What a difference a dot makes (on a siliqua)

Discussion in 'Ancient Coins' started by Valentinian, May 11, 2022.

  1. Severus Alexander

    Severus Alexander find me at NumisForums Supporter

    Wow, I'm sorry I missed this! :( Congrats on your two wins! There are an impressive number of miliarensia, also siliquae of Eugenius. Great hoard!

    Here's my only heavy miliarense, of Theodosius:
    theo i miliarense.jpg
    As far as I know, my coin is unique. The Pewsey hoard contains a VOTIS V MVLTIS X from Trier with some references I will have to check up on. They date their coin to 393, which is controversial. It's likely to be earlier in Theodosius's reign.
     
  2. Avatar

    Guest User Guest



    to hide this ad.
  3. Severus Alexander

    Severus Alexander find me at NumisForums Supporter

    Just wanted to correct this. (Can't leave something false on the internet, no! :nailbiting:) First, the Noonan catalogue gives different dates for their heavy miliarense of Theodosius. In the listing for the coin they say 378-83, but earlier in the catalogue they say 393-4: "Struck in 393 or 394 to coincide with accession of Magnus Maximus and the quinquennalia of Theodosius I, the coin features a declaration of the celebrations on its reverse, with the legend VOTIS V MVLTIS X spread across four lines within a wreath." This latter is obviously a typo, they meant 383-4 since that's when Maximus's accession was.

    I checked the original reference, Matthew Ball's “An Unlisted Miliarensis Type in the Name of Theodosius I” Numismatic Chronicle 177, 2017, and he shows that the very rare Trier VOTIS V MVLTIS X heavy miliarensia for Theodosius were in fact issued by Magnus Maximus, because there's a reverse die link between a Theo and a Maximus example. So the correct date for their coin is 383 or early 384. Here's their coin:
    Screen Shot 2022-05-17 at 2.51.03 PM.jpg

    As for mine (Constantinople mint), it would likely have been issued upon Theodosius's accession (replacing Valens) in 379 or perhaps 380 when he arrived in Constantinople. But in principle it could have been issued any time in the first few years of his reign, while he was kept busy by the Goths. He would have had little time for ceremony which perhaps explains the extreme rarity of these kinds of presentation pieces.
     
    Johndakerftw, Edessa, seth77 and 3 others like this.
  4. DonnaML

    DonnaML Well-Known Member

    Edessa and Severus Alexander like this.
  5. dltsrq

    dltsrq Grumpy Old Man

    DonnaML likes this.
  6. DonnaML

    DonnaML Well-Known Member

    Nice articles. It's always exciting to buy known hoard coins, especially from such a recent hoard. I won't post the photos yet, but for anyone interested, the ones I bought were Lots 11 and 82.
     
    Edessa and dltsrq like this.
  7. Edessa

    Edessa Well-Known Member

    Constantius II, AD 337-361. AR Siliqua (20mm, 3.21g, 5h). Constantinople mint, 8th officina. Struck AD 351-355. Obv: D N CONSTAN–TIVS P F AVG; Pearl-diademed, draped, and cuirassed bust right. Rev: VOTIS/ XXX/ MVLTIS/ XXXX in four lines within wreath; C • H. Ref: RIC VIII 102; RSC 342-3j. Good Very Fine, a few faint scratches on obverse. Ex CNG eAuction 323 (26 March 2014), Lot 426. Ex CNG eAuction 476 (9 Sept 2020), Lot 542. From the BLS Collection.
    2012_2.jpg
     
Draft saved Draft deleted

Share This Page