GALLIENUS son of Valerian I Silver Rare Ancient Roman Coin Virtus Cult i55703

By admin, November 1, 2018

GALLIENUS son of Valerian I Silver Rare Ancient Roman Coin Virtus Cult i55703
GALLIENUS son of Valerian I Silver Rare Ancient Roman Coin Virtus Cult i55703
GALLIENUS son of Valerian I Silver Rare Ancient Roman Coin Virtus Cult i55703

GALLIENUS son of Valerian I Silver Rare Ancient Roman Coin Virtus Cult i55703
Item: i55703 Authentic Ancient Coin of. Gallienus – Roman Emperor : 253-268 A. Silver Antoninianus 22mm (3.70 grams) Rome mint 254 A. Reference: RIC 181; C. 1288 IMP C P LIC GALLIENVS AVG, radiate, draped bust of Gallienus right. VIRTVS AVGG, Virtus standing left, leaning on shield and holding spear. The Roman personification of Valour was represented helmeted with spear and sword and standing with right foot on helmet. There was a golden statue of her at Rome which was melted by Alaric, king of the Goths. Valour is frequently represented on coins- VIRTVS AVG. Virtus was a specific virtue in Ancient Rome. It carries connotations of valor, manliness, excellence, courage, character, and worth, perceived as masculine strengths (from Latin vir , “man”). It was thus a frequently stated virtue of Roman emperors , and was personified as a deity. The origins of the word virtus can be traced back to the Latin word vir , “man”. The common list of attributes associated with virtus are typically perceived masculine strengths, which may indicate its derivation from vir. From the early to the later days of the Roman Empire, there appears to have been a development in how the concept was understood. Originally virtus was used to describe specifically martial courage, but it eventually grew to be used to describe a range of Roman virtues. It was often divided into different qualities including prudentia (prudence), iustitia (justice), temperantia (temperance , self-control), and fortitudo (courage). This division of virtue as a whole into cardinal virtues is today classified as virtue ethics , as described by Plato’s Republic and Aristotle’s Nicomachean Ethics. It implies a link between virtus and the Greek concept of arete. This inclusion leads to the belief that at one time virtus extended to cover a wide range of meanings that covered one general ethical ideal. The use of the word began to grow and shift to fit the new idea of what manliness meant. No longer did virtus mean that a person was a brave warrior but it could also mean that he was a good man, someone who did the right thing. During the time of the decline of the Roman elite virtus the Roman upper class no longer thought of themselves as unmanly if they did not serve in the military. Virtue as described by Aristotle was rediscovered in the medieval age by Muslim philosopher Averroes , which in turn impacted Thomas Aquinas to fuse virtue ethics with Christianity in connection with the Renaissance of the 12th century. In Roman political philosophy. Virtus comes from the aristocratic tradition in which it is a specific type of public conduct. It is really only applicable in the cursus honorum , certainly by the late republic at least. It is not a “private” virtue in the way that modern people might consider it. Valor, courage, and manliness are not things that can be pursued in the private sphere of the individual or the individual’s private concerns. There could be no virtue in exploiting one’s manliness in the pursuit of personal wealth, for example. Virtus is exercised in the pursuit of gloria for the benefit of the res publica resulting in the winning of eternal memoria. Earl “Outside the service of the res publica there can be no magistratus and therefore, strictly speaking, no gloria , no nobilitas , no virtus “. For the nobility virtus lies not only in one’s personal “acta” but also that of one’s ancestors. However Cicero, a novus homo , asserted that virtus was a virtue particularly suited to the new man just as nobilitas was suited to the noble. Cicero argued that just as young men from noble families won the favor of the people so too should the novus homo earn the favor of the people with his virtus. He even extended the argument that virtus and not ones family history should decide a mans worthiness. Virtus is something that a man earns himself, not something that is given to him by his family, thus it is a better measure of a mans ability. Cicero’s goal was not to impugn the noble class but widen it to include men who had earned their positions by merit. The term was used quite significantly by the historian Sallust , a contemporary of Cicero. Sallust asserted that it did not rightfully belong to the nobilitas as a result of their family background but specifically to the novus homo through the exercise of ingenium (talent). For Sallust and Cicero alike, virtus is situated in the winning of glory by the execution of illustrious deeds (egregia facinora) and the observance of right conduct through bonae artes. Who could have it? Virtus was not universally applicable to just anyone – generally (although not always exclusively) only adult male Roman citizens would be thought of as possessing virtus. Virtus was rarely to women, likely because of its association with vir. The highest regarded female virtue was pudicitia : “modesty” or “chastity”. Cicero , however, attributes this characteristic to females several times. He