Coin Community Family of Web Sites Join Thousands of Coin, Bullion, & Money Collectors
300,000 items to help build your collection! Royal Canadian Mint products, Canadian, Polish, American, and world coins and banknotes. Vancouvers #1 Coin and Paper Money Dealer Specializing in Modern Numismatics Royal Estate Auctions - $1 Coin AuctionsJoin Thousands of Coin, Bullion, & Money Collectors Coin, Banknote and Medal Collectors's Online Mall








Username:
Password:
Save Password
Forgot your Password?


This page may contain links that result in small commissions to keep this free site up and running.

Welcome Guest! Registering and/or logging in will remove the anchor (bottom) ads. It's Free!

Constaninian Era Commemorative: 330 Ad Vs 530 Ad

To participate in the forum you must log in or register.
Author Previous TopicReplies: 2 / Views: 791Next Topic  
Moderator
Learn More...
Spence's Avatar
United States
34419 Posts
 Posted 11/10/2018  08:00 am Show Profile   Bookmark this topic Add Spence to your friends list Get a Link to this Message Number of Subscribers
I recently picked up this silver Half Siliqua showing a helmeted and draped bust of Constaninopolis on the obv and a large K on the rev (the abbreviation for Constantinople). I really liked the provenance (Agora, CNG, Gorny & Mosch, and Thomas Bentley Cederlind) and the stated date (530s AD). I understand that the small silver pieces (such as mine) are actually donative or distribution medalets.

After some research, I am now a bit confused about the dating. Specifically, I am unsure if my piece dates to the original celebrations (i.e. the 330s AD) or is one of the centennial or bicentennial commemoratives. Vagi has this to say:


Quote:
Some of these small pieces are engraved in fine style (compact, high relief), whereas others are of debased style (low relief, coarse execution). The former probably belong to the period 330 to 346 (and perhaps specifically to 330) whereas the coarse ones are from a later period, seemingly the 5th-6th centuries. Indeed it is probably that they were struck for centennial and bicentennial celebrations in Constantinople.


In looking at RIC, I only see one other example, and this specifically has a legend mentioning Justinian I. I guess that the relief and execution are roughly equivalent between that piece and mine, so it seems that I could conclude that mine is also a bicentennial. On acsearch.info, a couple dozen are listed, but I don't see a clear correlation between level of detail and date on these. Rather every single piece from Constantinople is listed as being from the 530s. More evidence that my piece is a bicentennial commemorative, but not particularly definitive.

I know we have some Roman experts here on CCF--I would appreciate any further thoughts or determining features, so please weigh in. Similarly, if you have one of these pieces, please post it here as it may be useful for making comparisons. Thx.



Constaninian-Era-Commemorative:-330-Ad-Vs-530-Ad

Constaninian-Era-Commemorative:-330-Ad-Vs-530-Ad
"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
Pillar of the Community
Ben's Avatar
United Kingdom
4208 Posts
 Posted 11/10/2018  6:36 pm  Show Profile   Bookmark this reply Add Ben to your friends list Get a Link to this Reply
Under Constantine, the die sinkers were much worse than under the 12 caesars...but under Justinian, there really were just about no issues of artistic merit, even in gold. Take a look at the forms of the Chi-rho on Magnentius' coinage and the form of the letters on nummi under Justinian, then look at the cut on that K. Take a look at the way drapery was cut on Constantinian miliarenses and siliquae, then look at the way they rendered the drapery on Justinian solidi. As far as I can tell, the artistry on this piece puts it firmly later than the Constantinopolis issues from Constantine.

That being said, I do have a soft spot for the simpler designs that are uncluttered by legends. It is an interesting period of Byzantine history too - the Eastern Roman Empire would soon recapture Rome.

EDIT: Here's a siliqua attributed to Justinians reign:
Constaninian-Era-Commemorative:-330-Ad-Vs-530-Ad

And one during Constantine's:
Constaninian-Era-Commemorative:-330-Ad-Vs-530-Ad
Edited by Ben
11/10/2018 6:39 pm
Moderator
Learn More...
Spence's Avatar
United States
34419 Posts
 Posted 11/10/2018  7:24 pm  Show Profile   Bookmark this reply Add Spence to your friends list Get a Link to this Reply
@ben, this is exactly what I needed. You rock!
"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
  Previous TopicReplies: 2 / Views: 791Next Topic  

To participate in the forum you must log in or register.



    




Disclaimer: While a tremendous amount of effort goes into ensuring the accuracy of the information contained in this site, Coin Community assumes no liability for errors. Copyright 2005 - 2026 Coin Community Family- all rights reserved worldwide. Use of any images or content on this website without prior written permission of Coin Community or the original lender is strictly prohibited.
Contact Us  |  Advertise Here  |  Privacy Policy / Terms of Use

Coin Community Forum © 2005 - 2026 Coin Community Forums
It took 0.21 seconds to rattle this change. Forums