Constantine campgate from Siscia with lots of rows

No siree!

In-between 324 and 330 AD there were five Antioch issues, but evidentially the come-up-with-new-issue-marks dude (pretty sure this was his official title) wasn't being paid enough, so we have three issues of SMANT, separated by two issues of dot-SMANT.

On the types for the ladies the "dot" part of the mint/issue mark is in the exergue, making it clear that it is an issue mark, but on the campgates the dot is moved to within the arch, presumably for a more pleasing symmetric design. What's confusing of course is that we're used to ignoring central dots, but in this case we not only know there must be that dot from the issue mark somewhere, but also it's often fat enough to be obvious what it is, and more importantly sometimes so far below center that there can be no ambiguity.

The multiple issues, with repeating issue marks, can be hard to tell apart, but at least for Constantine it's very clear since his bust evolves with the issues from laureate, to plain diademed, to draped + rosette-diademed.

Here's a couple of examples of the 1st "dot" issue, with laureate bust for Constantine, RIC 71, where the dot is well below center.




And here's a couple of examples of the 2nd "dot" issue, with diademed bust, RIC 81, where the dot is again below center, but as typical not so exaggeratedly so. The second coin is interesting since the dot is really pretty central, but you can also see the remains of the real centering dot just above it.



The issues for the caesars and ladies are a bit harder to tell apart since we don't have the same evolving bust types as for Constantine. In fact, RIC only records a single SMANT issue for the caesars and a single dot-SMANT one, despite expectations telling us the caesars must have been included in all issues, the same as at other mints.

It turns out the first pair of SMANT, dot-SMANT issues for the caesars, and the second pair, can usually be distinguished based on reverse style. The early issues have much simpler campgates with very few rows, while the later ones have many more rows and often elaborated designs with bases and decorative dots.

Compare Victor's coin, above, to this early issue example for Constantius II. RIC would classify both as RIC 74 (implying both were issued alongside the laureate bust RIC 71 for Constantine I), but in reality only the simple one, below, would have been issued alongside RIC 71, and Victor's fancy one would have been issued later, alongside the diademed bust 81.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

not too many rows, but it is a rarely seen type (though I looked through the posts and saw I had already posted it )




Valens, Eastern Roman Empire (AD 364-378). AE2 (22mm, 4.43 gm, 5h). NGC XF★ 5/5 - 3/5. Trier, AD 367-375. D N VALEN-S P F AVG, pearl-diademed, draped and cuirassed bust of Valens right, seen from front / GLORI-A ROMA-NORVM, campgate with six rows, two turrets, no doors; S above, SMTR in exergue. RIC IX 29b.

 

It's ok, Victor Clark. I have only a six-row campgate (pic from AMCC3):



But it's not about how many rows you have, it's how you use them!

 

I've got a 17 row campgate now---

 

Yes, I posted my little joke before reaching the end of the thread. Who would have thought you'd come up with a 17-row campgate? :-O (Wow emoji). In any case: congratulations!

I must say that I've enjoyed this thread. I've always liked the campgate design, but never got one until some weeks ago. Now I see so many variations, all of them interesting. I think my favourite ones have the open doors. No scratch that: the one with the portcullis is my favourite, but the open doors are great, too.

 

Hahaha…

…but also congrats!

 

I had to resurrect this thread because I was sorting through some LRB's and found this campgate with 18 rows.




Constantine I
A.D. 328-9
18x19mm 3.1g
CONSTAN-TINVS AVG; Laureate head right
PROVIDEN-TIAE AVGG; camp gate with 18 rows, two turrets, no doors, ✶ above.
in ex. ΔSIS double crescent
RIC VII Siscia 214