Amarmur

48 minutes ago, kirispupis said:

Prices are all over the place for these. In general:

• The heaviest coins always bring a premium. I'd love one of the 90g octobols some day, but they can get pricy.
• Better details can cause the prices to skyrocket, but you have to be careful. Many of these coins are tooled.
• The auction house matters. On some sites they go for a lot more than on others.

FWIW, here's my drachm. I was very happy to pick it up for $90.

Ptolemy IV Philopator
222-205/4 BCE
AE Drachm 41.4mm 66.2g
Alexandreia Mint
Obv: Head of Zeus-Ammon right, wearing tainia
Rev: Eagle standing left on thunderbolt, filleted cornucopia to left; LI between legs
Ref: Svoronos 1126

Ah the size to me is the biggest appeal. These are some of the largest coins in antiquity. I prefer to collect Roman Egypt coins for the variety of designs. These Zeus Greek Egypt coins are cool too but I don't think I want more unless I upgrade this one to a bigger size. I assume the smaller denominations of Ptolemic bronzes like diobol don't fetch high prices unless the condition is exceptional, my first ptolemy coin bronze was very cheap and small.

I haven't really found a focus area of ancient collecting but I have always loved big bronzes. A Flavian Sestertius in good shape is next on my radar. 

I did spot a few super large ones on eBay but the prices are woof around $800 to a grand. The largest are called octobols. They are unfortunately out of my budget as much as I would like one. I think I'm happy with the example I have. idk if I can afford a bigger one. 

Hi I have a question on Ptolemaic bronzes. Generally does pricing depend on weight and size aside for condition. I am not familiar with the market. I paid $92 for this tetrobol of Ptolemy III. It isn't the biggest weight but it is 47 grams and it is in ok shape nothing too nice nor terrible either. The surface is a tad grainy. How much do generally the biggest Ptolemaic Egypt coins cost? 

Yeah letting go of coins is tough. I sold my first Nero coin. It was such a nice provincial and I miss it a lot because it was really my first big ancient coin purchase and I saved up for it when I didn't make as much as I do now. Even though it didn't really fit my collection at the time it fits in mine just fine rn because I started collecting provincials again. Be careful on what you let go. 

1 hour ago, John Conduitt said:

Actually, I think it's ok. I have one I was also unsure about with a similar edge, and everyone thought is was good. The porous surfaces and the weight relate to corrosion. Cast coins wouldn't be so sharp (despite the wear and corrosion) and the holes would be round and bunched together.

Thank you for the reassurance. Yes, it is kind of decent despite corrosion. 

I'm thinking about this sestertius but the surface seems grainy and the edge looks a bit off. It is 18.3 grams. A bit light typically it's 20 grams or more. I think it just lacks a patina. Thank you for your time and help. 

The hair and details looks extremely carved and fake. I'm typically bad at telling tooled coins it just doesn't look right. 

I have 1 Lucilla coin and it's a Sestertius. Nice coin with Pietas on the reverse. 

1 minute ago, Roman Collector said:

I think the price is too high given the coin's state of preservation. Pass on it. 

Thank you. I could make an offer. I think $50 would be ok. I can't for the life of me find a nice Vespasian portrait in bronze 

Thank you!! I like the portrait but not the corrosion. I might go for it, is $100 too much considering the reverse is toasted?

4 minutes ago, sand said:

I wonder, if the vertical lines, are an artifact of the photography. The vertical lines, are parallel to the greenish vertical lines, on the background surrounding the coin, on both obverse and reverse.

Regarding tooling. I'm not an expert in tooling. I'm also not familiar with the coin type. However, nothing jumps out at me. Nothing screams "tooling" to me. Higher quality photographs, if possible, may help, to figure out, if the coin is tooled.

The vertical lines is just the photo taken on my laptop 

3 minutes ago, sand said:

I wonder, if the vertical lines, are an artifact of the photography. The vertical lines, are parallel to the greenish vertical lines, on the background surrounding the coin, on both obverse and reverse.

