Author Topic: Helena mule?  (Read 2284 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Phil

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 6
  • Country: gb
Helena mule?
« on: October 17, 2018, 02:24:42 PM »
Hello Victor and other coin-lovers,
I was pointed in the direction of this forum (this is my first post here) by Warren Esty, who I contacted to ask about an inconspicuous-looking bronze I picked up as part of a large lot from Roma Numismatics in the summer.
The strange thing about this coin (rather poor photos below) is that it has a reverse that I can only find described for commemorative issues for Constantius' second wife, Theodora: PIETAS ROMANA; Pietas standing right holding infant in arms. Cross in left field. I'm fairly sure the mintmark is from Trier. Obverse legend: FL IVL HELENAE AVG. 15 mm.
I therefore wondered whether it is a mule. Warren told me: 'I think it is a genuine mule. The Helena and Theodora coins were minted at the same time and place (337-340 at Trier according to RIC VIII, but 335 according to Callu). Yours has the cross in the left reverse field they sometimes have...If I am right, it confirms--if confirmation were needed--they were minted at the same time.'
I wonder if anyone else has come across one like this?

Offline Victor

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4097
  • Country: us
  • all my best friends are dead Romans
    • Victor's Imperial Coins
Re: Helena mule?
« Reply #1 on: October 17, 2018, 03:00:50 PM »
Hello Phil and welcome. Yes, the two types for Helena and Theodora were indeed struck at the same time. It could be a mule, but it might also be an unofficial product. The style looks good, but sometimes they are very close in style to official coinage. Mint employees may have even "moonlighted" and sometimes struck unofficial coins. The Chorleywood hoard, which was a mainly "Gallic" hoard from around A.D. 340, even had several unofficial Trier coins for Helena and Theodora. Bastien, in "Imitations of Roman bronze Coins" even theorized that some unofficial issues were probably in such good style that you would not be able to tell them apart from official issues-- of course, this can never be proven.

So, maybe a mule, but possibly a really nice style unofficial issue. I always tend to first think unofficial with mules though (unofficial issues from Western mints are more common, especially during this period), as official mint mules are fairly rare, but do happen occasionally.

Offline Phil

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 6
  • Country: gb
Re: Helena mule?
« Reply #2 on: October 17, 2018, 04:56:48 PM »
Victor, thanks a lot - that's very interesting. I've just had a look at Bastien's article and it opens up many different possibilities! I was partly hoping to find some ideas there about why an unofficial coin would combine the 'wrong' obverse and reverse, since the aim would be to pass off these coins as genuine. But given the examples cited by Bastien of combinations of the skilful with the clumsy on the same coin, I guess it's possible that an unofficial workshop could ineptly turn out nicely executed obverse portrait + nicely executed reverse, on the same coin.
Then again, maybe the average 4th-century citizen didn't look too closely at his small change, and in any case there were so many different types in circulation that an anomalous obverse/reverse combination wouldn't have stood out!

Offline Victor

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4097
  • Country: us
  • all my best friends are dead Romans
    • Victor's Imperial Coins
Re: Helena mule?
« Reply #3 on: October 17, 2018, 05:03:49 PM »
Unofficial coinage paired with mismatched obverse/ reverses is common enough, especially with VRBS ROMA and Constantinopolis types. Below is a Helena (probably copying Trier) with a type never issued for her- SARMATIA DEVICTA.


Offline Phil

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 6
  • Country: gb
Re: Helena mule?
« Reply #4 on: October 17, 2018, 06:50:00 PM »
Right! I'm on a steep learning curve here...Thanks!

Offline Victor

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4097
  • Country: us
  • all my best friends are dead Romans
    • Victor's Imperial Coins
Re: Helena mule?
« Reply #5 on: October 17, 2018, 07:03:48 PM »
If you have not seen it yet, I have a page on 4th century unofficial coinage--

http://www.constantinethegreatcoins.com/barb2/

Offline Phil

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 6
  • Country: gb
Re: Helena mule?
« Reply #6 on: October 18, 2018, 11:30:07 AM »
Porous borders and slightly dodgy coinage - really interesting stuff.
Ultimately, as you say, it seems that there's no failsafe way to distinguish an official mule (which I take to mean an accidental obv/rev mismatch in the mint) from a well-executed unofficial product. Bastien claims in his article that the obverse dies were subject to tighter security (kept under lock and key when not in use) than the reverse. Do you think he's right to be so confident about that? If he is right, and the obverse of a questionable coin is identical to official coins, that would make it more likely that the coin was an official mule, I suppose?
I'm not trying to prove that my Helena is an official mule - just trying to work out exactly what the criteria for deciding are.

Offline Victor

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4097
  • Country: us
  • all my best friends are dead Romans
    • Victor's Imperial Coins
Re: Helena mule?
« Reply #7 on: October 18, 2018, 12:13:02 PM »
Yes, I believe that the obverse dies were kept more secure, because it was the image of the Emperor. This is the concept of the veneration of the image of the Emperor, of which a lot has been written. If an Emperor was declared damnatio memoriae, then his images might be destroyed, like statues and even coins defaced, though the defacing of coins seems to have died out by the 4th century.

An obverse die match to an official issue would make it very likely that a coin was also official. Many coins, however, look close and die matches in some circumstances, like slightly worn or a bit off-struck, might be hard to verify. Couple this with the fact that the person that engraved the official die might also be engraving unofficial dies. We know this happened because of a law recorded in the Theodosian Code-

Theodosian Code 9:21:2
Since some imperial minters are secretly and criminally engaged in the coinage of counterfeit money, all shall know that the necessity is incumbent on them of seeking out such men, that they may be tracked down and delivered to the courts, so that they may forthwith betray the accomplices of their deeds through torture and thereupon be sentenced to suitable punishments. (20 November 321)

counterfeiting was a huge problem during this period...here are two more laws issued a few years later.

9:21:3
If any person should mold a coin by false casting, We command that all his property shall be confiscated to the fisc and that he shall be punished with statutory severity, in order that such zeal for coining money may prevail only in Our mints. (6 July 326)

9:21:4
It was formerly established as law that, if money should be secretly stamped and coined on a farm or at a house without the knowledge of the owner, the fisc should vindicate to its own ownership the seat of the crime. Now it is our pleasure that a distinction shall be made, namely that if the owner dwells…at a very long distance from the said house or landholding, he shall sustain no loss. (4 May 326)

Offline Phil

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 6
  • Country: gb
Re: Helena mule?
« Reply #8 on: October 18, 2018, 04:18:13 PM »
Fascinating - thanks again for all your informative replies, Victor.