dougsmit

I see no helmet on your coin but attach a Constantine I with it. These were issued from more than one mint and by more than one ruler. I may be imagining that I see SIS on your coin (reverse bottom) which would make it from the Siscia mint like mine. The shield is inscribed VOT PR (vows to the people of Rome). I am less certain about whether your coin shows Constantine I Augustus or his son Constantine II whose legend would end with a C for Caesar. In poor condition, ID is not easy.

I doubt anyone's wallet will be happy to know there is an AEQVITI set from Rome also. I only have three of them. The code letter is placed in exergue between the R for Rome and the officina letter. I have not seen the full set. RIC lists an RIE that I would especially like to see. REB (2) RVdelta (4) RIZ (7)

I'd call that a mantle or consular robe. This one even has CONS II in the obverse legend. Each mint had variations but these all will have the eagle on scepter. I assume there was a lot of demand for good embroidery at the palace.

Wildwinds posts things as described by a seller and does not correct 'problems' that show dealers who don't understand "Radiate, mantled, and cuirassed bust left..." is not appropriate. Probus is shown mantled honoring his civilian positions and cuirassed honoring his military position. He does not mix up wardrobe components. He does, however, have a huge number of different military suits. Not all the military types are cuirassed. There are variations in the consular attire/mantel coins but I don't find them nearly as varied. This is a military type without cuirass: This has a cuirass without a cloak to make it hard to see: This strikes me as a cuirass with a cloak over it but I would not call it a mantle. Perhaps some dealer would. Has any of the scholarly works on Probus tried to distinguish between the many, many styles? That would strike me as way more work than any normal person would undertake.

While small and not as attractive as other Silphium options, I believe this Kyrene AE16 Sear6341 with three plants joined at the base with legend K Y P (retrograde) is something you don't see everyday. https://www.acsearch.info/search.html?id=7679815 https://www.acsearch.info/search.html?id=8264483 https://www.acsearch.info/search.html?id=436362 So, what demand is there for equal or better of the three on acsearch of what is probably the least appealing silphium type? Is there a number less than zero?

I have always wondered how it came to be that they had the finest die cutters and striking crews that could not strike coins on center. I selected mine as easily identifiable by the huge die break on the reverse. It appears to me that the strikers were trying to keep striking coins while the replacement die was being made. It was hit harder on the side without the break causing full legends, a nice face and flat hair. Another blow might have made a better looking coin or it might have destroyed the die. I got this one cheaper in 1991 because it is defective but IMO the defect makes it more interesting. Boehringer 703 (v345/r481)

I give up. People will never understand that any image looks like the coin when view in light like shown. When you say which looks like the coin you are asking which looks like the coin in the light you use to look at coins. Take the coin in bright sun and it looks different from a desk lamp. Hold the coin in a ring light and it looks like the ringlight image; hold it in the diffuse light from slightly from the top and you will see less detail and more color contrast. Hold it in a room with no light and it will look too dark. We have to learn to read lighting styles.

Those who know me know that I photograph coins using a recent model of digital camera. I got my first digital camera in 2000 - a Nikon Coolpix 990. My coin website began in 1997 so the images on it for three years were made on a film camera and prints were scanned into files for web use. I experimented (and even wrote a page) with scanning coins directly using that Canon scanner. Windows was revised several times and support drivers for that scanner were dropped so it went into the trash. My next scanner did a terrible job with direct from coin scans. Recently my daughter bought a new scanner but retained her old Epson XP410 solely because it has an SD card slot which allows scanning documents to a JPG file saved on that SD card and neither her new printer/scanner nor mine had that feature. Neither of us had ever been able to figure out how to link our scanner/printers to our computers to transfer files although bot claimed it was possible. When I was using the old Epson XP410 for some other documents, I decided to try scanning a coin just to see how bad it was. The results are below along with the same coin done with my camera. I won't be using the scanner again for coins but thought there might be some here who have trouble with taking coin photos that might want to try their general purpose scanners to see if it worked better than whatever else they have been trying. I was shocked at how it emphasized the dust on the coin or scanner glass but the image is such that it allows the coin to be identified. The scanner file here is the size it was produced but the camera result is much reduced. There is a small amount of lighting adjustment available on a flatbed scanner by rotating the coin so the highlights and shadows will be slightly different. The camera image could be lighted in a hundred different ways probably simulating the scanner angle if you wanted. This was the first try with my recent new addition (Julia Domna Sestertius). As presented here there is a lot (!) of difference in lighting. Notice the scanner placed a white line around the devices while the ringlight used with the camera made that line dark and added glare from the shiny surfaces of the coin. I have been known to reshoot a coin many times to get what I want. Obviously this coin will be reshot again (and again???). Is anyone using a scanner for coins now? Scanner: Camera:

While I would like to get a type I, I have always liked my type II showing the king actually shooting an arrow. It gets extra points for having the fancy shoe on flan.

I did not notice wear on yours but I strongly prefer coins with good strike and surfaces to those with nothing going for them but being mint state. Your examples strike me as excellent in every regard save a couple filled letters on some. My Carus has silver free surfaces that made it welcome here. I know coins with retained silvering are 'better' but patchy silver can be uglier than none. This Numerian was struck on a flan so thin that there was not enough metal to fill the obverse high points. This is a common fault from the period. Stamp collectors pay extra for 'boardwalk margins'. This Carinus appealed to me mostly for the LVG mintmark.

My earliest Trajan denarius has a portrait that rather resembles Nerva. Trajan built a 'long-cut' road that was longer than the old Appian Way but less hilly so it actually took less time and was easier on travelers. It was called Via Traiana. Trajan was adopted by Nerva but also issued a coin in honor of his biological father DIVVS PATER TRAIAN. My favorite bronze of Trajan is this as showing the club and lion skin of Hercules. It rather reminds me of the type with Trajan's column which I do not have. Another as type shows fancy shields. A popular Provincial tetradrachm of Tyre shows Trajan over an eagle with reverse head of Melquarth.

My most attractive Titus sestertius (but only Fine) is the same coin as my ugliest. It just depends on which side is up. It was surgically treated for bronze disease many years ago but now is healthy but scarred.

A person selecting to go for an Alexandrian of Nero has several choices to make but few would select the one I like best. I'll show a few without saying which TYPE I would prefer (not which coin so condition is not a factor. There are several others which I do not own including several that are really good. First is very early in the reign year 3 with a snake. Second is part of the series with reverse heads of earlier emperors. This is Tiberius. Last is his (pregnant) wife Poppaea who is best known for having died from a kick from Nero. Which I prefer is not important. Which would you prefer? Most people would take the Augustus or the ship, neither of which I have. IMO, the best coin to represent Nero is his sestertius with the Temple of Janus honoring peace across the entire Empire that was ended by the revolt in Judaea which required Nero to send Vespasian to put down the 'problem'. I do not have the sestertius but Nero was kind to those of us on a budget and also issued an as with the type.

I'm not saying your prices are too high but simply that I am in the hobby for fun and troubles with delivery from Europe made me stop looking at coins not already in my country unless the coin is something really special to me or so different than anything I have that I feel it is worth the hassle. Meanwhile, I await normal (post-Covid) resumption of coin shows and activity by a new generation of small dealers who sell coins that appeal to me at prices I also find appealing. There was a time I bought coins because I did not have one like it but now I have enough things like the one below which I'm glad I got in 1995 ($7) but would not buy again at today's rates. I'm sure that my collection of things that do interest me would be equally unwanted by most collectors at prices that would make me want to sell them. I do wonder if people who today consider a mid-grade late Roman worth $22 will still be interested in similar coins at 3x the price in another 25 years or will there be a reset in prices when collections of people like me are sent to market by their grandchildren. Similar questions arise regarding most of the other coins shown. I actually paid more for the Galeria in 1998 than you are asking now but the Maxentius was half in 2000. That is how it works in a hobby with no 'Red Book' to guide prices and differing opinions as to whether a coin is better with less wear or better strike and surfaces. Your Maxentius is better in most ways but I am not interested in upgrading late Romans. Have you noticed that there seem to be available more Heraclea mint Licinius era coins than average? Was there a hoard in the 1990's or did that mint know how to apply silver better? Again these three came from 25 years ago when I was buying late Roman at shows from dealers now retired. Is there demand today for these coins in the number that exist? When I bought them, I was impressed by the silvering but did not realize that there were so many silvered coins of this mint. In today's condition driven market, these may be worth more than the old prices ($15-$25 each) even if we allow for a reasonable dealer markup but does the condition demand outrank the apathy toward late Romans? If $48 is a reasonable price for a small dealer to ask for such a coin, what is it reasonable for a collector to expect to be paid by that dealer. I know dealers that would take my collection on consignment but finding someone willing to pay cash is not so easy and encourages people like me to leave the coins to grandchildren and hope they get interested when they are my age. (sorry, I don't have the Crispus) You asked for input. This was mine.

