a handsome Siliqua of Magnus Maximus

[Nerosmyfavorite68]

I had to put my intended order on hold for two weeks when this popped up, but it was well worth it.  My intended coin, which I probably overpaid for, was ordered today.  So I got both! This handsome Magnus Maximus Siliqua/Argentiolus was actually slightly less than most unclipped vcoins examples.

The picture is pretty accurate about showing the toning. It's a deeply toned coin.

My first Magnus siliqua was purchased by my Dad in 1994, as a Derby win present.  It's in about the exact same condition, also unclipped (my pre-2008 coins are unphotographed).  While I prefer the rainbow toning of the 1994 coin (and it has a more personal story), both are great examples.

Magnus Maximus is one of my favorite late emperors, mostly because the name.  Perhaps some day I'll luck into a Eugenius.

I strongly prefer unclipped siliquae.  I don't have many, perhaps 5.

 

 

MAGNUS MAXIMUS AR silver siliqua. Augusta Treverorum (Trier) mint. D N MAG MAX-IMVS P F AVG, diademed, draped and cuirassed bust right. Reverse - VIRTVS ROMANORVM, Roma enthroned facing, head left, holding globe & spear, TRPS in exergue. RIC 84b of Trier. RSC 20a. 18mm, 2.0g.

 

POSTUMUS AE dupondius. IMP C M CASS LATT POSTVMVS P F AVG, radiate, draped and cuirassed bust right. Reverse - VICTORIA AVG, Victory walking left, captive at feet. RCV 11065. 23mm, 6.1g.

 

The second coin was a throw-in.  I chose it because of the patina.  While I strongly prefer the large Postumus double Sestertii overstruck on Antonine era Sestertii, I have a couple of the dupondius sized ones.  My question; were these small ones reduced-sized double Sestertii, dupondii, or both,depending on when they were issued?

Feel free to post any Siliquae of Maximus or Eugenius. Or, the small-sized Postumus double Sestertii.

 

[Nerosmyfavorite68]

Is it just me or are Siliquae of Magnus Maximus more common than his Western empire contemporaries and near contemporaries, Gratian, Valentinian I and II, respectively? 

[Magnus Maximus]

Very nice coin. I have a nice one I will post this weekend, that recently arrived. 

I approve of this siliqua. 
 

1 hour ago, Nerosmyfavorite68 said:

Is it just me or are Siliquae of Magnus Maximus more common than his Western empire contemporaries and near contemporaries, Gratian, Valentinian I and II, respectively? 

Indeed, Maximus required large amount of funds to compensate his soldiers and the large number of barbarian clients he had at his disposal. Consequently, Maximus’s persecution of Priscillian and his followers probably had more to do with a need for coin than it did with any religious intolerance. The surge in siliqua production occurred prominently in the regions of his primary headquarters, specifically from 383 to 387 in Gaul and from 387 to 388 in Italy. These funds served a dual purpose, as they not only directly compensated the soldiers for their service, but also facilitated payments to merchants and farmers supplying the field armies.

[John Conduitt]

That's a good portrait of Maximus. I don't think his siliquae are more common than Gratian but Valentinian I is surprisingly scarce.
 

4 hours ago, Magnus Maximus said:

Indeed, Maximus required large amount of funds to compensate his soldiers and the large number of barbarian clients he had at his disposal. Consequently, Maximus’s persecution of Priscillian and his followers probably had more to do with a need for coin than it did with any religious intolerance. The surge in siliqua production occurred prominently in the regions of his primary headquarters, specifically from 383 to 387 in Gaul and from 387 to 388 in Italy. These funds served a dual purpose, as they not only directly compensated the soldiers for their service, but also facilitated payments to merchants and farmers supplying the field armies.

This is an interesting question. (Or two). Maximus did have barbarian clients but so did Theodosius I and Valentinian II, so much so that Maximus complained about them using barbarians against him. They should have struck at least as many coins. He was also rather maligned after his defeat about Priscillian, even though it wasn't him that started it and he wouldn't be the last to persecute Priscillian's followers. I'm sure he was happy to confiscate their wealth but it's not as if he didn't do that to other people without such an excuse. Maximus was pious and his orthodox faith may even have been his motivation for attacking Valentinian II (and for Theodosius I, who shared his beliefs, allowing him to rule). I suspect most of his coin production was to fund his invasion of Italy and to remove Valentinian II, which he seemed ready to do from the moment he took power, but he probably struck most coins from 386 onwards.

[seth77]

6 hours ago, Nerosmyfavorite68 said:

Is it just me or are Siliquae of Magnus Maximus more common than his Western empire contemporaries and near contemporaries, Gratian, Valentinian I and II, respectively? 

I think that much of this perceived abundance is also due to the fact that during the 380s was the last great influx of Roman silver currency to Britain, before the island was evacuated by the military and authorities. And since the UK laws are collector and dealer-friendly, these coins enter easily and legally all markets.

[John Conduitt]

2 hours ago, seth77 said:

I think that much of this perceived abundance is also due to the fact that during the 380s was the last great influx of Roman silver currency to Britain, before the island was evacuated by the military and authorities. And since the UK laws are collector and dealer-friendly, these coins enter easily and legally all markets.

This is true - something like 80% of all hoards containing silver coins across the Roman Empire from 388-410 are found in southeast England - but it should also have meant lots of coins of the other emperors mentioned (and did, certainly in the case of Gratian and Constantius II). Between 383 and 388 all the silver in Britain would've come from Trier and would've been of Maximus, so presumably that pushes up Maximus's percentage, but before and after it seems to have come from Lyon, Milan, Rome and Arles as well. That would mean more Gratian but not so much Theodosius I. But why not Valentinian I and II? You even get lots more of Valens, who only ruled in the East.

Edited January 30 by John Conduitt

[Magnus Maximus]

3 hours ago, John Conduitt said:

That's a good portrait of Maximus. I don't think his siliquae are more common than Gratian but Valentinian I is surprisingly scarce.
 

This is an interesting question. (Or two). Maximus did have barbarian clients but so did Theodosius I and Valentinian II, so much so that Maximus complained about them using barbarians against him. They should have struck at least as many coins. He was also rather maligned after his defeat about Priscillian, even though it wasn't him that started it and he wouldn't be the last to persecute Priscillian's followers. I'm sure he was happy to confiscate their wealth but it's not as if he didn't do that to other people without such an excuse. Maximus was pious and his orthodox faith may even have been his motivation for attacking Valentinian II (and for Theodosius I, who shared his beliefs, allowing him to rule). I suspect most of his coin production was to fund his invasion of Italy and to remove Valentinian II, which he seemed ready to do from the moment he took power, but he probably struck most coins from 386 onwards.

 

The siliqua gradually phased out of production towards the latter part of Emperor Valens' reign in the East, with only a minimal quantity being struck under Theodosius I. So I am not surprised why we don’t see large numbers minted there. The reduction in the Italian mints suggests to me that Valentinian II likely wasn't preparing for war when Magnus Maximus crossed into Italy, as there would have been little need to strike a large number of siliquae in such a scenario. Moreover, the rapidity with which Maximus overran Valentinian II's territory implies that Valentinian II's army was probably smaller in size. Additionally, it's important to remember the 388 incident when a group of Christians burned down a synagogue, leading to their censure by Magnus Maximus, a decision that notably displeased St. Ambrose. This episode suggests that Maximus was a more shrewd politician than most historians acknowledge.

Edited January 30 by Magnus Maximus

[Nerosmyfavorite68]

Honorius' siliquae also seem to pop up pretty often.