Classical Numismatics Discussion
  Welcome Guest. Please login or register. 10% Off Store-Wide Sale Until 2 April!!! Explore Our Website And Find Joy In The History, Numismatics, Art, Mythology, And Geography Of Coins!!! Expert Authentication - Accurate Descriptions - Reasonable Prices - Coins From Under $10 To Museum Quality Rarities Welcome Guest. Please login or register. 10% Off Store-Wide Sale Until 2 April!!! Explore Our Website And Find Joy In The History, Numismatics, Art, Mythology, And Geography Of Coins!!! Support Our Efforts To Serve The Classical Numismatics Community - Shop At Forum Ancient Coins

New & Reduced


Author Topic: Double Beaded Obverse Constantinopolis  (Read 834 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Ken Dorney

  • Praetorian
  • **
  • Posts: 71
    • Ancient Coins & Antiquities
Double Beaded Obverse Constantinopolis
« on: August 26, 2015, 02:22:47 pm »
Has anyone ever seen a double beaded border like this one?  I've looked at it for 20 years and still cant decide what it is.  I am sure an overstrike will be suggested, but the two borders are so perfectly aligned the odds of an overstrike like this happening seem astronomical.  What are the opinions?  Overstrike or intentional design?
Ken
"Man has not evolved an inch from the slime that spawned him".  Dr. Jeckyll
http://www.coolcoins.com

Offline dougsmit

  • Tribunus Plebis Perpetuus
  • Procurator Monetae
  • Caesar
  • *****
  • Posts: 2126
    • Ancient Greek & Roman Coins
Re: Double Beaded Obverse Constantinopolis
« Reply #1 on: August 26, 2015, 04:04:42 pm »
What is the weight and diameters of the three circles of dots?  The photos make the reverse circle look larger than the outside circle of the obverse.  The reverse is a one standard model which should be a bit smaller than a two standard model.  One possibility I considered is that the coin is very early after the reduction but a reduced size die made on a die blank that already had a circle of the earlier diameter on it should show the reverse here match the smaller circle.  We also have to ask when this and any other 'mule' types were made.  I always tended toward the idea that the mules were made toward the end of the Commemoratives when the reverse dies were used up but one this widely struck would make more sense as a pattern coin were the reverse a standard ship rather than a 'mule'.  These are not theories based on evidence but brainstorming directions that could be produced and deleted by the dozen before finding one that fits.  You also have to ask if there is any chance that the coin is unofficial or even modern.

I do not own a Constantinopoli mule of this mint.  Can you produce images of normal coins of this issue and mint that compare in style with the obverse bust?  I'm particularly interested in the twin 'things' hanging on the neck.  My coin below is 1.95g.  Should the busts be more similar?  To answer that, I'd want to see more specimens. 

Thanks for sharing the interesting coin.

Offline dougsmit

  • Tribunus Plebis Perpetuus
  • Procurator Monetae
  • Caesar
  • *****
  • Posts: 2126
    • Ancient Greek & Roman Coins
Re: Double Beaded Obverse Constantinopolis
« Reply #2 on: August 26, 2015, 04:13:31 pm »
http://www.acsearch.info/search.html?term=constantinopoli+heraclea&category=1-2&en=1&de=1&fr=1&it=1&es=1&ot=1&images=1&currency=usd&thesaurus=1&order=0&company=

After reviewing the coins on acsearch, the style here seems perfectly normal for Heraclea including the pendants so I'd tend to accept the coin as official.  I can not find a coin with anything approaching those margins which brings us back the the question of weight and diameters.

Offline SC

  • Tribunus Plebis Perpetuus
  • Procurator Monetae
  • Caesar
  • *****
  • Posts: 6068
    • A Handbook of Late Roman Bronze Coin Types 324-395.
Re: Double Beaded Obverse Constantinopolis
« Reply #3 on: August 29, 2015, 06:18:17 am »
Very interesting coin.

This type is a fascinating type which is not fully understood. 

There are Constantinopolis / Gloria 2 standard pairings but they appear to be very rare and I only know of ones from Cyzicus.

On the other hand the Constantinopolis / Gloria 1 standard pairings are fairly common from Heraclea (like your example) and Constantinople, rarer from Nicomedia, and quite rare from Thessalonika and Cyzicus.

Unfortunately there are few good clues in terms of dating.  Most of these mints used the same mint mark throughout the reduced size period making it hard to narrow it down.  The rare Cyzicus coins do give one important clue in that they are found with two mint marks - SMKA (widely thought to be the first post-reduction mark as it was the pre-reduction mark) and SMKA :dot: (usually thought to be the second post-reduction mark).  There are a few other Cyzicus mint marks in this period that it has not been found with. 

Interestingly almost the same pattern exists with the Urbs Roma / Gloria pairings.

What can we conclude from this?

They are too common at at least two mints for them to be typical mules.  They must have been intentional issues at at least Heraclea and Constantinople

Given that they exist at all the Pontic area mints, and in both Constantinopolis and Urbs Roma types, we have to consider it possible that even those from Cyzicus, Nicomedia and Thessalonika were also official issues, though struck in much smaller numbers than those from Heraclea and Constantinople.  These five mints might have been under the jurisdiction of a single supervisor.

The fact that they occur in two mint marks at Cyzicus might mean that they were struck for a relatively longer period - though in low numbers - and not just for a brief time such as just after the reduction.

The very rare example with Gloria two standard reverse which is found at Cyzicus for both Constantinopolis and Urbs Roma could be either a sign of some sort of sloppiness or administrative chaos at the mint OR it could be a sign that this type began to be struck at Cyzicus just prior to the size reduction and then spread to the other Pontic mints.  This is by far the most speculative of these conclusions

As to Ken's example I agree with Doug that it seems to indicate it dates from very near the reduction phase though the exact diameters of all pearl rings would be very useful.

Shawn

SC
(Shawn Caza, Ottawa)

Offline Ken Dorney

  • Praetorian
  • **
  • Posts: 71
    • Ancient Coins & Antiquities
Re: Double Beaded Obverse Constantinopolis
« Reply #4 on: August 31, 2015, 10:33:11 am »
The obverse inner ring is 14.5mm, the outer 16.5 (as is the reverse ring).  The weight is 1.72 grams.
Ken
"Man has not evolved an inch from the slime that spawned him".  Dr. Jeckyll
http://www.coolcoins.com

Offline SC

  • Tribunus Plebis Perpetuus
  • Procurator Monetae
  • Caesar
  • *****
  • Posts: 6068
    • A Handbook of Late Roman Bronze Coin Types 324-395.
Re: Double Beaded Obverse Constantinopolis
« Reply #5 on: August 31, 2015, 03:28:17 pm »
That fits Doug's transition theory well. 

The larger two standard series averages about 2.3 grams and 17 mm PRD.  The smaller one standard about 1.5-1.6 grams and 15-16 mm PRD. 

So yours looks like a small flan (by weight) with both the proper smaller diameter ring and the larger older ring.  So a die that either had the larger ring, but no design details, engraved on prior to the reduction and then was finished soon after the reduction, or one that was fully engraved soon after the reduction but where the engraver started with the wrong diameter out of habit - the way we accidentally write the old year on the date for the first part of January.

Shawn
SC
(Shawn Caza, Ottawa)

 

All coins are guaranteed for eternity