
|
1
|
|
|
|
|
|
no |
no |
no |
https://www.coinarchives.com/a/openlink.php?l=712898|1224|405|fad38ebba294e7ba48d47975417ecd6b
|
[show]
[edit]
|
| I |
5411 |
Uncertain
|
Uncertain
|
Uncertain
|
Coinage with Q
|
|
|
Brass (20 mm)
|
Augustus |
|
bare head, right
|
Q
|
prow right
|
FITA 13–19
|
For discussion, see https://rpc.ashmus.ox.ac.uk/type/27029.
|
|
6
|
|
|
CNG EA 351, 20 May 2015, lot 563
|
4.46
|
15.5
|
1
|
1
|
|
|
|
|
|
no |
no |
no |
https://www.coinarchives.com/a/openlink.php?l=780456|1454|563|1a5c101c263fdde18ea340218d73a7de
|
[show]
[edit]
|
| I |
5411 |
Uncertain
|
Uncertain
|
Uncertain
|
Coinage with Q
|
|
|
Brass (20 mm)
|
Augustus |
|
bare head, right
|
Q
|
prow right
|
FITA 13–19
|
For discussion, see https://rpc.ashmus.ox.ac.uk/type/27029.
|
|
7
|
|
|
PV coll. = Rauch 98, 21 Sept. 2015, lot 187
|
5.71
|
20
|
|
1
|
|
|
|
|
|
no |
no |
yes |
https://www.coinarchives.com/a/openlink.php?l=809769|1516|187|0c3f0f35c1f6a1a5064b61b018515b07
|
[show]
[edit]
|
| I |
5411 |
Uncertain
|
Uncertain
|
Uncertain
|
Coinage with Q
|
|
|
Brass (20 mm)
|
Augustus |
|
bare head, right
|
Q
|
prow right
|
FITA 13–19
|
For discussion, see https://rpc.ashmus.ox.ac.uk/type/27029.
|
|
8
|
|
|
CGT coll. = Pecunem Gitbud & Naumann 37, 1 Nov. 2015, lot 422
|
5.08
|
16
|
12
|
1
|
|
|
|
|
|
no |
no |
no |
|
[show]
[edit]
|
| I |
5411 |
Uncertain
|
Uncertain
|
Uncertain
|
Coinage with Q
|
|
|
Brass (20 mm)
|
Augustus |
|
bare head, right
|
Q
|
prow right
|
FITA 13–19
|
For discussion, see https://rpc.ashmus.ox.ac.uk/type/27029.
|
|
9
|
|
|
Naumann 46, 11 Sept. 2016, lot 328
|
4.71
|
21
|
|
1
|
|
|
|
|
|
no |
no |
no |
https://www.coinarchives.com/a/openlink.php?l=997516|1940|328|7ab58b3ed840a7d80a03210b533305c5
|
[show]
[edit]
|
| I |
5411 |
Uncertain
|
Uncertain
|
Uncertain
|
Coinage with Q
|
|
|
Brass (20 mm)
|
Augustus |
|
bare head, right
|
Q
|
prow right
|
FITA 13–19
|
For discussion, see https://rpc.ashmus.ox.ac.uk/type/27029.
|
|
10
|
|
|
Nomos obolos 7, 9 July 2017, lot 271
|
3.91
|
19
|
7
|
1
|
|
|
|
|
|
no |
no |
no |
https://www.coinarchives.com/a/openlink.php?l=1014866|1977|271|aa97c23a823715555920b3295dbe08de
|
[show]
[edit]
|
| I |
5411 |
Uncertain
|
Uncertain
|
Uncertain
|
Coinage with Q
|
|
|
Brass (20 mm)
|
Augustus |
|
bare head, right
|
Q
|
prow right
|
FITA 13–19
|
For discussion, see https://rpc.ashmus.ox.ac.uk/type/27029.
|
|
11
|
|
|
Nomos obolos 16, 11 Oct. 2020, lot 1046
|
4.41
|
16.5
|
1
|
1
|
|
|
|
|
|
no |
no |
no |
|
[show]
[edit]
|
| I |
5411 |
Uncertain
|
Uncertain
|
Uncertain
|
Coinage with Q
|
|
|
Brass (20 mm)
|
Augustus |
|
bare head, right
|
Q
|
prow right
|
FITA 13–19
|
For discussion, see https://rpc.ashmus.ox.ac.uk/type/27029.
|
|
12
|
|
|
N&N London Green IX, 14 May 2023, lot 379
|
4.1
|
17.1
|
|
1
|
|
|
|
|
|
no |
no |
no |
https://www.biddr.com/auctions/nnlondon/browse?a=3517&l=4058546
|
[show]
[edit]
|
| I |
5411 |
Uncertain
|
Uncertain
|
Uncertain
|
Coinage with Q
|
|
|
Brass (20 mm)
|
Augustus |
|
bare head, right
|
Q
|
prow right
|
FITA 13–19
|
For discussion, see https://rpc.ashmus.ox.ac.uk/type/27029.
|
|
13
|
|
|
CNG EA 559, 3 Apr. 2024, lot 328
|
5.38
|
16
|
1
|
1
|
|
|
|
|
|
no |
no |
no |
https://www.coinarchives.com/a/openlink.php?l=2363368|5801|328|281b9d9aa74ce091a18362332ca965d7
|
[show]
[edit]
|
| I |
5412 |
Uncertain
|
Uncertain
|
Uncertain
|
COS VIII
|
26 BC
|
Marcus Memmius Flaminius ; Titus Vomanius |
Æ (20 mm)
|
Augustus |
IMP CAESAR DIVI F AVGVSTVS COS VIII
|
bare head of Augustus, right
|
T VOMAN M MEMM FLAM QVINQ ITER
|
colonist (priest) ploughing with two humped oxen, right; behind, aquila between two signa
|
|
5412-4: The above issue, struck in three denominations, has raised problems of interpretation and mint. Only 5413 and 5414 have been published before; series 5412 is unpublished. [..., see RPC I, p. 716 for full comment]. This attribution [to Heraclea] is no longer possible, now that we know that the issue was struck in 26 BC. But the problem remains insoluble: the issue was struck by a colony that had existed at least ten years in 26 BC and had been founded during the Triumvirate. All the new specimens that have turned up recently are from Turkey, though unfortunately without an exact provenance; Cilicia seems to be the only area that can be ruled out (according to E. Levante). The humped bull on 5412 might suggest that it was struck in southeastern Anatolia, and the same goes for the twin goddesses on series 5413, where the closest parallel is indeed Comama or, slightly less likely, Aspendos (see L. Robert, Hellenica XI-XII (1960), pp. 176–88). The colonies of Antioch, Olbasa, Comama, Cremna, Parlais or Lystra are among the possibilities, except that they are all thought to have been founded by Augustus. This issue would therefore indicate that one of them was in fact founded earlier or that there was another colony, hitherto unknown.
|
|
1
|
P
|
Delepierre (Patras)
|
|
6.58
|
20
|
1
|
1
|
5604
|
5605
|
|
|
|
no |
no |
no |
https://gallica.bnf.fr/ark:/12148/btv1b103114604
|
[show]
[edit]
|
| I |
5412 |
Uncertain
|
Uncertain
|
Uncertain
|
COS VIII
|
26 BC
|
Marcus Memmius Flaminius ; Titus Vomanius |
Æ (20 mm)
|
Augustus |
IMP CAESAR DIVI F AVGVSTVS COS VIII
|
bare head of Augustus, right
|
T VOMAN M MEMM FLAM QVINQ ITER
|
colonist (priest) ploughing with two humped oxen, right; behind, aquila between two signa
|
|
5412-4: The above issue, struck in three denominations, has raised problems of interpretation and mint. Only 5413 and 5414 have been published before; series 5412 is unpublished. [..., see RPC I, p. 716 for full comment]. This attribution [to Heraclea] is no longer possible, now that we know that the issue was struck in 26 BC. But the problem remains insoluble: the issue was struck by a colony that had existed at least ten years in 26 BC and had been founded during the Triumvirate. All the new specimens that have turned up recently are from Turkey, though unfortunately without an exact provenance; Cilicia seems to be the only area that can be ruled out (according to E. Levante). The humped bull on 5412 might suggest that it was struck in southeastern Anatolia, and the same goes for the twin goddesses on series 5413, where the closest parallel is indeed Comama or, slightly less likely, Aspendos (see L. Robert, Hellenica XI-XII (1960), pp. 176–88). The colonies of Antioch, Olbasa, Comama, Cremna, Parlais or Lystra are among the possibilities, except that they are all thought to have been founded by Augustus. This issue would therefore indicate that one of them was in fact founded earlier or that there was another colony, hitherto unknown.
|
|
2
|
|
|
RBW = Private coll., Paris = Aufhäuser 7 Oct. 1987, lot 228
|
8.05
|
20
|
|
1
|
5604
|
5605
|
|
|
|
no |
no |
no |
|
[show]
[edit]
|
| I |
5412 |
Uncertain
|
Uncertain
|
Uncertain
|
COS VIII
|
26 BC
|
Marcus Memmius Flaminius ; Titus Vomanius |
Æ (20 mm)
|
Augustus |
IMP CAESAR DIVI F AVGVSTVS COS VIII
|
bare head of Augustus, right
|
T VOMAN M MEMM FLAM QVINQ ITER
|
colonist (priest) ploughing with two humped oxen, right; behind, aquila between two signa
|
|
5412-4: The above issue, struck in three denominations, has raised problems of interpretation and mint. Only 5413 and 5414 have been published before; series 5412 is unpublished. [..., see RPC I, p. 716 for full comment]. This attribution [to Heraclea] is no longer possible, now that we know that the issue was struck in 26 BC. But the problem remains insoluble: the issue was struck by a colony that had existed at least ten years in 26 BC and had been founded during the Triumvirate. All the new specimens that have turned up recently are from Turkey, though unfortunately without an exact provenance; Cilicia seems to be the only area that can be ruled out (according to E. Levante). The humped bull on 5412 might suggest that it was struck in southeastern Anatolia, and the same goes for the twin goddesses on series 5413, where the closest parallel is indeed Comama or, slightly less likely, Aspendos (see L. Robert, Hellenica XI-XII (1960), pp. 176–88). The colonies of Antioch, Olbasa, Comama, Cremna, Parlais or Lystra are among the possibilities, except that they are all thought to have been founded by Augustus. This issue would therefore indicate that one of them was in fact founded earlier or that there was another colony, hitherto unknown.
|
|
3
|
|
|
JSW = CNG MBS 79, 17 Sept. 2008, lot 633
|
9.47
|
21
|
12
|
1
|
5604
|
5605
|
|
|
|
no |
no |
no |
https://www.coinarchives.com/a/openlink.php?l=227052|328|633|fe56cdcc601762b81bdb3ad1eacf8d2a
|
[show]
[edit]
|
| I |
5412 |
Uncertain
|
Uncertain
|
Uncertain
|
COS VIII
|
26 BC
|
Marcus Memmius Flaminius ; Titus Vomanius |
Æ (20 mm)
|
Augustus |
IMP CAESAR DIVI F AVGVSTVS COS VIII
|
bare head of Augustus, right
|
T VOMAN M MEMM FLAM QVINQ ITER
|
colonist (priest) ploughing with two humped oxen, right; behind, aquila between two signa
|
|
5412-4: The above issue, struck in three denominations, has raised problems of interpretation and mint. Only 5413 and 5414 have been published before; series 5412 is unpublished. [..., see RPC I, p. 716 for full comment]. This attribution [to Heraclea] is no longer possible, now that we know that the issue was struck in 26 BC. But the problem remains insoluble: the issue was struck by a colony that had existed at least ten years in 26 BC and had been founded during the Triumvirate. All the new specimens that have turned up recently are from Turkey, though unfortunately without an exact provenance; Cilicia seems to be the only area that can be ruled out (according to E. Levante). The humped bull on 5412 might suggest that it was struck in southeastern Anatolia, and the same goes for the twin goddesses on series 5413, where the closest parallel is indeed Comama or, slightly less likely, Aspendos (see L. Robert, Hellenica XI-XII (1960), pp. 176–88). The colonies of Antioch, Olbasa, Comama, Cremna, Parlais or Lystra are among the possibilities, except that they are all thought to have been founded by Augustus. This issue would therefore indicate that one of them was in fact founded earlier or that there was another colony, hitherto unknown.
|
|
4
|
Afyon
|
5995
|
|
10.5
|
|
12
|
1
|
|
|
|
|
This new coin supports the attribution of the three denominations made in 26 BC with the names of the duoviri quinquennales to Turkey, though it does not help decide between the possibilities (e.g. Antioch, Olbasa, Comama, Cremna, Parlais or Lystra).
|
no |
no |
no |
|
[show]
[edit]
|
| I |
5412 |
Uncertain
|
Uncertain
|
Uncertain
|
COS VIII
|
26 BC
|
Marcus Memmius Flaminius ; Titus Vomanius |
Æ (20 mm)
|
Augustus |
IMP CAESAR DIVI F AVGVSTVS COS VIII
|
bare head of Augustus, right
|
T VOMAN M MEMM FLAM QVINQ ITER
|
colonist (priest) ploughing with two humped oxen, right; behind, aquila between two signa
|
|
5412-4: The above issue, struck in three denominations, has raised problems of interpretation and mint. Only 5413 and 5414 have been published before; series 5412 is unpublished. [..., see RPC I, p. 716 for full comment]. This attribution [to Heraclea] is no longer possible, now that we know that the issue was struck in 26 BC. But the problem remains insoluble: the issue was struck by a colony that had existed at least ten years in 26 BC and had been founded during the Triumvirate. All the new specimens that have turned up recently are from Turkey, though unfortunately without an exact provenance; Cilicia seems to be the only area that can be ruled out (according to E. Levante). The humped bull on 5412 might suggest that it was struck in southeastern Anatolia, and the same goes for the twin goddesses on series 5413, where the closest parallel is indeed Comama or, slightly less likely, Aspendos (see L. Robert, Hellenica XI-XII (1960), pp. 176–88). The colonies of Antioch, Olbasa, Comama, Cremna, Parlais or Lystra are among the possibilities, except that they are all thought to have been founded by Augustus. This issue would therefore indicate that one of them was in fact founded earlier or that there was another colony, hitherto unknown.
|
|
5
|
|
|
Helios 5, 25 June 2010, lot 1034
|
8.56
|
20
|
|
1
|
|
|
|
|
|
no |
no |
yes |
https://www.coinarchives.com/a/openlink.php?l=364109|656|1034|eada2b81da724c2260ee140e7eaa8953
|
[show]
[edit]
|
| I |
5412 |
Uncertain
|
Uncertain
|
Uncertain
|
COS VIII
|
26 BC
|
Marcus Memmius Flaminius ; Titus Vomanius |
Æ (20 mm)
|
Augustus |
IMP CAESAR DIVI F AVGVSTVS COS VIII
|
bare head of Augustus, right
|
T VOMAN M MEMM FLAM QVINQ ITER
|
colonist (priest) ploughing with two humped oxen, right; behind, aquila between two signa
|
|
5412-4: The above issue, struck in three denominations, has raised problems of interpretation and mint. Only 5413 and 5414 have been published before; series 5412 is unpublished. [..., see RPC I, p. 716 for full comment]. This attribution [to Heraclea] is no longer possible, now that we know that the issue was struck in 26 BC. But the problem remains insoluble: the issue was struck by a colony that had existed at least ten years in 26 BC and had been founded during the Triumvirate. All the new specimens that have turned up recently are from Turkey, though unfortunately without an exact provenance; Cilicia seems to be the only area that can be ruled out (according to E. Levante). The humped bull on 5412 might suggest that it was struck in southeastern Anatolia, and the same goes for the twin goddesses on series 5413, where the closest parallel is indeed Comama or, slightly less likely, Aspendos (see L. Robert, Hellenica XI-XII (1960), pp. 176–88). The colonies of Antioch, Olbasa, Comama, Cremna, Parlais or Lystra are among the possibilities, except that they are all thought to have been founded by Augustus. This issue would therefore indicate that one of them was in fact founded earlier or that there was another colony, hitherto unknown.
|
|
6
|
|
|
Savoca 132nd Blue, 7 May 2022, lot 486
|
5.78
|
21
|
12
|
1
|
|
|
|
|
|
no |
no |
no |
|
[show]
[edit]
|
| I |
5412 |
Uncertain
|
Uncertain
|
Uncertain
|
COS VIII
|
26 BC
|
Marcus Memmius Flaminius ; Titus Vomanius |
Æ (20 mm)
|
Augustus |
IMP CAESAR DIVI F AVGVSTVS COS VIII
|
bare head of Augustus, right
|
T VOMAN M MEMM FLAM QVINQ ITER
|
colonist (priest) ploughing with two humped oxen, right; behind, aquila between two signa
|
|
5412-4: The above issue, struck in three denominations, has raised problems of interpretation and mint. Only 5413 and 5414 have been published before; series 5412 is unpublished. [..., see RPC I, p. 716 for full comment]. This attribution [to Heraclea] is no longer possible, now that we know that the issue was struck in 26 BC. But the problem remains insoluble: the issue was struck by a colony that had existed at least ten years in 26 BC and had been founded during the Triumvirate. All the new specimens that have turned up recently are from Turkey, though unfortunately without an exact provenance; Cilicia seems to be the only area that can be ruled out (according to E. Levante). The humped bull on 5412 might suggest that it was struck in southeastern Anatolia, and the same goes for the twin goddesses on series 5413, where the closest parallel is indeed Comama or, slightly less likely, Aspendos (see L. Robert, Hellenica XI-XII (1960), pp. 176–88). The colonies of Antioch, Olbasa, Comama, Cremna, Parlais or Lystra are among the possibilities, except that they are all thought to have been founded by Augustus. This issue would therefore indicate that one of them was in fact founded earlier or that there was another colony, hitherto unknown.
|
|
7
|
|
|
N&N London EA 43, 14 Jan. 2024, lot 525
|
|
21.1
|
|
1
|
|
|
|
|
The weight given (27.1) is certainly wrong.
|
no |
no |
no |
https://www.biddr.com/auctions/nnlondon/browse?a=4207&l=4977628
|
[show]
[edit]
|
| I |
5413 |
Uncertain
|
Uncertain
|
Uncertain
|
COS VIII
|
26 BC
|
Marcus Memmius Flaminius ; Titus Vomanius |
Æ (18 mm)
|
Augustus |
IMP CAESAR DIVI F AVGVSTVS COS VIII
|
bare head of Augustus, right
|
T VOMAN M MEMM FLAM QVINQ ITER
|
two goddesses with kalathos seated facing, holding patera (?)
|
FITA 143–4
|
5412-4: The above issue, struck in three denominations, has raised problems of interpretation and mint. Only 5413 and 5414 have been published before; series 5412 is unpublished. [..., see RPC I, p. 716 for full comment]. This attribution [to Heraclea] is no longer possible, now that we know that the issue was struck in 26 BC. But the problem remains insoluble: the issue was struck by a colony that had existed at least ten years in 26 BC and had been founded during the Triumvirate. All the new specimens that have turned up recently are from Turkey, though unfortunately without an exact provenance; Cilicia seems to be the only area that can be ruled out (according to E. Levante). The humped bull on 5412 might suggest that it was struck in southeastern Anatolia, and the same goes for the twin goddesses on series 5413, where the closest parallel is indeed Comama or, slightly less likely, Aspendos (see L. Robert, Hellenica XI-XII (1960), pp. 176–88). The colonies of Antioch, Olbasa, Comama, Cremna, Parlais or Lystra are among the possibilities, except that they are all thought to have been founded by Augustus. This issue would therefore indicate that one of them was in fact founded earlier or that there was another colony, hitherto unknown.
|
|
1
|
L
|
1978,1002.1
|
vA
|
5.9
|
|
|
1
|
|
|
|
|
|
no |
no |
no |
https://www.britishmuseum.org/collection/object/C_1978-1002-1
|
[show]
[edit]
|
| I |
5413 |
Uncertain
|
Uncertain
|
Uncertain
|
COS VIII
|
26 BC
|
Marcus Memmius Flaminius ; Titus Vomanius |
Æ (18 mm)
|
Augustus |
IMP CAESAR DIVI F AVGVSTVS COS VIII
|
bare head of Augustus, right
|
T VOMAN M MEMM FLAM QVINQ ITER
|
two goddesses with kalathos seated facing, holding patera (?)
