Orange Julius

That’s a cool coin! I’d love to get some late Roman silver but it’s so expensive! I get that later Roman silver is rarer than say… 2nd century denari but it’s crazy how expensive nice siliquae can be. I want some! …and some Trier fallen horseman!! Here’s a few that types that haven’t been posted yet: Constantius II DN CONSTANTIVS PF AVG, pearl diademed, draped and cuirassed bust right / SPES REI-PVBLICE, emperor standing left, holding globe and inverted spear. Mintmark SMKS RIC VIII 117 Constantius II 337-361. Bronze 23 mm 350 Siscia. Diademed bust r.; A in left, star in right field DN CONSTANTIVS PF AVG / CONCORDIA MILITVM Emperor holding two standards with Christogram, star above; mintmark A/°ASIS°. RIC 284 Above is the sole bareheaded campgate type. Very rare and unlisted in RIC. Constantius II, AE3, c.328-329 (?), Nicomedia, Officina 2 FL IVL CONSTANTIVS NOB C Bare-headed, draped, cuirassed bust left PROVIDEN_TIAE CAES . Campgate with seven rows, two turrets, no doors, star above, top and bottom rows empty blocks SMNB in exergue 18mm x 20mm, 3.20g RIC VII, -- (cf. RIC 158, but bare-headed bust type) https://www.forumancientcoins.com/notInRic/7nic-158_d.html

That’s a fun coin with an interesting reverse! I have one that I bought last year too! Gallienus AR Antoninianus. Mediolanum, AD 262-263. GALLIENVS AVG, radiate bust to right / APOLLO CONSERVA, Apollo standing facing, raising hand to head and holding lyre on altar. RIC V.1 467 (sole reign) var. (altar); MIR 1166; RSC 93.

Sometimes I like nice examples of usually scrappy, poorly preserved and under appreciated coins. Here’s one in better shape than most of the type. Still scrappy but I’d challenge anyone to show a nicer one! I got it for $3.25 total in 2017. Constantius II A.D. 337- 340 FL IVL CONSTANTIVS AVG; laureate, cuirassed bust right VIRTVS AVGG NN; Soldier standing holding spear and resting hand on shield. In ex. TRP RIC VIII Trier 74

One of my favorites that’s not easy to find: Constantius II AE3 "Spurned Captive" Constantius II AD 324-361 AE3 Obv: D N CONSTAN-TIVS P F AVG - Diademed bust right, draped and cuirassed. Rev: FEL TEMP RE-PARATIO - Emperor in military dress advancing left, holding Victory on a globe and a standard with chi-rho in the banner; with his right foot he spurns a captive. Exe: (gamma) \ (star) TSA (star) / (star) Thessalonica mint: AD 348-351 = RIC VIII, 172, page 418 - LRBC #1671

Oooh, nice coin! Here’s mine:

That is a great informational read. We discussed this back in 2020 on CT. I have one of those scarce Aurelian year 1 coins and I was interested in the chronology. Below is that I posted at the time on the coin, taken from the article: ”So, I finally got time to read this article.I was looking to find out who held Alexandria when these Aurelian year one eagle coins were minted. Was it the short time that Aurelian was in control of the city in 270 (makes sense), or where they minted when Alexandria was under the control of Zabdas occupying the city for Vabalathus/Zenobia before minting the Vabalathus/Aurelian year 4/1 coins? The paper lays out the timeline well but does not seem to directly comment on who was in charge when these were minted. Common sense seems to say that they were minted under Aurelian before the city was re-occupied by Zabdas.Here's some quotes from the paper laying out the timeline in regards to these coins: Autumn 270 - Zabdas invades Egypt, probably shortly after Aurelian’s accession in October. The Roman governor Tenagino Probus briefly regains control of the province but is defeated and killed by the Palmyrenes in December 270. Mint of Alexandria strikes coins in names of Aurelian year 1 and Vabalathus. Zenobia’s general Zabdas conquered Egypt at about this time (October 270). Some of the sources (Zonaras 12.27, Syncellus 721; Dodgeon and Lieu 1991, pp. 86-8; Peachin 1983, p. 327, Watson 1999, pp. 61-2) place the Palmyrene invasion of Egypt early in Aurelian’s reign, although others (Zosimus 1.44, Historia Augusta, Claudius 11.1; Dodgeon and Lieu 1991, pp. 86-7) incorrectly place it in Claudius’s reign. Tenagino Probus, the Governor of Egypt and loyal to Aurelian, briefly regained Alexandria from the Palmyrenes in about November, before the Palmyrenes recaptured it, with support from within the city. Zabdas’s army subsequently defeated Tenagino Probus’s force, and Probus committed suicide (Watson 1999, pp. 62-3). The papyri provide more precise dating evidence for these events: documents from 12 October to 11 November 270 are dated according to ‘the consuls of the current year’, suggesting some confusion as to who was in authority, while twopapyri dated respectively to between 7 and 15 December and 27 December 270 and 25 January 271 are dated to Aurelian’s year one and Vabalathus, suggesting that the Palmyrenes had defeated Tenagino Probus by 15 December 270 (Rathbone 1986, p. 123). Aurelian’s reign began with a small issue of coins in his sole name dated Year 1 (September - c.December 270), and was succeeded by an issue with year one of Aurelian and no regnal year for Vabalathus (c.December 270 – c.March 271), followed by another in the names of Aurelian and Vabalathus dated Years 1 and 4 (c.March 271 - 28 August 271 It seems that initally the Egyptian authorities placed Aurelian’s dies imperii after the start of the New Year on 29 August 270, and that coins were issued on this reckoning firstly for Aurelian alone (Year 1), then for Aurelian and Vabalathus (in Aurelian’s Years 1 and 2, December 270 - spring 272)... With these comments, it seems that these year 1 sole Aurelian eagle coins were minted in October/November - early December 270 when Aurelian's forces controlled the city before Zabdas gained control back in December, then minting of the Vabalathus/Aurelian coins began.”

