Constantius Chlorus, Radiate Fraction: Which mint is that?

[Tejas]

I was wondering if anybody could tell me which mint the coin below is from? 

The coin is a so called radiate fraction or post-reform antoninianus, or neo or pseudo antoninianus of Constantius Chlorus. I bought the coin very cheaply on Ebay. I don't have it yet.

 

Obv.: FL VAL CONSTANTIVS NOBC

Rev.: VOT X X  T 

I'm not entirely sure if I read the T correctly. 

If it is T, I suppose the mint is Ticinum, but does that match with the VOT XX?

[John Conduitt]

The obverse legend is different. The letter is the officina. Rome RIC 88a.

[Tejas]

Super helpful, many thanks. So it is Rome, third officina.

Would this also apply to this coin?

Edited February 12 by Tejas

[Tejas]

 

I have the answer. The second coin is from Ticinum. Here the T is a mint mark. Indeed, according to OCRE Rome did not use T as officina, but used Gamma instead.

Online Coins of the Roman Empire: Browse Collection (numismatics.org)

 

Also, on the first coin the letter is probably not a T, but a reverse Gamma. This coin below from the OCRE is very similar (in fact perhaps die-identical) to my coin above:

Note the reverse Gamma and the XX, which are excuted more like ++.

Edited February 13 by Tejas

[Tejas]

The third mint, which produced this reverse type was Carthage. I also have an exemplar in my collection:

Obv.: FL VAL CONSTANTIVS NOBC

Rev.: VOT X FK (Felix Karthago)

Mint: Carthage

Date: RIC dates the issue to AD 303, but a date closer to AD 296 maybe more appropriate.

RIC VI 35a.

Edited February 12 by Tejas

[Heliodromus]

Both VOT XX specimens look unofficial (or mules at best).

- The VOT XX type was for the augustii, VOT X for the caesars

- The obverse legend is wrong

- The reverse lettering looks crude & slightly blundered (retrograde officina, wrongly orientated X's, inconsistent letter sizes)

[Tejas]

That is interesting, but RIC VI Rome 87a, 88a and 89a all have Constantius I as Caesar with VOT XX reverse. 88a and 88b have the same obverse legend, i.e CONSTANTIVS NOB CAES and CONSTANTIVS NOB C.  Do you think that these are all mules or unofficial mint products? 

This coin here from the BM collection certainly does not look like an unofficial mint product. 

https://www.britishmuseum.org/collection/object/C_R-3267

Edited February 12 by Tejas

[John Conduitt]

VOT XX was used for Caesars. Crispus had plenty of BEATA, VIRTVS and wreath reverses with VOT XX at all sorts of mints.

Edited February 12 by John Conduitt

[Heliodromus]

Agreed - that BM one looks official, and has expected obv legend.

Per RIC, Rome *only* issued VOT XX (for augustii and caesars alike), while Ticinum and Carthage differentiated caesars (X) from augustii (XX).

Edit: I originally said the BM coin could be a mule, but of course it's Rome not Ticinum, so is 100% as expected.

Edited February 12 by Heliodromus

[Heliodromus]

28 minutes ago, John Conduitt said:

VOT XX was used for Caesars. Crispus had plenty of BEATA, VIRTVS and wreath reverses with VOT XX at all sorts of mints.

Sure, there's no logical reason VOT XX couldn't be used for a caesar, but it all comes down to different types, mints and dates.

The ones you are referring to are from era of Constantine I when most of those with VOT XX (e.g. BEATA) are actually referring to Constantine. Ticinum, only, did actually issue VOT XX for Crispus and Constantine II, switching to this from VOT X at the same time they switched from VOT XX to VOT XXX for Constantine I.

 

Edited February 12 by Heliodromus

[Tejas]

I get the impression that the OP coin is neither a mule nor an unofficial mint product. Here is a coin from the BM collection

https://www.britishmuseum.org/collection/object/C_R-3266

I think Rome minted VOT XX for Constantius as caesar and used the shortened obverse legend.

Edited February 12 by Tejas

[Heliodromus]

6 minutes ago, Tejas said:

I get the impression that the OP coin is neither a mule nor an unofficial mint product. Here is a coin from the BM collection

https://www.britishmuseum.org/collection/object/C_R-3266

I think Rome minted VOT XX for Constantius as caesar and used the shortened obverse legend.

Yes - I was confused thinking OP coin was from Ticinum (T, not retrograde gamma). The reverse legend isn't so great, but neither is it on that BM specimen!

So I agree, OP coin is official Rome product.

[Tejas]

Interestingly, from the BM website I learned that the VOTA fractions were also minted at Trier, even for Constantine I. 

[Heliodromus]

2 minutes ago, Tejas said:

Interestingly, from the BM website I learned that the VOTA fractions were also minted at Trier, even for Constantine I. 

Those would be a different series and denomination though. These Rome/Ticinum/Carthage ones are post-reform radiates, while the Trier ones are fractions of a nummus and span all the way from Diocletian to VOT/MVLT varieties issued for Constantine I and his caesars c.321.

[Tejas]

Yes, that is true of course. Still, I somehow have missed those VOTA nummus fractions. They seem to be pretty rare.

Warren (Valentinian), who is a member of this forum, has this web page on radiate fractions, which is my standard reference:

RFtable (augustuscoins.com)

[Heliodromus]

There is also the OCRE website which at least lists everything in RIC, even if they don't have photos of everything.

http://numismatics.org/ocre/results

Using those search criteria on the left you can be as specific, or not, as you like to find stuff. For example, to find vota types issued during the first tetrarchy you could search for the date range 284-305, then narrow it down by adding keyword "vot", material "bronze",  etc.

In the past there have also been PDF versions of RIC floating about online too.