Has anyone suggested a period where two kings ruled jointly as the case with some Romans? If rays indicated dating as once was the theory and tamgha style indicated ruler, that would seem an answer but I was unaware of that in this culture.

I like the way that Alexandrian coins can retain collectability even when they are not in perfect condition. This new pair are attractive with contrasty high points which look good to me. I only have one Hadrian tetradrachm.

If the 4/3 prongs are transitional, it would seem the obverse rays should all be the same count. Mine is too off center to help. Do you have input on this question?

I had not heard that one. It will take some work to convince me that the prongs and letter styles don't indicate mints.

Two of the last three large lots I bought were to obtain the same coin that was included in the lot and not respected as worthy of separate listing by the seller. I have posted them several times. Cohen listed the BnF specimen and the British Museum has two (as do I). Others?

My favorite Carinus is year three mentioning Legion II Traiana (ΛΕΓ Β ΤΡΑΙ). I bought this from a well known and high end dealer at a Baltimore show to whom all late Romans were junk and a cleaned Alexandrian tet was beneath notice. I remain curious if he read the reverse legend.

There was a period in my collecting where I tried to get interested in Soter Megas and tried to assemble a representative selection. There are two denominations often called drachms and tetradrachms but I might call the units and quarter units not really knowing what the users called them. There were several mints (3 or 4???) often distinguished by style of the lettering. Some used rounded letters (note the W omegas) but can be squared. Sometimes the tamgha on one side or both have four prongs other than the usual three. The coins are dated by the number of rays on the crown BUT it is odd IMO since the earlier ones have the most rays (14???) while later ones go down (to 5???). That means I really did not like coins off center enough to not show countable rays or letters of the ones that were different. The four denomination is not all that easy to find full legend so I compromised and bought the awful obverse to get the full reverse legend. It also shows the weapon/ax of the king clearly and well rounded E and W This one is a 'one' denomination with a lot of hard to count certainly rays THis single has twelve countable rays and four pronged tamghas on each side. While it is not full legend, it shows cleraly sguared E and W letters making it a winner in my book if only fine in grade. This square letter, four denomination has a four prong tamgha on the obverse and three prong reverse. The rays appear to be spaced like a mid number (8-9?) but are too much off center to be a good example. The rest of these followed me home because I liked the style or could count the rays (or they were priced reasonably). Those interested can count and diagnose these but my mind has dropped the theories on mint identification. IMO Soter Megas has some decent coins available to those who can forgive him not writing his name on them. 😀

My one favorite Constantius II is my Amiens mint FH3. I like the style and it is not a common coin. However my favorite single Falling Horseman is easily the Amiens of Constantius Gallus with severe damage to the reverse by a die clash. I know most people would shun this coin due to condition but I do ask to see the ones anyone has that are better. There are over 2200 variations of FH coins and 15 mints plus barbarous ones. Amiens is one of the least common (Trier is the other) and Gallus is less often seen than Constantius II. On top of that, the style is cartoon level great making it THE coin of the thousands of choices. If I have to pick one from the Alexandria mint specimens, it would be my ALEA due to the long, long face.

Whatever happened to Clio?

Coins that survive in lower grades need to be studied and photographed as well. This is especially true when the type is not known in mint state. High grade coins can be easier to photograph but we need to find ways to show what needs to be shown. One of my more recent images is the oval Athens obol with three prong tail. I have not seen one of this description in mint state. I need to reshoot the tail alone to upgrade that 'inset' rather than just cropping it from the overall image. Lighting coins requires paying attention to the direction the ruler faces. This face-to-face bronze of Septimius Severus and Clodius Albinus has given me a lot of trouble making them each look 'right' at the same time. The fact that it is barely fine makes it no less deserving of attempting to show it well.