|
FITA 143–4
|
5412-4: The above issue, struck in three denominations, has raised problems of interpretation and mint. Only 5413 and 5414 have been published before; series 5412 is unpublished. [..., see RPC I, p. 716 for full comment]. This attribution [to Heraclea] is no longer possible, now that we know that the issue was struck in 26 BC. But the problem remains insoluble: the issue was struck by a colony that had existed at least ten years in 26 BC and had been founded during the Triumvirate. All the new specimens that have turned up recently are from Turkey, though unfortunately without an exact provenance; Cilicia seems to be the only area that can be ruled out (according to E. Levante). The humped bull on 5412 might suggest that it was struck in southeastern Anatolia, and the same goes for the twin goddesses on series 5413, where the closest parallel is indeed Comama or, slightly less likely, Aspendos (see L. Robert, Hellenica XI-XII (1960), pp. 176–88). The colonies of Antioch, Olbasa, Comama, Cremna, Parlais or Lystra are among the possibilities, except that they are all thought to have been founded by Augustus. This issue would therefore indicate that one of them was in fact founded earlier or that there was another colony, hitherto unknown.
|
|
2
|
L
|
1885,0606.355
|
FITA, pl. IV, 24: obv.
|
4.65
|
|
|
1
|
|
|
|
|
|
no |
no |
no |
https://www.britishmuseum.org/collection/object/C_1885-0606-355
|
[show]
[edit]
|
| I |
5413 |
Uncertain
|
Uncertain
|
Uncertain
|
COS VIII
|
26 BC
|
Marcus Memmius Flaminius ; Titus Vomanius |
Æ (18 mm)
|
Augustus |
IMP CAESAR DIVI F AVGVSTVS COS VIII
|
bare head of Augustus, right
|
T VOMAN M MEMM FLAM QVINQ ITER
|
two goddesses with kalathos seated facing, holding patera (?)
|
FITA 143–4
|
5412-4: The above issue, struck in three denominations, has raised problems of interpretation and mint. Only 5413 and 5414 have been published before; series 5412 is unpublished. [..., see RPC I, p. 716 for full comment]. This attribution [to Heraclea] is no longer possible, now that we know that the issue was struck in 26 BC. But the problem remains insoluble: the issue was struck by a colony that had existed at least ten years in 26 BC and had been founded during the Triumvirate. All the new specimens that have turned up recently are from Turkey, though unfortunately without an exact provenance; Cilicia seems to be the only area that can be ruled out (according to E. Levante). The humped bull on 5412 might suggest that it was struck in southeastern Anatolia, and the same goes for the twin goddesses on series 5413, where the closest parallel is indeed Comama or, slightly less likely, Aspendos (see L. Robert, Hellenica XI-XII (1960), pp. 176–88). The colonies of Antioch, Olbasa, Comama, Cremna, Parlais or Lystra are among the possibilities, except that they are all thought to have been founded by Augustus. This issue would therefore indicate that one of them was in fact founded earlier or that there was another colony, hitherto unknown.
|
|
3
|
P
|
1981/402
|
Sternberg XI, 1981, lot 372
|
5.45
|
|
|
1
|
|
|
|
|
|
no |
no |
no |
https://gallica.bnf.fr/ark:/12148/btv1b8482934s
|
[show]
[edit]
|
| I |
5413 |
Uncertain
|
Uncertain
|
Uncertain
|
COS VIII
|
26 BC
|
Marcus Memmius Flaminius ; Titus Vomanius |
Æ (18 mm)
|
Augustus |
IMP CAESAR DIVI F AVGVSTVS COS VIII
|
bare head of Augustus, right
|
T VOMAN M MEMM FLAM QVINQ ITER
|
two goddesses with kalathos seated facing, holding patera (?)
|
FITA 143–4
|
5412-4: The above issue, struck in three denominations, has raised problems of interpretation and mint. Only 5413 and 5414 have been published before; series 5412 is unpublished. [..., see RPC I, p. 716 for full comment]. This attribution [to Heraclea] is no longer possible, now that we know that the issue was struck in 26 BC. But the problem remains insoluble: the issue was struck by a colony that had existed at least ten years in 26 BC and had been founded during the Triumvirate. All the new specimens that have turned up recently are from Turkey, though unfortunately without an exact provenance; Cilicia seems to be the only area that can be ruled out (according to E. Levante). The humped bull on 5412 might suggest that it was struck in southeastern Anatolia, and the same goes for the twin goddesses on series 5413, where the closest parallel is indeed Comama or, slightly less likely, Aspendos (see L. Robert, Hellenica XI-XII (1960), pp. 176–88). The colonies of Antioch, Olbasa, Comama, Cremna, Parlais or Lystra are among the possibilities, except that they are all thought to have been founded by Augustus. This issue would therefore indicate that one of them was in fact founded earlier or that there was another colony, hitherto unknown.
|
|
4
|
B
|
I-B
|
FITA, pl. IV, 24: rev.
|
4.42
|
|
|
1
|
|
|
|
|
|
no |
no |
no |
|
[show]
[edit]
|
| I |
5413 |
Uncertain
|
Uncertain
|
Uncertain
|
COS VIII
|
26 BC
|
Marcus Memmius Flaminius ; Titus Vomanius |
Æ (18 mm)
|
Augustus |
IMP CAESAR DIVI F AVGVSTVS COS VIII
|
bare head of Augustus, right
|
T VOMAN M MEMM FLAM QVINQ ITER
|
two goddesses with kalathos seated facing, holding patera (?)
|
FITA 143–4
|
5412-4: The above issue, struck in three denominations, has raised problems of interpretation and mint. Only 5413 and 5414 have been published before; series 5412 is unpublished. [..., see RPC I, p. 716 for full comment]. This attribution [to Heraclea] is no longer possible, now that we know that the issue was struck in 26 BC. But the problem remains insoluble: the issue was struck by a colony that had existed at least ten years in 26 BC and had been founded during the Triumvirate. All the new specimens that have turned up recently are from Turkey, though unfortunately without an exact provenance; Cilicia seems to be the only area that can be ruled out (according to E. Levante). The humped bull on 5412 might suggest that it was struck in southeastern Anatolia, and the same goes for the twin goddesses on series 5413, where the closest parallel is indeed Comama or, slightly less likely, Aspendos (see L. Robert, Hellenica XI-XII (1960), pp. 176–88). The colonies of Antioch, Olbasa, Comama, Cremna, Parlais or Lystra are among the possibilities, except that they are all thought to have been founded by Augustus. This issue would therefore indicate that one of them was in fact founded earlier or that there was another colony, hitherto unknown.
|
|
5
|
|
|
RBW = Private coll., Paris
|
5.64
|
|
|
1
|
|
|
|
|
|
no |
no |
no |
|
[show]
[edit]
|
| I |
5413 |
Uncertain
|
Uncertain
|
Uncertain
|
COS VIII
|
26 BC
|
Marcus Memmius Flaminius ; Titus Vomanius |
Æ (18 mm)
|
Augustus |
IMP CAESAR DIVI F AVGVSTVS COS VIII
|
bare head of Augustus, right
|
T VOMAN M MEMM FLAM QVINQ ITER
|
two goddesses with kalathos seated facing, holding patera (?)
|
FITA 143–4
|
5412-4: The above issue, struck in three denominations, has raised problems of interpretation and mint. Only 5413 and 5414 have been published before; series 5412 is unpublished. [..., see RPC I, p. 716 for full comment]. This attribution [to Heraclea] is no longer possible, now that we know that the issue was struck in 26 BC. But the problem remains insoluble: the issue was struck by a colony that had existed at least ten years in 26 BC and had been founded during the Triumvirate. All the new specimens that have turned up recently are from Turkey, though unfortunately without an exact provenance; Cilicia seems to be the only area that can be ruled out (according to E. Levante). The humped bull on 5412 might suggest that it was struck in southeastern Anatolia, and the same goes for the twin goddesses on series 5413, where the closest parallel is indeed Comama or, slightly less likely, Aspendos (see L. Robert, Hellenica XI-XII (1960), pp. 176–88). The colonies of Antioch, Olbasa, Comama, Cremna, Parlais or Lystra are among the possibilities, except that they are all thought to have been founded by Augustus. This issue would therefore indicate that one of them was in fact founded earlier or that there was another colony, hitherto unknown.
|
|
6
|
|
|
JSW = CNG EA 194, 20 Aug. 2008, lot 216
|
3.85
|
18
|
12
|
1
|
|
|
|
|
|
no |
no |
no |
https://www.coinarchives.com/a/openlink.php?l=305737|543|216|5b66f7241a7b121068c66d2406a428ab
|
[show]
[edit]
|
| I |
5413 |
Uncertain
|
Uncertain
|
Uncertain
|
COS VIII
|
26 BC
|
Marcus Memmius Flaminius ; Titus Vomanius |
Æ (18 mm)
|
Augustus |
IMP CAESAR DIVI F AVGVSTVS COS VIII
|
bare head of Augustus, right
|
T VOMAN M MEMM FLAM QVINQ ITER
|
two goddesses with kalathos seated facing, holding patera (?)
|
FITA 143–4
|
5412-4: The above issue, struck in three denominations, has raised problems of interpretation and mint. Only 5413 and 5414 have been published before; series 5412 is unpublished. [..., see RPC I, p. 716 for full comment]. This attribution [to Heraclea] is no longer possible, now that we know that the issue was struck in 26 BC. But the problem remains insoluble: the issue was struck by a colony that had existed at least ten years in 26 BC and had been founded during the Triumvirate. All the new specimens that have turned up recently are from Turkey, though unfortunately without an exact provenance; Cilicia seems to be the only area that can be ruled out (according to E. Levante). The humped bull on 5412 might suggest that it was struck in southeastern Anatolia, and the same goes for the twin goddesses on series 5413, where the closest parallel is indeed Comama or, slightly less likely, Aspendos (see L. Robert, Hellenica XI-XII (1960), pp. 176–88). The colonies of Antioch, Olbasa, Comama, Cremna, Parlais or Lystra are among the possibilities, except that they are all thought to have been founded by Augustus. This issue would therefore indicate that one of them was in fact founded earlier or that there was another colony, hitherto unknown.
|
|
7
|
|
|
Lindgren III, 1656
|
4.84
|
|
|
1
|
|
|
|
|
|
no |
no |
no |
|
[show]
[edit]
|
| I |
5413 |
Uncertain
|
Uncertain
|
Uncertain
|
COS VIII
|
26 BC
|
Marcus Memmius Flaminius ; Titus Vomanius |
Æ (18 mm)
|
Augustus |
IMP CAESAR DIVI F AVGVSTVS COS VIII
|
bare head of Augustus, right
|
T VOMAN M MEMM FLAM QVINQ ITER
|
two goddesses with kalathos seated facing, holding patera (?)
|
FITA 143–4
|
5412-4: The above issue, struck in three denominations, has raised problems of interpretation and mint. Only 5413 and 5414 have been published before; series 5412 is unpublished. [..., see RPC I, p. 716 for full comment]. This attribution [to Heraclea] is no longer possible, now that we know that the issue was struck in 26 BC. But the problem remains insoluble: the issue was struck by a colony that had existed at least ten years in 26 BC and had been founded during the Triumvirate. All the new specimens that have turned up recently are from Turkey, though unfortunately without an exact provenance; Cilicia seems to be the only area that can be ruled out (according to E. Levante). The humped bull on 5412 might suggest that it was struck in southeastern Anatolia, and the same goes for the twin goddesses on series 5413, where the closest parallel is indeed Comama or, slightly less likely, Aspendos (see L. Robert, Hellenica XI-XII (1960), pp. 176–88). The colonies of Antioch, Olbasa, Comama, Cremna, Parlais or Lystra are among the possibilities, except that they are all thought to have been founded by Augustus. This issue would therefore indicate that one of them was in fact founded earlier or that there was another colony, hitherto unknown.
|
|
8
|
|
|
Private coll.
|
|
|
|
1
|
|
|
|
|
said to be found in Ankara
|
no |
no |
no |
|
[show]
[edit]
|
| I |
5413 |
Uncertain
|
Uncertain
|
Uncertain
|
COS VIII
|
26 BC
|
Marcus Memmius Flaminius ; Titus Vomanius |
Æ (18 mm)
|
Augustus |
IMP CAESAR DIVI F AVGVSTVS COS VIII
|
bare head of Augustus, right
|
T VOMAN M MEMM FLAM QVINQ ITER
|
two goddesses with kalathos seated facing, holding patera (?)
|
FITA 143–4
|
5412-4: The above issue, struck in three denominations, has raised problems of interpretation and mint. Only 5413 and 5414 have been published before; series 5412 is unpublished. [..., see RPC I, p. 716 for full comment]. This attribution [to Heraclea] is no longer possible, now that we know that the issue was struck in 26 BC. But the problem remains insoluble: the issue was struck by a colony that had existed at least ten years in 26 BC and had been founded during the Triumvirate. All the new specimens that have turned up recently are from Turkey, though unfortunately without an exact provenance; Cilicia seems to be the only area that can be ruled out (according to E. Levante). The humped bull on 5412 might suggest that it was struck in southeastern Anatolia, and the same goes for the twin goddesses on series 5413, where the closest parallel is indeed Comama or, slightly less likely, Aspendos (see L. Robert, Hellenica XI-XII (1960), pp. 176–88). The colonies of Antioch, Olbasa, Comama, Cremna, Parlais or Lystra are among the possibilities, except that they are all thought to have been founded by Augustus. This issue would therefore indicate that one of them was in fact founded earlier or that there was another colony, hitherto unknown.
|
|
9
|
|
|
Naumann 92, 2 Aug. 2020, lot 408 = Naumann 96, 1 Nov. 2020, lot 270
|
4.73
|
20
|
|
1
|
|
|
|
|
|
no |
no |
yes |
|
[show]
[edit]
|
| I |
5413 |
Uncertain
|
Uncertain
|
Uncertain
|
COS VIII
|
26 BC
|
Marcus Memmius Flaminius ; Titus Vomanius |
Æ (18 mm)
|
Augustus |
IMP CAESAR DIVI F AVGVSTVS COS VIII
|
bare head of Augustus, right
|
T VOMAN M MEMM FLAM QVINQ ITER
|
two goddesses with kalathos seated facing, holding patera (?)
|
FITA 143–4
|
5412-4: The above issue, struck in three denominations, has raised problems of interpretation and mint. Only 5413 and 5414 have been published before; series 5412 is unpublished. [..., see RPC I, p. 716 for full comment]. This attribution [to Heraclea] is no longer possible, now that we know that the issue was struck in 26 BC. But the problem remains insoluble: the issue was struck by a colony that had existed at least ten years in 26 BC and had been founded during the Triumvirate. All the new specimens that have turned up recently are from Turkey, though unfortunately without an exact provenance; Cilicia seems to be the only area that can be ruled out (according to E. Levante). The humped bull on 5412 might suggest that it was struck in southeastern Anatolia, and the same goes for the twin goddesses on series 5413, where the closest parallel is indeed Comama or, slightly less likely, Aspendos (see L. Robert, Hellenica XI-XII (1960), pp. 176–88). The colonies of Antioch, Olbasa, Comama, Cremna, Parlais or Lystra are among the possibilities, except that they are all thought to have been founded by Augustus. This issue would therefore indicate that one of them was in fact founded earlier or that there was another colony, hitherto unknown.
|
|
10
|
|
|
Ares 6, 19 Jan. 2020, lot 360
|
5.46
|
20
|
|
1
|
|
|
|
|
|
no |
no |
no |
|
[show]
[edit]
|
| I |
5413 |
Uncertain
|
Uncertain
|
Uncertain
|
COS VIII
|
26 BC
|
Marcus Memmius Flaminius ; Titus Vomanius |
Æ (18 mm)
|
Augustus |
IMP CAESAR DIVI F AVGVSTVS COS VIII
|
bare head of Augustus, right
|
T VOMAN M MEMM FLAM QVINQ ITER
|
two goddesses with kalathos seated facing, holding patera (?)
|
FITA 143–4
|
5412-4: The above issue, struck in three denominations, has raised problems of interpretation and mint. Only 5413 and 5414 have been published before; series 5412 is unpublished. [..., see RPC I, p. 716 for full comment]. This attribution [to Heraclea] is no longer possible, now that we know that the issue was struck in 26 BC. But the problem remains insoluble: the issue was struck by a colony that had existed at least ten years in 26 BC and had been founded during the Triumvirate. All the new specimens that have turned up recently are from Turkey, though unfortunately without an exact provenance; Cilicia seems to be the only area that can be ruled out (according to E. Levante). The humped bull on 5412 might suggest that it was struck in southeastern Anatolia, and the same goes for the twin goddesses on series 5413, where the closest parallel is indeed Comama or, slightly less likely, Aspendos (see L. Robert, Hellenica XI-XII (1960), pp. 176–88). The colonies of Antioch, Olbasa, Comama, Cremna, Parlais or Lystra are among the possibilities, except that they are all thought to have been founded by Augustus. This issue would therefore indicate that one of them was in fact founded earlier or that there was another colony, hitherto unknown.
|
|
11
|
|
|
Rex Numismatics Rex Budget 1, 19 Aug. 2023, lot 590
|
5.3
|
19
|
|
1
|
|
|
|
|
|
no |
no |
no |
https://www.biddr.com/auctions/rexnumis/browse?a=3749&l=4334890
|
[show]
[edit]
|
| I |
5414 |
Uncertain
|
Uncertain
|
Uncertain
|
COS VIII
|
26 BC
|
Titus Vomanius ; Marcus Memmius Flaminius |
Æ (16 mm)
|
|
T VOMANIVS IIVIR QVINQ
|
head of Hercules, right; club behind neck
|
M MEMMIV FLAM QVINQ ITER
|
bust of Mercury, right, with caduceus
|
FITA 254–5
|
5412-4: The above issue, struck in three denominations, has raised problems of interpretation and mint. Only 5413 and 5414 have been published before; series 5412 is unpublished. [see RPC I, p. 716 for full comment]. This attribution [to Heraclea] is no longer possible, now that we know that the issue was struck in 26 BC. But the problem remains insoluble: the issue was struck by a colony that had existed at least ten years in 26 BC and had been founded during the Triumvirate. All the new specimens that have turned up recently are from Turkey, though unfortunately without an exact provenance; Cilicia seems to be the only area that can be ruled out (according to E. Levante). The humped bull on 5412 might suggest that it was struck in southeastern Anatolia, and the same goes for the twin goddesses on series 5413, where the closest parallel is indeed Comama or, slightly less likely, Aspendos (see L. Robert, Hellenica XI-XII (1960), pp. 176–88). The colonies of Antioch, Olbasa, Comama, Cremna, Parlais or Lystra are among the possibilities, except that they are all thought to have been founded by Augustus. This issue would therefore indicate that one of them was in fact founded earlier or that there was another colony, hitherto unknown.
|
|
1
|
P
|
|
FITA, pl. IX, 3
|
4.99
|
16
|
7
|
1
|
|
|
|
|
|
no |
no |
no |
https://gallica.bnf.fr/ark:/12148/btv1b84829356
|
[show]
[edit]
|
| I |
5414 |
Uncertain
|
Uncertain
|
Uncertain
|
COS VIII
|
26 BC
|
Titus Vomanius ; Marcus Memmius Flaminius |
Æ (16 mm)
|
|
T VOMANIVS IIVIR QVINQ
|
head of Hercules, right; club behind neck
|
M MEMMIV FLAM QVINQ ITER
|
bust of Mercury, right, with caduceus
|
FITA 254–5
|
5412-4: The above issue, struck in three denominations, has raised problems of interpretation and mint. Only 5413 and 5414 have been published before; series 5412 is unpublished. [see RPC I, p. 716 for full comment]. This attribution [to Heraclea] is no longer possible, now that we know that the issue was struck in 26 BC. But the problem remains insoluble: the issue was struck by a colony that had existed at least ten years in 26 BC and had been founded during the Triumvirate. All the new specimens that have turned up recently are from Turkey, though unfortunately without an exact provenance; Cilicia seems to be the only area that can be ruled out (according to E. Levante). The humped bull on 5412 might suggest that it was struck in southeastern Anatolia, and the same goes for the twin goddesses on series 5413, where the closest parallel is indeed Comama or, slightly less likely, Aspendos (see L. Robert, Hellenica XI-XII (1960), pp. 176–88). The colonies of Antioch, Olbasa, Comama, Cremna, Parlais or Lystra are among the possibilities, except that they are all thought to have been founded by Augustus. This issue would therefore indicate that one of them was in fact founded earlier or that there was another colony, hitherto unknown.
