IMP XXXXII COS XVII P P (type III / II, B) (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.

IMP XXXXII COS – XVII PP

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.

One coin sold on 26/09/2011 by Fritz Rudolf Künker GmbH & Co. KG, link to the sale: https://www.acsearch.info/search.html?id=1090188.

Variant without a dot on the obverse and two dots on the reverse located after the first and the last P of P P. COMOB mark. Reverse of type III (legend with dots) and design of type II, shield of type B.

This coin has a dot above the first X of XXXXII, which I have chosen to disregard. One might consider it a three dot variety if that dot were included, but its location combined with a raised pellet beneath COMOB, right at the edge of the die, suggests a die break rather than an intentional dot.

RIC X does not list any coin with two dots without officina letter. It is possible that coins with only one dot actually have two or more... the same reasoning applies to coins with two or three.. dots, which could have more. These details are too small and shallow, prone to wear or poor minting quality. Coins with almost invisible dots are regularly observed. Coins in excellent condition leave little doubt as to the number of dots inscribed, but we must still remain open to the possibilities I just outlined.

On many coins (regardless of the number of dots), there is a sort of dark dot located between the two Ps or after the last one. If one of the dots is unmistakably present after one of the Ps, the other letter often shows another dark dot. Is it a case of a clogged die revealing a tiny remnant that looks like a sort of smudge due to the lighting in the photo? This also applies to other spots in front of other letters (though this is less common). It could just as well be a matter of micro-cracks in the die like those seen on the obverse but the location of these small details on the reverse is peculiar, as they are situated between the letters.

Je note ici un coin de revers montrant deux points entre P et P. Voici la monnaie: 

Photo of a coin sold on 24/11/2022 by Roma Numismatics Limited, E-Sale 103, lot 1407, link to the sale: https://www.acsearch.info/search.html?id=10218186, link to their website: http://www.romanumismatics.com/. This coin shares the reverse die with several other coins: coin sold on 07/04/2016 by Roma Numismatics Limited, Auction 11, lot 905, link to the sale: https://www.acsearch.info/search.html?id=3020695. This coin has been resold on 08/09/2016 by Heritage Auctions, Auction 3049, lot 30295, link to the sale: https://www.acsearch.info/search.html?id=3238027. These last two sales illustrate the point I make in all or most of the sheets: that counting the number of dots is difficult. Indeed, these photos reveal a third dot between "XVII" and "P P" one that is invisible in the other sales photos (although one might think the dot was added later to the die used to strike these specimens, this remains unlikely, as a shape resembling a flat spot is visible in the same location on the other coins). Lets list the last specimen struck from the same dies as the two coins above: coin sold on 05/03/2009 by Numismatica Ars Classica, Auction 51, lot 1102, link to the sale: https://www.acsearch.info/search.html?id=584997. Coin resold by the same auction house on 24/03/2010, Auction 54, lot 1338, link to the sale: https://www.acsearch.info/search.html?id=759564.I have not assigned a number to these specimens as a legend variant with two (or three?) dots, because it appear to be minor die breaks. Their shape, and the fact that they are followed by raised trails, indicate that they are fractures. That said, with a view to keeping a record for the day when an actual specimen might be available for analysis, I am noting these examples here.

Type III: with the mark CONOB or COMOB (CONOB here). Legend punctuation on the reverse. This corresponds to type II of RIC X. Variant A and B are the same as RIC X: A = large, B = smaller, rounder shield. This type blends characteristics of types I and II in terms of design and the position of the legend relative to the shield: Constantinople large or small, helmet flat or not, drapery tight or not natural, legend ending before or at the level of the shield. The likely reuse of old reverse dies (there are already links between obverse dies and coins without reverse dots) consequently mixes the first two types. This mixing of the two types may also demonstrate the high probability that this series with dots on reverse is the last. For each Type III coin, I add the reverse design type after ''/'', thus giving either: ''III / I'' or ''III / II'', designating a Type III reverse with a Type I or II design followed by shield type A or B.