SYRIA, Seleucis and Pieria. Emesa. Uranius Antoninus, usurper, 253-254. Tetradrachm (Billon, 24 mm, 13.32 g, 12 h). AYTO K COYΛΠ ANTⲰNINOC CЄ Laureate, draped and cuirassed bust of Uranius Antoninus to right, seen from behind.
Rev. ΔHMAPX ЄΞOYCIAC YΠA T B / S C Eagle with spread wings standing front, head to right and holding wreath in beak. Baldus - (XV/-). Baldus Suppl. II, pl. 51, Σ/σ (
same dies). Prieur 1046. RPC IX 1894 (3 examples). Very rare. Well struck and with an attractive portrait. Good very fine.
From a European collection, formed before 2005.
H.-R. Baldus convincingly argued that Uranius Antoninus must be the same person as Sampsigeramos, a high priest of the Emesan god, Elagabalus, whom we know from John Malalas, a 6th century Byzantine historian. Malalas reports that Sampsigeramos fought off a Sasanian offensive under Shahpur I and killed the enemy general, suggesting that the priest put together an ad-hoc force of local troops to react to an imminent crisis. Fortunately, the usurpation of Sampsigeramos/Uranius Antoninus is securely dated to 253/4 through his local bronze coinage, which carries the year 565 of the Seleukid Era, a year which saw a massive Sasanian offensive and, perhaps, even the plundering of Antiochia on the Orontes by Rome's greatest enemy.
It is doubtful that Uranius Antoninus claimed empire-wide recognition. While his bronze and silver coinage do carry the titles Imperator and Augustus (in Greek), his aurei do not, only providing his plain name instead. It is thus entirely possible that Sampsigeramos/Uranius Antoninus was not a true usurper, but instead a particularly vigorous local nobleman stepping in to defend his homeland in a time of imperial absence. If this is true, he would be a precursor to Odaenathus of Palmyra, who would undertake the duty of fighting the Sasanid threat somewhat later, in the 260s, while Gallienus was occupied in the West. In any case, when Valerian I arrived in Syria in early 254 to reorganize Rome's Syrian Army, Uranius disappears from all historical sources, leaving the question unanswered as to whether he was executed by the emperor or permitted to return to his civil life.