Regarding tooling. I'm not an expert in tooling. I'm also not familiar with the coin type. However, nothing jumps out at me. Nothing screams "tooling" to me. Higher quality photographs, if possible, may help, to figure out, if the coin is tooled.

The photo is kinda bad it was taken off my laptop lol

1 minute ago, Hrefn said:

I do not hold myself as any sort of expert on bronzes, but this appears extensively tooled to me. The vertically oriented parallel lines which sweep across the obverse and reverse are very bothersome.  Perhaps this could be termed normal cleaning but I find it distracting. 

I kinda agree with you. I can't really find any portraits like this. Maybe smoothing. Lyon mint portraits are kinda similar but it just looks off 

The portrait looks unusually sharp in comparison to the reverse. The seller didn't mention any tooling. The obverse is nice. 

I recently bought this Justinian Plague Follis from Nicomedia and paid $100. I overpaid here. It came with 4 other byzantines but they were cull and shabby. It is a beautiful portrait but the big Justinian Follis coins come a lot cheaper generally like $60 give or take. Byzantine bronzes are generally inexpensive. I still like it so I'm not too upset. 

On 3/8/2024 at 8:21 PM, DonnaML said:

Nice animals, @Amarmur! Here's my herd of elephants to start with, since I do love those wonderful animals:

Roman Republic, Anonymous [probably Caecilius Metellus Diadematus or Caecilius Metellus Delmaticus], AR Denarius 128 BCE. Obv. Head of Roma right, wearing winged helmet, * [monogram for value: XVI asses] behind; otherwise anepigraphic  / Rev. Pax or Juno driving biga galloping right, holding reins and long scepter in left hand and branch (olive or laurel) in right hand; elephant head under horses, facing right with trunk curving down, wearing bell dangling from neck; ROMA in exergue. Crawford 262/1, RSC I Caecilia 38 (ill.), BMCRR 1044, Sear RCV I 138, Sydenham 496. 18.5 mm., 3.89 g., 11 h.* 

*One of only four anonymous Roman Republican denarii after ca. 154 BCE (see also Crawford 222/1, 287/1, & 350A/2), and the only one of the four that can be identified with near-certainty. See Crawford Vol. I at p. 287, explaining that the elephant head with dangling bell depicted on the reverse signals that the moneyer belonged to the Caecilii Metelli family, and recalls the victory of L. Caecilius Metellus, Cos. 251, over Hasdrubal at Panormus in 250 BCE, and the capture of Hasdrubal’s elephants. (See also the denarii depicting elephants or elephant heads issued by, e.g., M. Metellus Q.f. [127 BCE, Crawford 263/1a-1b], C. Caecilius Metullus Caprarius [125 BCE, Crawford 269/1]; Q. Caecilius Metellus Pius [81 BCE, Crawford 374/1]; and Q. Caecilius Metullus Pius Scipio [47-46 BCE, Crawford 459/1]. Therefore, it is generally accepted that this denarius was issued by either L. Caecilius Metellus Diadematus (Cos. 117), or L. Caecilius Metellus Delmaticus (Cos. 119), with the authorities seemingly preferring the former, given that his three brothers all held the moneyership. (Id.; see also Sear RCV I at p. 99; Harold B. Mattingly, “Roman Republican Coinage ca. 150-90 B.C.,” in From Coins to History (2004), pp. 199-226 at p. 219 n. 75.) 

The uncertainty in identifying the goddess in the biga arises from the inability to identify definitively the branch she holds: an olive branch would mean that the goddess is Pax, and a laurel branch would mean that she is Juno Regina. (See Crawford at p. 287.)  Grueber (in BMCRR) and Seaby (in RSC) identify the goddess as Pax; Crawford and Sear note both possible identifications.

