Message:

<p>[QUOTE=&quot;seth77, post: 3969352, member: 56653&quot;]Long time no ancient posting so with this thread I&#039;d like to return to one of my earlier interests: the coinage of the Late Empire in general and of the 350s in particular.</p><p><br /></p><p>After the new interpretations that seem to push the rebellion of Nepotian to 351 rather than 350 (according to Mr. Curtis Clay et al), I think that it is more likely that the new large denomination, that is so specific to the reign of Magnentius, might have originated in Rome around this period in 351, to be then moved to Trier for the regular large chi-rho type that we all know and love.</p><p><br /></p><p>What am I basing this on?</p><p><br /></p><p>The large modules of both Nepotian and Magnentius at Rome:</p><p><br /></p><p>[ATTACH=full]1044436[/ATTACH]</p><p>Nepotian from Kuenker 270 lot 8984 2015, at unknown diameter and 8.88g</p><p><br /></p><p><br /></p><p><br /></p><p>[ATTACH=full]1044435[/ATTACH]</p><p>Magnentius from &quot;Via Agrippa&quot; -- a French dealer -- 2015, at 25mm and 7.09g</p><p><br /></p><p>The weight for both these specimens (and the diameter for the Magnentius) is off, about 50 to 100% heavier than the mean 4.5 to 5g usual for the maiorinae of 350-351, after Magnentius ousted Constans and before introducing the new &quot;double maiorina.&quot;</p><p><br /></p><p>So could these specimens be the precursors of the wide and heavy (many at about 6.5 to 10g) AE1s of Magnentius and Decentius coins from the West?[/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