Valentinian

There is one third reign type: GENIO IMPERATORIS, third reign. Only at Antioch and Alexandria, mints of Maximinus II. http://augustuscoins.com/ed/tetrarchy/retirement.html#third It is third reign, not because he issued it for himself during his third reign, but because it was issued in his name (in the East) after the Conference at Carnuntum. Right. This coin is not from "earlier in 307", rather it is from "autumn 307 - end of 308", just like the one being discussed RIC VI Trier 788, struck "autumn 307 - end of 308" on that page here: http://augustuscoins.com/ed/tetrarchy/retirement.html#T3M My page on tetrarchal retirement types is: http://augustuscoins.com/ed/tetrarchy/retirement.html The bulleted questions about "AVG" and "AVGG" are very good, which is not to say they have easy and convincing answers. The key may be that they were issued at a mint of Constantine (who was in a tricky relationship with Maximian). Maybe there is only one G because only Diocletian is regarded as retired. That is a fascinating period of history.

I wonder how many of you take notes on what is out there that you might collect. Do you keep a paper (or digital) want list? Or, is your want list all in your head? Or, maybe you don't plan much in advance and just buy what pleases you at the moment. Long ago I used to take copious paper notes on what I saw in paper catalogs that I might like and what they cost (This note taking was largely made obsolete by the web and especially acsearch). I took extensive notes on Roman imperial historical types (made obsolete by Roman Historical Coins by Foss). A simple example might be all the types of the animal series struck for the 1000th anniversary of Rome under Philip. I still take lots of notes on any mini-series I might collect. Now I can make web pages that incorporate the information I assemble. It's my updated version of "notes" that I share with others. For years I have been interested in AE coins of Diocletian (284-305) and later. I have very many web pages on them, each of which is like notes on a theme that might be collected. Here is my latest page which is simply a list of emperors and mints that issued GENIO POPVLI ROMANI types, linked to pages with images of them. http://augustuscoins.com/ed/tetrarchy/GPRtypes.html Here is one example of the common GENIO POPVLI ROMANI type: Maximian, Cyzicus mint. 28 mm. 9.17 grams.IMP C MA MAXIMIANVS PF AVG KΔ in exergue RIC Cyzicus 12a "c.295-296" If you know very little about coins of the First Tetrarchy, that new page is not the place to start. An introductory page is here: http://augustuscoins.com/ed/tetrarchy/ If you want to skip the introduction, here is a page of links to pages about coins of the era: http://augustuscoins.com/ed/tetrarchy/extra.html I'd love to hear if you have a written want list, and if you take notes and what types of notes they are.

Here is my page on all the AE types of Aelia Flaccilla: http://augustuscoins.com/ed/ricix/AeliaFlaccilla.html Here is the first one on that page: Aelia FlaccillaSALVS REIPVBLICAEAE2. 22 mm. 4.73 grams.•TESΔRIC IX Thessalonica 46

So, where can we buy the volumes? I didn't find them in a google search.

That coin has had the surface stripped down almost to bare metal. Other than that is is very nice. The remaining detail is excellent, but the surface is porous from the chemical cleaning. I'd say it is not tooled. Maybe the top of that "O" in the first line has been touched, but that is insignificant and certainly far less distracting than the horizontal scratches often seen between the lines when someone "cleaned" a similar coin with a sharp metal tool.

There is nothing to clean. That green is patina, not dirt or unsightly encrustation. Any chemical strong enough to remove the green would remove a lot of the metal with it and you then have a coin with a terrible surface. Leave it as it is!

As every child knows when drawing people, size is related to importance. Therefore, Jupiter ought to be large, even compared to the emperor. This coin illustrates that simple understanding. Gordian III, 238-244. 22 mm. 4.52 grams. IOVI CONSERVATORI Jupiter, with thunderbolt and staff, protects the emperor. RIC 2. Struck July 238 - July 239 "first issue" . Sear III 8614.

I think we have shown it is difficult to find a DEO VOLKANO in nice condition. Here is mine, which is simply more evidence: 22-18 mm. 2.79 grams. DEO VOLKANO 4-column temple with Vulkan with hammer Cunetio 706 (30 pieces, among 125 of Valerian from this mint and, over all mints, 10,559 from the joint reign of Valerian and Gallienus) "mint of Gaul". RIC 5. Sear III 9934.

You'd think Roman mints would know how to spell the emperor's name, but the name of the emperor we call Licinius was not consistently spelled that way even after a few years had gone by. Here is typical coin with the usual spelling: IMP LICINIVS AVGSimple! 19 mm. 3.27 grams. RIC Nicomedia 24However, the mints of Cyzicus, Antioch, and Alexandria sometimes spelled it with two Ns and spelled out more of his name.22 mm. 6.34 grams.VAL LICINNIANVS LICINNIVS PF AVG [Now, that's a name!]GENIO AVGVSTI CMH (the CMH ligate)Genius standingMKVΓRIC VI Cyzicus 76 "c. mid 311"Licinius was appointed Augustus in late 308 at the Conference at Carnuntum. This coin is from 2 1/2 years later and his name is spelled with two Ns. Most other mints spell it with one N.Some legends at Cyzicus and Nicomedia, like this one, end with the enigmatic elided CMH: If that is really CMH, what does it mean? I don't think we know, but some have speculated that the C is 100 in Roman numerals and MH is 48 (in Greek). Maybe it is "48 to the pound" and 100 of something (denarii?). I like coins with long versions of the emperor's name. Show us a Licinius or a coin on which the emperor's name is unusually long.