|
|
2
|
Mu
|
|
|
3.98
|
16
|
|
1
|
|
|
|
|
|
no |
no |
no |
|
[show]
[edit]
|
| I |
5414 |
Uncertain
|
Uncertain
|
Uncertain
|
COS VIII
|
26 BC
|
Titus Vomanius ; Marcus Memmius Flaminius |
Æ (16 mm)
|
|
T VOMANIVS IIVIR QVINQ
|
head of Hercules, right; club behind neck
|
M MEMMIV FLAM QVINQ ITER
|
bust of Mercury, right, with caduceus
|
FITA 254–5
|
5412-4: The above issue, struck in three denominations, has raised problems of interpretation and mint. Only 5413 and 5414 have been published before; series 5412 is unpublished. [see RPC I, p. 716 for full comment]. This attribution [to Heraclea] is no longer possible, now that we know that the issue was struck in 26 BC. But the problem remains insoluble: the issue was struck by a colony that had existed at least ten years in 26 BC and had been founded during the Triumvirate. All the new specimens that have turned up recently are from Turkey, though unfortunately without an exact provenance; Cilicia seems to be the only area that can be ruled out (according to E. Levante). The humped bull on 5412 might suggest that it was struck in southeastern Anatolia, and the same goes for the twin goddesses on series 5413, where the closest parallel is indeed Comama or, slightly less likely, Aspendos (see L. Robert, Hellenica XI-XII (1960), pp. 176–88). The colonies of Antioch, Olbasa, Comama, Cremna, Parlais or Lystra are among the possibilities, except that they are all thought to have been founded by Augustus. This issue would therefore indicate that one of them was in fact founded earlier or that there was another colony, hitherto unknown.
|
|
3
|
|
|
RBW, ex PV coll.
|
3.27
|
16
|
|
1
|
|
|
|
|
|
no |
no |
no |
|
[show]
[edit]
|
| I |
5414 |
Uncertain
|
Uncertain
|
Uncertain
|
COS VIII
|
26 BC
|
Titus Vomanius ; Marcus Memmius Flaminius |
Æ (16 mm)
|
|
T VOMANIVS IIVIR QVINQ
|
head of Hercules, right; club behind neck
|
M MEMMIV FLAM QVINQ ITER
|
bust of Mercury, right, with caduceus
|
FITA 254–5
|
5412-4: The above issue, struck in three denominations, has raised problems of interpretation and mint. Only 5413 and 5414 have been published before; series 5412 is unpublished. [see RPC I, p. 716 for full comment]. This attribution [to Heraclea] is no longer possible, now that we know that the issue was struck in 26 BC. But the problem remains insoluble: the issue was struck by a colony that had existed at least ten years in 26 BC and had been founded during the Triumvirate. All the new specimens that have turned up recently are from Turkey, though unfortunately without an exact provenance; Cilicia seems to be the only area that can be ruled out (according to E. Levante). The humped bull on 5412 might suggest that it was struck in southeastern Anatolia, and the same goes for the twin goddesses on series 5413, where the closest parallel is indeed Comama or, slightly less likely, Aspendos (see L. Robert, Hellenica XI-XII (1960), pp. 176–88). The colonies of Antioch, Olbasa, Comama, Cremna, Parlais or Lystra are among the possibilities, except that they are all thought to have been founded by Augustus. This issue would therefore indicate that one of them was in fact founded earlier or that there was another colony, hitherto unknown.
|
|
4
|
|
|
Jacquier Münzliste 17, Herbst '95, lot 389
|
5.02
|
|
|
1
|
|
|
|
|
|
no |
no |
no |
|
[show]
[edit]
|
| I |
5414 |
Uncertain
|
Uncertain
|
Uncertain
|
COS VIII
|
26 BC
|
Titus Vomanius ; Marcus Memmius Flaminius |
Æ (16 mm)
|
|
T VOMANIVS IIVIR QVINQ
|
head of Hercules, right; club behind neck
|
M MEMMIV FLAM QVINQ ITER
|
bust of Mercury, right, with caduceus
|
FITA 254–5
|
5412-4: The above issue, struck in three denominations, has raised problems of interpretation and mint. Only 5413 and 5414 have been published before; series 5412 is unpublished. [see RPC I, p. 716 for full comment]. This attribution [to Heraclea] is no longer possible, now that we know that the issue was struck in 26 BC. But the problem remains insoluble: the issue was struck by a colony that had existed at least ten years in 26 BC and had been founded during the Triumvirate. All the new specimens that have turned up recently are from Turkey, though unfortunately without an exact provenance; Cilicia seems to be the only area that can be ruled out (according to E. Levante). The humped bull on 5412 might suggest that it was struck in southeastern Anatolia, and the same goes for the twin goddesses on series 5413, where the closest parallel is indeed Comama or, slightly less likely, Aspendos (see L. Robert, Hellenica XI-XII (1960), pp. 176–88). The colonies of Antioch, Olbasa, Comama, Cremna, Parlais or Lystra are among the possibilities, except that they are all thought to have been founded by Augustus. This issue would therefore indicate that one of them was in fact founded earlier or that there was another colony, hitherto unknown.
|
|
5
|
|
|
RBW = Gorny & Mosch 126, 14 Oct. 2003, lot 1602
|
3.76
|
16
|
|
1
|
|
|
|
|
This new specimen confirms the expected reverse legend of M MEMMIV
|
no |
no |
no |
https://www.coinarchives.com/a/openlink.php?l=59660|63|1602|7ca7439b4c9fe8997b4653511508d567
|
[show]
[edit]
|
| I |
5414 |
Uncertain
|
Uncertain
|
Uncertain
|
COS VIII
|
26 BC
|
Titus Vomanius ; Marcus Memmius Flaminius |
Æ (16 mm)
|
|
T VOMANIVS IIVIR QVINQ
|
head of Hercules, right; club behind neck
|
M MEMMIV FLAM QVINQ ITER
|
bust of Mercury, right, with caduceus
|
FITA 254–5
|
5412-4: The above issue, struck in three denominations, has raised problems of interpretation and mint. Only 5413 and 5414 have been published before; series 5412 is unpublished. [see RPC I, p. 716 for full comment]. This attribution [to Heraclea] is no longer possible, now that we know that the issue was struck in 26 BC. But the problem remains insoluble: the issue was struck by a colony that had existed at least ten years in 26 BC and had been founded during the Triumvirate. All the new specimens that have turned up recently are from Turkey, though unfortunately without an exact provenance; Cilicia seems to be the only area that can be ruled out (according to E. Levante). The humped bull on 5412 might suggest that it was struck in southeastern Anatolia, and the same goes for the twin goddesses on series 5413, where the closest parallel is indeed Comama or, slightly less likely, Aspendos (see L. Robert, Hellenica XI-XII (1960), pp. 176–88). The colonies of Antioch, Olbasa, Comama, Cremna, Parlais or Lystra are among the possibilities, except that they are all thought to have been founded by Augustus. This issue would therefore indicate that one of them was in fact founded earlier or that there was another colony, hitherto unknown.
|
|
6
|
|
|
RBW
|
3.92
|
|
|
1
|
|
|
|
|
|
no |
no |
no |
|
[show]
[edit]
|
| I |
5414 |
Uncertain
|
Uncertain
|
Uncertain
|
COS VIII
|
26 BC
|
Titus Vomanius ; Marcus Memmius Flaminius |
Æ (16 mm)
|
|
T VOMANIVS IIVIR QVINQ
|
head of Hercules, right; club behind neck
|
M MEMMIV FLAM QVINQ ITER
|
bust of Mercury, right, with caduceus
|
FITA 254–5
|
5412-4: The above issue, struck in three denominations, has raised problems of interpretation and mint. Only 5413 and 5414 have been published before; series 5412 is unpublished. [see RPC I, p. 716 for full comment]. This attribution [to Heraclea] is no longer possible, now that we know that the issue was struck in 26 BC. But the problem remains insoluble: the issue was struck by a colony that had existed at least ten years in 26 BC and had been founded during the Triumvirate. All the new specimens that have turned up recently are from Turkey, though unfortunately without an exact provenance; Cilicia seems to be the only area that can be ruled out (according to E. Levante). The humped bull on 5412 might suggest that it was struck in southeastern Anatolia, and the same goes for the twin goddesses on series 5413, where the closest parallel is indeed Comama or, slightly less likely, Aspendos (see L. Robert, Hellenica XI-XII (1960), pp. 176–88). The colonies of Antioch, Olbasa, Comama, Cremna, Parlais or Lystra are among the possibilities, except that they are all thought to have been founded by Augustus. This issue would therefore indicate that one of them was in fact founded earlier or that there was another colony, hitherto unknown.
|
|
7
|
|
|
RBW
|
4.94
|
|
|
1
|
|
|
|
|
|
no |
no |
no |
|
[show]
[edit]
|
| I |
5414 |
Uncertain
|
Uncertain
|
Uncertain
|
COS VIII
|
26 BC
|
Titus Vomanius ; Marcus Memmius Flaminius |
Æ (16 mm)
|
|
T VOMANIVS IIVIR QVINQ
|
head of Hercules, right; club behind neck
|
M MEMMIV FLAM QVINQ ITER
|
bust of Mercury, right, with caduceus
|
FITA 254–5
|
5412-4: The above issue, struck in three denominations, has raised problems of interpretation and mint. Only 5413 and 5414 have been published before; series 5412 is unpublished. [see RPC I, p. 716 for full comment]. This attribution [to Heraclea] is no longer possible, now that we know that the issue was struck in 26 BC. But the problem remains insoluble: the issue was struck by a colony that had existed at least ten years in 26 BC and had been founded during the Triumvirate. All the new specimens that have turned up recently are from Turkey, though unfortunately without an exact provenance; Cilicia seems to be the only area that can be ruled out (according to E. Levante). The humped bull on 5412 might suggest that it was struck in southeastern Anatolia, and the same goes for the twin goddesses on series 5413, where the closest parallel is indeed Comama or, slightly less likely, Aspendos (see L. Robert, Hellenica XI-XII (1960), pp. 176–88). The colonies of Antioch, Olbasa, Comama, Cremna, Parlais or Lystra are among the possibilities, except that they are all thought to have been founded by Augustus. This issue would therefore indicate that one of them was in fact founded earlier or that there was another colony, hitherto unknown.
|
|
8
|
|
|
CGT coll.
|
3.51
|
16
|
6
|
1
|
|
|
|
GIC — (uncertain in rectangular punch) |
|
no |
no |
no |
|
[show]
[edit]
|
| I |
5414 |
Uncertain
|
Uncertain
|
Uncertain
|
COS VIII
|
26 BC
|
Titus Vomanius ; Marcus Memmius Flaminius |
Æ (16 mm)
|
|
T VOMANIVS IIVIR QVINQ
|
head of Hercules, right; club behind neck
|
M MEMMIV FLAM QVINQ ITER
|
bust of Mercury, right, with caduceus
|
FITA 254–5
|
5412-4: The above issue, struck in three denominations, has raised problems of interpretation and mint. Only 5413 and 5414 have been published before; series 5412 is unpublished. [see RPC I, p. 716 for full comment]. This attribution [to Heraclea] is no longer possible, now that we know that the issue was struck in 26 BC. But the problem remains insoluble: the issue was struck by a colony that had existed at least ten years in 26 BC and had been founded during the Triumvirate. All the new specimens that have turned up recently are from Turkey, though unfortunately without an exact provenance; Cilicia seems to be the only area that can be ruled out (according to E. Levante). The humped bull on 5412 might suggest that it was struck in southeastern Anatolia, and the same goes for the twin goddesses on series 5413, where the closest parallel is indeed Comama or, slightly less likely, Aspendos (see L. Robert, Hellenica XI-XII (1960), pp. 176–88). The colonies of Antioch, Olbasa, Comama, Cremna, Parlais or Lystra are among the possibilities, except that they are all thought to have been founded by Augustus. This issue would therefore indicate that one of them was in fact founded earlier or that there was another colony, hitherto unknown.
|
|
9
|
|
|
Naumann 85, 5 Jan. 2020, lot 204
|
2.62
|
16
|
|
1
|
|
|
|
|
|
no |
no |
yes |
|
[show]
[edit]
|
| I |
5414 |
Uncertain
|
Uncertain
|
Uncertain
|
COS VIII
|
26 BC
|
Titus Vomanius ; Marcus Memmius Flaminius |
Æ (16 mm)
|
|
T VOMANIVS IIVIR QVINQ
|
head of Hercules, right; club behind neck
|
M MEMMIV FLAM QVINQ ITER
|
bust of Mercury, right, with caduceus
|
FITA 254–5
|
5412-4: The above issue, struck in three denominations, has raised problems of interpretation and mint. Only 5413 and 5414 have been published before; series 5412 is unpublished. [see RPC I, p. 716 for full comment]. This attribution [to Heraclea] is no longer possible, now that we know that the issue was struck in 26 BC. But the problem remains insoluble: the issue was struck by a colony that had existed at least ten years in 26 BC and had been founded during the Triumvirate. All the new specimens that have turned up recently are from Turkey, though unfortunately without an exact provenance; Cilicia seems to be the only area that can be ruled out (according to E. Levante). The humped bull on 5412 might suggest that it was struck in southeastern Anatolia, and the same goes for the twin goddesses on series 5413, where the closest parallel is indeed Comama or, slightly less likely, Aspendos (see L. Robert, Hellenica XI-XII (1960), pp. 176–88). The colonies of Antioch, Olbasa, Comama, Cremna, Parlais or Lystra are among the possibilities, except that they are all thought to have been founded by Augustus. This issue would therefore indicate that one of them was in fact founded earlier or that there was another colony, hitherto unknown.
|
|
10
|
|
|
Damaris Numismatics Biweekly Auction 1, 4 June 2022, lot 439
|
3.42
|
16
|
12
|
1
|
|
|
|
|
|
no |
no |
no |
|
[show]
[edit]
|
| I |
5415 |
Uncertain
|
Uncertain
|
Uncertain
|
COS IX
|
25 BC
|
Marcus Acilius Glabrio |
Æ (28 mm)
|
Augustus |
IMP CAESAR DIVI F AVGVSTVS COS IX
|
bare head of Augustus, right, crowned by Victory, standing left
|
M ACILIVS GLABRIO PRO COS
|
heads face to face of Marcellus (on left) and Julia (on right)
|
FITA 81; RIM 27–9
|
The series struck in the name of the proconsul M. Acilius Glabrio is dated to 25 BC, as Augustus is consul for the ninth time. But the coins lack any indication of mint. Babelon, when publishing the specimen of the Waddington collection (RN 1898, p. 629), was the first to propose the attribution of this series to Africa. It is clear that he had in mind the inscription from Ephesus published by Boeckh (GIG 11, 2679), where an Acilius Glabrio is entitled ἀνθύπατος Ἀφρίκ[η]ς, though the Fasti of Africa do not mention a Glabrio as proconsul. This attribution was accepted by Grant, FITA, pp. 81-2, who was inclined to assign the series to a Byzacenian mint. But Groag and Stein (PIR 12, A 71) had already stated that the Ephesian inscription was to be dated to the first century AD and could not refer to the consul suffectus of 33 BC. Therefore the attribution of this series to Africa must really be questioned, and M. Acilus Glabrio's inclusion among proconsuls of Africa is not certain. (Thomasson includes him but not Pflaum.) This series is known from a reasonable number of specimens, but unfortunately they all lack a provenance. The coins are struck on flans with round edges, which excludes Byzacene; if African, a mint like Utica might be proposed. This series has a diameter of 27-31 mm and a weight of 14.88 g, and presumably represents a dupondius. The identification of the portraits on the reverse is problematic. Babelon proposed Caesar and Octavia. But the male head seems too youthful for Caesar. An attribution to Agrippa is possible in 25 BC, but it would be difficult to find a suitable partner for him. The same is true if the female portrait is identified as Octavia. Therefore the solution proposed by Grant is tentatively accepted here: in 25 BC Marcellus married Julia and Glabrio portrayed him and his wife.
|
Axis: 6 or 12
|
1
|
L
|
1854,0617.98
|
|
21.09
|
|
|
1
|
|
|
|
|
|
no |
no |
no |
|
[show]
[edit]
|
| I |
5415 |
Uncertain
|
Uncertain
|
Uncertain
|
COS IX
|
25 BC
|
Marcus Acilius Glabrio |
Æ (28 mm)
|
Augustus |
IMP CAESAR DIVI F AVGVSTVS COS IX
|
bare head of Augustus, right, crowned by Victory, standing left
|
M ACILIVS GLABRIO PRO COS
|
heads face to face of Marcellus (on left) and Julia (on right)
|
FITA 81; RIM 27–9
|
The series struck in the name of the proconsul M. Acilius Glabrio is dated to 25 BC, as Augustus is consul for the ninth time. But the coins lack any indication of mint. Babelon, when publishing the specimen of the Waddington collection (RN 1898, p. 629), was the first to propose the attribution of this series to Africa. It is clear that he had in mind the inscription from Ephesus published by Boeckh (GIG 11, 2679), where an Acilius Glabrio is entitled ἀνθύπατος Ἀφρίκ[η]ς, though the Fasti of Africa do not mention a Glabrio as proconsul. This attribution was accepted by Grant, FITA, pp. 81-2, who was inclined to assign the series to a Byzacenian mint. But Groag and Stein (PIR 12, A 71) had already stated that the Ephesian inscription was to be dated to the first century AD and could not refer to the consul suffectus of 33 BC. Therefore the attribution of this series to Africa must really be questioned, and M. Acilus Glabrio's inclusion among proconsuls of Africa is not certain. (Thomasson includes him but not Pflaum.) This series is known from a reasonable number of specimens, but unfortunately they all lack a provenance. The coins are struck on flans with round edges, which excludes Byzacene; if African, a mint like Utica might be proposed. This series has a diameter of 27-31 mm and a weight of 14.88 g, and presumably represents a dupondius. The identification of the portraits on the reverse is problematic. Babelon proposed Caesar and Octavia. But the male head seems too youthful for Caesar. An attribution to Agrippa is possible in 25 BC, but it would be difficult to find a suitable partner for him. The same is true if the female portrait is identified as Octavia. Therefore the solution proposed by Grant is tentatively accepted here: in 25 BC Marcellus married Julia and Glabrio portrayed him and his wife.
|
Axis: 6 or 12
|
2
|
P
|
1064
|
FITA, pl. I, 23
|
12.41
|
|
|
1
|
|
|
|
|
|
no |
no |
no |
https://gallica.bnf.fr/ark:/12148/btv1b84833964
|
[show]
[edit]
|
| I |
5415 |
Uncertain
|
Uncertain
|
Uncertain
|
COS IX
|
25 BC
|
Marcus Acilius Glabrio |
Æ (28 mm)
|
Augustus |
IMP CAESAR DIVI F AVGVSTVS COS IX
|
bare head of Augustus, right, crowned by Victory, standing left
|
M ACILIVS GLABRIO PRO COS
|
heads face to face of Marcellus (on left) and Julia (on right)
|
FITA 81; RIM 27–9
|
The series struck in the name of the proconsul M. Acilius Glabrio is dated to 25 BC, as Augustus is consul for the ninth time. But the coins lack any indication of mint. Babelon, when publishing the specimen of the Waddington collection (RN 1898, p. 629), was the first to propose the attribution of this series to Africa. It is clear that he had in mind the inscription from Ephesus published by Boeckh (GIG 11, 2679), where an Acilius Glabrio is entitled ἀνθύπατος Ἀφρίκ[η]ς, though the Fasti of Africa do not mention a Glabrio as proconsul. This attribution was accepted by Grant, FITA, pp. 81-2, who was inclined to assign the series to a Byzacenian mint. But Groag and Stein (PIR 12, A 71) had already stated that the Ephesian inscription was to be dated to the first century AD and could not refer to the consul suffectus of 33 BC. Therefore the attribution of this series to Africa must really be questioned, and M. Acilus Glabrio's inclusion among proconsuls of Africa is not certain. (Thomasson includes him but not Pflaum.) This series is known from a reasonable number of specimens, but unfortunately they all lack a provenance. The coins are struck on flans with round edges, which excludes Byzacene; if African, a mint like Utica might be proposed. This series has a diameter of 27-31 mm and a weight of 14.88 g, and presumably represents a dupondius. The identification of the portraits on the reverse is problematic. Babelon proposed Caesar and Octavia. But the male head seems too youthful for Caesar. An attribution to Agrippa is possible in 25 BC, but it would be difficult to find a suitable partner for him. The same is true if the female portrait is identified as Octavia. Therefore the solution proposed by Grant is tentatively accepted here: in 25 BC Marcellus married Julia and Glabrio portrayed him and his wife.
