Emperors of Rome - A (Chronological) Portrait Gallery

[Severus Alexander]

I happen to have all 3 of today's folks.

Johannes:

Valentinian III:

and a Cherson AE2:

Galla Placidia:

[lrbguy]

20 hours ago, Severus Alexander said:

That's for an AE4, of course.  @mc9 suspects his coin is actually silver, though. (It looks AE to me in the photo, though.)

Since bronze is (and long has been) an alloy of copper and tin, sometimes with a bit of zinc thrown in, it is not hard to queer the mix and get a slightly silvery look to it. 

[Pellinore]

The last throes, but I still have some crumbles...

First we have this siliqua, and some of you will immediately recognize a picture by Frank Robinson (thanks!). 

2843. AR siliqua Honorius, Milan. Obv. DNHONORI-VSPFAVG. Draped and cuirassed bust t.r. Rev. VIRTVSRO-MANORVM. Roma seated left with little Victory in one hand and sceptre in the other. In exergue, MDPS. 15 mm, 1.29 gr. Cabinet toning with iridescent highlights. RSC 59b var. RIC X 1228 var. Frank S. Robinson auction March 2018.

AE4 Valentinian III, 425-455. Obv: Draped, diademed and cuirassed bust to the right, ...ANVS PF AV. Rev: Campgate with two towers, 4 layers, [VOT] - PVB; T (?) in the field. In exergue: [RTM?]. 10.5 mm. 0.99 gr. RIC 2123. Sear 4317. A bit rough. Gert Boersema June 2014.

[O-Towner]

Not much going on with this group but here's a few of mine. It's interesting to note that the coins of Val III and Johannes (to a lesser extent) are mostly struck on small odd-shaped flans and as such are commonly missing much of the legends.

Johannes Ae, Rome mint (12mm, 1.4gms); RIC X 1916

Obv: D N IOHANNES P F AVG; Diademed and cuirassed bust right

Rev: SALVS REIPVBLICE; Victory advancing left holding trophy over shoulder and dragging captive, staurogram over P in left field; RM in exergue

Valentinian III Ae, Rome mint (12mm, 1.5gms) : RIC 2132

Obv: D N VALENTINIANVS P F AVG; Diademed and cuirassed bust right

Rev: VICTORIA AVGG; Two Victories facing and jointly holding wreath. P above; RM in exergue

Valentinian III Ae, Cyzicus mint (12mm, 1.2gms) : RIC 438

Obv: D N VALENTINIANO P F AVG; Diademed and cuirassed bust right

Rev: CONCORDIA AVGG; Victory advancing facing holding wreaths in outstretched hands; SMKA in exergue

 

[lrbguy]

I hope I'm not too late to the party.  Hunted for a missing coin and finally had to give up.  So I can only show two of the coins for May 20. 

One request: In comparing this material with the descriptions and illustrations in RIC X various points of difference were noted such that the catalog description and photos do not always agree or line up.  Please check my attributions against your own interpretation of the listings in RIC X and as needed comment on what listing might be a better fit for each coin in question.

 

JOHANNES

 

Johannes  AE4 - 11mm*    Rome mint; 423-425     RIC X 1910*
DN IOHAN - [NES PF AVG]   diademed, draped and cuirassed bust right
[SALVS] REI - PVBLICAE**; Victory bearing trophy in r hand/shoulder leads captive to L
Left field: staurogram***   In exergue: Q [?]

*This module was too small for the full scale of the designs on both sides of the coin, but this specimen weighs 1.24g against an average of 1.25g. It fits the scale of the illustrated full version of RIC X 1909 for Theodosivs II with this reverse.

 

Johannes  AE4 - 12mm    Rome mint; 423-425     RIC X 1920*
DN IOHANNES PF AVG   diademed, draped and cuirassed bust right
[SALVS] REI - PVBLICAE**; Victory bearing trophy in r hand/shoulder leads captive to L
Left field: staurogram***   In exergue: RMP

*The two options for obverse legend call for a division N-N or NN-A. There is no division for this coin.
**contra RIC X which gives REI-PUBLICE.
***in this case the bottom arc of the rho impinges on the horizontal crossbar.

