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: Constantine I - Help  (Read 1171 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Crassus

  • Caesar
  • ****
  • Posts: 1267
Constantine I - Help
« on: November 01, 2021, 02:29:05 pm »
Hi for all friends

Need help to confirm the RIC of this Constantine coin struck in Rome, is RIC 176?

18mm. - 2,4 grs

Offline Lech Stępniewski

  • Procurator Caesaris
  • Caesar
  • ****
  • Posts: 2900
    • NOT IN RIC
Re: Constantine I - Help
« Reply #1 on: November 01, 2021, 02:58:34 pm »
No laureate helmet, no gates, so probably RIC VI ROMA 165 (or 167 - bowl-shaped helmet with long crest)
Lech Stępniewski
NOT IN RIC
Poland

Offline Crassus

  • Caesar
  • ****
  • Posts: 1267
Re: Constantine I - Help
« Reply #2 on: November 01, 2021, 03:01:38 pm »
 The campgate show the close gates, is possible see the dots in left gate

Offline Lech Stępniewski

  • Procurator Caesaris
  • Caesar
  • ****
  • Posts: 2900
    • NOT IN RIC
Re: Constantine I - Help
« Reply #3 on: November 01, 2021, 03:29:23 pm »
The campgate show the close gates, is possible see the dots in left gate

If you say so... Then this is an unlisted variety with bust D7 or D2.
Lech Stępniewski
NOT IN RIC
Poland

Offline Crassus

  • Caesar
  • ****
  • Posts: 1267
Re: Constantine I - Help
« Reply #4 on: November 01, 2021, 03:31:51 pm »
You not see the close gate and dots?

Offline Heliodromus

  • Procurator Caesaris
  • Caesar
  • ****
  • Posts: 2176
Re: Constantine I - Help
« Reply #5 on: November 01, 2021, 03:59:35 pm »
This is RIC VI Rome 176 - closed doors and D6 bust.

Here's the D6 and D7 (unlisted for this issue) busts for comparison.


Offline Lech Stępniewski

  • Procurator Caesaris
  • Caesar
  • ****
  • Posts: 2900
    • NOT IN RIC
Re: Constantine I - Help
« Reply #6 on: November 01, 2021, 04:00:23 pm »
You not see the close gate and dots?

On your picture I see the dots very clear.
Lech Stępniewski
NOT IN RIC
Poland

Offline Lech Stępniewski

  • Procurator Caesaris
  • Caesar
  • ****
  • Posts: 2900
    • NOT IN RIC
Re: Constantine I - Help
« Reply #7 on: November 01, 2021, 04:04:19 pm »
This is RIC VI Rome 176 - closed doors and D6 bust.

Well, I see rather D7 with a long crest.



Lech Stępniewski
NOT IN RIC
Poland

Offline Heliodromus

  • Procurator Caesaris
  • Caesar
  • ****
  • Posts: 2176
Re: Constantine I - Help
« Reply #8 on: November 01, 2021, 08:33:10 pm »
Quote
Well, I see rather D7 with a long crest.

I don't believe there is any such thing, although RIC VII's helmet descriptions are so useless that it's not as clear cut as it should be.

In reality there are three types of helmet design/construction seen on the coins: archaic/pseudo-corinthian, ridge and attic/praetorian (as on praetorian relief), each of which may have either type of crest: feather or horse hair (= 3 x 2 total varieties).

Of course RIC VII doesn't actually describe helmet types in general, outside of a few clues in footnotes, but rather gives us bust types such as D2 (& draped D1), D6 (& draped D5) and D7.

Comparing coins to descriptions, it seems that D6 and D7 both refer to ridge helmets, although only the D7 description gives us a clue ("bowl shaped"). The main differentiator of D6 vs D7 is that D7 is described as "high-crested", which seems to mean feather crest vs horsehair crest (which lays flatter vs standing straight up, typically parts in the middle - falling to front and back, and may flow down the back of the helmet). Additionally it should be obvious from the engraving whether an attempt was made to depict individual broad feathers or more closely engraved lines indicating horsehair. RIC's descriptions also say D6 is laureate, but in reality each of D6 and D7 may or may not be laureate, especially on these Rome 318-319 coins, so it's better to use the helmet/crest type as differentiator.

The D2 bust description only says "helmet", not giving any clue whatsoever what it is talking about, and seems to be used as a catch-all for non-ridge helmets. In practice any Constantine helmet pre-318 AD, other than his 313 AD Trier billion (which gives us a preview of his later feather-crested ridge helmet), is going to be archaic/pseudo-corinthian, and *almost* everything after 320 AD is going to be attic/praetorian (with upright decorated browband, and swirly decoration).

