Message:

<p>[QUOTE=&quot;Victor_Clark, post: 2646554, member: 10613&quot;]While it is true that Siscia did not mint one standard Chi-Rho&#039;s for Constantine I, you first have to figure that out by looking at coins from Constantine II&#039;s brothers in conjunction with his to verify that it is indeed Constantine II. This particular issue is struck by the three brothers all using AVG, so there is no confusion who is on the coin; since the use of AVG for all mean that Constantine I was dead.</p><p><br /></p><p>There is another potentially problematic issue though. Siscia used the mintmark ASIS star for the GE reverse once during Constantine I&#039;s life and once after his death.</p><p><br /></p><p>The problem is differentiating coins of Constantine I from Constantine II. After the death of his father, Constantine II used the same legend of CONSTANTINVS MAX AVG. </p><p><br /></p><p>The first issue is demonstrated by an abundance of coins with the Caesars as NOB C, so Constantine I must also have coins as MAX AVG. The second issue of this series has the brothers Constans and Constantius II depicted as Augustii, so coins must also have been struck for Constantine II as AVG.</p><p><br /></p><p>LRBC says that there are different diadems, but adds that it is unconfirmed. Constantine I and Constantine II as Augustus both wore rosette diadems. In RIC VII, Bruun suggests that workshop A is usually Constantine I, but then states that the “distribution of officinae tends to be blurred.” </p><p><br /></p><p>RIC VIII probably gives the best answer- “A satisfactory means of distinguishing these pieces from those of Constantine I with the same mint-mark has not yet been established.”[/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