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: First Known Coin of Helena II?  (Read 3879 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline romeman

  • Consul
  • ***
  • Posts: 113
  • ROMA AETERNA
First Known Coin of Helena II?
« on: February 28, 2014, 11:22:23 am »
A rare and interesting coin is offered by Roma Numismatics Auction VII, lot 1321. It is described as "First Known Coin of Helena II" and the details are given: "Helena II AR Heavy Siliqua. Uncertain mint, AD 360. FLAV MAX HELENA AVG, diademed and draped bust right, hair bound in bunch behind / AETERNITAS, Aeternitas standing left, holding globe and rudder set on ground line. 2.84g, 17mm, 5h."

The text to the lot states: "Helena was the daughter of Constantine I and Fausta, sister to Constantine II, Constantius II, Constans and Constantina and half-sister of Crispus. Her paternal grandparents were Constantius I Chlorus and Helena I, and her maternal grandparents were Maximian and Eutropia."

The cataloguer was unaware that this type is not unknown. Another example was for sale 13 June 2002 by Jesus Vico, S.A. in Madrid. In the catalogue it was described as showing Helena the mother of Constantine the Great. A date of 310 AD was given. A metallographic analysis had been made on the coin, showing it to be 80.75% silver, 17.91% copper and 1.34% other.

So who is figured? Almost certainly, Jesus Vico was right in assigning the coin to Helena the elder (but got the date wrong). On Moneta, Rasiel has commented on the Roma Numismatics example, and I subscribe to his conclusion, which agrees with Vico's. The style is consistent with the posthumous coinage of 337-340, especially the hair-do which is identical to that of both Theodora and Helena on the small bronzes struck in their honour after the death of Constantine. Further, the Aeternitas reverse fits well for Helena the elder, who passed away in 328, but not for Helena the younger. The absence of a mint mark often means a special issue struck for local use at a celebration, but there are many exceptions.

Finally, what about the name? The full name of Helena the elder is usually Flavia Julia Helena. Constantine's unlucky wife was named Flavia Maxima Fausta. I think there is a mixup, resulting in the legend FLAV MAX HELENA AVG.

Offline SC

  • Tribunus Plebis Perpetuus
  • Procurator Monetae
  • Caesar
  • *****
  • Posts: 6068
    • A Handbook of Late Roman Bronze Coin Types 324-395.
Re: First Known Coin of Helena II?
« Reply #1 on: March 01, 2014, 02:23:37 am »
You, and Ras, are correct that the diadem looks just like that worn by Helena on her PAX PVBLICA coins of 337 - 340.

The portrait looks a bit more like some of Theodoras from the same time though there is a wide stylistic variety anyway.  Interestingly Theodora also wears the same wide diadem with pearls on coins struck at Rome and Constantinople, though at Treveri she only wears the laurel wreath.

The reverse type looks very similar to the AETERNA PIETAS type struck at Treveri, Lugdunum and Arelate 337 - 340.  Though the figure portrayed is different - it is a helmeted Emperor on the reverse of the AETERNA PIETAS - the pose and engraving style are very similar.  And note of course the legend.  The figure on the AETERNA PIETAS faces right on coins from Arelate and Lugdunum and left (like on this siliqua) on coins from Treveri and Lugdunum.

Despite the MAX in the title I think everything else points to an issue struck by Constantine II, for Helena senior (i.e. his grandmother), during 337 - 340 and most likely at Treveri/Trier.

Shawn
SC
(Shawn Caza, Ottawa)

Offline Poemenius

  • Consul
  • ***
  • Posts: 159
Re: First Known Coin of Helena II?
« Reply #2 on: March 01, 2014, 03:21:48 am »
Thank you guys,
excuse  my English, maybe I will not be able to write very well.....
the first time I read the name Helena II I was laughing...that because an attribution to unknown emperor needs a lot of supported evidences, and of a lot of evidence against a Helena  I attribution.
anyway, I think you are right, both AETERNITAS and MAXIMA make me think to a dead person.

MAXIMA - is from superlative of MAGNUS. maybe in this case is an attribution, and not part of the name... maybe we can read it Flavia The Great Helena Augusta
AETERNITAS - immortality of fame - or eternity

so, Helena II is very very improbable, even for the weight of the coin...if we believe a 360s attribution, the coin so too heavy

Offline Vincent

  • Caesar
  • ****
  • Posts: 685
Re: First Known Coin of Helena II?
« Reply #3 on: March 01, 2014, 06:30:15 am »
So easy to produce a fantasy issue now. Just a while ago I was able to obtain some very authentic looking pressed copies of LRBC of Constantine dynasty I am not stating this coin is one or is a fake, but a red flag goes up. Looks Ok but the surfaces appear to be acid wash.
Other than that, I would throw my hat into the ring of Helena, Mother of Constantine the Great. Style looks like of Western mint (trier maybe) and would fit into the mint production. Thank you for the post and bring this interesting coin to light. Hope it is am original ancient Rome issue.

