Duhh. Gert you are absolutely right about the "prototype". I got so excited to see the "protoype" Rick chose (I love that
type) that the backwards N in the
exergue blinded me to the fact that the right
field has only the one mark and therefore
Siscia and Thes varieties are a much more likely prototype.
Had the right
field had the three marks typical of those early Eatsern issues.... Anyway, in the sober light of day I stand well
corrected.
(Rick, sorry for leading you astray. The protoype you showed was the 312-313 era but as Gert says the more likely protoype for yours is a later Balkan issue which could date as late as 321 or even 324.)
Gert, you are right that many imitatives circulate within the Empire. But was there a difference in those with the "blundered lettering? I would like to know more about what the
hoard evidence says about the "blundered
legend type" imitatives. What sources do you have for
hoard information on those? I have yet to find the distinction between
types of imitatives in anything I have read yet. It is onmy "to do" list to look into this one day.
The UK case is interesting as lots of imitatives of
Gloria Exerctivs and FTRs circulated in Britian and some were very crude. However, they generally shrunk greatly in size so the question of
legend is not as relevant as it is with the full-size imitatives like the VLPPs. In effect you can't really see the legends on the cruder ones to tell if they were faithful or blundered.
I have read before the theory that the legends were purposely blundered on imitatives to set them aside as a group (and at least one author claimed that it was to
help avoid the charge of lese majeste/treason) but I have not looked into the evidence enough. There are certainly far more imitatives done with
good lettering and in a close to original
style but
still easily detectable as imitatives so clearly the need to distinguish them from originals by lettering was not a universal need.
So to me it seems that there must be a different solution to the blundered letter imitatives. Either a different
area of circulation or perhaps it is the theory you mentioned about distinguishing them but it only
applied in some times and some areas. I would like to look into it more to see how
contemporary the various classes of imitatives are. Isn't the
VLPP a case where you get many with blundered but also many with faithful inscriptions?? If so wouldn't that complicate your arguement that they did it to distinguish them?
Shawn