Roman Republic, M. Caecilius Q.f. Metelllus, AR Denarius, 127 BC (Crawford, RSC, Sear), ca. 126 BCE (Mattingly, op. cit. at p. 258, Table 3), Rome Mint. Obv. Head of Roma right in winged helmet, star on helmet flap, ROMA upwards behind, * (XVI ligature, mark of value = 16 asses) below chin / Rev. Macedonian shield, decorated with elephant head in center wearing bell, M METELLVS Q F around beginning at 6:00, all within laurel wreath. Crawford 263/1(a), Sydenham 480, RSC I Caecilia 29, Russo RBW 1064, Sear RCV I 139 (ill.). 19.5 mm., 3.80 g., 9 hr. [Footnote omitted.]

Roman Republic, C. Caecilius Metellus Caprarius, AR Denarius 125 BCE. Obv. Head of Roma right wearing winged Phrygian helmet with crest in form of head and beak of eagle (i.e, griffin); behind, ROMA downwards; before, mark of value * (= XVI) [off flan] / Rev. Jupiter, crowned with wreath by flying Victory above, in biga of elephants left, holding thunderbolt in left hand and reins in right hand; in exergue, C•METELLVS (ME ligate). 17 mm., 3.90 g. Crawford 269/1, BMCRR I 1180-1182 (& Vol. III Pl. xxx 8), RSC I Caecilia 14, Sear RCV I 145. Purchased from Dix Noonan Webb Auction 253, 13 April 2022, Lot 1247; ex. Spink Numismatic Circular Dec. 1985, No. 8404 at p. 334.*

 

*The moneyer “is presumably C. Caecilius Metellus Caprarius, Cos. 113” (Crawford Vol. I p. 293), who was born ca. 160 BCE, and served under Scipio Aemilianus at the siege of Numantia in 133 BCE in the Third Punic War; he died sometime after 102 BCE. BMCRR I p. 182 n. 1;  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gaius_Caecilius_Metellus_Caprarius.

Roman Republic, Q. Caecilius Metellus Pius, AR Denarius, 81 BCE. Obv. Head of Pietas right, wearing diadem; below chin, stork standing right / Rev. Elephant standing left, wearing bell around neck; in exergue, Q•C•M•P•I [Q. Caecilius Metellus Imperator]. Crawford 374/1, RSC I Caecilia 43, Sear RCV I 301 (ill.), Sydenham 750, BMCRR Spain 43. 18 mm., 3.9 g.*

 

*See Sear RCV I at p. 128: “The issuer strikes as imperator in Northern Italy where he was campaigning on behalf of Sulla. The following year he was to be the dictator’s colleague in the consulship.” See also Crawford Vol. I p. 390: “This issue was produced by Q. Caecilius Metellus Pius, serving as a Sullan commander in the fight against Carrinas, Norbanus and Carbo. The obverse type [of Pietas] . . . alludes to his cognomen, acquired for his part in securing the restoration from exile of his father Q. Caecilius Metullus Numidicus.” The stork depicted in front of Pietas “is an emblem of family piety and an occasional adjunct of the goddess.” Jones, John Melville, A Dictionary of Ancient Roman Coins (London, Seaby, 1990) p. 243, under entry for Pietas.  (Apparently, the Romans believed that the stork demonstrated family loyalty by returning to the same nest every year, and that it took care of its parents in old age.) [Remainder of fn., re elephants, omitted.] 

