Please help: Roman coin, Diocletian

edmerlr

After years of studying 19th Century U.S. Coins, I have a budding interest in Roman coins.

My interest is very much in its infancy. ...so for the time being, I am not investing in hard copy reference materials. I am sticking with the "Wonderful World of Google."

I have not been able to find a photo on the Internet of the following coin. I believe it is a "common" coin. I would like to BOTH confirm what I know about it AND to find out MORE INFORMATION about it.

Here is what I know. ...and please correct me if I am wrong.

(1) The coin is from the period of the Emporer Diocletian, 284 AD to 305 AD.
(2) The statue on the reverse is of Jupiter.
(3) The "XXI" on the reverse refers to the metal content: 20:1 copper to silver
(4) The "B" on the reverse refers to EITHER the second office of the Roman Mint OR it is a Mint Mark for one of the Roman Eastern Mints. Which is correct? If it is an eastern mint, which one?

If anyone has the time and/or inclination to share any information about this coin, IT WOULD BE VERY MUCH APPRECIATED.

Thank you so much for your time.

Regards,

Ed

Photos of the coin with toning:




Photos of the coin with the toning removed:

WillieBoyd2

edmerlr

Thank you so much.

I checked out the RIC link you gave me.

I agree, it does look like RIC 271.

...but above the left arm on my coin (Jupiter's right arm) it looks like there is "more there" than what I see in the photo of the RIC271.

Ed

dcamp78

<< <i>
...but above the left arm on my coin (Jupiter's right arm) it looks like there is "more there" than what I see in the photo of the RIC271.
>>



Looks like a trident - a symbol of power...

WillieBoyd2

Roman coin dies were hand-carved so coins from different dies might look slightly different.
Also wear on the coin can change the appearance.

I have a Byzantine coin with an image supposed to be the emperor Justinian but looks like a giant ant.
Justinian coin

STLNATS

Coin is pre monetary reform of 294.

Your explanation of the XXI is one, but is still open to controversary and I think that the more commonly accepted explanation is that it is a denomination mark, that 20 smaller units equal this one (or 20 of these equal a higher denomination). The eastern coins of the period also use the equivalent KA (20 = 1 in Greek). These things were silver washed to look like silver coins, so it would be odd to point out the disbasement so explicitly.

This mark was also used on folles of Antioch and Alexandria (and several others) following the edict of maximal prices (300-1) along with a KV mark. One explanation is that XX or K (20) sesterces = 5 (V) denarii = this coin and was used along with the Moneta type to drive home the values the emperors had assigned to the coin.

I know folles much better, but don't think that the B is either a workshop # nor a mint mark. If this is siscia, I think it indicates that it is the 2nd issue of the mint. On folles, the B would be associated with the mint mark and would designate the 2nd workshop in most cases. I think I recall that this was an innovation of Diocletian's reform and don't think that workshop indicators were were commonly used before then.

Tennisman12

It looks like Willieboyd2 has it pegged!,sharp as a Crackerjack. Edmerlr don't get started on this really old stuff, it will drive you crazy!

lordmarcovan

I just bought a Diocletian with sandy desert patina, which is something I've recently grown to appreciate.




Greetings from another newbie Roman coin collector!