Glycerius, 473-474.
Tremissis Mediolanum 473-474, AV 1.50 g. DN GLVCER IVS F P AVG Pearl-diademed, draped and cuirassed bust r. Rev. Cross within wreath; in exergue, CONOB. Ulrich-Bansa 148. Lacam 32 (these dies). Ulrich-Bansa 148. LRC 937 (this reverse die). Depeyrot 35/1. RIC 3114.
Extremely rare. A scuff on obverse and flan slightly bent, otherwise very fine

In 472 the West descended into a state of crisis, for two emperors and the emperor-making general Ricimer all died. Ricimer was seamlessly replaced by his nephew Gundobad, who kept the throne vacant for four months, until he appointed as emperor Glycerius, a man of no particular distinction who had been the last emperor's comes domesticorum. The Eastern emperor Leo I was enraged by this and sent an army to Italy to remove Glycerius, who had been appointed illegally. The expedition was led by Julius Nepos, the magister militum of Dalmatia, who captured Glycerius without a fight on June 19, 474. However, Nepos made the fatal error of sparing Glycerius' life and appointing him bishop of Salona, within his own family's fiefdom. During the course of Nepos' expedition Leo I died, and a struggle for power erupted in the East. Lacking any direction from Constantinople, Nepos claimed the western throne for himself, only to be overthrown about fourteen months later by his magister militum Orestes, who then hailed his own son Romulus Augustus emperor. Nepos fled to Dalmatia, where he continued to rule autonomously until 480, when he was murdered, seemingly at the instigation of Glycerius, who apparently had no gratitude for having been spared six years before. The coinage of Glycerius is quite rare: virtually none of his silver coins survive, and his gold coins seldom come to market. He struck solidi at Ravenna and Milan, and tremisses – the most popular denomination of gold in the West – at Rome, Ravenna, Milan. All of his solidi seem to have been struck in his own name, whereas he appears to have struck tremisses not only in his own name, but also in the name of the eastern emperor Leo. Both Kent and Lacam attribute this tremissis to Rome, though with some hesitation as the portrait style is considerably more compact and appealing than those on other tremisses attributed to Rome, which have a rough and unsophisticated style.