My AiCC "series" has been put off lately due to starting college back in August, but now that the Spring Semester hasn't started I had some time to make meaningful progress. I don't remember exactly where I left off, but I have some exciting news. Two whole coins gained full attribution! I had some trouble finding out exactly which emperor issued these two coins, but a thorough search through my very favorite resource- Tesorillo- has yielded long-awaited results. Here's the very first one: AE4 CONSTAN SPFAVG bust of Constans facing right. GLORIA EXERCITVS reverse two soldiers holding spears and shields, military standard between them. This particular one was minted in Siscia, with the SIS mint mark beneath the soldiers. Constantius II issued the second. CONSTANTI VSPFAVG Bust of Constantius II facing right. VICTORIAEDDAVGGQNN two victories standing facing each other holding palm branches. On mine there is a dot between the victories meaning it was minted in Rome as I understand it. On each of these coins one can see where I accidentally scratched the base metal, I suppose that's why these are practice coins. If I were doing this on rare Roman coins for a museum I'd be in a bit more trouble, luckily that is not the case. One thing that I've been using that I've not heard mention of in the realm of ancient coin cleaning is MS-70, which has been my very favorite tool in my adventures, and here's why: contrast. Rubbing it into the surface of my coins will help me differentiate between what has dirt packed into it and what is just patina. I can target specific areas with my pick and the MS-70 seems to loosen it up a bit as well. I like using it to make the patina just that much more uniform on my coins as well. It doesn't strip the patina down at all either and has overall been invaluable. Well, that seems to be everything. I hope you enjoyed this update because there is one more coming very soon (hopefully) about another LRB that I've been cleaning and need to attribute. Thanks for reading!
I don't think the dot has anything to do with the mint. On these it might be a centering dot which can appear anywhere. If you look at the wildwinds page, e.g., you'll see examples of this reverse with a dot from almost every mint (at a minimum you can see it in the pictured examples from Arles, Lyons, Rome, Siscia, probably one of the Aquileias and Thessalonicas but grainy). I can't quite read the mintmark on yours. Maybe Thessalonica? https://www.wildwinds.com/coins/ric/constantius_II/t.html
Looking it it, I could see either Serdica or Ostia. The last letter could be an O, D, or T with a heavy serif. It is partly off of the flan either way which makes this more difficult, as the first letter is incomprehensible. The thing keeping me from being certain that it's Serdica is the fact that the SD would be so far to the left for it to be just the two. I think I see an O before it, but it could just be a pit. However, judging by the surface of the rest of the coin, a pit that large is unlikely. I added two more photos here, hopefully they help. I played around with the zoomed-in one but it wasn't much help. What do you think?
It can't be Serdica or Ostia (those mints were not active at all under Constantius II, as far as I know, and definitely not for this type of coin). Both Guido Bruck (2014, Late Roman Bronze Coinage: An Attribution Guide... [English edition p. 114]) and Carson, Hill, and Kent (1965, Late Roman Bronze Coinage, AD 324-498) give the same seven mints as possibilities: Treves/Trier, Ludgnum/Lyons, Arles, Aquileia, Rome, Siscia, and Thessalonica. (I haven't checked any other print refs. but I'm sure they say the same.) If you don't have any print references to look up the usual late Roman bronze types (there are several different ones that are good for these and quite affordable), the popular online resources do well enough for coins like this, as long as there's nothing particularly rare about them: wildwinds (linked above), tesorillo, or OCRE: https://numismatics.org/ocre/results?q=constantius+II+VICTORIAE+two+victories+AE3 All of those illustrate at least a couple examples from each of the mints listed above. It may not be possible to tell for sure from what remains of the exergue, though. But it has to be one of those seven mints unless one was left out by mistake.