Offline Genio popvli romani

  • Consul
  • ***
  • Posts: 136
  • ROMA CAPVT MVNDI REGIT ORBIS FRENA ROTVNDI
    • Constantinian coinage website
Re: First Known Coin of Helena II?
« Reply #4 on: March 06, 2014, 04:22:50 am »
First, It seems that obverse and reverse dies are different for each coin.
I would suggest that this obverse legend would be unusual for Helena senior. If it is a posthumous or commemorative issue, we can expect the dative form of  her name, HELENAE like the PAX PVBLICA issues either like the Theodora’s emissions.
If MAX(ima) is considered as the superlative of magna, I would expect the following legend instead of the one I read on the coin: FL (IVL) HELENA(E) MAX AVG.
Romeman, could you, please, give us the weight of the Vico’s coin?

Note that I do not have read the opinion of Ras. I will be pleased to do. Where can I find it?

Offline Poemenius

  • Consul
  • ***
  • Posts: 159
Re: First Known Coin of Helena II?
« Reply #5 on: March 06, 2014, 06:02:45 am »
"Genio popvli romani" you are basically right, but this coin is strange...
the dative is not always necessary in known poshumous coinage.....
you are right when you say "I would expect the following legend instead of the one I read on the coin: FL (IVL) HELENA(E) MAX AVG" - but I was reading it not as Helena Maxima... but instead as
The great Flavia, the Augusta Elena, because if MAX means MAXIMA/MAGNA, it is referred to Flavia, not to Helena....
i would say ... Helena the Augusta and Great Flavia
anyway your expressed opinion is very correct

Offline Poemenius

  • Consul
  • ***
  • Posts: 159
Re: First Known Coin of Helena II?
« Reply #6 on: March 06, 2014, 06:27:41 am »
If this coin is a real Helena II coin, I would thik to a commemorative issue...
few coin, high weith, and "aeternitas" written in the reverse... so minted after her Death in 360 and before Julians Death.

Offline Rich Beale

  • Procurator Caesaris
  • Caesar
  • ****
  • Posts: 663
  • Nec Aspera Terrent
    • ROMA NUMISMATICS
Re: First Known Coin of Helena II?
« Reply #7 on: March 11, 2014, 08:36:51 am »
For the benefit of the doubting Thomases, the Hungarian National Museum confirms the existence of a third specimen, ostensibly from yet another die pair.

I was reading it not as Helena Maxima... but instead as
The great Flavia, the Augusta Elena, because if MAX means MAXIMA/MAGNA, it is referred to Flavia, not to Helena....
i would say ... Helena the Augusta and Great Flavia

This is an erroneous line of reasoning. MAX in this case is derived from Helena's mother's name.

Finally, what about the name? The full name of Helena the elder is usually Flavia Julia Helena. Constantine's unlucky wife was named Flavia Maxima Fausta. I think there is a mixup, resulting in the legend FLAV MAX HELENA AVG.

It is extremely rare to find truly blundered names on Roman coinage; I might accept the possibility of an error on one die, but not on two or three. In any case, the name FLAVIA MAXIMA HELENA is corroborated by Ammianus Marcellinus, who relates the known history of Helena, wife of Julian - see Ammianus Marcellinus, lib XV, c.8; lib XVI, c.10; lib XXI, c.1.

Aeternitas may well here signify a posthumous commemorative issue, but is absolutely appropriate for Julian's wife, who passed away soon after her elevation. A devastated Julian would very appropriately have issued such a commemorative with the Aeternitas reverse, which would be his numismatic recourse now that deification was out of the question. This widens the possible date range slightly to 360-363, though one might surmise such a commemorative would be struck soon after Helena's death, perhaps to be distributed at her funeral or interment ceremony.

Seemingly struck from at least three die pairs, this suggests an issue of not inconsiderable size.

Offline SC

  • Tribunus Plebis Perpetuus
  • Procurator Monetae
  • Caesar
  • *****
  • Posts: 6068
    • A Handbook of Late Roman Bronze Coin Types 324-395.
Re: First Known Coin of Helena II?
« Reply #8 on: March 11, 2014, 09:57:31 am »
Personally, I don't doubt their authenticity.  And as you note 3 obv and 3 rev dies means a non-negligible issue.

