Valentinian and Valens bronze coins

[thenickelguy]

 

Valentinian and Valens

I think I have identified these correctly.

 

 

(These images will be updated when these coins arrive tomorrow. I'm glad we can edit posts that way)

Valentinian Roman Emperor 364-375 AD (western half)

 

Valentinian I, AE3, Siscia. DN VALENTINI-ANVS PF AVG, pearl diademed, draped, cuirassed bust right / GLORIA RO-MANORVM, Emperor in military dress, walking right, head left, holding labarum, dragging captive behind him. Left field: M. Right field: star over F. Mintmark: BSISC. RIC IX Siscia 14a, type xvi.

UPDATED image These arrived in the mail 6.27.22 looking very dark, almost black.

 

Valens Roman Emperor 364-378 AD (eastern half)

 

Valens AE3. 365 AD. DN VALENS PF AVG, diademed draped and cuirassed bust right / GLORIA ROMANORVM, emperor walking right, head left, holding labarum and dragging bound captive behind him. Mintmark
Siscia dot BSISC

UPDATED image These arrived in the mail 6.27.22 looking very dark, almost black.

Edited June 28, 2022 by thenickelguy

[Curtisimo]

Nice coins @thenickelguy. I will looks forward to your updated photos. I agree edit-ability of posts here is wonderful!

You have reminded me I haven’t shown my own low grade GLORIA ROMANORVM in a while.

Valentinian I 
AE3, struck ca. 364-375
Obv.: D N VALENTINIANVS P F AVG - Diademed, draped bust right
Rev.: GLORIA ROMANORVM - Valentinian, holding labarum, advancing right dragging captive by the hair.

[Orange Julius]

Valentinian I
DN VALENTINI-ANVS PF AVG, diademed bust, draped and cuirassed on the right

RESTITV-TOR REIP, Emperor standing facing, head right, holding labarum and Victory on globe, ALEA with the exergue

Alexandria - 364/367 - RIC 2 a 1 (S) - Cohen 21 - NBC 414 - NBD 59803 - 16 mm / 2.29 g 

[Victor_Clark]

33 minutes ago, Orange Julius said:

Emperor standing facing, head right, holding labarum and Victory on globe

 

nice details on the reverse.

[Spaniard]

@thenickelguy..They look nice and green....🙂

Valens. 364-378 AD. AE Nummus (2.19 gm, 18mm). Thessalonica mint. Struck 364-367 AD.
Obv.: D N VALENS P F AVG, pearl-diademed, draped and cuirassed bust to right.
Rev.: GLORIA ROMANORVM, Emperor walking to right, head to left, holding labarum and dragging captive; TESΓ in exergue.
RIC IX #16b. VF.

 

[shanxi]

There are three emperors called Valentinian:

 

Valentinian I:

Valentinianus I.
364-375 AD
AE-Follis, Siscia, 367-375
Obv.. DN VALENTINIANVS PF AVG / Diademed, draped and cuirassed bust right.
Rev.: GLORIA ROMANORVM M / * / P, BSIS in ex, Emperor advancing right, holding labarum and grasping captive
AE, 15 mm, 2.5g
Ref.: RIC 14a

 

Valentinian II:

 

 

Valentinianus II (AD 375-392)
Cyzicus mint, AD 378-383
Obv: DN VALENTINIANVS P F AVG, Bust of Valentinian II, helmeted (with pearl-diadem), draped and cuirassed, right, holding spear and shield in front
Rev: GLORIA ROMANORUVM, Emperor, head right, standing facing, on ship, raising right hand; Victory at helm
RIC 9, p.242, 14B

 

 

Valentinian III:

Valentinianus III
Æ-Nummus, Kyzikos
Obv: DN VALENTINIANO P F AVG, Bust of Valentinian, draped, cuirrased, right-
Rev: Victory advancing forward, holding wreath in both hands. SMKA
RIC X (theososius II), p. 274, 438, R3

 

 

Edited June 27, 2022 by shanxi

[Ursus]

Coins of Valens and Valentinian I are often overlooked. I like them.

Valens, Roman Empire, AE3, 367–375 AD, Aquileia mint. Obv: DN VALENS PF AVG; bust of Valens, draped, cuirassed, and pearl-diademed, r. Rev: SECVRITAS REIPVBLICAE; Victory advancing l., holding wreath and palm; in exergue, SMAQP. 19mm, 2.75g. Ref: RIC IX Aquileia 12B.

Valens, Roman Empire, AR siliqua, 367–378 AD, Trier mint. Obv: DN VALENS PF AVG; bust of Valens, draped, cuirassed, and pearl-diademed, r. Rev: VRBS ROMA; Roma seated l. on throne, holding Victory on globe and sceptre; in exergue TRPS•. 17mm, 1.71g. Ref: RIC IX Treveri 27E/45B.