|
Axis: 6 or 12
|
3
|
P
|
1065
|
|
15.47
|
|
|
1
|
|
|
|
|
|
no |
no |
no |
https://gallica.bnf.fr/ark:/12148/btv1b8483397j
|
[show]
[edit]
|
| I |
5415 |
Uncertain
|
Uncertain
|
Uncertain
|
COS IX
|
25 BC
|
Marcus Acilius Glabrio |
Æ (28 mm)
|
Augustus |
IMP CAESAR DIVI F AVGVSTVS COS IX
|
bare head of Augustus, right, crowned by Victory, standing left
|
M ACILIVS GLABRIO PRO COS
|
heads face to face of Marcellus (on left) and Julia (on right)
|
FITA 81; RIM 27–9
|
The series struck in the name of the proconsul M. Acilius Glabrio is dated to 25 BC, as Augustus is consul for the ninth time. But the coins lack any indication of mint. Babelon, when publishing the specimen of the Waddington collection (RN 1898, p. 629), was the first to propose the attribution of this series to Africa. It is clear that he had in mind the inscription from Ephesus published by Boeckh (GIG 11, 2679), where an Acilius Glabrio is entitled ἀνθύπατος Ἀφρίκ[η]ς, though the Fasti of Africa do not mention a Glabrio as proconsul. This attribution was accepted by Grant, FITA, pp. 81-2, who was inclined to assign the series to a Byzacenian mint. But Groag and Stein (PIR 12, A 71) had already stated that the Ephesian inscription was to be dated to the first century AD and could not refer to the consul suffectus of 33 BC. Therefore the attribution of this series to Africa must really be questioned, and M. Acilus Glabrio's inclusion among proconsuls of Africa is not certain. (Thomasson includes him but not Pflaum.) This series is known from a reasonable number of specimens, but unfortunately they all lack a provenance. The coins are struck on flans with round edges, which excludes Byzacene; if African, a mint like Utica might be proposed. This series has a diameter of 27-31 mm and a weight of 14.88 g, and presumably represents a dupondius. The identification of the portraits on the reverse is problematic. Babelon proposed Caesar and Octavia. But the male head seems too youthful for Caesar. An attribution to Agrippa is possible in 25 BC, but it would be difficult to find a suitable partner for him. The same is true if the female portrait is identified as Octavia. Therefore the solution proposed by Grant is tentatively accepted here: in 25 BC Marcellus married Julia and Glabrio portrayed him and his wife.
|
Axis: 6 or 12
|
4
|
P
|
|
Wa 7449
|
11.91
|
|
|
1
|
|
|
|
|
|
no |
no |
yes |
https://gallica.bnf.fr/ark:/12148/btv1b8483398z
|
[show]
[edit]
|
| I |
5415 |
Uncertain
|
Uncertain
|
Uncertain
|
COS IX
|
25 BC
|
Marcus Acilius Glabrio |
Æ (28 mm)
|
Augustus |
IMP CAESAR DIVI F AVGVSTVS COS IX
|
bare head of Augustus, right, crowned by Victory, standing left
|
M ACILIVS GLABRIO PRO COS
|
heads face to face of Marcellus (on left) and Julia (on right)
|
FITA 81; RIM 27–9
|
The series struck in the name of the proconsul M. Acilius Glabrio is dated to 25 BC, as Augustus is consul for the ninth time. But the coins lack any indication of mint. Babelon, when publishing the specimen of the Waddington collection (RN 1898, p. 629), was the first to propose the attribution of this series to Africa. It is clear that he had in mind the inscription from Ephesus published by Boeckh (GIG 11, 2679), where an Acilius Glabrio is entitled ἀνθύπατος Ἀφρίκ[η]ς, though the Fasti of Africa do not mention a Glabrio as proconsul. This attribution was accepted by Grant, FITA, pp. 81-2, who was inclined to assign the series to a Byzacenian mint. But Groag and Stein (PIR 12, A 71) had already stated that the Ephesian inscription was to be dated to the first century AD and could not refer to the consul suffectus of 33 BC. Therefore the attribution of this series to Africa must really be questioned, and M. Acilus Glabrio's inclusion among proconsuls of Africa is not certain. (Thomasson includes him but not Pflaum.) This series is known from a reasonable number of specimens, but unfortunately they all lack a provenance. The coins are struck on flans with round edges, which excludes Byzacene; if African, a mint like Utica might be proposed. This series has a diameter of 27-31 mm and a weight of 14.88 g, and presumably represents a dupondius. The identification of the portraits on the reverse is problematic. Babelon proposed Caesar and Octavia. But the male head seems too youthful for Caesar. An attribution to Agrippa is possible in 25 BC, but it would be difficult to find a suitable partner for him. The same is true if the female portrait is identified as Octavia. Therefore the solution proposed by Grant is tentatively accepted here: in 25 BC Marcellus married Julia and Glabrio portrayed him and his wife.
|
Axis: 6 or 12
|
5
|
P
|
D'Ailly 17428
|
|
12.19
|
|
|
1
|
|
|
|
|
|
no |
no |
no |
https://gallica.bnf.fr/ark:/12148/btv1b8483399c
|
[show]
[edit]
|
| I |
5415 |
Uncertain
|
Uncertain
|
Uncertain
|
COS IX
|
25 BC
|
Marcus Acilius Glabrio |
Æ (28 mm)
|
Augustus |
IMP CAESAR DIVI F AVGVSTVS COS IX
|
bare head of Augustus, right, crowned by Victory, standing left
|
M ACILIVS GLABRIO PRO COS
|
heads face to face of Marcellus (on left) and Julia (on right)
|
FITA 81; RIM 27–9
|
The series struck in the name of the proconsul M. Acilius Glabrio is dated to 25 BC, as Augustus is consul for the ninth time. But the coins lack any indication of mint. Babelon, when publishing the specimen of the Waddington collection (RN 1898, p. 629), was the first to propose the attribution of this series to Africa. It is clear that he had in mind the inscription from Ephesus published by Boeckh (GIG 11, 2679), where an Acilius Glabrio is entitled ἀνθύπατος Ἀφρίκ[η]ς, though the Fasti of Africa do not mention a Glabrio as proconsul. This attribution was accepted by Grant, FITA, pp. 81-2, who was inclined to assign the series to a Byzacenian mint. But Groag and Stein (PIR 12, A 71) had already stated that the Ephesian inscription was to be dated to the first century AD and could not refer to the consul suffectus of 33 BC. Therefore the attribution of this series to Africa must really be questioned, and M. Acilus Glabrio's inclusion among proconsuls of Africa is not certain. (Thomasson includes him but not Pflaum.) This series is known from a reasonable number of specimens, but unfortunately they all lack a provenance. The coins are struck on flans with round edges, which excludes Byzacene; if African, a mint like Utica might be proposed. This series has a diameter of 27-31 mm and a weight of 14.88 g, and presumably represents a dupondius. The identification of the portraits on the reverse is problematic. Babelon proposed Caesar and Octavia. But the male head seems too youthful for Caesar. An attribution to Agrippa is possible in 25 BC, but it would be difficult to find a suitable partner for him. The same is true if the female portrait is identified as Octavia. Therefore the solution proposed by Grant is tentatively accepted here: in 25 BC Marcellus married Julia and Glabrio portrayed him and his wife.
|
Axis: 6 or 12
|
6
|
V
|
GR 27335
|
|
15.27
|
|
|
1
|
|
|
|
|
|
no |
no |
no |
|
[show]
[edit]
|
| I |
5415 |
Uncertain
|
Uncertain
|
Uncertain
|
COS IX
|
25 BC
|
Marcus Acilius Glabrio |
Æ (28 mm)
|
Augustus |
IMP CAESAR DIVI F AVGVSTVS COS IX
|
bare head of Augustus, right, crowned by Victory, standing left
|
M ACILIVS GLABRIO PRO COS
|
heads face to face of Marcellus (on left) and Julia (on right)
|
FITA 81; RIM 27–9
|
The series struck in the name of the proconsul M. Acilius Glabrio is dated to 25 BC, as Augustus is consul for the ninth time. But the coins lack any indication of mint. Babelon, when publishing the specimen of the Waddington collection (RN 1898, p. 629), was the first to propose the attribution of this series to Africa. It is clear that he had in mind the inscription from Ephesus published by Boeckh (GIG 11, 2679), where an Acilius Glabrio is entitled ἀνθύπατος Ἀφρίκ[η]ς, though the Fasti of Africa do not mention a Glabrio as proconsul. This attribution was accepted by Grant, FITA, pp. 81-2, who was inclined to assign the series to a Byzacenian mint. But Groag and Stein (PIR 12, A 71) had already stated that the Ephesian inscription was to be dated to the first century AD and could not refer to the consul suffectus of 33 BC. Therefore the attribution of this series to Africa must really be questioned, and M. Acilus Glabrio's inclusion among proconsuls of Africa is not certain. (Thomasson includes him but not Pflaum.) This series is known from a reasonable number of specimens, but unfortunately they all lack a provenance. The coins are struck on flans with round edges, which excludes Byzacene; if African, a mint like Utica might be proposed. This series has a diameter of 27-31 mm and a weight of 14.88 g, and presumably represents a dupondius. The identification of the portraits on the reverse is problematic. Babelon proposed Caesar and Octavia. But the male head seems too youthful for Caesar. An attribution to Agrippa is possible in 25 BC, but it would be difficult to find a suitable partner for him. The same is true if the female portrait is identified as Octavia. Therefore the solution proposed by Grant is tentatively accepted here: in 25 BC Marcellus married Julia and Glabrio portrayed him and his wife.
|
Axis: 6 or 12
|
7
|
V
|
|
|
13.66
|
|
|
1
|
|
|
|
|
|
no |
no |
no |
|
[show]
[edit]
|
| I |
5415 |
Uncertain
|
Uncertain
|
Uncertain
|
COS IX
|
25 BC
|
Marcus Acilius Glabrio |
Æ (28 mm)
|
Augustus |
IMP CAESAR DIVI F AVGVSTVS COS IX
|
bare head of Augustus, right, crowned by Victory, standing left
|
M ACILIVS GLABRIO PRO COS
|
heads face to face of Marcellus (on left) and Julia (on right)
|
FITA 81; RIM 27–9
|
The series struck in the name of the proconsul M. Acilius Glabrio is dated to 25 BC, as Augustus is consul for the ninth time. But the coins lack any indication of mint. Babelon, when publishing the specimen of the Waddington collection (RN 1898, p. 629), was the first to propose the attribution of this series to Africa. It is clear that he had in mind the inscription from Ephesus published by Boeckh (GIG 11, 2679), where an Acilius Glabrio is entitled ἀνθύπατος Ἀφρίκ[η]ς, though the Fasti of Africa do not mention a Glabrio as proconsul. This attribution was accepted by Grant, FITA, pp. 81-2, who was inclined to assign the series to a Byzacenian mint. But Groag and Stein (PIR 12, A 71) had already stated that the Ephesian inscription was to be dated to the first century AD and could not refer to the consul suffectus of 33 BC. Therefore the attribution of this series to Africa must really be questioned, and M. Acilus Glabrio's inclusion among proconsuls of Africa is not certain. (Thomasson includes him but not Pflaum.) This series is known from a reasonable number of specimens, but unfortunately they all lack a provenance. The coins are struck on flans with round edges, which excludes Byzacene; if African, a mint like Utica might be proposed. This series has a diameter of 27-31 mm and a weight of 14.88 g, and presumably represents a dupondius. The identification of the portraits on the reverse is problematic. Babelon proposed Caesar and Octavia. But the male head seems too youthful for Caesar. An attribution to Agrippa is possible in 25 BC, but it would be difficult to find a suitable partner for him. The same is true if the female portrait is identified as Octavia. Therefore the solution proposed by Grant is tentatively accepted here: in 25 BC Marcellus married Julia and Glabrio portrayed him and his wife.
|
Axis: 6 or 12
|
8
|
|
|
PV
|
17.05
|
|
|
1
|
|
|
|
|
|
no |
no |
no |
|
[show]
[edit]
|
| I |
5415 |
Uncertain
|
Uncertain
|
Uncertain
|
COS IX
|
25 BC
|
Marcus Acilius Glabrio |
Æ (28 mm)
|
Augustus |
IMP CAESAR DIVI F AVGVSTVS COS IX
|
bare head of Augustus, right, crowned by Victory, standing left
|
M ACILIVS GLABRIO PRO COS
|
heads face to face of Marcellus (on left) and Julia (on right)
|
FITA 81; RIM 27–9
|
The series struck in the name of the proconsul M. Acilius Glabrio is dated to 25 BC, as Augustus is consul for the ninth time. But the coins lack any indication of mint. Babelon, when publishing the specimen of the Waddington collection (RN 1898, p. 629), was the first to propose the attribution of this series to Africa. It is clear that he had in mind the inscription from Ephesus published by Boeckh (GIG 11, 2679), where an Acilius Glabrio is entitled ἀνθύπατος Ἀφρίκ[η]ς, though the Fasti of Africa do not mention a Glabrio as proconsul. This attribution was accepted by Grant, FITA, pp. 81-2, who was inclined to assign the series to a Byzacenian mint. But Groag and Stein (PIR 12, A 71) had already stated that the Ephesian inscription was to be dated to the first century AD and could not refer to the consul suffectus of 33 BC. Therefore the attribution of this series to Africa must really be questioned, and M. Acilus Glabrio's inclusion among proconsuls of Africa is not certain. (Thomasson includes him but not Pflaum.) This series is known from a reasonable number of specimens, but unfortunately they all lack a provenance. The coins are struck on flans with round edges, which excludes Byzacene; if African, a mint like Utica might be proposed. This series has a diameter of 27-31 mm and a weight of 14.88 g, and presumably represents a dupondius. The identification of the portraits on the reverse is problematic. Babelon proposed Caesar and Octavia. But the male head seems too youthful for Caesar. An attribution to Agrippa is possible in 25 BC, but it would be difficult to find a suitable partner for him. The same is true if the female portrait is identified as Octavia. Therefore the solution proposed by Grant is tentatively accepted here: in 25 BC Marcellus married Julia and Glabrio portrayed him and his wife.
|
Axis: 6 or 12
|
9
|
|
|
Glendining, Platt Hall Coll. I, 19 July 1950, lot 856 = RIM 27, fig. 6
|
|
|
|
1
|
|
|
|
|
|
no |
no |
no |
|
[show]
[edit]
|
| I |
5415 |
Uncertain
|
Uncertain
|
Uncertain
|
COS IX
|
25 BC
|
Marcus Acilius Glabrio |
Æ (28 mm)
|
Augustus |
IMP CAESAR DIVI F AVGVSTVS COS IX
|
bare head of Augustus, right, crowned by Victory, standing left
|
M ACILIVS GLABRIO PRO COS
|
heads face to face of Marcellus (on left) and Julia (on right)
|
FITA 81; RIM 27–9
|
The series struck in the name of the proconsul M. Acilius Glabrio is dated to 25 BC, as Augustus is consul for the ninth time. But the coins lack any indication of mint. Babelon, when publishing the specimen of the Waddington collection (RN 1898, p. 629), was the first to propose the attribution of this series to Africa. It is clear that he had in mind the inscription from Ephesus published by Boeckh (GIG 11, 2679), where an Acilius Glabrio is entitled ἀνθύπατος Ἀφρίκ[η]ς, though the Fasti of Africa do not mention a Glabrio as proconsul. This attribution was accepted by Grant, FITA, pp. 81-2, who was inclined to assign the series to a Byzacenian mint. But Groag and Stein (PIR 12, A 71) had already stated that the Ephesian inscription was to be dated to the first century AD and could not refer to the consul suffectus of 33 BC. Therefore the attribution of this series to Africa must really be questioned, and M. Acilus Glabrio's inclusion among proconsuls of Africa is not certain. (Thomasson includes him but not Pflaum.) This series is known from a reasonable number of specimens, but unfortunately they all lack a provenance. The coins are struck on flans with round edges, which excludes Byzacene; if African, a mint like Utica might be proposed. This series has a diameter of 27-31 mm and a weight of 14.88 g, and presumably represents a dupondius. The identification of the portraits on the reverse is problematic. Babelon proposed Caesar and Octavia. But the male head seems too youthful for Caesar. An attribution to Agrippa is possible in 25 BC, but it would be difficult to find a suitable partner for him. The same is true if the female portrait is identified as Octavia. Therefore the solution proposed by Grant is tentatively accepted here: in 25 BC Marcellus married Julia and Glabrio portrayed him and his wife.
|
Axis: 6 or 12
|
10
|
|
|
Münzen&Medaillen AG 13, 1954, lot 965
|
|
|
|
1
|
|
|
|
|
|
no |
no |
no |
|
[show]
[edit]
|
| I |
5415 |
Uncertain
|
Uncertain
|
Uncertain
|
COS IX
|
25 BC
|
Marcus Acilius Glabrio |
Æ (28 mm)
|
Augustus |
IMP CAESAR DIVI F AVGVSTVS COS IX
|
bare head of Augustus, right, crowned by Victory, standing left
|
M ACILIVS GLABRIO PRO COS
|
heads face to face of Marcellus (on left) and Julia (on right)
|
FITA 81; RIM 27–9
|
The series struck in the name of the proconsul M. Acilius Glabrio is dated to 25 BC, as Augustus is consul for the ninth time. But the coins lack any indication of mint. Babelon, when publishing the specimen of the Waddington collection (RN 1898, p. 629), was the first to propose the attribution of this series to Africa. It is clear that he had in mind the inscription from Ephesus published by Boeckh (GIG 11, 2679), where an Acilius Glabrio is entitled ἀνθύπατος Ἀφρίκ[η]ς, though the Fasti of Africa do not mention a Glabrio as proconsul. This attribution was accepted by Grant, FITA, pp. 81-2, who was inclined to assign the series to a Byzacenian mint. But Groag and Stein (PIR 12, A 71) had already stated that the Ephesian inscription was to be dated to the first century AD and could not refer to the consul suffectus of 33 BC. Therefore the attribution of this series to Africa must really be questioned, and M. Acilus Glabrio's inclusion among proconsuls of Africa is not certain. (Thomasson includes him but not Pflaum.) This series is known from a reasonable number of specimens, but unfortunately they all lack a provenance. The coins are struck on flans with round edges, which excludes Byzacene; if African, a mint like Utica might be proposed. This series has a diameter of 27-31 mm and a weight of 14.88 g, and presumably represents a dupondius. The identification of the portraits on the reverse is problematic. Babelon proposed Caesar and Octavia. But the male head seems too youthful for Caesar. An attribution to Agrippa is possible in 25 BC, but it would be difficult to find a suitable partner for him. The same is true if the female portrait is identified as Octavia. Therefore the solution proposed by Grant is tentatively accepted here: in 25 BC Marcellus married Julia and Glabrio portrayed him and his wife.
|
Axis: 6 or 12
|
11
|
Rome
|
|
Gnecchi, RIN 2 (1889), 153–6, n. 2, pl. III, 16, rev.
|
|
|
|
1
|
|
|
|
|
'Tiberius and Livia'
|
no |
no |
no |
|
[show]
[edit]
|
| I |
5416A |
Uncertain
|
Uncertain
|
Uncertain
|
|
|
|
Æ (21 mm)
|
Augustus |
[IM]P CAES. COLONIAE IVLIAE [ ]A[ N?]SIS
|
head of Augustus, right
|
[ ]IIVIR ITER (?)
|
Athena/Roma standing facing, head left, holding Victoria on her right hand, her left resting on spear and shield; on right field, signum (?)
|
P. Villemur, Une monnaie inédite d'une colonie julienne: Cassandrée en Macédoine?, BSFN 77.02, Février 2022, pp. 35-41.
|
|
|
1
|
|
|
P. Villemur coll. (ex Zeus EA 21, 26 Dec. 2021, lot 419)
|
6.98
|
21
|
12
|
1
|
|
|
|
|
|
no |
no |
yes |
|
[show]
[edit]
|
| I |
5416 |
Uncertain
|
Uncertain
|
Uncertain
|
|
|
|
Bronze (29 mm)
|
Augustus |
|
bare head of Augustus, right
|
|
prow with superstructure, right
|
FITA 82–4
|
Original comment: "This series of rare bronze coins raises problems of interpretation. It was assigned to Gaul by Sydenham (NG I9I7, p. 58) and to a date of c. 40-38 BC. But Grant, FITA, pp. 82-3, easily disproved this early date: Augustus's portrait indicates that these bronzes are post-Actian. It remains to determine the mint. The discovery of one specimen (5416/5) in the neighbourhood of Istanbul, and supposed stylistic similarities with Macedonian issues, led Grant to propose a Macedonian series ordered by M. Antonius Primus, proconsul of the province in 23 BC (FITA, pp. 83-4). This solution, however, seems highly implausible, and it is better to return to a Gallic mint for the following reasons: (I) the form of the prow with superstructure is paralleled at Copia (5I4-I5), Vienna (5I7) andArausio? (533); (2) a second provenance is now recorded: specimen 54I6/7 was bought in Lyon before I910. Even if Grant did not see any of these coins among the 847 Augustan Gallic aes he examined in the south of France, the mere fact that three coins are in the P collection favours a Gallic origin; (3) the double-bevelled edge of the present series and the careful die-setting at twelve o'clock recall the C. I. V. issue (517). Therefore a Gallic mint is suggested here, and a date of c. 30-25 BC.Three unpublished analyses reveal that these coins are made of bronze (91% of copper+ 6% of tin and 3% of lead). The denomination struck was probably an as, but the series of Arausio (?) (533), which has exactly the same weight, is considered by Amandry as a dupondius (GENE, April-June 1986, pp. 21-34)." A Gallic mint was favoured by the printed volume of RPC I (1992), but Richard Ashton points out some provenances that suggest Asia is also a possibility. Although 5416/7 was bought in Lyon, 5416/5 was found near Istanbul; two new specimens come from Turkey (12-13) and one other has a Balkan provenance (14).
