Late Roman Bronze Coins
Coin talk => Late Roman Bronze coins => Topic started by: Nikko on March 25, 2014, 07:10:10 PM
I think that these two coins from two different issue share the same obverse die.
Looking at the two coin, I think also that they share the same obverse die.
I also think that they are a match.
Then, there is an evident connection between the left/right star issuses. It could be important to defenitly establishing the chronological sequence of the two issue.
Quote from: Nikko on March 25, 2014, 07:32:30 PM
It could be important to defenitly establishing the chronological sequence of the two issue.
RIC VI has the right star issued from mid 310 - late 312 and the left star issued from late 312- 313.
Quote from: Victor on March 25, 2014, 07:44:08 PM
Quote from: Nikko on March 25, 2014, 07:32:30 PM
It could be important to defenitly establishing the chronological sequence of the two issue.
RIC VI has the right star issued from mid 310 - late 312 and the left star issued from late 312- 313.
I disagree. Aboveall because the COS II coin with the star in the left field fix this issue from early 312.
Quote from: Nikko on March 26, 2014, 12:21:25 PM
I disagree. Aboveall because the COS II coin with the star in the left field fix this issue from early 312.
Yes, definitely 312 or even possibly late 311. The authors of RIC VI were perhaps only a few months off, which is not bad at all. The existence of the dated coin, which was not in RIC VII because Bruun doubted it existed, has been verified since the 1980's, even though earlier references like Mionnet, Cohen and Maurice included it. About this coin, Marice said "indique suffisamment que cette piece etait frappee au nom de Constantine le grand dont le deuxieme consultat tomba en l'annee 312" (pg 35 vol II) and this was published in 1908. Most recently Huvelin in her 1990 article "Les deux emissions londoniennes" argues for an early 312 dating. Early 312 does seem most likely since the consulship began in January, unfortunately having a die match shared between the two star issues does not help with dating.
It indicates that this reverse type is one of the earliest of the *| issue. H. Huvelin had noticed this fact and wrote :
"Indeed, many die match identified between the two issues can not be accidental, mainly related to reverse MARTI CONSERVATORI * |, linked to two types PRINCIPI IVVENTVTIS * | and PRINCIPI IVVENTVTIS (globe and scepter for all ages) * | associated with MILIT CONCORD, COMITI AVGG NN and PRINCIPI IVVENTVTIS (two standards) | *. This suggests that these two types were struck at the beginning of the issue * |. FELICITAS AVGG NN, ROMAE AETER AVGG, ROMAE RESTITVAE and SECVRITAS AVGG being a little later and PM TR P COS II PP for recalling the second consulate when it was ending."
Here is a link to the article by Huvelin if anyone is not familiar with it--
http://www.constantinethegreatcoins.com/articles/Huvelin_Les_Deux_Emissions_Londoniennes.pdf
Thank you, Victor, for the link I had forgotten to give.
I hope my translation as closer as possible.
Quote from: Genio popvli romani on March 26, 2014, 03:42:16 PM
I hope my translation as closer as possible.
I am sure that your translation is much better than mine!