The Rome 318-319 period (P-R coinage) is especially confusing since:

a) All three types of helmet, and two types of crest, are in use at this time
b) As they admit in the footnotes, RIC fails to distinguish between archaic/pseudo-corinthian and attic/praetorian helmets, referring to both as "D2", which turns out to be a rather fatal mistake
c) Of the two plate pictures RIC gives us related to helmet types, one is wrong. RIC 143 is listed with a D6 helmet, but illustrated with an archaic/pseudo-corinthian one, which per their convention should be described as D2.

Anyways, I believe D7 "high-crested" is always a feather crest, normally *very* obvious. D6 is a horsehair crest, which may have a fairly broad range of appearance from low lying to fairly high (but then parted, falling to each side, possibly flowing down back of helmet).

I'd say the coin you posted is RIC 213 with a D6 (horsehair crest) helmet. For comparison, here's RIC 214 with a D7 "high crested" (feather crest) helmet.


Offline Lech Stępniewski

  • Procurator Caesaris
  • Caesar
  • ****
  • Posts: 2900
    • NOT IN RIC
Re: Constantine I - Help
« Reply #9 on: November 01, 2021, 09:05:34 pm »
Quote
Well, I see rather D7 with a long crest.

I don't believe there is any such thing, although RIC VII's helmet descriptions are so useless that it's not as clear cut as it should be.

There are two separate problems.

First, how these Rome 318-319 coins should be correctly ("in reality") described, divided etc. etc.

Second, what was Bruun's idea (which may be or may be not correct), because when we ask for a RIC number we should follow Bruun as close as possible. Otherwise, asking for a RIC number (established by Bruun) does not make sense.

And it is obvious that Bruun believed in D7 (bowl-shaped helmet) with long crest. He explicitly mentions such variety in footnote 148, 167 and 214.

The main differentiator of D6 vs D7 is that D7 is described as "high-crested"

I used to think so, but then Lars Ramskold convinced me that the most important thing is just a laurel wreath. All helmets on cuirass bust with laurel wreath are D6. Helmets without wreath and bowl-shaped are D7. And the rest are D2. There are at least two sub-types of D7 (high-crested and with long crest) and also few sub-types of D2.
Lech Stępniewski
NOT IN RIC
Poland

Offline Heliodromus

  • Procurator Caesaris
  • Caesar
  • ****
  • Posts: 2176
Re: Constantine I - Help
« Reply #10 on: November 01, 2021, 09:53:22 pm »
Well, RIC's bust descriptions leave so much unsaid that it's possible there are multiple ways to interpret them that are consistent both with the listings (outside of gross errors such as RIC 214) and the coins.

My goal is to understand the structure of the coinage on it's own merit, and secondarily align that to RIC, but it turns out there's really no conflict.

The most obvious starting point to understand the difference between D6 and D7 is the VLPP coinage which is all D6 and D7 busts (aside from a few non-helmeted Arlelate ones). Looking at the coins we can see these are all (bowl shaped) ridge helmets. On the VLPP coins the presence of laurel wreaths also aligns with RIC's bust descriptions, so we have high crested helmets without laurel wreaths, which must be what RIC is calling D7 busts, and "low crested" helmets with laurel wreaths which must be what RIC is calling D6 busts. The feather vs horsehair depictions on the VLPPs isn't always as good as at Rome, but by looking at the D6 vs D7 busts, we can see the difference.

So now, knowing what RIC VII means by D6 vs D7, we can look at the much more complicated coinage of Rome 318-319 AD. If we focus on the D6/D7 ridge helmets, then we see Rome gives us not two, but four helmet varieties:

1) high crested without laurel wreath = D7
2) high crested *with* laurel wreath
3) "low crested" with laurel wreath = D6
4) "low crested" *without* laurel wreath

RIC is of course silent about the unlisted types 2) and 4), so how should we call them?

Maybe the defining characteristic of a D7 (vs D6) helmet is the "high crest", so we should call 2) a "D7 var" bust, and 4) a "D6 var" bust. Or maybe we should ignore the "high crested" part of RIC's D7 bust description and consider it's lack of a laurel wreath it's real defining characteristic and therefore call 2) a "D6 var", and 4) a "D7 var" ? Or maybe we should call 2) and 4) something else altogether, unrelated to D6 and D7 ?