uses it once to describe Caecilia Metella when she helps a man who is being chased by assassins. Twice more he uses it when describing his daughter, Tullia , portraying her in his letters as brave in his absence. He uses it again to describe his first wife Terentia during his exile. Livy in Book 2 attributes it to Cloelia. Virtus was not a term commonly used to describe children. Since virtus was primarily attributed to a full grown man who had served in the military, children were not particularly suited to obtain this particular virtue. While a slave was able to be homo (“man”) he was not considered a vir. Slaves were often referred to as puer (Latin for boy) to denote that they were not citizens. Since a slave could not be a vir it follows that they would not be allowed to have the quality of virtus. Once a slave was manumitted he was able to become a vir and he was also classified as a freedman but this did not allow him to have virtus. A good slave or freedman was said to have fides , but no virtus. Foreigners in the Roman world could be attributed with virtus : If they fought bravely they could be said to have virtus. Virtus could also be lost in battle. Virtus could even be a cause to gain citizenship as in the case of Spanish cavalry men granted citizenship by Cn. Pompeius Strabo in 89 B. For their virtus in battle. How was it used? Virtus applies exclusively to a man’s behaviour in the public sphere, i. To the application of duty to the res publica in the cursus honorum. His private business was no place to earn virtus , even when it involved courage or feats of arms or other qualities associated to it if performed for the public good. While in many cultures around the world it is considered “manly” to father and provide for a family, family life was considered in the Roman world to be part of the private sphere. During this time there was no place for virtus in the private sphere. Most uses of virtus to describe any part of private life are ambiguous and often refer to another similar quality. His wife, daughters, sons, and his sons families were all under his potestas. The only time a son was seen as separate from his father’s control in the eyes of other Romans was when he assumed his public identity as a citizen. He could earn his virtus by serving in the military, and thus could only demonstrate manliness outside of the family setting. This is another reason that virtus is not often used to describe the Roman private life. Virtus was a crucial component for a political career. Its broad definition led to it being used to describe a number of qualities that the Roman people idealized in their leaders. In everyday life a typical Roman, especially a young boy, would have been inculcated with the idea of virtus. Since military service was a part of most Roman men’s life, military training would have started fairly early. Young boys would have learned how to wield weapons and military tactics starting at home with their fathers and older male relatives and later in school. Also as a young boy one would have heard numerous stories about past heroes, battles, and wars. Some of these stories would have surely told of the virtus of past heroes, and even family members. Publicly it was easy to see the rewards of virtus. Public triumphs were held for victorious generals and rewards were given to brave fighters. All of this propaganda would have encouraged young boys coming into their manhood to be brave fighters and earn the attribute of virtus. It was the duty of every generation of men to maintain the dignitas which his family had already earned and enlarge it. This pressure to live up to the standards of ones ancestors was great. In achieving virtus one could achieve gloria. By gaining virtus and gloria one could hope to aspire to high political office and great renown. While young boys were encouraged to earn virtus there were also limits put on showing virtus in public. Virtus was often associated with being aggressive. And this could be very dangerous in the public sphere and the political world. Displays of violent virtus were controlled through several methods. Men seeking to hold political office typically had to follow the cursus honorum. Many political offices had an age minimum which ensured that the men filling the positions had the proper amount of experience in the military and in government. This meant that even if a man proved himself capable of filling a position or was able to persuade people that he was capable, he would not necessarily be able to hold the position until he had reached a certain age. This also served to ensure that in elections of public offices no one had a certain advantage over another person because by the time most men went into public office they would have retired from military service. Furthermore, before any Roman soldier could partake in single combat he had to gain permission from his general. This procedure was meant to keep soldiers from putting themselves in extremely dangerous situations that they may or may not have been able to handle in order gain virtus. The concept of virtus also tended to be a concept of morality as far as politics were concerned. Plautus in Amphitruo contrasted virtus and ambitio. Virtus is seen as a positive attribute, though ambitio itself is not necessarily a negative attribute but is often associated with