Message:

<p>[QUOTE=&quot;maridvnvm, post: 2955281, member: 31620&quot;]The T-F//PTR issue of Constantine the Great at Trier caused the writers of RIC some problems. </p><p><br /></p><p>The issue is split between RIC VI and RIC VII but there are more subtle splits even than that.</p><p><br /></p><p>RIC VI p. 225 shows us the &quot;heavier follis&quot; dated c.309 with coins in the weight range 7.0-5.0 gms. The issue contains two Mars types&nbsp; - MARTI PATRI CONSERVATORI (Mars standing right leaning on shield) and MARTI PATRI PROPVGNATORI (Mars advancing with spear and shield) and two PRINCIPI IVVENTVTIS types (whic I will ignore for brevity). RIC VI 829 - 843.</p><p><br /></p><p>RIC VI p. 226-227 shows us the &quot;lighter follis&quot; dated to 310-13 with coins in the weigth range 5.0-4.0 gms. The issue contains the GENIO POP ROM, MARTI CONSERVATORI and SOLI INVICTO COMITI types. RIC VI 844 - 876.</p><p><br /></p><p>At some point during the T-F//PTR issue there was a break between east and west in the empire and coins of Maximinus II Daia stop production.</p><p><br /></p><p>RIC VII p. 167-168 shows us the continuation of this &quot;lighter follis&quot; issue dating to 313-315. All the examples allocated to this issue seem to have been given R3-R5 scarcity wheras the RIC VI coins are all given C2 through to R scarcity. Some thought has been given to sub-dividing this issue into years based on weight. This is problematic too since hoard analysys cited in the notes seems to indicate that a weight range of 6.30-3.50 gms. It would appear that the coin are spread across the weight range without distinct groupings of weights that might indicate a sub-division by weight alone. RIC also places all coins almost all coins with the obverse legend IMP CONSTANTINVS P F AVG in the &quot;earlier light issue&quot; as these are generally realtively heavier. There seems to be problems at every turn with this issue.</p><p><br /></p><p>The issue was followed by the A-S//PTR issue.</p><p><br /></p><p>I have recently obtained a Mars example from the T-F and the A-S issue and thought it worth sharing them here to illustrate how some of this confusion might arise.</p><p><br /></p><p>Firstly the T-F Follis</p><p>Obv:– IMP CONSTANTINVS P F AVG, Laureate cuirassed bust right</p><p>Rev:- MARTI CON-SERVATORI, Mars helmeted, in military dress, spread cloak, standing, right, holding reversed spear, left hand leaning on shield</p><p>Minted in Trier (T | F / PTR). A.D. 310 - 313</p><p>Reference(s) – RIC VI Trier 855 (rated S). </p><p><br /></p><p>3.64g. 23.95 mm. 180 degrees</p><p><br /></p><p><img src="http://www.forumancientcoins.com/gallery/albums/userpics/10618/RI_160gn_img.jpg" class="bbCodeImage wysiwygImage" alt="" unselectable="on" /> </p><p><br /></p><p>And the A-S issue Follis</p><p>Obv:– IMP CONSTANTINVS AVG, Laureate, cuirassed bust right</p><p>Rev:–. MARTI CON-SERVATORI. Mars helmeted, in military dress, spread cloak, standing, right, holding reversed spear, left hand leaning on shield</p><p>Minted in Trier (A | S / PTR). A.D. 315-316</p><p>Reference(s) – RIC VII Trier 80 (R2)</p><p><br /></p><p>3.76g. 20.44 mm. 180 degrees</p><p><br /></p><p><img src="http://www.forumancientcoins.com/gallery/albums/userpics/10618/RI_160gl_img.jpg" class="bbCodeImage wysiwygImage" alt="" unselectable="on" /> </p><p><br /></p><p>My T-F coin is distinctly larger than the A-S coin but is lighter.</p><p><br /></p><p>Here they are together to aid comparison. </p><p><br /></p><p>[ATTACH=full]722408[/ATTACH]</p><p><br /></p><p>We will probably never know but was the T-F issue broken into sub-issues or was there simply a much larger than usual weight distribution within the issue.</p><p><br /></p><p>Thoughts?</p><p><br /></p><p>BTW I was drawn to the pleasing details on Mars on both these.</p><p><br /></p><p>Martin[/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