coin confirms the existence of Domitianus AD271?

coin confirms the existence of Domitianus AD271? - Printable Version

+- RomanArmyTalk (https://www.romanarmytalk.com/rat)
+-- Forum: Research Arena (https://www.romanarmytalk.com/rat/forumdisplay.php?fid=4)
+--- Forum: Roman Military History & Archaeology (https://www.romanarmytalk.com/rat/forumdisplay.php?fid=8)
+--- Thread: coin confirms the existence of Domitianus AD271? (/showthread.php?tid=1149)

coin confirms the existence of Domitianus AD271? - Luca - 02-26-2004

www.romanhideout.com/News...040226.asp

Re: coin confirms the existence of Domitianus AD271? - FlaviusCrispus - 02-26-2004

This is indeed an amazing discovery, although it confirms an earlier find rather than identifying a "new" emperor. One coin of Domitianus II (as I guess he'll now be called) has been known for more than a century and was even catalogued in volume V of Roman Imperial Coinage (published ca. 1935), with the following entry: "In 1900 a hoard o0f 1300 coins, from Gordian III to Aurelian, was discovered at Cleons, Loire Inferieure, and fortunately fell into the competent hands of Colonel Allotte de la Fuye. The bulk of the hoard consisted mostly of coins of the Gallic Empire... and one coin of Gallic fabric which bore the obverse inscriptioon IMP C DOMITIANVS P F AVG.... The portrait is that of a large-featured, heavily bearded ban, distinguishable from those of Victorinus and Tetricus I, though the style of the coin is similar to their regular coinage... Though we have no historical record of any western usurper named Domitianus, there seems no reason to doubt the genuineness of the coin." 
 
Interestingly enough, there is another obscure coin of an apparent Roman usurper named Silbannacus in the BM, which was confirmed ca. 1996 by a second coin discovery in France. This dude has proven baffling, since there are no historical references to anyone named Silbannacus in Roman history (with Domitianus, we at least have a general of that name in the region around the same time). I'm now at work on a research paper which, I think, establishes the identity of the mysterious Silbannacus and places him in the context of the Gallic rebellion, ca. AD 259-260. Stay tuned. 
 
T. Flavius Crispus 
Legio VI Victrix Pia Fidelis 
California, USA

Re: coin confirms the existence of Domitianus AD271? - Robert Vermaat - 02-26-2004

Guys, Antoninus and me were ahead of you, and I even posted a picture of the coin! 
[url=http://pub45.ezboard.com/fromanarmytalkfrm1.showMessage?topicID=878.topic" target="top]pub45.ezboard.com/fromanarmytalkfrm1.showMessage?topicID=878.topic[/url] 
 
Valete, 
Valerius/Robert

Re: coin confirms the existence of Domitianus AD271? - Luca - 02-27-2004

uh! sorry I didn't open that topic. 
Cool pics!

Re: coin confirms the existence of Domitianus AD271? - FlaviusCrispus - 02-27-2004

Valerius-- 
 
Right-- I actually noticed your earlier post on the Newbie Caesar. The point I was trying to make is that the Times and BBC reporting on this issue has been rather sloppy. The thrust of both stories is that Domitianus is a "new" Caesar, previously unrecorded, which is not the case. The Times even claims the previously known coin of Domitianus was "believed to be a forgery," but this is also not the case-- RIC and most scholars accepted it as genuine, as it came from a recorded hoard. 
 
I would imagine the publicity means more coins of Domitianus will start to show up, because people will start scrutinizing coins in mid-third century Gallic hoards more closely (and because the Bulgarian forgers will start cranking out fakes!). On first glance, the Domitianus piece could easily be passed over as another late Postumus, Victorinus or Tetricus issue. There are hundreds, if not thousands of Gallic Empire coins found every year, and the legends on these pieces are often difficult to decipher. 
 
I'd also like to point out that the fact we know the context of the Domitianus coin, and can therefor confirm its authenticity, is a tribute to Britain's enlightened Treasure Trove law. 
In many countries, metal detectoring in search of ancient artifacts (derided as "treasure hunting" by many academics) is flat-out illegal, and any coins or artifacts found in this manner are liable to seized by the government and the finder arrested. That doesn't really discourage the practice, it just forces it underground, so that the context of many finds simply goes unreported. Britain seeks to regulate the practice, rather than banning it outright, and as a result many important finds by private individuals are reported to the authorities and the local experts notified, so that the context and content of the find are properly recorded. 
 