 

VALENTINIAN III

 

Valentinian III  AE4 - 11X13mm    Rome mint; 423-425     RIC X 2123
DN VALENTINIANVS PF AVG   diademed, draped and cuirassed bust right
V O T - P V B ; 4 layer gate w/2 pointed turrets (type A)
Between turrets: e<epsilon> (officina)             In exergue: []*

After literally dozens of attempts I am going to submit these photos for this coin, but am aware that I can get a clear view of the design when holding the coin at less than a 90 degree angle with further angled incident light.
*There does not appear to be any residual lettering in the exergue, which corresponds to the only type listed but not illustrated.

 

Valentinian III  AE4 - 12mm    Rome mint; 423-425     RIC X 2126*
DN VALENTINIANVS PF AVG   diademed, draped and cuirassed bust right
V O T - P V B ; 4 layer gate w/2 pointed turrets (type B var)
Between turrets: 2 dots   In exergue: RM

 

Galla Placidia

I had no luck in finding the Galla Placidia I had acquired a few years ago. By way of recompense let me show a couple of better examples of Edoxia AE3s I came across and would have used earlier.

 

 

Aelia Eudoxia redux

Aelia Eudoxia AE3 - 15mm   Constantinople mint; 400-404
AEL EVDO - XIA AVG  Nimbate (halo of dots), wearing 2 strand pearl diadem & necklace (?) r.
SALVS REI - PVBLICAE  Victory seated on cuirass r*, writing on chi-bar shield of dots set atop cippus                      In exergue: CONSA

*Note the closely cropped hair, masculine features of the detailed face of victory, and the use of a cuirass for seating.  

 

Aelia Eudoxia AE3 - 16mm   Constantinople mint; 400-404
AEL EVDO - XIA AVG  Nimbate (ring halo w/ dots), wearing diadem & pearl necklace r.
GLORIA ROMANORVM     Figure enthroned, crossed arms, facing
In upper right field: crux quadrata (Greek cross)     In exergue: ANTG

 

Edited May 22, 2023 by lrbguy
fixed a year date

[Ancient Coin Hunter]

Today - it will be interesting to see who, if anyone has a Romulus Augustulus.

[Qcumbor]

I'm out for today, but will come again with Theodosius II

😞 Q

Edited May 22, 2023 by Qcumbor

[lrbguy]

59 minutes ago, Qcumbor said:

😞 Q

Let me guess: Charles Emerson Winchester III

[mc9]

@Severus Alexander:

You are right, looking through a microscope to the crack, the coin is an AE4 (copper/bronze )core.

Great eye !

( I corrected the text ).

@Irbguy :

in this regard : this is the explanation in RIC IX on page XXIX:

the bronze underwent many changes, and its relation to the gold and silver in any of its transforations is still a matter of conjecture. it is generaly accepted that the bronze throughout our periode was supposed to contain a slight alloy of silver, with would materially increase its value above that of the normal ratio of unalloyed bronze to gold and silver

( this coin was tested by a silver smidt, there is a slight alloy of silver present on the outside ).

 

 

Edited May 22, 2023 by mc9

[Ancient Coin Hunter]

Silver residue???........

 

That means that even these (miserable) AE4's were silvered! What happened to all of the guys who were artisans at the mint after 400?

 

[O-Towner]

Might as well begin with examples from today's group:

Anthemius (467 - 472 AD) Ae Nummus : Rome mint (9.5mm, 1.2gms)

Obv: Diademed and cuirassed bust (I guess) of Anthemius right

Rev: Monogram of Anthemius

Ref: RIC 2857

Julius Nepos (474 - 475 AD) Ae : Mediolanum mint (10.3mm, 1.0gms)

Obv: Diademed and cuirassed bust right

Rev: Monogram of Julius Nepos

Ref: RIC 3222

 

Edited May 22, 2023 by O-Towner

[lrbguy]

3 hours ago, mc9 said:

@Severus Alexander:

You are right, looking through a microscope to the crack, the coin is an AE4 (copper/bronze )core.