negative methods such as bribery. Plautus said that just as great generals and armies win victory by virtus , so should political candidates. Ambitio is the wrong method of reaching a good end. Part of virtus , in the political sphere was to deal justly in every aspect of ones life, especially in political and state matters. Although the two concepts are related, virtus , for the Roman, did not necessarily emphasize the behavior that the associations of the present-day English term’virtue’ suggest. Virtus was to be found in the context of’outstanding deeds’ (egregia facinora), and brave deeds were the accomplishments which brought gloria (‘a reputation’). This gloria was attached to two ideas: fama (‘what people think of you’) and dignitas (‘one’s standing in the community’). The struggle for virtus in Rome was above all a struggle for public office (honos), since it was through aspiring to high office, to which one was elected by the People, that a man could best show his manliness by means of military achievement which would in turn cultivate a reputation and votes. It was the duty of every aristocrat and would-be aristocrat to maintain the dignitas which his family had already achieved and to extend it to the greatest possible degree, through higher political office and military victories. This system resulted in a strong built-in impetus in Roman society to engage in military expansion and conquest at all times. While in many cultures the virtue of manliness is also seen as being partly sexual, in the Roman world virtus apparently did not have sexual connotations. Similar words deriving from the same stem often have sexual connotations. In the Roman world virtus dealt with a great many areas such as martial courage, honor, and being morally upright rather than sexual manliness. One of the most well known demonstrations of virtus was shown by Lucius Quinctius Cincinnatus. Before Cincinnatus was appointed dictator in 458 BCE, Rome was in the midst of a battle with the Aequi and needed someone to take control. Messengers sent to fetch him found him plowing in his field. Upon being informed of the appointment, he wept saying, So my field will be unsown this year, and we shall be in danger of not having enough food to support us. Nevertheless, he dutifully gathered his things, kissed his wife goodbye and departed to raise an army and defeat the Aequi in a mere fifteen days. Upon returning home after the victory, Cincinnatus picked up the plough from where he left it and began plowing again. Dionysius of Halicarnassus recounts this story to illustrate the type of leaders the men of Rome were. He says that they worked with their hands, led self-disciplined lives, did not complain about honorable poverty, and far from pursuing positions of royal power. Pompey is another prominent example of virtus. In 55 BCE, Pompey inaugurated his grand theatre complex and dedicated several shrines to different gods, one of these being Virtus. This consecrated Pompeys link with virtus. He gained a reputation with the public as being a man of virtus. Cicero, throughout his speech, the De imperio Cn. Pompei , connects Pompey with “divina virtus”. Pompey was so closely connected with virtus that once during a production of a play at the Ludi Apollinares one of the characters spoofed Pompey by stating “eandem virtutem istam veniet tempus cum graviter gemes” : “The time will come when you bitterly resent that same virtus “. The audience did not need to hear his name to know that Pompey was being referenced. Marcellus and the Temple. Claudius Marcellus , during the battle of Clastidium in 222 BCE, dedicated a temple to Honos and Virtus. This was one of the first times that Virtus had been recognized as divine. The connection with Honos would have been obvious to most Romans as demonstrations of virtus led to election to public office and both were considered honos. The cult of Honos was already a long-standing tradition in Rome. The marriage of the two deities ensured that Virtus would also get proper respect from the Romans. But an objection by the pontiffs was that one temple could not properly house two gods because there would be no way of knowing which god to sacrifice to should a miracle happen in the temple. Publius Licinius Egnatius Gallienus Augustus. 218 268 was Roman Emperor with his father Valerian from 253 to 260 and alone from 260 to 268. He ruled during the Crisis of the Third Century that nearly caused the collapse of the empire. While he won a number of military victories, he was unable to prevent the secession of important provinces. The exact birth date of Gallienus is unknown. The Greek chronicler John Malalas and the Epitome de Caesaribus report that he was about 50 years old at the time of his death, meaning he was born around 218. He was the son of emperor Valerian and Mariniana , who may have been of senatorial rank, possibly the daughter of Egnatius Victor Marinianus , and his brother was Valerianus Minor. Inscriptions on coins connect him with Falerii in Etruria , which may have been his birthplace; it has yielded many inscriptions relating to his mother’s family, the Egnatii. Gallienus married Cornelia Salonina about ten years before his accession to the throne. She was the mother of three princes: Valerian II , who died in 258; Saloninus , who was named co-emperor but was murdered in 