Roman Republic, Q. Caecilius Metellus Pius Scipio, 47/46 BCE, N. Africa, Utica (provincial capital 30 mi. NW of site of Carthage) or mobile military mint traveling with Scipio’s camp [see Sear Imperatorial (CRI), infra at p. 34]. Obv. Laureate head of Jupiter right, Q. METEL around to right, PIVS in exergue (PI ligate)/ Rev. African elephant walking right, SCIPIO above, IMP in exergue. Crawford 459/1, Sear Imperatorial (CRI) 45 (pp. 33-34) [David Sear, The History and Coinage of the Roman Imperators 49-27 BC (1998)], RSC I Caecilia [Babelon] 47 (ill. p. 21), Sear RCV I 1379 (ill. p. 262), RBW Collection 1601 (ill. p. 337), BMCRR Africa 1, Claire Rowan, From Caesar to Augustus (c. 49 BC - AD 14), Using Coins as Sources (Cambridge 2019) at pp. 44-45 & Fig. 2.22. 19.5 mm., 3.78 g. Purchased from Germania Inferior Numismatics, Netherlands, Dec. 2021.*

 

*Issued by Q. Caecilius Metellus Pius Scipio (ca. 95-46 BCE), a great-great-great-grandson of Scipio Africanus [see Wikipedia, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quintus_Caecilius_Metellus_Pius_Scipio], and also a member of the Caecilii Metelli family by testamentary adoption [id.]. He issued this coin as the commander-in-chief of the remaining Pompeian forces in North Africa after Pompey’s defeat at Pharsalus and subsequent assassination, leading up to their defeat by Caesar at the Battle of Thapsus (in present-day Tunisia) on 6 Feb. 46 BCE. In CRI at p. 34, Sear states as follows about this coin: “Both stylistically and in volume this coinage stands apart from the rather limited issues in Scipio’s name which can safely be attributed to the provincial capital of Utica (nos. 40-43)/ The inescapable conclusion is that this type, which is in the sole name of the commander-in-chief, is a product of the military mint operating within the security of Scipio’s camp. It would appear to belong to the latter stages of the campaign as the Pompeian army was moving around the province prior to being enticed into the fatal engagement at Thapsus.” 

See Metellus Scipio’s biography in Encyclopedia Britannica, 11th edition, Vol. XVIII, pp. 258-259 (1911):

 “QUINTUS CAECILIUS METELLUS PIUS SCIPIO, son of P. Scipio Nasia, was adopted by [Q. Caecilius Metellus Pius (d. ca. 64 BCE), issuer of Crawford 374/1 in 81 BCE, through the latter's will.]. He was accused of bribery in 60 B.C., and defended by Cicero, to whom he had rendered valuable assistance during the Catilinarian conspiracy. In August 52, he became consul through the influence of [his son-in-law] Pompey, who had married his daughter Cornelia [as his fifth wife. Pompey was Cornelia's second husband; her first, the son of Crassus, died at Carrhae.].  In 49 [Metellus Scipio] proposed that Caesar should disband his army within a definite time, under pain of being declared an enemy of the state. Afte the outbreak of the civil war, the province of Syria was assigned to him, and he was about to plunder the temple of Artemis at Ephesus when he was recalled by Pompey. He commanded the centre at Pharsalus, and afterwards went to Africa, where by Cato's influence he received the command. In 46 he was defeated at Thapsus; while endeavoring to escape to Spain he fell into the hands of P. Sittius, and put himself to death. His connexion with two great families gave him importance, but he was selfish and licentious, wanting in personal courage, and his violence drove many from his party.” 

Clare Rowan discusses Metellus Scipio and his coinage, including this type, at length at pp. 42-46 of her book (see citation above): 

