Constantius II

Nice coin for yourself, and thank you for the further clarity of my DIVO CONSTANTIO.
Best,
Brian

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

I fail to see why they would use GAL VAL on a coin honoring Maximianus. Galerius was deified? That I had missed.

 

That's a regular-size follis - being a posthumous commemorative it is a somewhat unusual type for the era, granted. But it's not out of the ordinary as to its denomination (it's not a fraction) or size. If the date of issue is correct (~312) it was issued as much as a couple of years after Maximian's demise in ~310. Galerius was still alive in early 311.
As I understand it (and without dragging out RIC to check all the legend citations), both Maximian and Galerius used the GAL VAL titlature in their coin legends at various times; both were associated with Hercules vs. Diocletian and Constantius being associated with Zeus. So, although there is a possibility this was issued for Maximian a couple of years after the old tetrarch's death, it seems more likely to have been in honor of the more recently deceased Galerius - we at least know and are familiar with his use of the GAL VAL name contraction.
I suppose there might be a distant possibility it was issued in honor of both at the same time? Not a typical Roman move, but not inconceivable.

 

Please show an online reference showing GAL VAL applied to Marcus Aurelius Maximianus.

 

RIC VI pages 452-454 refer to these as coins of Divus Galerius. What I can't explain is why the catalog listings for Group III at the bottom of page 477 list this as 'Divus: Galerius Maximian'. Note that the last lifetime issues for Galerius, number 1 in Augusti, also call him Galerius Maximian. I wonder if the author of this section might even agree with me that the whole mess would have been better if the man we call Galerius had gone down in history as Maximianus II. Perhaps one of our tetrarchy specialists can make this all clear. The authors of RIC made no effort to making things clear for amateurs since the books were produced for their peer group. For example, on page 479, listing 1. is IMP MAXIMIANVS P F AVG which I considered Galerius but the author could have made clear by adding a small "(Galerius)" after those listings. Earlier we learn that coins with the name Maximianus but as Caesar have to be Galerius and that those with GAL VAL require us to separate the Maximianus from the Maximinus. Here we are in the period where there are no Marcus Aurelius or Galerius Valerius clues in the legend so we are supposed to know that the Maximianus here listed is the second one without anyone telling us.

I believe the circumstances of Maximianus' death in 310 prevented any Divus coin for him immediately following his death. After Maxentius was dead and only Constantine and Licinius remained, the old man's memory was rehabilitated allowing his inclusion in the small coins of the Divo series (starting with post 9 on this thread). I wonder if most of this was to satisfy his daughter Fausta (Constantine's wife).

I apologize for my part in stealing this thread which was started on Constantius II and went down more than one rabbit hole along the way.

 

I don't mind the extra input. I signed up here to learn.

 

ABSOLUTELY!!!

 

JQB #58. Smyrna - Bronze coin (AE 3/4) minted at RSIS = Siscia, Yugoslavia during the reign of CONSTANTIUS II, as Caesar, between 334 - 335 A.D. Obv. FL.IVL.CONSTANTIVS.NOB. C. Laureate, draped & cuirassed bust r. Rev. GLOR-IA.EXERC-ITVS. Two soldiers with two standards. RCS #3986. RICVII #237 pg.256. DVM #72. LRBC #744.


Here is one of my Constantius II that was purchased in a small bag of coins that were a lump of dirt.

 

@Jims Coins Nice. That's the way to get them. Not necessarily in a clump, but uncleaned. The only method to my Ancient collection is to clean them myself and see what I have.