Valentinian

Constantine the Great, Augustus 307-337, is "the Great" for championing Christianity. Nevertheless, his coins barely touch on Christianity. I have a web site on early Christian symbols on Roman coins: http://augustuscoins.com/ed/Christian/ChristianSymbols.html and our member @Victor Clark has a very good site: http://www.constantinethegreatcoins.com/symbols/ When a coin under Constantine has a chi-rho on it the symbol is a Christian reference. If it has a square cross, + [similar to a cross pattée] it might be, but it might not be. Maybe it is just one of the many field possible marks with no significant reference. What about the symbol on this coin, recently acquired? 18-17 mm. 3.05 grams. RIC Rome 19, "314-5" SOLI INVICTO COMITI R F + R P for the Rome mint. I bought it for the +, but I did not think it is a Christian symbol. The issue actually has, on most examples, a clear X in that position. This one is merely tilted differently. The almost-cross on this example is really an "X". It is unlikely that the engraver had Christian sympathy and very subtlety changed the field mark X to hint at Christianity!

Michael VIII, Palaeologus, of the restored Byzantine empire. It is not easy to get a well-struck trachy of Michael VIII. 25-22 mm. 1.49 grams. Sear 2259. Bust of Christ, K to left Michael kneeling before seated Christ, supported by St. Michael 25-23 mm. 3.08 grams. Sear 2260 Virgin enthroned facing Michael kneeling before seated Christ, supported by St. Michael 24-22 mm. 2.49 grams. Sear 2264. Virgin Emperor and St. George, with patriarchal cross between 25-21 mm. 2.60 grams. Sear 2265 Sear 2259. "Struck 1261-early in reign" [Grierson] St. Demetrius standing Michael crowned by the Virgin 25-23 mm. 2.33 graams. Sear 2283. Winged archangel Michael emperor standing with labarum With coins with quality like these you really have to love Byzantine history to want examples. I can understand why images in Bendall and Donald's book, "The Later Palaeologan Coinage" were line-drawings and not photos. Line drawings which consolidate the most visible parts of several coins of one type are clearer than any individual coin of the type. I am almost surprised that I have some!

Theodore I, Empire of Nicaea, 1208-1221. Theodore I 28-25 mm. 3.01 grams. Virgin enthroned Theodore and St. Theodore Sear 2061 John III, Ducas, Vatatzes, of Nicaea: 29-27 mm. 3.06 grams. 3/4 length figure of archangel Michael John and Christ Sear 2089 John III. 28-27 mm. 2.97 grams. Full length Christ Full length emperor Sear 2096 John III, tetarteron. 19 mm. 2.07 grams. (This coin is smaller than the previous coins, so I used to NF feature (double click the image) to make its image smaller, even though the original image is the same width in my files).) Bust of St. George facing Emperor standing, legible legend IW (for "John:) ΔЄCΠOTHC O ΔɣKAC John, Despot, the Ducas (Greek uses "the" more than we do) Theodore Comnenus-Ducas, Empire of Thessaloncia, 1224-1230 33-28 mm. 3.10 grams. Pierced. Originally cup-shaped, but since then flattened, but not flat. I have seen others of this type flattened, too. St. Demetrius. O AΓIOC ΔЄMHTPIOC Emperor and Virgin Sear 2167 From my website: http://augustuscoins.com/ed/Byz/late2.html I repeat this about this Theodore (there is more than one "Theodore") Empire of Thessaloncia (The tan-colored area on the map from wikipedia). Theodore Angelus Comnenus Ducas, 1225-1230. In 1215 the Crusaders ("Latins") were in charge of Constantinople, a region around it, and some of Greece (the tan-colored area on the map from wikipedia) including Thessalonica, the second-largest city after Constantinople. The Despotate of Epirus occupied the west coast of Greece. The Bulgarians occupied much of the rest of the Balkins. The Empire of Nicaea occupied Asia Minor outside the Latin territory. Theodore became ruler of the Despotate of Epirus in 1215 upon the death of his half-brother Michael Angelus. (There is a different Theodore, Theodore I Lascaris, who was Emperor of Nicaea.) He was a relative of three of the most promient Byzantine families, which explains all those names. In 1224 Theodore reconquered Thessalonica from the Latins and founded "The Empire of Thessalonica". In 1230 he invaded Bulgarian territory and lost his army and was captured by Ivan (a.k.a. John) II Asen, the Bulgarian Tsar. Initially treated well, he was blinded after plotting against Ivan. Amazingly, that was not the end of his political involvement. After many more complicated events, Ivan's first wife died during an epidemic and Theodore managed to persuade Ivan to take his, Theodore's, daughter, Irene (who then was renamed Anna) as his new wife. As father-in-law of the Tsar, he was released, went back to Thessalonica in disguise, and deposed his brother, Manuel Comnenus-Ducas, in 1237 and installed his son, John Comnenus-Ducas, who was "emperor" only until 1242 and then was obliged to accept the lessor title of "despot" and acknowledge John III Comnenus-Dukas, emperor of Nicaea, as overlord. John III of Nicaea took full control in 1246, bringing the "Empire of Thessalonica" to an end. (This is only one of many sequences of events where the history is truly "Byzantine.") The coins may not be beautiful, but the stories are fascinating!

