| Note |
Orignal comment: "This coin was assigned to Apamea by Babelon and Reinach but its inclusion in the series of that city (2001-16) is difficult for the following reasons: (1) in Roman times, the coins attributed to Apamea have the ethnic C.I.C., as a colony was founded there by Caesar or planned by Caesar and founded by Antony in c. 42-40 BC; the city did not retain its old name Myrlea which is found on coins dated from the fourth and third century BC; (2) the coinage of Apamea in Roman times has Latin legends; (3) the appearance of the type of Apollo Clarios at Apamea is very strange and would suit a mint like Colophon better. Therefore, as the engraving of the legends is equally bizarre, it is suggested here that this coin might possibly be a modern forgery." --- K. Sommer comments (NC 1996, p. 154 note 31): ‘The coin seems to be a coin of the Greek community of Apamea/Myrlea. The reasons given in RPC for not including the coin under Apamea are not compelling: (1) the fact that there was a colony at the place issuing coins does not necessarily mean that there was no Greek community still continuing in many of its old traditions; in fact, this coin could be taken as evidence that there was; (2) this would explain why the coin has Greek legends; (3) the type of Apollo Clarios is not strange at Apamea/Myrlea, as it was a colony of Colophon (cf. O. Hirschfeld, RE 1, 1894, s.v. Apameia (5), 2664), which is probably why Apollo and his symbols are very prominent on the coinage of Apamea (Rec 10-21, 28, 30f.). Moreover Pliny refers to Apamea as ‘nunc Myrlea Colophoniorum’ (NH V.143; he mentions the ‘colonia Apamena’ in 149), and whatever his source (probably Agrippa, cf. W. Kroll, RE 21, 1, 1951 s.v. Plinius (5), 271-439, 304f.), as he mentions Iuliopolis and Germanicopolis in the same context, it must be after the establishment of the colony at Apamea. Therefore as such an unexpected coin is unlikely to be a forgery, it should be accepted as authentic.’ See also B. Woytek, ‘The Coinage of Apamea Myrlea under Trajan and the Problem of Double Communities in the Roman East’, NC 171 (2011), pp. 121-32.
|