The 2nd half of the 3rd century of the Christian era saw a Roman empire that was slowly crumbling under the weight of barbarian incursions & incessant civil wars. The battered economy was stamping out near worthless money and citizens were taxed to an extreme. It took the genius of Diocletian along with three other Balkan generals to save the empire from ruin. Diocletian, Maximian Herculius, Galerius, and Constantius I became the Tetrarchy, who slowly and painfully restored order to the empire and economy, although only temporary. Diocletian envisioned an authoritarian regime where all four generals had a specific role and designated area to maintain order and enforce his idea of a new Roman empire. The monetary system was completely overhauled and independent provincial coinage was eliminated. There was now uniformity of coinage throughout the empire. I will focus on on one new denomination, the follis (as we know it) and it's stylistic evolution that changed the face of Roman coinage. The early follis was a billon coin measuring 24-31 mm, with an average weight of 10.5 gm, and containing about 5% silver. The new follis was a handsome, well-crafted coin that had a bright silvery appearance when freshly struck. The new follis was a welcomed sight compared to the debased coinage of earlier decades. Gradually the coin was reduced in weight and silver content, and it's buying power was reduced. The imperial image took on a totally different appearance with the new coinage. No longer were the portraits a realistic image of the emperor, instead they became a stylized, geometric image with a blocky, bearded head. Hair and beards were closely trimmed. Individuality ceased and all the emperors began to look alike. This is sometimes referred to as the "Asian" or "Eastern" style. Regardless of what we call it the change in style wasn't accidental, and neither did all the engravers working at more than a dozen mints forget how to engrave a realistic portrait. Although no official decree has ever surfaced that I'm aware of, Diocletian wanted the emperors to look godlike and all the same, creating an illusion of strength and equality. The word and actions of one emperor was equal to all four, although Diocletian had the last word. The uniformity of the new style can be seen in the plastic arts too, as in the illustration below This famous porphyry carving in the Vatican Museum,circa AD 300, shows Diocletian and Maximian embracing, each holding a miniature globe of the earth in their hands. You can't tell who is who in this sculpture. Both figures are the same size with the same childlike physique, and both are wearing the same clothes. The same thing can be seen in the porphyry carving below of the four members of the Tetrarchy. This sculpture is in St. Mark's Basilica, Venice. The two coins pictured below were struck at the Lugdunum Mint and from the same officina. One coin depicts Diocletian and the other depicts Galerius. Without the inscriptions on the obverse you wouldn't know who you were looking at. The Cyzicus Mint is also well known for producing cookie-cutter coinage in the new style as the two coins below illustrate. One coin depicts Maximian and the the other depicts Constantius I. Occasionally an engraver would impart a characteristic well known to a certain emperor that a viewer could recognize instantly without reading the coin's inscription, like the coin below from the Ostia Mint. Maxentius is almost always depicted with boyish bangs that you will not see on the other emperors. References Wikipedia Diocletian and the Roman Recovery, by Stephen Williams, 1985 Article by C.G.J. Pannekeet: Diocletian's Monetary Reform, 2013 All coins in A.K. collection
Totally cookie-cutter coins, @Al Kowsky ! Informative write-up. I like when a write-up incorporates art history to put the coins in context. Here are a trio from the mint at Trier but not the same issue. Cookie-cutter enough, though: Diocletian, AD 284-305. Roman billon follis, 8.99 g, 28.3 mm, 6 h. Trier, AD 302-303. Obv: IMP DIOCLETIANVS AVG, Laureate and cuirassed bust, right. Rev: GENIO POPV-LI ROMANI, Genius, turreted, nude but for chlamys draped over left shoulder, standing left, holding patera in right hand and cornucopiae in left hand; S/F//IITR. Refs: RIC vi, p. 196, 524a; RCV --. Notes: Some have suggested the S F in the fields is an abbreviation for SAECVLI FELICITAS. Galerius as Caesar, AD 293-305. Roman silvered billon follis, 8.62 g, 27.2 mm, 6 h. Trier, AD 302-3. Obv: MAXIMIANVS NOBIL C, laureate and cuirassed bust, right. Rev: GENIO POPV-LI ROMANI, Genius standing facing, head left, wearing modius, naked but for chlamys over left shoulder, holding patera and cornucopiae; S/F//IITR. Refs: RIC vi, p. 196, 508b; Cohen 65; RCV 14348. Notes: Some numismatists postulate that the S F in the fields of these coins from Trier is an abbreviation for SAECVLI FELICITAS. Maximian, 1st Reign, AD 286-305. Roman billon follis, 10.96 g, 27.2 mm, 12 h. Trier, AD 298-99. Obv: IMP MAXIMIANVS P F AVG, laureate head, right. Rev: GENIO POP-VLI ROMANI, Genius, wearing modius, nude but for chlamys draped over left shoulder, standing left, holding patera in right hand and cornucopiae in left hand; A/*//TR. Refs: RIC vi, p. 186, 277b. Notes: Typically, the reverse legend is broken GENIO POPV-LI ROMANI.
