Unlisted Valentinian III type? (Actual post)

Ok, so, I tried making this post a little earlier & it all went wrong (tiiiny buttons/gnarled old fingers). I can't figure out how to delete the mess-up & I can't edit it anymore, I timed out. So now there's 2 posts with this title from me (because I'm awesome). Please disregard the other.

I just picked this very interesting little coin up from Sol Numismatik's Auction XII (really digging them, by the way). It was listed as a Vandal immitation of Val. III; I am pretty sure that is not the case. It looks official to me, not even close. That abbreviated Ob legend, DN VALENTINIAN, was used, along with others, on all the AE types that were struck at Rome towards the end of his reign (V10 & V11 Ob Leg in RIC X). RIC X breaks all such coins into two groups; with or without mintmark (ROM, ROMA, RO, RM, R, etc.). The closest type to this coin is 2140, Re: XV. I have neither seen nor heard of any with dots to either side of the numerals, let alone to both. The earlier Re: XX type; RIC 2129, 2130 & 2136; did sometimes have dots in various places for all 3 issues, but those all had different Ob legends & were struck on flans of a different standard, among other differences. It is possibly an engraver's error, but I really do not think so, it looks deliberate with the dots & centering (even if VOT is reversed) & someone of above-average skill clearly made it. And most examples of that type are in an even cruder style & just bad all around. As for an imitation, it is simply too nice, the lettering especially, & too spot-on for mass & fabric. The style & the flan are textbook examples for the (assumed assumed-)time.
So, assuming Kent was right to break the V10/11 Ob leg types into two groups (& I believe he was. The Victory & Camp-Gate types with MMs are almost always on a noticeably larger & differently-irregularly-shaped flan, more triangular, than the others without MM, & the portrait style changes), & that a date range of 440-455 is reasonable (starting with the "XV" type & using it as a regal date then going to the end of his reign, I assume?), that means these started with the smaller no-MM types & transitioned to the larger triangular flan with a MM. This coin clearly has no MM but is on a larger triangular flan & in the style of the later types, placing it somewhere in the middle? 450? 450ish? So, to whome could a regal date of 5 be referring around 450? Not Valentinian himself. So who? I'm short on ideas, but would love to hear what better minds think? Maybe one of the Augusta? Or someone in the East, with Theo. II?
I know, I'm playing fast & loose with the assumptions here, but I'm looking at this coin & I'm convinced that it is official & that it was deliberately engraved & I'm just following the line of thought. Throw in the anomalies like, if it's supposed to be "XV" then why is it on a flan for, & in the style of, coins of later series?, & I think there's something here. The kicker is, I am all-but certain that I have seen that Ob die on a different official coin; die-linking it to an official coin & helping to determine the sequence in which they were struck. I think it was on one of the Camp-Gate types. Looking through my catalog of screen-shots to find it; no luck yet, but I'm hoping someone recognizes the Ob die & can help me out.
I am loving this mystery. If it pans out, it could help nail down some dates for these AE types from the end of Valentinian III's reign, about which we currently know little.
So, what do you think? Anyone know of another? Even if it's an imitation in Val. III's name with a VOT/V Re? Am I way off base here, or could I be right?
Thanks for looking.

*V10: DN VALENTINIANO
V11: DN VAL-ENS AVG (AV OR VG usually combined & "E" as an epsilon) *

1.5 g
14mm X 12.5mm (triangular)
45° axis (only thing that vaguely points to it being an imitation)
Ob Leg is more "there" in-hand; I'm certain of what it says

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

The only real explanation I can come up with for this coin is something issued by Val. III in the West in honor of Marcian in the East. It's a stretch, but maybe; the timing syncs pretty well. It could be from 450 & actually be a vow referance. Or from 454 & marking Marcian's 5th regal year. The problem with that is, there very well may not have been any bronze being struck in the west that late in Val. III's reign. Or sporadic output? It's a theory. Maybe a few of these were struck for a ceremony or celebration or commemoration or whatever? It's an interesting idea, I'm enjoying myself. No evidence, that I can find, that anything like that happened, but I haven't looked that hard yet.