Catalog
See full images - free registration
Continue with Google - no registration!
or register with email
Why register? Just to keep bots out of our catalog. Your email stays private - we will never share it or send you anything uninvited. We guarantee you that!
1 Aureus - Imitating Probus, 276-282
| Issuer | Uncertain Germanic tribes |
|---|---|
| Year | 276-325 |
| Type | Non-circulating coin |
| Value | Log in to see details |
| Currency | Log in to see details |
| Composition | Log in to see details |
| Weight | Log in to see details |
| Diameter | Log in to see details |
| Thickness | Log in to see details |
| Shape | Log in to see details |
| Technique | Log in to see details |
| Orientation | Log in to see details |
| Engraver(s) | Log in to see details |
| In circulation to | Log in to see details |
| Reference(s) | Log in to see details |
| Obverse description | Log in to see details |
|---|---|
| Obverse script | Log in to see details |
| Obverse lettering | Log in to see details |
| Reverse description | Barbarous imitation of a Roman imperial reverse type, depicting a seated figure facing left, likely imitating a deity or personification enthroned, rendered in a schematic and crude style consistent with Germanic die-cutting. The figure appears to hold attributes reminiscent of Roman reverse types associated with Probus-era aurei. A garbled, pseudo-Latin legend surrounds the design, composed of degraded letter forms largely unintelligible as coherent text. A suspension hole is present near the upper edge of the flan, consistent with use as personal adornment. The reverse workmanship is rough, with an irregular flan and uneven strike typical of non-official barbarian gold imitations. |
| Reverse script | Log in to see details |
| Reverse lettering | Log in to see details |
| Edge | Plain |
| Mint | Log in to see details |
| Mintage | Log in to see details |
| Additional information |
Barbarous gold imitations of Roman aurei present one of the more persistent puzzles in late antique numismatics. These pieces were struck by Germanic groups — almost certainly within or just beyond the Rhine-Danube frontier — who had access to Roman gold through payment, plunder, or tribute, and the technical means to produce convincing copies. Probus was a logical model: his reign was long enough that his coinage circulated widely, and his active campaigns along the Germanic frontier guaranteed exposure.
The Calicó cross-reference is instructive. That catalogue's hesitation to assign a firm parallel reflects how idiosyncratic individual barbarous strikes can be — same weight standard, different hand entirely.