Captch

I just identified an uncleaned coin as a provincial issue of Philp the Arab - I think it's this coin, up to the regnal year. I've attached a pdf highligthing which features are visible when the coin is wet. It's been in distilled water for ~15 months now and I'm not really sure there's anything else to clean off. I am able to see the details highlighted in the slides when the coin is wet, but the thing looks like a total slug when dry. Is Renwax a good solution for making the details pop? Will an outer layer of Renwax allow the coin to repatinate? I dug down to bare metal in the center of the reverse not knowing what I was looking at. What are good next steps for cleaning? dirty_phil.pdf

Ephesus AE Unit Turreted female head facing left, identity uncertain. Bee viewed from above flanked by E-Φ. Ionia Ephesus, 305-288 BCE 1.295 gr, 10.8 mm, 1h BMC Ionia #68 (pl. X #3)

I am seeing news that the Chechens either let the Wagner column by or joined them. A little bit like legions changing sides on the battlefield 😛

I'm guilty of necroposting here, but @Steppenfool this is a great video!

Myrina (Aeolis) AE unit, 2nd-1st C. BCE. Laureate head of Apollo, facing right. Amphora center, lyre in right field. MY-PI at base of amphora. 3.393 gr, 16.7 mm, 12h. SNG Copenhagen part 21 #224 & 225 (plate 5) Next: the coin in your collection minted closest to your hometown.

Roman Imperial imitative AE nummus Diademmed bust of emperor facing right. Lots of Is for lettering. Two victories holding a shield above a cippus. Imitations of a legend and mint mark are present. 2.62 gr, 19.0 mm Likely minted 316-361 CE.

.Nice video, @Steppenfool and nice coin @Curtisimo. I didn't know about the Constantine issue with his eyes raised upwards. I did a double-take when it first appeared onscreen because of how it differs from every other bust

How about even more 5th officina Phocas AE Follis 607-608 CE Robed bust of Phocas, facing. Wearing crown with cross and holding a mappa in right hand and a cross in the left. DN FOCAS PERP AV ANNO above four large Xs followed by a lowercase zeta denoting sixth regnal year. CON and epsilon in exergue. 9.976 gr, 29.5 mm, 7h Catalogue of the Byzantine Coins in the Dumbarton Oaks Collection and in the Whittemore Collection, Volume 2-1, #30c

@JeandAcre duly noted. It's frustrating as a new collector that secondary sources are so much harder to find than the coins themselves 🙂. I've been able to make pretty good use of my school's ILL program, but sometimes I need a reference ASAP!

@Broucheion It looks like my coin is in Schlumberger after all from the note you attached, just on a different plate than all of Tancred's other coins. If I follow what he wrote in that section correctly, that's because there is (was?) some debate as to where the final coins of Tancred's were minted, since he also was prince of Galilee. So that coin gets stuck into the section dealing with secondary baronies of the Kingdom of Jerusalem, since it's possible they could have been minted in Tiberias. Confusing...

Great, thanks.

Thank you so much! This is awesome.

Thank you so much! I assume that it's St. Peter that's depicted on the obverse. That makes sense with Schlumberger's argument about the second type - that maybe it was a little too daring to depict Tancred in local dress and cause a stir. I will have to see if the dots below St. Peter's cross looks like any of the words stamped on the obverse of that second type.

@Edessa since you just posted about medieval Antiochean coinage, I'm taking the liberty of @ing you...

Hey all, I'm going through my collection and was reminded that my example of this coin: https://cngcoins.com/Coin.aspx?CoinID=304594 isn't referenced in Schlumberger's Numismatique de l'Orient latin. Does anyone have a copy of Malloy or Metcalf that can double check that the reference is correct and share what the D-S-F-T is all about? Here's my version of the coin by the way.