Barbarous Honorius?

I wasn't aware that barbs were being made in the time of Honorius, but the awful undersized flan and strange facial features point to a non-official origin, maybe?

Reverse is Gloria Exertici on a tiny 14mm flan, too small for any rev legend

what do you think?

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

I think they were. They seem to have been just before in Magnus Maximus's time:

Magnus Maximus Barbarous AE2, 383-388
Barbarous Lugdunum. 22mm, 4.39g. D N MIG MA-MVS P F AVG. REPARATIO M AVGG

 

This coin looks like something only a barbarian would accept .

 

Unofficial small AE from the late 4th and 5th centuries are not uncommon.

 

The reverse is VIRTVS EXERCITI:

(Photo from Wildwinds.)
But I agree with you that it's probably a barbarous, Vandalic-era imitation.

 

Fulfilling the small change needs of an ailing populace. But it's hard to imagine that such a coin would have much purchasing power.

 

Hard to be 100% sure. In the early fifth century the quality of official coins was sometimes pretty horrible - especially at Rome, though I can't recall if this type was struck at Rome or not (and am too lazy to get up and consult RIC-X....). In any event, official VE's are often found on undersized flans so that is not unusual or definitely indicative of an imitation.

The obverse does look to be an imitation, but the quality makes it hard to be 100% certain. Is the head elongated or is that a blob under a normal chin. If the latter, is it a blob from corrosion, die damage, casting, bad design, etc.???

To complicate matters further it appears that some official 5th century coins were cast instead of struck.

SC

 

..ah..i dig your avatar...one of my all time favortie Christmas shows....this year i got a vintage Bumbles for the season (along with the Grinch)..

 

Another strange Honorius??

 

That like the grinch, except the flan is 3 sizes too small

 

It's small 10-11 mm, and I have this with 20 mm diameter:

 

I think your coin is more interesting than you give it credit. They are the local coinage of coastal Spain linking the imperial maiorinae of Magnus Maximus (REPARATIO REIPVB and VICTORIA AVGG) with the maiorinae of Maximus of Barcino (409-411) and were likely used afterwards during the first stages of Visigothic rule in Barcino ca. 415.

- local Maximus maiorina [VICT]O - [RI]A AVCC[C] with Barcino mintmark, partially visible:


- typical "local maiorina" from Spain, ca. 400-420+

 

The top two coins have no real relation to each other.

The VIRTVS EXRCITI Victory crowning emperor is an early fifth century type, often struck on small flan, sometimes imitated, very common in the East but quite rare in the West.

The Magnus Maximus REPARATIO REIPVB off-shoot imitation and related types were struck circa the 380s. Such unofficial issues / imitations were common in Spain because of the coin shortage there.

SC

 

This imitative type is usually given to the Vandals. Here's an example which is interesting because it's overstruck on an official SALVS REIPVBLICAE. You can see the legend of the undertype at 6 o'clock on the reverse, along with its cross-rho. There's also some remainder of the original portrait on the obverse.

 

That is a fantastic example. The under type is really clear, though too bad Victory seems to have obliterated the old mint mark.

I agree that one is definitely not official Roman. I love the googly-eye on the standing Emperor.

SC