260 by the army of general Postumus; and Marinianus , who was killed in 268, shortly after his father was assassinated. When Valerian was proclaimed Emperor on 22 October 253, he asked the Senate to ratify the elevation of Gallienus to Caesar and Augustus. He was also designated Consul Ordinarius for 254. As Marcus Aurelius and his adopted brother Lucius Verus had done a century earlier, Gallienus and his father divided the Empire. Valerian left for the East to stem the Persian threat, and Gallienus remained in Italy to repel the Germanic tribes on the Rhine and Danube. Division of the empire had become necessary due to its sheer size and the numerous threats it faced, and it facilitated negotiations with enemies who demanded to communicate directly with the emperor. Early reign and the revolt of Ingenuus. Gallienus spent most of his time in the provinces of the Rhine area (Germania Inferior , Germania Superior , Raetia , and Noricum), though he almost certainly visited the Danube area and Illyricum during 253 to 258. According to Eutropius and Aurelius Victor, he was particularly energetic and successful in preventing invaders from attacking the German provinces and Gaul, despite the weakness caused by Valerian’s march on Italy against Aemilianus in 253. According to numismatic evidence, he seems to have won many victories there, and a victory in Roman Dacia might also be dated to that period. Even the hostile Latin tradition attributes success to him at this time. In 255 or 257, Gallienus was made Consul again, suggesting that he briefly visited Rome on those occasions, although no record survives. During his Danube sojourn (Drinkwater suggests in 255 or 256), he proclaimed his elder son Valerian II Caesar and thus official heir to himself and Valerian I; the boy probably joined Gallienus on campaign at that time, and when Gallienus moved west to the Rhine provinces in 257, he remained behind on the Danube as the personification of Imperial authority. Sometime between 258 and 260 (the exact date is unclear), while Valerian was distracted with the ongoing invasion of Shapur in the East, and Gallienus was preoccupied with his problems in the West, Ingenuus , governor of at least one of the Pannonian provinces, took advantage and declared himself emperor. Valerian II had apparently died on the Danube, most likely in 258. Ingenuus may have been responsible for that calamity. Alternatively, the defeat and capture of Valerian at the battle of Edessa may have been the trigger for the subsequent revolts of Ingenuus, Regalianus , and Postumus. In any case, Gallienus reacted with great speed. He left his son Saloninus as Caesar at Cologne , under the supervision of Albanus (or Silvanus) and the military leadership of Postumus. He then hastily crossed the Balkans , taking with him the new cavalry corps (comitatus) under the command of Aureolus and defeated Ingenuus at Mursa or Sirmium. The victory must be attributed mainly to the cavalry and its brilliant commander. Ingenuus was killed by his own guards or committed suicide by drowning himself after the fall of his capital, Sirmium. Invasion of the Alamanni. A major invasion by the Alemanni and other Germanic tribes occurred between 258 and 260 (it is hard to fix the precise date of these events), probably due to the vacuum left by the withdrawal of troops supporting Gallienus in the campaign against Ingenuus. Franks broke through the lower Rhine, invading Gaul , some reaching as far as southern Spain, sacking Tarraco (modern Tarragona). The Alamanni invaded, probably through Agri Decumates (an area between the upper Rhine and the upper Danube), likely followed by the Juthungi. After devastating Germania Superior and Raetia (parts of southern France and Switzerland), they entered Italy, the first invasion of the Italian peninsula, aside from its most remote northern regions, since Hannibal 500 years before. When invaders reached the outskirts of Rome, they were repelled by an improvised army assembled by the Senate, consisting of local troops (probably prtorian guards) and the strongest of the civilian population. On their retreat through northern Italy, they were intercepted and defeated in the battle of Mediolanum (near present day Milan) by Gallienus’ army, which had advanced from Gaul, or from the Balkans after dealing with the Franks. The battle of Mediolanum was decisive, and the Alamanni didn’t bother the empire for the next ten years. The Juthungi managed to cross the Alps with their valuables and captives from Italy. An historian in the 19th century suggested that the initiative of the Senate gave rise to jealousy and suspicion by Gallienus, thus contributing to his exclusion of senators from military commands. The revolt of Regalianus. Around the same time, Regalianus , a military commander of Illyricum , was proclaimed Emperor. The reasons for this are unclear, and the Historia Augusta (almost the sole resource for these events) does not provide a credible story. It is possible the seizure can be attributed to the discontent of the civilian and military provincials, who felt the defense of the province was being neglected. Regalianus held power for some six months and issued coins bearing his image. After some success against the Sarmatians , his revolt was put down by the invasion of Roxolani into Pannonia , and Regalianus himself was