Ed Snible

I am not convinced that Reid's "specimen 40" is fake. I have never found a die link to it from another fake. The other fakes are die linked to each other. 40 was the only crystalized (reticulated corroded) example. I have seen false crystallization, but I am not convinced that it has been applied to 40. Reid and his helpers on CoinForgeryDiscussionList created a good initial catalog of the dies. In two decades I have only been able to find 7 new linked anchor dies and 7 new gorgoneion dies to complement what what is on https://web.archive.org/web/20180423012536/http://medusacoins.reidgold.com/newyork.html . I have a good feeling about your coin, @ambr0zie.

@Ryro, do you know how to tell the difference between Nezak coins struck 480-560 AD, and the coins struck by the Turks after 560 AD which continue to use Nezak legends? I do not. The Zeno categories are: Nezak Kings in Zabulistan and Kabulistan, ca 480-560 (types 198, 217-222, 224) Later coins struck in the name of the Nezaks, but during the time of the Western Turks (types 200, 200A, 201, 203-205, 267-271) Both have bull-head crowns. Here is a bull-head crown, but I can't tell which type it is. I think it is the later Western Turk type, but I am uncertain. 630-711 AD? 2.23g (but it has a little chip) 28mm Obv: Pahlavi lengd NAPKI MALKA; Nezak Malka type, bull's head crown Rev: Fire altar with two attendents

7 Researcher.

Don’t buy any of these coins! Coin #1 will auction for a high price because most of the other bidders will not take the time to look it up. Perhaps you could write to the auction house and suggest they change their listing but by this time it is probably too late for Coin #1 to escape the notice of other bidders. Coin #2 isn’t rare and is only worth $60. Why are you even thinking about paying $100 for it? Maybe bid higher on 3.B. The price of coin 3.A must be quite low, because you are concerned about shipping fees. You only like it, don’t love it. Wait until you have a chance to get something you love, even if shipping might be free depending on winning something else. Save your money but maybe bid higher on 3.B. Coin #4 has interested you because you think you can get it at wholesale. You already have a similar, better, coin. If you are a dealer you could buy it and re-sell it. You are not planning to re-sell it. Why lock-up $75 for the rest of your life for a coin that you are only looking at because of its price? Maybe bid higher on 3.B.

Great coins @Valentinian, @Curtisimo, and @ambr0zie. These tiny coins were not collected before the age of metal detectors because in their uncleaned state they rarely look like coins. They look like pebbles. Every year I see more and more in auctions described as unpublished denominations. @Valentinian tells the usual story, that this was an early phenomenon, before people realized bronze was a good metal for coins. Here is an early example, often described as being from 550-525 BC: Ionia, Miletos Circa 550-500 BC, tetartemorion or 1/48 stater?, 5.5mm, 0.14g Obv: Facing lion head within a triangular border of dots Rev: Incuse stellate/stellite pattern. Ref: cf. SNG Kayhan 461, Klein 423. This example has a solid circle around the center pellet, and a diamond whose edges intersect the four rays. The Greeks switched to bigger bronze coins. People continued to experiment with tiny silver coins. Here is an example from 500 years later: CELTIC, Atrebates & Regni tribes, Verica 10-40 AD, "minim" 0.15g. I forgot to record the diameter but it's tiny. Obv: COF (or C and F separated by circle?) within rectangle, pellet-within-ring above and below, all within border of dots. Rev: [VERICA]; Facing head of Medusa (or Cernunnos?) Ref: SCBC (Standard Catalogue of British Coins) 141, Van Arsdell 384-1 (old numbering) (See also 488-1) Acquired August 2017; said to be from the estate of Tom Cederlind but without his ticket. Some people never believed bronze is better and very light silver coins keep appearing. Here is another of my favorites: 1835 Turkey, para, Mahmud II, Constantinople, 12.5mm, 0.11g. KM# 594. This one has a bigger diameter than the last two but weights even less! It looks and feels like a sequin. (Our word "sequin" itself comes from a much larger Venetian coin). Certainly no one would do this today? Wrong. Here is a coin from 2020, said to be from "Rwanda" but somehow I doubt the markets of Kigali are overflowing with these. (reference photo, mine didn't photograph well.) "Rwanda". 2020. 10 francs. 8mm, 0.155g. The "Rwanda" coin is so tiny it comes from the manufacturer embedded in something the size of the business card so it doesn't get lost. Switzerland made a much smaller gold 1/4 franc depicting Einstein a few years ago. It sold out instantly.