|
|
1
|
P
|
4643
|
FITA, pl. III, 14, rev.
|
14.75
|
|
12
|
1
|
|
|
|
|
|
no |
no |
no |
https://gallica.bnf.fr/ark:/12148/btv1b112930438
|
[show]
[edit]
|
| I |
5416 |
Uncertain
|
Uncertain
|
Uncertain
|
|
|
|
Bronze (29 mm)
|
Augustus |
|
bare head of Augustus, right
|
|
prow with superstructure, right
|
FITA 82–4
|
Original comment: "This series of rare bronze coins raises problems of interpretation. It was assigned to Gaul by Sydenham (NG I9I7, p. 58) and to a date of c. 40-38 BC. But Grant, FITA, pp. 82-3, easily disproved this early date: Augustus's portrait indicates that these bronzes are post-Actian. It remains to determine the mint. The discovery of one specimen (5416/5) in the neighbourhood of Istanbul, and supposed stylistic similarities with Macedonian issues, led Grant to propose a Macedonian series ordered by M. Antonius Primus, proconsul of the province in 23 BC (FITA, pp. 83-4). This solution, however, seems highly implausible, and it is better to return to a Gallic mint for the following reasons: (I) the form of the prow with superstructure is paralleled at Copia (5I4-I5), Vienna (5I7) andArausio? (533); (2) a second provenance is now recorded: specimen 54I6/7 was bought in Lyon before I910. Even if Grant did not see any of these coins among the 847 Augustan Gallic aes he examined in the south of France, the mere fact that three coins are in the P collection favours a Gallic origin; (3) the double-bevelled edge of the present series and the careful die-setting at twelve o'clock recall the C. I. V. issue (517). Therefore a Gallic mint is suggested here, and a date of c. 30-25 BC.Three unpublished analyses reveal that these coins are made of bronze (91% of copper+ 6% of tin and 3% of lead). The denomination struck was probably an as, but the series of Arausio (?) (533), which has exactly the same weight, is considered by Amandry as a dupondius (GENE, April-June 1986, pp. 21-34)." A Gallic mint was favoured by the printed volume of RPC I (1992), but Richard Ashton points out some provenances that suggest Asia is also a possibility. Although 5416/7 was bought in Lyon, 5416/5 was found near Istanbul; two new specimens come from Turkey (12-13) and one other has a Balkan provenance (14).
|
|
2
|
P
|
D'Ailly 11284
|
|
21.19
|
|
12
|
1
|
|
|
|
|
|
no |
no |
no |
https://gallica.bnf.fr/ark:/12148/btv1b11293042t
|
[show]
[edit]
|
| I |
5416 |
Uncertain
|
Uncertain
|
Uncertain
|
|
|
|
Bronze (29 mm)
|
Augustus |
|
bare head of Augustus, right
|
|
prow with superstructure, right
|
FITA 82–4
|
Original comment: "This series of rare bronze coins raises problems of interpretation. It was assigned to Gaul by Sydenham (NG I9I7, p. 58) and to a date of c. 40-38 BC. But Grant, FITA, pp. 82-3, easily disproved this early date: Augustus's portrait indicates that these bronzes are post-Actian. It remains to determine the mint. The discovery of one specimen (5416/5) in the neighbourhood of Istanbul, and supposed stylistic similarities with Macedonian issues, led Grant to propose a Macedonian series ordered by M. Antonius Primus, proconsul of the province in 23 BC (FITA, pp. 83-4). This solution, however, seems highly implausible, and it is better to return to a Gallic mint for the following reasons: (I) the form of the prow with superstructure is paralleled at Copia (5I4-I5), Vienna (5I7) andArausio? (533); (2) a second provenance is now recorded: specimen 54I6/7 was bought in Lyon before I910. Even if Grant did not see any of these coins among the 847 Augustan Gallic aes he examined in the south of France, the mere fact that three coins are in the P collection favours a Gallic origin; (3) the double-bevelled edge of the present series and the careful die-setting at twelve o'clock recall the C. I. V. issue (517). Therefore a Gallic mint is suggested here, and a date of c. 30-25 BC.Three unpublished analyses reveal that these coins are made of bronze (91% of copper+ 6% of tin and 3% of lead). The denomination struck was probably an as, but the series of Arausio (?) (533), which has exactly the same weight, is considered by Amandry as a dupondius (GENE, April-June 1986, pp. 21-34)." A Gallic mint was favoured by the printed volume of RPC I (1992), but Richard Ashton points out some provenances that suggest Asia is also a possibility. Although 5416/7 was bought in Lyon, 5416/5 was found near Istanbul; two new specimens come from Turkey (12-13) and one other has a Balkan provenance (14).
|
|
3
|
P
|
1979/223
|
|
16.68
|
|
12
|
1
|
|
|
|
|
|
no |
no |
no |
https://gallica.bnf.fr/ark:/12148/btv1b11293041c
|
[show]
[edit]
|
| I |
5416 |
Uncertain
|
Uncertain
|
Uncertain
|
|
|
|
Bronze (29 mm)
|
Augustus |
|
bare head of Augustus, right
|
|
prow with superstructure, right
|
FITA 82–4
|
Original comment: "This series of rare bronze coins raises problems of interpretation. It was assigned to Gaul by Sydenham (NG I9I7, p. 58) and to a date of c. 40-38 BC. But Grant, FITA, pp. 82-3, easily disproved this early date: Augustus's portrait indicates that these bronzes are post-Actian. It remains to determine the mint. The discovery of one specimen (5416/5) in the neighbourhood of Istanbul, and supposed stylistic similarities with Macedonian issues, led Grant to propose a Macedonian series ordered by M. Antonius Primus, proconsul of the province in 23 BC (FITA, pp. 83-4). This solution, however, seems highly implausible, and it is better to return to a Gallic mint for the following reasons: (I) the form of the prow with superstructure is paralleled at Copia (5I4-I5), Vienna (5I7) andArausio? (533); (2) a second provenance is now recorded: specimen 54I6/7 was bought in Lyon before I910. Even if Grant did not see any of these coins among the 847 Augustan Gallic aes he examined in the south of France, the mere fact that three coins are in the P collection favours a Gallic origin; (3) the double-bevelled edge of the present series and the careful die-setting at twelve o'clock recall the C. I. V. issue (517). Therefore a Gallic mint is suggested here, and a date of c. 30-25 BC.Three unpublished analyses reveal that these coins are made of bronze (91% of copper+ 6% of tin and 3% of lead). The denomination struck was probably an as, but the series of Arausio (?) (533), which has exactly the same weight, is considered by Amandry as a dupondius (GENE, April-June 1986, pp. 21-34)." A Gallic mint was favoured by the printed volume of RPC I (1992), but Richard Ashton points out some provenances that suggest Asia is also a possibility. Although 5416/7 was bought in Lyon, 5416/5 was found near Istanbul; two new specimens come from Turkey (12-13) and one other has a Balkan provenance (14).
|
|
4
|
B
|
537/1911
|
FITA, pl. III, 13, obv.
|
18.99
|
|
12
|
1
|
|
|
|
|
|
no |
no |
no |
|
[show]
[edit]
|
| I |
5416 |
Uncertain
|
Uncertain
|
Uncertain
|
|
|
|
Bronze (29 mm)
|
Augustus |
|
bare head of Augustus, right
|
|
prow with superstructure, right
|
FITA 82–4
|
Original comment: "This series of rare bronze coins raises problems of interpretation. It was assigned to Gaul by Sydenham (NG I9I7, p. 58) and to a date of c. 40-38 BC. But Grant, FITA, pp. 82-3, easily disproved this early date: Augustus's portrait indicates that these bronzes are post-Actian. It remains to determine the mint. The discovery of one specimen (5416/5) in the neighbourhood of Istanbul, and supposed stylistic similarities with Macedonian issues, led Grant to propose a Macedonian series ordered by M. Antonius Primus, proconsul of the province in 23 BC (FITA, pp. 83-4). This solution, however, seems highly implausible, and it is better to return to a Gallic mint for the following reasons: (I) the form of the prow with superstructure is paralleled at Copia (5I4-I5), Vienna (5I7) andArausio? (533); (2) a second provenance is now recorded: specimen 54I6/7 was bought in Lyon before I910. Even if Grant did not see any of these coins among the 847 Augustan Gallic aes he examined in the south of France, the mere fact that three coins are in the P collection favours a Gallic origin; (3) the double-bevelled edge of the present series and the careful die-setting at twelve o'clock recall the C. I. V. issue (517). Therefore a Gallic mint is suggested here, and a date of c. 30-25 BC.Three unpublished analyses reveal that these coins are made of bronze (91% of copper+ 6% of tin and 3% of lead). The denomination struck was probably an as, but the series of Arausio (?) (533), which has exactly the same weight, is considered by Amandry as a dupondius (GENE, April-June 1986, pp. 21-34)." A Gallic mint was favoured by the printed volume of RPC I (1992), but Richard Ashton points out some provenances that suggest Asia is also a possibility. Although 5416/7 was bought in Lyon, 5416/5 was found near Istanbul; two new specimens come from Turkey (12-13) and one other has a Balkan provenance (14).
|
|
5
|
C
|
117/1949 (Grant coll.)
|
|
18.34
|
|
12
|
1
|
|
|
|
|
|
no |
no |
no |
|
[show]
[edit]
|
| I |
5416 |
Uncertain
|
Uncertain
|
Uncertain
|
|
|
|
Bronze (29 mm)
|
Augustus |
|
bare head of Augustus, right
|
|
prow with superstructure, right
|
FITA 82–4
|
Original comment: "This series of rare bronze coins raises problems of interpretation. It was assigned to Gaul by Sydenham (NG I9I7, p. 58) and to a date of c. 40-38 BC. But Grant, FITA, pp. 82-3, easily disproved this early date: Augustus's portrait indicates that these bronzes are post-Actian. It remains to determine the mint. The discovery of one specimen (5416/5) in the neighbourhood of Istanbul, and supposed stylistic similarities with Macedonian issues, led Grant to propose a Macedonian series ordered by M. Antonius Primus, proconsul of the province in 23 BC (FITA, pp. 83-4). This solution, however, seems highly implausible, and it is better to return to a Gallic mint for the following reasons: (I) the form of the prow with superstructure is paralleled at Copia (5I4-I5), Vienna (5I7) andArausio? (533); (2) a second provenance is now recorded: specimen 54I6/7 was bought in Lyon before I910. Even if Grant did not see any of these coins among the 847 Augustan Gallic aes he examined in the south of France, the mere fact that three coins are in the P collection favours a Gallic origin; (3) the double-bevelled edge of the present series and the careful die-setting at twelve o'clock recall the C. I. V. issue (517). Therefore a Gallic mint is suggested here, and a date of c. 30-25 BC.Three unpublished analyses reveal that these coins are made of bronze (91% of copper+ 6% of tin and 3% of lead). The denomination struck was probably an as, but the series of Arausio (?) (533), which has exactly the same weight, is considered by Amandry as a dupondius (GENE, April-June 1986, pp. 21-34)." A Gallic mint was favoured by the printed volume of RPC I (1992), but Richard Ashton points out some provenances that suggest Asia is also a possibility. Although 5416/7 was bought in Lyon, 5416/5 was found near Istanbul; two new specimens come from Turkey (12-13) and one other has a Balkan provenance (14).
|
|
6
|
|
|
PC
|
17.94
|
|
|
1
|
|
|
|
|
|
no |
no |
no |
|
[show]
[edit]
|
| I |
5416 |
Uncertain
|
Uncertain
|
Uncertain
|
|
|
|
Bronze (29 mm)
|
Augustus |
|
bare head of Augustus, right
|
|
prow with superstructure, right
|
FITA 82–4
|
Original comment: "This series of rare bronze coins raises problems of interpretation. It was assigned to Gaul by Sydenham (NG I9I7, p. 58) and to a date of c. 40-38 BC. But Grant, FITA, pp. 82-3, easily disproved this early date: Augustus's portrait indicates that these bronzes are post-Actian. It remains to determine the mint. The discovery of one specimen (5416/5) in the neighbourhood of Istanbul, and supposed stylistic similarities with Macedonian issues, led Grant to propose a Macedonian series ordered by M. Antonius Primus, proconsul of the province in 23 BC (FITA, pp. 83-4). This solution, however, seems highly implausible, and it is better to return to a Gallic mint for the following reasons: (I) the form of the prow with superstructure is paralleled at Copia (5I4-I5), Vienna (5I7) andArausio? (533); (2) a second provenance is now recorded: specimen 54I6/7 was bought in Lyon before I910. Even if Grant did not see any of these coins among the 847 Augustan Gallic aes he examined in the south of France, the mere fact that three coins are in the P collection favours a Gallic origin; (3) the double-bevelled edge of the present series and the careful die-setting at twelve o'clock recall the C. I. V. issue (517). Therefore a Gallic mint is suggested here, and a date of c. 30-25 BC.Three unpublished analyses reveal that these coins are made of bronze (91% of copper+ 6% of tin and 3% of lead). The denomination struck was probably an as, but the series of Arausio (?) (533), which has exactly the same weight, is considered by Amandry as a dupondius (GENE, April-June 1986, pp. 21-34)." A Gallic mint was favoured by the printed volume of RPC I (1992), but Richard Ashton points out some provenances that suggest Asia is also a possibility. Although 5416/7 was bought in Lyon, 5416/5 was found near Istanbul; two new specimens come from Turkey (12-13) and one other has a Balkan provenance (14).
|
|
7
|
|
|
Thiollier coll., Toulon
|
17.08
|
|
|
1
|
|
|
|
|
|
no |
no |
no |
|
[show]
[edit]
|
| I |
5416 |
Uncertain
|
Uncertain
|
Uncertain
|
|
|
|
Bronze (29 mm)
|
Augustus |
|
bare head of Augustus, right
|
|
prow with superstructure, right
|
FITA 82–4
|
Original comment: "This series of rare bronze coins raises problems of interpretation. It was assigned to Gaul by Sydenham (NG I9I7, p. 58) and to a date of c. 40-38 BC. But Grant, FITA, pp. 82-3, easily disproved this early date: Augustus's portrait indicates that these bronzes are post-Actian. It remains to determine the mint. The discovery of one specimen (5416/5) in the neighbourhood of Istanbul, and supposed stylistic similarities with Macedonian issues, led Grant to propose a Macedonian series ordered by M. Antonius Primus, proconsul of the province in 23 BC (FITA, pp. 83-4). This solution, however, seems highly implausible, and it is better to return to a Gallic mint for the following reasons: (I) the form of the prow with superstructure is paralleled at Copia (5I4-I5), Vienna (5I7) andArausio? (533); (2) a second provenance is now recorded: specimen 54I6/7 was bought in Lyon before I910. Even if Grant did not see any of these coins among the 847 Augustan Gallic aes he examined in the south of France, the mere fact that three coins are in the P collection favours a Gallic origin; (3) the double-bevelled edge of the present series and the careful die-setting at twelve o'clock recall the C. I. V. issue (517). Therefore a Gallic mint is suggested here, and a date of c. 30-25 BC.Three unpublished analyses reveal that these coins are made of bronze (91% of copper+ 6% of tin and 3% of lead). The denomination struck was probably an as, but the series of Arausio (?) (533), which has exactly the same weight, is considered by Amandry as a dupondius (GENE, April-June 1986, pp. 21-34)." A Gallic mint was favoured by the printed volume of RPC I (1992), but Richard Ashton points out some provenances that suggest Asia is also a possibility. Although 5416/7 was bought in Lyon, 5416/5 was found near Istanbul; two new specimens come from Turkey (12-13) and one other has a Balkan provenance (14).
|
|
8
|
|
|
RBW coll. = Waddell II, 12 Oct. 1987, lot 315 = Sternberg XI, 1981, lot 568
|
18.94
|
|
|
1
|
|
|
|
|
|
no |
no |
no |
|
[show]
[edit]
|
| I |
5416 |
Uncertain
|
Uncertain
|
Uncertain
|
|
|
|
Bronze (29 mm)
|
Augustus |
|
bare head of Augustus, right
|
|
prow with superstructure, right
|
FITA 82–4
|
Original comment: "This series of rare bronze coins raises problems of interpretation. It was assigned to Gaul by Sydenham (NG I9I7, p. 58) and to a date of c. 40-38 BC. But Grant, FITA, pp. 82-3, easily disproved this early date: Augustus's portrait indicates that these bronzes are post-Actian. It remains to determine the mint. The discovery of one specimen (5416/5) in the neighbourhood of Istanbul, and supposed stylistic similarities with Macedonian issues, led Grant to propose a Macedonian series ordered by M. Antonius Primus, proconsul of the province in 23 BC (FITA, pp. 83-4). This solution, however, seems highly implausible, and it is better to return to a Gallic mint for the following reasons: (I) the form of the prow with superstructure is paralleled at Copia (5I4-I5), Vienna (5I7) andArausio? (533); (2) a second provenance is now recorded: specimen 54I6/7 was bought in Lyon before I910. Even if Grant did not see any of these coins among the 847 Augustan Gallic aes he examined in the south of France, the mere fact that three coins are in the P collection favours a Gallic origin; (3) the double-bevelled edge of the present series and the careful die-setting at twelve o'clock recall the C. I. V. issue (517). Therefore a Gallic mint is suggested here, and a date of c. 30-25 BC.Three unpublished analyses reveal that these coins are made of bronze (91% of copper+ 6% of tin and 3% of lead). The denomination struck was probably an as, but the series of Arausio (?) (533), which has exactly the same weight, is considered by Amandry as a dupondius (GENE, April-June 1986, pp. 21-34)." A Gallic mint was favoured by the printed volume of RPC I (1992), but Richard Ashton points out some provenances that suggest Asia is also a possibility. Although 5416/7 was bought in Lyon, 5416/5 was found near Istanbul; two new specimens come from Turkey (12-13) and one other has a Balkan provenance (14).
|
|
9
|
NY
|
2015.20.489
|
RBW coll. = Glendining, 13 Oct. 1992, lot 186
|
17.26
|
29.2
|
12
|
1
|
|
|
|
|
|
no |
no |
no |
|
[show]
[edit]
|
| I |
5416 |
Uncertain
|
Uncertain
|
Uncertain
|
|
|
|
Bronze (29 mm)
|
Augustus |
|
bare head of Augustus, right
|
|
prow with superstructure, right
|
FITA 82–4
|
Original comment: "This series of rare bronze coins raises problems of interpretation. It was assigned to Gaul by Sydenham (NG I9I7, p. 58) and to a date of c. 40-38 BC. But Grant, FITA, pp. 82-3, easily disproved this early date: Augustus's portrait indicates that these bronzes are post-Actian. It remains to determine the mint. The discovery of one specimen (5416/5) in the neighbourhood of Istanbul, and supposed stylistic similarities with Macedonian issues, led Grant to propose a Macedonian series ordered by M. Antonius Primus, proconsul of the province in 23 BC (FITA, pp. 83-4). This solution, however, seems highly implausible, and it is better to return to a Gallic mint for the following reasons: (I) the form of the prow with superstructure is paralleled at Copia (5I4-I5), Vienna (5I7) andArausio? (533); (2) a second provenance is now recorded: specimen 54I6/7 was bought in Lyon before I910. Even if Grant did not see any of these coins among the 847 Augustan Gallic aes he examined in the south of France, the mere fact that three coins are in the P collection favours a Gallic origin; (3) the double-bevelled edge of the present series and the careful die-setting at twelve o'clock recall the C. I. V. issue (517). Therefore a Gallic mint is suggested here, and a date of c. 30-25 BC.Three unpublished analyses reveal that these coins are made of bronze (91% of copper+ 6% of tin and 3% of lead). The denomination struck was probably an as, but the series of Arausio (?) (533), which has exactly the same weight, is considered by Amandry as a dupondius (GENE, April-June 1986, pp. 21-34)." A Gallic mint was favoured by the printed volume of RPC I (1992), but Richard Ashton points out some provenances that suggest Asia is also a possibility. Although 5416/7 was bought in Lyon, 5416/5 was found near Istanbul; two new specimens come from Turkey (12-13) and one other has a Balkan provenance (14).
