Classical Numismatics Discussion
  Welcome Guest. Please login or register. All Items Purchased From Forum Ancient Coins Are Guaranteed Authentic For Eternity!!! 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. Internet Challenged? We Are Happy To Take Your Order Over The Phone 252-646-1958 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!!!

Recent Additions to Forum's Shop


Author Topic: Constantius II??? Rare??'  (Read 1115 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

kressohawk

  • Guest
Constantius II??? Rare??'
« on: May 23, 2005, 11:35:07 pm »
Any date on this coin?
RIC number?
Mint?
It is like Constantius II

Thanks and regards from Argentina.
Gabriel.

Offline Varangian

  • IMPERATOR
  • Caesar
  • *****
  • Posts: 463
  • Det er ikke √• unng√• fare det vi har komme!
Re: Constantius II??? Rare??'
« Reply #1 on: May 24, 2005, 12:42:36 am »
I agree that it looks like Constantius, but that reverse is almost exclusively that of Magnentius or Decentius.

There are a few coins of Treverorum with Constantius II obverses and that reverse, but they are rare and the reason for the pairing of the obverse of Constantius with the reverse type of traitors is unclear.

Offline wolfgang336

  • Procurator Caesaris
  • Caesar
  • ****
  • Posts: 926
  • Aut Caesar Aut Nullus
Re: Constantius II??? Rare??'
« Reply #2 on: May 25, 2005, 10:20:33 pm »
From the CNG website:

Quote
Several numismatists have tried to associate this coin, combining an obverse of Constantius II and a reverse type of the usurpers Magnentius and Decentius, with a tantalizingly obscure passage from the fourth-century historian, Ammianus Marcellinus. There, the historian, relating the clean-up of Magnentius' revolt, mentions the killing of a Poemenius who revolted against the usurpers in Trier and handed the city over to the legitimate emperor, Constantius II. While J.P.C. Kent (NC 1959, pp. 105-108) asserted these coins, as well as a contemporary gold issue, were struck by Poemenius in anticipation of the emperor's retaking of the city, P. Bastien (QT 1983), revisited the question. Re-analyzing the gold issue, he concluded that the bronze coins were issued only after Constantius had retaken the city, and not before. More recently, W. C. Holt (AJN 15 [2004]), while arguing with slight modifications, nevertheless agrees in genere with Kent's hypothesis. Although this coin is clearly associated with the events of the revolt in Trier, any more certain conslusion at this point remains based on how one wishes to interpret the scant evidence.

One unanswered question remains: for what reason was a reverse type so closely associated with the usurpers used in combination with a legitimate obverse of Constantius? The political use of Christian symbolism became much more visible during the latter stages of Magnentius' revolt. His use of the Chi-Rho reflects a similar one of Vetranio: the emperor (either Vetranio himself, or Constantius II) holding a labarum, and the legend IN HOC SIGNO VICTOR ERIS, a statement associated with the vision of Constantine I on the night before has battle with his rival, Maxentius. In the present case, it is quite possible that the forces of Constantius II in Trier briefly coopted the symbology of the usurpers, adding the legend of the legitimate emperor to parallel the ultimate victory of Constantius II with that of his father. Certainly an interesting issue for further research.

Evan

 

All coins are guaranteed for eternity