Help with a Constantine I Roman coin [solved]

9 posts

» Quick access to the last post

Hi,

I got this nice Constantine I follis last saturday:

Obverse: IMP CONSTANTINVS PF AVG
Reverse: SOLI INV(ICT)O COMI(TI) - S-F on fields

There are many types/mints of it (here and on Wildwinds), and I need help if I want a proper ID to enter it here. The problem is that the mintmark is gone (one of the few things worn out on this coin).

Is there anyone able to determine the mint of my follis?
Thanks in advance.
Small up.
Mint can be narrowed down to two: Arles with PARL (P, S, T, Q) or Rome with RP (P,S, T, Q).
It's Arles.
RIC VII #57 (with only 2 mintmark variants: TARL and SARL)

The photos on Wildwinds for this coin are a perfect match with my coin.
http://www.wildwinds.com/coins/ric/constantine/_arles_RIC_VII_057.jpg
http://www.wildwinds.com/coins/ric/constantine/_arles_RIC_VII_057_T.jpg

Mine is SARL variant, found it not because of the mintmark but because of the variations on INVICTO.
(SARL is INV-I-CTO and TARL is IN-VI-CTO, check the links above)
Status changed to Solved (Giobruno, 14-Jun-2019, 03:21)
In RIC the Arles issue has all four mint marks possible with the correct legend breaks. That same legend break is found on the Rome pieces, RIC p299 #33, 34, 37. See this coin for an example from Rome:
http://www.wildwinds.com/coins/ric/constantine/_rome_RIC_vII_033.jpg
Quote: "numisquare"​In RIC the Arles issue has all four mint marks possible with the correct legend breaks. That same legend break is found on the Rome pieces, RIC p299 #33, 34, 37. See this coin for an example from Rome:
http://www.wildwinds.com/coins/ric/constantine/_rome_RIC_vII_033.jpg
​Thanks, did not see that (used Ctrl F "S-F across fields" and it didn't appear because this Rome coin have "S left, F right")
But I still think it's Arles, because I've found that there's a trace of the first mintmark letter, in a position not found on Rome coins.

By the way, I entered the Arles coin yesterday and Pejounet already validated: https://en.numista.com/catalogue/pieces169759.html

He completed the coin info saying that there's actually four variants: PARL, QARL, SARL and TARL. With that, I saw that the remaining letter looks more like a P than Q, S or T, so it's PARL. Indirectly he helped on this case.
By the way, I entered the Arles coin yesterday and Pejounet already validated: https://en.numista.com/catalogue/pieces169759.html

Nice entry, but there are two corrections. In the heading and under the heading of Obverse, the ruler is written as Constantinus I. It should be Constantine I, as listed correctly to the right side under Features: Emperor.
Quote: "numisquare"​Nice entry, but there are two corrections. In the heading and under the heading of Obverse, the ruler is written as Constantinus I. It should be Constantine I, as listed correctly to the right side under Features: Emperor.

​It's done. Thanks.
Hi,
Indeed for this type, caesura and officina are not specifically "relevant" to separate lines. Anybody can still indicate its own caesura through its own comment.

Emperor name within title on English side is written in Latinized form; will stay as is for the moment. Within description, English can be written. Having both versions make file searchable for both terms.
Sapientiae plerumque stultitia est comes.
Si c'est un grand plaisir d'être reconnu par ses amis, c'est peut-être encore plus flatteur d'être reconnu par ses adversaires.
Be yourself; everyone else is already taken.

» Forum policy

Used time zone is UTC+1:00.
Current time is 21:49.