Valentinian I, Roman Empire, AE3, 364–367 AD, Thessalonica mint. Obv: DN VALENTINIANVS P F AVG; bust of Valentinian I, draped, cuirassed, and pearl-diademed, r. Rev: RESTITVTOR REIP; emperor, head r., standing facing, holding labarum and Victory on globe; in exergue, TES(A/B?). 15mm, 1.80g. Ref: RIC IX Thessalonica 17A.

[Qcumbor]

Valentinian I : siliqua and AE1

 

And Valens : siliqua and AE1

Q

[thenickelguy]

Just yesterday lI earned what AE1 AE2 AE3 and AE4 meant.

The HIGHER (corrected) the number, the smaller in diameter the bronze coin is.

Edited June 27, 2022 by thenickelguy

[shanxi]

2 minutes ago, thenickelguy said:

The lower the number, the smaller in diameter the bronze coin is.

No, just the other way around

[thenickelguy]

I fixed it. See, you do learn something new everyday.

Thanks 😊

1 minute ago, shanxi said:

the other way around

 

[Nerosmyfavorite68]

Valentinian I AE 1

Attribution: RIC IX 2 Heraclea
Date: AD 364-367
Obverse: DN VALENTINI-ANVS P F AVG, pearl-diademed, draped and cuirassed bust right
Reverse: RESTITVTOR REIBVBLICAE, emperor standing right holding labarum and Victory; SMHA in exergue
Size: 27.77mm
Weight: 7.95 grams

Valens (364-378). AR Siliqua (18mm, 1.60g, 6h). Treveri, 367-375. Pearl-diademed, draped and cuirassed bust r. R/ Roma seated l., holding Victory on globe and spear; TRPS•. RIC IX 27e; RSC 109†b. Edge broken,

[Victor_Clark]

 

 

Valens
A.D. 364- 378
Ӕ2 22mm 4.4g
D N VALEN-S P F AVG; pearl-diademed, draped and cuirassed bust right.
GLORI-A ROMA-NORVM; campgate with six rows, two turrets, no doors; S above.
In ex. SMTR
RIC IX Trier 29b

[Magnus Maximus]

Grade: VF+/EF- black patina, flan crack, small area of damage on obverse 11 o'clock Material: Silver Weight: 1.91 g Diameter: 19 mm Obverse: D N VALENTINIANVS P F AVG, pearl-diademed, draped and cuirassed bust to right Reverse: VRBS ROMA / R P, Roma seated left holding reversed spear and Victory on globe 

[Severus Alexander]

A dark green Valens from Siscia:

And a light apple green Valens from Thessalonica:

I've often wondered what they looked like fresh from the mint, and this thread has presented a bit of a puzzle for me in that respect, in particular @Ursus's very yellow coin up there:

19 hours ago, Ursus said:

 

Looks very bronze rather than pure copper.  By contrast, here's a lightly patinated brown, more coppery looking coin from Siscia (Valentinian):

... and then here is a largely unpatinated Valens I got from @zumbly.  I don't know if it has been cleaned or if it came out of a hoard this way.  (Any idea, Z?)  Very coppery, like a penny, although it does have a bit of a yellowish tinge on the face.  This is the example I have that comes closest to what it would have looked like coming out of the mint.

 

So what's normal here?  Is @Ursus's coin yellow-patinated copper?  Coyly, we say AE, but are these all pretty much copper with a few impurities?  Or can there be quite a variety of metals and unpatinated colours depending on mint/time?  Could there even be more than one denomination like for the As/dupondius two centuries earlier, but where we can't tell them apart now due to patination?!  🤯

You coin cleaners probably know this, and I'm sure there are papers on the alloys and stuff I could look up.  But it's easier just to ask and be enlightened. 🙂 @Victor_Clark? @Valentinian?  Anyone?

[Alegandron]

Valens

RI Valens AD 364-378 AE Red Follis Siscia Mint

[maridvnvm]

I don't have too many coins from this period.

Valens - AE3

Obv:– D N VALENS P F AVG, Diademed, draped and cuirassed bust right
Rev:– SECVRITAS REIPVBLICAE, Victory advancing left holding wreath & palm branch
Minted in Rome (//SM leaf RB). 24th August A.D. 367 - 17th November 375
Reference:– RIC IX 24b

[zumbly]

6 hours ago, Severus Alexander said:

Looks very bronze rather than pure copper.  By contrast, here's a lightly patinated brown, more coppery looking coin from Siscia (Valentinian):... and then here is a largely unpatinated Valens I got from @zumbly.  I don't know if it has been cleaned or if it came out of a hoard this way.  (Any idea, Z?)  Very coppery, like a penny, although it does have a bit of a yellowish tinge on the face.  This is the example I have that comes closest to what it would have looked like coming out of the mint.

