Curtis JJ

I'm a particular fan of Aurelian's Eastern captives coinage (identifiable by their pointed Parthian caps). The pair of Antoniniani (or Aurelianiani) were struck c. 274, just 14 years after Valerian was captured by Shapur. As I've written before, the Oriens Augusti legends have a double-meaning: dominance over "the East," and "A New Morning in Rome." Coin-in-hand video. The AE Denarius has a different legend, but it's a similar message:

Hard to tell for sure from the small photo, but it certainly looks like Doug's Concordia denarius matches both dies to this one In groups, it's easier to tell they're fake. Depending on how convincingly any artificial aging is, and the fabric, I can easily imagine some of these being deceptive to someone who hasn't studied / collected their specific types. For something like the Alexander III type drachm, for which styles vary tremendously from mint-to-mint and over the centuries, I could see it slipping by. (Kind of like the Seleukos Tetradrachm in another thread, which, apparently, has been sold by many different major auction firms.)

Oh, p.s., speaking of numismatic libraries.... the other day I made a little video (~75 seconds) and titled it "Time to Reorganize my Ancient Coin Library" (Sound On: a version of "walk the line" that was reportedly public domain)... several decades of book acquisitions there:

Outstanding work this Faustina Friday! I love reading the history of the different interpretations based on the various examples cataloged. Your die catalog is great. Very convincingly shows that the statuette is Spes. And very interesting question: Who is holding dear little Spes?? (I don't imagine it was Pandora...) Not sure if I have any Faustinian Spes' (none photographed anyway), but I'll share a favorite Spes and Elpis.... First one is the Elpis (Greek doppelganger of Spes). Only known specimen of its type, though there's a rare matching Year 7 Tetradrachm of Julia Mamaea. Before Savio-Dattari (1999: DS 12335 = 9892bis) and Emmett's (2001: 3101.7) Alexandrian Coins, it was thought that Severus Alexander's Elpis coinage didn't start until Year 10. Since no one's written about it, I have a few hypotheses of my own about why Severus Alexander might've wanted a "Hopeful" coin message in Alexandria in Year 7. The very very short version... Trouble at home: with Rome (Epagathus’ uprising, murder of Ulpian, and rioting in Rome); and with Orbiana (Sev. Alex's wife), who had just been exiled to Libya, for supposedly plotting to overthrow him. So it makes sense that they would want to put Elpis on Alexandrian coins, including one of Mamaea, replacing Orbiana's prior coinage, and suggest a new "hope" for the future and the royal family: Roman Provincial. Egypt, Alexandria. Severus Alexander Billon Tetradrachm (24mm, 12.44g, 12h). Regnal Year 7 = 227/8 CE. Obverse: Α ΚΑΙ ΜΑΡ ΑΥ ϹƐΥ ΑΛƐΞΑΝΔΡΟϹ. Laureate, draped, and cuirassed bust right. Reverse: L – Z (date). Elpis standing left, holding flower in her right hand, raising skirt with her left. Published: Dattari-Savio (1999, 2007) 12335 / 9892bis (this coin illustrated) = RPC VI Temp 10362 (this coin illustrated online) = Emmet 3101 (7), pp. 153 & 254 (this coin cited). Provenance: Ex-Giovanni Dattari (1858-1923) Collection; Ex-Harlan J. Berk w/ ticket & inventory no. (cc33653, no date); Ex-Unknown Dealer with tag, incl. price & inventory nos. (779 - HZHQANUSB, no date); ex-CNG e-Auction 505 (1 Dec 2021), Lot 361 (erroneously described as 2nd known, after Dattari); ex-Rocky Mountain Collection of Alexandrian Coins. Here's my Claudius Sestertius ("branch mint" according to NGC, usually described as imitative, probably British, possibly Spanish) with NCAPR countermark: Roman Imperial. Claudius (Augustus, 41-54 CE) AE Sestertius (35mm, 21.84g, 6h). Contemporary imitation or Western “Branch Mint” [NGC], c. 41/2 CE or later. Countermarked under Nero or Vespasian. Obv: TI CLAVDIVS CAESAR AVG P M TR P IMP. Laureate head right. Rev: SPES AVGVSTA S C. Spes, draped, advancing left, holding flower in right hand and raising skirt with left. Ref: RIC (I) 99. Pangerl 60. Prov: Ex-Richard Baker Countermark Collection, CNG EA 439 (6 Mar 2019), Lot 224; CNG EA 483 (6 Jan 2021), Lot 408 (unnamed Al Kowsky consignment; CT Thread 334702); NGC Ancients, 2101304-007.

