kevikens

From the portrait alone I would have guessed Antoninus Pius.

I noticed and spent hours fooling around with my settings before throwing up my hands. if Vcoins wants to make changes, fine, but please tell viewers what's going on.

From the appearance of your coin I would guess it was in circulation some hundred years or so. Imagine what it could say it say if it could speak to us.

A very nice looking coin and a good addition to any collection.

I can see why you chose the Tarentum Greek. So often these coins are struck with a good portion of the design off the flan. You have a good eye for well struck coinage.

Nice presentation.

Absolutely agree with your analysis of what makes a coin an attractive one. Honest wear (but no roughness or corrosion) is fine by me. Think of all the Romans who handled this coin and the things it paid for.

I had no idea that coins of this kind existed.

Look at my avatar for my answer.

Possibly looped or mounted at one time and adjustments to the edges to make it fit better. Images and the coin itself look good to me.

I had posted this image a few months ago on ancient musical instruments and on three of them , the denarius on the left and the center and quinarius on the right are examples of the carnyx.

That's actually a very nice looking coin with an attractive portrait of the guy.

If more of his coins looked like this I'd be a major collector of his coins. Yours is an exceptionally attractive coin.

You are right about that. Both his denarii are well designed and struck and so too, are his brass. Some of my finest sesterces are of him and somehow the mint found the right alloy to make his silver quite attractive, even confidence building. Here are two sesterces of Severus Alexander and one deeply toned denarius., Sear 8005 on Alex. Sestertius, ., RIC iv 224 on the denarius, RIC 500 on his mother, Julia Mamaea.

Excellent topic with two questions to answer, one historical and the other numismatic. First the historic question of why more attention is not given to Commodus as a person or a ruler. We might call, it having a "good press", that is, people writing about a figure. Face it, from 100 BC to 100 AD Rome had splendid historians and writers who have left a good deal of information about their times including the quirks and achievements of their "interesting" people. Some, like Julius Caesar and Cicero wrote enough about themselves to make them known to us, warts and all. And with Suetonius, Tacitus, Sallust, and Plutarch writing during this period, they could have made anybody at all seem a worthwhile candidate for fame or notoriety. Who did Commodus have? Well Cassius Dio but I do not think that either he or the later Historia Augusta writers had the gravitas of writers to make their subjects as interesting as those of the earlier period of Roman history. Commodus not only did not have a very press, he had very little contemporary press either, good or bad. For all we know the best and most interesting ruler of Rome might have been some obscure late Third Century AD ruler, maybe a Probus or Aurelian who , if we or they had good writers might have turned out to be the best of Roman Emperors. If a tree in a forest falls and there is no one to hear (or record it) it, does it make a sound? Heck, Commodus did not even have lumberjacks, good or bad, working in his forest. Second as a reason for a lack of interest in the coins of Commodus is a numismatic one. The coins of the late Second Century AD are not, in my opinion as well designed or struck as those of the post Severan Period or the those of the previous Antonines. I see the period from say 175 to 235 as a kind of dead zone for attractive coinage, especially the silver denarii which seem to be especially poorly struck as they declined in weight and diameter. In any event, the later coins of Marcus Aureius and Commodus and Severus and his offspring look like garbage to me. One last point on the bronze of this period. Apparently the metal lead was then part of the alloy for bronze and that seems to make these coins a dull, dark grayish color and unattractive to me. Of course I do have some of the coins of Commodus and they are pictured below, about the most decent I could find in my price range. I am having trouble posting images this morning, but if I get them, they will be here below. On the upper left a sestertius whose shading is a lighter brown than usual and is decently struck with an atypically well struck reverse of a seated Jupiter. It is Sear 5812. To its right is a dupondius of a young Commodus , again pretty well struck but on the typical dark side with a standing Libertas on the reverse. it is Sear 1608. In the middle is an As with Concordia on the reverse and is Sear 5857. On the lower left is an interesting silver di drachm of Caesarea, well, struck and of a good silver alloy (weighing 4.3 grams) and a much better appearing small silver, to me, anyway, than the typical denarius of his reign. it is Sear Greek imperial 2039. Lastly on the lower right is another dupondius (without the radiate crown) celebrating Pietas with priestly implements. It's Sear 5521. Well, here are my coins of Commodus and if we knew more about him, and he had better celators we might find his coinage more 'Interesting".

My unusual character is one more common on Greek coinage than Roman, which seems appropriate since this is a provincial coin and the language is Greek. The coin itself (Sear 2782) is from Nicopolis ad Istrum and a 26 mm, 13.72 bronze of Geta and the uncommon reverse (for Roman coins) is Nemesis, the deity who provides a rough kind of justice, good or bad for mortals. For us today, a nemesis has the connotation of an enemy or adversary, which Nemesis could be, but Nemeses would provide eventual justice and that could be a reward rather than just a base revenge. Notice that on this reverse Nemesis is holding a balance scale of justice and possibly a cubit stick for measuring well, measure for measure, allotments. Also imaged is a wheel (of fortune?) showing that "what goes around, comes around", so to speak. The inscription titles Geta as the "autocrator". For what it is worth, I find the provincial coinage of Moesia Inferior an excellent source of well done imagery and portraiture and recommend collectors looking for such portraiture and imagery to check out these coins when looking for something larger than the Imperial denarii of the Severan period. And be careful out there this time of year, naughty or nice, Nemesis is watching and keeping tabs.

I hope he paid the three sesterces sales tax on the transaction.

Makes me feel comfortable that this guy is in charge, Empire or corporation, things are going to get done.

I am inclined to see this as an overcleaned, (wire brushed?) brass provincial. I don't know that Rome ever issued an electrum coinage, unless you consider Byzantine coinage an extension of Roman coinage.

Lucky you. As a point of historical interest, I think Theodosius I was the last emperor who stood a chance of reversing the fall of the Western Roman Empire. Thanks to his feckless followers, it's fall was now inevitable.

Actually that's an excellent image of the emperor, better than anything I have of him in copper.

There was a great deal of fighting on the Iberian Peninsula during the Napoleonic period, think of Wellington's campaigns, I have seen items like this that look like parts of the kit of soldiers of that period.

When in Rome... AC, DC. Ante Christo, Detto Christo and older books on ancient coins did use the AUC system of dating. Of course I was joking about using the AUC system of dating (Ab Urbe Condita) on my checks, but think about it. AUC works nicely for dating Ancient coins as none were produced BEFORE the AUC system of dating (Lydians probably started coinage around 110 AUC so all coinage could be dated using it). Lastly I can rationalize any religious issue in using the newer BCE or CE dating by choosing to interpret it as Before the Christan Era or the Christan Era.

No problem for me. I always use A.U.C. My bank hates it when the checks come in for clearing.

I have seen studies where these coins, pre Peloponnesian War mintages, were something like 96-98 % pure Ag. i wonder if things being what they were, this might have declined after the war started going bad for Athens, say right after the Syracusan disaster. Certainly at one point near the end of the war Athens seems to be issuing plated silver coinage. The assay (assuming it is accurate) of 92% seems closer to Sterling standard.