Thank you very much. I was familiar with the History, but you put into a nice concise perspective, @Al Kowsky ... fun read. Great coins, too! Really illustrates your points, and are very nice specimens. Mine are more of a "dog's breakfast", but I can put out the Tetrarchy. I seem to mess up the cookie cutter concept, as I really like Quinarii. Kinda me, I have never been the cookie-cutter type. DIOCLETIAN RI Diocletian Ӕ Quinarius 1.46g 16mm Rome AD 284-305 IOVI CONSERVAT AVGG, Jupiter stndng thunderbolt sceptre RIC 193 R MAXIMIAN RI MAXIMIANUS HERCULIUS 286-305 CE antoninianus Antioch 292-295 CE Pre-Reform CONCORDIA MILITVM Jupiter RIC V 621 H-officina 8 GALERIUS RI Galerius 293-308 AE30mm Folles Ticinum mint Moneta 12g CONSTANTIUS I RI Constantius I Chlorus 293-306 CE DIVO AE Quinarius Thesalonika 317-318 Seated RIC VII 25 R5 R
There is one interesting characteristic I should have mentioned in the original post that I will now. Maximian is often seen with a slightly upturned nose on his coins like the examples below.
a.c.h., Your example of Maximian has that slightly upturned nose I mentioned in my 2nd post . I like your example of Maxentius too .
Another good example of cookie-cutter imaging can be seen in the coins below. The coin on the left is Diocletian, struck at the Trier Mint, and the coin on the right is Maximian, struck at the Aquileia Mint. The major difference between these coins is rather fitting, Diocletian is holding a scepter since he was the administrator, and Maximian is holding a spear since he was the fighting enforcer.
Actually, you can find these types in both flavors- spear or sceptre. I believe that this was merely an engraving shortcut-- it was easier to not engrave the pointy bit.
Victor, I've noticed the same thing you kindly pointed out as the coins below illustrate. Both of these coins were struck at the Trier Mint & the same officina. Photo courtesy of CNG auction 418, lot 473 Photo courtesy of CNG auction 69, lot 1702
Nice write up and coins. I am a very big fan of the Cyzicus Mint that you mentioned... yes many of the busts are "stylized", however the art work and detail are very impressive in my opinion.. amazing artists! Constantius I (Cyzicus Mint): Plus coins had been minted there for more than 800 years on and off.. how is that for impressive?? Mysia, Kyzikos. Circa 510-475 BC. AR Obol (0.79 gm, 13mm). Obv.: Forepart of boar l.; behind, tunny. Rev.: Head of lion l. in incuse square. SNG France 370. VF.
Clavdivs, I agree with you, the Cyzicus Mint produced coinage at the highest level of craftsmanship ! Their dies were expertly engraved & the coins were consistently well centered. Fortunately some sizable hoards of their coinage have come to light, giving many collectors a chance to snag an example for their collections .
@Severus Alexander I love the way that Diocletian is often only distinguishable from Galerius due to the obligatory 'worry-lines' expressing his auctoritas or gravitas. Similarly, and as noted above, Maximian often has an upturned and slightly piggyish nose, and as time went on he was regularly portrayed as more corpulent than his colleagues, with a fuller and more jowly appearance, with a higher beard line. Constantius, at least at the mints under his control, can often be spotted by his comically hooked nose. At London, coins of the two Western emperors are far more distinctive and recognisable than their Eastern counterparts. Is this also true of the eastern mints?