Yes, I'd just read about this coin in an auction description -- but it was for a different Constantine IX from the same issue, so there wasn't actually a photo of one. Interesting to see it! Without being able to comment on whether the hypothesis is plausible or not, this reminds me of the 2005 article in the Journal for the History of Astronomy about the Istros inverted heads representing a solar eclipse! (Who even knew that such a journal existed -- much less that it would've made it to volume 36 and beyond!!!) [Saslow, W. & P. Murdin, “The double heads of Istrus: the oldest eclipse on a coin?” JHA 36, Part 1, No. 122, pp. 21 - 27] Gives me a little something extra to ponder every time I look at my pair of Istros Drachm Triptychs!

I think all of that's true, but I'm sure it was more a question of etiquette than law (I posted something similar recently when I found one -- and a half dozen others like it). In my case, I didn't want to share it before the auction house had a chance to take it down, thus insulting or unnecessarily embarrassing any staff or burdening them with incoming communications warning them of the fake. I've also seen people on coin forums get very riled up over someone mentioning a coin while bidding is still open (to the point of blocking them or commenting angrily). Ever since seeing a few people get severely hammered for it on another forum or two, I've always refrained from publicly commenting on any upcoming coin auctions. (Though, on a more-or-less daily basis, I might like to do so because I've noticed a lot with a lost provenances to SNG Lockett and the Pozzi Collection, or to an important published hoard -- stuff which shouldn't be lost forever.) So I can understand being cautious. Personally, I've never seen anything wrong with discussing the coins in upcoming auctions online -- if you're a hobbyist, or researcher, or professional, and spend hours a day on coins, then the upcoming auctions are your daily newspapers and monthly magazines. They're the current events, so I feel it's only natural to discuss them. But I guess the theory is that if you draw attention to a coin, the bids might go up, and people get upset. So I try not to.

