Dea Moneta
login
Banner Artemide LX
Majorian Tremissis
Lot # 638 - Majorian (457- 461). AV Tremissis, Ravenna mint. Obv. D N IVL MAIORIANVS P F AVC. Pearl-diademed, draped, and cuirassed bust right. Rev. Latin cross pattée within wreath; large central jewel above; COMOB. RIC X 2610; Depeyrot 23/2; Ranieri 141; Lacam 42. AV. 1.46 g. 14.00 mm. RR. Very rare and superb. Slightly soft strike on reverse, otherwise. EF. Julius Valerius Majorian owned his name to his maternal grandfather, who had been magister militum in Illyricum in the 370s. He had himself served with distinction under Aetius, and in 455 he was considered a possible successor of Valentinian III. Presumably, when he and Ricimer deposed Avitus in October 456, it was intended that he should succeed him, but according to Sidonius Apollinaris, who knew him personally, he was reluctant to assume the burden, and an interregnum of six months followed during which he and Ricimer were in fact masters of the West but the Emperors were nominally Marcian and, after January 457, Leo. Even after he had been proclaimed emperor by the army outside Rome on 1st April 457, he continued to call himself no more than magister militum, and he was not proclaimed at Ravenna until 28 December 457. Just as Avitus had not been acceptable in Italy, so Majorian was not acceptable in Gaul. In 458 he led an army of German mercenaries into the Rhone valley, made himself master of Lyon, which had accepted a Burgundian garrison, and having defeated the Visigoths outside Arles, he compelled them to come to terms. But his Gallic successes in 458/9 were followed by misfortunes in Spain in 460/1. Two naval expeditions planned against Gaiseric met with disaster, and he was forced to return to Italy with no accomplishment to his credit. Such successes as he had had, however, aroused the suspicions of Ricimer: Majorian, who had deserved better things, was seized by treachery at Tortona on 2 August, deposed, and beheaded five days later. AE4 were struck under Majorian at Milan, Ravenna and Rome […] The coins of all three mints are larger and substantially heavier than any Western bronze coins had been since the reign of Honorius. Lacam (1988, 220) has suggested that these unusually high weights are to be explained by Ricimer's need for betterc coin to offer Gundobald's mercenaries when preparing for his campaign against the Vandals, but it is difficult to immagine any troops being satisfied with such miserable scraps of metal. (Grierson-Mays 'Catalogue of Late Roman Coin in the Dumbarton Oaks Collection and in the Whittemore Collection', Washington, 1992, pp. 250-252).
Lot # 639 - Majorian (457-461). AE 13.5 mm. Mediolanum mint. Obv. DN MAIORIANVS PF AVG. Pearl-diademed, draped and cuirassed bust right. Rev. VICTORI-A AVGGG. Victory standing left, holding wreath and palm branch; in exergue, [MD]. RIC X 2645. AE. 1.44 g. 13.50 mm. Scarce. In excellent condition for issue, well centred on unusually regular flan. VF. Julius Valerius Majorian owned his name to his maternal grandfather, who had been magister militum in Illyricum in the 370s. He had himself served with distinction under Aetius, and in 455 he was considered a possible successor of Valentinian III. Presumably, when he and Ricimer deposed Avitus in October 456, it was intended that he should succeed him, but according to Sidonius Apollinaris, who knew him personally, he was reluctant to assume the burden, and an interregnum of six months followed during which he and Ricimer were in fact masters of the West but the Emperors were nominally Marcian and, after January 457, Leo. Even after he had been proclaimed emperor by the army outside Rome on 1st April 457, he continued to call himself no more than magister militum, and he was not proclaimed at Ravenna until 28 December 457. Just as Avitus had not been acceptable in Italy, so Majorian was not acceptable in Gaul. In 458 he led an army of German mercenaries into the Rhone valley, made himself master of Lyon, which had accepted a Burgundian garrison, and having defeated the Visigoths outside Arles, he compelled them to come to terms. But his Gallic successes in 458/9 were followed by misfortunes in Spain in 460/1. Two naval expeditions planned against Gaiseric met with disaster, and he was forced to return to Italy with no accomplishment to his credit. Such successes as he had had, however, aroused the suspicions of Ricimer: Majorian, who had deserved better things, was seized by treachery at Tortona on 2 August, deposed, and beheaded five days later. AE4 were struck under Majorian at Milan, Ravenna and Rome […] The coins of all three mints are larger and substantially heavier than any Western bronze coins had been since the reign of Honorius. Lacam (1988, 220) has suggested that these unusually high weights are to be explained by Ricimer's need for betterc coin to offer Gundobald's mercenaries when preparing for his campaign against the Vandals, but it is difficult to immagine any troops being satisfied with such miserable scraps of metal. (Grierson-Mays 'Catalogue of Late Roman Coin in the Dumbarton Oaks Collection and in the Whittemore Collection', Washington, 1992, pp. 250-252).
Lot # 662 - Ostrogothic Italy. Non-Regal Bronze Issue from the time of Theoderic and Athalaric. AE Follis. Early to mid 6th century. 'Countermarked' early Imperial bronze issue. XLII (mark of value = 42 Nummi) cut into obverse of AE As of Claudius. Obv. TI CLAVDIVS CAESAR [...]. Bare head of Claudius left, XLII cut behind. Rev. LIBERTAS AVGVSTA SC. Libertas, draped, standing front, head right, holding pileus in her right hand and extending her left. For undertype, cf. Claudius RIC I (2nd ed.) 113. AE. 9.89 g. 31.00 mm. R. Rare and interesting, brown patina with malachite spots. Undertype Good F; mark of value. Good 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). The mark of value XLII refer to a twelfth of a silver unit valued at 500 nummi, which itself amount to the 24th fraction 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 seem 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. The only paper devoted solely to these countermarked coins is : 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.