ANCIENTS - A common Soldiers with Standards with nice detail

I suspect that people would find patterns (it is in our nature to do so) but whether those patterns would translate to something meaningful is something quite different. Andreas Alfoldi made a detailed study on the coinage of Probus from Siscia and he noted many variations of the "Emperor on horseback spearing fallen enemy" type with regards to raised arms, position of shield etc. etc. In all likelihood these were simply variations introduced by the engravers with no real intent for differentiation. I suspect that a detailed study of the Soldiers with standards would yield anything meaningful but until one is done we will never really know.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

I am inclined to agree.....as well as the engravers own style there would have been styles for each mint/workshop, but this was probably just because the engravers learnt their trade from the engravers around them and so copied their styles, and this would have continued for generations.
It is possible to have a good guess at which mint certain URBS Roma coins came from by the helmet style and the shape of the wolf, again style copied from other engravers.
I have read elsewhere that an example of copying what came before, is the dot often seen in the centre of LRB's. This was probably the hole made when the engraver used a compass to create the circle of lettering or of the image. usually this would have been filled in, but once or twice was not and so a dot was produced on the coin and subsequently copied with the engraver believing it to be part of the design.
Interesting discussion though.

 

That's amazing Doug, generally coin clubs want new members.

 

I like the idea though: if you want to be part of this club, we'll give you the DaVinci Code directions.

 

Since everyone seems to be showing their best "soldiers and standards", I guess I can show a couple of mine:

Constantine I


Constantine II


Constantius II

 

I consider John's SCONST an amazing coin with that wreath shoehorned in between the standards and the huge layout dot below it. However the coin is Arles (then called Constantia) not Constantinople. Constantinople placed the Greek letter officina number after the city name while Constantia placed the Latin ordinal (S=secundus) in front. It is found in RIC vol. VII page 274 as #378. This is another example where RIC used a stock wreath cut with open top and no ribbons on the listing. I love this coin.

 

Thank you for the clarification Doug - I knew it was Arles, but I posted hastily this morning, before I had even finished my first cup of coffee!

 

I think the Rome mint coin is imitative

 

The thought occurred to me as well. The style seems to cross the line into something not officially Roman.

 

Heres one I bought for the style

 

Nice set Randy. You've got a two-standards coin of Constans from Antioch there, so we've got seven of the mints in Doug's challenge. How many more to go?

(And the US collectors think THEY have it tough. Pffft.)

 

Lyon?? have we had that yet../

 

Nice YOC! 8 mints and counting...

Wait, the challenge was Constans only.

 

well we fell off the Constans wagon.....ages ago! Does single standard/banner count?

 

No, I guess it's got to be two standards because they were issued so briefly before they transitioned to one, hence the scarcity. As far the thread going all over the map, well, that's the way we roll at CT, lol.

 

nice to see
I'll spoil Doug if he likes these so much....before i got my nice camera though..