I have purchased world coins there with no problems. It is a very good platform for low-value world coins, which often cannot be purchased anywhere else.

It looks genuine.

I also edit YouTube videos for the society. Our channel is https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC-kSpUYuNyGdS4qgYY131Dg

No one knows why the A is sometimes on the left, sometimes on the right. Here are some examples in museum collections. There were two weight standards, the lighter weight is standard is later. The A is on the left more often in these lower-weight examples. I have been trying to arrange and study these coins for many years. (Nothing to publish, yet.) The years are for when the museum either acquired or published a photo of the coin.

I am webmaster for https://www.orientalnumismaticsociety.org/ . I want to know what people think of the Oriental Numismatic Society so I know how to focus my efforts on the website. Thanks in advance.

Three lots. I would like to see them before I post them here.

Maybe the prize should be a cheap but interesting coin, like a VG drachm of Alexander the Great, plus an afternoon with @kirispupis in his coin vault? This might appeal to anyone with an unrealized interest in coins and antiquities. Everyone bidding would know what to expect. Another danger is that no one would bid. I have been at charity auctions where "the house" has to bid to avoid making the donor feel awkward. Then the coin not only undersells but you have to spend an hour with someone who isn't sure why they are there.

Non-collectors won't know how much the coin is worth, or if it is authentic. They might bid very little, thinking it is some kind of replica. They might bid very high, then feel foolish for paying too much. I realize this is a charity auction, raising money for a good cause. However, your winner is going to go on reddit.com or some other site to brag about the great Roman coin he won for $200 and hear people telling him he was ripped off. I realize the coin is less of a rip-off than $200 for a dinner for two at a restaurant. Yet everyone knows how much dinner is worth, so no one feels bad the next day. Maybe it will work out great.

http://grifterrec.org/coins/sasania/sas_mint/dp/sas_date_table.html http://grifterrec.org/coins/sasania/sas_mint/sas_mint_table.html

I agree with @Parthicus that 33 seems likely. What is everyone using to read dates? I still haven't found anything better than Tom Mallon's page http://grifterrec.org/coins/sasania/sas_mint/dp/sas_date_table.html -Ed

Let's remember there are nine different types of coin collector. Some of the kinds are interested in provenance, others are not. @NewStyleKing is type 7, "The Researcher". My experience is that type 7s are especially interested in coins that were used in key studies. For example, I suspect NewStyleKing would pay extra for a coin that Margaret Thompson owned or cited in her book on New Style coins. Or was known to her, but she didn't include, because she misinterpreted it. Researcher collectors are usually not interested in market provenance unless it proves or disproves some piece of evidence that can be used in an article or paper.

In 2020 I got the four-volume set plus index for $390 plus shipping in the Kolbe and Fanning auction. It was a well-used copy from the dealer Eldert Bontekoe (Pegasi coins). While I was waiting to receive it, another dealer offered a copy on a Facebook group for slightly less than I paid at auction. A pristine set might go for more to the right buyer.

"Supply and Demand" is correct -- but that is the correct answer to nearly every question about the prices of anything. @JayAg47 must be asking about demand. Why are US gold coins in higher demand than other gold coins? The types are interesting and varied. Sovereigns have a nice reverse, Pistrucci's St. George, but it is the same reverse as the crown and it has been used for nearly two centuries now. The obverses are exactly the same as the bronze and silver. There is less US numismatic history. All collectors of US coins are all competing for the same 230 years worth of coins. The coins are obtainable without major effort. Except for the Charlotte mint and a few keys, anyone can buy them. Because the coins are common, pawnshops will accept them. You can't really pawn medieval gold or even Conservation Series world gold.

The parent come to harm by being deprived of the schooling for which they have presumably contracted for. Wouldn't the Asimov robot be required to consider external humans? Certainly the children couldn't tell the robot to attack a human or steal food from one. A robot that is capable of evaluating harm correctly would know that some clowns lie. Here is a coin depicting a robot. The photo is not of my own coin, but the one from Numista, as mine is in a mint set with a shiny bit of plastic that defies photography. All of the 1986 San Marino coins were on science fiction themes.

Sometimes you can figure it out from the website: https://numismatics.org/pella/id/price.2799 Symbol (Below): torch with fillets → https://numismatics.org/pella/id/price.2800 Symbol (Below): torch ←

I am curious to see measurements of the same ancient coin using XRF and this device.