EDIT: After following up on the portrait question, I noticed the faint obverse legend on mine (as in Cahn-Gerin 8), which I think supports Cahn & Gerin's (1988: pp. 18-20) suggestion that this particular type is a portrait. Description & references updated, and more additions at end. Thanks again, @Ryro for bringing that topic up, or I might've never gone looking and realized what this coin actually was! EDIT, AGAIN: Another good writeup and post, specifically addressing the portrait question, was made by @Curtisimo in an excellent thread...elsewhere. The summary of Nollé'& Wenninger is much appreciated, since I couldn't catch most of it in the original German. I especially appreciate that there's enough detail for me to reach a different interpretation from @Curtisimo, but still understand his interpretation (that C & G are wrong, it's not Themistokles; N & W are right, it's Hephaestus). Personally, I do think the Θ-Ε is enough (specifically because it appears on both sides -- in any other context we interpret the legend next to a bust as naming it) to believe the portrait was supposed to be identified with Themistokles, even if it may have also been supposed to invoke Hephaestus. (It seems many early numismatic portraits -- and later ones, and other kinds of sculptural portraits -- took such a form, i.e., ruler-so-and-so-as-such-and-such-deity.) Thanks for the interesting writeup! And congratulations on your Themistokles! If that's a portrait of him on the obverse, that would be really amazing. (I wonder if yours should probably be called a Tetartemorion [both Nollé and Cahn refer to other 0.17g Themisto. specimens as "1/4 Obol?"] rather than 1/2 Obol? Interestingly, the weight is almost exactly half of my "Hemi" below.) I'm also excited to have just won my first coin of Themistokles, a little AR Hemiobol from Magnesia (7mm, 0.36g). It was cited but not illustrated (referencing a 1999 Gorny sale) in one of Nollé's two articles (both in German) on these coins, which have become standard references (Nollé – Wenninger 1998/1999, JNG [or go directly to PDF file of issue XLVIII/XLIX]). See also Nollé's "Themistokles in Magnesia..." (1996) in SNR. Mine's not terribly attractive, but we buy these ones for the history, not the art, don't we? Greek Asia Minor (Archaic/Classical). Ionia, Magnesia AR Hemiobol (7mm, 0.36g), temp. Themistokles, c. 459 BCE. Obv: Θ-Ε. Bearded head of Themistokles (?) right, wearing tight fitting cap. Rev: ΘΕ monogram in dotted square within incuse square. Ref: J. Nollé & A. Wenninger, JNG 48, 1998, p.67 Th5a (this coin cited); J. Nollé, SNR 75 , 1996, p.12, note 35 & Taf.1, No. 3c; Cahn & Gerin (1988) pl. 2, no. 8. Prov: Sammlung Gert Cleff; Gorny & Mosch e-288 (27 Jul 2022), Lot 3; ex Giessener Münzhandlung Auction 97, Munich 1999, 376. This is very interesting! I had heard similar claims for Persian satraps, but not Themistokles. I'm very glad I have now! My German is very limited, so it takes forever to work through even portions of articles like Nollé's above. But now that I look: I see a big section in the 1996 SNR article: "Künstlerische und Mentale Voraussetzungen für Porträtmünzen," which Google tells me = "artistic and mental requirements for portrait coins." And the footnote cited in my description (p. 12, n. 35) references an article by Oeconomides in a 1979/1982 conference proceedings, "Le Problème de l'Effigie de Thémistoclès sur les Monnaies (à Propos d'une Monnaie de. Magnésie)," which would seem to be about Themisto's portrait coins. I have yet to find it. Perhaps after a few more weeks I'll have translated Nollé's answer to whether my bearded "Hephaestus (?)" coin could be considered a "disguised portrait" (like Alexander III/Herakles) and thus one of the "Porträtmünzen" (another wonderful German word)! I would be thrilled if so. For now, I'm starting on the Numismatic Chronicle articles by Herbert Cahn, available free on JSTOR (and thankfully in English!): 1988 (with Gerin), "Themistocles at Magnesia"; 1991 (with Mannsperger), "Themistocles again". EDIT: One more for the Themistocles bibliography available online: Kenneth Sheedy. 2017. “Themistocles, his son Archepolis, and their successors (Themostocles V?); numismatic evidence for the rule of a dynasty at Magnesia on the Maeander,” in E. Minchin and H. Jackson (eds), Text and the Material World. Essays in Honour of Graeme Clarke , pp. 65-80. [Focuses more on the coins of Themistocles’ son & successors, but accepts N&W re: Hephaestus.] EDIT: According to Cahn-Gerin (link above), this is the coin about which Oeconomides wrote. Apparently she concluded that this particular type was not Themistocles. I'm not sure whether others have disagreed, and which types might indeed be the Themiso. portraits: EDIT 2: Obverse legend = Yes, very likely a portrait of Themistokles! (Per Cahn & Gerin, 1988: pp. 18-20.) I only just noticed this, but there's also a "Θ - Ε" on the obverse. It's almost impossible to see on my example, and I only realized it when comparing to example 8 of Cahn & Gerin... The old hand-engraved illustration (same example) helps:

Note: For anyone interested, here a copy of BMC Corinth online Forum Ancient Coins (Joe Sermarini), direct to PDF file Oh my gosh ("I just threw up in my mouth a little bit"), now that I've read that, once I complete this comment I'm going back to bed to cry under the covers for the rest of the day... maybe weekend too... That price is SO unfair!!! I would've totally sold my Prius and tried to outbid you! That's why I love Konvolute (the Germans have the perfect word for it, which I think is used in other languages and, in my opinion, should be adopted by all English-speaking book collectors!). Sometimes you can find the most wonderful groups of books much cheaper than they have any right to sell for. You're right that most copies of BMC Corinth are not as expensive (usually a couple-or-few hundred, and damaged copies with original cover as low as $100-150, probably some even less). I'm not an experienced enough book collector to know what makes some copies worth 10X more than others, but I imagine small gradations in quality at the higher end result in huge increases in price. (Provenance may matter too, but maybe not as much as for coins, sometimes just in generating excitement and bids for an important library, like the Mark & Lottie Salton at Kolbe-Fanning or Poinsignon at Kunker.) Here's the recent $2.750 + fees Salton re-bound original BMG Greek Corinth (note that the description mentions a previous sale of a copy for $1,600 hammer): https://bid.numislit.com/lots/view/1-4Y4151/original-bmc-corinth [Edit, another] $1,600 + fees: https://bid.numislit.com/lots/view/1-4JAYOD/original-bmc-greek-on-corinth-colonies Kolbe & Fanning also recently had one listed on their website for a comparable fixed price (2k range, I believe), but apparently it sold, since I don't see the listing. I believe they've sold others in that price range. I'll edit in some other examples if I can find them. But apparently they weren't just a "one off" or "two off" -- there were multiple. For some of the other volumes in the BMC Greek set too, but I can't remember which, exactly, I've seen bring 4-figure prices. BTW, here's my BMC Corinth, which I've shown before (it lives inside a custom box with my BMC Central Greece [1884], both from part 1 of the Hermann Lanz [1910-1998] library in Jan. at G. Hirsch). The cover is damaged along the spine (but internally perfect), but I really wanted this copy for G.F. Hill's (1867-1948) bookplate (the famous numismatist, Director of the British Museum, author/editor of several volumes of BMC). The 150 EUR hammer seemed surprisingly low given the "object biography," but that goes to show I don't understand book prices that well:

Yes, that one should be pretty apparent. FWIW, I recently informed a premier auction house of a fake, they immediately acknowledged it, but took a comparable number of days to complete the withdrawl. The auction was still a month away, and I think they were just doing their process of due diligence & checks-and-balances or whatever goes on. That might be a different situation, with a bigger firm with a more complicated "chain-of-command". No idea who this is, and it's maybe not relevant here, but I've also seen newer firms whose auctions are so riddled with fakes (and false provenances, since they clearly just cut and paste from serious firms), that there's no point even telling them. (For some, it would take hours, maybe days, to catalog them all.)

Fantastic group! I'd love to have all those. The Akerman look really beautiful. The plate you showed is much better than most of the digital copies I've seen. Deeply jealous of the BMC set! Depends on condition & volume, but i think nice originals of certain BMC Greeks can sell for much more. For instance, I've seen several copies of Corinth sell for $2k-3000-plus! ($2750+fees for the Salton Lib. copy, which was rebound, and a few other copies recently in that range. But, of course, you can also buy a complete set of 29 average used copies in that range too.) P.s. if shipping was half the total then I'm assuming this must've been around $1000 or even less which strikes me as a great steal. Could be wrong depending on details, but I'd have paid a lot for these!

P.s. Here's a dramatic and uncommon "flip-over double-strike" from Olympia, Elis. You can see Zeus's elbow/arm & part of the reverse legend on Apollo's head and part of of Apollo's neck/head truncation on the reverse:: Should look more like this (NOT MINE):

That is really interesting. If I understand right: You're suggesting the dies themselves had multiple designs engraved on them (probably not for striking two coins at once but using either of the two)? I know some very early archaic fractions worked that way and I'm sure it was used on later types too. And I could imagine that being a technical solution to some problem (e.g. keeping the dies from overheating during rapid repeated striking). And, when you say double- struck, at least on the obv., both impressions were struck at once (from both conjoined obverses)? But I can't quite figure out how that works here. Possibly just limited imagination. The obv images are far enough apart to imagine separate dies (or die sections). But on the reverse, it looks like two sequential strikes since one is covering up part of the latter. It is very unusual to see a stroke as far off center as the "under" strikes. Occasionally I've seen an undertype flan folded or prepared in such a way that the previous coin's design gets "pushed" to the edge but I don't think that's happening here. Not that long ago I saw a Zoom presentation at the ANS with a pair of researchers studying cases where mistakes/flaws/errors revealed something about the production process. If this turns out to be something truly unusual I'll send you their info so you can share it. Curious to hear what others think. It's amazing how much we still don't know (and how much production varied over the centuries).

Achaemenid AR Quarter-Shekel (8mm, 1.26g), temp. Xerxes II to Artaxerxes II or Artaxerxes III. Sardes, circa 420-340 BCE. Klein 764 (this coin). NEXT: "QUARTER" OR "TETRA-" DENOMINATION (any time/place/metal)

I can see why -- that is a really interesting portrait of Claudius -- captivating. Besides being very "real" and expressive, it makes him look much older than I expect him to. The reverse is more worn/weathered, but the obverse is still quite attractive. The more I stare it, the more I feel like I'm looking at a real living person. That's always a sign of a great portrait!

