I like my emperors like I like my pudding...

nice and thick.

This massive Maximian has just about the ugliest, fattest, most meat-head appearance I've seen yet. The face-to-head ratio is grotesque, but very endearing.

This comes from the popular large follis Sacra Moneta series of the tetrarchy. I previously had a much smoother, but similar Diocletian that was thicker, but smaller and more worn. This new big follis has excellent details, lovely glossy, dark green patina.



The difference between the two is that Diocletian abbreviates much of the legend:
SAC MON VRB AVGG ET CAESS NN. Meaning, Sacred Money of the City [of Rome] Our Augustii and Caesares.
This legend type was only used for coins made by the Rome mint, which is why is specifies VRB.

While Maximian here spells it all out
SACRA MONETA AVGG ET CAESS NOSTR. Meaning, Sacred Money of Our Augustii and Caesares.
This legend type was made for other cities, in this case, Aquileia.

These coins were once fully silvered; a sack of those must have been a sight to behold, not unlike seeing a bank bag of Morgan dollars.


Maximian, RIC Aquileia 29b.
30x27mm, 9.0g

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

My largest neck is on this Aquileia. Unfortunately the prize fighter look was made worst by damage to the face.

 

Definitely a face not even a mother could love

 

seriously, but did the old engravers just die out or they didn't teach their apprentices? I mean it's not long when even coins of Philip the Arab and Trajan Decius had an almost exact portrayal of their face, from that to this cartoonish figure in a couple of decades?!

 

Talk about your bobble-headed Maximian!

 

I always wondered. I mean, the reverses aren’t great but aren’t terrible, the faces just seem really butchered and idk why

 

I have some beefy-necked Tetrarchs.

Constantius from Ticinum:



Maximian from Antioch:



Diocletian from Ticinum:


Galerius from Thessalonica:


As for the decline in portrait quality since the adoptive emperors, it's clearly real, but I think the similarity and stylized nature of their portraits was all part of Diocletian's plan.

All the emperors look the same. The regime is sending a message that it doesn't matter which emperor is on your coin, so long as it's one of the four. Just like it doesn't matter which emperor is hearing your petition, or leading your army, or judging your law case, as long as it's one of the four. A big part of why Diocletian did what he did was spreading the administrative load among multiple shoulders.

The other reason Diocletian did what he did was he didn't want to get assassinated. See, it doesn't matter exactly what the emperor looks like. He's so far above you that you'll probably never get more than a glimpse of him. Acting against him is like acting against a god. No need to show his exact features - just showing the idea of him is enough.

 

I really like your analysis of the artistic styles. The famous porphyry Tetrarchs statue in Sant Marks is similar - four guys with identical faces. Certainly a political statement.

I couldn’t have said it any better than you - doesn’t matter which of the four you fall under, as they’re all part of the whole

 

I have a fathead Licinius I:

Bronze Nummus
Siscia mint, A.D. 313-314
Obv: IMP LIC LICINIVS P F AVG
Rev: IOVI CONS-ERVATORI - Jupiter, standing, facing left, chlamys hanging from shoulder, leaning on scepter and holding Vicotry with wreath on globe; eagle with wreath at feet.
SIS in exergue; Γ in right field
RIC 8
20mm, 3.1g.

I think part of the reason for the fatheads is that celators started carving heads rather than busts, and they wanted to fill the obverse. On coins of the same period that depict a bust on the obverse, the heads are less bizarre because there is more to work with, as on this coin of Diocletian:

Bronze Nummus
Treir mint, A.D. 301-305
Obv: IMP DIOCLETIANVS AVG
Rev: GENIO POPV-LI ROMANI - Genius, modius on head, naked but for chlamys hanging from shoulder, holding patera and cornucopiae
PTR in exergue; S in left field, F in right
RIC 582a
26mm, 7.7g.

Interesting, though, that at the same time many of the mints were cranking out fathead coins, Antioch was minting coins with a completely different style portrait, the tiny eye. I've seen many examples of coins from Antioch with this strange head:

Maximinus II ("Daia")
Caesar, A.D. 305-309
Filius Augustorum, A.D. 309-310
Augustus, A.D. 310-313
Bronze Nummus
Antioch mint, A.D. 312
Obv: IMP C GAL VAL MAXIMINVS P F AVG
Rev: GENIO AVGVSTI - Genius, modius on head, naked but for chlamys hanging from shoulder, holding head of Sol and cornucopiae
ANT in exergue; ✳ in left field, S in right
RIC 164b
22mm, 4.7g.

 

Earl, you are really becoming an ancient collector!

I like the reasoning: "Don't put a good likeness of my face on the coins so assassins won't know what I look like."

Making all four emperors look the same for political solidarity also makes sense.

John

 

Galerius, Follis of Carthage

 

Here’s another guy who was fond of eating:



And the two presented earlier, Maximianus and Constantius Chlorus:





Licinius doesn’t exactly look athletic trim either...

 

Some London mint coins of the first Tetrarchy:

RIC VI, Londinium, Diocletian, Augustus of the East:


RIC VI, Londinium, Maximian Herculius, Augustus of the West:



Above and below - RIC VI, Londinium, Constantius, Caesar of the West:


RIC VI, Londinium, Galerius Maximian, Caesar of the East:

 

Diocletian: unreduced follis - laureate truncated bust, with thick bare neck & shoulders

RIC Volume VI, Londinium, No.1a, Diocletian, Augustus of the East:


IMP C DIOCLETIANVS PF AVG ......................... GENIO POPV -- LI ROMANI
LON in reverse exergue

As depicted in RIC Volume VI, Plate 1.

 

MAXIMIANUS
AE Antoninianus
OBVERSE: IMP MAXIMIANVS P F AVG, laureate head right
REVERSE: FELIX ADVENT AVGG N N, Africa standing facing, looking left, wearing elephant-skin headdress, holding standard and elephant's tusk, lion with captured bull at feet, H in right field, mintmark PKB
Struck at Carthage. AD 298
9.1g, 28mm
RIC VI 25b

 

Much thinner faces in London. Clearly British food was already bad by the fourth century.

 

Licinius with a big square head.



Licinius I. Minted circa 308-312 CE. AE Follis. 26mm, 5.91g. Alexandria mint, fifth officina. Obverse: IMP C VAL LIC LICINIVS P F AVG. Laureate head right. Reverse: GENIO IMPERATORIS. Genius standing left, nude but for chlamys over shoulders and left arm, holding patera and cornucopia. K in left field, Ε over P in right field. ALE in exergue. RIC VI Alexandria 101b. Glossy black patina with slight orange earthen deposits.

 

My favorite description of the new styles ushered in by the tetrarchy, from Peter Leithart's DEFENDING CONSTANTINE:

[T]he Tetrarchs’ faces exude stern moral discipline: their wild “burning gaze” communicates their passion for restoring Roman order.… The scrutinizing eyes of the Tetrarchs are the eyes of the tribal fathers, the gods of the past, who ensure conformity with Rome's founding traditions. More important, Tetrarchan art communicates the union of the four. A corner of St. Mark’s, Venice, is now the site of a statuary group in porphyry showing the four original Tetrarchs in groups of two, embracing. The faces are indistinguishable, apart from the fact that two—presumably senior—members are bearded. A porphyry bust of a tetrarch in the Egyptian Museum, Cairo, is even more stylized. Large eyes bug out from the stone, staring intensely; the hair and beard are stippled in regular rows; the forehead is furrowed and wrinkled with an imperious intensity. Who is it? No one knows. The point is not to depict a person but a power. --Leithart (2015): 45.

 

Ha ha Gavin! Very droll.