Square hole (from a square nail): As, 1st century AD, 7.10g 24mm, three countermarks. One countermark is probably retrograde and blundered TICA (Claudius, 43 AD) or TICAE (Tiberius). Purchased from Donald Zauche, April 2002 Rectangular hole: Seleukid Kings. Seleukos I. 312-280 BC. Æ 13.5mm (2.49g). Antioch. ex CNG e-auction 349, April 2015, lot 730 (part of; unsold; John Mixter collection of coins modified in antiquity) John Mixter wrote: "The hole has a rectangular shape which is most unusual in any size, but more so when it is this large on a relatively small diameter coin. It is uncertain what tool was used, though it is possible is was simply a large punch that was the only tool available at the time." It's unclear if this was nailed to a wall as a decoration, modified to become a tool, or perhaps to become a button. If this was a decoration, the bull side was the display side.

SELEUKID EMPIRE. Alexander I Balas. 152-145 BC. Æ (13mm, 2.13 g, 12h). Antioch on the Orontes mint. Struck circa 150-146 BC. ex-Classical Numismatic Group, e-auction 426, August 2018, lot 228 The first published example of this type was by Pellerin in 1762. I was never able to figure out how he deduced the coin was Seleukid. It is now attributed to Antioch. No clue why; Newell did not include it in his book on Antioch. Antioch is a bit like the junk or "odd sock" drawer; it accumulates types that don't clearly belong somewhere else. Pegasos was mythologically the “child” of Medusa – born from her neck – and Alexander Balas claimed to be the child of Antiochos IV, a king who used the aegis as a coin type. It makes sense to strike types related to the types of the claimed father. Balas struck no other coins with Pegasos or the aegis, however. Houghton and Lorber note that thunderbolt iconography is prominent in Alexander Balas’ coinage and Athena is frequently represented on his bronze. The aegis could represent Athena, or thunder (or both I suppose!) SAMARIA, “Middle Levantine” Series. Bedyehibel (or Beruhibel, or Yehibel). Circa 375-333 BC. AR Obol (8.7mm, 0.50 g, 11h). Obv: Facing gorgoneion Rev: ࠁࠃࠉࠇࠁࠋ (=BDYHBL); Forepart of Pegasos left. CNG, auction 97, September 2014, lot 323 (Dr. Patrick H. C. Tan Collection) Meshorer & Qedar 17; Sofaer 95 Meshorer and Qedar say the inscription BDYHBL should be read as the inscription BD YHBL “by the hand of Yehibel.”

Here is one that hasn't been posted on the thread yet: Spain, Ildurir/Ilturir (Granada). Circa 225-125 BC, As. 16.12g Obv: Helmeted and bearded head right. Rev: Crude round grinning face (gorgoneion?) within triskeles, no tongue, the head (but not triskeles) within a circle of dots, [with Iberian legend below?] Ref: L. Villaronga and J. Benages, Ancient Coinage of the Iberian Peninsula, 2286-2289 ex-Aureo & Calicó, online Auction 321, December 2018, lot 2243 Here is a question for the linguists: Is "triskeles" singular or plural? I believe "triskeles" and "triskele" were both borrowed into English. The Oxford English Dictionary considers the word to be "triskele", although it undermines itself because one its reference citations uses 'triskeles' in a singular context. (Link to my 2010 blog).

I probably deleted the reviews of auctions 20-23, but these results seem in line with the previous auctions. Leu Web Auction 24 - ReviewStarting: 529,125 CHF | Hammer: 2,803,292 CHF | 100% sold45,514 bids | 1,864 bidders from 75 countries Web Auction 19 - ReviewStarting: 325,175 CHF | Hammer: 2,046,574 CHF | 100% sold38,853 bids | 1,752 bidders from 75 countries Web Auction 18 - ReviewStarting: 430,425 CHF | Hammer: 2,395,185 CHF | 100% sold44,127 bids | 1,751 bidders from 72 countries Web Auction 17 - ReviewStarting: 345,725 CHF | Hammer: 1,783,573 CHF | 100% sold36,590 bids | 1,534 bidders from 66 countries Web Auction 16 - ReviewStarting: 613,075 CHF | Hammer: 2,849,721 CHF | 100% sold46,860 bids | 1,694 bidders from 73 countries