Theodosius, Antioch | mint | RIC | G | V2 | T | A | RIC plate |
| Aq | 37 | 2 | 2 | |||
| 51 | S | R | ||||
| Rome | 50 | 4 | ||||
| Sis | 30 | S | S | |||
| 37 | R | R | V2-IX.15 | |||
| Th | 49 | S | S | V2-X.21 | ||
| Her | 19 | R | C | C | ||
| Con | 63 | C | C | |||
| Cyz | 21 | S | C | C | R | |
| Nic | 38 | R | S | |||
| Ant | 56 | S | C | C | S | A-XIV.19 |
| 65 | C | C | C | A-XIV.18 | ||
| Ale | 13 | 3 | S | R,C,S,S | R | |
| 19 | S
|
S | R,S | V2-XVI.13 T-XVI.15 A-XVI.14 |
||
| mint | G | V2 | T | A |
Cayon G--, V2-79 (1, Ale), T 76(2, Aq?, Th?), A 63(2,
Ant?, ?)
Hunter G--, T 86.50(Nic), T 86.64(Ant), T 86.68(Ale), A--
DO for Arcadius: none. Table 18, "Western Coinages," page 108. "The VOT/X/MVLT/XV (or XX) coins struck in 387 were struck for the decennalia of Theodosius in 387, celebrated at the same time as Arcadius's quinquenallia." The "XV" termination is on gold. Does this quotation say that all these coins were struck for this occasion and at this date? Or does it only say that those struck in 387 (among the others, including ones dated earlier by RIC) were struck for this reason?
Ratto photos, Arcadius 136.
RIC X, 419, plate 18.419, has this type for Theodosius II as "R5". Their example is almost full flan, except for the mint mark, and only 10mm. It does not have a star behind the head, but the legend is unbroken. Is it this and the small size that suggests it is Theodosius II? I put it in Table 3A as type 3A5.