Dea Moneta
login
Banner Artemide LXI
Lot # 686 - Aelia Pulcheria, sister of Theodosius II and wife of Marcian (414-453). AV Tremissis. Constantinople mint, c. 439 AD. Obv. AEL PVLCHERIA AVG. Pearl-diademed and draped bust right, wearing necklace and earrings, hair elaborately weaved with long plait up the back of head and tucked under diadem. Rev. Cross within wreath; below CONOB*. RIC X 280; Depeyrot 72/4. AV. 1.49 g. 15.00 mm. RRR. Very rare and superb; brilliant surfaces with delicate warm tone; faint graffito on obverse. EF. Ex Papillon Numismatics 6, 2021, 383. Aelia Pulcheria, the daughter, sister and wife to three different East Roman emperors, played a critical role in maintaining the stability of the Eastern Roman regime, during the tumultuous early to mid-fifth century AD. Born circa AD 398 to Arcadius and Aelia Eudoxia, she had a far more dominating personality than her timid younger brother, Theodosius II. When Arcadius died in AD 408 and Theodosius ascended the throne, at the age of seven, Pulcheria took upon herself the role of her brother's protector. In AD 414, she came of age and the Senate declared her Augusta, or Empress, whereupon she took over the regency herself. She declared her intent to remain a virgin (possibly to avoid a political marriage), and took her brother's education into her own hands, seeing to it he learned how to look, act, and perform rituals like an emperor; however he lacked backbone, which she had to provide to keep the Theodosian regime in undisputed power. Under her guidance, the Eastern Roman Empire successfully intervened in the West and installed her nephew, Valentinian III, on the throne (AD 424-425), while to the East, a brief war against Persia was successfully prosecuted (AD 421). When Theodosius was killed in a riding accident, in AD 450, Pulcheria briefly ruled as sole empress before bowing to demands that she marry and thus chose a suitable man to rule as Augustus. She wisely chose the lowborn but capable Marcian, who proved to be the strong, even-handed ruler the Empire needed. The year following her marriage, Pulcheria was instrumental in summoning the Fourth Ecumenical Council at Chalcedon, which established the basic principles of teaching the Eastern Orthodox Church. Pulcheria died in AD 453, having kept her vows of virginity and defense of her Imperial dynasty for a half-century and left all of her possessions to the poor. (Heritage 3039, 2021, 31146 note).
Lot # 713 - Ostrogothic Italy. Non-Regal Bronze Issue from the Period of Theoderic and Athalaric. AE Double Follis. Early to mid 6th century. 'Countermarked' early Imperial bronze issue. LXXXIII (mark of value = 83 Nummi) cut into obverse of AE Sestertius of Galba (Rome mint, 68-69 AD). Obv. [SER GALBA] IMP CAES AVG TR P. Laureate head right. Rev. AVGVSTA, S-C. Livia seated right, holding patera and sceptre. Cf. MEC 1, 65; For undertype: Galba RIC I (2nd ed.), 335. AE. 22.33 g. 35.00 mm. RRR. Extremely rare and fascinating. Lovely dark patina with minor earthy deposits. VF. These countermarked issues have long been considered as made in Vandalic North Africa, but the hoard evidence and the results of the latest studies makes it seem that they were, in fact, made in the Ostrogothic Italy, and were in use there during the first quarter or first half of the 6th century (Cf, NAC, May 1993, 457).These countermarked issues have long been considered as made in Vandalic North Africa, but the hoard evidence and the results of the latest studies makes it seem that they were, in fact, made in the Ostrogothic Italy, and were in use there during the first quarter or first half of the 6th century (Cf, NAC, May 1993, 457).The mark of value  XLII refers to a twelfth of a silver unit valued at 500 nummi, which itself amounts to the 24thfraction of a gold solidus valued at 12,000 nummi. (Cf. Grierson, MEC, p.28-31).These are not countermarked coins in the usual sense of word, since the LXII figure was not punched or stamped with a single instrument, but seems to have been cut or incised with several chisel strokes. (C. Morrisson,1983).J. Friedlander suggested that for the more finely incised series the pieces were certainly softened by fire in order to be able to engrave more easily the deep and crude strokes. (“Die Erwerbungen des Konigl. Munzkabinets vom 1.Jan.1877 bis 31 Marz 1878” ZfN VI, 1879, p.1-26).Such crude workmanship seems to point to the markings being done by private persons, at least in the case of the most anomalous countermarks. While for the more finely incised countermarks – like our outstanding example – the role of some official authority cannot be excluded. (C. Morrisson).Tentatively, Morrisson suggests that an official practice of marking and re-issuing older bronzes was followed with varying success by private individuals as and when they came into possession of similar pieces. (Morrisson, C. “The re-use of obsolete coins : the case of Roman imperial bronzes revived in the late fifth century” in: ed. C.N.L.Brooke et al. Studies in Numismatic Method presented to Philip Grierson, Cambridge 1983.XLVI, 487).For completeness of information, two more recent studies are also reported which specifically dealt with the problem of coins with these rebated numerals:Asolati M. "I bronzi Imperiali contromarcati con numerali lXXXIII e XlII: nuove ipotesi interpretative" in: Praestantia nummorum. Temi e note di numismatica tardo antica e alto medievale, Padova 2012, Numismatica Patavina, 11 and Asolati M. "Nuove scoperte sulle monete bronzee d’età imperiale con contromarche XLII e LXXXIII", in Percorsi nel passato. Miscellanea di studi per i 35 anni del Gr.A.V.O. e i 25 anni della Fondazione Colluto, a cura di A. VIGONI, Rubano (PD) 2018 (L’Album 22), pp. 253-265.