Both
types were pretty surely struck in 222; but the exact sequence of the coinage in that year is uncertain.
Maybe the first
largesse type formed
part of a Proclamation Issue, the first of the new reign, as proposed in
BMC; a
largesse to the people soon after Elagabalus' assassination would seem appropriate. In that case the seen from behind
bust type on the
sestertii might have preceded the seen from front
type, since all
Liberalitas sestertii that I have seen, with platform scene or
Liberalitas standing alone, show the seen from behind
bust type. However, the
Liberalitas standing
aurei of 222 are known with both
bust types, BM 1-2, Plate 1.
Turcan, in
his publication of the Guelma
sestertius hoard, suggested that the seen from front
portraits were more reminiscent of
Elagabalus than those seen from behind, so seen from front should have been earlier.
Liberalitas types seem sometimes to have been accompanied by
Libertas types, so for
Commodus in 190 (
LIBERAL AVG VII) and Septimius and sons in 208 (
LIBERALITAS AVG VI). Maybe the same was also true in 222, but so far that is just a conjecture!
Finally there is the question, in 222 which came first, the
types with descriptive legends, for example
LIBERTAS AVG(VSTI), or the same
types with the dated
legend P M TR P COS P P ?
Carson,
BMC p. 50, placed the dated legends first, because he thought they were associated with younger looking
portraits of
Alexander on
denarii, particularly those of the Elveden find, Num. Chron. 1954. But he doesn't attempt to buttress this conclusion by referring to specific coins illustrated in
BMC or elsewhere, and he didn't mention this question at all in
his brief listing of the contents of the Elveden find in 1954, which provides no illustrations.