IMP XXXXII COS XVII P P (type I, A) (441 / 450)

Bust of Theodosius II facing, cuirassed, wearing a helmet with crest and a pearl diadem. Holding a spear passing behind his head with the right hand and a decorated shield with a horseman slaying an enemy, with the left hand.

Constantinople seated left on a throne, holding a spear with the left hand and a globe surmounted by a cross with the right hand. A shield behind the throne and a star in the field to the left.

Photo of a coin sold the 18/01/2017 by Classical Numismatic Group, Electronic Auction 389, lot 812, link to the sale: https://www.acsearch.info/search.html?id=3673901, link to their website: https://www.cngcoins.com/.

Type I: with mark CONOB and the reverse legend usually ending before the shield with a square throne, the right leg as a triangular protuberance, stiff drapery and vertical scepter. This corresponds to type III of RIC X. Var A is the same as RIC X: elongated and long shield.

We can ask the question about the change of mark: COMOB and CONOB. Why does this mint of Constantinople use two different marks for the same series? And why on this only series? Why again, does it use coding with dots? We also note the great diversity of style of the productions. Even considering that it extends over a large period which would justify changes of engravers what is really interesting is to note the wide difference in quality of engraving, ranging from the classical style of Constantinople with fine engraving to an almost barbaric style.                                                                 I note an obverse die having been used for three different types and dated from 420 to 450! See here: https://www.all-your-coins.com/en/archives-anciennes/romaines-imperiales/concordia-avgg-autour-de420ou-peu-apres. Here are the coins linked but their observe: https://www.acsearch.info/search.html?id=2016573, type CONCORDIA AVGG (420), https://www.acsearch.info/search.html?id=1555052, type SALVS REIPVBLICAE (425), https://www.acsearch.info/search.html?id=218701, type IMP XXXXII COS XVII P P (440/450). Before giving my conclusions I will list other particularities: we regularly see the letter M of COMOB which seems ''modified''. You can see photo examples under this comment. Is this a change from CONOB to COMOB? Or a bad engraving? Difficult to say since often the letter M in IMP looks the same. It may therefore be a poorly understood modification where the engraver sometimes also modified the other letter M of IMP or a bad engraving. We can still lean a little more towards the theory of a modification because if this letter was badly engraved then why do we often observe the M badly engraved in the mark but not in the word IMP? In addition it seems that there are coins with the legend INP.. Once again difficult to examine because we can have the light of the photo which obscures part of the leg forming an M which would be very close to the right part. This particular shape is often visible, giving the impression of a letter N when the legs are simply very thin and stuck to the right part.                                                                                                                                                            I also note the series from the same period with the legend: IMP XXXXII COS XVII P P struck in the name of Galla Placidia who uses the COMOB mark. Finally, let's remember that all the imitations that I have observed for this type (around 30) never put dots on the reverse with the exception of one copy.. But, these dots are noted on the obverse. However, we can estimate that the engravers must have had enough difficulty imitating to make the decision not to imitate these dots, especially since the legend is long and leaves little room for additional engraving. But this lack of space is also the problem of an official engraver who nevertheless finds the solution by placing the dots above or below the letters.

Conclusion: By retaining all these anomalies, we can consider that they are too numerous to be simple errors, bad engravings... I also have a theory which can combine all the points listed, including a historical point of view. Which would therefore make several elements difficult to assert, such as the modification of the letter M, appear to be very likely converging evidence. So here is my theory: from 435 Theodosius II begins to pay tribute to the Huns. And in 440, in addition to the tribute, the Huns stole significant booty. In addition, Illyria is shared between the two empires. In 446 Attila was named 'master of the militia by Theodosius II'. Finally in 447 the tributes stopped because of an attack on Constantinople. These tributes resumed in 449.                                                                                  From 440 it was therefore necessary to urgently mint money to continue paying tribute and also probably to compensate for the deficit created by the taking of booty from the Huns. I consider it possible that the Romans decided to relocate part of the workforce from the Constantinople mint in order to quickly supply the region close to the borders where the Huns are located. A mint close to Sirmium or Viminacium may have been created. It was necessary to be close to a mine without having to transport the products over long distances, especially at this time when the enemies were close to Constantinople. The marking was therefore COMOB to logically indicate a Comitatus mint. Which also explains this marking for Galla Placidia. We could therefore think that we could isolate these productions by their marking alone, observing a sometimes more barbaric style for this production given that it was probably necessary to employ engravers of barbarian origin. However, this is not the case because the COMOB marking is much superior in production quantity and displays various styles, something in common with CONOB production. The solution is, however, simple: emptied of some of its best engravers, the Constantinople mint employed engravers of barbarian origin. This mint and the Comitatus mint therefore had a similar composition resulting in these productions of diverse quality and styles. We could possibly have thought of a single relocation of the mint from Constantinople because of the fall of the wall in 447, in order to protect the precious metal but then we would not have this same mark for Galla Placidia for a production struck in 443 at the latest. I have already observed a wide variety of styles for the Constantinople mint and it is not new that these official mint already use barbarians for their productions. But this coinage has too many letters M poorly executed and more probably modified on the COMOB mark alone, changes of CONOB and COMOB marks over a long period for all this to be due to errors.                                                             Let's also look at this obverse die with dots, used for three different types and as luck would have it used for the type that interests us here: IMP XXXXII COS XVII P P. This production of the three types is very rare! I have only noted one copy for each coin using this obverse die. It is indeed normal to find very few copies using the same obverse die as the search is so difficult but there is no production using these dots on the obverse for the two previous types: CONCORDIA AVGG and SALVS REIPVBLICAE. Otherwise we would have found other copies from different dies. For this point I propose a solution: the transport of obverse and reverse dies in the Comitatus mint in order to save time for striking the reverses. These dies of the types used previously were then quickly abandoned. May be transported and used in error. In addition, this coin shares the obverse die with dots with a reverse die whose mint letter has been modified: B/. Which shows a reduction in the workforce.        Before approaching the last part of my theory let us remember that these imitations almost never have dots on the reverse and that they are Germanic. Which makes me think of this also special marking containing dots of different numbers while the other productions do not have any and that these dots, given the length of the legend, are not easy to inscribe and are indeed a particular desire to note these series. If we start from this principle then the marking becomes logical: total production intended for the entire empire and marked by CONOB and COMOB. The first series being perhaps the one without a dot, then we would have this marking indicating the different tributes paid. If we look at the dates of payment of the tributes that we have in relation to the beginning of this series: 440 to 447 then 449/450. Possibly therefore we would have: 440/441 series without a dot on the reverse, 441/442: one dot, 442/443: two dots, 443/444: three dots, 444/445: four dots, 445/446: five dots, 449 /450: six dots. In 447 the attack on Constantinople having occurred in January the tribute was quickly stopped.. Here again, in front of a question, we find a logical and common explanation with the rest of the convergent elements. It would now be necessary to be able to analyze the metal composition in order to determine whether production comes from different mines, which could again indicate a probable relocation.