Great eye !

( I corrected the text ).

@Irbguy :

in this regard : this is the explanation in RIC IX on page XXIX:

the bronze underwent many changes, and its relation to the gold and silver in any of its transforations is still a matter of conjecture. it is generaly accepted that the bronze throughout our periode was supposed to contain a slight alloy of silver, with would materially increase its value above that of the normal ratio of unalloyed bronze to gold and silver

( this coin was tested by a silver smidt, there is a slight alloy of silver present on the outside ).

 

 

I gut tells me this should be examined privately, but the errors have not been corrected.  So, new to the list as I am, I will raise the question. Our interest is only to set the record straight, and maybe to help a fellow collector who is trying to make sense out of a confusing phenomenon.

With all due respect, MC9, you have identified the coin as a half siliqua, claiming it to be silver.  Citing Pearce on the question of silver as an adulterant in a bronze matrix misses the point.  The coin which corresponds to RIC IX 26c is listed by Pearce as an "Aes IV" directly under the word "BRONZE."  Pierce's comment on page XXIX applies to all bronze coins of this period.  But you have singled out a few that you call "silver" (cf. also your first entry of May 10 for Valentinian, which you also identify as a half-siliqua, unlisted). You do not make this distinction for all late bronze coins, but you did for these two, originally noting in both cases that RIC missed it.  What tells you these are silver coins when the others like them are not?

[mc9]

@Irbguy :

Thank you for reading, you are right.

The material type for Arcadius has also been adjusted ( I did not payed attention to that ).  We are all here to learn.

content deleted

The Arcadius coin has a very low amount of silver present.

 

 

 

Edited May 25, 2023 by mc9

[lrbguy]

4 hours ago, mc9 said:

For the Valentinianus coin I stand by what I have written.

 I have inquired about this in the past ( started more then 20 years ago ) on various coin forums and it was suggested that given the weight, diameter, thickness and ( material type ( that is why i have it tested )) of the coin, it should  be called a half siliqua in the absence of an existing name given its weight  .

Thank you for the reply.  I am beginning to get the picture, I think.  The crux of the whole matter is your earlier experience with the Valentinian piece, which you have carefully examined, and discussed with collectors, but apparently have not formally "presented to the world" as a new discovery.  May I encourage you to do that, since the verifiable discovery of an unknown denomination is no small thing. That having been said, it is also a fact that our standard reference for this material is hopelessly out of date and can be expected to have many gaps.  Might I suggest a report to the ANS (if in the US), or whatever numismatic agency operates in your part of the world, might be in order so your piece may have referential value for other students of this material?  If it is to be authoritative, it needs to be properly vetted and published. From what you have said here it sounds as if you have seen something worthy of a closer look. I would look forward to hearing more about that coin.

Thanks for sharing it.  All the best.

 

 

[mc9]

My favorite portraits from Theodosius II :

D N THEODOSIVS P F AVG : pearl - diademed, draped and cuirassed bust right
CONCO - RDIA AVG // CON : Victory advancing facing, holding wreath in each hand.
Ae4, Constantinopel, (A.D.425-435), RIC 434 var. ( conco – rdia avg ); Weight: 0.55 g. Diameter: 10.45 mm

D N THEODOSIVS P F AVG : pearl – diademed, draped and cuirassed bust right
Monogram within wreath // CON : monogram type 3
AE 4, Constantinople, A.D. 445 – 450, RIC 463

 

Edited May 23, 2023 by mc9

[wittwolff]

My two Theodosius II. coins:

[Octavius]

 I think I just heard Rome fall!

[mc9]

Gave flowers to my wife this morning for our wedding anniversary ( XXXVIIII years ), she fell out of the sky, that is May 25th! Sorry, wrong date.

Then realized that I posted the content for May 24 yesterday.

SORRY!  SORRY!!   SORRY!!!

