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: A thread for scarce and/or interesting GLORIA EXERCITVS soldiers & standards.  (Read 55072 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Romanorum

  • Conservator
  • Consul
  • ***
  • Posts: 155
    • Romanorum Ancient Coins
GLOR dot IA is only minted at Cyzicus for the one standard type. Some of them are quite uncommon, on the first page of this thread I posted a pretty interesting unrecorded variation for Constantine II as Augustus, bust left with ladder shaped diadem.

Wonderful coin indeed! Especially with the diadem! As Vincent mentioned earlier, Wildwinds only has this type for Constans. Have you submitted it to Dane at Wildwinds?


Offline Romanorum

  • Conservator
  • Consul
  • ***
  • Posts: 155
    • Romanorum Ancient Coins
Here's an interesting Barbarous imitative, purportedly of Trier.

Offline Vincent

  • Caesar
  • ****
  • Posts: 685
Re: Eye to Heaven interesting GLORIA EXERCITVS soldiers & standards.
« Reply #52 on: February 07, 2014, 07:40:39 am »
Cute Eye upward to Heaven that is unusual to say the least. Hard to say if it was intentional. This was the last emission of Antioch of this long running GLORIA EXERCITVS series (a brief VICT AVG was struck before the coinage reform of 354). The flan was so small the Celator had a hard time with the mintmark letters, running out of room and they themselves appear going upwards too!
Does anyone else have a Eye to Heaven they like to share?
CONSTANTIVS AVG Head right with diadem
GLORIA EXERCITVS 2 soldiers with standard (line of dots!) with 2 dots on each side above!
RIC VIII 54
This is without a doubt one of the MOST common Roman coins ever!
I do not know which is more common, the Camp Gate issue or this one?

Offline Vincent

  • Caesar
  • ****
  • Posts: 685
Dealer photo (coin sold) of a scarce/rare example of the famous (at least here) VM title issue of Constantine II from Heraclea issued from the third officina.

Offline SC

  • Tribunus Plebis Perpetuus
  • Procurator Monetae
  • Caesar
  • *****
  • Posts: 6068
    • A Handbook of Late Roman Bronze Coin Types 324-395.
Wow!  And a beautiful example at that.

Shawn
SC
(Shawn Caza, Ottawa)

Offline Vincent

  • Caesar
  • ****
  • Posts: 685
Shawn that was indeed a exceptional example of the VM Constantine II.
Here is one that I just added to my collection that is equally as interesting from the Aquileia mint in northern Italy under Constans control minted for his older brother, Constantine II.
After the death of their father, the three brothers issued death commemorative issues. These are one of the most easily acquired death issue of the Roman series.
However, Constans was against such issues and refused to mint legit types honoring DIVO CONSTANTINE and went along with regular 2 soldiers/ one standard type for their Dad.
The one here below is the "death issue" for Constantine with his title "MAX"
and the issue for Constantine II has the Pius Felix (PF) inscribed

Offline Frans Diederik

  • Procurator Caesaris
  • Caesar
  • ****
  • Posts: 2918
  • carpe diem, vita brevis est!
Not that this coin is extremely rare or special, but just a nice quality from a scarcer mint.


Frans

Offline Caesarea

  • Consul
  • ***
  • Posts: 126
This is my rarest GE coin minted at Arles

Offline agord

  • Consul
  • ***
  • Posts: 199
Not sure how rare this is but I have not found many 2 standard Delmatius coins.
RIC VII Constantinople 84, R5 in RIC

Offline Gert

  • Procurator Monetae
  • Procurator Monetae
  • Caesar
  • *****
  • Posts: 1483
    • My Vcoins store
I am wondering if this coin is Arelate mint Constantine I (RIC 394) or a Siscia mint Constantine II (RIC 89/95). I couldn't find any non-stylistic criteria, except for the ex mark of course, to decide for either of these attributions, so I am hoping to see if anybody has some parallel examples.
Regards
Gert

Metrology: 14mm,

Offline BiancasDad

  • Caesar
  • ****
  • Posts: 1070
Hi Gert,

Imho, the bust style is very typical for Lyons which would make Constantine II the only option.