If coins marked "XI" have twice the silver of coins marked "XXI", we cannot infer that "XX" refers to twenty of some smaller unit. Rather, twenty make some larger unit. The "XI" coins are rare and were issued for only a very short time. Apparently, Tacitus thought he could improve the intrinsic value of the coins by a factor of two without making much of a difference in their appearance. Wrong! They were too valuable to continue to be minted. The reform failed. Metallurgical analyses show the early "XXI" coins of Aurelian's reform in 274 closely fit the "20 parts copper and one part silver" alloy and the "XI" coins closely fit the "10 parts copper and one part silver" alloy. When, c. 299-300, a couple of mints (Siscia, Alexandria) put "XXI" on some folles (and omitted it on many, and other mints didn't mention "XXI"), metallurgical analyses show that they, too, are not too far off the "20 and 1" alloy if you include the original surface-silvering. Here is a very rare Greek version with "IA" instead of "XI". (They used "KA" for "XXI"). Tacitus. 275-276. 23 mm. 4.12 grams. RIC 214, plate 10.154. RIC p. 320 "extremely rare". Tripolis mint.

It is nice to see silver from a different city. 19-18 mm. 3.29 grams. Trajan, struck 98/99 (year B) RPC page 337 says, "made for Lycia ... (probably minted in Rome)" and "it circulated widely in the western provinces of the empire alongside denarii in the second century." Sear Greek Imperial 1046. SNG von Aulock 4267 RPC III 2676, page 338 and plate 121. Ex Peus 369 (Oct. 2001) lot 528.

@Prieure de Sion, thank you very much indeed for your long and interesting discussion of Caesarea and its coins. I read it closely and bookmarked it so I can return to it. I have a tridrachm of Gordian III: Gordian III, 238-244. 23-22 mm. 9.64 grams. 12:00 die axis. AV KAI M ANT ΓOPΔIANOC CЄ Bust right, laureate, draped, cuirassed B NЄ across field (twice Necorate) MHTPOΠ KAICAPIA (the city name fully spelled out) ЄTOVC Δ (Year four is 241/2) Weak countermark at 3:00-5:00 on the reverse. Sydenham CCC --, design of 602A but denomination of 599, page 129. Sear Greek Imperial -- SNG Danish -- (denomination of 304) SNG von Aulock 6525 with the same c/m in the same place, plate 223. c/m is expected to be Howgego 848 (plate 32) "Tyche head" but this is too weak to confirm. Weber --, McClean --, cf 9239 with this design as a drachm. Ex Triskeles auction 5 (June 2013) lot 73.

Roman silver coins are mostly denarii, but there are some silver coins minted at provincial mints. Of course, there are many tetradrachms from Antioch and other Syrian mints, but this coin is different for being a drachm minted at Caesarea in Cappadocia (see the google map). It was a prosperous trading town. Caesarea minted coins which are discussed in books by William Metcalf The Silver Coinage of Cappadocia, Vespasian to Commodus (only through Commodus) and Sydenham The Coinage of Caesarea in Cappadocia (all of of its coins, including AE, through Gordian III and Tranquillina, but this book is older and not as up-to-date for silver coins up to Commodus). 18 mm. 2.81 grams. Silver drachm. AV K M AVPH ANTΩNINOC Autokrater, Caesar, Marcus Aurelius Antoninus (for Caracalla) MHTP KAIS Metropolis Caesarea Mt. Argaeus, on summit, star. The volcano is 16 miles south of the city. ЄT IΔ in exergue. Year 14 = 205/6. Tetradrachms of Antioch and other Syro-Phoenician cities belong in a different thread. Show us some other provincial silver.

That's a pretty good pedigree! Oh, and by the way, the coin is nice, too!

I wonder how a coin firm can sell about 5000 lots to over 1000 bidders and assemble and mail the wins rapidly. How long would it take you to pack up 500 packages? (Savoca is amazingly rapid in that regard). I pay with Wise the same day and the last two times I won from Leu it took 27 days (over Christmas) and 18 days to get the coins to Oregon. (I keep track of the dates coins arrive.)

I pay Leu with Wise.com and Leu gets the full amount, so they agreed to accept it without the 12 CHF. I just take the invoice which has the 12 CHF bank fee and pay 12 CHF less, remind them of our agreement, and that works fine.

There are many Gallienus types that may belong to particular victories. Foss (#15) says this one relates to victories on the Danube. 23-21 mm. 3.95 grams. Large flan. VICTORIA GERMAN Alfoldi wrote a long article in NC (1930) "The numbering of the Victories of the emperor Gallienus and of the loyalty of his legions" which has been reprinted. Those types would make an interesting collecting theme.

