Septimius Severus Avg Imp VIII

Well I got nothing then. However, I'm eagerly waiting to hear what some of our experts say on this stuff.

Here goes

# 1,3,4 Rome
# 2 & 6 Old style
# 5 New style.

Knowing me I have got it completely wrong.

Not sure which is the odd one out, apart from the drapes on coin 4 which Ellarby has already pointed out.

Correct me if I am wrong, but it appears to me that not all of these coins are of the IMP VIII series. Coin #2 appears to be IMP VII and Coin #3 appears to be IMP VIIII. This might have a bearing on "old style" vs "new style" since the transition took place during IMP VIII. Correct?

As for the draped bust of coin #4, could that be an indication that this was patterned after an aureus?

Forgive me as I puzzle this out.

Obverse inscription break patterns:

1: RT - AV

2: ER - T A

3: RT - AV

4: PE - RT

5: PE - RT

6: RT - AV


The logic:

Coin 3 was just affirmed to be from Rome as an IMP VIIII "with no style differences from IMP VIII at Rome." The beard has two prominent spikes. The RT-AV break may be a marker for Roman style.

Coin 6 has a reduced scale bust with two strong spikes. The characteristic of "New Style" at Laodicea is that it more closely emulated Rome. I then associate Coin 6 with New Style Laodicea. Same break pattern as #3.

Coin 2 also has a reduced size bust and on that ground I attribute it to Laodicea. However the beard is much less prominent, so I associate coin 2 with Eastern mint "old style" due to the contrast with coin 6. Different break pattern than #3 (or "New Style" #6)

If the shorter beard is characteristic "Old Style," then coins 1 and 5 are also old style. Coin 5 has a reduced size bust, so I still associate that with Laodicea. Coin 1 has a larger bust like coins 3 & 4, but a less prominent beard (unless the details are shadowed). Did Rome also produce in "Eastern Old Style," or may we allow a larger bust from an Eastern mint? Against the latter for coin 1 is the break pattern of the obverse inscription which precisely follows that of coins 3 and 6. I still maintain that coin 1 is from Rome, but in beard design shows what we are calling "Old Style" for the East.

For me the pivot is becoming coin 4. This coin has Old Style treatment of the beard and has the same "Eastern" PE - RT break pattern as coin #5. If the supposition that it was patterned after an aureus (draped) is correct, there is an aureus from Laodicea which has these characteristics, but I have not seen a picture so cannot verify a match on the bust size (reverse features Mars).

-----CONCLUSION-----
So it boils down to this:
Coin 1 - Rome, but in Old Style
Coin 2 - Laodicea - Old Style
Coin 3 - Rome (pattern for New Style)
Coin 4 - Laodicea - Old Style (after an aureus)
Coin 5 - Laodicea - Old Style
Coin 6 - Laodicea - New Style

OK.

Coins 1, 3 and 4 are Rome mint with coin 4 being a rare bust type on a denarius as it is draped.
Coins 2 and 5 are Laodicea "Old Style". There is quite a range in style with this issue and I picked a couple of the extremes of style here.
Coin 6 is the Laodicea "New Style" and forms the basis for the evolution of the style through to A.D. 202.

With regards to IMP VII or even IMP VI old style these are ALL mis-readings of coins where the obverse legend extends beyond the end of the bust. This has been confirmed with all examples where die matches have been found that make this clear.

The "Old Style" "IMP VIII" coins seem to continue on from the "IMP II" series from Laodicea.

These are all distinct from the Emesa series which is a different topic entirely.

I don't actively collect Rome mint coins but have a passion for the eastern issues. The best way to understand these is to look at as many coins as you can.

For those interested I have some galleries at FAC with my collection illustrated there.

Rome:-
http://www.forumancientcoins.com/ga...p?album=1471

Alexandria:-
http://www.forumancientcoins.com/ga...p?album=1472

Laocidea IMP II
http://www.forumancientcoins.com/ga...p?album=6014

Laocidea Old IMP VIII
http://www.forumancientcoins.com/ga...p?album=6015

New Style Laodicea
http://www.forumancientcoins.com/ga...p?album=1473

Emesa
http://www.forumancientcoins.com/ga...php?album=56

Contemporary Imitative (aka Barbarous)
http://www.forumancientcoins.com/ga...p?album=1474

I am currently working on putting together based on some recent findings of mint that might change some of the allocation of some of the coins above but that is a work in progress and will have to wait for another day.

Martin

Just like to say thanks Martin for posting these threads.

They've been really educational, interesting and I've thoroughly enjoyed them.I feel I've learnt a great deal.In this thread I only got one wrong..right mint wrong style!

The links are excellent as a research source as well as being a lovely collection

Thanks again for sharing Saludos Paul

Thank you for the links to your collection at Forum. That is a great resource for study. And thank you as well for taking the time to put this lesson together for us. It has been most stimulating for me. I missed on coin 4, which was a tossup for me. I went with "not Rome" because of the obverse break pattern (which really is more "Eastern" than for Rome in this series), combined with an "old Style" treatment of the beard, and the supposition that it was derived from an aureus which pointed me toward the aureus just following BMCRE Eastern mints (Wars)450 (which ironically has this reverse type but with a different inscription). It was in the ballpark, but foul.

Martin has identified coin 4 as a variant of BMCRE W146 from Rome. I think that #149 is a tad closer because it has the same reverse break pattern as Martin's coin. What is fascinating to me is that the next coin listed in BMCRE after #149 is an aureus with a draped and laureate left facing bust, and the victory reverse but with Victory advancing to the right. Call me crazy, but I still think the denarii with draped busts are derived from aurei. The BMCRE footnotes on #146 point in the same direction, with their references to Cohen 419 and the associated C.418.