I'm a big believer in understanding any topic by studying its intellectual history, so for numismatics that means being interested in old collections and collectors, books, articles, and catalogs. My most rewarding coins are the ones where I found a lost provenance to an important old collection or piece of literature that might've otherwise been lost forever (or possibly for generations). I can also feel as if I've preserved a few tiny bits of lost numismatic history in the process of collecting. This one, most of all, since I'd had the coin for 30 years before I discovered it was in the Dr. S. Pozzi (1846-1918) Collection. I've told the story before, but it was one of my first coins, and I could always tell it had been in an old collection, but had no provenance until about a year ago: More recently, when I bought this coin, there was virtually no provenance, and CNG (EA 505 [2021], 361) and RPC (10362, now corrected) both had it described as only the second known example, after the Giovanni Dattari (1858-1923) Collection specimen. As it happens, I have a copy of the 2007 Dattari-Savio volume illustrating >13,200 of his coins for just this purpose. It turned out to be the Dattari specimen (making it still the only known). Two things I'd still like to know, when was this coin sold by Harlan J Berk (who correctly noted on the old ticket that it was the Dattari coin) and whose dealer ticket is that below: The lost provenance isn't always so old. This one had entirely lost its provenance when I saw it for sale, but I recognized it as BCD Thessaly II 218 (the BCD Collection of Thessaly, Part II, sold at Triton XV in 2012). The BCD catalog didn't give any prior provenance, but I was able to trace it to the Thessaly 1993 Hoard (CH IX 64) and several publications by Catharine Lorber and colleagues (I added them in the ACSearch comments linked) I'm very familiar with the BCD Collection catalogs (there are 10 major ones, plus several "supplements" and many minor sales), so I have several others like that, all of which are very satisfying. But sometimes it's just as satisfying to find information that BCD himself missed, despite having a world class library and personal knowledge of the ancient coin world. And especially since I view his collection as a source of inspiration. (As I've said before, I'll enjoy my small victories when I find them!) BCD had included the Messene Triobol below's (BCD Peloponnesos II 2327) provenance to a Stack's 1979 sale (but neglected to mention that it was the John Sawhill (1892-1976) Collection, which had been bequeathed to John Madison University). Both Sawhill/JMU Catalog and BCD Peloponnesos II failed to recognize that this coin was from the important old collection of the German textile magnate Heinrich Otto, Jr. (1856-1931), better known as "Sammlung Kommerzienrat H. Otto, Stuttgart," from Adolph Hess 207 in 1931: I could keep going on and on and on (even more than I have), but you get the idea. It's hard to say which is the most satisfying (after the Corinth Stater), but all of these rank near the top.