Great coins! I especially like the Aurelian. I recently bought one too! Aurelianus (270-272) - Alexandria, with Vabalathus - BI Tetradrachm (dated RY 1 and 4 = AD 270/271, 8.82 gm.) - Laureate, draped and cuir. bust right of Aurelian / Laureate, diademed, draped and cuir. bust right of Vabalathus (Dattari 5422 / Milne 4308 / Emmett 3914)

I absolutely love this coin. It’s nearly in “just from the mint” condition but still looks like junk. 😂 Look at the silvering on the obverse, the sharpness of the portrait… then there’s the flan that looks like it’s been eaten by a garbage disposal, the reverse die clash… it’s beautifully ugly.

Here’s my Arcadius of the type from Constantinople.

Wow! That’s a great coin! I love Beavis but that reverse is really cool. It looks like a barbarous fallen horseman struck over an earlier GLORIA EXERCITVS soldiers and standard(s) coin. Super cool!

L. Lucretius Trio, Denarius, Rome, 76 BC AR Laureate head of Neptune r. behind, trident and control numeral, Rv. Winged boy on dolphin speeding r. below, L LVCRETI / TRIO. Crawford 390/2 Lucretia 3 Sydenham 784

Oh yes! That could be another fun direction in itself, coins and modern/abstract art 🖼️!

BEHOLD! The Cyclops of Constantinople! Constantius Gallus, as Caesar, BI Centenionalis. Constantinople, AD 351-355. D N FL CL CONSTANTIVS NOB CAES, bare-headed, draped and cuirassed bust to right / FEL TEMP REPARATIO, soldier standing to left, holding round shield and spearing fallen horseman to lower left; Γ-• to either side of spear, CONSB in exergue. RIC VIII 107; LRBC 2029. ...well, actually he has another eye on the side of this head, so more than just one eye. But a Cyclops sometimes had more than one eye. Here's a fun link on the topic: https://sarahemilybond.com/2014/10/26/third-eye-blind-the-cyclops-in-late-antiquity/ The effect is much more apparent on the coin in-hand, I wish I could have captured it better in the photo. Anyway, "The Cyclops of Constantinople" sounds like the best book title ever. This coin that was going to go into the "Posts that don't deserve their own thread.... thread" but I figured it could lead to seeing your fun and mis-struck coins too. So..... BRING OUT YOUR FREAKS OF NATURE AND MISSHAPEN FORMS! Let’s see your humorous mis-struck or double/triple struck coins! AND… if you wish, post with your coin a name or title befitting of it’s freakishness.

I don’t see anything suspicious. Weigh it when you get it and look at the edges to make sure they look normal but I’d guess it’s ok. I’ve been wanting one of these too!

OOOOOHHHHH!!!!! Do I have a post for you!!!!! I have your answer! I know! For real, not a guess! (Page down for dramatic effect….) (Get ready…) (Almost to the answer!) BOOOOOM! Your coin is either a die match to mine… or the same thing happened twice. The coin is either an over strike, or a flip over double strike. I think the chin cone is a feature from a past coin or from the reverse “M”! Cool huh?! Nice coin! …now I feel like I should have waited and let the mystery simmer for awhile. I got excited.

I’m just going to drop these here just in case 😬 1 2 Any help would be… amazing. Thank you!

I have two similar Ottoman coin I’ve struggled with for years… I don’t suppose I could have you look at a couple more?

