Ancients.info - The Online Resource for Ancient Coins & Antiquities  

Go Back   Ancients.info - The Online Resource for Ancient Coins & Antiquities > Coin Talk > Roman
Home Register FAQ Members List Calendar Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Sidebar Off

Roman Roman Republican, Imperatorial, and Imperial coinage.

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old Feb 7, 2008, 08:27 AM   #1
BeastCoins
Moderator
 
BeastCoins's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Wisconsin
Posts: 1,490
   View My Photo Gallery
Divus Galerius Follis - who is on it?

O.k. folks, I have a question and although I should know the answer, I admit I don't. Here is a piece in my collection:



Divus Galerius, AE Follis, c. May 311-c.May 313, Cyzicus, Officina 1
DIVO MAXIMIANO MAXIMINVS AVG FIL
Laureate head right
AETERNAE MEMORIAE GALERI MAXIMIANI
Lighted altar, garlanded, eagle standing left, head right, wreath in beak on front panel
MKVA in exergue
25mm, 5.44g
RIC VI, 75 (--) (Unattested officina)

My question is: who is on the obverse? Since a lot of the portraiture during the Tetrarchic Period is homogenous, the image itself isn't entirely helpful. Normally on Divus/Diva coinage you have the consecrated individual on the obverse. My confusion arises from the fact we do have other contemporary Divus Galerius folles, but the obverse is the expected veiled type.



Divus Galerius, AE Follis, c. Late 311, Group IV, Class I, Siscia, Officina 2
DIVO GAL VAL MAXIMIANO
Veiled head right
FORTI FO_RTVNAE
Fortuna standing facing, head left, rudder in right hand set on globe, cornucopiae in left, wheel behind
B in right field
SIS in exergue
24mm x 27mm, 6.50g
RIC VI, 221 variant (Legend break)

I can't imagine the Cyzicene piece is a departure from tradition and shows Maximinus II with ties to Galerius, since he was already elevated to augustus before this was minted. So, does this piece show just a laureate head of Divus Galerius with legend Divine Galerius, (honored by) Maximinus Filius Augustorum?

Confusedly,

--Zach Beasley
__________________
VCoins Ancients Store:
http://www.vcoins.com/beastcoins

VCoins US/Banknotes Store:
http://www.vcoins.com/us/beastcoins

VCoins World Store:
http://www.vcoins.com/world/beastcoins

Beast Coins Research Site:
http://www.beastcoins.com
BeastCoins is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Feb 7, 2008, 09:57 AM   #2
Congius
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 211
View My Photo Gallery
Good question!

I think it must be Galerius depicted, despite the lack of veil. The same type from Alexandria shows a more distinctive portrait which looks like the older Galerius with sagging jaw line rather than the more youthful Maximinus. Patrick Bruun notes (in general) this sagging jaw line as a deliberate mark of an elder emperor (he calls it a "tux frons" or something like that).

http://www.coinarchives.com/a/lotvie...cID=79&Lot=934

Bolstering that, Divus Galerius is of course the one the coin is meant to commemorate, and is the one primarily named. Maxentius also issued a series of Divus coins that also named himself on the obverse (along with his various relations to the deceased), but in that case the traditional veiled portrait was used.

Ben
Congius is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Feb 8, 2008, 07:04 AM   #3
Congius
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 211
View My Photo Gallery
Having gone and looked at more specimens of the Alexandria type, it's actually not so clear from the portrait... Out of 5 specimens 3 have the heavier sagging jaw Galerian portrait, but 2 have a bust very close to that used for Maximinus on the same issue (BONO GENIO).

It'd be interesting to see the bust on the later Alexandrian issues of this type (it was issued six times, all the way up to 313) to see how they compare to contemporary Maximinus busts, but I don't have any photos of these.

Ben
Congius is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Feb 8, 2008, 08:07 AM   #4
BeastCoins
Moderator
 
BeastCoins's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Wisconsin
Posts: 1,490
   View My Photo Gallery
Thanks Ben. I'll see later today if I have any images in my files to add for comparison.