T. Flavius Crispus 
Legio VI Victrix Pia Fidelis 
California, USA Edited by: <A HREF=http://pub45.ezboard.com/bromanarmytalk.showUserPublicProfile?gid=flaviuscrispus@romanarmytalk>FlaviusCrispus</A> <IMG HEIGHT=10 WIDTH=10 SRC="http://photos.groups.yahoo.com/group/legiovi/vwp?.dir=/Flavius+photo&.src=gr&.dnm=flavhead2.jpg" BORDER=0> at: 2/27/04 8:24 pm

Re: coin confirms the existence of Domitianus AD271? - Daniel S Peterson - 02-28-2004

Crispus, you're a coin guy. I have a Sestertius of Trajan with his pentagon-shaped port/harbor on the back. It's not in great shape, but is definately what it is. I couldn't find it in my 'basic' coin books and believe it might be quite rare. Do you know much about this coin? 
 
Dan

Re: coin confirms the existence of Domitianus AD271? - FlaviusCrispus - 02-29-2004

Ave, Dan! 
 
It sounds like you've got an example of the extremely rare Trajan "Port of Ostia" sestertius. Nero struck one in the mid 60s, showing an bird's eye view of a circular harbor, ships, and other interesting architectural details. It marked the completion of his adoptive father's rebuilding of Ostia to provide a winter harbor for Rome. Unfortunately, the new harbor also proved vulnerable to bad weather, so Trajan underook another rebuilding sometime after the Dacian wars. He, too, marked the project with a coin, this time showing a polygon-shaped harbor. There are probably fewer than 20-30 examples of this type recorded, so it's highly sought-after by collectors of architectural reverse types. 
 
When I get back to the office Monday, I'll give you some reference numbers on the coin and some examples of sales prices achieved at auction. 
 
Dan, where are you now? I'm coming over to Munich next week (Thursday, to be exact) and might have a free day or two to do some traveling. I'll be in town to pick up a couple of extremely exciting artifacts, including a complete muscle cuirass! Any chance of getting together? Failing that, are there any reenactors or purveyors of Roman stuff in the vicinity of Munich you could turn me on to? You can contact me off-list at [email protected] . Or, if you feel like spending some of those inflated euros, my phone numbers are (310) 450-8634 (days,work) and (661) 753-9771 (evenings). 
 
T. Flavius Crispus 
Legio VI Victrix Pia Fidelis 
California, USA Edited by: <A HREF=http://pub45.ezboard.com/bromanarmytalk.showUserPublicProfile?gid=flaviuscrispus@romanarmytalk>FlaviusCrispus</A> <IMG HEIGHT=10 WIDTH=10 SRC="http://photos.groups.yahoo.com/group/legiovi/vwp?.dir=/Flavius+photo&.src=gr&.dnm=flavhead2.jpg" BORDER=0> at: 2/29/04 6:10 pm

Re: coin confirms the existence of Domitianus AD271? - Daniel S Peterson - 02-29-2004

Flavius, 
You should have come a week earlier. There was a fairly big ancient coin and relic show TODAY in Konz, near Trier, which is close to where I live. See the Plumata post for more details. 
 
Dan

Re: coin confirms the existence of Domitianus AD271? - FlaviusCrispus - 03-01-2004

OK, Dan, here's more info on your coin: 
 
The harbor depicted is not Ostia, as I remembered, but Centumcellae (now Civitavecchia). Trajan built this port starting in AD 106 because Ostia was becoming increasingly overburdened and unstatisfactory; it remains Rome's primary seaport to this day. 
 
Depending on the obverse legend, it could either be RIC 471 (ob. legend ends COS V P P), RIC 631 (ob. legend ends COS VI P P, laureate head right) or 632 (laureate, draped bust right). All of these coins are rated as Rarity 2, which means 10-15 known specimens known at time of publication. 
 
It is also no. 3188 in David Sear's new book, Roman Coins & Their Values Vol. II (Nerva-Severus Alexander). It is valued at $2,500 in fine condition (that is, heavily worn but still legible), $6,500 in very fine condition and a whopping $25,000 in extremely fine condition. 
 
Dan, one of the reasons I am coming to Munich this weekend is for the annual Munich coin and artifact fair. This is a really big event, attended by coin and antiquity dealers from all over Europe and the US; I imagine it ought to be somewhat larger than the Trier fair (although it sounds like you snagged some highly significant pieces there!). You'd also very likely be able to find a Caligula denarius at a reasonable price. 
 
If you'd like to come down to Munich for Saturday and/or Sunday, you can certainly share my hotel room for the night (and no, I'm not being fresh!). I'll wager you'll find some significant military artifacts there, at the very least. 
 
T. Flavius Crispus 
Legio VI Victrix Pia Fidelis 
California, USA