Confuse.com

Edited May 24, 2023 by mc9

[O-Towner]

Theodosius II AV Solidus; Constantinople mint (20.6mm, 4.2gms)

Obv: D N THEODOSIVS P F AVG; Helmeted and cuirassed bust facing holding spear over shoulder and shield

Rev: CONCORDIA AVGG H; Constantinopolis seated facing, head right, with foot on prow and holding scepter and Victory on globe; CONOB in exergue

Ref: RIC 202

Eudocia (wife of Theodosius II) AV Tremissis; Constantinople mint (14.6mm, 1.4gms)

Obv: AEL EVDOCIA AVG; Diademed and draped bust right

Rev: Cross within wreath; CONOB(star) in exergue

Ref: RIC X 252

 

[Ancient Coin Hunter]

Great gold coins! Skip the sad AE4s and go for the gold! 

[John Conduitt]

I'll have to give you some sad AEs for my last post in this thread. Both come after the Romans left Britain, so it's interesting the British were still using bronze while apparently burying all the silver in the Western Empire.

I'm not even sure who's on the obverse of either of them.

For the first, I regularly change my mind between Honorius and Theodosius II. It seems to come down to the obverse legend, which is largely missing. At least both emperors are on the reverse, so I can't go wrong for this thread. The mint is a bit of a guess too.

Honorius, 408-423

Heraclea. Bronze, 1.77g. Bust of Honorius, pearl-diademed, draped, cuirassed, right, star behind; D N HONORI-VS P F AVG. Honorius and Theodosius II standing facing, heads toward one another, each holding a spear in outer hand and holding a globe between them with inner hands; GLORIA RO-MANORVM; SMHA in exergue (RIC X Theodosius II (East), 407). Found in Britain.

This one has even less legend but I don't think it can be anyone else.

Theodosius II Æ4, 425-435

Cyzicus. Bronze, 11mm, 1.13g. Theodosius II, pearl-diademed, draped, cuirassed, right; D N THEODO-SIVS P F AVG. Cross within a wreath; SMKA (RIC X, 449). Found Oxfordshire.

[Rand]

37 minutes ago, John Conduitt said:

Found in Britain.

 

37 minutes ago, John Conduitt said:

Found Oxfordshire.

It is incredible what coins are found in Britain and how you have assembled so many of them! A great collection!

[Severus Alexander]

It’s not 3pm Eastern yet!

Majorian:

Libius Severus (with Ricimer monogram):

At least we covered 4 of these difficult dudes!

 

[Severus Alexander]

@mc9 and @lrbguy: I think both the Valentinian II campgate (here: https://www.numisforums.com/topic/2120-emperors-of-rome-a-chronological-portrait-gallery/?do=findComment&comment=50385 ) and the Arcadius Victory with captive (https://www.numisforums.com/topic/2120-emperors-of-rome-a-chronological-portrait-gallery/?do=findComment&comment=50875 ) are straightforward AE4s (whatever this silvered AE denomination was called at the time), not fractional siliquae. Mc9, you mentioned that the jeweler’s analysis found surface silver, which is perfectly consistent with that conclusion. The interesting thing about these two coins is that they still have a remarkable amount of their surface silvering remaining, which is pretty rare for these. (I suppose one must  bear in mind the possibility of it having been added later, particularly on the Val II which has so much of it. Apparently this practice was lamentably common in the 19th century. Though it doesn’t look modern to me in the photo.)

I’m not sure if that’s what you meant to conclude, mc9… They are neat coins in any case!

 

 

 

[Qcumbor]

1 hour ago, Severus Alexander said:

It’s not 3pm Eastern yet!

I hope it is now ! 😄 

Of my two Theodosius II coins, my best is undoubtedly this siliqua

Theodosius II, Siliqua - Constantinople mint
D N THEODO SIVS P F AVG, diademed draped and cuirassed bust right seen from front
VOT/XX/MVLT/XXX, within a laurel wreath, CONS* at exergue
2.16 gr, 18.5 mm
RIC X, # 381

Q