THE ROMAN IMPERIAL COINAGE EDITED BY ©. H. V. SUTHERLAND, CBE, MA, D.Litt, PBA, FS.A. Emeritus Student of Christ Church, Oxford Formerly Keeper of the Heberden Coin Room, Ashmolean Museum, Oxford AND R. A. G. CARSON, MA, FBA, FSA. Keaper of Goins and Medals in the British Museum VOLUME VIII THE FAMILY OF CONSTANTINE I AD. 337-364 BY J.P. G. KENT, BA, Ph.D., FSA. Deputy Keaper of Coins and Medals in the British Museum LONDON SPINK & SON LTD 198tGENERAL EDITORS’ FOREWORD ‘More than a decade has elapsed since the preparation of the present volume was announced in the foreword to vol. VI, the last in date to be published in this series. That interval of time underlines the difficult nature of the work which Dr J. P, C. Kent has carried out. Each successive volume in the series has shown the need for ever more accurate analysis and arrangements and this greater precision, o evident in vol. IX, and increasingly employed in vols. VI and VI, is no less painfully necessary for the period from A.D. 337 10 364, in which we count ourselves fortunate to have been able to call upon Dr Kent's long experience and detailed knowledge. We believe that his ‘treatment of this petiod in vol. VIII will be most gratefully welcomed, by all numismatists and historians. With this volume the original scope of The Roman Imperial Coinage, as first ‘conceived by Harold Mattingly and E. A. Sydenham when vol. I appeared in 1923, has been fulfilled. After more than fifty years the series which they planned now stands complete. Its standards and its objectives have changed with the years, and it has ended up more like a corpus than like the manval that was originally intended. It may yet develop further. Material for a tenth volume, as already foreshadowed, down to the reform of Anastasius, has for long been forming in Dr Kent's hands; and revision of certain earlier volumes (notably I and V) has been begun in order to remedy obvious deficiencies. The extent to which these further projects can be carried forward depends on the extent of public support. If this were forthcoming, then the editor and the publishers (to whom the editors, through Mr Howard Linecar, are deeply indebted) would feel that still wider objectives could be achieved, ¢. H. V. SUTHERLAND R. A. G. CARSON viiAUTHOR’S PREFACE ‘The coinage of the middle years ofthe fourth century a.v. is common in all metals, but its among the least known series of antiquity. Magnentius alone has inspired the preparation of a corpus; even Julian is represented only by fa handful of studies, none of them entirely satisfactory. ‘There is indeed a fgreat demand from archaeologists for an accurate presentation of the base- metal issues found in such abundance throughout the Empire; Late Roman Bronze Coinage has remained in print for twenty years, testimony to the need fora reliable handbook. Yet this general neglect ofthe period is of twentieth- century growth, and in the late nineteenth century, the elucidation and presentation of late Roman coinage in the hands of savants like Missong And Hetiner atiained a level that was not to be surpassed for almost century. In Britain Sir George Hill, on the Continent O. Voetter, mark the end ofan era of real comprehension an ‘As the Bibliography will show, there is no great body of studies on which it has been possible to base this work. Even today, few scholars work on the numismatic material, though, with the securer datings made possible by RBG, there is an increasing number of studies of the currency. Coinage of the Houses of Valentinian and ‘Theodosius was the great love of the late J. W. E. Pearce, but surviving notes show that he was not unmindful of ‘arlier coinage. Although his published work on that period is confined to some very Pertinent observations on contemporary imitations, there is little doubt that, had he come to numismatic studies a younger man, he would in due course have turned his attention to the sons of Constantine ‘The coinage of 337-364 has been presented along broadly traditional lines, though the actual appearance of the page has been lightened by the aban- donment of many of the heavy vertical rules. There are two significant changes of terminology: the knowledge of metallic composition gained over the last sixteen years has led to the general definition of the base-metal coinages as ‘Base Billon and Bronze’; and the loaded word ‘Rarity’ has been replaced by the neutral ‘Frequency’—it would be absurd to think of many entries having ‘rarity’ in any meaningful sense. The determination of ‘frequency’ is necessarily subjectives it has been arrived at by considering the composition of hoards and sitefinds, by totalling separate specimens in public collections and sale catalogues, and, not least, by drawing upon the expertise of colleagues, Clearly, a single large hoard in which an unusual issue happens to be well represented might easily distort frequency, but an attempt hhas been made to take account of this, and I have not simply set a total of specimens against a numerical scale, ‘Every generation and each student have their predilections in the field of study, and the Introduction faithfully reflects this in the discussion of ota,AUTHOR'S PREFACE and in the extended and detailed chapter on currency. I hope it wil be clear that I regard the monetary system as essentially three quite distinet and not closely integrated metallic series of gold, silver and base metal, and likewise that I do not share the concern of many students over the exact weight of the Roman pound; I do not believe this to be knowable, least ofall from the weights of surviving coins and exegia, and T doubt whether it was in practice identical from Amiens to Alexandria. Previous volumes in the series, though always including precious metal ‘multiples, have differed in thei attitude to the medallic bronze and billon In this stady, the latter have been included; large medallions and the little VOTA PVBLIGA series will be found in separate sections at the end of the Rome catalogue, though other ‘medallie 4% 4° will be found in the coin- lists at an appropriate place. After much hesitation, the gold uniface ‘Schau- rmiinzen’ have been omitted from the Catalogue; their relationship with the ‘ordinary gold coinage is s0 tenuous a to cast serious doubt on the possibility that they possessed an aetual monetary function. In a work which has taken so long to prepare and which has had to be undertaken amid many other quite unrelated academic preoccupations there are inevitably some inconsistencies and changes of plan. One concerns the POP ROMANVS coinage of Constantinople, whose post-337 dating in ERBC was accepted by Professor Bruun in RIC VII. I had become doubtful of 0 late a date, because ofits incidence in British hoards, and discussion with Mlle Claude Brenot has now finally convinced me that it belongs to the early 30s and should properly be rejected from this volume. However, ihas been retained, with appropriate comment, so that this common coinage should not lack an RIC reference. Conversely, T have found it necessary #0 clude certain Rome medallions already catalogued by Bruun; hs references are prominently set down. Finally, I would draw attention to the GLORIA EXERCITVS issues of Trier between 337 and 340. The recognition of a major coinage during the interregnum of 337, and the generally imperfect state of surviving examples, have made this part of the catalogue less dan satisfactory. A detailed study of these numerous and unattractive litle coins is much needed. This work is of course no more ‘definitive’ than any other similar numis matic study, and at almost every point I have been acutely eonscious of the pioneering nature of many of my clasifications. lam notwithstanding deeply indebted to my predecessors and fellow-workers, and T hope that this is adequately expressed in the Bibliography. I shall be more than content if in the coming years RIC VIII becomes a quarry facilitating the detailed studies the need for which appears on so many pages Tt would be almost impossible o acknowledge individually all those who have helped in the preparation of this volume. In fst place, however, must bbementioned The Institute for Advanced Study, Princeton, and the American Numismatic Society, New York. With them must be named the Trustees of the British Museum, who gave me Ieave of absence in 1970-1971 to take up the opportunity ofa period of study in the United States of America. During that time were prepared the lists of coins from which the catalogue was ultimately made, and extensive drafts of introductory material. The patience,