I got home from a rough day of shovelling/blowing snow/ found that I won 2 out 3 lots I had placed proxy bids on. Both are very common coins/ but they are in pristine quality. Here there are, one is a younger Constans/ second is an older Emperor with shaggy unkept looking beard! #1 AV Solidus ND Constantinople Mint struck 643-46 21mm./ 4.45g. obv. Emperor Facing/ Holding Globus Crucifer rev. Cross Potent on Four Steps #2 AV Solidus ND Constantinople Mint struck 659-62 21mm./ 4.46g. obv. Constans III/ Constantine IV Facing rev. Heraclius/ Tiberius Standing Constans made some very unpopular decisions in the latter part of his reign (other then trimming his beard) He ended up being murdered by his servant while taking a bath. Note: Constans II was the son of usurper Constantine III/ he was Augustus 409-11AD. His coins are $$$$$$$$$$$$$
@panzerman , Sear, Dumbarton Oaks, Hahn, and almost everyone else numbers him Constans II, not III. I see you explained your numbering but Sear and others just call that one "Constans" and ignore the numbering problem. He is so rare there is little chance of confusing him with the very common coins of "Constans," son of Constantine. Has some reference source (which one?) convinced you to call the Byzantine emperor usually called "Constans II," Constans III?
In ERIC 2 the author names the son of Constantine III /Constans II, so he renamed Emperor Constans II now the III.
I am going with the traditionalists. Constans II. Wanna trade one of those for mine? It has a cool graffito and an explosion!
He's My Avatar... Also another name change... if you look at old Auction Catalogs, Constantine VII used to be called Constantine X.. They called Basil I's Son Constantine IX, Theophilus's Son Constantine VIII and Leo V's Son Constantine VII.. but now they are all just called "Constantine"
My personal feeling, I would agree with ERIC II . Reason, Constans II was elevated to Augustus by his Father/ Constantine III. Second, coins were struck with his image/name. If Saturninus is listed then Constans II 409-11AD should be. The older publications are outdated in many ways, dues to recent discoveries of coins from before unknown rulers. Same for Theodosius III son of Maurice Tiberius/ coins were struck/ so the "old" Theodosius III is now the IV. Nothing wrong with updating coin publications
Wonderful posts everyone!! Congrats @panzerman----both coins are magnificent.....but I LOVE the second the most!
Thanks Mikey! They are both common/ but these were esp. nice that the legends are well struck, and they are truly mint state/ Elsen have very high grading standards like CNG.
When I was into collecting butterflies/moths, we always had "newer" publications coming out with revisions in taxonomy/ new sp., ssp., forms which were described/found. Hence all of the classic works were way out of date/ only usefull for their historical value ie: Seitz books/images all hand painted! Same with coins/ probably in time ERIC II will be be revised/ updated with new discoveries.
