Naville Numismatics Ltd.
Auction 58 14 Jun 2020
View prices realized
► Sale information
Find similar lots
Domitian caesar, 69 - 81 Aureus circa 77-78, AV 20.2mm., 7.14g. CAESAR AVG F – DOMITIANVS Laureate head r. Rev. Captive kneeling r., offering standard with vexillum; in exergue, COS V. C 48. BMC Vespasian 231. RIC Vespasian 959. CBN Vespasian 205. Calicó 819.
Obverse weel centred, Very Fine/About Very Fine.
The reverse of this remarkably aureus depicts a barbarian kneeling in submission presenting a Roman standard. While the long trousers and cloak clearly identify the figure as a Parthian, the bowl-shaped curly hair style and long beard are a far cry from the portraits found on any contemporary Parthian drachms. These features do, however, quite strongly favour the middle-aged portrait of Mithradates the Great, the Parthian monarch who reigned from 121-91 B.C. We might wonder if the model for this interesting reverse had been an old Parthian tetradrachm or drachm of Sellwood type 24 showing the king with a mid-length beard. Regardless of whether a Parthian coin served as inspiration for the engraver, what is most interesting about this reverse is the complex story behind it. The type mirrors the famous kneeling Parthian reverse of Augustus by the moneyers Turpilianus, Florus, and Durmius c. 19/8 B.C. which commemorated the return of the few surviving captives as well as the Roman military standards from the Roman defeats suffered by Cassius at Carrhae in 53 B.C., by L. Decidius Saxa in Syria in 40 B.C., and by Mark Antony in 36 B.C. Mattingly saw in the type a reference to the Parthian embassy which arrived at Vespasian's court seeking aid against the nomadic Alani, who at the time were pressing upon the northern borders of the Parthian Empire and proving a nuisance. His argument was that Domitian sought to lead an eastern campaign in support of the Parthians against the Alani, but that Vespasian refused to sanction the expedition. This would simply be another instance of Domitian being sidelined by his father and his elder brother.
However, Mattingly's argument does not hold up under closer scrutiny. Curtis Clay questioned why Vespasian would even commemorate his refusal of offering aid to the Parthians, and if he had, would it not have more properly belonged on the coinage of Vespasian himself and not that of his second, younger son? With Mattingly's argument refuted, the question then arises: if there is no event to commemorate, what is the purpose of the reverse? Again, Clay astutely observed that Vespasian was simply reusing older types from circulation so that they would not be lost. In this view, it must first be understood that Vespasian was profiting from Nero's debasement of the coinage in A.D. 64 by actively withdrawing and reissuing pre-64 gold and silver from circulation. In fact, several other reverse types struck the same year as this coin clearly copy earlier reverse types from precious metal issues.
Obverse weel centred, Very Fine/About Very Fine.
The reverse of this remarkably aureus depicts a barbarian kneeling in submission presenting a Roman standard. While the long trousers and cloak clearly identify the figure as a Parthian, the bowl-shaped curly hair style and long beard are a far cry from the portraits found on any contemporary Parthian drachms. These features do, however, quite strongly favour the middle-aged portrait of Mithradates the Great, the Parthian monarch who reigned from 121-91 B.C. We might wonder if the model for this interesting reverse had been an old Parthian tetradrachm or drachm of Sellwood type 24 showing the king with a mid-length beard. Regardless of whether a Parthian coin served as inspiration for the engraver, what is most interesting about this reverse is the complex story behind it. The type mirrors the famous kneeling Parthian reverse of Augustus by the moneyers Turpilianus, Florus, and Durmius c. 19/8 B.C. which commemorated the return of the few surviving captives as well as the Roman military standards from the Roman defeats suffered by Cassius at Carrhae in 53 B.C., by L. Decidius Saxa in Syria in 40 B.C., and by Mark Antony in 36 B.C. Mattingly saw in the type a reference to the Parthian embassy which arrived at Vespasian's court seeking aid against the nomadic Alani, who at the time were pressing upon the northern borders of the Parthian Empire and proving a nuisance. His argument was that Domitian sought to lead an eastern campaign in support of the Parthians against the Alani, but that Vespasian refused to sanction the expedition. This would simply be another instance of Domitian being sidelined by his father and his elder brother.
However, Mattingly's argument does not hold up under closer scrutiny. Curtis Clay questioned why Vespasian would even commemorate his refusal of offering aid to the Parthians, and if he had, would it not have more properly belonged on the coinage of Vespasian himself and not that of his second, younger son? With Mattingly's argument refuted, the question then arises: if there is no event to commemorate, what is the purpose of the reverse? Again, Clay astutely observed that Vespasian was simply reusing older types from circulation so that they would not be lost. In this view, it must first be understood that Vespasian was profiting from Nero's debasement of the coinage in A.D. 64 by actively withdrawing and reissuing pre-64 gold and silver from circulation. In fact, several other reverse types struck the same year as this coin clearly copy earlier reverse types from precious metal issues.