Constantine?

The obverse legend CONSTANTINVS IVN NOB CAES places the coin with Constantine II (Junior) who was Noble Caesar or honored son of the Augustus Constantine I. Coins of the father would not have IVN in the legend and his brothers had names spelled a bit differently so, with a little care, they are not hard to separate.

The reverse is CLARITAS REPVBLICAE pointing out that the brightness, lightness, clarity and celebrity of the Republic was due to the Imperial family being so wonderful. Note the figure personifying Claritas has a radiant crown like we see on the sun god Sol even though this coin is after Constantine had began supporting Christianity. He was careful in the early period to avoid types that were either too Christian or too pagan which was probably the politically correct answer for that era.

The mintmark TS A states that the coin was the product of the 1st (A) workshop in the mint at Thessalonica in 317-318 AD. This specimen is a little rough and is a type less than the most common. It has a decent portrait of the young Caesar but the collectible value of the coin is reduced by the rough reverse. I'd guess a oin of this grade would sell fairly for $10 but there are dealers that would ask several times that simply because they know there are people out there that will pay more for anything that old.

Now for the good part: RIC, the standard catalog for these, volume VII page 502 lists the coin as #23 which it codes as R4 meaning that very few of the museums they checked had that coin. That does not mean that it is overall rare enough to be worth a lot of money (especially considering the condition) but it is not something that is seen every day. What keeps it from being valuable is that there are so many rare types of these coins that demand is not high for low grade examples. If the reverse were as clear and detailed as the obverse, I suspect the coin might bring more like $50 but it isn't and coin collectors are a condition driven bunch and more care about eye appeal than RIC rarity scales. The coin would be worth more to a specialist in the period than to most general collectors but finding someone trying to get every mintmark of any late Roman series (and willing to pay extra) can be a bit hard.

Does this answer your question?

Sometime we need to look at these old types with an eye to just what they were saying or what were they thinking. In 317, Constantine was in control but sharing with Licinius. Both had young sons (Constantine even had one, Crispus, getting big enough to be useful in the empire). Kings like to point out that they have your secure future in mind even after they are gone and coins showing young princes in a favorable light have more or less the same effect as we have today with the people of the UK looking forward to children of Prince William except that Constantine's kids would be expected to rule in much more a full sense of the word. As it worked out it was not Constantine II that was the light of the future but his younger brother Constantius II who was not yet on the coins in 317 since he was born that year. The old saw is 'an heir and a spare' but Constantine had enough that they could kill each other off somewhat at will an still not run out for a long time. Interestingly to me, none of the sons left grandsons to keep the dynasty alive.

Nice coin and a great answer...