The Trier fractions (mostly vota, but not only) are certainly not common - they were likely given out during ceremonies in Trier, so not produced in huge numbers like regular coinage.

Here's a few I've been able to snag over the years:

1) Trier bronze denomination lineup from 307: nummus, 1/2 nummus, 1/4 nummus (Constantine VOTIS X), 1/8 nummus (Constantine PLVR NATAL FEL)

2) Memoria Felix type in 3 denominations: nummus, 1/2 nummus, 1/4 nummus (unlisted as a 1/4 nummus)

3) Trier denominations before/after coinage reform and weight reduction of 310 AD. Top and bottom row are both same nummus, 1/2 nummus and 1/4 nummus denominations, but bottom row ones are smaller since at a reduced weight standard.

Edited February 13 by Heliodromus

[Tejas]

Wow, that is a very nice group.

[Tejas]

I think that post-reform radiate fractions are one of the least popular coin series among collectors.of ancient coins. This makes it sometimes possible to find rather rare coins at low prices. Below are two radiate fractions of Severus II from my collection. The first was minted for  Caesar Severus and the second  for Augustus Severus.

The first was minted in May to July 306

The first was minted in the second half of 306.

 

Edited February 13 by Tejas

[Marsyas Mike]

12 hours ago, Heliodromus said:

The Trier fractions (mostly vota, but not only) are certainly not common - they were likely given out during ceremonies in Trier, so not produced in huge numbers like regular coinage.

An interesting discussion, though my knowledge is about nil on these, I do have what is apparently an odd-ball VOTA type from Trier, with comments from @Heliodromus on CT a while back: 

Constantine I  Æ 18 (323-324 A.D.) Trier Mint (Unofficial?) CONSTAN-TINVS AVG, laureate head right / CAESARVM NOSTRORVM around, VOT • X within laurel wreath, PTR in exergue.  RIC VII Treveri 430 (see note). (4.39 grams / 18 mm) D. Smith Oct. 2021 

Notes:  "That's an interesting coin, but I think it has to be unofficial. It's strange that RIC 430 exists as a listed type at all since it's at best a mule - pairing an obverse of Constantine I with a reverse (CAESARVM NOSTRORVM, VOT X) meant for the caesars.  What gives these away as unofficial vs mules is the bust style, which generally is not at all what would be expected for Constantine." (Heliodromus, CT, Apr. 2022)

 

 

[Valentinian]

6 hours ago, Tejas said:

Below are two radiate fractions of Severus II from my collection.

Excellent! Severus II is hard to find in nice shape. 

I have a webpage on "radiate fractions":

http://augustuscoins.com/ed/tetrarchy/radiatefraction.html

Here is one of Constantine as Caesar:



Constantine as Caesar, July 306-July 307 (after the Second Tetrarchy)
20 mm. 
FL VAL CONSTANTINVS NOB CAES
(The portrait is not at all like the portrait from western mints that knew what Constantine looked like.)
  Δ
ALE

RIC VI Alexandria 85 "306 - early 307" 

[Tejas]

Great coin. I wish it was mine (as so often :-))

The British Museum also lists a Constantine radiate fraction, but in reality it is a common Constantius. (I have notified them about the mistake).

https://www.britishmuseum.org/collection/object/C_1981-0413-12

[Rand]

It would be intersting to know the BM reply, please.

[Victor_Clark]

4 hours ago, Tejas said:

Great coin. I wish it was mine (as so often :-))

The British Museum also lists a Constantine radiate fraction, but in reality it is a common Constantius. (I have notified them about the mistake).

https://www.britishmuseum.org/collection/object/C_1981-0413-12

 

It's Constantine I. Look at the legend-- CONSTANTINVS vs CONSTANTIVS

 

[Marsyas Mike]

Since the radiate fraction topic came up, here's a bewildering radiate fraction of Galerius - my attribution follow's the excellent @Valentinian website (and the British Museum), but as you can see from my notes, some say it is Maximian...or else I'm just really confused, again:

Galerius      Æ Radiate Fraction (305-306 A.D.) Alexandria Mint IMP C MAXIMIANVS P F AVG, radiate, draped, cuirassed bust (of Galerius) r. / CONCORDIA MIL[ITVM], emperor standing r. holding sceptre, taking Victory on globe from Jupiter, standing l., holding sceptre, Δ between, ALE in ex.    RIC VI Alex. 59b. (3.25 grams / 19 mm) eBay Apr. 2023 Lot@$1.50 BIN

Attribution:  This looks like a Maximian issue, but OCRE and British Museum, as well as several Roma auctions attribute this portrait to Galerius: RIC VI Alexandria 59b

See Augustuscoins.com for explanation of this issue, with example (as Galerius). Wildwinds, some auctions attribute it to Maximian. 

Here's another radiate fraction for Galerius - this one came taped to a cardboard holder that had been sold as a souvenir in England at Bath:

Galerius     Æ Radiate Fraction (295-299 A.D.)      Cyzicus Mint GAL VAL MAXIMIANVS NOB CAES, radiate, draped and cuirassed  bust right / CONCORDIA MILITVM, emperor standing r. holding sceptre, taking Victory on globe from Jupiter, standing l., holding sceptre, KA between RIC VI Cyzicus 19b. (2.95 grams / 20 mm) eBay Jan. 2022         Lot @ $6.17

Provenance Note:  Coin was taped to a cardboard holder with the printed heading:  The Roman Baths of Bath, England / Genuine Roman Bronze Coin.  Additional description of the actual coin was typed out on blue paper and glued to cardboard.  c. 1940s-1960s (?) souvenir. 

 

 

 

 

 

[Tejas]

1 hour ago, Victor_Clark said:

 

It's Constantine I. Look at the legend-- CONSTANTINVS vs CONSTANTIVS

 

Yes, you are right. I misread the legend.