I don't think these are arbitrary decisions. I would prefer to make a choice of attribution that reflects the structure and sequencing of the coinage, and I believe only one of these choices does that !

Edit: On reconsideration, I'm not sure it makes much difference. There's a general trend from D7 to D6, with most of these "wrong crest" (typically "low-crest D7") busts being part of the transitional, so it doesn't really affect sequencing. The D7 vars are basically late D7s and the (rare) D6 vars early (feather crested) D6s. So, call this guy what you want.

Offline Lech Stępniewski

  • Procurator Caesaris
  • Caesar
  • ****
  • Posts: 2900
    • NOT IN RIC
Re: Constantine I - Help
« Reply #11 on: November 02, 2021, 05:36:25 am »
1) high crested without laurel wreath = D7
2) high crested *with* laurel wreath
3) "low crested" with laurel wreath = D6
4) "low crested" *without* laurel wreath

RIC is of course silent about the unlisted types 2) and 4), so how should we call them?

Sorry, Ben, but I think that you are wrong in emphasizing the type of crest. As I said, Bruun explicitly marks D7 busts high crested and low crested ("long crest").

He also explicitly distinguish on p. 348 "c) a bowl-shaped laureate helmet". So your coin with clear laurel wreath is in my opinion D6 (and ROME 219, not 220), because presence of laurel wreath is more important than the shape of crest. At least in Bruun's practice. Your type 2) is D6. And your type 4) is D7 when bowl-shaped and D2 in other cases.

Of course, you may construct a new typology using shape of crest as a main point of reference. But as long we ask "what would Bruun do" (with particular coin and HIS RIC numbers) the new typology is only a mess (although on the other hand it may be interesting and more clear).


Lech Stępniewski
NOT IN RIC
Poland

Offline Heliodromus

  • Procurator Caesaris
  • Caesar
  • ****
  • Posts: 2176
Re: Constantine I - Help
« Reply #12 on: November 02, 2021, 08:27:52 am »
Well, you can see from the VLPPs that D6 and D7 *both* refer to ridge helmets, differing only in crest type. Who knows why Bruun bothered to called one bowl shaped and the other not, but he did. They are both ridge helmets.

You seem to be interpreting "high crested" as an issue of engraving style rather than something substantive - crest type.

Given that we have two types of crest - feather and horsehair, looking radically different on the coins, and that Bruun's "high crested" appears to refer to this, I'm not sure why you are trying to spin this as me "constructing a new typology based on crest type" !

Let's look at what Bruun actually says on p.348, below.

It sure seems to me that Bruun is:

a) Calling the "bowl-shaped helmet with a long crest extended to the back of the helmet" a D6 bust
b) Constrasting this helmet to the also-bowl-shaped helmet with the "high but short feathery crest" (aka Alfoldi's "monogram-helmet")
c) Referrring to this high feathery crest, bowl-shaped helmet as D7

Maybe you're reading this differently.

I came here to attribute a coin, not to argue, so I'm out.


Offline Lech Stępniewski

  • Procurator Caesaris
  • Caesar
  • ****
  • Posts: 2900
    • NOT IN RIC
Re: Constantine I - Help
« Reply #13 on: November 02, 2021, 09:09:33 am »
Well, you can see from the VLPPs that D6 and D7 *both* refer to ridge helmets, differing only in crest type. Who knows why Bruun bothered to called one bowl shaped and the other not, but he did. They are both ridge helmets.

I think that you will agree that term "ridge helmet" is not used by Bruun. Otherwise, he decided to call "one bowl shaped and the other not". And his attribution is based on this differentiation. So you can't attribute a coin in a way RIC does it and ignore this differentiation.

Of course, you are free to make your own typology, your own numbers and your own attribution. Maybe it would be better than Bruun's.

You seem to be interpreting "high crested" as an issue of engraving style rather than something substantive - crest type.

High crest in RIC VII is probably exclusively connected with bowl-shaped helmet, i.e. when you see only high crest (of triangle shape) you can unerringly guess that the helmet is bowl-shaped. But it does not work in opposite way, because most of D7 busts have high crests but sometimes (as footnotes 148, 167 and 214 shows) D7 has "long crest". How would you deal with that?

It sure seems to me that Bruun is:

a) Calling the "bowl-shaped helmet with a long crest extended to the back of the helmet" a D6 bust

Yes, but only when there is also a clear laurel wreath! It is obvious that you can't call the helmet laureate if there is no laurel wreath!