|
|
10
|
NY
|
2015.20.490
|
RBW coll. = Kovacs MBS IX, 21 Nov. 1988, lot 281
|
15.82
|
28.9
|
12
|
1
|
|
|
|
|
|
no |
no |
no |
|
[show]
[edit]
|
| I |
5416 |
Uncertain
|
Uncertain
|
Uncertain
|
|
|
|
Bronze (29 mm)
|
Augustus |
|
bare head of Augustus, right
|
|
prow with superstructure, right
|
FITA 82–4
|
Original comment: "This series of rare bronze coins raises problems of interpretation. It was assigned to Gaul by Sydenham (NG I9I7, p. 58) and to a date of c. 40-38 BC. But Grant, FITA, pp. 82-3, easily disproved this early date: Augustus's portrait indicates that these bronzes are post-Actian. It remains to determine the mint. The discovery of one specimen (5416/5) in the neighbourhood of Istanbul, and supposed stylistic similarities with Macedonian issues, led Grant to propose a Macedonian series ordered by M. Antonius Primus, proconsul of the province in 23 BC (FITA, pp. 83-4). This solution, however, seems highly implausible, and it is better to return to a Gallic mint for the following reasons: (I) the form of the prow with superstructure is paralleled at Copia (5I4-I5), Vienna (5I7) andArausio? (533); (2) a second provenance is now recorded: specimen 54I6/7 was bought in Lyon before I910. Even if Grant did not see any of these coins among the 847 Augustan Gallic aes he examined in the south of France, the mere fact that three coins are in the P collection favours a Gallic origin; (3) the double-bevelled edge of the present series and the careful die-setting at twelve o'clock recall the C. I. V. issue (517). Therefore a Gallic mint is suggested here, and a date of c. 30-25 BC.Three unpublished analyses reveal that these coins are made of bronze (91% of copper+ 6% of tin and 3% of lead). The denomination struck was probably an as, but the series of Arausio (?) (533), which has exactly the same weight, is considered by Amandry as a dupondius (GENE, April-June 1986, pp. 21-34)." A Gallic mint was favoured by the printed volume of RPC I (1992), but Richard Ashton points out some provenances that suggest Asia is also a possibility. Although 5416/7 was bought in Lyon, 5416/5 was found near Istanbul; two new specimens come from Turkey (12-13) and one other has a Balkan provenance (14).
|
|
11
|
Lyon
|
|
Argenor 4, 27 Apr. 2001, lot 100
|
21.59
|
29
|
12
|
1
|
|
|
|
|
|
no |
no |
no |
https://www.coinarchives.com/a/openlink.php?l=100|1|100|f2fc990265c712c49d51a18a32b39f0c
|
[show]
[edit]
|
| I |
5416 |
Uncertain
|
Uncertain
|
Uncertain
|
|
|
|
Bronze (29 mm)
|
Augustus |
|
bare head of Augustus, right
|
|
prow with superstructure, right
|
FITA 82–4
|
Original comment: "This series of rare bronze coins raises problems of interpretation. It was assigned to Gaul by Sydenham (NG I9I7, p. 58) and to a date of c. 40-38 BC. But Grant, FITA, pp. 82-3, easily disproved this early date: Augustus's portrait indicates that these bronzes are post-Actian. It remains to determine the mint. The discovery of one specimen (5416/5) in the neighbourhood of Istanbul, and supposed stylistic similarities with Macedonian issues, led Grant to propose a Macedonian series ordered by M. Antonius Primus, proconsul of the province in 23 BC (FITA, pp. 83-4). This solution, however, seems highly implausible, and it is better to return to a Gallic mint for the following reasons: (I) the form of the prow with superstructure is paralleled at Copia (5I4-I5), Vienna (5I7) andArausio? (533); (2) a second provenance is now recorded: specimen 54I6/7 was bought in Lyon before I910. Even if Grant did not see any of these coins among the 847 Augustan Gallic aes he examined in the south of France, the mere fact that three coins are in the P collection favours a Gallic origin; (3) the double-bevelled edge of the present series and the careful die-setting at twelve o'clock recall the C. I. V. issue (517). Therefore a Gallic mint is suggested here, and a date of c. 30-25 BC.Three unpublished analyses reveal that these coins are made of bronze (91% of copper+ 6% of tin and 3% of lead). The denomination struck was probably an as, but the series of Arausio (?) (533), which has exactly the same weight, is considered by Amandry as a dupondius (GENE, April-June 1986, pp. 21-34)." A Gallic mint was favoured by the printed volume of RPC I (1992), but Richard Ashton points out some provenances that suggest Asia is also a possibility. Although 5416/7 was bought in Lyon, 5416/5 was found near Istanbul; two new specimens come from Turkey (12-13) and one other has a Balkan provenance (14).
|
|
12
|
|
|
Cyzicus excavations, H. Köker, NC 2007, p. 307, no. 16
|
13.7
|
|
|
1
|
|
|
GIC — (head of ram); GIC — (head of boar) |
|
|
no |
no |
no |
|
[show]
[edit]
|
| I |
5416 |
Uncertain
|
Uncertain
|
Uncertain
|
|
|
|
Bronze (29 mm)
|
Augustus |
|
bare head of Augustus, right
|
|
prow with superstructure, right
|
FITA 82–4
|
Original comment: "This series of rare bronze coins raises problems of interpretation. It was assigned to Gaul by Sydenham (NG I9I7, p. 58) and to a date of c. 40-38 BC. But Grant, FITA, pp. 82-3, easily disproved this early date: Augustus's portrait indicates that these bronzes are post-Actian. It remains to determine the mint. The discovery of one specimen (5416/5) in the neighbourhood of Istanbul, and supposed stylistic similarities with Macedonian issues, led Grant to propose a Macedonian series ordered by M. Antonius Primus, proconsul of the province in 23 BC (FITA, pp. 83-4). This solution, however, seems highly implausible, and it is better to return to a Gallic mint for the following reasons: (I) the form of the prow with superstructure is paralleled at Copia (5I4-I5), Vienna (5I7) andArausio? (533); (2) a second provenance is now recorded: specimen 54I6/7 was bought in Lyon before I910. Even if Grant did not see any of these coins among the 847 Augustan Gallic aes he examined in the south of France, the mere fact that three coins are in the P collection favours a Gallic origin; (3) the double-bevelled edge of the present series and the careful die-setting at twelve o'clock recall the C. I. V. issue (517). Therefore a Gallic mint is suggested here, and a date of c. 30-25 BC.Three unpublished analyses reveal that these coins are made of bronze (91% of copper+ 6% of tin and 3% of lead). The denomination struck was probably an as, but the series of Arausio (?) (533), which has exactly the same weight, is considered by Amandry as a dupondius (GENE, April-June 1986, pp. 21-34)." A Gallic mint was favoured by the printed volume of RPC I (1992), but Richard Ashton points out some provenances that suggest Asia is also a possibility. Although 5416/7 was bought in Lyon, 5416/5 was found near Istanbul; two new specimens come from Turkey (12-13) and one other has a Balkan provenance (14).
|
|
13
|
|
|
Dascylaeum, now in Banderma Museum = Köker, NC 2007, p. 307 (ment.)
|
|
|
|
1
|
|
|
|
|
|
no |
no |
no |
|
[show]
[edit]
|
| I |
5416 |
Uncertain
|
Uncertain
|
Uncertain
|
|
|
|
Bronze (29 mm)
|
Augustus |
|
bare head of Augustus, right
|
|
prow with superstructure, right
|
FITA 82–4
|
Original comment: "This series of rare bronze coins raises problems of interpretation. It was assigned to Gaul by Sydenham (NG I9I7, p. 58) and to a date of c. 40-38 BC. But Grant, FITA, pp. 82-3, easily disproved this early date: Augustus's portrait indicates that these bronzes are post-Actian. It remains to determine the mint. The discovery of one specimen (5416/5) in the neighbourhood of Istanbul, and supposed stylistic similarities with Macedonian issues, led Grant to propose a Macedonian series ordered by M. Antonius Primus, proconsul of the province in 23 BC (FITA, pp. 83-4). This solution, however, seems highly implausible, and it is better to return to a Gallic mint for the following reasons: (I) the form of the prow with superstructure is paralleled at Copia (5I4-I5), Vienna (5I7) andArausio? (533); (2) a second provenance is now recorded: specimen 54I6/7 was bought in Lyon before I910. Even if Grant did not see any of these coins among the 847 Augustan Gallic aes he examined in the south of France, the mere fact that three coins are in the P collection favours a Gallic origin; (3) the double-bevelled edge of the present series and the careful die-setting at twelve o'clock recall the C. I. V. issue (517). Therefore a Gallic mint is suggested here, and a date of c. 30-25 BC.Three unpublished analyses reveal that these coins are made of bronze (91% of copper+ 6% of tin and 3% of lead). The denomination struck was probably an as, but the series of Arausio (?) (533), which has exactly the same weight, is considered by Amandry as a dupondius (GENE, April-June 1986, pp. 21-34)." A Gallic mint was favoured by the printed volume of RPC I (1992), but Richard Ashton points out some provenances that suggest Asia is also a possibility. Although 5416/7 was bought in Lyon, 5416/5 was found near Istanbul; two new specimens come from Turkey (12-13) and one other has a Balkan provenance (14).
|
|
14
|
|
|
RBW
|
13.75
|
|
|
1
|
|
|
GIC — (head of ram); GIC — (head of boar) |
|
|
no |
no |
no |
|
[show]
[edit]
|
| I |
5416 |
Uncertain
|
Uncertain
|
Uncertain
|
|
|
|
Bronze (29 mm)
|
Augustus |
|
bare head of Augustus, right
|
|
prow with superstructure, right
|
FITA 82–4
|
Original comment: "This series of rare bronze coins raises problems of interpretation. It was assigned to Gaul by Sydenham (NG I9I7, p. 58) and to a date of c. 40-38 BC. But Grant, FITA, pp. 82-3, easily disproved this early date: Augustus's portrait indicates that these bronzes are post-Actian. It remains to determine the mint. The discovery of one specimen (5416/5) in the neighbourhood of Istanbul, and supposed stylistic similarities with Macedonian issues, led Grant to propose a Macedonian series ordered by M. Antonius Primus, proconsul of the province in 23 BC (FITA, pp. 83-4). This solution, however, seems highly implausible, and it is better to return to a Gallic mint for the following reasons: (I) the form of the prow with superstructure is paralleled at Copia (5I4-I5), Vienna (5I7) andArausio? (533); (2) a second provenance is now recorded: specimen 54I6/7 was bought in Lyon before I910. Even if Grant did not see any of these coins among the 847 Augustan Gallic aes he examined in the south of France, the mere fact that three coins are in the P collection favours a Gallic origin; (3) the double-bevelled edge of the present series and the careful die-setting at twelve o'clock recall the C. I. V. issue (517). Therefore a Gallic mint is suggested here, and a date of c. 30-25 BC.Three unpublished analyses reveal that these coins are made of bronze (91% of copper+ 6% of tin and 3% of lead). The denomination struck was probably an as, but the series of Arausio (?) (533), which has exactly the same weight, is considered by Amandry as a dupondius (GENE, April-June 1986, pp. 21-34)." A Gallic mint was favoured by the printed volume of RPC I (1992), but Richard Ashton points out some provenances that suggest Asia is also a possibility. Although 5416/7 was bought in Lyon, 5416/5 was found near Istanbul; two new specimens come from Turkey (12-13) and one other has a Balkan provenance (14).
|
|
15
|
|
|
RBW
|
15.87
|
|
|
1
|
|
|
GIC — (head of ram); GIC — (head of boar) |
|
|
no |
no |
no |
|
[show]
[edit]
|
| I |
5416 |
Uncertain
|
Uncertain
|
Uncertain
|
|
|
|
Bronze (29 mm)
|
Augustus |
|
bare head of Augustus, right
|
|
prow with superstructure, right
|
FITA 82–4
|
Original comment: "This series of rare bronze coins raises problems of interpretation. It was assigned to Gaul by Sydenham (NG I9I7, p. 58) and to a date of c. 40-38 BC. But Grant, FITA, pp. 82-3, easily disproved this early date: Augustus's portrait indicates that these bronzes are post-Actian. It remains to determine the mint. The discovery of one specimen (5416/5) in the neighbourhood of Istanbul, and supposed stylistic similarities with Macedonian issues, led Grant to propose a Macedonian series ordered by M. Antonius Primus, proconsul of the province in 23 BC (FITA, pp. 83-4). This solution, however, seems highly implausible, and it is better to return to a Gallic mint for the following reasons: (I) the form of the prow with superstructure is paralleled at Copia (5I4-I5), Vienna (5I7) andArausio? (533); (2) a second provenance is now recorded: specimen 54I6/7 was bought in Lyon before I910. Even if Grant did not see any of these coins among the 847 Augustan Gallic aes he examined in the south of France, the mere fact that three coins are in the P collection favours a Gallic origin; (3) the double-bevelled edge of the present series and the careful die-setting at twelve o'clock recall the C. I. V. issue (517). Therefore a Gallic mint is suggested here, and a date of c. 30-25 BC.Three unpublished analyses reveal that these coins are made of bronze (91% of copper+ 6% of tin and 3% of lead). The denomination struck was probably an as, but the series of Arausio (?) (533), which has exactly the same weight, is considered by Amandry as a dupondius (GENE, April-June 1986, pp. 21-34)." A Gallic mint was favoured by the printed volume of RPC I (1992), but Richard Ashton points out some provenances that suggest Asia is also a possibility. Although 5416/7 was bought in Lyon, 5416/5 was found near Istanbul; two new specimens come from Turkey (12-13) and one other has a Balkan provenance (14).
|
|
16
|
Warsaw
|
151030
|
|
20.21
|
|
|
1
|
|
|
|
|
under Nicomedia
|
no |
no |
no |
|
[show]
[edit]
|
| I |
5416 |
Uncertain
|
Uncertain
|
Uncertain
|
|
|
|
Bronze (29 mm)
|
Augustus |
|
bare head of Augustus, right
|
|
prow with superstructure, right
|
FITA 82–4
|
Original comment: "This series of rare bronze coins raises problems of interpretation. It was assigned to Gaul by Sydenham (NG I9I7, p. 58) and to a date of c. 40-38 BC. But Grant, FITA, pp. 82-3, easily disproved this early date: Augustus's portrait indicates that these bronzes are post-Actian. It remains to determine the mint. The discovery of one specimen (5416/5) in the neighbourhood of Istanbul, and supposed stylistic similarities with Macedonian issues, led Grant to propose a Macedonian series ordered by M. Antonius Primus, proconsul of the province in 23 BC (FITA, pp. 83-4). This solution, however, seems highly implausible, and it is better to return to a Gallic mint for the following reasons: (I) the form of the prow with superstructure is paralleled at Copia (5I4-I5), Vienna (5I7) andArausio? (533); (2) a second provenance is now recorded: specimen 54I6/7 was bought in Lyon before I910. Even if Grant did not see any of these coins among the 847 Augustan Gallic aes he examined in the south of France, the mere fact that three coins are in the P collection favours a Gallic origin; (3) the double-bevelled edge of the present series and the careful die-setting at twelve o'clock recall the C. I. V. issue (517). Therefore a Gallic mint is suggested here, and a date of c. 30-25 BC.Three unpublished analyses reveal that these coins are made of bronze (91% of copper+ 6% of tin and 3% of lead). The denomination struck was probably an as, but the series of Arausio (?) (533), which has exactly the same weight, is considered by Amandry as a dupondius (GENE, April-June 1986, pp. 21-34)." A Gallic mint was favoured by the printed volume of RPC I (1992), but Richard Ashton points out some provenances that suggest Asia is also a possibility. Although 5416/7 was bought in Lyon, 5416/5 was found near Istanbul; two new specimens come from Turkey (12-13) and one other has a Balkan provenance (14).
|
|
17
|
|
|
Rauch Summer 2009, 17 Sept. 2009, lot 589
|
18.69
|
29
|
|
1
|
|
|
|
|
|
no |
no |
no |
https://www.coinarchives.com/a/openlink.php?l=317989|570|589|6a2df29a3bef5062dd84265050f4845f
|
[show]
[edit]
|
| I |
5416 |
Uncertain
|
Uncertain
|
Uncertain
|
|
|
|
Bronze (29 mm)
|
Augustus |
|
bare head of Augustus, right
|
|
prow with superstructure, right
|
FITA 82–4
|
Original comment: "This series of rare bronze coins raises problems of interpretation. It was assigned to Gaul by Sydenham (NG I9I7, p. 58) and to a date of c. 40-38 BC. But Grant, FITA, pp. 82-3, easily disproved this early date: Augustus's portrait indicates that these bronzes are post-Actian. It remains to determine the mint. The discovery of one specimen (5416/5) in the neighbourhood of Istanbul, and supposed stylistic similarities with Macedonian issues, led Grant to propose a Macedonian series ordered by M. Antonius Primus, proconsul of the province in 23 BC (FITA, pp. 83-4). This solution, however, seems highly implausible, and it is better to return to a Gallic mint for the following reasons: (I) the form of the prow with superstructure is paralleled at Copia (5I4-I5), Vienna (5I7) andArausio? (533); (2) a second provenance is now recorded: specimen 54I6/7 was bought in Lyon before I910. Even if Grant did not see any of these coins among the 847 Augustan Gallic aes he examined in the south of France, the mere fact that three coins are in the P collection favours a Gallic origin; (3) the double-bevelled edge of the present series and the careful die-setting at twelve o'clock recall the C. I. V. issue (517). Therefore a Gallic mint is suggested here, and a date of c. 30-25 BC.Three unpublished analyses reveal that these coins are made of bronze (91% of copper+ 6% of tin and 3% of lead). The denomination struck was probably an as, but the series of Arausio (?) (533), which has exactly the same weight, is considered by Amandry as a dupondius (GENE, April-June 1986, pp. 21-34)." A Gallic mint was favoured by the printed volume of RPC I (1992), but Richard Ashton points out some provenances that suggest Asia is also a possibility. Although 5416/7 was bought in Lyon, 5416/5 was found near Istanbul; two new specimens come from Turkey (12-13) and one other has a Balkan provenance (14).
|
|
18
|
|
|
CNG EA 376, 15 June 2016, lot 335
|
12.69
|
28
|
12
|
1
|
|
|
|
|
|
no |
no |
no |
https://www.coinarchives.com/a/openlink.php?l=903005|1709|335|6f54f34aa277cfc9b53ebd8e81dcfb1f
|
[show]
[edit]
|
| I |
5416 |
Uncertain
|
Uncertain
|
Uncertain
|
|
|
|
Bronze (29 mm)
|
Augustus |
|
bare head of Augustus, right
|
|
prow with superstructure, right
|
FITA 82–4
|
Original comment: "This series of rare bronze coins raises problems of interpretation. It was assigned to Gaul by Sydenham (NG I9I7, p. 58) and to a date of c. 40-38 BC. But Grant, FITA, pp. 82-3, easily disproved this early date: Augustus's portrait indicates that these bronzes are post-Actian. It remains to determine the mint. The discovery of one specimen (5416/5) in the neighbourhood of Istanbul, and supposed stylistic similarities with Macedonian issues, led Grant to propose a Macedonian series ordered by M. Antonius Primus, proconsul of the province in 23 BC (FITA, pp. 83-4). This solution, however, seems highly implausible, and it is better to return to a Gallic mint for the following reasons: (I) the form of the prow with superstructure is paralleled at Copia (5I4-I5), Vienna (5I7) andArausio? (533); (2) a second provenance is now recorded: specimen 54I6/7 was bought in Lyon before I910. Even if Grant did not see any of these coins among the 847 Augustan Gallic aes he examined in the south of France, the mere fact that three coins are in the P collection favours a Gallic origin; (3) the double-bevelled edge of the present series and the careful die-setting at twelve o'clock recall the C. I. V. issue (517). Therefore a Gallic mint is suggested here, and a date of c. 30-25 BC.Three unpublished analyses reveal that these coins are made of bronze (91% of copper+ 6% of tin and 3% of lead). The denomination struck was probably an as, but the series of Arausio (?) (533), which has exactly the same weight, is considered by Amandry as a dupondius (GENE, April-June 1986, pp. 21-34)." A Gallic mint was favoured by the printed volume of RPC I (1992), but Richard Ashton points out some provenances that suggest Asia is also a possibility. Although 5416/7 was bought in Lyon, 5416/5 was found near Istanbul; two new specimens come from Turkey (12-13) and one other has a Balkan provenance (14).
