Maximinus II - RIC VI Trier 826 - silvered bronze

Home · Search · Register

Home » Member Galleries » lrbguy

« Previous image · Slide Show · Next image »

« more ·

· more »

Maximinus II - RIC VI Trier 826 - silvered bronze

View Smaller Image

Photo Details
lrbguy Registered User Registered: July 2004 Posts: 55 users gallery	Maximinus II Trier mint RIC VI 826 309 AD (?) Silver surfaced bronze (3-4%) 18 mm; 3.11 g Obv: IMP MAXI - MINVS AVG left facing bust, radiate, draped, cuirassed, holding up right hand, holding orb with left Rev: SOLI INVI-C-TO COMITI exergual mark: PTR Sol radiate, facing left, standing in facing quadriga holding up right hand, holding orb and whip in left Technically speaking this coin is not listed in RIC and is somewhat problematic. It is silver coated bronze with a much lower silver content than its RIC listed counterpart. Its silver content is typical of the folles issued late in the reign of Maximinus II, but its weight is a little more than half the average weight of the folles issued in 309, and 60-90% of the weight of folles issued from 310-313. Since the obverse bust is radiate it might be a half follis, but the module of the coin, which approximates that of its silver counterpart, is smaller than that of the half folles that were being issed prior to 309, and larger than that of those later. Since the convention of using a radiate bust to indicate a half follis was not being followed at this time, that is not a determining factor. Nonetheless, my preliminary conclusion based on the metrology of the coin is that it is a half follis of Maximinus II issued in 309, and not later in his life.
	· Date: March 8, 2007 · Views: 723 ·
	Additional Info
	Inventory Sheet

Author

Thread

lrbguy
Registered User

Registered: July 2004
Posts: 55

March 9, 2007 4:07pm

It looks like I fell into the same trap that Sutherland did in RIC VI, who placed this coin type just ahead of the series of heavy folles from 309. The coin cannot be dated to 309 since it bears the AVG title which Maximinus did not assume until May 310. But for that year and later the module of the coin is too large for a half follis. On that score it was suggested to me that this example is not a silver coated bronze coin, but another mix of a 25% silver bronze alloy. It now seems most likely that this coin was only issued in billon as a degraded silver denomination (argenteus?) and never as bronze at all. Despite the different surface appearances, this coin and the more obviously silver counterpart are both from the same issue.

------------------------------
ellarbe

Click here to Send this user a Private Message

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 12:14 PM.