--Zach
__________________
VCoins Ancients Store:
http://www.vcoins.com/beastcoins

VCoins US/Banknotes Store:
http://www.vcoins.com/us/beastcoins

VCoins World Store:
http://www.vcoins.com/world/beastcoins

Beast Coins Research Site:
http://www.beastcoins.com
BeastCoins is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Feb 8, 2008, 01:10 PM   #5
gert
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 28
View My Photo Gallery
At first I thought that this portrait had to be Maximinus, because his name appears in the nominative case in the obv. legend and because of the convention of portraying a diefied emperor veiled. But thinking of it now, at this point there weren't enough tetrarchic consacratio issues minted to call it a 'convention'. Only Maxentius' coinage that Ben mentioned was in existence. Anyway, I agree with you that the portrait has to be of divus Galerius - the legends are formulated precisely like the Maxentius coins. The issuing emperor in the nominative, the honored emperor in the dative case, stating that the living emperor honors the deified one.


DIVO MAXIMIANO MAXIMINVS FIL AVG
DIVO MAXIMIANO PATRI MAXENTIVS AVG

Compare also SPQR OPTIMO PRINCIPI

I don't think FIL AVG refers to 'Filius Augustorum'. That would have to be FIL AVGG and why use a lesser title when you are (as you stated) already Augustus? I think it can only mean 'Filius augusti' - because Maximinus was Galerius' adopted son.
Regards
Gert
gert is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Feb 8, 2008, 01:23 PM   #6
BeastCoins
Moderator
 
BeastCoins's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Wisconsin
Posts: 1,490
   View My Photo Gallery
Gert,

Thanks for bringing up the whole question in the first place with your email a few weeks ago. I'm still trying to get my head around why there was such a departure from what was convention on consecration pieces. Here is an example from just a few years previous:



Divus Constantius I, AE Follis, Autumn 307-end of 308, Trier, Officina 1
DIVO CONSTANTIO PIO
Laureate, veiled head right
MEMORIA FELIX
Lighted and garlanded altar, eagle on either side
PTR in exergue
21mm, 4.15g
RIC VI, 789

And shows the veiled portrait as one would normally expect and only the deified personage in the legend.

Some crazy stuff with the Maxentius and Maximinus II pieces. I know I have more examples, I just have to catch up a bit on things so I can get back into this discussion with my head on straight.

--Zach
__________________
VCoins Ancients Store:
http://www.vcoins.com/beastcoins

VCoins US/Banknotes Store:
http://www.vcoins.com/us/beastcoins

VCoins World Store:
http://www.vcoins.com/world/beastcoins

Beast Coins Research Site:
http://www.beastcoins.com
BeastCoins is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Feb 8, 2008, 01:45 PM   #7
gert
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 28
View My Photo Gallery
(Here's another Cyzicus coin.) You can call the veiled portrait convention by AD 336, but was the veiled portrait already convention mid AD 311? There were three centuries of unveiled deified emperors before 311...

Another idea: maybe comparing the portrait on this issue to regular Maximinus II folles from the Cyzicus mint will show differences.

Regards
Gert
Attached Images
File Type: jpg VK01.JPG (40.4 KB, 106 views)
gert is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Feb 8, 2008, 02:11 PM   #8
BeastCoins
Moderator
 
BeastCoins's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Wisconsin
Posts: 1,490
   View My Photo Gallery
Gert,

I was speaking contextually within the Tetrarchic Period as far as veiled convention. Since the Tetrarchic Period ushers in a new convention of semi-homogenous artistic portraiture, I look at RIC VI as a breaking point for re-establishing "convention". I'll do some work on this tonight to review the deified portraiture through the Tetrarchic Period by mint to see if there are any clues.

