Delmatius caesar, 335 – 337. Solidus, Constantinopolis 336–337, AV 4.54 g. FL DELMATIVS NOB CAES Laureate, draped and cuirassed bust r. Rev. PRINCIPI – IV – VE – NTVTIS Delmatius standing l., in military attire, holding vexillum in r. hand and sceptre in l.; in r. field, two standards. In exergue, CONS. C 15 var. (in exergue, TSE). RIC 113. Alföldi 406. Depeyrot 7/10.
Extremely rare. Several scratches and nicks, otherwise very fine

Ex Naville III, Evans, 1922, 199; NAC 33, 2006, 601 and NAC 52, 2009, 614 sales.
Though Constantine the Great made many impressive and correct decisions in his three decades as emperor, one must seriously question his plan for succession. Not only did he divide the empire among his remaining three sons, but he added to the mix two of his half-nephews, Delmatius and Hanniballianus. With the benefit of hindsight we know this arrangement failed, but even at the time it must have seemed half-baked: only in a fantasy world could five young noblemen share an empire. Constantine tested his theory by having all five of his successors installed by 335 so during the remaining two years of his life the ageing emperor could shepherd them. Arguably, he had created a new Tetrarchy, but unlike Diocletian’s merit-based model of two emperors and two caesars, all four of Constantine’s choices were family members holding the title Augustus, and a fifth member, Hanniballianus, was given a special title (‘King of Kings’) and function on the Persian border. After Constantine’s death in May of 337, his three sons wasted little time in murdering Delmatius and Hanniballianus along with many members of that branch of the family, (among the few survivors were Julian II and Constantius Gallus, both of whom emerged later). If the brief reign of Delmatius represents anything, it is that the level-headed and practical Constantine – despite his decades of cynical decision making – still harboured a naive hope that his descendants could rule more wisely and generously than he.