Three New Roman Coins

The Vallens coin for how much you bought it?

I like the facing bust of the Honorius too.

What is the story behind the change to facing portraits?

This is about the only common facing bust coin in the Roman Imperial series other than some of the gold from about 350 to the end. I have no idea why they did some that way. The same coin comes in Arcadius also. I consider the total price paid for the three coins to be correct with the first two being good deals and the Honorius being a bit overpriced for the grade.

Thanks guys.

I also think the Honorius was a bit over-priced. I also couldn't find any of the same type within that particular price range. The shipping was somewhat steep at $4. Worse still that the seller only lives about 90 miles from me, in Canada. The coin actually looked better in the seller's photo than it did when I received.

As far as the facing bust is concerned. I wonder if they were reusing some dies in order to save time and money.

JangoFett is right about the line dividing Roman and Byzantine coin being hard to pin down. When Theodosius I died he left the Empire to his two sons giving Honorius the West and Arcadius the East. Some consider Arcadius the first Byzantine Emperor. Cohen left him out of his book on Roman coins but included those of Honorius which means that two coins produced on the same day in the same building were separated into two different Empires. That makes no sense. Of the decisions that Raisel Suarez made in his book ERIC, continuing Cohen's error ranks near the bottom of my list.

Everyone seems to consider Honorius Roman and Anastasius Byzantine. It is the guys in the middle that get pushed around. The last 'Roman' coin in my collection is a pre-reform Anastasius ...or is it the first Byzantine? Certainly, I consider Marcian and Leo Roman (Eastern) just as much as Romulus Augustulus (Western -of whom I will never afford a coin).

RIC IX reports the mints with coins of each Emperor issued at that mint together while RIC X separates the coins of each ruler together so the same coins for Arcadius from each of the mints are together on one page but you have to look up Honorius separately if you want to know if he also issued the type. That is easier to use for a collector but hard for students and those of us used to the way it was done in volumes VI through IX. Actually the RIC X system's greatest benefit is the fact that many of the bronzes are struck on small flans losing the mintmark so it is possible to find the type more easily than if you had to know the mint first. I'd say 75% of the AE4's of Marcian (the common 5th century bronze) are missing the mintmark altogether. Can't win.

The shame in all this is that there are some coins that get left out because they came after 476 AD when the West 'fell' (actually when the Germanic powerbroker who had been in charge decided it was unnecessary to replace the last Western puppet with another one) but before the currency reform in 498 when Byzantine coins start looking Byzantine. Most are rare so we don't care. Who collects Zeno?

Anyone interested in a cataloging exercise, try the coin below. Is it really all that different from the OP coin?

The coin in the originating post......ie your coin.

I don't think both coins are too much different. If the legend was completely off the flan or the legend was worn to the point where it was gone, perhaps it would not be exactly attributable.