I won two coins of Licinius at the recent FSR auction. Lately I have really enjoyed picking up his coins and I have especially been keeping my eye out for portraits that are unusual or particularly well done. The art of the period was transitioning... not to everyone's taste but I do appreciate it. This one has an excellent obverse bust (in my opinion). The coin has some neat brown/red toning that changes in the light. A very nice effect that my photographic "skills" cannot do justice to. The next coin I purchased for the Reverse .. and this one prompts the question: This was Frank's description of the lot: Æ3, bust left w/mappa & scepter/IOVI CONSERVATORI AVG, Eagle with Ruler on back, STR; F+/VF, well centered, medium brown, minor hint of graininess. Very scarce type. With Christian Blom tag $150. The BLOM Tag states: "Eagle with wings spread, carrying Emperor" RIC 212(R3) Wildwinds has the following entry for RIC 212: RIC VI Trier 825 give the following description: This notes that the mintmark is PTR (mine is STR) and that the figure on the eagle is Jupiter. I do own Sears' Roman Coins and their Values IV... perhaps it's 15346 - which states mintmark TR preceded by officina mark (S=2). States Jupiter... however it has a right facing bust. Perhaps the answer is that this is RIC VI Trier 825.. from a different officina (P=1).. and that the figure is in fact Jupiter? Wondering if anyone has any insight. Thank you.
Nice coins @Clavdivs . Normally I'm not the biggest fan of coins that have been stripped of their patina, but that first Licinius with the unusual portrait is a beauty. Such a wonderfully unusual portrait.
Thank you for taking the time to look this up on acsearch - I really appreciate it.... very odd that Wildwinds states that RIC 212 does not exist.
Oh - that is a really good point that I did not really think about. As I stated the first coin has some really great toning that does not show in my photo. Perhaps it was stripped long ago and has gained some "cabinet toning"? Interesting. Maybe I will start a thread on that question...
The main distinction made in RIC between RIC VI 825 and RIC VII 212 is that the former is a base silver unit and the latter is a copper follis. Secondarily, the former has Jupiter as the eagle-rider, and the latter has the emperor as the eagle-rider, but really, how did they tell? Of the pictures of examples I've seen, I wouldn't be comfortable saying any given one is definitely "base metal" and another is "copper". Perhaps the suggestion in Wildwinds is that all RIC VII 212s are in fact just RIC VI 825s and they weren't actually struck in two different metals? And yet, Wildwinds doesn't dispute the existence of RIC VII 211, which is exactly the same as 212, except for the fact the latter has the eagle with "spread wings." (For the record, I can't say I can tell the difference between the eagles with spread wings and those that supposedly don't have their wings spread either). Ultimately, I just gave up and called mine RIC VI Trier 825 because it looks kind of billon-y. But the question about the eagle wings being spread or not still gives me sleepless nights (not really ). Below is my RIC VII Trier 210, which does seem to be quite clearly AE, as opposed to the one above. Sorry if I just made things more muddled for you. Maybe someone else has a clearer picture of these. Or, you could write to Dane at Wildwinds. Let us know what you eventually decide to go with.
I can't add much except to say that the fact that the reverse figure is holding and eagle and a scepter suggests that it is Jupiter and not Licinius.
I know nothing that has not been covered. I have always called mine billon and Jupiter. Any time you try to compre anything in two different RIC volumes, you are likely to run into problems. I'm not sure the authors ever talked to each other. They all did it 'their way'.