Numismatically yours,

--Zach

ps - welcome to ancients.info I was hoping if I led you in with discussing your question here you might take the bait
__________________
VCoins Ancients Store:
http://www.vcoins.com/beastcoins

VCoins US/Banknotes Store:
http://www.vcoins.com/us/beastcoins

VCoins World Store:
http://www.vcoins.com/world/beastcoins

Beast Coins Research Site:
http://www.beastcoins.com
BeastCoins is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Feb 8, 2008, 02:16 PM   #9
vozmozhno
Registered User
 
vozmozhno's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 375
   View My Photo Gallery
The Cyzicene (is that a word?) portrait strikes me as closer to the portraits of Galerius at that mint than those of other emperors, but I'd hardly call that definitive.
vozmozhno is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Feb 9, 2008, 09:01 AM   #10
BeastCoins
Moderator
 
BeastCoins's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Wisconsin
Posts: 1,490
   View My Photo Gallery
O.k. folks, here is what I can find in RIC VI (all AE Folles or fractions unless otherwise noted, consecration issues between 294 (Diocletian's reform) and 313 AD - non-veiled examples of deified augusti (Romulus was never augustus) are highlighted):

LONDON

Autumn 307-Early 310 = RIC 110: DIVO CONSTANTIO PIO (Constantius I, veiled, laureate, draped)

TRIER

Autumn 307-End of 308 = RIC 789-790: DIVO CONSTANTIO PIO (Constantius I, veiled, laureate, cuirassed)

309-c.May 313 = RIC 809 (AV Solidus): DIVVS CONSTANTIVS (Constantius I, bare-headed)

LUGDUNUM

Late 306-Early 307 = RIC 202: DIVO CONSTANTIO AVG (Constantius I, laureate)

Autumn 307-Summer 308 = RIC 251: DIVO CONSTANTIO PIO (Constantius I, laureate)
Autumn 307-Summer 308 = RIC 264: DIVO CONSTANTIO PIO (Constantius I, veiled, laureated, cuirassed)
Autumn 307-Summer 308 = RIC 265: DIVO CONSTANTIO AVG (Constantius I, veiled, laureate, cuirassed)
Autumn 307-Summer 308 = RIC 266: DIVO CONSTANTIO PIO (Constantius I, laureate)
Autumn 307-Summer 308 = RIC 267: DIVO CONSTANTIO PIO (Constantius I, laureate)
Autumn 307-Summer 308 = RIC 268: DIVO CONSTANTIO PIO (Constantius I, laureate)

Autumn 307-Summer 308 = RIC 269: DIVO CONSTANTIO PIO (Constantius I, veiled, laureate, cuirassed)

Autumn 308-Spring 309 = RIC 297: DIVO CONSTANTIO PIO (Constantius I, veiled, laureate, cuirassed)

TICINUM

Autumn 307-Spring 308 = RIC 96: DIVO CONSTANTIO AVG (Constantius I, veiled)
Autumn 307-Spring 308 = RIC 97: DIVO CONSTANTIO AVG (Constantius I, veiled)

Note: RIC footnotes on p.294 that these two coins may actually belong in the issues during May 308-309/310 instead.

AQUILEIA

Autumn 307-c.309/310 = RIC 127: DIVO CONSTANTIO PIO (Constantius I, veiled)

ROME

308-310 = RIC 207: DIVO ROMVLO N V BIS CONS (Romulus, bare-headed)
308-310 = RIC 226: DIVO ROMVLO N V BIS CONS (Romulus, bare-headed)
c.310 = RIC 239: DIVO ROMVLO N V BIS CONS (Romulus, bare-headed)
c.310 = RIC 240: DIVO ROMVLO N V BIS CONS (Romulus, laureate, consular robes)

