Otho-some clarification required

[expat]

According to the little I have been able to find about the coinage of Otho, the basics are;

Aureus and denarii were struck at Rome

Bronzes, with Latin legends, were cast in Antioch, the reverse has a larger diameter rounding to a slightly narrower obverse, enabling the easier release from the moulds, the production method used there at that time.

Tetradrachms and AE´s with Greek legends were struck at Antioch.

McAlee gives three size classifications for the bronzes,

323a, b and c which seems to be 28-30+mm, 25-27mm and 21-24mm.

RIC, RPC and numerous auction listings have so many attribution mistakes with the wrong obverse legend for the issues with large SC in wreath reverses.

Even those with clearly visible obverse legend of CAE AVG IMP M OTHO are listed as IMP M OTHO CAE AVG.

Any opinions or knowledge of the provincial large SC in wreath reverse would be most welcome. I will post my new acquisition when I am sure of its attribution.

Many thanks in advance

 

 

 

[seth77]

There are many inconsistencies and errors in RPC online -- names of deities in varying forms, reverse characters unidentified, bust types recorded erroneously etc. Since this project is work in progress I think it is expected. 

Otherwise the complexity of Antioch coinages is something that is yet to be fully grasped (Bland, Butcher, McAlee, Prieur, etc) and if we add the very distinct possibility that the mint operating there might have worked on coinages for other cities and towns in Coele, Phoenice and other Syrian areas at large, things get even more complicated. For instance while the late SC coinage for Nero and then Galba and Otho was being produced likely there for the region, the same workshop was working also for Antiochus IV of Commagene for at the very least his coinage for Samosata and Anemurium in Cilicia Trachea.

[shanxi]

1 hour ago, expat said:

Even those with clearly visible obverse legend of CAE AVG IMP M OTHO are listed as IMP M OTHO CAE AVG.

It's the same legend. It just depends where you start reading.

Looking for one of the RPC examples with this legend, it seems logical to me to start reading at 1 o'clock.

https://rpc.ashmus.ox.ac.uk/coins/1/4316

 

also the legends on Othos denarii start with IMP and end with AVG 

 

Edited June 28 by shanxi

[ambr0zie]

1 hour ago, expat said:

Even those with clearly visible obverse legend of CAE AVG IMP M OTHO are listed as IMP M OTHO CAE AVG.

Not sure if I follow. I saw your coin on the other thread - the way you read the legend - you start it at 6 o clock  but it's also logical (or more logical) to start it at 1-2 o clock. 

And judging after the way other legends, for other emperors, are composed, IMP M OTHO CAE(S) AVG sounds more likely. 

My similar example 

27,7 mm, 14,97 g.
Syria, Seleucis and Pieria, Antioch. Otho 69 AD. Ӕ.
IMP M OTHO CAE(S) AVG (clockwise), laureate head of Otho, r. / S C, inscription in a laurel wreath of eight leaves. Countermarked - Howgego 245 - Athena facing right with shield and spear.
RPC I 4318; BMC 207; 209–11; McAlee 321c.

Too bad these rarely show Otho's name because of wear, bad flans - or countermarks in my example. 

Edited June 28 by ambr0zie

[expat]

@ambr0zie thanks for that. I have just been informed that the legend, starting from 6 o´clock, didn´t start till about 30-40 years later.