I agree that Bruun's description is not very clear and this is why I used years ago typology somehow similar to yours. But later I was convinced that D6 ("laur. helmet") without laurel wreath is a nonsense. And of course it is also a nonsense to ignore that helmet is laureate when laurel wreath is clearly visible. It can't be a D7 var. (as you attributed your allegedly ROME 220, which has nice clear laurel wreath).

Maybe you are right and crest type should be also treated as substantive, but laurel wreath is substantive for sure.
Lech Stępniewski
NOT IN RIC
Poland

Offline Heliodromus

  • Procurator Caesaris
  • Caesar
  • ****
  • Posts: 2176
Re: Constantine I - Help
« Reply #14 on: November 02, 2021, 11:25:22 am »
Quote
High crest in RIC VII is probably exclusively connected with bowl-shaped helmet, i.e. when you see only high crest (of triangle shape) you can unerringly guess that the helmet is bowl-shaped. But it does not work in opposite way, because most of D7 busts have high crests but sometimes (as footnotes 148, 167 and 214 shows) D7 has "long crest". How would you deal with that?

In those p.348 notes we see Bruun refer to "high but short feathery crest", so I wouldn't assume that "long" (opposite of "short") refers to the same dimension as "high". I can guess what he might mean, but without photos of these specimens there is no point.

Let's also note that Bruun describes himself as confused with helmet typology and having kept poor notes. Certainly a D7 bust with a jewel diadem (148 footnote) seems highly suspect. Again we need the photo.

There are certainly some transitonal varieties that I have not discussed - no point if we can't even agree on the basics.

Offline Lech Stępniewski

  • Procurator Caesaris
  • Caesar
  • ****
  • Posts: 2900
    • NOT IN RIC
Re: Constantine I - Help
« Reply #15 on: November 02, 2021, 11:58:05 am »
without photos of these specimens there is no point.

Yes, that's a pity because even circa 5 photos would ultimately explain Bruun's intentions. And now we're doomed to guess what the coins Bruun described might have looked like.

Many coins from ROME 143-224 listed in RIC are in Vienna (also this one with jewel diadem). Perhaps looking at these coins would explain something.
Lech Stępniewski
NOT IN RIC
Poland

Offline Lech Stępniewski

  • Procurator Caesaris
  • Caesar
  • ****
  • Posts: 2900
    • NOT IN RIC
Re: Constantine I - Help
« Reply #16 on: November 05, 2021, 01:27:30 pm »
Good news! Dr. Klaus Vondrovec (director of the Münzkabinett of the Kunsthistorisches Museum Wien) kindly complied with my request and uploaded pictures of some coins we discussed in this thread.

This is RIC VII ROME 148, officina T. Bust marked by Bruun as D7 and additionally described in footnote as "with long low crest, but with jewel diadem".



https://www.ikmk.at/object?lang=en&id=ID204609

This is RIC VII ROME 167, officina T. Bust also marked D7 and also described in footnote as "with long crest"



https://www.ikmk.at/object?lang=en&id=ID204596

And this is another RIC VII ROME 167. Of course also D7 but this time from officina S and with "proper" high-crest

 

https://www.ikmk.at/object?lang=en&id=ID204594

This is RIC VII ROME 176. Marked as D6 (laurel wreath!) and additionally described in footnote: "V. coin, off. P with high feathery crest"

 

https://www.ikmk.at/object?lang=en&id=ID204595

I am glad that my intuitions were correct and Bruun marked as D7 helmets with high-crest and also helmets with long crest (in Ben's terminology "horsehair crest"). And he marked as D6 helmets with laurel wreath and high crest.

So I can only repeat that:

Ben's 2) high crested *with* laurel wreath" - is D6
and
Ben's 4) "low crested" *without* laurel wreath - is D7 when bowl-shaped and D2 in other cases.
Lech Stępniewski
NOT IN RIC
Poland

Offline Lech Stępniewski

  • Procurator Caesaris
  • Caesar
  • ****
  • Posts: 2900
    • NOT IN RIC
Re: Constantine I - Help
« Reply #17 on: November 05, 2021, 01:48:44 pm »
And now I am inclined to say, that the coin posted by young on the beginning of this thread has bust D7 and (probably) gate closed, so it is unlisted variety which should be placed after ROME 176.
Lech Stępniewski
NOT IN RIC
Poland

Offline Heliodromus

  • Procurator Caesaris
  • Caesar
  • ****
  • Posts: 2176
Re: Constantine I - Help
« Reply #18 on: November 05, 2021, 03:15:58 pm »
Yes, it seems that (despite his bust descriptions) Bruun was only using the presence/absence of a laurel wreath to attribute as D6 vs D7.