“After the defeat at Pharsalus and Pompey's death in Egypt in 48 BC, opposition to Caesar continued in Africa under the command of Metellus Scipio, who had previously commanded forces in Syria. Along with other Pompeian commanders, Scipio was subjected to criticism by the Caesarian side -- in The Civil War Caesar attacked their legitimacy, noting that Scipio (and others) did not wait for the ratification of the appointments by the assembly and left Rome without taking the appropriate auspices, amongst other irregularities (Caes. BCiv. 1.6.6-7). Caesar wrote ‘all rights, divine and human, were thrown into confusion.’ Whether Caesar's accusations are true or not, we find a clear response to them on Scipio's coinage, which display an inordinate emphasis on Scipio's offices, and their legitimacy. . .  [Citing, among other things, obverse references to Jupiter as "underlining Scipio's divine support."]. . . .[Discussion of Scipio's other coins omitted.] Th[e] combination of familial history and contemporary politics can also be seen on Fig. 2.22 [illustration of Crawford 459/1, this type], which has a reverse decorated with an elephant accompanied by the legend SCIPIO IMP. Although one might be tempted to see this as a 'reply' to Caesar's elephant (Fig. 2.1, Crawford 443/1), there is little to support this hypothesis. The elephant had been a symbol of the Metelli since the victory of L. Caecilius Metellus over Hasdrubal at Panormus during the First Punic War in 250 BC, and elephants had previously appeared on the coinage of several moneyers from the family. [See Crawford 262/1, Crawford 263/1a-1b, Crawford 269/1, and Crawford 374/1] . . . . Indeed, Q. Caecilius Metellus Pius [Scipio's father by testamentary adoption] . . . released an issue displaying an elephant with the initials of his name in the exergue: Q.C.M.P.I. (the ‘I’ referring to his title as imperator).” [See Crawford 374/1]. [Portion of fn. re familial elephant connection omitted.] . . . . 

Rowan continues at pp. 45-46: 

“Scipio may have been using an ancestral type in keeping with Republican tradition. Nonetheless, the elephant was a topical motif, particularly since Casear's own elephant issue [Crawford 443/1] was very large, and so others may have interpreted the image within the competing claims of the civil war (particularly if they didn't have an intimate knowledge of Roman elite family symbols). Since the issue was struck in Africa, the image might also have been interpreted as a reference to the elephants of King Juba I, who supported Scipio against Caesar (Dio 43.3.5-4.1). Juba himself released coins with an elephant on the reverse (Fig. 2.24), and so any users of Scipio's currency in Africa may have seen the elephant as a local symbol rather than (or in addition to) a reference to the Roman general."

Titus (son of Vespasian) AR Denarius 80 AD, Rome Mint. Obv. Laureate head right, IMP TITVS CAES VESPASIAN AVG P M / Rev. Elephant walking left, TR P IX IMP XV COS VIII P P.  RIC II-1 Titus 115 (2007 ed.); RIC II 22a (1926 ed.); RSC II Titus 303; BMCRE 43; Sear RCV I 2512. 18 mm., 3.12 g. [This type is believed to have been issued in celebration of the opening of the Colosseum.]

Trajan, AE Drachm, Year 15 (111/112 AD), Alexandria, Egypt Mint. Obv. Laureate bust right, nude and with aegis on left shoulder, ΑΥΤ ΤΡΑΙΑΝ ϹЄΒ ΓЄΡΜ ΔΑΚΙΚ / Rev. Emperor (Trajan), laureate and togate, standing in elephant quadriga, right. holding eagle-tipped sceptre and branch; first three elephants with trunks turned down at end and fourth elephant with trunk turned up; in exergue, L IƐ (Year 15).  RPC [Roman Provincial Coinage] Vol. III 4605.4 (2015); RPC Online at https://rpc.ashmus.ox.ac.uk/coins/3/4605.4 ; Emmett 462.15 [Emmett, Keith, Alexandrian Coins (Lodi, WI, 2001)]; Dattari (Savio) 769 [Savio, A. ed., Catalogo completo della collezione Dattari Numi Augg. Alexandrini (Trieste, 2007)]; BMC 16 Alexandria 512 [Poole, Reginald Stuart, A Catalog of the Greek Coins in the British Museum, Vol. 16, Alexandria (London, 1892)]; Milne 669 at p. 19 [Milne, J.G., Catalogue of Alexandrian Coins (Oxford 1933, reprint with supplement by Colin M. Kraay, 1971)]. 33.5 mm., 21.26 g. Purchased from Odysseus- Numismatique, Montpellier, France, June 2021.

