For cataloguers of Roman Imperial coins, RIC (Roman Imperial Coinage, Volumes I–X, 1923 onwards) is the ‘Bible’. A complete run sits on my desk at home, accompanied by a select few additions — a couple of volumes of BMC (British Museum Catalogues); a couple of Hunterian Museum Catalogues (for their copious illustrations); LRBC (Late Roman Bronze Coinage, 1960) for the Valentinianic period; and, for the London mint, Cloke and Toone, 2015. The latter can now be replaced, only a decade later, by Cloke and Toone’s second edition, 2024.
The first edition of their work revolutionised the identification of coinage of the London mint, which was opened in the aftermath of the victory of Constantius I over Allectus in 296 and closed by Constantine I in 325 as the axis of the Empire shifted towards the east. Prior to 2015 we had relied on the London elements of RIC VI (Sutherland, 1967) for the period 294–313 and RIC VII (Bruun, 1966) for 313–325. Unsurprisingly, both volumes are showing their age, and Cloke and Toone’s update, taking into account the enormous volume of coinage (including several very large hoards) recovered in the intervening years, vastly simplifies the identification of the Tetrarchic and Constantinian coinage produced in Britannia.
Most importantly, the authors devised a cataloguing and numbering system that anticipated the need to incorporate future finds, including previously unrecorded types; and this system has been used to good effect in the second edition, which therefore purposely replaces, rather than sits alongside, the earlier edition. The new edition now includes data from the three largest Tetrarchic hoards ever discovered in Britain (the Rauceby, Fyfield and Wold Newton hoards); the London portion of the Juillac hoard; as well as data from the PAS (Portable Antiquities Scheme), auction catalogues and elsewhere. The first edition expanded the number of known types by nearly 70%, from the 617 listed in RIC to 1037; and the second edition has added another 15 to the total.
The new edition retains all the useful features of the old. These include a two-way concordance with RIC, which greatly facilitates updating of the catalogues in older coin reports; and a much more precise dating scheme than that provided by RIC, based on the detailed analysis of mint marks and the series of four weight and size reductions which took place between 307 and 313. Under this scheme, coins were struck at 32 to the Roman pound from c. 294 to 307 (diameter 25 mm); at 42 per libra from c. May 307 (with only a slight reduction in diameter, to 24 mm); 48 per libra from c. November 307 (23 mm); 72 per libra from late 309 (21–22 mm); and 96 per libra (19–20 mm) from c. mid-313.
That said, a catalogue arranged according to weight standard has its drawbacks for the cataloguing of poorly preserved specimens (which describes a large percentage of site finds); so, to my mind the most useful innovation was the recording not just of weight and flan size (the latter also evident from the splendid illustrations), but also the size of the beaded circle that outlines the types on both obverse and reverse of the coins. This, on many imperfectly preserved examples, is an invaluable aid to identification, often allowing a badly corroded or otherwise damaged coin to be dated relatively accurately regardless of its weight.
This is not something that could be done with any confidence using RIC, since many site finds are so badly worn and/or corroded or abraded that they cannot safely be linked to a particular weight standard. As an example, thanks to Cloke and Toone (admittedly used in combination with some excellent modern X-ray images), I have recently been able to suggest a much more accurate date for a stratigraphically crucial coin from South Shields that two or three decades ago I had identified simply as ‘perhaps Carausius or possibly Tetrarchic’.
The introductory notes in the second edition are largely unchanged from the first, but they incorporate addition information on weight standards derived from the more recent hoards (p. 15); and there has been a slight revision of the section on nummi of the second reduction struck at London under Constantine Caesar (Part 5.03, pp. 49–52).
The adjustments to the chronology provided by RIC afford an opportunity for scholars to reappraise the significance of individual types. Perhaps most important of these, from a historical perspective, are the Adventus issues, exclusive to London at this time and arguably to be related to imperial visits to the province. The mint of London produced four such issues between c. 307 and c. 314, assigned in RIC to c. Summer 307; c. mid-310–late 312; 313–14; and 314–15, respectively.
The first type, ADVENTVS AVGG, struck in the name of Constantine as Caesar (5.03.005, mint-mark PLN; re-dated to c. November–December 307) clearly cannot relate to Constantine himself, and I am happy to accept that the Augusti concerned are Maximian and Maxentius, celebrating their triumph in Rome; but to my mind this by no means precludes a direct relationship to Britain for the other issues, which, according to Cloke and Toone’s scheme, were minted in c. 311–12 (7.01.020-22, mint mark /*//PLN); c. 314 (ADVENTVS AVG N; 8.02.001-3, mint mark S/F//PLN; and 8.03.001, mint mark S/F/MLL, also ascribed to c. 314).
This, however, is a small point of disagreement — and the salient point is that the material is presented clearly for all to draw their own conclusions. This book is a splendid addition to the numismatist’s armoury — and not just for the London mint. Its scheme will surely form the basis for the full revision of RIC VI and VII, when it comes; and, in the meantime, I (for one) am tempted (and happily admit to yielding to the temptation), when cataloguing continental issues, to extrapolate their dating scheme for London to Trier and further afield.