What I doubt is its definitive attribution to Helena the younger.  I don't rule out that possibility, but as was noted elsewhere the supposition of coinage for a new figure should rest on a little more substance before it can be fully accepted. 

I also think the extremely close parallels to the style of the coinage of 337 - 340 is an important fact.

Now there was no coinage struck for any woman between 340 and 361 so I guess it is possible that if an obverse portrait for an augusta was required in 361 they would go to the latest female bust style, even if it was 21 years prior, but that is by no means certain.

When I look at those diadems Occam's razor tells me a dating near 337 - 340 is still the most likely scenario in which case we would almost certainly be dealing with Helena the elder.

Shawn
SC
(Shawn Caza, Ottawa)

Offline Rich Beale

  • Procurator Caesaris
  • Caesar
  • ****
  • Posts: 663
  • Nec Aspera Terrent
    • ROMA NUMISMATICS
Re: First Known Coin of Helena II?
« Reply #9 on: March 11, 2014, 10:06:44 am »
Yet, for Occams razor to apply, you have to ignore the clear legend that is wholly incompatible with Helena, mother of Constantine, but which fits perfectly for Helena, wife of Julian.

Instead, the suggested alternative is that whatever mint was striking these made a tremendous error and blundered the empress' name in a way that I can truthfully say I cannot recall having ever seen.

That is far from being the simplest explanation, and is rendered more unlikely still by the identical legend on three different dies.

Offline SC

  • Tribunus Plebis Perpetuus
  • Procurator Monetae
  • Caesar
  • *****
  • Posts: 6068
    • A Handbook of Late Roman Bronze Coin Types 324-395.
Re: First Known Coin of Helena II?
« Reply #10 on: March 11, 2014, 10:31:05 am »
Is Smith's assertion that there is a Helena Flavia Maxima medallion now dis-proven or does such a creature exist?

Also, I don't think the existence of three dies means there could not have been a legend error.  There are errors of engraving, where the engraver simply gets it wrong.  You are correct that these are extremely unlikely to exist on multiple dies.  However, there can also be errors of interpretation where the engraver did not make a mistake but the entire mint staff did.  An example of this occurs with the first issue of bronze for Constantius Gallus at Thessalonica shortly after 15 March 351 which was struck with an obverse legend FL IVL CONSTANTIVS NOB CAES.  Neither FL nor IVL actually applied to Gallus and they disappeared by his second issue.  However, this was not a case of one die, it was an entire issue with multiple dies.  So we have a precedent for such an error in the general time frame we are dealing with.

Once again I am not saying the coin can not be for Helena II I am just saying that there is more than a shadow of doubt, and therefore not enough evidence to declare it certain.

Shawn






SC
(Shawn Caza, Ottawa)

Offline Rich Beale

  • Procurator Caesaris
  • Caesar
  • ****
  • Posts: 663
  • Nec Aspera Terrent
    • ROMA NUMISMATICS
Re: First Known Coin of Helena II?
« Reply #11 on: March 11, 2014, 01:38:02 pm »
An example of this occurs with the first issue of bronze for Constantius Gallus at Thessalonica shortly after 15 March 351 which was struck with an obverse legend FL IVL CONSTANTIVS NOB CAES.  Neither FL nor IVL actually applied to Gallus and they disappeared by his second issue.  However, this was not a case of one die, it was an entire issue with multiple dies.

This is a specific case where Gallus has been promoted to Caesar in great haste by Constantius, who required a deputy in the wake of Magnentius usurpation and the murder of Constans. That the mint should have continued the legend of Constantius for the first issue is unsurprising. Unless we are suggesting however that the Helena siliqua was the first posthumous coin of Helena, mother of Constantine, and/or produced in such haste that they could not consult the many references, other coins, or dedications to her, then this is not a basis for comparison.

Offline stultus

  • Procurator Monetae
  • Consul
  • *****
  • Posts: 234
Re: First Known Coin of Helena II?
« Reply #12 on: March 11, 2014, 02:09:23 pm »
I might be wrong, but the reverse strongly resembles the SPES REI PVBLICAE coins of Constantius II and Julian II.

