FORVM`s Classical Numismatics Discussion Board
Numismatic and History Discussion Forums => Coin of the Day => Topic started by: leetoone on March 26, 2006, 07:06:02 am
-
On the surface, a common coin in excellent condition, but it appears to have a cross between the two standards. The mintmark in the exergue is difficult to read but could be R*B. I cannot find any similar mintmark listed. Anyone out there got something similar?
-
Perhaps RIC (Aquileia) 125, p407?
Steve
-
Thanks Steve!
How did I miss that one ::)
I first thought it was a listed but scarce mintmark, then looked it up on Helvetica's pages and could not find it.
I have now checked in my RIC as you advised and have found it. I shouldn't rush to post!
Still a nice find. Another one from the Nether Compton hoard.
Lee
-
Having checked again, I now see they are listed on Helvetica. My poor eyesight mistaking them for an asterisk!
-
This mark was only used on Gloria Exercitvs, not on the contemporary Constantinopolis & Vrbs Roma, although the following Aquileia "F" issue included all three active types.
On some of these the cross consists of a serif'ed "T" with a large round dot making the top "upright" (this is the only way Guido Bruck's "Die Spatromische Kupferpragung.." depicts it - see also Num. Chron. 1997), but on others it's clearly a two crossed lines construction. It's not obvious what was the cannonical form, or the intention - a T, some form of cross (commissa/imissa/?) , or possibly a deliberately ambiguous symbol?
Given Constantine's prediliction for T-F control marks, I've wondered if these consequetive marks should be taken that way, but on balance I'm more inclined to assume it was meant as a some type of cross. We do also sometimes see what appears to be a deliberate long cross (vs the more common "+" greek cross) on the emperor's standard of the Fel Temp "2 captives" type.
From what I can recall it was at one of the church councils during Constantine's time that the cross was formally adopted as a Christian symbol - earlier it had been rejected by the apologist Minucius Felix as being a pagan symbol, and it seems quite likely that it's use as a Christian symbol grew out of it's existing usage taking adavantage of the crux immissa symbolism, notwithstanding the crux simplex (stauros) originally attested in the bible (& depicted in some early engravings).
Ben
-
Ben
Thanks for the references. I recently bought a copy of Num.Chron. 1997 but hadn't had time to look at it yet.
I will now!
Lee