Message:

<p>[QUOTE=&quot;Valentinian, post: 4042227, member: 44316&quot;][USER=19463]@dougsmit[/USER] has some good points. I can tell you why I am thinking of switching. I am writing a web page on coins of the First Tetrarchy (Diocletian, etc.)&nbsp; In 294 Diocletian had a coin reform which created two new AE denominations, the &quot;follis&quot; (or &quot;nummus&quot;) and the &quot;post-reform radiate&quot; (an awkward name, but it is &quot;post-reform&quot; and it is &quot;radiate&quot;).&nbsp; Unfortunately, the post-reform radiate looks a great deal like the previous radiates which had much more intrinsic value (perhaps 4 times as much). The significant difference in the two denominations is in their intrinsic value. I want to distinguish the pre- and post-reform radiates. The pre-reform ones had more value, not because they are in the series with declining silver value of coins we call antoniniani, but because they are in the series of reformed coins of Aurelian. So, if you are going to have both denominations in the mix, the pre-reform denomination does not include coins pre-Aurelian. </p><p><br /></p><p>Maybe we should just call all those radiate coins from 215 to 294 &quot;radiates.&quot; </p><p><br /></p><p>Next is an except from my not-yet-published web page on coins of the First Tetrarchy.</p><p><br /></p><p>The &quot;post-reform radiate&quot; denomination is copper with no added silver and no surface-silvering. It looks very much like the aurelianus. They can be hard to tell apart. The next two coins are similar in appearance but were actually much different in antiquity.</p><p><br /></p><p>[ATTACH=full]1060829[/ATTACH] </p><p><br /></p><p>Compare this coin, an aurelianus, to the next coin, a post-reform radiate.</p><p>They are quite similar. They have the same obverse legend:</p><p>IMP C C VAL DIOCLETIANVS AVG</p><p>They have the same reverse type:</p><p>CONCORDIA MILITVM, emperor being presented with Victory on a globe.</p><p>This coin does not name the mint, but has the distinctive &quot;XXI&quot; of the aurelianus denomination.&nbsp; </p><p><i>RIC</i> V.II Diocletian 306v, page 253. Cyzicus.</p><p><br /></p><p>The second coin names the mint: ALE for Alexandria. </p><p><br /></p><p><br /></p><p>[ATTACH=full]1060828[/ATTACH] </p><p><br /></p><p>Note that the previous coin shows signs of silvering (so, it must be an aurelianus) and this one does not. Also, the second has a larger head.</p><p><br /></p><p><i>RIC</i> VI Alexandria 46a. &quot;c. 296-7&quot;</p><p><br /></p><p>Many aureliani do not have this &quot;CONCORDIA MILITVM&quot; reverse (e.g. the first coin on this page).&nbsp; There are a few (not many) post-reform radiates that have a different reverse.</p><p><br /></p><p>[Continued on the web page.][/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