Message:

<p>[QUOTE=&quot;dougsmit, post: 1154722, member: 19463&quot;]I believe the Constantius was either an error or was used locally without the knowledge of Constantius.&nbsp; The coin is what is called a &#039;Poemenius&#039; after a figure that was reported to have rebelled against Magnentius and handed over Trier to Constantius.&nbsp; What is known about him is beneath scanty but fully stated here:</p><p><a href="http://www.acsearch.info/record.html?id=12456" target="_blank" class="externalLink ProxyLink" data-proxy-href="http://www.acsearch.info/record.html?id=12456" rel="nofollow">http://www.acsearch.info/record.html?id=12456</a></p><p><br /></p><p>I will point out that the reference to Poemenius states that he was killed in the affair but you will find reference to that same name twenty years later as a cleric (after Orthodoxy was the norm).&nbsp; There may be no connection or it could be a son/relative.&nbsp; If we want to be most cautious in our pipe dreams it would be better to consider the type issued because it was what Magnentius was making the day before.&nbsp; The reverse legend does not match since the one used by Magnentius referred to his having a Caesar but Constantius ruled alone at that time so the Caesar part of the legend was deleted.&nbsp; </p><p><br /></p><p>When it comes to political interest of the period, these rare coins are on top of my list.&nbsp; Poemenius is a step more obscure than Vetranio and not all that different from Aureolus under Postumus except that his coins are much rarer.&nbsp; The study required to get full benefit from collecting ancient coins is not appealing to all but you really miss out if you just collect Twelve Caesars.[/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