That came from a group of Valens and Valentinian coins I bought that were all lacking patina.  I don't know for sure if they all came from a hoard, but I think the likelihood's high (all from Siscia, all the same look, quite a number still with those green malachite hoard deposits).  I think they had been cleaned and showed varying degrees of retoning... some had that slightly yellowish hue, others had become darker, but others were still fresh and copper penny-like, such as the one below:

Edited June 28, 2022 by zumbly

[Severus Alexander]

1 hour ago, zumbly said:

That came from a group of Valens and Valentinian coins I bought that were all lacking patina.  I don't know for sure if they all came from a hoard, but I think the likelihood's high (all from Siscia, all the same look, quite a number still with those green malachite hoard deposits).  I think they had been cleaned and showed varying degrees of retoning...

Green malachite can be stubborn, but still, the cleaning must not have been very aggressive. If the container was sealed air tight, is it possible the coins are as found, do you think?

[O-Towner]

Here's my larger AR Miliarense of Valentinian I:

Obv: D N VALENTINIANVS P F AVG; Draped bust right

Rev: VICTORIA AVGVSTORVM; Victory standing right and inscribing shield resting on cippus; R P (Rome mint) in exergue

Size: 21mm, 3.3gms

An interesting upwards gaze.

 

 

Edited June 28, 2022 by O-Towner

[zumbly]

17 minutes ago, Severus Alexander said:

Green malachite can be stubborn, but still, the cleaning must not have been very aggressive. If the container was sealed air tight, is it possible the coins are as found, do you think?

I'd be out of my depth there, but it'd be interesting if they came out of the ground that way.  Maybe someone who's done some research on 4th century hoards may know.

[Ursus]

8 hours ago, Severus Alexander said:

I've often wondered what they looked like fresh from the mint, and this thread has presented a bit of a puzzle for me in that respect, in particular @Ursus's very yellow coin up there:

I would be frankly surprised if late 4th century base metal coins were made from a single, clearly defined alloy. I'm no expert in this field and don't know if there is a metallurgical study of Roman bronze coins after 364 AD (please chime in if you know more than me!), but the examples in this thread definitely show rather different colors.

With my coin, one can speculate that a bunch of old orichalcum coins might have ended up in the melting pot, making for the yellowish color. I do not know whether this happened accidentally, had a specific meaning, was typical of the (rather scarce) Aquileia mint, or whether the mints by that point just used whatever old material they could get their hands on. Ockham's razor points to the latter answer, though.

[Severus Alexander]

6 hours ago, Ursus said:

I would be frankly surprised if late 4th century base metal coins were made from a single, clearly defined alloy. I'm no expert in this field and don't know if there is a metallurgical study of Roman bronze coins after 364 AD (please chime in if you know more than me!), but the examples in this thread definitely show rather different colors.

Me too, that is I’d be surprised by a consistent metallurgy. On the other hand, one might expect a reasonably consistent appearance coming from a single mint and possibly across mints, for the same denomination - the same appearance being achievable with varying metal compositions.  (After all, vastly different appearances could create confusion in everyday use.) Except of course our experience as collectors is allmost entirely limited to patinated examples, even in this thread, thus my query.  It’s at least conceivable that your brassy coin and my copper coin are different denominations, though that would be an extreme conclusion.  More mildly it could be evidence for a different date of issue, for example.

Or, of course, it could be as you say, @Ursus, and there were melting pots galore as needs must, with a rainbow of centenionali constantly flying out of all the mints. I’m just hoping for some relevant evidence on this question. 

[John Conduitt]

On 6/27/2022 at 2:38 PM, thenickelguy said:

Just yesterday lI earned what AE1 AE2 AE3 and AE4 meant.

The HIGHER (corrected) the number, the smaller in diameter the bronze coin is.

Until you get to AE12, AE13, AE14...when the numbers are the size in mm.

[Steve]

Nice, thenickelguy is at it again ... sweet new OP-additions (congrats)

 

Hmmm, I only had only example of both of those later rulers ... wanna see 'em?

 

Valens AE3 (below)

(Siscia mint)

Date: 364-378 AD

Diameter: 18.1 mm

Weight: 2.3 grams

Obverse: DN VALENS P F AVG - Diademed, draped and cuirassed bust of Valens

Reverse: GLORIA ROMANORVM - Emperor, holding labarum and dragging captive. [dot]ΓSISC in ex

Ex-stevex6

 

=> oh and this next baby was my very first ancient purchase (I bought it with another slightly sketchier coin)

... yup, this coin was the one that got me interested in buying my next coin, and my next coin, and my ... well, you know

Valentinian I, AE 19 (below)
Minted AD 367--375

Obverse: D N VALENTINIANVS P F AVG, diademed, draped and cuirassed bust right
Reverse: GLORIA ROMANORVM, emperor walking right, head left, dragging captive and holding labarum, TES B in exergue
Weight: 2.7 g
Diameter: 19 mm
Reference: RIC IX Thessalonica 16a

Ex-stevex6

---

 

Man, that coin always makes me happy

😁

Edited June 28, 2022 by Steve