SEVERUS II NICOMEDIA DATING MYSTERY

[Gavin]

So I'm currently looking at early (AD 306-307) coins of Constantine as Caesar bearing the GENIO POPVLI ROMANI reverse. These are not hard to find from Western mints, but they are scarce or rare for the East.

NOT IN RIC lists a 306-307 GPR for Severus II from Nicomedia. Lech Stępniewski comments:

UNLISTED FOR RULER. RIC lists this issue for Galerius Maximian, Maximinus and Constantine (p. 561). General note from p. 548: "Scarce or rare coins are known for Galerius Maximian, Maximinus and Constantine with reverse Genio Populi Romani. [...] Absemce [sic] of Severus and continued recognition of Constantine as Caesar suggest a date in summer 307, i.e. at an interval after the preceding aes". Now, this date must be revised.

See the coin here: http://www.notinric.lechstepniewski.info/6nic-48.html

I'm curious about this last assertion. Why must the date be revised? Isn’t Severus still Augustus in the Summer of 307 with Constantine as Caesar?

Severus is made Augustus soon after Constantius’s death, so July 306 is a terminus post quem for the coin. Severus dies in Sept. 307, so that provides a terminus ante quem for the coin.

Now, Severus surrenders to Maximian in c. April of 307. Perhaps Lech is suggesting that date as the terminus ante quem for the coin under the assumption that Eastern mints would no longer strike for a surrendered Augustus. Or could it be argued that Eastern mints might continue doing so as an act of defiance against the West going rogue? “Captured or not, Severus is the Augustus until we say he isn’t” might be the message.

So, the short form of this long-winded post: How might the RIC VI date of summer 307 for this Nicomedia issue be altered by the discovery of a Severus II coin?

[Heliodromus]

There's a RIC footnote to the 307 date explaining that it is due to the absence of Severus - i.e. the authors of RIC VI assumed that since they hadn't seen coins of Severus they didn't exist, therefore the issue must post-date him !

Now that Severus has been seen, the issue can be assumed to directly follow the elevation of Severus in 306, and be dated to 306-307.

It's rather odd that the authors of RIC VI assumed (wrongly) that Galerius would have chosen to recognise Constantine but not the more legitimate Severus !

[Gavin]

Thanks for the footnote reference!

For lurkers, the footnote reads, "So far lacking issues for Severus, and thus probably falling after the spring of 307."

I guess RIC is implying that since Severus was captured in April of 307, Nicomedia would not have struck coins for him, dating that particular run of coins to after Spring (April) 307.

But now we have an extant Severus II, so the series could be dated anytime after Severus's elevation to Augustus (late summer of 306).

I'm basically writing all this out to get it straight in my own head. Thanks again for the response!

[Severus]

Always a shock to log into a forum here and see one of my coins discussed! Needless to say I was delighted to stumble across it!

[Gavin]

Severus finding Severus. That works out nicely.