Oh, you got that one! Congrats, that's a fantastic coin, I was really thinking about bidding higher and I immediately regretted letting that one get away!! (I don't remember if I was the "underbidder" or an "underbidder," but somewhere in there.) By the way, among the rest of that coin's distinguished provenance, Leu failed to mention one important bit: ex-Slg. P.R. Franke. They did mention Grun 64 (2014 ). Part 1 (which included this coin) was the collection of the late great Peter Robert Franke (1926-2018), or just "PRF," well known for many things numismatic -- his excellent volumes with Max Hirmer (the numismatic photographer), index of SNG von Aulock, his volumes on Epirus, and many articles. His "second wiki" page: https://second.wiki/wiki/peter_robert_franke His online publications from Digital Library Numis; And an essay on PRF by Bernard Woytek (2020) -- it's in German (I just downloaded & auto-translated it) -- the link is DIRECT TO PDF on the Solidus Numismatik website (you can also just Google woytek solidus franke). His collection wasn't high-end, but a large "scholarly collection" (euphemism for not valuable, but large & interesting & built from intellectual curiosity). Many of his Roman Provincial bronzes are still being sold by Solidus (unless they've just run out). Although it's also possible they donated the best coins to museums (here are more than 4,000 donated by Peter & Leonore Franke to Yale!) My most recent ex-PRF coin (in the mail): Kings of Persis, AR Hemidrachm (14-15mm, 1.53g) of Manchihr III (also a plate coin in van't Haaff [free on Issuu from CNG], and previously Gonnella [1935-2009] Coll., later Gert Gleff). I like this particular issue because the obverse is anepigraphic & just has a Triskeles instead (that's probably his father Manchihr II on the back): From van't Haaff ("after Alram," which I haven't seen directly), described as "short legend," which I've edited as follows (his original Drachm legend below, thumbnail): (from vH, p. 195, edited; CJJ: "Son of Manchihr" -- I think) Recently purchased PRF book (small one!) that arrived yesterday from Brooklyn Gallery: I wouldn't have bought a copy with cracked binding except that it's internally fine & also adds to my numismatic bookplate collection -- that of another notable scholar, Henry S. Robinson (1914-2003), director of Am. School of Classical Studies in Athens & the Corinth Excavations: Peter Robert Franke [text] & Max Hirmer [photography]. 1961. Romische Kaiserportrats im Munzbild. Munich: Hirmer Verlag. 8vo (cover: 175mm x 190mm), 55 pages + 52 photographic plates (16 color). Bibliographic: Clain-Stefanelli 4832; Grierson (1966) p. 54; Kroh --. "A Note from BCD" [Library Duplicates Sales, 2015 & 2017]: Jacquier 43 (2017), 1066: "Hirmer's superb coin photography remains unsurpassed, even in this day of electronic precision. Together with professor Franke they are an unbeatable pair and this is the reason for the popularity of this book." Auctiones 39 (2015), 86: "The Professor is here joined by Max Hirmer whose stunning coin photography remains unsurpassed to this day. The enlarged coin portraits in this book are real works of art and Franke’s text a worthy tribute to them."

I think that would be volume 3 (sometimes called "Varbanov III"). He has a website, the main value of which (at least in my experience), is bibliographic, as it includes one page listing his books (the GIC series) and another page books on Roman Provincials (Greek Imperial Coins) from Bulgaria / Thrace. Just as there is for his website, the books come in English and a Bulgarian versions. You can see the covers/titles/blurbs for all seven of his vols. (3X English, 4X Bulgarian; as far as I know, vol 4 [2002] only comes in Bulgarian) - http://www.varbanovbooks.com/varbanovbooks.html If it's of any use, here's my biblio entry for Varbanov III: Ivan Varbanov. 2007 [2002, Bulg.]. Greek Imperial Coins and Their Values. Volume III: Thrace (from Perinthus to Trajanopolis), Chersonesos Thraciae, Insula Thraciae, Macedonia. Bourgas, Bulgaria: Adicom Publications I haven't found any publications by Varbanov available free online (i.e., with legit permissions), whether in English or Bulgarian, but if anyone knows of them, please let me know so I can add them to my file.

It's not my area but it's interesting. I've seen the Palaeologian bronzes with a B on one side, or two B's on one side facing apart, but never something quite like this. I know it's not a Cherson Basil, but that's the first thing that came to mind -- those the little cast bronzes from several centuries earlier. Of course, this looks like a struck coin, not cast, and the type wouldn't match (I've seen various reverses, but not another "B"). I'm always curious about Byantine bronzes & small change, so I'll be interested to see what comes up...

Thanks for reminding me @DonnaML et al.! I hadn't yet paid my Leu invoice. Despite buying only one coin this time -- and one of the cheapest in the entire auction, at that -- I was happy to find the shipping & processing fees (i.e., not counting the 18.5% buyer's fee) only accounted for 24% (19 E) of the total, which made for a very acceptable "all in" price. I liked a couple things about it. One: The many faces of Caracalla... I think this will be the "smiliest" in my collection. My apple-cheeked baby face Caracallas (denarii with trophy/captives, below) aren't exactly smiley, but definitely not growly scowly either. (I would, however, have preferred if the "panther" didn't look so much like a chubby little Corgi dog!) And, of course, I appreciate that it was in the H.C. Lindgren Collection (vol. I, 1264). He looks downright maniacal with wicked joy in Frank Kovacs' photo for the 1985 book: Some of my previous RIC Caracallas... "smiley-ish" Caracallas (at least non-scowly, though I think you can still tell he's happy because he's thinking about harming someone): Then again, even my scowly-growly Sarapis-Sol pair look like they caught Caracalla on a particularly good day, so maybe I need to work on that end of the spectrum too [edited: only the den. = Sar., the Ant. = Sol]:

Eight new additions with Captives Reverse types… Well, not necessarily new, acq. over the past 20 years, but newly photographed (or, in one case, newly identified). I haven’t yet added these examples to my “Barbarians, Captives, and Enemies” (BCE Collection) page (I'm about to), but for some types I’ve previously posted an example or two, sometimes better ones. Several are interesting because they’re distinctly uncommon (it can be hard to tell which are “scarce,” “rare,” or “even more rare,” since they’re not valuable, and rarely documented in commerce). Rather than go into too much detail in the first post, maybe more will come out in comments. A few might be attractive. And some are neither. But with a specialized interest, even one's “duplicates” are rarely “just duplicates.” In order of general “interestingness” to me at this particular moment: 1. Theodosius AE3, Thessalonica (20mm, 2.16g, 6h), c. 383-384 (or -388). Emperor in galley with Victory and bound captive. RIC 61b, Esty Type 34: My first example of one of these. It's interesting that the larger AE2 module with the galley has Victory, but not the captive, and the smaller type adds the captive! Don't see these types very often. Luckily it's in nice shape. 2. Valens AE3, CROSSES IN BOTH FIELDS. Not very attractive or artistic, but these seem outright rare. I could be mistaken, of course. If so, please tell me! Valens AE3 (17mm, 1.91g, 6h). Constantinople, 367-375 CE. Obverse: D N VALENS P F AVG. Bust of Valens, pearl-diademed, draped and cuirassed, right. Reverse: GLORIA ROMANORVM. Emperor advancing right, dragging captive with right hand and holding labarum in left. Crosses in fields to left and right; CONSΔ in exergue. References: ERIC II p. 1098, No. 493 (tentative) = RIC (IX, Constantinople) 41b, Subtype 7 [+/+//CONSΔ]; OCRE 41b.7 ; (Zero examples cited). Provenance: Acq. 9 Oct 2013 from N. Hochrein (Holding History Coins) for $2.11. Esty Reverse Type 5 for GLORIA ROMANORVM Emperor dragging captive. See also next. 3. Valentinian I AE3 (17mm, 2.82g, 6). Rome mint, officina spelled out: R.SECVNDA. I always liked these and saved them from group lots, so I’ve got a little baggie of mixed PRIMA, SECVNDA, TERTIA, and QVARTA types, but the majority are non-captives SECVRITAS reverse types. Esty Reverse Type 5. As Esty writes on his “Officina Numbers” page: “Spelling the officina number out in full (PRIMA, SECVNDA, TERTIA, QVARTA) was used only on coins minted at Rome, and only for three Roman emperors (Valentinian, Valens, and Gratian) and only on two types, GLORIA ROMANORVM and SECVRITAS REPVBLICAE, during the period 364-375 AD. […] ”The varieties with the officina number spelled out are scarce or rare. In each case, the number is preceded by an "R" for "Roma", the mint city.” The “Officina Numbers” page has a nice table showing various examples. (But note: the link from @Valentinian's Type 5 page is broken, still points to old site.) 4. Honorius AE4 with TWO Captives. Very Rare. Honorius only. Esty Type 54. Sorry for the tiny photo!! This is the only one of these I’ve shown before. Unfortunately, I don’t have a better photo and can’t find the bag it’s in. (Probably in the safety deposit box. Clearly, I need to organize.) A previous post here reminded me that it was actually an official Honorius captives issue (not a barbarous “three emperors” or GLORIA EXERCITVS imitation, as I first believed). 5. Valentinian AE3 (19mm, 3.03g, 12h), Siscia, 364-375. Ref: RIC IX 5a.ii; LRBC 1275; OCRE 5A.ii; Esty Rev Type 5. This one is more attractive than most of mine for this type. I believe it was the earlier issues that lacked all the fieldmarks which clutter the reverse and crowd the figures (but make for more types to research and collect). Maybe they were a bit larger, too? Well struck and preserved, these can be very attractive and artistic for a small bronze of the late fourth century. (The larger AE2s even more so, but these little ones usually aren’t.) 6-8. Theodosius AE3, Aquileia; Arcadius AE2, Heraclea; Arcadius AE4, Thessalonica. None of these three are very attractive or, as far as I can tell, very scarce. Multiple emperors struck all these types and often at many different mints and with numerous combinations of control symbols (especially the Victory dragging captive AE4). Consequently, it can be quite the challenge to try to fill in a “type set” for any particular reverse or ruler – much less for all the captives types for even very short periods. It’s nice to have very nice examples; I find it nice to also have examples of very many types. I’d love to see others’ examples of (Very) Late Roman Bronze Coins & / or “captives coinage” – nice or otherwise!