killed when the invaders took the city of Sirmium. Capture of Valerian, revolt of Macrianus. In the East, Valerian was confronted with serious troubles. A band of Scythians set a naval raid against Pontus , in the northern part of modern Turkey. After ravaging the province, they moved south into Cappadocia. Valerian led troops to intercept them but failed, perhaps because of a plague that gravely weakened his army, as well as the contemporary invasion of northern Mesopotamia by Shapur I , ruler of the Sassanid Empire. In 259 or 260, the Roman army was defeated in the Battle of Edessa , and Valerian was taken prisoner. Shapur’s army raided Cilicia and Cappadocia (in present day Turkey), sacking, as Shapur’s inscriptions claim, 36 cities. It took a rally by an officer Callistus (Balista), a fiscal official named Fulvius Macrianus , the remains of the Eastern Roman legions, and Odenathus and his Palmyrene horsemen to turn the tide against Shapur. The Persians were driven back, but Macrianus proclaimed his two sons Quietus and Macrianus (sometimes misspelled Macrinus) as emperors. Coins struck for them in major cities of the East indicate acknowledgement of the usurpation. The two Macriani left Quietus, Ballista, and, presumably, Odenathus to deal with the Persians while they invaded Europe with an army of 30,000 men, according to the Historia Augusta. At first they met no opposition. The Pannonian legions joined the invaders, being resentful of the absence of Gallienus. He sent his successful commander Aureolus against the rebels, however, and the decisive battle was fought in the spring or early summer of 261, most likely in Illyricum, although Zonaras locates it in Pannonia. In any case, the army of the usurpers surrendered, and their two leaders were killed. In the aftermath of the battle, the rebellion of Postumus had already started, so Gallienus had no time to deal with the rest of the usurpers, namely Balista and Quietus. Odenathus received the title of dux Romanorum and besieged the usurpers, who were based at Emesa. Eventually, the people of Emesa killed Quietus, and Odenathus arrested and executed Balista about November 261. The revolt of Postumus. After the defeat at Edessa, Gallienus lost control over the provinces of Britain, Spain, parts of Germania, and a large part of Gaul when another general, Postumus , declared his own realm (usually known today as the Gallic Empire). The revolt partially coincided with that of Macrianus in the East. Gallienus had installed his son Saloninus and his guardian, Silvanus , in Cologne in 258. Postumus, a general in command of troops on the banks of the Rhine, defeated some raiders and took possession of their spoils. Instead of returning it to the original owners, he preferred to distribute it amongst his soldiers. When news of this reached Silvanus, he demanded the spoils be sent to him. Postumus made a show of submission, but his soldiers mutinied and proclaimed him Emperor. Under his command, they besieged Cologne, and after some weeks the defenders of the city opened the gates and handed Saloninus and Silvanus to Postumus, who had them killed. The dating of these events is not accurate, but they apparently occurred just before the end of 260. Postumus claimed the consulship for himself and one of his associates, Honoratianus, but according to D. Potter, he never tried to unseat Gallienus or invade Italy. Upon receiving news of the murder of his son, Gallienus began gathering forces to face Postumus. The invasion of the Macriani forced him to dispatch Aureolus with a large force to oppose them, however, leaving him with insufficient troops to battle Postumus. After some initial defeats, the army of Aureolus, having defeated the Macriani, rejoined him, and Postumus was expelled. Aureolus was entrusted with the pursuit and deliberately allowed Postumus to escape and gather new forces. During the siege, Gallenus was severely wounded by an arrow and had to leave the field. The standstill persisted until the death of Gallienus, and the Gallic Empire remained independent until 274. The revolt of Aemilianus. In spring of 262, the city was wrenched by civil unrest as a result of a new revolt. The rebel this time was the prefect of Egypt, Lucius Mussius Aemilianus , who had already given support to the revolt of the Macriani. The correspondence of bishop Dionysius of Alexandria provides a colourful commentary on the sombre background of invasion, civil war, plague, and famine that characterized this age. Knowing he could not afford to lose control of the vital Egyptian granaries, Gallienus sent his general Theodotus against Aemilianus, probably by a naval expedition. The decisive battle probably took place near Thebes, and the result was a clear defeat of Aemilianus. In the aftermath, Gallienus became Consul three more times in 262, 264, and 266. Herulian invasions, revolt of Aureolus, conspiracy and death. In the years 267269, Goths and other barbarians invaded the empire in great numbers. Sources are extremely confused on the dating of these invasions, the participants, and their targets. Modern historians are not even able to discern with certainty whether there were two or more of these invasions or a single prolonged one. It seems that, at first, a major naval expedition was led by the Heruli starting from north of the Black Sea and leading