Antoninus Pius AE As, 148 AD, Rome Mint. Obv. Laureate head right, ANTONINVS AVG PIVS P P TR P XII / Rev. Elephant walking left, MV-NIFICENTIA AVG; in exergue COS IIII/S C in two lines. RIC III 863, Sear RCV II 4308 (var.), BMCRE 1840. 29 mm., 10.4 g. (Issued to commemorate games and spectacles held to celebrate 900^th anniversary of Rome.)

Septimius Severus, AR Denarius 197 AD, Rome Mint. Obv. Laureate head right, L SEPT SEV PERT AVG IMP VIII / Rev. Elephant advancing right, MVNIFICENTIA AVG. RIC IV-1 82, RSC III 348, Sear RCV II 6317. 18 mm., 3.32 g.

Philip I AR Antoninianus, ca. 247/48 AD, Rome Mint. Obv. Radiate, draped, & cuirassed bust right, IMP PHILIPPVS AVG/ Rev. Elephant walking left, bearing driver holding goad, AETERNITAS AVGG. RIC IV-3 58, RSC IV 17, Sear RCV III 8921. 23 mm., 4.2 g.  (Issued in connection with 1,000th anniversary of founding of Rome.)

I'm in awe of your Titus elephant. I really think that's a fantastic piece.

9 minutes ago, DimitriosL said:

Greetings,

I face difficulties finding me some proper Valerian I portraits. Most fall victim to the fish eye curse or straight up look like caricatures. Do you have any good depictions that are also “bust” accurate? 

I think Sestertii of Valerian tend to have nicer and more realistic portraits. The antoniannius is kinda half baked and rushed. Most are kinda crude looking 

Here is mine. It was identified by members on this fourum. Antiochus's wife sits on the reverse. An interesting coin from his rule in Cilicia.

What are your favorite animals on ancient coins? Here are a few I enjoy

Bull from Bosporus Kingdom

Horse from Carthage

Owl from Athens

Elephant\Bull Indo greek

Octopus from Syracuse

Man headed Bull from Arcanian Confederacy

Thank you for helping me Id the coins. Yes it happens, I'm not fishing for the victim. I got it from 1 dealer, went around to some other tables for help with attribution. It is reasonable to misidentify the senate coin as cleopatra because the portrait is actually very similar. Dealers are just people, even ancient coin dealers aren't experts on everything. 

On 2/26/2024 at 4:56 AM, seth77 said:

Were they drug dealers?

Was pretty disappointed with the senate one but a cleopatra for $5 would be a little too crazy. Out of all of these I think the antiochos iv of commogene and Anastasius seem like the most interesting coins. The rest well maybe trade pieces or sell pieces. 

Hi thank you for the help in advance. You guys are incredible! 

I went a coin show and got 5 coins for $5 each. My favorite is the first one.  

1. I believe this is Livia but I had 2 dealers tell me this portrait is of cleopatra vii. I couldn't find this type on wildwinds

2. Anastasius Follis minted in Antioch I think

3. Roman provincial of severan period emperess 

4. Roman provincial of Augustus or Claudius

5. Elagabalus provincial with fancy script on the reverse

31 minutes ago, Ryro said:

Weight and size?

It's 13.6 grams and size like a half dollar 

Hi I got this as a gift from a friend as a birthday gift who knows nothing about ancients. I believe it is either from Ptolemy I or II. It is quite cool but I am unsure it is authentic. Does it look okay (the wear looks genuine)? Which ruler is it? 
 

Thanks!

I picked up a bucket list coin for my birthday coming up. Athens owl Tetradrachm new style 149/148 bc. This beast is 30mm and is beautiful despite not having the nicest surface. I wasn't sure whether to get the old style or the new style but this was $175 so I just went for this one. It's just special. I'm not sure this one is famous as the old owl but it is just as magnificent.