Picked up a Constantine not seen very often.

Somewhere I got the idea that 12 1/2 referred to Licinius revaluing the coinage at half of the previous number of 25 denarii of account at the mints he controlled but Constantine did not go along with that. I bought mine for the Martinian connection mostly but I do like the style of the hair on the forehead. I have no idea how to tell a coin from the days before Martinian from those after he was gone and truce was reestablished. This time, Constantine let Licinius live because he was married to Constantine's sister but insisted on the death of Martinian.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

there is a primary source, which I believe I have posted before that specifically states "reduced to the half of a nummus" Letter in Archive of official Theophanes, c. 321 (P. Rylands IV. 607)

 

Those are some fine examples, @Victor_Clark, @Gavin Richardson and @Alegandron. It’s interesting to me to see the CONSTANTINI legend used on non-wreath votive coins.

 

The majority of ancient collectors are not really interested in minor differences in obverse and/or reverse designs and inscriptions. Most of the time I'm not either, but this Trier mint issue of Constantine caught my attention with the highly abbreviated reverse inscription of VICTORIAE LAET P P

 

@Victor_Clark Thank you very much for the correction on my coin.
I have changed it on my label for the coin.

 

Victor, I am trying to understand this. I suppose the date 321 comes independent of the content (e.g. explicitly dated to year 13 of Licinius, as opposed to deduced from the coins.) It says some thing was "reduced to half of a nummus." Was it newly issued coins with the reduced nominal value, or a revaluation of old coins? Which size coin is the nummus at the time? Was is some older, larger, coin type? [For those of you who don't know, folles c. 300 were c. 28 mm and by c. 312 they were only a bit more than half the original weight and c. 24 mm and by 317 most were c. 19 mm which stayed c. 19 mm until 328 or so.] If this was indicted by the radiate AE3 shown above, are we to think the non-radiate AE3s are worth 25--twice the radiates--and they are nummi? Why are there radiates from this time only at Cyzicus? Or, are we to think that all AE3s of the period are the affected coins? There is really only one size of AE coin at the time.


Above is a coin from about the same time. This one is of Licinius (who issued that Constantine radiate I posted above). This is about the same size.
19 mm. 4.14 grams. Struck "late 317-early 318". The imperial mantle suggests it was struck in a year when he was consul, and he was consul each year 315 through 318. Was this the "25" coin and the new radiate reduced to half, therefore "1 1/2."

One problem with ancient sources is they have a context that we often don't know the way the ancients did. That means there is a lot we don't know, but that is okay. It gives us a lot to think about.

 

The 12.5 fractional radiates are not only issued from Cyzicus, but from all the mints controlled by Licinius (A.D. 321- 324)-- Heraclea, Nicomedia, Cyzicus, Antioch, and Alexandria. The primary source I quoted above has had much written about it over the years (for one see Hendy "Studies in Byzantine Monetary Economy" pg 464). The dating is sometimes debated, but as Hendy explains A.D. 321 is the best because the document "very probably derives from the archive of one Theophanes, who was on the staff of the Prefect of Egypt in the second and third decades of the fourth century. Dionysious {to whom the letter was addressed} was possibly his father. This, of course, would explain the inside knowledge of the retariffing evident in his letter. It would also exclude any of the other datings, extending right back to Aurelian, that have been proposed for this letter."

perhaps the first record of insider trading.

 

Right. My statement about 12 1/2 being "only at Cyzicus" was in error. (Coins of Martinian are only at Cyzicus).



Here is one of mine from Alexandria. 19 mm. RIC Alexandria 28 "321-324."
Do you think that document refers to this having nominal value has the value of the non-radiate AE3s of the time period?

 

[correction] and Nicomedia.