in the ravaging of many cities of Greece (among them, Athens and Sparta). Then another, even more numerous army of invaders started a second naval invasion of the empire. The Romans defeated the barbarians on sea first. Gallienus’ army then won a battle in Thrace , and the Emperor pursued the invaders. According to some historians, he was the leader of the army who won the great Battle of Naissus , while the majority believes that the victory must be attributed to his successor, Claudius II. In 268, at some time before or soon after the battle of Naissus, the authority of Gallienus was challenged by Aureolus , commander of the cavalry stationed in Mediolanum (Milan), who was supposed to keep an eye on Postumus. Instead, he acted as deputy to Postumus until the very last days of his revolt, when he seems to have claimed the throne for himself. The decisive battle took place at what is now Pontirolo Nuovo near Milan; Aureolus was clearly defeated and driven back to Milan. Gallienus laid siege to the city but was murdered during the siege. There are differing accounts of the murder, but the sources agree that most of Gallienus’ officials wanted him dead. According to the Historia Augusta , an unreliable source compiled long after the events it describes, a conspiracy was led by the commander of the guard Aurelius Heraclianus and Marcianus. Cecropius, commander of the Dalmatians, spread the word that the forces of Aureolus were leaving the city, and Gallienus left his tent without his bodyguard, only to be struck down by Cecropius. One version has Claudius selected as Emperor by the conspirators, another chosen by Gallienus on his death bed; the Historia Augusta was concerned to substantiate the descent of the Constantinian dynasty from Claudius, and this may explain its accounts, which do not involve Claudius in the murder. The other sources Zosimus i. 40 and Zonaras xii. 25 report that the conspiracy was organized by Heraclianus, Claudius, and Aurelian. According to Aurelius Victor and Zonaras, on hearing the news that Gallienus was dead, the Senate in Rome ordered the execution of his family (including his brother Valerianus and son Marinianus) and their supporters, just before receiving a message from Claudius to spare their lives and deify his predecessor. Arch of Gallienus in Rome, 262 dedicated to, rather than built by, Gallienus. Gallienus was not treated favorably by ancient historians, partly due to the secession of Gaul and Palmyra and his inability to win them back. According to modern scholar Pat Southern, some historians now see him in a more positive light. Gallienus produced some useful reforms. He contributed to military history as the first to commission primarily cavalry units, the Comitatenses , that could be dispatched anywhere in the Empire in short order. This reform arguably created a precedent for the future emperors Diocletian and Constantine I. The biographer Aurelius Victor reports that Gallienus forbade senators from becoming military commanders. This policy undermined senatorial power, as more reliable equestrian commanders rose to prominence. In Southern’s view, these reforms and the decline in senatorial influence not only helped Aurelian to salvage the Empire, but they also make Gallienus one of the emperors most responsible for the creation of the Dominate , along with Septimius Severus , Diocletian, and Constantine I. By portraying himself with the attributes of the gods on his coinage, Gallienus began the final separation of the Emperor from his subjects. A late bust of Gallienus (see above) depicts him with a largely blank face, gazing heavenward, as seen on the famous stone head of Constantine I. One of the last rulers of Rome to be theoretically called “Princeps”, or First Citizen, Gallienus’ shrewd self-promotion assisted in paving the way for those who would be addressed with the words “Dominus et Deus” (Lord and God). Antoninianus issued to celebrate. LEG II ITAL VII P VII F. LEG III ITAL VI P VI F. Italica Legio III six times faithful and loyal. LEG VII MAC VI P VI FF. Macedonica Legio VII six times faithful and loyal. LEG VII CLA VI P VI F. Claudia Legio VII six. What is a certificate of authenticity and what guarantees do you give that the item is authentic? You will be quite happy with what you get with the COA; a professional presentation of the coin, with all of the relevant information and a picture of the coin you saw in the listing. Is there a number I can call you with questions about my order? When should I leave feedback? Once you receive your order, please leave a positive. Please don’t leave any negative feedbacks, as it happens many times that people rush to leave feedback before letting sufficient time for the order to arrive. The matter of fact is that any issues can be resolved, as reputation is most important to me. My goal is to provide superior products and quality of service. The item “GALLIENUS son of Valerian I Silver Rare Ancient Roman Coin Virtus Cult i55703″ is in sale since Thursday, May 19, 2016. This item is in the category “Coins & Paper Money\Coins\ Ancient\Roman\ Imperial (27 BC-476 AD)”. The seller is “highrating_lowprice” and is located in Rego Park, New York. This item can be shipped worldwide.
  • Ruler: Gallienus
  • Composition: Silver

GALLIENUS son of Valerian I Silver Rare Ancient Roman Coin Virtus Cult i55703