Balkan bingo (sort of)

[Per D]

A couple of years ago I decided to assemble a set of the ‘quarter folles’ (or ‘denarii’ or whatever these coins are) from Siscia with a GENIO POPVLI ROMANI reverse. It seemed a simple enough task, but as is always the case with such projects, turned out to be more difficult than I had anticipated.

Although these coins used to be considered rare, the market was apparently flooded after the breakup of Yugoslavia, and most of the ten types are easily available today. One exception is the type with obv. legend GAL VAL MAXIMINVS P F AVG. A specimen in Vienna is mentioned in a footnote on p. 475 of RIC and a few others have shown up. As this is most likely an engraver’s error (Maximinus would remain Caesar for another five years) I haven’t really looked for it.

I did want to include both RIC 146 and 147, however. These are the strange coins struck in the name of the recently retired Maximian (… C M A MAXIMIANVS…), but with a bust that looks much more like Galerius. For some unexplained reason, RIC 146 (IMP C M A MAXIMIANVS P F AVG) is the most common of all coins in the series, and the legend must have seemed appropriate for some time.

RIC 147 is quite rare, however. It has the very* unusual obv. legend IMP C M A MAXIMIANVS AVG (no pius felix), and I suspect this is also an engraver’s error. I haven’t been able to find a photo of the Budapest specimen cited by Sutherland, but five others have been up for sale in recent years. I’m not 100 % sure, but I think all come from the same obverse die.

The specimen I found on eBay a while ago is the ugliest one, but it cost me less than a decent lunch and I was quite happy to finally find one without having to pay a premium. As an additional bonus, the coin came with a former owner’s index card (showing that s/he paid 170 D-mark for it at some point).

[Heliodromus]

I'm pretty sure the "IMP C M A MAXIMIANVS" RIC 146-147 were intended as Galerius, and someone just got the legend wrong. After all, Siscia was Galerius's mint, and it would be extremely odd if after being promoted to augustus he chose to ignore himself on this series and instead include the retired Maximianus. RIC gets this wrong and dates RIC 146-147 to the first tetrarchy, while noting (footnote p.471) that the bust is "not truly Herculean, though it is certainly not truly Galerian either". On most specimens I've seen it certainly looks more like Galerius.

There appear to be two separate issues on this type, the first with long obverse legends, and the second with short legends.

The first long legend issue is:

RIC 146-7 IMP C M A MAXIMIANVS PF AVG (= Galerius, despite legend)
RIC 167-8 IMP C CONSTANTIVS PF AVG
RIC 170a FL VAL SEVERVS NOB C
RIC 170b GAL VAL MAXIMINVS NOB C

 

The second short legend issue is:

RIC 169b MAXIMIANVS AVG
RIC 169a CONSTANTIVS AVG
RIC 171a SEVERVS NOB C
RIC 171b MAXIMINVS NOB C

 

The only one of these that I own is the short legend Galerius (1st coin in 2nd group above - RIC 169b) which is uncommonly nice for these, and has some remaining silvering. I'd not mind assembling a full set too, but most that appear for sale are in poor condition.

[Per D]

I'm pretty sure the "IMP C M A MAXIMIANVS" RIC 146-147 were intended as Galerius, and someone just got the legend wrong.

I'm sure you're right: these coins must have been intended for Galerius (they probably represent the otherwise missing type for him with a long legend). I forgot to save the picture, but there was a Siscia follis up for auction last week, struck for Galerius,  and with a portrait very similar to the one you find on the quarters I illustrated.

The strange thing is that there were so many coins produced with the mistaken C M A-legend.

It's interesting that your coin has some remaining silvering; I would've guessed these were plain bronze. I also wonder what function these low denomination coins had in the economy, e.g if they have been found in hoards together with folles.

[Heliodromus]

The strange thing is that there were so many coins produced with the mistaken C M A-legend.

Yes - the entire long-legend issue (multiple dies). So, not just a memory lapse by some engraver, but a systematic error. Whoever gave out the orders at the mint must have been well aware that Galerius was in power as newly minted augustus, and the 2nd tetrarchy line-up on the coins is otherwise correct, so it seems inconceivable there wasn't an intent to have Galerius on this new series. Maybe the initial instructions at the mint of who to put on the coins and what legends to use (with this being the new 2nd tetrarchy lineup) specified the "M A" legend (too much drinking the night before?!), and the engravers then just blindly followed it.

Once the mistaken instructions had been given, maybe we shouldn't expect the engravers to flag it as suspect. They just did as they were told.

It's interesting that your coin has some remaining silvering; I would've guessed these were plain bronze. I also wonder what function these low denomination coins had in the economy, e.g if they have been found in hoards together with folles.

Yes, I was surprised by the silvering, but it seems pretty clear. Whatever purpose these coins served seems to have rapidly disappeared since there's no Severus II AVG, so we're just talking about 2nd tetrarchy 305-306. I can't recall ever reading any theories or study of these coins, but presumably articles have been written about them. A research job for PNO, perhaps? 

[Per D]

I believe the general idea is that irregular fractions used to be distributed as missilia during celebrations. With the Siscia coins (tokens?), the establishment of the new tetrarchy would seem a likely candidate (the Genius reverse signaling unity and continuity, perhaps). That doesn’t explain what seems to be two emissions (long and short legends), though. I guess there could have been two such occasions.

Warren Esty has a page on the Siscia fractions with an interesting frequency chart. (http://augustuscoins.com/ed/qf/QF_Counting.htm) Judging from this sample (244 specimens from one collection), the (earlier?) variant with long obverse legends is more common.

As the profits from PNO Numismatics’ coming auctions will fund a new edition of RIC VI we should all bid like mad.