RIC VIII 6 or 7 but I can't find any examples at the moment.

-Kurt

Offline Gert

  • Procurator Monetae
  • Procurator Monetae
  • Caesar
  • *****
  • Posts: 1483
    • My Vcoins store
Lyon! I didn't realise there was a christogram issue there as well. RIC 7 with the rosette diadem.

Definitely not Siscia. I think you are right that style would indicate Lyon. Thanks very much for your opinion on the matter, which pretty much closes the case.
Regards
Gert

Offline Akropolis

  • Procurator Monetae
  • Caesar
  • *****
  • Posts: 2762
    • Akropolis Ancient Coins
Great discussion.
So, is the image below (RIC VIII 96) properly attributed to Constantine I?
Thanks.
PeteB

Offline SC

  • Tribunus Plebis Perpetuus
  • Procurator Monetae
  • Caesar
  • *****
  • Posts: 6068
    • A Handbook of Late Roman Bronze Coin Types 324-395.
Constantine II.  He stole daddy's title at a few mints....

Struck well after Constantine I's death.  Likely circa 340.

Shawn
SC
(Shawn Caza, Ottawa)

Offline Akropolis

  • Procurator Monetae
  • Caesar
  • *****
  • Posts: 2762
    • Akropolis Ancient Coins
Thank you, Shawn!
PeteB

Offline agord

  • Consul
  • ***
  • Posts: 199
 Received this one the other day. A rare legend for Constans, FL I CONSTANS NOB CAES. This legend was used only by the mint at Heraclea, and only on the last issue of the 2 standard type and the first issue of the 1 standard type.
RIC 7 Heraclea 141
18mm, 1.94g

Offline SC

  • Tribunus Plebis Perpetuus
  • Procurator Monetae
  • Caesar
  • *****
  • Posts: 6068
    • A Handbook of Late Roman Bronze Coin Types 324-395.
"Fli you fools!!!"

(Sorry couldn't resist.)

I have one with the same mint mark but have never seen one of the one-standard versions.

SC


SC
(Shawn Caza, Ottawa)

Wojciech U

  • Guest
I think it's perfect topic to ask my question.

I was just rumaging through my unsorted constantine pile, thinking there are only common types there. And I stumbled across this AQP.

If I attribute it correctly it's Constantine I, Aquileia RIC VII 118. Question is - what's that thing between standards? It's neither cross nor F, that happen on issues from this mint. Or maybe I'm paranoid and it's just some side part of standard?

If my attribution is correct - RIC says R4, but what's Your experience. How often do You see this particular type?

Thanks in advance,
duoluo

Offline SC

  • Tribunus Plebis Perpetuus
  • Procurator Monetae
  • Caesar
  • *****
  • Posts: 6068
    • A Handbook of Late Roman Bronze Coin Types 324-395.
I don't think there is anything between the standards.  Some standards have small projections which stick out at roughly a 90 degree angle near the bottom.  They are likely some sort of foot rest for planing the standard in the ground.  Yours might have these.

I also think that your coin might be a contemporary copy - an ancient fake.  The legends are somewhat crude.  The standards lean over.  The soldiers are uneven.  The diadem is unusual.

SC


SC
(Shawn Caza, Ottawa)

Offline Frans Diederik

  • Procurator Caesaris
  • Caesar
  • ****
  • Posts: 2918
  • carpe diem, vita brevis est!
Just to rekindle this potentially interesting thread, I stumbled upon the following coin:
CONSTANTI-NVS MAX AVG rosette diademed and draped bust of Constantine right /
GLOR-IA EXERC-ITVS, two soldiers with spears on ezach side of a standard with an annulet. CONS in the exergue.
What apears on the photo as deposit, is for the larger part the original silvering.
Constantinople regularly used the mintmark CONS without an officina letter/symbol, but, as far as I know, not on this type.
Who can shed some more light on this matter?