Quote
This is RIC VII ROME 148, officina T. Bust marked by Bruun as D7 and additionally described in footnote as "with long low crest, but with jewel diadem".

I suppose the riveted rim was his "diadem".

Quote
This is RIC VII ROME 167, officina T. Bust also marked D7 and also described in footnote as "with long crest"

So, not only do we have Bruun on p.348 referring to one "bowl shaped" helmet as D6, but here we have him referring to a "D6-shaped" helmet as D7, underscoring the point that it's only the laurel wreath that he used for attribution.

Quote
This is RIC VII ROME 176. Marked as D6 (laurel wreath!) and additionally described in footnote: "V. coin, off. P with high feathery crest"

At least he's being consistent - a "high-crested D6". These are pretty rare. Out of 500+ coins from this period I only have a couple of dozen ones varying from the cannonical D6/D7 descriptions, and the majority of those are low-crested D7s vs high-crested D6s.

There's a bunch of other (unrelated) coins that I with Vienna would provide photos for. They generally seem to provide photos only of their best condition coins, not the rare ones not to be found elsewhere that would be more interesting.

Offline SC

  • Tribunus Plebis Perpetuus
  • Procurator Monetae
  • Caesar
  • *****
  • Posts: 6068
    • A Handbook of Late Roman Bronze Coin Types 324-395.
Re: Constantine I - Help
« Reply #19 on: November 07, 2021, 08:56:33 am »
While these new images (thanks for getting and posting them Lech) help resolve our understanding what Bruun meant with his helmet codings, it also clearly demonstrates, at least to me, that his codings are nearly useless for really understanding the coinage.

As Ben noted, in effect Bruun had little care for the actual form of the helmet and seemed intent only on the presence of the laurel wreath.  And even this is not entirely consistent.  For example, as far as I can tell Trier 231, shown on plate 4, is reported to have D6 - Laureate Helmet - but has no laureate wreath.  Same for Rome 143 on plate 7.  Neither of these have visible laurel leaves nor do they have visible ties behind the head.  I can't tell whether Constantinople 143 on plate 19 has a laurel wreath or not.  So, by my count as many as three of the 12 examples in his plates with a type designated as "laureate helmet" type D6, H7, H9, N1 without an actual laureate wreath.

What we have in Bruun appears to me to be akin to having a system that classifies cars based on their color, not their make and model.  A laurel wreath can be added to any helmet type - whether a separate wreath or an embossed decoration on the helmet rim itself.  In that way it is just a decoration very similar to the presence or absence of other decoration on the helmet such as stars.  Now you could argue that the presence or absence of the laurel wreath is important for symbolizing something particular vis-a-vis an un-laureled helmet. 

And I agree with Ben there is no diadem - the row of dots between two parallel lines is clearly the lower riveted band of the helmet, as the middle vertical decoration visible on many helmets is the riveted cross-band.  These are entirely consistent with the late Roman bandhelm family of helmets.

What we really need, in my opinion, to advance our understanding of the coinage of this period is a system that categorizes the form of helmet (body, visor, neck and ear guards), the form of plume(s), and decoration. 

SC

SC
(Shawn Caza, Ottawa)

Offline Lech Stępniewski

  • Procurator Caesaris
  • Caesar
  • ****
  • Posts: 2900
    • NOT IN RIC
Re: Constantine I - Help
« Reply #20 on: November 07, 2021, 10:04:02 am »
What we really need, in my opinion, to advance our understanding of the coinage of this period is a system that categorizes the form of helmet (body, visor, neck and ear guards), the form of plume(s), and decoration. 

It would be nice but it is easy to go too far. Coins are (sorry for reminding the obvious) small, artistic depictions, not a sale catalogue of real armament. These depictions are sometimes conventional and even anachronistic. But sometimes also shows preferences of particular engraver. In fact we now nothing what was really important on this depictions, so we always impose our own convention.

If one wants to go into details to establish a chronology, perhaps a better way is to study die links.

ROME 143 is actually D2 and even Bruun admitted that wreath on helmet is "not quite certain" (noted as D2 on Not in RIC)

TRIER 231 is probably a typo (also noted on Not in RIC)

CONSTANTINOPLE 143 is Urbs Roma, you probably mean 144. I agree that picture in RIC is poor but other specimens show clear wreath:



Lech Stępniewski
NOT IN RIC
Poland

 

All coins are guaranteed for eternity