Offline SC

  • Tribunus Plebis Perpetuus
  • Procurator Monetae
  • Caesar
  • *****
  • Posts: 6068
    • A Handbook of Late Roman Bronze Coin Types 324-395.
Re: First Known Coin of Helena II?
« Reply #13 on: March 12, 2014, 05:32:35 am »
Though obverse legends errors will obviously be more common on transitional issues they are also possible on at other times, especially with limited issues such as this one.

More to the point though is the very clear stylistic links to the coins of Helena and Theodora of 337 - 340 where the diadem style is an exact match - and is not found on any other coinage in the 4th century - and the hair style is not too far off - especially on examples from Treveri.  Four Helena and a Fausta, all from treveri, below for comparison.

Shawn


 
SC
(Shawn Caza, Ottawa)

Offline Genio popvli romani

  • Consul
  • ***
  • Posts: 136
  • ROMA CAPVT MVNDI REGIT ORBIS FRENA ROTVNDI
    • Constantinian coinage website
Re: First Known Coin of Helena II?
« Reply #14 on: March 12, 2014, 02:50:00 pm »
What makes a real difference to my eyes about iconography is that Helena (regardless of which one) is represented wearing no mantle, neither necklace and I don't remember to have seen any late roman augusta coin with such a bust.
Am I wrong?

Offline SC

  • Tribunus Plebis Perpetuus
  • Procurator Monetae
  • Caesar
  • *****
  • Posts: 6068
    • A Handbook of Late Roman Bronze Coin Types 324-395.
Re: First Known Coin of Helena II?
« Reply #15 on: March 13, 2014, 04:38:49 am »
I can't tell what bust this Helena, lets call her silver Helena for now, has.

The newest coin appears to show some drapery, but it is worn very high on the neck like a modern shawl.

The Jesus Vico S.A. example does not appear to have any drapery.

The Hungarian National Museum example appears to show drapery, but worn lower on the neck than the newest coin.

And you are right that none show signs of a necklace.

On another note I am curious about Helena the younger's titles.  As far as I can see Ammianus never refers to her as Maxima.  In XV/8 he notes that she was Constantius' maiden sister [that would of course give her the Flavia] and married Julian circa mid-November 354, in XVI/10 he speaks about her miscarriage, and in XXI/1 he speaks of her burial.  There are no other references to her.  She is only referred to as Helena in the Latin with no Flavia or Maxima.

But she is apparently also referred to in Zosimus, Sozomen, Socrates, Philostorgius and the Chronicon Pascale.  Perhaps one of those shed light on her titles but I don't have access to all of them.  Maybe others do.

Shawn

SC
(Shawn Caza, Ottawa)

Offline Rich Beale

  • Procurator Caesaris
  • Caesar
  • ****
  • Posts: 663
  • Nec Aspera Terrent
    • ROMA NUMISMATICS
Re: First Known Coin of Helena II?
« Reply #16 on: March 14, 2014, 07:58:38 am »
Though obverse legends errors will obviously be more common on transitional issues they are also possible on at other times, especially with limited issues such as this one.

Please qualify that with an example.

More to the point though is the very clear stylistic links to the coins of Helena and Theodora of 337 - 340 where the diadem style is an exact match - and is not found on any other coinage in the 4th century - and the hair style is not too far off - especially on examples from Treveri.  Four Helena and a Fausta, all from treveri, below for comparison.

There is indeed an undeniable similarity in the manner in which the hair and wreath are engraved, but this is hardly surprising given that numismatic style evolved very little over the twenty year period from 340-360. The diadem style may not be found on any other coinage in this period, but there again that is stating the obvious and pretending that it has significance - not only are there no other portraits of Augustae around this time, and most Augusti are shown with pearl diadems, or variations of such. Julian II's portraits are all depicted thus.

The fact remains that this legend is not to be found anywhere else on ancient coinage. Moreover, the reverse type is not one associated with Helena, mother of Constantine, the fabric of the coin is distinct from anything produced in her name, and the stylistic differences in the portrait type are significant, despite the similar hair arrangement. 

Offline stultus

  • Procurator Monetae
  • Consul
  • *****
  • Posts: 234
Re: First Known Coin of Helena II?
« Reply #17 on: March 21, 2014, 07:37:13 am »
Though obverse legends errors will obviously be more common on transitional issues they are also possible on at other times, especially with limited issues such as this one.

Please qualify that with an example.
 

The quarter follis issue at Siscia in 305 AD. The coins minted for Galerius Maximian bear the name of Maximian Herculius VI (RIC 146 and 147). Two out of the three obverse inscription variations are correct for Herculius, the third, the shortest one is correct for both rulers.

 

All coins are guaranteed for eternity