"Invasion coinage" of Constantius

[jamesicus]

Although primarily relating to Carausius and Allectus, this online review extract from R.A.G Carson's Mints, Dies & Currency (Essays dedicated to the memory of Albert Baldwin) does contain some interesting information relating to the Boulogne Mint in general.

James

[jamesicus]

And so this is how the early Constantius coinage is now shaping up to me:

Unknown Continental Mint (Lyons workers?) issue -- possibly prepared for invasion usage (?)


LON mint mark issue


Intermediate Group (?) issue -- Lyons style bust/London style lettering (?)


"Small head (ugly) on tall neck" issue

[leetoone]

James

Agree with that but we also need an intermediate cuirassed bust in there. I don't think I have one. I have this Diocletian but I assume this is a Class III. Happy to be contradicted, though.

Lee

[RobertB]

I'll add this one -- I have this ID'ed as RIC Lon 14b.

Now, actually, let me revisit that. The first coin I have RIC Lon 14b. The second coin I have ID'ed as RIC Lon 28a ("Class III"), which I think I just copied over from the dealer. Presumably this is the "large spread bust ... in low relief" but now I'm not sure ... should these two coins be in the same category, whichever it is?? The first coin IS struck in noticeably higher relief.

I would also notice that the lettering style is different as well. The letterforms on the first coin are noticeably more compact. On the obverse, it could just be because there are more letters, but even on the reverse, the first coin has more compact letters with more spacing.

[Mauseus]

Originally Posted by jamesicus

Although primarily relating to Carausius and Allectus, this online review extract from R.A.G Carson's Mints, Dies & Currency (Essays dedicated to the memory of Albert Baldwin) does contain some interesting information relating to the Boulogne Mint in general.

James

There is a problem in that the mark he ascribes to Boulogne is RSR, undisputedly a London mark if one accepts the work of Casey and also de la Bedoyere. He also places the Rouen coinage of Carausius far too late in the reign.

Regards,

Mauseus

[jamesicus]

An observation on portrait laureate ribbons -- the long ends of the ribbons seem to me to lay across the bust on the Unknown Continental Mint coinage and derivitives: Londinium Mint issues -- LON and Intermediate Group -- whereas the ribbon is mostly vertical (not touching the bust) on the unmarked Class II and Class III Londinium issues. The short ends of the ribbons appear to be arranged so as not to interfere with the lettering. Of course, this may not hold up under close scrutiny (I have not researched this to any extent) -- I just offer this as a discussion point.

James


Constantius, RIC VI, Lugdunum, 17a (class I) -- long ribbon end across bust -- Unknown Continental Mint -- Lugdunum/Lyons?



Diocletian, RIC VI, Londinium, 1a -- long ribbon end across bust -- LON Mint Mark


--
Galerius, RIC VI, Londinium, 14b (?) -- long ribbon end across bust -- Intermediate Group -- plain bust



Constantius, RIC VI, Londinium, 20 (?) -- long ribbon end across bust -- -- Intermediate Group -- cuirassed bust



Diocletian, RIC VI, Londinium, 6a -- long ribbon end ribbon vertical - not across bust -- Unmarked Londinium Class II



Galerius, RIC VI, Londinium, 33 -- long ribbon end ribbon vertical - not across bust -- Spread bust -- Londinium class III

[jamesicus]

Originally Posted by leetoone

.......... Agree with that but we also need an intermediate cuirassed bust in there ..........

You are right, Lee -- I am trying to come up with one of my own.

James

[jamesicus]

Originally Posted by RobertB

.......... The second coin I have ID'ed as RIC Lon 28a ("Class III"), which I think I just copied over from the dealer. Presumably this is the "large spread bust ... in low relief" but now I'm not sure ...........

The characteristics are certainly very similar to the following Galerius Class III (spread bust) RIC VI, Londinium, No. 33 of mine, Robert.

James

[leetoone]

James
My Diocletian of a few posts ago certainly seems to bear similarities to your Class III #33 just posted especially the almost cone shape of the cuirass. I wouldn't automatically call either of them "spread bust" though.
Lee

[RobertB]

Another stylistic cue that hasn't been brought up that might be useful is the style of Genius on the reverse.

1) The unmarked Lugdunum/"continental mint" coins have a well-modeled, almost cherubic Genius, standing in a naturalistic posture. I also notice that these coins tend to have pronounced horizontal spiral marks on the cornucopia?

2) The London mint coins have a more spindly, less-naturalistic figure -- tends to look like he's trying to hold his balance in a stiff breeze, to my eyes. This includes the "transitional" coinage.

3) The Class 3 "spread bust" coinage seems to mark a return to a stockier, more well-modeled Genius.

Again, haven't done an exhaustive analysis, but based on the samples in this thread (which is nontheless turning into a rather comprehensive reference!) it seems to fit.

More grist for the mill,
Robert

[RobertB]

This is coin that I used as my Class 3 example in previous post, BTW -- seems the very definition of "large, spread bust ... in low relief." I'm going to re-classify several of my London coins, but probably not this one.

[jamesicus]

Originally Posted by leetoone

.......... Agree with that but we also need an intermediate cuirassed bust in there ..........

Originally Posted by jamesicus

You are right, Lee -- I am trying to come up with one of my own.
James

Maybe this:

CONSTANTIUS
Intermediate Group (b), cuirassed bust, (RIC VI. Londinium, 20 ?)

[leetoone]

Originally Posted by jamesicus

Maybe this:

Perfect, James!

Lee

[Fitzwilliam05]

Here are two Constantius folles that I would classify as intermediate style coins of London. One has the more elaborate cuirass I alluded to in an earlier posting. Both have shoulder bands and breast borders “ornamented with palm leaves,” a description employed by Stewartby in noting similar detail on coins of all four tetrarchs in the Market Stainton hoard (Stewartby, NC, 1998, pp. 94, 96).

Fitz

[Congius]

Originally Posted by Fitzwilliam05

Here are two Constantius folles that I would classify as intermediate style coins of London.

Those are also what I understand as the intermediate style. There are also some examples for Diocletian that I posted near the top of this thread.

However, in general these class IIe/a/b, III style distinctions seem to exist along a continuum... one can pick examplars that highlight the progression, but others seem very much inbetween. I'm not sure that even with a very large sample set they would neatly cluster into groups and that one could therefore meaningfully tease distinct issues out of them. If it were me I'd attribute most of them the same and relegate the stylistic progression to a footnote that noted the distinctive early/middle/late styles.

Ben