théorie: un atelier Comitatus ouvert et composé de graveurs expérimentés et barbares, constantinople ayant des graveurs délocalisés prend également des barbares. Ce qui explique le style allant de très bon à barbare. Ceci pour payer rapidement le tribut en 440 et combler la perte d'un important butin. ensuite ce tribut étant régulier Constantinople prend plus en charge le monnayage. Il faudrait analyser la composition métallique pour savoir si on note qu'une autre mine a été utilisée. Galla placida voit également ce même type utiliser la marque COMOB. On voit d'abord une série sans points en 440/441, puis un point en 441/442 (tribut 2) puis deux en 443/444, trois en 444/445, quatre en 445/446, cinq en 446/447 et six en 449? M regravé peut être une modification mais IMP voit aussi parfois et même souvent la lettre M modifiée. Le coin d'avers utilisé pour plusieurs types allant de 420 à 450 est probablement un coin créé vers 440 qui a été employé avec d'anciens coins d'autres types (qui peut-être avaient été choisis par erreur pour être reproduits afin de payer le premier tribut) ce qui explique la modification de l'officine B/ sur le type CONCORDIA AVGG avec une réduction du nombre d'officines. 

Les monnaies intéressantes:

https://www.acsearch.info/search.html?id=1555052

https://www.acsearch.info/search.html?id=6458960

https://www.acsearch.info/search.html?id=551816

https://www.acsearch.info/search.html?id=243854

https://www.acsearch.info/search.html?id=532323

https://www.acsearch.info/search.html?id=875626

https://www.acsearch.info/search.html?id=7922871

https://www.acsearch.info/search.html?id=9994902

https://www.acsearch.info/search.html?id=2926265

https://www.acsearch.info/search.html?id=3669863

https://www.acsearch.info/search.html?id=4586310

https://www.acsearch.info/search.html?id=5660782

https://www.acsearch.info/search.html?id=5592163

https://www.acsearch.info/search.html?id=5248995

https://www.acsearch.info/search.html?id=5218985

https://www.acsearch.info/search.html?id=5149307

https://www.acsearch.info/search.html?id=4282044

https://www.acsearch.info/search.html?id=4248549

https://www.acsearch.info/search.html?id=2926263

https://www.acsearch.info/search.html?id=2843466

https://www.acsearch.info/search.html?id=3096368

https://www.acsearch.info/search.html?id=3328131

https://www.acsearch.info/search.html?id=1823544

https://www.acsearch.info/search.html?id=973592

https://www.acsearch.info/search.html?id=745555

https://www.acsearch.info/search.html?id=373168

https://www.acsearch.info/search.html?id=465657

https://www.acsearch.info/search.html?id=101058

CONOB est la marque pour l'ensemble de la période. COMOB apparaît seulement pour ce type et VOT XXX MVLT XXXX RIC 265 comme par hasard très rare et daté de 430/440 

La même particularité sur les monnaies Galla Placidia type IMP XXXXII COS XVII P P de même période avec marque majoritairement COMOB. 

Les imitations semblent toutes imiter le type sans point au revers alors que l'avers comporter parfois des points. Preuve que le type copié est bien celui sans point au revers. Seule une monnaie a un point en fin de légende. 

Peut-on estimer que ces monnaies COMOB sont d'un atelier (sirmium?) délocalisé afin de payer le tribut à partir de 435 jusqu'en 447 et reprend en 449? Les modifications CONOB COMOB sont dues à la gravure ou à une modification dans le but de fournir rapidement le tribut aux frontières? Le type CONOB sans point au revers serait donc la première production, transformée ensuite en COMOB. 

RIC 291 CONOB 6 points probablement un M.