My friend Ron Bude asked me to post this for him: "At least GM said there was work done. My research shows undescribed repairs to be a pervasive problem (presented in Warsaw at the every six year ancient numismatic conference and now accepted for publication in the next Numismatic Chronicle). For coins for which I had an auction photo showing defect(s) and then later resale of the same coin at auction, 25 percent of them were “repaired” in the interim and were resold as genuine, intact coins - no mention of work done. I had no evidence to implicate any dealer of being complicit. But this high rate of “repair” surprised me and shows thus is a serious problem, for which this coin is but a single example. Watch for my article in the next NC."

One Republican type clearly refers to a grain law subsidizing prices: Reverse legend: AD FRV[mentum] EM[vndum] "for buying grain" EX SC. L. Calpurnius Piso, 100 BC. Crawford 330/1. Clearly this type refers to buying grain for the public. Scholars relate this particular type to a historical law of 100 BC which subsidized grain prices. To place this event in time it takes knowledge (from a treatise of Cicero) of the existence of and date of L. Saturninus's grain law. The head on the obverse with a harpa (sickle) behind his neck as an attribute of Saturn identifies Saturn--an agricultural deity--which makes a plausible reference to Saturninus. Seriation gives an approximate date of the type to begin with and other grain-related types seem more-distant in time. Putting these together, scholars think this is one type where they have the reference and its date right. However, it is possible that the type commemorated that event a year or more later when the moneyer interested in commemorating it was in office. It is accepted that in the second century BC and the early part of the first, many coins do not refer to specific events. But, those that do refer to events refer to deeds of the moneyer's family, not to current events of the state. So, if a moneyer from family B is in office when a member of family C does something noteworthy it may (will) not be mentioned on the coins because a moneyer from family B would not publicize family C. Was there a connection between Saturninus and Piso? The event is firmly fixed in time to 100 BC. Does that mean the coin commemorating the event was issued at the same time rather than later, perhaps years later, when the moneyer was in office and promoting his family? The timeline page shows that some scholars dated this type to about five years after the event, although Crawford picked the year of the event (100 BC). Seriation and other factors contribute to assigning a date. The above discussion is taken from my two pages on how Roman Republican coins are assigned dates. http://augustuscoins.com/ed/Repub/dating.html http://augustuscoins.com/ed/Repub/TimelineTable.html The first page is the theory. The second page discusses the evolution and dating of types that illustrate changes.