c.310-311 = RIC 243: DIVO MAXIMIANO SEN AVG (Maximianus, veiled)
c.310-311 = RIC 244: IMP MAXENTIVS DIVO MAXIMIANO PATRI (Maximianus, veiled)
c.310-311 = RIC 245: IMP MAXENTIVS DIVO CONSTANTIO COGN (Constantius I, veiled)
c.310-311 = RIC 246: DIVO MAXIMIANO IVN AVG (Galerius, veiled)
c.310-311 = RIC 247: DIVO MAXIMIANO SOCERO MAXENTIVS AVG (Galerius, veiled)
c.310-311 = RIC 248: IMP MAXENTIVS DIVO MAXIMIANO SOCERO (Galerius, veiled)
c.310-311 = RIC 249: IMP MAXENTIVS DIVO ROMVLO N V FILIO (Romulus, bare-headed)
c.310-311 = RIC 250: DIVO MAXIMIANO SEN AVG (Maximianus, veiled)
c.310-311 = RIC 251: IMP MAXENTIVS DIVO MAXIMIANO PATRI (Maximianus, veiled)
c.310-311 = RIC 252: IMP MAXENTIVS DIVO CONSTANTIO COGN (Constantius I, veiled)
c.310-311 = RIC 253: DIVO MAXIMIANO IVN AVG (Galerius, veiled)
c.310-311 = RIC 254: DIVO MAXIMIANO SOCERO MAXENTIVS AVG (Galerius, veiled)
c.310-311 = RIC 255: IMP MAXENTIVS DIVO MAXIMIANO SOCERO (Galerius, veiled)
c.310-311 = RIC 256: IMP MAXENTIVS DIVO ROMVLO N V FILIO (Romulus, bare-headed)
c.310-311 = RIC 257: DIVO ROMVLO N V BIS CONS (Romulus, bare-headed)
c.310-311 = RIC 271: DIVO MAXIMIANO AVG (Galerius, veiled)

OSTIA

c.308/309-October 312 = RIC 1 (AV Solidus Multiple!): DIVO ROMVLO N V BIS CONS (Romulus, facing bust, bare-headed, draped)

Late 309-October 312 = RIC 24: DIVO MAXIMIANO SEN AVG (Maximianus, veiled)
Late 309-October 312 = RIC 25: DIVO MAXIMIANO PATRI MAXENTIVS AVG (Maximianus, veiled)
Late 309-October 312 = RIC 26: IMP MAXENTIVS DIVO MAXIMIANO PATRI (Maximianus, veiled)
Late 309-October 312 = RIC 27: DIVO CONSTANTIO COGN MAXENTIVS AVG (Constantius I, veiled)
Late 309-October 312 = RIC 28: IMP MAXENTIVS DIVO CONSTANTIO COGN (Constantius I, veiled)
Late 309-October 312 = RIC 28A: DIVO CONSTANTIO ADFINI MAXENTIVS AVG (Constantius I, veiled)
Late 309-October 312 = RIC 29: IMP MAXENTIVS DIVO CONSTANTIO ADFINI (Constantius I, veiled)
Late 309-October 312 = RIC 30: DIVO MAXIMIANO SOCERO MAXENTIVS AVG (Galerius, veiled)
Late 309-October 312 = RIC 31: IMP MAXENTIVS DIVO MAXIMIANO SOCERO (Galerius, veiled)
Late 309-October 312 = RIC 32: DIVO ROMVLO N V FILIO MAXENTIVS AVG (Romulus, bare-headed)
Late 309-October 312 = RIC 33: IMP MAXENTIVS DIVO ROMVLO N V FILIO (Romulus, bare-headed)
Late 309-October 312 = RIC 34: DIVO ROMVLO N V BIS CONS (Romulus, bare-headed)
Late 309-October 312 = RIC 58: DIVO ROMVLO N V BIS CONS (Romulus, bare-headed)
Late 309-October 312 = RIC 59: DIVO ROMVLO N V FILIO MAXENTIVS AVG (Romulus, bare-headed)

Note: RIC footnotes on p.400 that the solidus multiple was lost in the 1831 theft from the Bibliotec Nationale. The authenticity of the piece is plainly uncertain. Its weight is unknown.

