The Tetrici

The Tetrici

The coinage of Tetricus I and his son, Tetricus II, is comprised in its entirety, of gold aurei, minted at a reduced standard of circa 1/72 libra, and huge quantities of very poor quality antoniniani that average about 2.5g and range from less than 1g to a little over 3.4g, both substantially below the standards of coins of Victorinus.

There were still the same two mints in operation, Cologne with its single officina and Trier with two, differentiated as before on antoniniani by the use of draped and cuirassed busts of Tetricus I at Trier and cuirassed busts at Cologne. The first issue at Cologne were consecration coins for Victorinus, with obverse legend DIVO VICRORINO PIO and reverse either CONSACRATIO (eagle standing n a globe holding a wreath in its beak) or PROVIDENTIA AVG, the latter type being inherited from Victorinus’ last issue, presumably using up leftover dies. Apart from any other motives, having Victorinus consecrated as a god might have been to counter the fact that in the central empire, Claudius II had just been consecrated, especially as Postumus, who might have been more worthy, had not been honoured in this way after his death.

As with Victorinus, the obverse legend the first Trier issue gave the emperor’s name in full, IMP C G P ESVVIVS TETRICVS AVG. This was abbreviated to IMP C P G ESV TETRICVS AVG in the second issue and then IMP C TETRICVSP F AVG (sometimes with dots, IM C TETRICVS•P•F•AVG) on all the others. The initial coinage was only in the name of Tetricus I. coins for his son, Tetricus II not appearing until the third issue. By contrast, the legends for Tetricus II actually get longer, starting With C P E TETRICVS CAES (or C•P•E•TETRICVS CAES) and then expanded C PIV ESV TETRICVS CAES.

The reverse types of Tetricus I are fairly trite and very limited in their extent At Trier these were SPES PVBLICA and VICTORIA AVG in the early issues, changing to COMES AVG and PAX AVG and finally SALVS AVGG and VIRTV AVGG. Those for Tetricus II start with PIETAS AVGVSTOR and PIETAS AVGG (sacrificial implements), SPES PVBLICA and PRINC IVVENT.

After the Divus Victorinus consecration coinage, the first Cologne mint issues for Tetricus had the reverse FIDES MILITVM, with the obverse legend contracting from IMP C P ESV TETRICVS AVG to IMP TETRICVS AVG and then IMP TETRICVS P FAVG on all other issues, using cuirassed busts throughout, By the middle of the reign the main reverse was LAETITIA AVG N or LAETITIA AVGG (on many coins with this reverse it is difficult to decide which). There was a marked improvement in the quality of the last two issues, HILARITAS AVG and SALVS AVGG for Tetricus I, seemingly matched by those of Tetricus II with NOBILITAS AVGG (though that reverse is quite rare) but not with his main reverse SPES AVGG. Tetricus II uses the obverse legend C PIV ESV TETRICVS CAES on all his coins from this mint.

It should be noted that Bland and Burnett in their catalogue of the Normanby hoard, place the Hilaritas and all the Salus coins (and the Nobilitas coins of Tetricus II) in the Trier mint, despite their consistent use of cuirassed busts instead of the normal draped and cuirassed busts at that mint. From this they infer that Trier was reduced from two officinae to just one at the end of the reign. They further suggest that all the dies were made at the same place, the work of a single engraver. I do not agree with any of this. It is contradictory to the accepted view, born out by stylistic considerations, for example the subtle differences in the portraits of Tetricus I, which at Trier slightly reminiscent of Victorinus (especially in the treatment of the nose) while that at Cologne somewhat austere and a lot more flattering. From this it can be seen immediately that both the Hilaritas and Salus coinages are the product of Cologne and not Trier. It is also highly unlikely that a single engraver could keep up with the demand for fresh dies even in one mint let alone two, especially at a time when the demand for coins was so high.

Portraits of Tetricus I

Left: cuirassed bust, Cologne mint
Right:¨draped and cuirassed bust, Trier mint.

I do agree with their statement that these late coins were of a higher weight and a better standard of workmanship. The reason for this improvement and the economic circumstances that made it possible are impossible to determine, but it may be worth noting that it must have followed soon after Aurelian’s first reform of the imperial coinage.

The remarks regarding the difficulty of obtaining good quality coins of Victorinus apply even more so to the coinage of the Tetrici, especially Tetricus II. As long ago as 1975, a superb example of a Tetricus II antoninianus sold for over £400, which, after allowing for inflation, has never been exceeded.

Tetricus I

Trier mint
British Museum