I have unearthed quite a bit of new information mostly due to the publication of the Cloke & Toone reference relating to London Mint folles (https://www.vcoins.com/en/stores/ch..._constantius__constantine/626727/Default.aspx) and the addition of some scarce issues to my collection: The tragic end of Galerius Maximian - a great, profound, read: https://www.journalacs.org/article/S1072-7515(12)00498-X/abstract Intermediate follis (Bastien) - Galerius Maximian as Caesar - not in RIC: C VAL MAXIMIANVS NOB C ........................... GENIO POPV -- LI ROMANI Laureate with truncated bare neck bust. London style lettering These intermediate style folles were issued immediately following the LON marked coins. Some had laureate bare neck truncated busts, others had laureate cuirassed busts, some with elaborate consular features. All had the laurel wreath long ribbon tie laying on the neck. All had London style inscriptional lettering and did not bear the LON mint mark. 10.1 gm. RIC VI, Londinium, No. 33, Galerius Maximian, Caesar of the East: CT (Cloke & Toone), No. 3.01.031, c. AD 303-1 May 305, Rarity: C MAXIMIANVS NOBIL C ......................... GENIO POPV -- LI ROMANI Laureate, cuirassed, bust. 11.9 gm. RIC VI, Londinium, No. 42, Galerius Maximian, Augustus of the East: CT (Cloke & Toone), No. 4.03.004, AD 1 May 305 - Spring 307, Rarity: S IMP C MAXIMIANVS P F AVG ......................... GENIO POPV -- LI ROMANI Laureate, cuirassed, bust. Identical obverse inscription (2C) to the primary one of Maximian Herculius. 9.7 gm.
An outstanding, relatively new, reference is: GALERIUS AND THE WILL OF DIOCLETIAN, William Lewis Leadbetter, Routledge, New York, (2013) The relationship between the two is presented in fascinating detail. I think if Galerius had not contracted the hideous disease that slowly led to his death, the Tetrarchy would have survived many more years with him as the driving force.
That is an interesting theory. As I see it, what killed the Tetrarchy was Maximianus' not being fully willing to retire with Diocletian and introducing the concept that there could be more than four Tetrarchs. Rome needed more than one ruler to administer the huge Empire but what they got was a group of contestants more interested in dealing with each other than with the external enemies of Rome. Obviously Galerius did not consider his co-Augustus Constantius I to be his equal or he would have accepted Constantine rather than forcing his man into the position. Constantius did not accept Galerius as being the most August of the Augusti and thought he should have a 50% share in the appointing of the new Caesars. Maxentius thought being the son of an original Augustus made him the obvious heir of his father but his father was not willing to stand aside in deference to his son or anyone else. No system of government can survive without some understanding of the orderly transfer of power. Rome rarely had a good grasp on this concept after the time of Commodus. If Galerius had lived would the Empire have reverted to a single ruler, continued with the four man system or fragmented into multiple sections cooperating only as much as each could enforce (more or less what we got anyway until Constantine unified the mess and killed the wrong son returning the mess to where it was when he appeared on the scene). Septimius Severus could have improved Rome by having only one child. Constantine made the same mistake. Sharing is an uncommon skill among the powerful. In the toon below, substitute 'Tetrarchs' for 'Animals'.
I must say that is a darn good analysis - about the best I have read. Constantius ceded too much to Galerius in his insistence of Constantius appointing Severus II (protege of Galerius) as Caesar of the west rather than his own son after the Abdication of Diocletian and Maximian Herculius, just to avoid confrontation, and that decision came back to haunt him. But I still think that Galerius had amassed enough prestige and stature at Carnuntum that he alone could have rescued the Tetrarchic system of governance for some more years (if he could have reined in Constantine, that is). All conjecture I know, but “that is the stuff (at least some of it) that Ancient coin research is made of.” Added: my reply may have come through in two parts because I lost my WiFi connection as it was loading and I had to reestablish the connection.
