27
My latest arrivals include this Valentinian II solidus. I question the attribution to RIC IX 69a by the auctioneer and the prior attribution to RIC IX 46c2 on a prior dealer tag that was included with the lot.
Auction description:
Valentinian II, Western Roman Empire (AD 375-392). AV solidus (20mm, 4.46 gm, 6h). Constantinople, 8th officina, 25 August AD 383-28 August AD 388. D N VALENTINI-ANVS P F AVG, pearl-diademed, draped, and cuirassed bust of Valentinian II right, seen from front / CONCORDI-A AVGGG H, Constantinopolis seated facing on throne, helmeted head right, right foot on prow, grounded scepter in right hand, globe in outstretched left hand; CONOB in exergue. RIC IX 69a.
There may be two errors of fact going on: (1) The pearl diadem may have a rosette on the obverse bust. (2) The throne may be ornamented with lions heads. Tell me if you agree.
That said, getting the correct attribution is not so easy. Using RIC IX is sweet sorrow, with its myriad codes, references to other entries, and scant photographs. I narrowed down the choices by the usual diagnostic elements. Mint > Periods > Obverse Legend (naming emperor) > Metal > Denomination > and (b) reverse type, legends, officinas, and mint-mark.
Valentinian II only appears in period III, IV, V, and VI (375-392 AD), but no coins were attributed to him in period III and no gold coins in VI, leaving only period IV and V. For period IV, the obverse legend D N VALENTINI-ANVS P F AVG matches code (2c). The rosette-diademed bust matches code (B). The reverse legend CONCORDI-A AVGGG H and type matches #46(d)2, presuming the lion heads throne. That’s not a million miles away from the earlier attribution to 46(c)2, which does not capture the rosette diadem, but does recognize the lion heads on the throne. The auction attribution to RIC IX 69(a) doesn’t capture the lion heads or the rosette. So am I mistaking the pearl diadem for the rosette (which includes the two strands of pears)?