Alexius III, 1195-1203 26-25 mm. 2.81 grams. Sear 2012 (It is hard to distinguish between Sear 2011, 2012, and 2013) Bust of Christ facing Alexius and St. Constantine standing 21-17 mm. 3.22 grams. Tetarteron. Sear 2015. Facing bust of St. George O/ΓЄ/P Π/OC Emperor standing AΛЄΞIOC ΔЄCΠOTHC 29-27 mm. 4.49 grams. Very pale electrum, virtually silver. "electrum aspron trachy" Sear 2010. Christ enthroned Alexius and St. Constantine standing

In late 3d C. Roman imperial coins "XI" has a different meaning, "10 parts copper and 1 part silver." (pdf reference: http://augustuscoins.com/ed/catalogs/AlloyXI.pdf ) Coins with "XI" are rare, but "XXI" is very common and has been shown to mean "20 parts copper and 1 part silver." I find it hard to credit that any city would make a denomination of eleven. Maybe "XI" means ten of these make one (of something else--a silver piece? A tetradrachm?) Or, "ten of something (an assarion?) is one of these." I can't think there could be a denomination "eleven".

Andronicus, 1183-1185 31-29 mm. 4.06 grams. Sear 1985 Virgin standing Andronicus being crowned by Christ. His name is legible on the left. 21-17 mm. 4.39 grams. Tetarteron. Sear 1987 Bust of the Virgin, orans, bust of Christ on her breast 3/4 length figure of the emperor holding labarum and globus cruciger 20-19 mm. 3.74 grams. Another Tetarteron. Sear 1986. Virgin standing (photo on the right) Andronicus and Christ. Legend clear but head of Andronicus gone. Isaac Comnunus, 11-84-1191. Usurper in Cyprus. Possibly struck at Nicosia. He was defeated by Richard the Lionheart who was on the Third Crusade. Flattened trachy. 30 mm. 3.21 grams. Sear 1991. Virgin facing holding nimbate head of Christ Isaac and St. George. Much of his name legible from 7:00. These are often flattened. 19 mm. 3.60grams. Sear 1998. Christ pantocrator enthroned facing Virgin, nimbate, crowns Isaac.

Thank you very much for pointing this variety out. Your example is excellent. I'll add it to my want-list!

Licinius was Augustus 308-324. He is not very interesting and his coins are common, so prices are generally low for his copper coins. You might buy one GENIO AVGVSTI reverse type for Licinius and quit: GENIO AVGVSTI for Licinius as Augustus, with Genius holding Victory on globe and cornucopia. Other varieties are below. Licinius's name is spelled with two N's (IMP C LIC LICINNIVS PF AVG), although it is commonly spelled with one.21-20 mm. 4.69 grams. Struck 311-312. Fieldmarks * S, mintmark ANT. RIC Antioch 162a. This issue is shared with Maximinus II (Antioch was in his territory) and Constantine. However, you might notice that they do not always have "Victory on globe." A search of RIC shows five varieties (not counting different mints) [EDIT: the next post shows there are actually six]. Cheap coins and only five varieties mean I think about getting them all. I did, and made a web page on them: http://augustuscoins.com/ed/tetrarchy/LiciniusGA.html If a series has a hundred coins, you have to be very serious to attempt to complete it. Five in a series makes it a merely a fun project. Comment are solicited, and if you have a short project completed, or nearing completion, we'd love to see it.

Here is one of my Leu wins that arrived yesterday, first with their photo and then with mine: Mine was taken with a ten-year-old iPad and a "daylight" LED bulb. Their photo shows all the detail, maybe even better. On the other hand, their photo lacks any metallic sheen. In hand, I'd say the coin looks just like my crude image, which, in my opinion, is warmer and less dry-looking than theirs. I could say the same about the other five late Roman AE I got. I think it is worthwhile, after you get coins, to compare them to the photos you bought them from. You can learn how each dealer's photos represent the coins.

Manuel, 1143-1180 (That's a long reign!) Trachy of Manuel are very common. Not so common are trachy where his name of the reverse is legible: MANɣHΛ ΔЄΠOTHC (Manuel, Despot) 28mm. 3.34 grams. Sear 1964. Virgin Mary Seated Manuel standing. Struck c. 1160-1164 at Constantinople The name is on the concave side which rarely shows wear. However, the name is usually weekly struck or doublestuck, making a clear name unusual. 29 mm. 3.52 grams. Sear 1966 Christ seated. Manuel crowned by the Virgin Mary. Struck 1167-1180? at Constantinople. Small Ae tetartera of Manuel are common: 21 mm. 4.85 grams (heavy standard). Sear 1975 Bust of St. George 1/2 length figure of Manuel (name visible) 19 mm. 2.42 grams. Sear 1977 Facing 1/2 length bust of Manuel monogram

