Log in or Sign up
Coin Talk
Home
Forums
>
Coin Forums
>
Ancient Coins
>
Ancient Errors: Criminally Undersized Flan
>
Reply to Thread
Message:
<p>[QUOTE="seth77, post: 4606139, member: 56653"]I'm kind of upset about this that came from a British lot:</p><p><br /></p><p>[ATTACH=full]1141012[/ATTACH]</p><p><br /></p><p>CONSTANTIUS II (337-361)</p><p>AE17mm 4.05g billon bronze maiorina/centenionalis, minted possibly at Trier, cca. September to November 353(?).</p><p>DN CONSTAN - TIVS PF AVG; pearl-diademed, draped cuirassed bust r; A behind bust</p><p>FEL TEMP RE - PARATIO; soldier spearing fallen horseman, bare-headed, reaching.</p><p>Exergue off-flan</p><p>cf. RIC VIII Trier 350-355</p><p><br /></p><p>The identification is not complete as the flan was too short for the dies, so the mintmark (and some legends) is off-flan, but judging by the style and the coins it came with, it is very likely a product of the Trier mint. The fourth series of the FH type at Trier is introduced after the discontinuation of the "Revolt of Poemenius" type, around September 353 and ended in November 353. As Constantius II took control of the West, mints began issuing his regular coinage -- the FH type -- sometimes, as it was the case at Trier, adding the markings that were carried over from the previous coinages, like the A behind the bust from the later smaller denominations of Magnentius from early 353.</p><p><br /></p><p>This should have been a smaller AE2 at around 20-21mm but instead, the short flan of 17mm shows it as an AE3/4, unfit for the standard of this fourth series. Perhaps the mint needed more time to accommodate the denominations of Constantius II after having minted either small AE3 denominations for Magnentius and Decentius in 352-353, a few different large denominations for Magnentius and Decentius in the first half of 353 and then a few large to medium denominations (AE1-AE2/3) during the "Revolt of Poemenius" episode in August-September 353.</p><p><br /></p><p>The coin is too heavy (4g+ instead of cca. 2.70-2.50g) and the obverse A mark does not fit with a fifth series small module AE3/4 of the period between the end of 353 and 356.</p><p><br /></p><p>For more discussion on the fourth series of FH see Koinon II pp. 125-127.[/QUOTE]</p><p><br /></p>
[QUOTE="seth77, post: 4606139, member: 56653"]I'm kind of upset about this that came from a British lot: [ATTACH=full]1141012[/ATTACH] CONSTANTIUS II (337-361) AE17mm 4.05g billon bronze maiorina/centenionalis, minted possibly at Trier, cca. September to November 353(?). DN CONSTAN - TIVS PF AVG; pearl-diademed, draped cuirassed bust r; A behind bust FEL TEMP RE - PARATIO; soldier spearing fallen horseman, bare-headed, reaching. Exergue off-flan cf. RIC VIII Trier 350-355 The identification is not complete as the flan was too short for the dies, so the mintmark (and some legends) is off-flan, but judging by the style and the coins it came with, it is very likely a product of the Trier mint. The fourth series of the FH type at Trier is introduced after the discontinuation of the "Revolt of Poemenius" type, around September 353 and ended in November 353. As Constantius II took control of the West, mints began issuing his regular coinage -- the FH type -- sometimes, as it was the case at Trier, adding the markings that were carried over from the previous coinages, like the A behind the bust from the later smaller denominations of Magnentius from early 353. This should have been a smaller AE2 at around 20-21mm but instead, the short flan of 17mm shows it as an AE3/4, unfit for the standard of this fourth series. Perhaps the mint needed more time to accommodate the denominations of Constantius II after having minted either small AE3 denominations for Magnentius and Decentius in 352-353, a few different large denominations for Magnentius and Decentius in the first half of 353 and then a few large to medium denominations (AE1-AE2/3) during the "Revolt of Poemenius" episode in August-September 353. The coin is too heavy (4g+ instead of cca. 2.70-2.50g) and the obverse A mark does not fit with a fifth series small module AE3/4 of the period between the end of 353 and 356. For more discussion on the fourth series of FH see Koinon II pp. 125-127.[/QUOTE]
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
Coin Talk
Home
Forums
>
Coin Forums
>
Ancient Coins
>
Ancient Errors: Criminally Undersized Flan
>
Home
Home
Quick Links
Search Forums
Recent Activity
Recent Posts
Forums
Forums
Quick Links
Search Forums
Recent Posts
Competitions
Competitions
Quick Links
Competition Index
Rules, Terms & Conditions
Gallery
Gallery
Quick Links
Search Media
New Media
Showcase
Showcase
Quick Links
Search Items
Most Active Members
New Items
Directory
Directory
Quick Links
Directory Home
New Listings
Members
Members
Quick Links
Notable Members
Current Visitors
Recent Activity
New Profile Posts
Sponsors
Menu
Search
Search titles only
Posted by Member:
Separate names with a comma.
Newer Than:
Search this thread only
Search this forum only
Display results as threads
Useful Searches
Recent Posts
More...