Yes, that's one of my favorites too -- I couldn't find mine to share here -- but the think I like about them is that they make a fairly faithful homage to Caius and Lucius CAESARES denarii c. 7-6 or 2-1 BCE. And @Orange Julius's example:

I've never owned an AR Denarius of Claudius, but to me this doesn't look tooled. I think the details you mentioned were just protected in the recesses, and the caduceus struck weakly or worn (though it does look fainter than usual). The only thing I can recall ever thinking about this particular type was, "Gosh, there sure are a lot of fourrees (plated) of this type!" But I don't see any broken plating on the example shown. By the way, here are more examples: https://www.acsearch.info/search.html?term=claudius+nemesis+AR+denarius&category=1

I'm aware you're not the one who posted such a coin in this thread and wasn't saying you were. This goes to my general point about taking things personally and assuming you're being addressed specifically even when you aren't and responding defensively without stopping to consider whether there might an alternative to your initial interpretation. Calling someone a "prude" is an insult. It's disingenuous to say it's not offensive. I'll admit it's not as offensive as when you went off on someone else you thought deserved it (whatever that was about kosmas' mother and wife, I don't remember all the details), but it's not the first time someone has pointed out your quickness to start insulting people and that it seems bizarre, offensive and/or out of place in a coin forum. As I've said before, I have no desire to join these conflicts myself and only do so when someone is insulting others who they think are unable or unwilling to defend themselves because they have "a bunch of folks supporting me" and "likes."

I don’t personally have any problem with the coins or topics posted (I don’t necessarily agree with everyone’s sense of humor). But when people say something is making them feel uncomfortable, it’s important to try to understand and consider low-cost solutions. The “NSFW” title solution is a good one. The only thing I’ve ever been bothered by here: Insults and mocking others. At least in this (and several prior), I see no reason to mock, insult, and try to escalate conflict with anyone who has already said they are uncomfortable. The last thing one should try to do is treat people like outsiders and try to further alienate them. Even if nothing about the Priapus post was originally hostile, that’s no longer true: Calling people “a couple of prudes,” or, over here, posting a phallic coin simply because it might make someone uncomfortable, and various bits of mockery/innuendo by others: I find the backlash rather sickening. There was nothing in the original post here that had to be interpreted as a challenge to any single individual, much less requiring escalation, insult, mockery, and more-or-less open hostility. It wasn’t clearly aimed exclusively or even primarily at a single individual -- it could’ve easily been the follow-up comments that were offensive. And was written in such a way as to address future standards. No reason any of it had to interpreted as hostile/a personal challenge. And there’s no reason why they should’ve sent a private message instead. A direct message would’ve failed to address it as a “community” issue, which is what it is, rather than as a personal issue, which is how it’s being taken. (And how were they to know that a direct message wouldn't have been interpreted as an even more serious direct challenge?) I posted my Priapus coins, and I’m interested in that topic, but I want nothing to do with any atmosphere of hostility over the fact that someone’s standards are different, and they didn’t voice it in a delicate enough way to avoid being interpreted as a personal challenge.

Excellent! A good opportunity to post a coin I really like (despite being marred & ex-jewelry, kinda gives it interesting character!) but haven't shared here before. Q. Titius AR Denarius, 90 BCE. Bacchus or Liber & Pegasos. Craw. 341/2. Weighs 3.983g according to Forum/Joe Sermarini (acq. by CSJ [father of CJJ] for JJ Family Collection, c. 2005-2012? when did FAC open?). NEXT: PEGASOS!