CARTHAGE

None - mint usurped by L. Domitius Alexander (Alexander of Carthage) around 307/308 and only issued coins in his name.

SISCIA

c.310-After May 311 = RIC 205: DIVO GAL VAL MAXIMIANO AVG (Galerius, veiled)
c.310-After May 311 = RIC 206: DIVO GAL VAL MAXIMIANO (Galerius, veiled)

Late 311 = RIC 220: DIVO GAL VAL MAXIMIANO AVG (Galerius, veiled)
Late 311 = RIC 221: DIVO GAL VAL MAXIMIANO (Galerius, veiled)

c.Earlier 312 = RIC 223: DIVO GAL VAL MAXIMIANO AVG (Galerius, veiled)
c.Earlier 312 = RIC 224: DIVO GAL VAL MAXIMIANO (Galerius, veiled)

c.Mid 312 = RIC 226: DIVO GAL VAL MAXIMIANO (Galerius, veiled)

SERDICA

None - Mint closed in 308 AD.

THESSALONICA

c.311 = RIC 48: DIVO MAXIMIANO (Galerius, veiled)

HERACLEA

No consecration issues listed (Why? Must have something to do with who controlled the various mints.)

NICOMEDIA

Again, no consercration issues.

CYZICUS

c.Mid-311 = RIC 75: DIVO MAXIMIANO MAXIMINVS AVG FIL (Maximinus II, laureate)

Note: RIC lists this as Maximinus II instead of the usual minted by Maximinus II but showing Galerius. Sutherland must have decided this obverse is a complete departure from all other consecration issues (based on portrait?).

ANTIOCH

No consecration issues listed.

ALEXANDRIA

311 = RIC 133: DIVO MAXIMIANO MAXIMINVS AVG FIL (Galerius, laureate)

c.311-312 = RIC 143: DIVO MAXIMIANO MAXIMINVS AVG FIL (Galerius, laureate)

312 = RIC 148: DIVO MAXIMIANO MAXIMINVS AVG FIL (Galerius, laureate)

312 = RIC 151: DIVO MAXIMIANO MAXIMINVS AVG FIL (Galerius, laureate, in imperial mantle, holding banch and mappa)

312 = RIC 154: DIVO MAXIMIANO MAXIMINVS AVG FIL (Galerius, laureate, in imperial mantle, holding banch and mappa)

312-313 = RIC 159: DIVO MAXIMIANO MAXIMINVS AVG FIL (Galerius, laureate, in imperial mantle, holding banch and mappa)


Those are all of the entries I could find in all of RIC VI. If I have missed any, or if there are entries to be added missing from RIC VI, please feel free to advise so I can update the list.

Best regards,

--Zach
__________________
VCoins Ancients Store:
http://www.vcoins.com/beastcoins

VCoins US/Banknotes Store:
http://www.vcoins.com/us/beastcoins

VCoins World Store:
http://www.vcoins.com/world/beastcoins

Beast Coins Research Site:
http://www.beastcoins.com

Last edited by BeastCoins : Feb 13, 2008 at 08:57 AM.
BeastCoins is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Feb 9, 2008, 11:50 AM   #11
Congius
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 211
View My Photo Gallery
That was a major effort Zach, and quite useful! I wasn't aware of RIC VI Trier 309 at all, nor that RIC VI Lyons 266-268 had non-veiled busts.

