| Author |
 Replies: 7 / Views: 1,488 |
|
|
New Member
Brazil
27 Posts |
Dear colleagues, I have a hard time differentiating between Valentinian II and Valentinian III. So put here the image of some AE4 ... if anyone can help me, I will be very grateful. 
|
|
|
|
Moderator
 United States
34423 Posts |
@jochkeney, that is a good question. If you could please post pics of individual coins rather than as a group, you will make it easier on the eyes of our Roman experts (of which I am not). I'm not sure that this overall pic has enough detail to allow for definitive opinions. Thx!
"If you climb a good tree, you get a push."
-----Ghanaian proverb
"The danger we all now face is distinguishing between what is authentic and what is performed."
-----King Adz
|
|
Moderator
United States
23731 Posts |
The coins of Valentinian III tend to have crude detail and not struck tiny flans. These all appear to be Valentinian II. A very nice group of them.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
6130 Posts |
|
|
Pillar of the Community
Russian Federation
5174 Posts |
...Um, pretty sure a few of those are not any Valentinian at all.
Here is my best guess:
V - ? - V? - T - A
A - A? - A - ? - V
A - V - V? - ? - ?
V = Valentinian II
T = Theodosius I
A = Arcadius
(There is also a Honorius version, but it apparently isn't particularly common, so it's fairly reasonable that none of those ended up here.)
A few seem to have the respective legend off flan, and/or in such a bad state I can't figure it out. Some of them might well be more obvious in hand!
|
|
Moderator
United States
23731 Posts |
Looking more closely at the group I agree not all are Valentinian II, Arcadius and Theodosius II.
|
|
New Member
 Brazil
27 Posts |
Dear friends, I send you a better photo. I agree, not all are Valentinian II. I understood the point put by echizento and I agree with him and the others. There is no Valentinian III on the lot. Still, if it was Valentinian III they would be from ROME, right? I would like additional criteria that would allow me, for example, to come across a Valentinian III MS (I know it's very unlikely, but ...) and not assume it to be Valentinian II by exceptional conservation status ... Thank you!!  |
|
Pillar of the Community
Russian Federation
5174 Posts |
Updated estimate:
T - V - T? - V? - T?
A? - A? - A - A - V
A? - xx - V - A - A
A = Arcadius
V = Valentinian II
T = Theodosius I
xx = probably illegible
...It took me surprisingly long to figure out the center coin (the first letter of the obverse legend was apparently missing, and the other ones never seemed to slot up properly).
As for the OP's question, I think reverse legend (and design) is the way to go in figuring out Val II/III - in all cases but one.
The exception is Tesorillo 100, VICTORIA AVGGG, in which case figuring them out might actually be hard (if it's not Rome mint, it's Val II, if it has PL in the obverse legend, it's Val III, and if it's of really crude style, it's Val III, but it might well possible, in principle, to have a coin that can be perceived as either).
|
| |
Replies: 7 / Views: 1,488 |
|
Posted 10/01/2017 03:08 am