|
|
19
|
|
|
Savoca EA 24 Silver, 29 July 2018, lot 166 (ex Savoca Live Online Auction 12, 22 Jan. 2017, lot 339)
|
15.59
|
29
|
|
1
|
|
|
|
|
Savoca Live Online Auction 12, 22 Jan. 2017, lot 339, 15.91 before cleaning
|
no |
no |
yes |
https://www.coinarchives.com/a/openlink.php?l=1272306|2586|166|7a6980fd871209dddd56094ff6e64005
|
[show]
[edit]
|
| I |
5416 |
Uncertain
|
Uncertain
|
Uncertain
|
|
|
|
Bronze (29 mm)
|
Augustus |
|
bare head of Augustus, right
|
|
prow with superstructure, right
|
FITA 82–4
|
Original comment: "This series of rare bronze coins raises problems of interpretation. It was assigned to Gaul by Sydenham (NG I9I7, p. 58) and to a date of c. 40-38 BC. But Grant, FITA, pp. 82-3, easily disproved this early date: Augustus's portrait indicates that these bronzes are post-Actian. It remains to determine the mint. The discovery of one specimen (5416/5) in the neighbourhood of Istanbul, and supposed stylistic similarities with Macedonian issues, led Grant to propose a Macedonian series ordered by M. Antonius Primus, proconsul of the province in 23 BC (FITA, pp. 83-4). This solution, however, seems highly implausible, and it is better to return to a Gallic mint for the following reasons: (I) the form of the prow with superstructure is paralleled at Copia (5I4-I5), Vienna (5I7) andArausio? (533); (2) a second provenance is now recorded: specimen 54I6/7 was bought in Lyon before I910. Even if Grant did not see any of these coins among the 847 Augustan Gallic aes he examined in the south of France, the mere fact that three coins are in the P collection favours a Gallic origin; (3) the double-bevelled edge of the present series and the careful die-setting at twelve o'clock recall the C. I. V. issue (517). Therefore a Gallic mint is suggested here, and a date of c. 30-25 BC.Three unpublished analyses reveal that these coins are made of bronze (91% of copper+ 6% of tin and 3% of lead). The denomination struck was probably an as, but the series of Arausio (?) (533), which has exactly the same weight, is considered by Amandry as a dupondius (GENE, April-June 1986, pp. 21-34)." A Gallic mint was favoured by the printed volume of RPC I (1992), but Richard Ashton points out some provenances that suggest Asia is also a possibility. Although 5416/7 was bought in Lyon, 5416/5 was found near Istanbul; two new specimens come from Turkey (12-13) and one other has a Balkan provenance (14).
|
|
20
|
|
|
Mark Thomas coll. (ex Bucephalus Black Auction 12, 18 Nov. 2022, lot 587)
|
18.02
|
30
|
1
|
1
|
|
|
|
|
|
no |
no |
no |
|
[show]
[edit]
|
| I |
5416 |
Uncertain
|
Uncertain
|
Uncertain
|
|
|
|
Bronze (29 mm)
|
Augustus |
|
bare head of Augustus, right
|
|
prow with superstructure, right
|
FITA 82–4
|
Original comment: "This series of rare bronze coins raises problems of interpretation. It was assigned to Gaul by Sydenham (NG I9I7, p. 58) and to a date of c. 40-38 BC. But Grant, FITA, pp. 82-3, easily disproved this early date: Augustus's portrait indicates that these bronzes are post-Actian. It remains to determine the mint. The discovery of one specimen (5416/5) in the neighbourhood of Istanbul, and supposed stylistic similarities with Macedonian issues, led Grant to propose a Macedonian series ordered by M. Antonius Primus, proconsul of the province in 23 BC (FITA, pp. 83-4). This solution, however, seems highly implausible, and it is better to return to a Gallic mint for the following reasons: (I) the form of the prow with superstructure is paralleled at Copia (5I4-I5), Vienna (5I7) andArausio? (533); (2) a second provenance is now recorded: specimen 54I6/7 was bought in Lyon before I910. Even if Grant did not see any of these coins among the 847 Augustan Gallic aes he examined in the south of France, the mere fact that three coins are in the P collection favours a Gallic origin; (3) the double-bevelled edge of the present series and the careful die-setting at twelve o'clock recall the C. I. V. issue (517). Therefore a Gallic mint is suggested here, and a date of c. 30-25 BC.Three unpublished analyses reveal that these coins are made of bronze (91% of copper+ 6% of tin and 3% of lead). The denomination struck was probably an as, but the series of Arausio (?) (533), which has exactly the same weight, is considered by Amandry as a dupondius (GENE, April-June 1986, pp. 21-34)." A Gallic mint was favoured by the printed volume of RPC I (1992), but Richard Ashton points out some provenances that suggest Asia is also a possibility. Although 5416/7 was bought in Lyon, 5416/5 was found near Istanbul; two new specimens come from Turkey (12-13) and one other has a Balkan provenance (14).
|
|
21
|
|
|
Concordia Numismatic 2, 4 - 5 Mar. 2023, lot 760
|
18
|
28.8
|
12
|
1
|
|
|
|
|
|
no |
no |
no |
https://www.biddr.com/auctions/concordianumismatic/browse?a=3293&l=3758409
|
[show]
[edit]
|
| I |
5416 |
Uncertain
|
Uncertain
|
Uncertain
|
|
|
|
Bronze (29 mm)
|
Augustus |
|
bare head of Augustus, right
|
|
prow with superstructure, right
|
FITA 82–4
|
Original comment: "This series of rare bronze coins raises problems of interpretation. It was assigned to Gaul by Sydenham (NG I9I7, p. 58) and to a date of c. 40-38 BC. But Grant, FITA, pp. 82-3, easily disproved this early date: Augustus's portrait indicates that these bronzes are post-Actian. It remains to determine the mint. The discovery of one specimen (5416/5) in the neighbourhood of Istanbul, and supposed stylistic similarities with Macedonian issues, led Grant to propose a Macedonian series ordered by M. Antonius Primus, proconsul of the province in 23 BC (FITA, pp. 83-4). This solution, however, seems highly implausible, and it is better to return to a Gallic mint for the following reasons: (I) the form of the prow with superstructure is paralleled at Copia (5I4-I5), Vienna (5I7) andArausio? (533); (2) a second provenance is now recorded: specimen 54I6/7 was bought in Lyon before I910. Even if Grant did not see any of these coins among the 847 Augustan Gallic aes he examined in the south of France, the mere fact that three coins are in the P collection favours a Gallic origin; (3) the double-bevelled edge of the present series and the careful die-setting at twelve o'clock recall the C. I. V. issue (517). Therefore a Gallic mint is suggested here, and a date of c. 30-25 BC.Three unpublished analyses reveal that these coins are made of bronze (91% of copper+ 6% of tin and 3% of lead). The denomination struck was probably an as, but the series of Arausio (?) (533), which has exactly the same weight, is considered by Amandry as a dupondius (GENE, April-June 1986, pp. 21-34)." A Gallic mint was favoured by the printed volume of RPC I (1992), but Richard Ashton points out some provenances that suggest Asia is also a possibility. Although 5416/7 was bought in Lyon, 5416/5 was found near Istanbul; two new specimens come from Turkey (12-13) and one other has a Balkan provenance (14).
|
|
22
|
|
|
Olympus Numismatik 6, 25 Aug. 2023, lot 465
|
11.41
|
28.6
|
|
1
|
|
|
|
|
|
no |
no |
no |
https://www.biddr.com/auctions/olympusnumismatik/browse?a=3783&l=4385379
|
[show]
[edit]
|
| I |
5416 |
Uncertain
|
Uncertain
|
Uncertain
|
|
|
|
Bronze (29 mm)
|
Augustus |
|
bare head of Augustus, right
|
|
prow with superstructure, right
|
FITA 82–4
|
Original comment: "This series of rare bronze coins raises problems of interpretation. It was assigned to Gaul by Sydenham (NG I9I7, p. 58) and to a date of c. 40-38 BC. But Grant, FITA, pp. 82-3, easily disproved this early date: Augustus's portrait indicates that these bronzes are post-Actian. It remains to determine the mint. The discovery of one specimen (5416/5) in the neighbourhood of Istanbul, and supposed stylistic similarities with Macedonian issues, led Grant to propose a Macedonian series ordered by M. Antonius Primus, proconsul of the province in 23 BC (FITA, pp. 83-4). This solution, however, seems highly implausible, and it is better to return to a Gallic mint for the following reasons: (I) the form of the prow with superstructure is paralleled at Copia (5I4-I5), Vienna (5I7) andArausio? (533); (2) a second provenance is now recorded: specimen 54I6/7 was bought in Lyon before I910. Even if Grant did not see any of these coins among the 847 Augustan Gallic aes he examined in the south of France, the mere fact that three coins are in the P collection favours a Gallic origin; (3) the double-bevelled edge of the present series and the careful die-setting at twelve o'clock recall the C. I. V. issue (517). Therefore a Gallic mint is suggested here, and a date of c. 30-25 BC.Three unpublished analyses reveal that these coins are made of bronze (91% of copper+ 6% of tin and 3% of lead). The denomination struck was probably an as, but the series of Arausio (?) (533), which has exactly the same weight, is considered by Amandry as a dupondius (GENE, April-June 1986, pp. 21-34)." A Gallic mint was favoured by the printed volume of RPC I (1992), but Richard Ashton points out some provenances that suggest Asia is also a possibility. Although 5416/7 was bought in Lyon, 5416/5 was found near Istanbul; two new specimens come from Turkey (12-13) and one other has a Balkan provenance (14).
|
|
23
|
|
|
Olympus Numismatik 12, 26 Apr. 2024, lot 231
|
18.9
|
31.8
|
|
1
|
|
|
|
|
|
no |
no |
no |
https://www.biddr.com/auctions/olympusnumismatik/browse?a=4519&l=5381201
|
[show]
[edit]
|
| I |
5417 |
Uncertain
|
Uncertain
|
Uncertain
|
|
|
Marcus Vehilius Turpilianus(?) ; Priscus |
Æ (22 mm)
|
Augustus |
IMP CAESARIS • A • TR • P M[VP]IVS
|
bare head, left
|
M VEHILIVS [TVR]PIL • PRIS • IIVQ
|
plough; in the field, D D
|
FITA 152–3
|
This unique coin lies among the coins of Buthrotum in the B collection, but its style has nothing in common with the Buthrotum series, as stated by Grant, FITA, p. 152, n. 5. The presence of the names of duoviri quinquennales on the reverse suggests a colonial or a municipal coinage. Grant offered the reading M.VEHIL.TVS[ ]TVRPIL.PRIS, suggesting the names M. Vehilius Tus(cus) (?) and Turpilianus Priscus. But no dot is visible between L and what Grant takes for a T, and it is possible that the name VEHILIVS is written in full, instead of the more complicated reading VEHIL.TVS.Anyway there is no room for any letters between . . .] VS and TVRPIL. Grant proposed a Sardinian origin for this coin for the following reasons: (I) the curious form of the plough, also found at Turris Libisonis (622); (2) the occurrence of the rare name Vehilius on an inscription also from Turris Libisonis (GIL X, 7967). He might be right, but the legend which he deciphered as MVPIVS is far from certain and his interpretation as MV(nicipium) P(ium) I(ulium) VS(elis) highly conjectural. Therefore this Augustan coin is here considered as uncertain, though a western origin (Sardinia or Sicily) looks the most plausible.
|
|
1
|
B
|
Rauch
|
FITA, pl. VI, 5
|
8.94
|
22
|
1
|
1
|
|
|
|
|
|
no |
no |
yes |
|
[show]
[edit]
|
| I |
5418 |
Uncertain
|
Uncertain
|
Uncertain
|
|
|
|
Æ (18 mm)
|
Augustus |
EX D D
|
bare head, right
|
AVFIDIVS RVFVS IIII
|
rider (Eros?) on a hippocamp, right
|
FITA 336
|
Vives and Grant attributed this coin to Carteia, but it is excluded here from the coinage of that city. Nevertheless, a Spanish origin may seem likely, as specimens oft his coin occur in Spanish collections.
|
TO DO: create uncertain mint, Hispania ?
|
1
|
B
|
|
FITA, pl. IX, 27
|
2.56
|
|
|
1
|
|
|
|
|
|
no |
no |
no |
|
[show]
[edit]
|
| I |
5418 |
Uncertain
|
Uncertain
|
Uncertain
|
|
|
|
Æ (18 mm)
|
Augustus |
EX D D
|
bare head, right
|
AVFIDIVS RVFVS IIII
|
rider (Eros?) on a hippocamp, right
|
FITA 336
|
Vives and Grant attributed this coin to Carteia, but it is excluded here from the coinage of that city. Nevertheless, a Spanish origin may seem likely, as specimens oft his coin occur in Spanish collections.
|
TO DO: create uncertain mint, Hispania ?
|
2
|
Madrid
|
|
|
|
|
|
1
|
|
|
|
|
|
no |
no |
no |
|
[show]
[edit]
|
| I |
5418 |
Uncertain
|
Uncertain
|
Uncertain
|
|
|
|
Æ (18 mm)
|
Augustus |
EX D D
|
bare head, right
|
AVFIDIVS RVFVS IIII
|
rider (Eros?) on a hippocamp, right
|
FITA 336
|
Vives and Grant attributed this coin to Carteia, but it is excluded here from the coinage of that city. Nevertheless, a Spanish origin may seem likely, as specimens oft his coin occur in Spanish collections.
|
TO DO: create uncertain mint, Hispania ?
|
3
|
|
|
Collection Rubio (Cádiz)
|
|
|
|
1
|
|
|
|
|
|
no |
no |
no |
|
[show]
[edit]
|
| I |
5418 |
Uncertain
|
Uncertain
|
Uncertain
|
|
|
|
Æ (18 mm)
|
Augustus |
EX D D
|
bare head, right
|
AVFIDIVS RVFVS IIII
|
rider (Eros?) on a hippocamp, right
|
FITA 336
|
Vives and Grant attributed this coin to Carteia, but it is excluded here from the coinage of that city. Nevertheless, a Spanish origin may seem likely, as specimens oft his coin occur in Spanish collections.
|
TO DO: create uncertain mint, Hispania ?
|
4
|
|
|
formerly coll. D. Julio Mellado = Vives, pl. CXXIX, 14
|
|
|
|
1
|
|
|
|
|
|
no |
no |
no |
|
[show]
[edit]
|
| I |
5418 |
Uncertain
|
Uncertain
|
Uncertain
|
|
|
|
Æ (18 mm)
|
Augustus |
EX D D
|
bare head, right
|
AVFIDIVS RVFVS IIII
|
rider (Eros?) on a hippocamp, right
|
FITA 336
|
Vives and Grant attributed this coin to Carteia, but it is excluded here from the coinage of that city. Nevertheless, a Spanish origin may seem likely, as specimens oft his coin occur in Spanish collections.
|
TO DO: create uncertain mint, Hispania ?
|
5
|
|
|
Herrero 20 May 1991, lot 31
|
4.14
|
|
|
1
|
|
|
|
|
|
no |
no |
no |
|
[show]
[edit]
|
| I |
5418 |
Uncertain
|
Uncertain
|
Uncertain
|
|
|
|
Æ (18 mm)
|
Augustus |
EX D D
|
bare head, right
|
AVFIDIVS RVFVS IIII
|
rider (Eros?) on a hippocamp, right
|
FITA 336
|
Vives and Grant attributed this coin to Carteia, but it is excluded here from the coinage of that city. Nevertheless, a Spanish origin may seem likely, as specimens oft his coin occur in Spanish collections.
|
TO DO: create uncertain mint, Hispania ?
|
6
|
|
|
CNG EA 287, 26 Sept. 2012, lot 300
|
4.63
|
19
|
3
|
1
|
|
|
|
|
|
no |
no |
yes |
https://www.coinarchives.com/a/openlink.php?l=539409|959|300|1ccbe3bf0ce6b28063d74864e70d7aef
|
[show]
[edit]
|
| I |
5419 |
Uncertain
|
Uncertain
|
Uncertain
|
|
|
|
Æ (19 mm)
|
Augustus |
AVGVST TR PO[T]
|
bare head, left
|
|
diademed head, left (uncertain letters before?)
|
|
The rev. legend (?) is clearer on 2. Presumably from Syria: as well as provenance, compare the obv. with the coinage of Antioch (e.g., 4248). Both coins schown by Barag are from the same dies as the Glasgow piece (5419/2); 2-3 clearly have the aramaic legend shin nun taf (i.e. year) III followed by another character which might be aten, but might be something else. Probably not Nabatean (fabric, inscription). Cf. parallel of Zenodorus at Chalcis.
|
|
1
|
P
|
1972/1341-4
|
|
7.97
|
19
|
12
|
1
|
|
|
|
|
bought by H. Seyrig in Beirut
|
no |
no |
no |
https://gallica.bnf.fr/ark:/12148/btv1b84987829
|
[show]
[edit]
|
| I |
5419 |
Uncertain
|
Uncertain
|
Uncertain
|
|
|
|
Æ (19 mm)
|
Augustus |
AVGVST TR PO[T]
|
bare head, left
|
|
diademed head, left (uncertain letters before?)
|
|
The rev. legend (?) is clearer on 2. Presumably from Syria: as well as provenance, compare the obv. with the coinage of Antioch (e.g., 4248). Both coins schown by Barag are from the same dies as the Glasgow piece (5419/2); 2-3 clearly have the aramaic legend shin nun taf (i.e. year) III followed by another character which might be aten, but might be something else. Probably not Nabatean (fabric, inscription). Cf. parallel of Zenodorus at Chalcis.
|
|
2
|
G
|
|
Hunter 738, no. 62, pl. CII.28 = SNG 4983
|
4.68
|
19
|
12
|
1
|
|
|
|
|
|
no |
no |
no |
|
[show]
[edit]
|
| I |
5419 |
Uncertain
|
Uncertain
|
Uncertain
|
|
|
|
Æ (19 mm)
|
Augustus |
AVGVST TR PO[T]
|
bare head, left
|
|
diademed head, left (uncertain letters before?)
|
|
The rev. legend (?) is clearer on 2. Presumably from Syria: as well as provenance, compare the obv. with the coinage of Antioch (e.g., 4248). Both coins schown by Barag are from the same dies as the Glasgow piece (5419/2); 2-3 clearly have the aramaic legend shin nun taf (i.e. year) III followed by another character which might be aten, but might be something else. Probably not Nabatean (fabric, inscription). Cf. parallel of Zenodorus at Chalcis.
|
|
3
|
|
|
Shown by Barag, 22 June 1991
|
7.62
|
19
|
|
1
|
|
|
|
|
|
no |
no |
no |
|
[show]
[edit]
|
| I |
5419 |
Uncertain
|
Uncertain
|
Uncertain
|
|
|
|
Æ (19 mm)
|
Augustus |
AVGVST TR PO[T]
|
bare head, left
|
|
diademed head, left (uncertain letters before?)
|
|
The rev. legend (?) is clearer on 2. Presumably from Syria: as well as provenance, compare the obv. with the coinage of Antioch (e.g., 4248). Both coins schown by Barag are from the same dies as the Glasgow piece (5419/2); 2-3 clearly have the aramaic legend shin nun taf (i.e. year) III followed by another character which might be aten, but might be something else. Probably not Nabatean (fabric, inscription). Cf. parallel of Zenodorus at Chalcis.
|
|
4
|
|
|
Shown by Barag
|
6.84
|
|
|
1
|
|
|
|
|
'from Jordan'
|
no |
no |
no |
|
[show]
[edit]
|
| I |
5419 |
Uncertain
|
Uncertain
|
Uncertain
|
|
|
|
Æ (19 mm)
|
Augustus |
AVGVST TR PO[T]
|
bare head, left
|
|
diademed head, left (uncertain letters before?)
|
|
The rev. legend (?) is clearer on 2. Presumably from Syria: as well as provenance, compare the obv. with the coinage of Antioch (e.g., 4248). Both coins schown by Barag are from the same dies as the Glasgow piece (5419/2); 2-3 clearly have the aramaic legend shin nun taf (i.e. year) III followed by another character which might be aten, but might be something else. Probably not Nabatean (fabric, inscription). Cf. parallel of Zenodorus at Chalcis.
|
|
5
|
|
|
CNG EA 400, 28 June 2017, lot 542
|
7.27
|
21.1
|
12
|
1
|
|
|
|
|
|
no |
no |
no |
https://www.coinarchives.com/a/openlink.php?l=1015724|1976|542|270f64710dbbc2450883d30101f0046e
|
[show]
[edit]
|
| I |
5419 |
Uncertain
|
Uncertain
|
Uncertain
|
|
|
|
Æ (19 mm)
|
Augustus |
AVGVST TR PO[T]
|
bare head, left
|
|
diademed head, left (uncertain letters before?)
|
|
The rev. legend (?) is clearer on 2. Presumably from Syria: as well as provenance, compare the obv. with the coinage of Antioch (e.g., 4248). Both coins schown by Barag are from the same dies as the Glasgow piece (5419/2); 2-3 clearly have the aramaic legend shin nun taf (i.e. year) III followed by another character which might be aten, but might be something else. Probably not Nabatean (fabric, inscription). Cf. parallel of Zenodorus at Chalcis.
|
|
6
|
|
|
CNG 91, 19 Sept. 2012, lot 661
|
7.7
|
22
|
12
|
1
|
|
|
|
|
|
no |
no |
no |
https://www.coinarchives.com/a/openlink.php?l=518613|929|661|93f60d0a5cf026677d55bd2bfbb14399
|
[show]
[edit]
|
| I |
5419 |
Uncertain
|
Uncertain
|
Uncertain
|
|
|
|
Æ (19 mm)
|
Augustus |
AVGVST TR PO[T]
|
bare head, left
|
|
diademed head, left (uncertain letters before?)