Ok ok ok... I have another question about the Price reference. There are two references. I'll use Ed's text for copy/paste simplicity: Price 2799 - Symbol (Below): torch with fillets → Price 2800 - Symbol (Below): torch ← I'm guessing fillets are the little tassel thingys at the bottom of the "torch." My coin seems to be a mix of the two, "torch with fillets" but "←". If you look at other acsearch listings for Price 2800, you find coins like below, torch ← (no fillets). Price 2800 example: My coin: My coin is torch (fire) left with fillets (tassels). Does that make it Price 2799v, 2800v, or another ref? I'm also just now noticing that the bow case is oriented the other direction. At what point does any of this matter! Haha, oh I love coins. So assuming the arrow → points to the top of the object... My coin is: Bow case: → Club: ← Torch with Fillets: ← ...the combination of which seems to be hard to find an example of... out of the 346 coins on acsearch found with the search words "bow club Herakles torch" there are NO examples with the same orientations. Weird.

Thank you @Ryro and @Ed Snible for the references and assistance! I like to know the differences behind the reference numbers, so this info is very helpful. So… as my torch fire is to the left, my coin is Price 2800 huh. Ok, sounds good. @Ryro also that’s a nice coin! Mine’s a bit more irregular in shape and although the added mineral color is pretty, the green and the black on the reverse of my coin makes it a bit hard to appreciate the details… as it is a crisply struck and a well preserved coin. Anyway, I like yours a lot! @ominus1 I like your coin as well! That thunderbolt on the reverse is cool! The coin looks to have nice relief and is in great condition. Love it! I also like your storage system. It’s kinda like the system I use for coins that have arrived but I have yet to research and get into the binders.

WOW! It's been a while since I've been able to look into this thread. Whenever it pops up, I haven't had the time to look in. Anyway, WOW @Prieure de Sion, what a run of amazing Gordian-era coins you've been collecting and buying! My favorite 3 are the Gordian as Caesar, the IOVI CONSERVATORI, or the Pupienus! Keep them coming! I don't have anything new... actually I do but it's not pretty. I bought a cheap Gordian denarius but the style is really ugly. Maybe I'll photograph is and post it later with a pretty coin to balance out the ugly.

Hi all, A quick self-serving topic. I have this below Herakles Club/Bow coin. Looking at similar examples on acsearch, it looks like the reference attribution for this coin would be either Price 2799 or 2800. I do not have M. Price's book "The Coinage of in the Name of Alexander the Great and Philip Arrhidaeus"... so I'm hoping one of you may! I'm interested to know... What IS the difference between Price 2799 and 2800? What does the book say about these coins (dating, whose reign, mint???) ...and which is my coin? AND! As always... I showed you mine, show me yours... let's see your Club and Bow coins of Alexander and those who followed him. Thanks all.

Interesting coin! The bust reminds me a bit of this coin... that I currently don't have fully attributed. PAX AVG, Siscia(?), Milan(?).

I asked it if I should dump all of my cash into collecting coins of Quintillus and it seemed to think that was a bad financial move…

Here’s another ChatGPT response that’s a bit generic but fun: Prompt written in about 10 seconds: Make a case for why late Roman bronze coins are the best subset of ancient coins to collect. Answer: Late Roman bronze coins can be an excellent subset of ancient coins to collect for several reasons: 1. Historical significance: Late Roman bronze coins provide valuable insights into the final days of the Roman Empire, a period marked by political and social upheaval. These coins can shed light on the struggles that Rome faced during its decline and fall, making them an essential part of Roman history. 2. Accessibility: Late Roman bronze coins are relatively easy to find and affordable to collect. Compared to other ancient coins, such as gold or silver coins, which are often rare and expensive, late Roman bronze coins are more widely available and can be obtained at a lower cost, making them an accessible option for collectors on a budget. 3. Artistic beauty: Late Roman bronze coins often feature intricate designs and detailed engravings, which make them aesthetically pleasing to the eye. Many of these coins depict important historical figures or events, adding to their appeal for both history buffs and coin collectors alike. 4. Collectible variations: Late Roman bronze coins come in a wide range of varieties, including different denominations, mint marks, and inscriptions. This variety allows collectors to focus on specific areas of interest, such as a particular emperor's reign or a specific mint location, which can add depth and nuance to a collection. 5. Longevity: Late Roman bronze coins have been around for over 1,500 years and have survived the test of time. Owning a piece of history that has endured for centuries can be a compelling reason to collect these coins, and their longevity means that they will likely remain a valuable collectible for many years to come. Overall, collecting late Roman bronze coins can be an enriching and rewarding experience for anyone interested in ancient history or numismatics. With their historical significance, accessibility, artistic beauty, collectible variations, and longevity, they offer a compelling case for why they are one of the best subsets of ancient coins to collect.

Yeah even with the errors, it’s pretty cool. Imagine how far it will advance in just a few years, it’s really going to be amazing/terrifying. I’m sure I would have received a more accurate response if I would have typed out the reverse inscription rather than citing a book that is scarce online.