If only we could all date our muse… No, no. This is a serious academic post no time for jokes.
My question is how late in the relative chronology can RRC 410 go.
First I’m going to say I don’t think Mattingly can be right that it could be as late as 52 BCE. I wish I was wrong here. I kind of want to find the ‘missing’ coins from my 53-50 period. But these are not them.
Why have I dismissed it out of hand? Mostly the Dunareni hoard. Not huge but not small. 128 denarii. (I don’t think treating serrati as a different denomination makes sense).
Popilian, G. “Tezaurul de monede Romane Republicane descoperit la Dunăreni (jud. Dolj).” Historica 1 (1970): 52-66.
Besides the tail of coins from the sixties and fifties the hoard looks like it was quietly collected over a long time. A few coins of many types evenly spaced over the whole history of the denarii. The only types appearing with more coins are those like RRC 340 which are huge issues.
Just look at the tail:
Really 56 is the absolutely latest closing date for this hoard and unless the Musa coin was in mint perfect condition it would be hard to put it at that date even (as Hersh Walker and Hollstien both did.)
This hoard is found at a great distance from Rome.
This thinking feels confirmed by its presence in the Ancona Hoard (AN1 = RRCH 344). This hoard must close after 58 BCE because it has RRC 422 (a securely dated aedilician type). And it is very likely it closes at 55 or 56 because RRC 430 and 426 on which their is broad consensus on dating. It is small and sadly not properly published. “Source: Michael Crawford’s personal notes.” Here wear could be interesting the earliest coin is only RRC 300/1.
Again, we have the Grazzanise hoard (GRA = CHRR 349). 54 BCE is a solid terminus post quem given the presence of RRC 431, again a well dated aedilician issue. And it have 4 coins of Brutus and 2 of Rufus. And 11 coins of the massive RRC 425/1 issue of Philippus. I’d love to see if their are die links.
Yet again, the Thessalonica hoard (THS): terminus post quem secured by the RRC 432 aedilician issue, ends with the coinage of Brutus and Rufus.
Caramessini, Mando Oeconomides. “Trésor de deniers de la République Romaine trouvé à Thessalonique.” Quaderni Ticinesi di Numismatica e Antichità Classiche 13 (1984): 139-145.
So could Musa be the third moneyer of 54. Maybe. BUt his coinage is so radically different that Brutus and Rufus… If we push him earlier then he’s in the big bunch of moneyers no one wants to sequence.
Just certainly not 52 BCE and even a negative conclusion is a good conclusion.
—
afterthought:
Was Mattingly tempted by the slight visual similarity between Laureate Concordia on RRC 436 and the Muses on RRC 410/2ff…?
Liv Mariah Yarrow 
One thought on “Dating the Muses”