The first Antioch issue of „Gloria Exercitus“ bronzes

[Rupert]

Around 330 AD, the Antioch mint was one of the really big mints in the Roman empire, working with ten officinae (the maximum number was fifteen around 350 AD!). Its established mintmark during the „Campgate“ issues was SMANTA, with SM standing for Sacra Moneta, ANT, of course, for Antioch, and the final letter for the officina. This, however, was a rather long mintmark, six letters to jam into a small exergue. Superstition made things worse: Since the letter  , denoting officina nine, was also the initial of the word thanatos (death), it was supposed to bring bad luck, and was avoided where possible (the same way you won’t find a room #13 in a hotel today, so times haven’t changed that much...). Thus, the number nine was expressed not with a theta but with the combination   E (4+5). Which makes SMANT E – seven letters in the exergue. This was too long, so in the SMANTA series, officina 9 wrote SMANT in the exergue and  -E to left and right of the campgate (image 1). So far, so good.
But in 330, coinage was reformed once again, and – invariably – coins became smaller: from about 19.5 to 17.5 mm. The exergue, naturally, became smaller, too. So coinage was begun with the SMANTA mintmark, but this was discontinued very soon, and the usual „GE2“ series from Antioch – as well as GE1, until well after Constantine’ death – carries the mintmark SMANA. With   for officina 9, by the way – apparently superstitious mint-workers were given the opportunity to apply for a job in a different officina.

In RIC VII for Antioch, the SMANA GE2 series starts with 86, and RIC 85 is the only GE2 coin known to RIC with SMANTA: for Constantine I only, from officinae B and   (image 2). Plausible as it may be that a new coinage was first struck for the principal ruler and then extended to cover his heirs as well, it doesn’t seem so today anymore: in the forty-five years since, these coins have shown up for

Constantine II Caesar (officina  , http://www.notinric.hox.pl/7ant-85_conii.html)
Constantius II Caesar (image 3, off. H=8)
Urbs Roma (http://www.notinric.hox.pl/7ant-85.html) (off. 9 - interestingly, even with the full 7-letter SMANT E in exergue!)
Constantinopolis (image 4, off.  =3 or I=10)

- which also proves that minting of the city commemoratives began instantly along with the normal emission. Judging from the rarity of the GE2 SMANTA coins, they cannot have been minted for more than one day or so.
My Constantinopolis specimen has some encrustations which make the reading of the mintmark difficult. As for now, I is most likely but   cannot be completely ruled out. I haven’t cleaned it yet in order not to destroy any evidence.
Since by that time coinage for Crispus, Fausta and Helena had ceased, and that for Constans and Delmatius had not yet begun, the obverse series seems to be complete now (the last one missing to my knowledge had been Constantius II which I saw, and instantly purchased, two weeks ago).
For the normal SMANA GE2 series, many officinae struck for each ruler, but there is a sharp division between very common officinae (c2 and c3 in RIC) and very rare ones (r3 to r5). There is speculation whether the dies were given out each day anew to the different officinae, and these „rare“ officina strikings happened when an officina got the wrong obverse die, for example a Constantine I die for officina 9. Taking into account only the common officinae, we have the following distribution:
Constantine I      AB    (1,2,3,4)
Constantine II      E    (5,6,9)
Constantius II      ZH           (7,8)
Urbs Roma       E           (9)
Constantinopolis   I           (10)
Except for Constantine II’s   coins (which may be due to a redistribution of officinae when Constans joined in), this forms a very regular pattern: the first four officinae for the Augustus, then two for each Caesar, and one for each city-goddess. It is very likely IMO that the rare SMANTA GE2’s were struck to the same pattern, which would mean that   for Constantine I, E for Constantine II, and Z for Constantius are probably still somewhere out there. A for Constantine is here already: http://www.notinric.hox.pl/7ant85_a.html

Best regards,

Rupert

[Adrianus]

Great summary, Rupert. As you say, the rest must be out there somewhere. Antioch seems to strike VRBS ROMA in every workshop during the regular SMAN- 2 standards and so it is feasible (though unlikely since I guess VRBS ROMA was firmly assigned to workshop 9 for the very brief period when the SMANT- coins were produced) that even more varieties of this very early issue may turn up...

Regards,

Adrianus

[curtislclay]

Yes, excellent analysis, Rupert! And nice purchases of the previously missing Constantius II and Constantinople types.

As Rupert says, the most important conclusion this rare issue provides is that the Roma and Constantinipolis types must have been introduced simultaneously with the GLORIA EXERCITVS type for the emperor and the two Caesars.

That conclusion seemed familiar to me: maybe Adrianus made it when he presented his Roma coin, the one that is now shown by Not in RIC, in Forvm in Dec. 2004!

That was the only new type of the issue that I had already written into my copy of RIC, but now I have managed to squeeze in Constantine II, Constantius II, and Constantinople too!

This thread should be moved to Classical Numismatics, I think, maybe in a couple of days to allow time for possible further responses.