My Leu coins (inexpensive Ramskold late Roman copper coins) from Auction 26 arrived today, August 14, a day more than a month after the auction closed. Each coin is a tiny bit nicer than its photo, so I'm happy. The sheen of metal is hard to capture in a photo. The Leu photos are very good and show all the details just right, but lack some of the elusive sheen of the coins. I doubt I can do any better, but I will try.

My page on Alexius I is here: http://augustuscoins.com/ed/Byz/Alexius.html One piece on that page is next: 25-23 mm. 3.68 grams.Facing bust of the Virgin Mary, MP ΘV either side, holding medallion of ChristAlexius standing holding labarum and globus crucigerAΛЄ ... for Alexius, beginning at 7:30.Sear 1909 Check out the story of his coin reform on that page. Again, http://augustuscoins.com/ed/Byz/Alexius.html

I usually post to this topic, but this time I will let my webpages (with the link provided by @Severus Alexander suffice: http://augustuscoins.com/ed/ByzAnon/ There is a lot of information there, including relative frequencies, that collectors will find interesting. Here is one, Class I: 25-23 mm. 5.62 grams. Attributed to Nicephorus III (1078-1081). Sear 1889.

@ambr0zie, your preferences read very much like mine. @Prieure de Sion, I have decided not to decide. Anyone can look at my websites http://augustuscoins.com/ed/ and see I have a hundred specialities, not one. After one has one of each emperor one wants, then reverses take on much greater importance. I'll stop commenting on individual posts. They are all interesting and many overlap my thoughts. I think a key to understanding happy collecting is the idea of "diminishing returns." If a complete set (say, US Lincoln cents) is very limited you can try to get them all and might be willing to pay a lot for that last item. But, the last few items in the set don't really add much (except cost) and your (mental) "returns" are less and less. But, in ancients, you know you can't get a complete set so that gives you mental permission to stop short of completion and move on to something else that interests you. And, in ancients, there is always something else of interest. Why pay a lot for the tenth-rarest Roman emperor when you can get a new historical reverse of greater interest for less? More "returns" for the money. Or, you could get a really interesting provincial, or Byzantine, or Arabic, or Greek fraction, or .... You get the picture. I love getting a coin type from a series I don't know well, getting the reference works, studying the coin and the series, and maybe getting a few more of the commoner and most illuminating of the types. Long ago, in the 1955 Numismatic Chronicle, Michael Grant, at the time president of the Royal Numismatic Society, devoted his presidential address to "Very Common Coins." He notes what might be obvious--common coins were more important in antiquity and more important to the understanding of antiquity than rare types. So, I recommend you don't get hung up on rarity. Rarity is a concept more important to limited series you can conceivably finish off. In that context rarity makes coins expensive. But, it doesn't make them historically interesting (or important, except in terms of money). I recommend you buy common types in condition that pleases you and move along to something new when returns diminish. I've been collecting ancients for 51 years and am now interested in series I didn't care about years ago. What interests me? Ancient coins--pretty much all of them. You can see if you look part way down this page: http://augustuscoins.com/ed/

Very nice. It looks like the "radiate fraction" or "post-reform radiate" which is very common for members of the First Tetrarchy, but only in the East. They look a lot like ants, but have no intentionally-added silver (ants do, which makes them much more valuable intrinsically). Here is a radiate fraction of Maximian: Maximian 22-20 mm. 3.12 grams. IMP C MA MAXIMIANVS PF AVG Radiate, draped, and cuirassed bust right. KB RIC Cyzicus 15b "c. 295-9" Sear IV 13315 I suppose the OP coin is an ant, even though it looks like it has no silver. I don't know that Carausius ever issued "radiate fractions." But, if he considered doing it and had a prototype made, it would have the CONCORDIA MILITVM reverse (one letter longer than the OP legend) and it might be rare like the OP coin and it would look a lot like the OP coin. For a page on "radiate fractions" see: http://augustuscoins.com/ed/tetrarchy/radiatefraction.html

