Unassuming Valentinian II rarity

This is one of those coins only a specialist would bother with. It's small, it's a LRB, it's a usual enough type and the ruling figure is a somewhat boring lackluster character:



VALENTINIAN II AE4 11mm 1.33g (aVF)

AV: DN VALENTINIANVS PF AVG; pearl-diademed draped cuirassed bust r. T behind bust

REV: VOT/X/MVLT/XX inside wreath

EXE: ALEgamma Alexandria mint.

REF: cf. RIC IX Alexandria 19a, rated Scarce, Type 26 cf. Warren Esty, unlisted 3rd officina for Valentinian II, RIC notes that this officina minted only for Theodosius, 383-388AD.

Rare little bronze from Alexandria, unknown to me until now but unlikely to be the only spec surviving. A bargain pick for 7$ delivered

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

Sweet deal for that Seth.

 

It's a nice example of a type that is hard to find in decent condition---frustrating for those of us desiring to fill all those Emperor portrait holes with coins of some eye appeal.

I have a varying example pending that is attributed to Val II and has a nice portrait---certainly better than the barely discernible example I now possess. This is the pending bronze:

 

I'm often on the lookout for these small variations when they're cheap.
I'll post better images as I see others share my interest too. Wasn't expecting that.

 

i love a bargain bin LRB score!

i thought the unusual thing was going to be the "T" on the obverse, i don't recall seeing that before.

 

Very nice find. I also keep my eyes peeled for unlisted LRB varieties. I have no such interesting coins for Val II, but I can share these two documented examples, Concordia and Victory...

 

@seth77 I have no Valentinian IIs to share, but I enjoy these kinds of posts.

 

The T behind the bust is specific to this series from Alexandria. I don't know what its use or signification was.

 

Here's another votive with unlisted officina, this one in a superior condition:

 

This is the great thing about ancients: so many possibilities for collections, so many details to explore, so may fun avenues. I admire you folks who dig deep into a slice of time and seek out specific coins that would likely be overlooked by others .

 

Thanks TIF, but in my case is more like compulsion and the aversion towards being idle, so when I'm not actively working or spending time with the wife and the cat all I do is somewhat coin-related.

 

That's a superb example Seth!!

 

Thank you all for the kind words. I'm really surprised this topic actually was of interest to so many. I'll return with a better pic for the OP coin tomorrow!

 

Sweet score, Seth ...



Sadly, I don't have a Val-II example (*rats*) ... yup, I need more coins!!

 

If you necessarily have to have a Val II, the coin in the OP is definitely NOT the one to have.

 

*edit*

 

Here is the fact. To a specialist, an officina variant is interesting. To shallow general collectors like me, there are many more interesting Valentinian II coins contending for our attention. Votive AE4's may be cute to some but more people go for AE2 coins with other reverses. This is good. I hope you will avoid making a rare Septimius Severus the one-per coin for him.

A few more common Valentinian II coins:

Silver - for those of us with no gold


Fancy bust and boat AE2


AE2 kneeling woman


When I bought this AE2 soldier with foot on captive I thought tha was some nose but it is a die break.

 

Don't get me wrong Steve, by all means if you like a small flawed LRB, buy it. But this is not the course that people who don't have LRBs as a focus usually take.
Now regarding both Val and Constans pictured above, the price of having these unrecorded variations going for cheap is the lack of any sources regarding actual individual rarity of these variations. That's because most collectors deem these unworthy of the effort necessary to track and record them.

 

The important thing to specialists is not so much finding something for $5 that is worth $6 but finding something that adds to what we know about what we study. A coin with a previously unlisted officina just says that on one day someone struck things a bit differently. We don't necessarily know why but sometimes we see or imagine some significance in a change in shop assignments. For example a rare officina could be an accident or a sign that the type was being struck when the word was received that a person on the obverse died or fell from favor. Coin people LOVE it when the coins contribute something to the knowledge of history. Little clues may come up a hundred times for every time we understand one but that is one more than we had before. I believe coin evidence has changed the year we believe Pescennius Niger died and is suggesting (to some, anyway) that Philip II may have lived longer than his father or that word of his death did not reach the East as rapidly as did word of his father's death. I don't have the proof on such things and warn that there is no absolute proof in any science.

 

I agree.
Were these errors? Can we say for sure that there was a rule that stated 3rd officina at Alexandria around 385 should mint only for Theodosius and not for Valentinian? We're doing puzzles here and I think it's most likely that the scarcity today of some types for some rulers by some officinae is simply the result of hazard.
On the other hand we just proved that 3rd officina at Alexandria between 383 and 388 minted for Val II too. Next time someone is interested in finding analogies for his unlisted Val II has this post to rely on. And he can add to his notes, like I do, "unlisted in RIC but not unknown as recorded by X on cointalk".