|
|
The rev. legend (?) is clearer on 2. Presumably from Syria: as well as provenance, compare the obv. with the coinage of Antioch (e.g., 4248). Both coins schown by Barag are from the same dies as the Glasgow piece (5419/2); 2-3 clearly have the aramaic legend shin nun taf (i.e. year) III followed by another character which might be aten, but might be something else. Probably not Nabatean (fabric, inscription). Cf. parallel of Zenodorus at Chalcis.
|
|
7
|
|
|
Roma Numismatics XXII, 8 Oct. 2021, lot 527
|
7.9
|
22
|
12
|
1
|
|
|
|
|
|
no |
no |
yes |
|
[show]
[edit]
|
| I |
5420 |
Uncertain
|
Uncertain
|
Uncertain
|
|
|
|
Æ (26 mm)
|
Augustus |
ϹΕΒΑϹΤΟΥ ΘΕ
|
bare head, right
|
ΑΓΡΙΠΠΑ [ ] ΑΓΡΙΠΠ[ ] ΚΑΙ ΙΟΥΛ[Ι]ΑϹ ΥΙΟ[Ϲ]
|
togate figure of Agrippa Postumus standing, right
|
FITA 362
|
Grant was presumably correct in dating the coin between the birth of Agrippa Postumus in 12 BC and the disgrace of Julia in 2 BC. See 5421.
|
to do: create a person for Agrippa Postumus?
|
1
|
P
|
incertaines
|
|
14.45
|
26
|
12
|
1
|
|
|
|
|
|
no |
no |
yes |
https://gallica.bnf.fr/ark:/12148/btv1b8482936m
|
[show]
[edit]
|
| I |
5421 |
Uncertain
|
Uncertain
|
Uncertain
|
|
|
|
Æ (20 mm)
|
Julius Caesar |
ΘΕΟϹ
|
bare head of Caesar, right
|
ϹΕΒΑϹΤΟΥ ΘΕ
|
bare head of Augustus, right
|
BMC Thessalonica 61
|
The attribution to Thessalonica was based on the general similarity with 1554-5, but has been rejected by I. Touratsoglou, Die Münzstätte von Thessaloniki in der römischen Kaiserzeit, p. 43, n. 69; the style is different, as is the die axis. As Touratsoglou has suggested, the piece should perhaps be associated with 5420, in view of the similar legend; the style of the two pieces, however, does not seem identical, and some doubt about the association remains. For a similar family group, see Apamea 2010–2010A. It is not clear if ΘΕ refers to Θεός (if so, why omit the last two letters?), or is part of another word such as an ethnic (hence the original attribution to Thessalonica).
|
|
1
|
L
|
|
BMC Thessalonica 61
|
6.92
|
20
|
7
|
1
|
|
|
|
|
|
no |
no |
no |
|
[show]
[edit]
|
| I |
5421 |
Uncertain
|
Uncertain
|
Uncertain
|
|
|
|
Æ (20 mm)
|
Julius Caesar |
ΘΕΟϹ
|
bare head of Caesar, right
|
ϹΕΒΑϹΤΟΥ ΘΕ
|
bare head of Augustus, right
|
BMC Thessalonica 61
|
The attribution to Thessalonica was based on the general similarity with 1554-5, but has been rejected by I. Touratsoglou, Die Münzstätte von Thessaloniki in der römischen Kaiserzeit, p. 43, n. 69; the style is different, as is the die axis. As Touratsoglou has suggested, the piece should perhaps be associated with 5420, in view of the similar legend; the style of the two pieces, however, does not seem identical, and some doubt about the association remains. For a similar family group, see Apamea 2010–2010A. It is not clear if ΘΕ refers to Θεός (if so, why omit the last two letters?), or is part of another word such as an ethnic (hence the original attribution to Thessalonica).
|
|
2
|
P
|
1276
|
|
8.97
|
20
|
7
|
1
|
|
|
|
|
|
no |
no |
no |
https://gallica.bnf.fr/ark:/12148/btv1b8591110t
|
[show]
[edit]
|
| I |
5421 |
Uncertain
|
Uncertain
|
Uncertain
|
|
|
|
Æ (20 mm)
|
Julius Caesar |
ΘΕΟϹ
|
bare head of Caesar, right
|
ϹΕΒΑϹΤΟΥ ΘΕ
|
bare head of Augustus, right
|
BMC Thessalonica 61
|
The attribution to Thessalonica was based on the general similarity with 1554-5, but has been rejected by I. Touratsoglou, Die Münzstätte von Thessaloniki in der römischen Kaiserzeit, p. 43, n. 69; the style is different, as is the die axis. As Touratsoglou has suggested, the piece should perhaps be associated with 5420, in view of the similar legend; the style of the two pieces, however, does not seem identical, and some doubt about the association remains. For a similar family group, see Apamea 2010–2010A. It is not clear if ΘΕ refers to Θεός (if so, why omit the last two letters?), or is part of another word such as an ethnic (hence the original attribution to Thessalonica).
|
|
3
|
G
|
|
Hunter 37
|
|
20
|
|
1
|
|
|
|
|
|
no |
no |
no |
|
[show]
[edit]
|
| I |
5421 |
Uncertain
|
Uncertain
|
Uncertain
|
|
|
|
Æ (20 mm)
|
Julius Caesar |
ΘΕΟϹ
|
bare head of Caesar, right
|
ϹΕΒΑϹΤΟΥ ΘΕ
|
bare head of Augustus, right
|
BMC Thessalonica 61
|
The attribution to Thessalonica was based on the general similarity with 1554-5, but has been rejected by I. Touratsoglou, Die Münzstätte von Thessaloniki in der römischen Kaiserzeit, p. 43, n. 69; the style is different, as is the die axis. As Touratsoglou has suggested, the piece should perhaps be associated with 5420, in view of the similar legend; the style of the two pieces, however, does not seem identical, and some doubt about the association remains. For a similar family group, see Apamea 2010–2010A. It is not clear if ΘΕ refers to Θεός (if so, why omit the last two letters?), or is part of another word such as an ethnic (hence the original attribution to Thessalonica).
|
|
4
|
B
|
51/1970
|
|
|
20
|
|
1
|
|
|
|
|
|
no |
no |
no |
|
[show]
[edit]
|
| I |
5421 |
Uncertain
|
Uncertain
|
Uncertain
|
|
|
|
Æ (20 mm)
|
Julius Caesar |
ΘΕΟϹ
|
bare head of Caesar, right
|
ϹΕΒΑϹΤΟΥ ΘΕ
|
bare head of Augustus, right
|
BMC Thessalonica 61
|
The attribution to Thessalonica was based on the general similarity with 1554-5, but has been rejected by I. Touratsoglou, Die Münzstätte von Thessaloniki in der römischen Kaiserzeit, p. 43, n. 69; the style is different, as is the die axis. As Touratsoglou has suggested, the piece should perhaps be associated with 5420, in view of the similar legend; the style of the two pieces, however, does not seem identical, and some doubt about the association remains. For a similar family group, see Apamea 2010–2010A. It is not clear if ΘΕ refers to Θεός (if so, why omit the last two letters?), or is part of another word such as an ethnic (hence the original attribution to Thessalonica).
|
|
5
|
V
|
GR 27335/4
|
|
|
20
|
|
1
|
|
|
|
|
|
no |
no |
no |
|
[show]
[edit]
|
| I |
5421 |
Uncertain
|
Uncertain
|
Uncertain
|
|
|
|
Æ (20 mm)
|
Julius Caesar |
ΘΕΟϹ
|
bare head of Caesar, right
|
ϹΕΒΑϹΤΟΥ ΘΕ
|
bare head of Augustus, right
|
BMC Thessalonica 61
|
The attribution to Thessalonica was based on the general similarity with 1554-5, but has been rejected by I. Touratsoglou, Die Münzstätte von Thessaloniki in der römischen Kaiserzeit, p. 43, n. 69; the style is different, as is the die axis. As Touratsoglou has suggested, the piece should perhaps be associated with 5420, in view of the similar legend; the style of the two pieces, however, does not seem identical, and some doubt about the association remains. For a similar family group, see Apamea 2010–2010A. It is not clear if ΘΕ refers to Θεός (if so, why omit the last two letters?), or is part of another word such as an ethnic (hence the original attribution to Thessalonica).
|
|
6
|
Mu
|
72
|
|
7.46
|
20
|
|
1
|
|
|
|
|
|
no |
no |
no |
|
[show]
[edit]
|
| I |
5421 |
Uncertain
|
Uncertain
|
Uncertain
|
|
|
|
Æ (20 mm)
|
Julius Caesar |
ΘΕΟϹ
|
bare head of Caesar, right
|
ϹΕΒΑϹΤΟΥ ΘΕ
|
bare head of Augustus, right
|
BMC Thessalonica 61
|
The attribution to Thessalonica was based on the general similarity with 1554-5, but has been rejected by I. Touratsoglou, Die Münzstätte von Thessaloniki in der römischen Kaiserzeit, p. 43, n. 69; the style is different, as is the die axis. As Touratsoglou has suggested, the piece should perhaps be associated with 5420, in view of the similar legend; the style of the two pieces, however, does not seem identical, and some doubt about the association remains. For a similar family group, see Apamea 2010–2010A. It is not clear if ΘΕ refers to Θεός (if so, why omit the last two letters?), or is part of another word such as an ethnic (hence the original attribution to Thessalonica).
|
|
7
|
|
|
P. Villemur coll. = CNG MBS 78, 14 May 2008, lot 1200
|
7.74
|
19
|
7
|
1
|
|
|
|
|
|
no |
no |
no |
https://www.coinarchives.com/a/openlink.php?l=213425|293|1200|220a9986ced79d1c605679a61204b6d6
|
[show]
[edit]
|
| I |
5421 |
Uncertain
|
Uncertain
|
Uncertain
|
|
|
|
Æ (20 mm)
|
Julius Caesar |
ΘΕΟϹ
|
bare head of Caesar, right
|
ϹΕΒΑϹΤΟΥ ΘΕ
|
bare head of Augustus, right
|
BMC Thessalonica 61
|
The attribution to Thessalonica was based on the general similarity with 1554-5, but has been rejected by I. Touratsoglou, Die Münzstätte von Thessaloniki in der römischen Kaiserzeit, p. 43, n. 69; the style is different, as is the die axis. As Touratsoglou has suggested, the piece should perhaps be associated with 5420, in view of the similar legend; the style of the two pieces, however, does not seem identical, and some doubt about the association remains. For a similar family group, see Apamea 2010–2010A. It is not clear if ΘΕ refers to Θεός (if so, why omit the last two letters?), or is part of another word such as an ethnic (hence the original attribution to Thessalonica).
|
|
8
|
|
|
SNG Evelpidis 1327
|
8.25
|
20
|
|
1
|
|
|
|
|
|
no |
no |
no |
|
[show]
[edit]
|
| I |
5421 |
Uncertain
|
Uncertain
|
Uncertain
|
|
|
|
Æ (20 mm)
|
Julius Caesar |
ΘΕΟϹ
|
bare head of Caesar, right
|
ϹΕΒΑϹΤΟΥ ΘΕ
|
bare head of Augustus, right
|
BMC Thessalonica 61
|
The attribution to Thessalonica was based on the general similarity with 1554-5, but has been rejected by I. Touratsoglou, Die Münzstätte von Thessaloniki in der römischen Kaiserzeit, p. 43, n. 69; the style is different, as is the die axis. As Touratsoglou has suggested, the piece should perhaps be associated with 5420, in view of the similar legend; the style of the two pieces, however, does not seem identical, and some doubt about the association remains. For a similar family group, see Apamea 2010–2010A. It is not clear if ΘΕ refers to Θεός (if so, why omit the last two letters?), or is part of another word such as an ethnic (hence the original attribution to Thessalonica).
|
|
9
|
|
|
Gorny & Mosch 191, 11 Oct. 2010, lot 1772
|
5.57
|
20
|
|
1
|
|
|
|
|
|
no |
no |
no |
https://www.coinarchives.com/a/openlink.php?l=379349|687|1772|775662fe74d2fd4310dabd8c3df018d8
|
[show]
[edit]
|
| I |
5421 |
Uncertain
|
Uncertain
|
Uncertain
|
|
|
|
Æ (20 mm)
|
Julius Caesar |
ΘΕΟϹ
|
bare head of Caesar, right
|
ϹΕΒΑϹΤΟΥ ΘΕ
|
bare head of Augustus, right
|
BMC Thessalonica 61
|
The attribution to Thessalonica was based on the general similarity with 1554-5, but has been rejected by I. Touratsoglou, Die Münzstätte von Thessaloniki in der römischen Kaiserzeit, p. 43, n. 69; the style is different, as is the die axis. As Touratsoglou has suggested, the piece should perhaps be associated with 5420, in view of the similar legend; the style of the two pieces, however, does not seem identical, and some doubt about the association remains. For a similar family group, see Apamea 2010–2010A. It is not clear if ΘΕ refers to Θεός (if so, why omit the last two letters?), or is part of another word such as an ethnic (hence the original attribution to Thessalonica).
|
|
10
|
|
|
CNG 88, 14 Sept. 2011, lot 1112
|
5.77
|
20
|
6
|
1
|
|
|
|
|
|
no |
no |
no |
https://www.coinarchives.com/a/openlink.php?l=428465|775|1112|de55285e6c25e0a229c4063d00807c03
|
[show]
[edit]
|
| I |
5421 |
Uncertain
|
Uncertain
|
Uncertain
|
|
|
|
Æ (20 mm)
|
Julius Caesar |
ΘΕΟϹ
|
bare head of Caesar, right
|
ϹΕΒΑϹΤΟΥ ΘΕ
|
bare head of Augustus, right
|
BMC Thessalonica 61
|
The attribution to Thessalonica was based on the general similarity with 1554-5, but has been rejected by I. Touratsoglou, Die Münzstätte von Thessaloniki in der römischen Kaiserzeit, p. 43, n. 69; the style is different, as is the die axis. As Touratsoglou has suggested, the piece should perhaps be associated with 5420, in view of the similar legend; the style of the two pieces, however, does not seem identical, and some doubt about the association remains. For a similar family group, see Apamea 2010–2010A. It is not clear if ΘΕ refers to Θεός (if so, why omit the last two letters?), or is part of another word such as an ethnic (hence the original attribution to Thessalonica).
|
|
11
|
|
|
CNG 108, 16 May 2018, lot 449 = CNG MBS 75, 23 May 2007, lot 798
|
7.74
|
21.2
|
6
|
1
|
|
|
|
|
|
no |
no |
yes |
https://www.coinarchives.com/a/openlink.php?l=1160126|2332|449|6b4a2c8b6d48cc11ac81b85974a45d73
|
[show]
[edit]
|
| I |
5421 |
Uncertain
|
Uncertain
|
Uncertain
|
|
|
|
Æ (20 mm)
|
Julius Caesar |
ΘΕΟϹ
|
bare head of Caesar, right
|
ϹΕΒΑϹΤΟΥ ΘΕ
|
bare head of Augustus, right
|
BMC Thessalonica 61
|
The attribution to Thessalonica was based on the general similarity with 1554-5, but has been rejected by I. Touratsoglou, Die Münzstätte von Thessaloniki in der römischen Kaiserzeit, p. 43, n. 69; the style is different, as is the die axis. As Touratsoglou has suggested, the piece should perhaps be associated with 5420, in view of the similar legend; the style of the two pieces, however, does not seem identical, and some doubt about the association remains. For a similar family group, see Apamea 2010–2010A. It is not clear if ΘΕ refers to Θεός (if so, why omit the last two letters?), or is part of another word such as an ethnic (hence the original attribution to Thessalonica).
|
|
12
|
|
|
Nomos obolos 15, 24 May 2020, lot 535
|
7.13
|
21
|
|
1
|
|
|
GIC 702 (D? (D with hook backwards, at top of D)) |
|
|
no |
no |
no |
|
[show]
[edit]
|
| I |
5421 |
Uncertain
|
Uncertain
|
Uncertain
|
|
|
|
Æ (20 mm)
|
Julius Caesar |
ΘΕΟϹ
|
bare head of Caesar, right
|
ϹΕΒΑϹΤΟΥ ΘΕ
|
bare head of Augustus, right
|
BMC Thessalonica 61
|
The attribution to Thessalonica was based on the general similarity with 1554-5, but has been rejected by I. Touratsoglou, Die Münzstätte von Thessaloniki in der römischen Kaiserzeit, p. 43, n. 69; the style is different, as is the die axis. As Touratsoglou has suggested, the piece should perhaps be associated with 5420, in view of the similar legend; the style of the two pieces, however, does not seem identical, and some doubt about the association remains. For a similar family group, see Apamea 2010–2010A. It is not clear if ΘΕ refers to Θεός (if so, why omit the last two letters?), or is part of another word such as an ethnic (hence the original attribution to Thessalonica).
|
|
13
|
|
|
Gorny & Mosch 293, 6 Mar. 2023, lot 375 (ex NAC 64, 2012, lot 2352)
|
7.9
|
20
|
7
|
1
|
|
|
|
|
|
no |
no |
no |
https://www.coinarchives.com/a/openlink.php?l=2159495|5201|375|a12270673bb8e1ad929376d10bb8b2d5
|
[show]
[edit]
|
| I |
5421 |
Uncertain
|
Uncertain
|
Uncertain
|
|
|
|
Æ (20 mm)
|
Julius Caesar |
ΘΕΟϹ
|
bare head of Caesar, right
|
ϹΕΒΑϹΤΟΥ ΘΕ
|
bare head of Augustus, right
|
BMC Thessalonica 61
|
The attribution to Thessalonica was based on the general similarity with 1554-5, but has been rejected by I. Touratsoglou, Die Münzstätte von Thessaloniki in der römischen Kaiserzeit, p. 43, n. 69; the style is different, as is the die axis. As Touratsoglou has suggested, the piece should perhaps be associated with 5420, in view of the similar legend; the style of the two pieces, however, does not seem identical, and some doubt about the association remains. For a similar family group, see Apamea 2010–2010A. It is not clear if ΘΕ refers to Θεός (if so, why omit the last two letters?), or is part of another word such as an ethnic (hence the original attribution to Thessalonica).
|
|
14
|
|
|
Private coll.
|
6.83
|
20
|
6
|
1
|
|
|
|
GIC 705 (J.M. (=? {ST}.M.)) |
|
no |
no |
no |
|
[show]
[edit]
|
| I |
5422 |
Uncertain
|
Uncertain
|
Uncertain
|
|
|
Charidamos ; Uncertain |
Æ (30 mm)
|
Augustus |
ΕΠΙ ΚΑΙΣΑΡΟΣ ΤΟ ΔΕΥΤΕΡΟΝ
|
bare head of Augustus, right
|
ΧΑΡΙΔΑΜΟΥ ΙΕΡΕΟΣ ΑΥΤΟ[ ]ΑΛ(??)ΑΕΟΣ
|
bearded head, right (Zeus?)
|
FITA 377
|
Grant, FITA, attributed this extraordinary coin to the province of Asia, an attribution supported by reference to a priest, while Howgego suggested Bithynia (GIC 649), an attribution supported by the unusual large size of the coin, though it is rather thin. The countermark otherwise occurs probably in Europe (BNC, pl. 31, no. 742). The attribution, however, remains uncertain, though the coin would be unusual wherever it comes from. Grant's reading of the end of the rev. legend, ΑΥΤΟΜ ΓΡΑΜ(Μ)ΑΤΕΟΣ (the last word in ligature), is by no means sure.
|
|
1
|
V
|
GR 27318
|
|
12.28
|
30
|
12
|
1
|
|
|
|
GIC 649 (monogram {IMP}) |
|
no |
no |
yes |
|
[show]
[edit]
|
| I |
5423 |
Uncertain
|
Uncertain
|
Uncertain
|
|
|
|
Æ (24 mm)
|
Augustus |
ΚΑΙΣΑΡΑ ΣΕΒΑΣΤΟΝ ΘΕΟΝ
|
bare head of Augustus, right
|
ΘΕΟΝ ΑΥΤΟΚΡΑΤΟΡΑ
|
capricorn, right; above, grapes (or cornucopia?); below, globe
|
|
Different dies. See also 5448. Grant suggested a mint in Cilicia, but there is no real evidence. The obverse legend is still unclear. The design is quite reminiscent of later coins of Amisus (of Trajan = Rec 77a: e.g. L). -- See now M. Amandry, Une mystérieuse émission provinciale tibérienne frappée en Asie Mineure, in R.Bland and D. Calomino (eds), Studies in Ancient Coinage in Honour of Andrew Burnett (London, 2015), pp. 119-23.
|
|
1
|
B
|
18240814, Rauch
|
|
7.85
|
24
|
6
|
1
|
|
|
|
|
|
no |
no |
no |
https://ikmk.smb.museum/object?id=18240814
|
[show]
[edit]
|