Frans

Offline SC

  • Tribunus Plebis Perpetuus
  • Procurator Monetae
  • Caesar
  • *****
  • Posts: 6068
    • A Handbook of Late Roman Bronze Coin Types 324-395.
Likely an error.  CONS occurred on the SECURITAS type just before this and then on the Quadriga type right after due to flan size / design but should have officinal number on your issue.

SC
SC
(Shawn Caza, Ottawa)

Offline Rupert

  • Procurator Caesaris
  • Caesar
  • ****
  • Posts: 1993
I've just discovered this thread and would like to add a coin. I don't own it but missed it on Fleabay years ago, which still bothers me - I let it go at 68.3 Euros. It's a Delmatius GE2 from Nicomedia and would be RIC VII Nic 194, but has the completely unknown obv. legend FL DALMATIUS CAESAR (instead of NOB CAES). All I have is the pictures that I saved back in 2009.

Rupert
Ducunt volentem fata, nolentem trahunt.

Offline SC

  • Tribunus Plebis Perpetuus
  • Procurator Monetae
  • Caesar
  • *****
  • Posts: 6068
    • A Handbook of Late Roman Bronze Coin Types 324-395.
Very neat.  The full CAESAR appears on the silver.  Perhaps that is what the engraver had previously made....

SC
SC
(Shawn Caza, Ottawa)

Offline Merinda

  • Consul
  • ***
  • Posts: 181
Just to rekindle this potentially interesting thread, I stumbled upon the following coin:
CONSTANTI-NVS MAX AVG rosette diademed and draped bust of Constantine right /
GLOR-IA EXERC-ITVS, two soldiers with spears on ezach side of a standard with an annulet. CONS in the exergue.
What apears on the photo as deposit, is for the larger part the original silvering.
Constantinople regularly used the mintmark CONS without an officina letter/symbol, but, as far as I know, not on this type.
Who can shed some more light on this matter?

Frans

Please see a second example of the unlisted coin originally posted by Frans (image re-posted to allow for direct comparison, the new coin shown first). While the flan is a bit short at the place where an officina later might be, the exergual line is complete so that there would at least be some traces of the officina if it had one I think. This second example, struck from different dies, increases the possibility that this was an official (albeit short-lived) issue of Constantine I. RIC VII lists the marks for the start of the 1 standard GLORIA issue as CONS and then CONSA, i.e. that the CONS mark was used first followed by CONSA. The only CONS coin listed is for the SECVRITAS PVBLICA issue of Hanniballianus (number 145) which is placed after the CONSA coins of Constantine I and sons and the city commemoratives (numbers 137 to 144) despite the order implied in the heading of the section (perhaps a layout issue, placing the CONS issue of Hanniballianus after the initial CONSA coins of Constantine I and family allowed for all the Hanniballianus issues to be listed together, i.e. for both the CONS and CONSA marks?).

There is at least 1 precedent for a short-lived mark at the start of a new design eg. Antioch's first 2 soldiers issue (SMANTA) is listed by RIC (number 85) as only being known for Constantine I, before the mark was changed to SMANA, which is known for Constantine I and all the Caesars, and the city commemoratives. (NB SMANTA is now also known for Constantine II, Constantius II, and the city commemoratives, but not (yet?) for Constans or Delmatius per Not in RIC)

Another option could be that it is a coin of Constantine II issued after the death of his father, but this is less likely I think. Per RIC VIII, while the CONS mark is known for Helena and the Quadriga type, barring one rare coin of Constantius II of the GLORIA type (51A with the mark CONSA), all the GLORIA types for Constantinople have heads, rather than draped busts. Also, while some mints included the MAX variant in the obverse legend for Constantine II, Constantius II and Constans post 337, at Constantinople it is only known for Constantius, the aforementioned rare and somewhat anomalous 51A

Weight is 1.63 g

Offline Flav V

  • Caesar
  • ****
  • Posts: 551
Im reading the subject today, nice!

Normally the one standard indicate the weight and size reduce.. but can it be too for the ''memorial'' issue? I mean, is this changing only for the reducing size?
Is it in all mints?
Is there coins with one standard but with same size and weight than the two standards?

 

All coins are guaranteed for eternity