Crispus BEATA TRANQVILLITAS from Trier with unlisted bust

[Victor]

This coin has a bust type not listed in RIC. It is unusual-- draped and cuirassed; but is reminiscent of a trabeate bust. Bruun would probably say this one was “Rather crudely executed; odd conception of obv. bust.” (footnote 344 pg 194) Unofficial or official? He might have called this one “irregular” The reverse is generally VO/TIS/XX instead of this one with VOT, though there are exceptions. The exergue is not clear--• PTR, but is there anything else, it is hard to be positive. This bust type is also not listed in Alten and Alten & Zschucke's Die romische Munzserie Beata Tranquillitas. On a side note, the seller gave this coin a grade of AU/XF, which is, to put it mildly, generous.


Crispus
Circa A.D. 321
18mm    3.2g
CRISPVS NOB CAES; laureate, draped and cuirassed bust left, spear pointing forward in left, shield on right.
BEATA TRAN-QVILLITAS, Globe set on altar insc. VOT/IS/XX; above three stars.
In exergue • PTR
RIC VII Trier --

[Nikko]

Could it be a barbarous imitation of very good style?

[Victor]

It could be, that is why I said "Unofficial or official?" though the reverse looks fine; but it is hard to really be sure because of condition issues, despite the seller claiming AU/XF. The bust just looks a bit odd, the way the spear is held etc. Bruun references some coins as "irregular" which, I believe, this one would fit in that category.

[seth]

The trabea-like garb on the OP spec reminded me of this peculiar spec, which is also apparently trabeate but without any adjuncts. There as far as I know no issues for Licinius II at Lyon at this point, and what's more intriguing is that I think that the legend here hints at a consular position.

LICINIUS II as CAESAR and CONSUL
AE3 18mm 2.60g follis, minted at Lugdunum, 321.
LICINIVS - IVN N C CON(?); laureate bust right wearing trabea.
BEATA TRAN *** QVLITAS; globe on altar inscribed with VO/TIS/XX, C - R in fields
PLG
unlisted in RIC, unlisted in Bastien

The eye and the overall appearance of the bust here looks at odds with the style of Lyon, so most likely an unofficial coin. What is intriguing is that a lot of these unofficial issues are emulating particular and rather historically important issues (even they even existed at all, this one seems to be completely made up by the unofficial mint). And they continue up to at least the 330s -- with irregular votives, irregular dynastic coppers, irregular campgates and so on, variations of Western mints especially Trier and Lyon.

[Victor]

It's definitely unofficial as Lyons did not issue the BEATA coins for the Licinii. Perhaps created by a Licinius supporter in Constantinian territory. Interesting, thanks for sharing.