Just received my new Allectus Quinarius. It made me review the story of his short reign. The galley reverse on the coin reminded me why he lost "the battle of the "English Channel". In September 296 AD, Constantius was planning an invasion from Bononia (now called Boulogne in Northern France) but the bad weather delayed his plan. In the meantime, Asclepiodotus, one of his general, exploit the thick fog to avoid Allectus' armada stationed at the Isle of Wight. His ships landed near Southampton Water where they completely burnt the usurper's fleet. Allectus' armies didn't have the choice to pull back from the coast, but sadly for him he was sandwiched by another of Constantius's division and had to fight a much bigger army. I was finally killed near Calleva Atrebatum. So please show me your coins of Allectus or anything with ships or galleys! Allectus Ae Quinarius 18mm 2.28g Camolodunum IMP C ALLECTVS PF AVG / VIRTVS AVG QC RIC V 128
He deserved it after betraying and killing Carausius! Here's my "quinarius" (which it almost certainly isn't): London mint (QL in ex.) And here's an "invasion follis" of Constantius, issued on the continent while he was waiting impatiently to thump Allectus: (easily mistaken for a London issue due to the lack of mintmark)
Not as snazzy as the Allectus galley but 40 years earlier Postumus had his version. POSTUMUS, ROMANO-GALLIC EMPEROR, 261 AD, 21MM, 3.85GM GALLEY LEFT. RIC 73.
No ifs, ands or buts about it. It unequivocally isn't a quinarius. Allectus's economy was crumbling so he shrank the module to stretch the buck. Making a coin that was a little bit cheaper but nominally worth many times less makes about as much sense as the U.S. mint restarting production of the half cent. Just a wild theory on my part but I think it far likelier that it's a denomination retariffed at five times the old ant. The Q stands for quinque; the number five in Latin and the the type itself, this quinqueremus five-oared galley, would work as an effective visual aid to drive home the point of the new coin's value. Rasiel
ALLECTUS RI Allectus 293-296 CE AE Ant PAX RI Allectus 293-296 AE Quinarius London Virtus Galley AE17 2.3g S 13870 RIC 55
Need your help here. I checked acsearch for the attribution of my coin and I'm really confused about it. Is it "galley sailing right or left? How do we know? Is the ship itself or the position of the rows determined it?
I like the theory that the Q means a number. Not so sure about 5, could be 4 as well. (Note that they don't all show 5 oars, far from it!) It could also correspond to 4 or 5 denarii which would be a rather less drastic (and more likely to be successful) reform. One significant problem for the theory is that Allectus also produced antoninianii. If you're suggesting there was an attempt to demonetize the antoninianii and replace them with the Q-radiates, the hoard data doesn't seem to support this as far as I know. That is, the Q-radiates are found alongside antoninianii in hoards - it doesn't seem that people held on to their ants when the new denomination came out. The generally good average condition of surviving examples doesn't tell us much about the reform's success since his defeat would have sunk the new coinage either way. ("Sunk." Heh heh.)
Here is my one and only Allectus Antoninian. This one is on a fairly large flan. I bought the coin years ago at the London coin fair. I liked the particularly lively or lifelike portrait.
It's an unsupported theory but there's plenty of contemporary correlation in the folles which saw simultaneous debasement, lowering of module size and increased nominal value - a triple whammy. Going off the top of my head but I'm pretty sure that period hoards tend to show that these all intermingled. A hoard containing Carausius/Allectus ants alongside others stretching all the way back to Gallienus is rather obvious proof the public didn't care. And what choice did they have? If you received payment from a government official and they said "here you go" while handing you less than you got the previous month what were you going to do about it? Nothing. If you were a merchant you'd jack up the prices for your own goods and pass the hurt on to the next guy. If you were in a position of authority you were likely as corrupt as a Honduran cop. If you were the low man on the totem pole you got screwed. Same as it's always been. This obviously led to hyperinflation and the subsequent attempts to control it such as with Diocletian's monetary reforms. The important thing to keep in mind is that the Roman treasury coined money to pay its debts and would always attempt to do so at a net profit. What ended up happening to the coins afterwards when they ended as currency in the marketplace is a different story. In the Britain of Allectus's time, as elsewhere in the Roman world, commerce almost certainly valued ants, folles, old denarii, etc. in fluctuating ad hoc rates in "what the market can bear" fashion. It's inconceivable to me that in the everyday transactions of back then ordinary people would have taken the trouble to check the designs of their coppers when all of them were just about equally worthless. By this point whether you sold a product or a service it would have been much easier to just set prices as number of coins and not bother with face value. Rasiel
There is a point (hull opener for ramming?) on the front and a steering oar out the rear. My green one with 9? oars is headed right. Tejas' brown 5 oar is going left. Both are C mint. The other choice is L mint as shown by Alegandron with the galley headed left. Did everyone notice that these come in Virtus and Laetitia versions?
