[Previous][Contents][Next]

possessed, this was indeed the likeliest place. But, since he wrote, the testimony of Shapuhr's inscription has made that impossible, for the second mint continued to strike after the capture of Valerian and at that time Samosata was in Shapuhr's hands. We must therefore abandon this identification. Voetter had already suggested Cyzicus or Tripolis.15 The finding of these coins at Dura disposes of Cyzicus. Alföldi dismisses Tripolis with a bare "irrtüimlich"; the suggestion was first made because it is generally agreed that Tripolis had a mint under Aurelian, and I do not think the possibility can be entirely excluded. However, Emisa, which was tentatively put forward by Olmstead16 seems to me a much better candidate. If the latest of Gallus' coins were struck there it would be the simplest thing for Valerian to use the facilities ready to hand, and I should assign the beginning of his issues then not to January 255, but to some time in 254, as soon as he had disposed of the ephemeral power of Antoninus. But this is, only hypothesis.17

We may now present the evidence from Dura. The excavation coins are as follows.

Antioch

First emission

IMPCLPLICVALERIANVS AVG Group 1
(1) PMTRPIICOSPP (Alföldi, Pl. V, 1-2) 2 specimens
(2) RESTITVT GENERHVMANI (Pl. V, 3-4) 1 "
(3) PACATORI ORBIS (Pl. V, 8-10) 4 "
(4) FORTVNA REDVX (Pl. V, 11-12) 1 "
(5) VICTORIA AVGG (Pl. V, 13-14) 11 "
(6) PIETATI AVGG (Pl. V, 17-18) 2 "
(7) VICTORIAE AVGG (Pl. V, 20-21) 3 "
(8) VIRTVS AVGG (Pl. V, 22) 6 "
(9) VENVS VICTRIX (Pl. V, 23) 3 "
(10) ROMAE AETERNAE (Pl. VI, 1) 26 "
(11) DIANA LVCIFERA (Pl. VI, 2) 2 "
(12) FELICITAS SAECVLI (Pl. VI, 3-4) 3 "
(13) LAETITIA AVGG (Pl. VI, 5-6) 35 "

15. Numismatische Zeitschrift, 1908, p. 97.
16. See above, pp. 47 f., n. 59.
17. We are now confronted with a difficulty based on style. Alföldi (P. 56, n. 32) says that the close stylistic connection between the first Antiochene issues of Valerian and the last issues of Gallus prove that they come from the same moneyers. If this is so Gallus' last coinage must belong to Antioch or Valerian's first coinage must belong to Emisa. But I do not

   

think that too much need be made of this. Considerations of style in these third-century coins are very unsatisfactory. I can compare or contrast different renderings of the same portrait or the same design, but contrast or comparison of the rendering of different portraits or designs is quite beyond me, and I confess myself sceptical of the ability of others in that respect.

[Previous][Contents][Next]
Created by the Digital Documentation Center at AUB in collaboration with Høgskolen i Østfold, Norway.

990202 MB - Email: hseeden@aub.edu.lb