coin project
Stable diffusion
Please support our sponsors


Log In | Register
[83796 Coins (44240 Unverified)]
 
 
Search
Advanced Search
Search By Coin ID
 
 
Home
ANCIENT/BYZANTINE
Ancient Spain (872)
Byzantine (753)
MEDIEVAL/EARLY WORLD
Germany (30)
MODERN WORLD
COUNTERFEITS AND IMITATIONS
 
Submit New Coin(s)
 
Sponsors page
Terms of Service
Contact Us
About Us
FAQ Page
Coin Detail
Click here to see enlarged image.
ID:     Z3779
Type:     Roman Imperial
Issuer:     Diocletian
Date Ruled:     AD 284-305
Metal:     Bronze
Denomination:     Follis
Struck / Cast:     struck
Date Struck:     AD 305-307
Diameter:     28.5 mm
Weight:     9.68 g
Obverse Legend:     D N DIOCLETIANO BAEATISSIMO SEN AVG
Obverse Description:     Laureated bust right, in imperial mantle, right hand holding an olive branch, left a mappa.
Reverse Legend:     PROVIDENTIA DEORVM QVIES AVGG
Reverse Description:     Providentia standing right, extending right hand to Quies standing left, right hand holding branch (up), and left leaning on sceptre
Exergue:     PTR
Mint Mark:     PTR/ S in left field/ KS in center field/ F in right field
Mint:     Cyzicus (incorrectly attributed to Trier)
Primary Reference:     RIC unlisted
Photograph Credit:     Beast Coins
Source:     http://www.beastcoins.com
Notes:     (1) This obverse inscription is unrecorded in RIC with the KS field mark. (2) On p. 208, footnote I states "The significance of the letters in the reverse field has not yet been explained." What appears to have happened is this reverse type was created in Trier and the die sent to Cyzicus to copy. In error, the celator did not realize the exergual mark was for Trier as was to replace it with a Cyzicene type, possibly due to the precedent set with the post-reform radiate folles where a field mark was used instead of an exergual. Two other attributes point to justify this hypothesis: Cyzicus did not use the longer version of BAEATISSIMO on this issue as standard and the style of the reverse is typical of retirement issues from Cyzicus vs. Trier as evidenced by the employment of a small branch for Quies and the generally compact nature of this mint, versus the often bold and grandiose style of Trier. In any event, even under the listings for Trier, this example is not noted for officina 6, although officinas 4 and 6 were the only documented ones in RIC which produced this series.