Constantius II is fun to collect and I recently started a thread on his coins: https://www.numisforums.com/topic/4312-constantius-ii/ Many different types were posted. You might wonder what types are out there, so I created a website with all the AE types of Constantius II. It has several pages: 1) a list of all the types, in tables (you could copy them as a checklist) http://augustuscoins.com/ed/ConstantiusII/ConstantiusII.html (Note: everything is linked to everything else, so I'd begin with this page) 2) a page with one of each type illustrated http://augustuscoins.com/ed/ConstantiusII/Cs2images.html 3) supplemental pages with additional images for a) FEL TEMP REPARATIO types b) types issued by Vetranio c) other types One of my favorite coins of Constantius II is next: Issued by Vetranio, 350. 23 mm.HOC SIGNO VICTOR ERISEmperor standing holding standard with chi-rho, to r. is Victory, crowning him with wreath and holding palm branchThis type is desirable because it is the first type with a Christian legend. HOC SIGNO VICTOR ERIS means "In this sign, you will be victorious" which God told Constantine in his famous vision before the Battle of the Milvian Bridge, Oct. 28, 312. Check out the type-set pages: http:// http://augustuscoins.com/ed/ConstantiusII/ConstantiusII.html and http://augustuscoins.com/ed/ConstantiusII/Cs2images.html

That is a wonderful group, obviously the accumulation of many years of thoughtful collecting. I'm impressed!

29-28 mm. 10.58 grams. Sear 1853. Constantine X and Eudocia On the obverse "+ЄMMA-NOVHA" is "God is with us"around Christ standing. IC XC either side. Reverse legend: +KωN T ΔK ЄVΔK AVΓ (unusually, beginning at 1:30 on the reverse)KωN[Σ]Τ[ΑΝΤΙΝΟΣ O] Δ[ΟY]Κ[ΑΣ] [ЄΥΔ[Ο]Κ[ΙΑ] ΑYΓ[ΟΥΣΤΟΙ] Constantine (the) Doukas, Eudocia, Augusti [or, emperors] 27-25 mm. 8.82 grams. Sear 1854. Bust of Christ/Bust of Constantine X"KωN" for "Constantine" followed (at 10:30) byRACILЄVC O ΔVK "Basileus [= emperor] (the) Ducas" with "R" an epigraphic form of "B" and "C" a lunate "S". Most of what I know about Byzantine-coin legends I learned from @voulgaroktonou . I have a page about Byzantine coin legends: http://augustuscoins.com/ed/Byz/legends.html

Welcome! That is an impressive coin in your first post. We hope it is the first of many.

Thanks for the suggestion. I tried that. Mine were also shipped 3 August, like yours.

I still have not received notification that my wins have shipped. Maybe if they had split it into two or three smaller auctions they could get around to shipping the coins more promptly. I won the coins July 12 and it is August 2 and they still have not shipped. There are a lot of things to like about Leu, but rapid shipping is not one of them.

Basil II (976-1025) and Constantine VIII (to 1028). Since they didn't issue copper in their names, that leaves us considering gold and silver denominations--and imitations. 24.6 - 23.8 mm. 2.20 grams. Apparently a miliaresion. Sear 1810. The style is good, however, the metal is base. At first I thought it was just tarnished, but silver polish did nothing to make it look more silvery. Can it be both official and this base? The next one is an attributed imitation of the same type. 20-19 mm. 1.22 grams. Tmutarakan Principality, probably under Mstislav Vladimirovich, until 1024 Reverse legend replaced by square dots. Golenko 8. Imitates Sear 1810 of Basil II.

The OP coin is a beauty! Congratulations. Here is Constantius of mine from Alexandria: Constantius as CaesarAlexandria27-24 mm. 11.42 grams.FL VAL CONSTANTIVS NOB CAESNote the curls in his beard. Curls only appear on coins of eastern mints.S in left field A over P in right fieldALE in exergueRIC Alexandria 35a "c. 302-303"