The overall pattern seems best illustrated at Lyons where we start with the archaic CONSECRATIO legend with simple eagle design and plain bust (RIC 202), then gradually give up these three traditional elements to end up with standard Constantinan Divus Constantius type (the only type issued at London & Trier) of MEMORIA FELIX with eagles flanking altar and veiled bust (RIC 264)

RIC VI Lyons 251, and 266-268 are clearly transitional types, and RIC has the sequence slightly out of order. The transition is:

RIC 202 laureate CONSECRATIO eagle
RIC 251 laureate CONSECRATIO eagle on altar
RIC 267 laureate MEMORIA FELIX two eagles on altar
RIC 266 laureate MEMORIA FELIX eagle on altar, plus eagles flanking altar
RIC 264 veiled MEMORIA FELIX eagles flanking altar

The solidus RIC VI Trier 309, issued later at the introduction of the solidus, has a plain bust because it is altogether an archaic type with CONSECRATIO legend and quadriga on funeral pyre.

Maxentius clearly followed Constantine's lead with the veiled bust on his early deification issues for Constantius from Ticinum and Aquileia, and continued to use it on the later issues after the death of Galerius. Romulus's age presumably account for his being an exception.

Licinius also followed this newfound tradition on his Divus Galerius types.

In this light, we can see that Maximinus II, in using the non-veiled bust for Divus Galerius, wasn't really bucking tradition, so much as sticking to it. Maybe his geographical distance from Constantine's realm accounts for his clinging to earlier tradition rather than following Constantine's lead with the veiled bust. I think the non-veiled bust should therefore not be a consideration in the identity of the obverse bust, who we should simply assume to be the expected Divus Galerius, as confirmed by at least some specimens of these coins having the better differentiated heavier bust of the elder statesman.

On a slightly different note, it's interesting why Constantine introduced this veiled bust since previously it seems (from a quick Coin Archives scan for CONSECRATIO types) to have been mainly, maybe exclusively, associated with female busts! Maybe the larger real-estate of the nummus tempted a more elaborate bust type.

Ben

Last edited by Congius : Feb 9, 2008 at 11:55 AM.
Congius is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Feb 13, 2008, 02:12 AM   #12
gert
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 28
View My Photo Gallery
Zach and Ben,
Thanks for the effort and this interesting thread. I'm convinced the portrait shows Galerius.

Further, I didn't realise the strange inconsistency in RIC that Zach notes in his list of issues: RIC gives exactly the same type of follis in Cyzicus to Maximinus II and in Alexandria to Galerius.
I am sure you will agree that group VI of Cyzicus should include '4. Divus Galerius' (just like Group V of Alexandria and the Maxentius issues).
Regards
Gert
gert is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Feb 13, 2008, 08:56 AM   #13
BeastCoins
Moderator
 
BeastCoins's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Wisconsin
Posts: 1,490
   View My Photo Gallery
Gert and Ben,

I'm inclined to agree it should be considered Divus Galerius on the sole example from Cyzicus. I don't see any compelling reason to assign it to Maximinus II since there is no other evidence or obvious reasoning for it. Thinking about it from the basis of time of issue, I don't think the common Roman would have thought highly of Maximinus honoring his benefactor, but using his own portrait.

Thanks for the interesting discussion,

--Zach
__________________
VCoins Ancients Store:
http://www.vcoins.com/beastcoins

VCoins US/Banknotes Store:
http://www.vcoins.com/us/beastcoins

VCoins World Store:
http://www.vcoins.com/world/beastcoins

Beast Coins Research Site:
http://www.beastcoins.com
BeastCoins is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Feb 13, 2008, 09:44 AM   #14
curtislclay
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Chicago
Posts: 316
   View My Photo Gallery
Probably just an error of Sutherland's in drawing up his list of obv. legends at Cyzicus, p. 590: he should have labeled the DIVO MAXIMIANO legend not 2c, but 4a, as at Alexandria, p. 682.

The Cyzicus piece shows Galerius according to Voetter, Kat. Gerin, p. 134, no. 27. If Sutherland wanted to DISPUTE this attribution, surely he would have had to give reasons in his introduction to Cyzicus. But all he says is "A rare memorial type was struck for Galerius in the name of Maximinus, as AVG FIL" (p. 576).
curtislclay is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 03:06 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.5
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Content copyright © 2002-2006, VHobbies.com, LLC. All rights reserved.