Numismatic and History Discussion Forums > Roman Coins Discussion Forum

4th Century head gear

(1/1)

dougsmit:

Since the question came up, I'm posting this image that shows the major head gear varieties of the period minus helmeted (complex) and, of course, the new hat currently being discussed on Moneta-L.  This does not address bust types (draped, cuirassed etc.) but that will have to be another picture before this becomes a web page.  I selected the 7 styles listed in RIC VIII but did not have handy an example of each style from RIC VIII period so I used some earlier examples (play the game: Guess who is shown here).  I added Radiate which does not exist in VIII but is found in VII.   What else should be added to this picture to make it more useful to beginners in the hobby?  Let me know if you see any errors.  Excuse the cross posting but I felt this belongs in the beginner or general areas more than the COD where the question arose.

Some errors on this photo have been changed so some of the comments below may no longer apply.  I hope new errors were not introduced in the process.

Doug Smith

dougsmit:
Sorry for the error.  Did you also note that the coin illustrated for VII 553 Heraclea 92 on plate 17 is not looking upward as an E4?  I see a double row of dots in the diadem (plain?).  Checking,  I don't seem to have a decent rosette diadem coin since all seem to be rosette and laurel.  I apologize to anyone I confused by my error.

Doug Smith

dougsmit:

In searching for appropriate coins to use for the group photo that started this topic I learned a lot that I did not know about diadems.  I am still confused but much of that is unwillingness to write off RIC distinctions as a lost cause.  The image above shows two diadems.  On top is a Constans/Thessalonika RIC VIII, page 411 #101 (or 100?) that appears to (maybe possibly???) be a code 4 rosette without laurel.  I put it in that slot on my image but I still see the possibility that a less worn and better struck example from the same die might show tiny leaves.  Opinion?

Below is a Constans/Lyons RIC VIII, page 182 #87 if you accept this as rosette.  The diadem seems a mixed affair from left to right: Large jewel, two dots, box with one dot and a row of pearls on top and one lone dot below the first in the row.  The ear hides the rest of the lower dots if the intention was a row of pearls.  There is nothing round about the device we could call a rosette (not the forehead jewel) and the first two dots could be a band with one pearl on each edge.  I prefer calling this a rosette (but previously, in error, I called that row of dotted boxes rosettes) so some may see those edge dots as pearls and call this a code 3 diadem.  Opinions?  I would appreciate seeing any photos anyone has showing other examples of RIC 84-89 (page 182) for comparison.

For that matter, I would enjoy seeing any clear examples of RIC VIII coins with code 4 diadems (clearly lacking laurel).  Most code 4 listings seem to be small coins and the condition of many will probably make it a hard call.  This points up a hard fact that many coins can never be attributed to RIC numbers due to their lack of condition and the flyspeck differences that separate some issues.  

Doug Smith

TKE96:
Doug-
let me just say thank you for your wonderful image for the types of head gear.  This type of tool is invaluable for many who just need that extra visual confirmation.

I look forward to see some educated opinions and follow up pictures as this is definitely a weak area for me!

Joe Sermarini:
Here is an interesting one:

Magnentius, 18 January 350 - 10 August 353 A.D.
Ex Aiello Collection.

A1180. Bronze centenionalis, RIC 109, aEF, 5.15g, 22.6mm, 225o, Lugdunum mint, 350-353 A.D.; obverse D N MAGNENTIVS P F AVG, rosette-diademed, draped and cuirassed bust right; reverse FELICITAS REIPVBLICE, Magnentius standing left holding Victory on globe in right and standard with X on ensign in left, FPLC in ex; bold, nice colors, recognizable portrait on reverse!; $190.00

I looked at it and thought pearl diademed, but then read my own attribution written earlier.  Apparently I can't even agree with myself.  Actually the rosette attribution was written by someone else.  I have always considered the squares as just connections between the two strands of pearls and therefore just a pearl diadem.  

The next one I have in the catalog as rosette, but those are probably leaves

Constans, 337-350 A.D.
Ex Aiello Collection.

A1068. Bronze AE3/4, RIC 8, VF+, 1.24g, 15.3mm, 0o, Rome mint, 337-340 A.D.; obverse D N FL CONSTANS AVG, rosette-diademed, draped and cuirassed bust right; reverse SECVRITAS REIP, Securitas standing right holding scepter in right and leaning left elbow on column, R leaf [ ] in ex; rare; $75.00

Here is an interesting diadem:

Valentinian II, 17 November 375 - 15 May 392 A.D.
Ex Aiello Collection.

A1272. Copper AE4, RIC 57a, VF, 1.29g, 12.5mm, 180o, Rome mint, 383-387 A.D.; obverse D N VALENTINIANVS P F AVG, diademed (unusual diadem with large jewel), draped and cuirassed bust right; reverse VICTORIAE AVGGG, R Q in ex; scarce; $40.00

The next would be rosette and pearl, but I have always called that just rosette.
 
Constans, 337-350 A.D.
Ex Aiello Collection.

A1081. Bronze AE3/4, RIC 183, EF, 1.47g, 15.1mm, 180o, Siscia mint, 347-348 A.D.; obverse CONSTANS P F AVG, rosette-diademed, draped and cuirassed bust right; reverse VICTORIAE DD AVGGQ NN, two victories facing one another, each holding a wreath and palm frond, dot in center ASIS in ex; price reduced; $22.00
 

 

Navigation

[0] Message Index