Were Roman/Byzantine coins of Arcadius also struck before 395?

I just have a question that is bothering me.

As you all know Arcadius was crowned as co-emperor in 383. But he was not a sole emperor in the Eastern Roman/Byzantine Empire until his father Theodosius I died in 395.

From 395 when the father passed on, Arcadius thus became the sole emperor in the eastern part.

Now as you know there are a lot of coins struck where the legends on the obverse even say "Our Lord Arcadius, lucky and pius, emperor".

I want to ask: Are all the coins where the only name of Arcadius appear struck only AFTER 395 when he became the sole emperor? Or were the coins of Arcadius also struck BEFORE during Theodosius I's life?

I dont know if there is a definitive answer to that question, but in case there is, then I would be glad to have it confirmed.

Thank you very much

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

According to RIC IX, there are coins of Arcadius with that legend - "D N ARCADIVS P F AVG" - from 19th January 383 AD, when he became co-emperor.

ATB,
Aidan.

 

I don’t have many of my Arcadius coins photographed but here are a few. I can add some more a bit later.

Here’s one reportedly from 383Ad

GLORIA ROMANORVM - RIC IX 41a Antioch

and here’s another from 384-387ad

GLORIA ROMANORVM - RIC IX 38c2 Siscia

 

While it's not possible to know precisely when the first coins in the name of Arcadius were struck, there are issues from Constantinople, for example, in which coins of both Arcadius and his mother Aelia Flaccilla (who died in early 386) share the same mint and privy marks. It can be said with some certainty, then, that the first coins in the name of Arcadius must have been struck no later than the death of Flaccilla. LRBC records three mint/privy combinations attested for both, so likely over some period of time prior. It makes good political sense, of course, that coins of Arcadius (or of any new emperor, for that matter) would have been struck almost immediately upon his elevation.