Message:

<p>[QUOTE=&quot;seth77, post: 4634563, member: 56653&quot;]These two coins are very interesting and paint a somewhat similar minting situation at Rome and Ticinum, both cities and mints that had been of paramount importance to Constantine in the 310s and especially after 315 and during the first civil war with Licinius. </p><p><br /></p><p>As Constantine&#039;s interests moved East along the Danube starting with 321/2 and more so during the second civil war with Licinius, Ticinum and even Rome lost some of their importance, at least as far as minting goes.</p><p><br /></p><p>Coins:</p><p><br /></p><p>[ATTACH=full]1145963[/ATTACH] </p><p><font size="3">Constantine II as Caesar</font></p><p><font size="3">AE3 18mm 2.73g, reduced follis/nummus, Rome mint, ca. early to mid 321.</font></p><p><font size="3">&nbsp;</font></p><p><font size="3">CONSTANTINVS IVN NOB C; laureate draped cuirassed bust right</font></p><p><font size="3">CAESARVM NOSTRORVM; VOT / · / X&nbsp; inside wreath.</font></p><p><font size="3">R ЄPωC Q </font></p><p><font size="3">RIC VII Rome 231, R5</font></p><p><br /></p><p>This mintmark was used initially on the issues marking 15 years of reign by Constantine I with the VOT X ET XV F and ROMAE AETERNAE types and in 321 it extended to the VOT V/X/XX series for both the junior Caesars Crispus and Constantine II, only at the mint of Rome. These three types - VOT X ET XV F / VOT XV FEL XX, ROMAE AETERNAE and VOT V/X/XX inside wreath with legend around are consistent of the same special issue, marking both the vota soluta of 15 years by Constantine and individual vota susceptae by the two heirs, making this into a dynastic issue. </p><p><br /></p><p>All the types are rare to very rare, which could mean that the mintage was rather limited, perhaps from July 320 to around mid 321, to cover both the event of the quindecennalia of Constantine and the subsequent vota susceptae of his sons. In this respect, we&#039;re dealing with a small-scale predecessor of the dynastic issues of 324/5-326.</p><p><br /></p><p><br /></p><p>[ATTACH=full]1145965[/ATTACH] </p><p><font size="3">Crispus as Caesar</font></p><p><font size="3">AE3 19mm 2.93g, silvered reduced follis/nummus, Ticinum mint, ca. early 322.</font></p><p><font size="3">&nbsp;</font></p><p><font size="3">CRISPVS - NOB CAES; laureate, cuirassed bust left, holding spear pointing forwards in right hand and shield in left hand.</font></p><p><font size="3">DOMINOR·NOSTROR·CAESS; VOT / · / X / crescent inside wreath.</font></p><p><font size="3">ST</font></p><p><font size="3">RIC VII Ticinum 171, R4</font></p><p><br /></p><p>As mentioned above, this type originated in 320 to mark the vota taken by the emperor and his heirs after the quindecennalia of Constantine I. At Ticinum, the type borrowed aspects from the previous VIRTVS EXERCIT type -- in this case the military bust type for Crispus. The consecutive issues from 320 to 322 all carried the bust type over, but it is likely that this series was discontinued in 322, in what might have been a hiatus in large-scale minting operations (like in the case of Rome around the same period(?)). At Ticinum it seems like a residual mintage still produced output after the summer of 322, as the coins of the Caesars are all rare to very rare, indicating a small issue (the one that ended in 322) while the coinage of Constantine I VOT / XX remained plentiful, indicating a continuing of the series (at least residual) to 325 or around that year. </p><p><br /></p><p><br /></p><p>One thing is certain, neither Rome nor Ticinum would mint the large-scale type SARMATIA/ALAMANNIA DEVICTA of 323-325. Rome seems to have completely shut down operations in the summer of 322, while Ticinum operated possibly just to satisfy local needs re-issuing the votive of Constantine I only.[/QUOTE]</p><p><br /></p>

Your name or email address:

Do you already have an account?

• No, create an account now.
• Yes, my password is:
• Forgot your password?

Stay logged in