I lurk periodically on this discussion board and contribute little, so I probably don’t deserve the board’s wisdom here. But I wanted to visit the fractional issues of Constantine ca. 313, shortly after his defeat of Maxentius.
I’ve made a composite photo of the coins in question, I think from Victor's images. The three coins have FVNDAT PACIS, GLORIA PERPET, and SAPIENT PRINCIPIS reverses. Victor has a nice page on these:
http://www.constantinethegreatcoins.com/pacis/ Still, I have some lingering questions. I’d be grateful for any input or idle speculation.
1. My first question is pretty banal. I’ve just never seen a nice one of these. The details are always soft, or the strike is shallow, or there is a lot of wear. Is there any logical accounting for this anecdotal observation? Is this phenomenon simply a function of having a small surviving pool of coins to begin with, or were these coins poorly produced from the start?
2. Why is Constantine bare-headed on all three coins? I suppose one answer is that the bare-headed obverse bust somehow correlates to the unusual denomination, not unlike the radiate bust on the VIRT EXERCIT GALL fractional issue of about the same time. (But note that the fractional PACI PERPET coin has a laureate bust.) I feel like there must some occasional reason why the obverse bust is bareheaded, as if such a portrait conveyed a greater sense of sacredness, though sacredness is usually indicated by a covered head in Roman iconography. I find the bareheaded bust enigmatic.
Rome and Trier were the only two mints to strike these coins. It appears that they were struck for both Constantine and Licinius at Rome (RIC VII, p. 297), but only for Constantine at Trier (RIC VII, p. 169). Again, I’m speaking anecdotally, but it seems that the coins for Licinius and all those from Trier are much rarer than Constantine issues struck at Rome.
Any thoughts about the above?
Gavin