Commodus, new dating on the aureii

During other research, I noticed a small detail: an obverse die link between coins, the first of which is not dated precisely. I do not know if this link has already been noted somewhere and if I am the first discoverer.

   In 2016, were sold at Numismatica Ars Classica, a unique Commode Aureus. The type of reverse is: FORTVNA MANENTI. The coin is dated between 186 and 189. As Numismatica Ars Classica points out, the reverse is known on very rare denari (RIC 191 a). Total description of the coin:

O/: M COMMANT P – FELAVG BRIT

R/: FORTUNAEMANENTI _ CVPP

Therefore COS V PATER PATRIAE below on the reverse, which therefore dates the coin between 186 and 189. What is interesting is that I found this same coin of obverse, on a coin whose reverse used shows TR P XIII IMP VIII. So this coin is struck after 187 and before 189. From what I could see, several coins seem to share this same obverse, always with the legend TR P XIII IMP VIII, type FORTUNA. these coins seem (and I mean to say) to have been struck with a little worn die. I can not confirm anything because gold is a soft metal and it is necessary to differentiate between wear and bad impression. But the coin type MANENTI has a perfect and clear strike. While some coins of the second type show what seems to be a die wear. The coin that I link here: https://www.acsearch.info/search.html?id=1877318, sold by Gorny & Mosch Giessener Münzhandlung could enter into this category of worn dies, but wait to see another coin lower in the article. While waiting for the photo rights agreement, I can only put a link instead of an illustration. I notice that the G of AVG has lost its small outgrowth at the bottom of the horizontal bar, which we see on the type MANENTI. The bottom of the B BRIT is wider on the top, which is not the case on the other coin. Finally, the overall appearance is fatter, less clear, which suggests that this die is worn. The MANENTI type would have been struck first.

At this point, for me it is a track, because we can have used an old obverse die much later. But this possibility seems unlikely to me. Do you imagine a die left unused for months to see more? And I add that other coins with this same die, for the usual FORTUNA type, have clear details and therefore, it seems logical to imagine that the two strikes are successive. It is not counting on a third type also using this die of obverse: the type AEQUITAS. Always with the same legend of reverse, so dated between 187 and 188. Link to this coin sold by Hess Divo: https://www.acsearch.info/search.html?id=1281766. The M of COMM has a die break on its top. She was struck last. Small remark, the B and G that I quoted before, are very clear and without missing detail or outgrowth on the B. which shows that the coin of Gorny & Mosch Giessener Münzhandlung did not show worn B or G, otherwise we would also have the break visible on the M as on the type AEQUITAS.

Conclusion: With the information we have, we can begin to emit a theory: a coin strcuk between 187 and 188 has a die break that does not exist on the coin type MANENTI. So we can date the type MANENTI before 189 in a certain way and even think of a strike before 188? Imagine a strike of the type MANENTI, then FORTUNA and then AEQUITAS seems correct. That said, nothing is sure because we know nothing about the quantities issued. Strike uninterrupted or in two times for the type AEQUITAS who would have used during his second strike phase, this obverse ... Impossible to say. But we can already see that the year 189 is to be removed for the type MANENTI. As we say during an investigation, what seems to be most likely is often what happened. Of course we are here in the field of science, so we should not draw any clear conclusion with these elements. An investigator would say that there is a very high probability of having a MANENTI-type strike before 188 or at the begining.