Thank you very much for linking to that pdf. I downloaded it. It is an important resource. Here is an unusual zoo type: 21-20 mm. 2.30 grams. HERCVLI CONS AVG, boar right, Є below. The boar of Erymanthus, the third labor of Hercules. RIV V.I 202. Sear III 10228. Cunetio 1367 (3 pieces [among nearly 3000 with "... CONS AVG"]; most major types have 100-245 pieces) "sixth series" struck 267-8. The new reference has it on page 126 as MIR 729u "267" "10th emission". I am sorry the coins are not given ID numbers so we could cite the new catalog more easily.

Thank you very much for the reference. I downloaded it and will study it (and, fix my Sear number).

Here is a page that will help you: http://augustuscoins.com/ed/Byz/legends.html and for a general introduction to Byzantine coins, look here: http://augustuscoins.com/ed/Byz/ Here is a Justin II and Sophia from Carthage. You can read their names. Sophia is spelled with an F instead of PH. 23-22 mm. 8.62 grams. DN IVSTIO ET SOFIA AC Two facing busts. VITA below, but virtually off the flan. K (20-nummi) ANNO VIII (year 8, 572/3) KAR in exergue for Carthage. Sear 395. DIC Justin II 199. MIBEC Justin II 76.

GENIO POPVLI ROMANI folles (nummi) of the First and Second Tetrarchies are among the most common Roman coins. They have the virtue of large size. This one is of Severus II as Augustus from shortly after the Second Tetrarchy. 28 mm. 10.93 grams. Severus II, Caesar 305-306, Augustus 306-307 (i.e. after Constantius died). RIC VI Cyzicus 27b "c. 307, early" Sear IV 14674. The reverse type was introduced c. 294 in the coin reform of Diocletian. Few were issued after the Second Tetrarchy (defined by the reign of Constantius as Augustus). This is one of them. There is a web site with several pages on the GENIO POPVLI ROMANI type: http://augustuscoins.com/ed/tetrarchy/Diocletianfolles.html Coins of the tetrarchies are introduced here: http://augustuscoins.com/ed/tetrarchy/ I love these hefty coins and wish you would show us some of yours!

I just got a nice example of this legend on a coin of Constans II, AD 641-668: ЄN TɣTo NIKA "In this [sign], conquer"with reference to Constantine's vision at the Battle of the Milvian Bridge (in 312). The Greek equivalent of the Roman "HOC SIGNO VICTOR ERIS".Normally much of the legend is obscure. ANA NEO (either side of the M) for ANANEOSIS = "renewal" [Of good times, much like FEL TEMP REPARATIO is in the 4th century] There are many similar varieties depending upon what it in the exergue (which is usually obscure and uncertain, as is this one). Sear 1005 [edit: I changed it from Sear 1000 based on information below from @quant.geek] and maybe DOC II.II Constans II, 65, which is very much like 59 and 66 and others. DOC plate XXVI has 23 similar coins, none of which has the obverse legend as clear as this one and only a few of which have decipherable letters in exergue. I collected Byzantine coins at a moderate level for years before I decided to learn much about their legends. Now I can decipher most. If you would like to learn about them, look at this page on how to read them: http://augustuscoins.com/ed/Byz/legends.html Show us something Byzantine (especially something with a legend)!

That particular coin was minted at Antioch (far fromConstantinople) with its new name "The(u)opolis," "City of God." See its mintmark THUΠ' The story of the name change is here: http://augustuscoins.com/ed/interesting/Justinian.html on my page about the numerous mintmarks of Antioch. Here is one from year 38 with a variant of that mintmark where an "E" has been inserted: Sear 239 Decanummium. 10 nummi. 19-18 mm. 4.65 grams. THEUP [The "T" is so curved it is almost like a C with a T top. This shape for "T" is also used later on Byzantine coins under Theophilus.] This mintmark was used years 35-38 on the M and I denominations.

As @Egryand @John Conduittknow, coins of Quintillus rarely (never?) come without significant problems. I have two, each with some nice features but with different problems. You will rarely find one full flan. This one is remarkable for having full beading on both sides, but it is weakly struck. It is ex NFA auction 9, Dec. 10, 1980, lot 621. A subsequent plus is it is the Sear Plate coin, #11477. Sear had access to the NFA photo files and many of the plate coins in Sear are ex NFA. I got lucky that he chose to use this one. My second coin is ex eBay in 2002. The strike and dies are better, but the coin is crowded. I like the portrait and the name is visible. I agree with @Egry that a £400 bid would seem enough to win that coin he didn't win. £2400 was far too much. If a nicer one comes along, it will be interesting to see what it brings.

@Marsyas Mike, congratulations on finding one in a group lot. For my attribution I used the volumes of Roman Provincial Coinage that are on-line: https://rpc.ashmus.ox.ac.uk/volumes I selected a volume and searched for obverse design "Pompey". Or, I could select the city Pompeiopolis in Cilicia if I knew that. In the volume for Domitian (volume II) my type is 1725. Your type is in volume 1. On that site clicking on the images my bring up additional examples of any type.