Discussion in 'Ancient Coins' started by Julius Germanicus, Mar 7, 2019.
Thank you for sharing this!
Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.
I thought so as well because of the identical placing of the hole on my OP coin and the very similar piece I posted before. These two specimens here however have the hole at different places, so the bronze flans must have been holed after striking, but before being gold-plated:
The two new specimens show nice detail on the emperor´s dress. Doesn´t it look like he is not draped, but only cuirassed? If so, there would be no corresponding original type from the early Tetrarchy.
Im am beginning to wonder if it is really Diocletian´s portrait that has been copied from a Roman original for this obverse die, because his colleague Maximian also issued an Aureus with a left facing bust. This specimen here even has traces from a removed mounting, so it likely has been in barbarian hands (and could therefore have been used as an inspiration by gothic celators:
They very much resemble each other on the coinage (what individual features do you see?), but I would say the little differences (look at the slightly thinner face and the angry mouth!) still speak for Diocletian as the man on the OP coin:
What do you think?
Beautiful!! I would want to feel them all! Wow- thank you for letting us see them-
Separate names with a comma.