Constantine's "Eyes to Heaven"... what's the big deal?

The NOT IN RIC site has a couple of these listed now, with the SMKS mintmark, which I now believe is my mintmark. A couple of 6-row campgates too.

https://www.forumancientcoins.com/notinric/7cyz57_s.html

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

My only ETH .

 

Another with the "band" diadem:

 

This one is new.

Similar reverse type as @dlhill132 but eyes not gazing to heaven. VOT XX instead of VOT XXX. But Constantine by this point was calling himself the great, viz., the reverse type of DN CONSTANTINI MAX AVG



Æ3, VOT XX in wreath etc, P*AR; Choice EF, centered & well struck, lustrous dark
brown surfaces, portrait exceedingly sharp.

 

Constantine was "Maximus" probably since 315, when he celebrated his decennalia at Rome and was awarded his triumph and arch. The summer of 315 is possibly the earliest date when MAX appears on coinage too.

 

Brilliant!

 

Another campgate eyes to heaven, this time from unlisted (but known) officina Γ

 

Don't blame historians. The dude himself was so narcissistic he called himself "the great" -- that's what the MAX in CONSTANTINVS MAX AVG stands for on his coins.

 

Agreed.

 

Can't argue with the narcissist part, but it's believed the MAXIMVS title was awarded to him by the Senate after his victory over Maxentius in 312-313AD. It's used on the inscription on the arch of Constantine.

He rarely used the MAXIMVS title on his coinage before 319AD; before that date we see it only on a small number of gold medallions, and at Lyons in 315 AD when it was used on the bronze coinage celebrating his decennalia.

Here's a neat coin from my collection that combines this rare early MAXIMVS title with an equally rare "COS IIII" date, leaving no doubt as to the date and occasion - Constantine's decennalia in 315 AD when his arch (bearing the MAXIMVS title) was dedicated, and when he held his 4th consulship.

Obv: CONSTANTINVS MAX COS IIII
Rev: SOLI INVICTO COMITI

Unlisted in RIC; Bastien Supp. II Pl. XXXVI #577.

 

Constantius II when a mere Caesar.

 

Sorry, failed to post ]

 

I have several coins with "head-turned-to-heaven" bust.
Here is a heavy Siliqua of Constantius II. This is probably the most beautiful bust of Constantius II.
Mint: Antioch
Date: 337-347
Constantius II was brought up a Christian and he was known for his piety. He took measures to promote Christianity and suppress Roman paganism. Constantius II leaned towards the Arian form of Christianity, which was later declared a heresy.

I think there can be no doubt that this particular bust type was intended to enforce a Christian sentiment, with the emperor turning to heaven for support.

 

Here is a follis of Constantine I with "head-turned-to-heaven" bust.



Here is another Constantine I follis with only the "eyes-turned-to-heaven" bust.

 

I had to revive this fun old thread to share a coin that I won in a group lot from CNG this week. Curiously the first "Eyes to Heaven" follis I've owned. (I think he's seeing a UFO.)

 

I think it's indisputable that Constantine was "Great." That's not to say that he was good, or that he was unusually interesting, but rather that he made a very substantial mark on history.

First, though, above all, he survived--no small feat for an emperor of his time. The Crisis of the Third Century, which began with a "Year of the Six Emperors," saw many men lifted to the purple for their ancient equivalent of fifteen minutes of fame. In less than 50 years, excluding co-emperors, there were more than a dozen emperors whose average reign was less than 4 years--and it is Gallienus's 15 year reign that is bringing that number up to the high average that it is!

Following that crisis, the empire was slowly pieced back together by Aurelian and Diocletian--who indisputably was great--but Diocletian himself left behind the Tetrachy--with all the tension, ready to burst, inherent in that structure. In civil war, Constantine I had to outlast, outmaneuver, and outright beat his co-Augustuses and co-Caesars, some with formidable resources. Not only that, he had to fight off another half dozen would-be emperors before he finally emerged as the sole ruler and the founder of a dynasty.

While still part of the Tetrarchy, Constantine legalized Christianity, but more than that, as sole emperor, he set it up to provide unity for the empire. The early Church Fathers, when they weren't writing their learned tomes, were busy hacking each other to death (ok, I am being a bit facetious, but people were killed) over obscure theological debates involving positions in one case literally separated from each other in name by a single iota. Constantine I convened a series of church councils in an attempt to impose some order on the Christian chaos. The Nicene Creed, which came out of the most famous of these councils, even today is still agreed upon by Catholics and Protestants and Orthodox denominations. It's true that various theological controversies continued, with one side now dominant, now in minority, for some time after Constantine I, but it was he who set the parameters for the (relatively quick) outcome of these damaging and divisive debates.

And even if we set aside all that, Constantine brought the seat of the empire to Byzantium, where it would continue to rule over Roman territory for a thousand years. As Olivander from Harry Potter might tell us, Constantine did things that were great--"terrible, but great."

So I do think Constantine's epithet of "Great" is fully deserved.

Having said all of that, I wish that Constantine had not set up Christianity to be a secular power. So much science and philosophy suffered thanks to this development. (Ironically, many Christians share my misgivings about these changes as they see here not Christianity conquering Rome, but rather Rome conquering Christianity.)

Constantine managed through bloodshed and sweat and vision (ahem!) to launch a new world order whose reverberations are still very much with us nearly two millennia later (what's a few hundred years between friends?;-)).

But for myself, if I were to choose an emperor from that era whom I would call genuinely interesting, I would actually choose Julian ("the Apostate"--even his epithet is given by the historians of the new world). But Justinian represents an ending, while Constantine inaugurated a new beginning.

 

Well said.. I think he was "Great" as far as his amazing accomplishments, military victories and complete domination of his age. He was an exceptional man who accomplished exceptional things. . How could he ever understand what he had unleashed for future generations? He could not.

Its over - but I still think the world would have been better off if this guy was successful..

 

you’re referring to Julian but typed Justinian correct?

 

Thank you, Orange Julius! You are absolutely right. I've fixed it now.

 

Calling yourself MAX ran in the family. I recently lost a Constans Max on eBay. Below are Constantius II Max and Constantine II Max.




If Maximus means greatest, how did we have three superlatives at the same time?
https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/maximus