Some Roman imperial reverse types are unique to particular emperors. I added one to my "unique" page: http://esty.ancients.info/unique/unique.html See if you can recognize who issued those types.
I believe this coin may be unique to Constantine I, which was issued to pay workers at Constantinopolis. Constantine AE3. 327-328 AD. 19.84mm, 3.9g OBV: CONSTANTI-NVS MAX AVG, Diademed head right. REV: GLORIA EXERCITVS, soldier standing front, head turned right holding inverted spear, leaning on shield to right, S left, CONS in ex. REF: RIC VII Constantinopolis 22
Nice work as always, Valentinian. You've got a very informative site. The DAFNE types were unique to Constantine I, just to throw one out there.
Yes, DAFNE belongs on my site, as does the GLORIA EXERCITVS Gil mentioned. Over time I will try to add more types. Readers, if you have more suggestions, I'll listen!
Numerian - PACATOR ORBIS is unusual in that it shows the emperor on foot using a sword to finish off a fallen captive. A type only found under Numerian.
I wonder: Out of the 200+ persons shown on Roman coins, how many of them can contribute a unique type? I know it is not all but I suspect that there are 175+. Some seem to specialize in having their own types while some went out of their way to be boring. I'll contribute my Julia Domna. I find it hard to believe that this reverse was not used by Septimius but it was not.
Doug, Like this one? Obv:- [IMP CAE L SEP S]EV PERT AVG COS II, Laureate head right Rev:- VICT AVG, Victory seated left holding wreath and palm Ref:- RIC 427, RSC 677, BMCRE 402a RIC and RSC cite Cohen 677, BMCRE cites Cohen 677 and Oldroyd bequest, 1946 (ex. L.A.L.). Cohen doesn't appear to provide a source.
I just added one more "unique" type at the top: http://esty.ancients.info/unique/unique.html Do you recognize, from the reverse alone, who issued the type?
I won't spoil it, but thanks for sharing that one - I wasn't aware of it. Another unique legend got squeezed onto the Two Victories type of Constans: VICTORIAE D(OMINORVM) AVG(VSTORVM) Q(VE) N(OSTRORVM), or “Victory to our lords and emperors.” What's interesting to me about this legend is that the dative "DOMINORVM" is abbreviated by DD and the genitive "NOSTRORVM" by NN, making it VICTORIAE DD AVG Q NN. I wonder if the Romans abbreviated all their various cases by doubling the first letter of the word. Or is this merely an indication of plurality? My understanding of Latin grammar is poor.
Click on the image to find out who issued the type. By the way, the small "two Victories" VICTORIAE DD AVG Q NN type for Constans is common for Constantius II, so does not make the "unique" list.
A couple points: Dominorum is genitive plural used with Augustorum Nostrorum meaning of our Lords and Augusti. The and is supplied by Que which is appended on the end of the second word in the series not between them as English might do. The legend reads DD AVGG Q NN with the second G on AVGG indicating the plural. They doubled the last letter for pural but when there was only one letter as in DD and NN the last and the first are the same so that letter got doubled. I would be a bit surprised if Victoria is dative singular here but first declension dative plurals end in -is so dedicating the coin to multiple victories would have read Victoriis. That suggests the -ae ending might be nominative plural which ends the same as dative singular. That would then read: "These are the two Victories of our Lords and Augusti". I never could make any more sense out of Latin than I can of English. Please set me straight if you are a Latin wiz. I only took the language because it seemed the right thing to do to be an Ancient History major. Romans were not terribly consistent on the matter but sometimes they even used AVGGG to indicate three of a kind. This is found on several coins of the family of Carus but most significantly on the rare coins of Carausius where he was trying to place himself as one of three Augusti equal to Diocletian and Maximianus. They did not see it that way so their coins with GGG belong to mints controlled by Carausius while their own mints used just GG. There is enough inconsistency on the coins of Carus' family that it is hard to point out hard rules. For example coins with Carus and Augustus and Numerian as Caesar can have GGG even though there would not have been three Augusti unless you counted Numerian who was Caesar on the obverse of that coin. Explain that one!
