Mmm...very nice coin! Sometimes mineral deposits detract from the aesthetic appeal of a coin. In this case, they add beautiful color and a look of great antiquity.

I make sure all of my coins have prices on them, and I have separate cases for Greek, Roman, Eastern, etc. I hate it when I have to ask a dealer for the price of a coin. I generally price my coins about 10% over what I want for them, which is generally 10% over the buy price, so a total markup of 20%. If a buyer asks for a discount, I take 10% off. Sometimes I sell coins at cost if they've been in my inventory for a while, collecting dust. Sometimes I give coins away for free. At my last show an old Marine (he had a USMC hat on) fished out a bunch of Lincoln Cents from my budget box, and I told him no charge for veterans today. Kids also get free coins. I don't really make any money, but I'm very popular, lol. (Is that a tactic?)

1 hour ago, Alegandron said:

This is how I got started...

So let me get this straight: eating more than one potato chip is SUBMITTING TO SATAN? Ad execs are worse than lawyers, lol. (Sorry, Donna!)

Wonderful images and coins everyone! This is the perfect thread for my aurora-toned 50 centavos of Bolivia...

Great coin! I love it when overstrikes have such clear details of the host coin. Two of my favorite overstrikes are these so-called Proto-Nabataean coins. When the Ptolemies and Seleucids had finally dispersed from Arabia and its environs, there were a bunch of small bronze coins floating around, which the Nabataeans overstruck for their purposes with Athena and Nike.

On this one you can see Athena looking up and Zeus looking down, and on the reverse, the eagle's head above Nike, claws below...

99.9999999% of these overstrikes occur on Ptolemaic bronzes, typically issues of Ptolemy III. But I did come across one struck over a Seleucid issue. Here you've got Athena and Antiochus IV (I think) on the obverse, and the reverse die had a chip that left part of his name un-struck. I've never seen another example of these types overstruck on a Seleucid coin...

Well the curator didn't say the piece was inauthentic. He shared your suspicions but couldn't confirm without seeing it in person. I know nothing about glass, but in my opinion it bears more research. Nice repair job though!

By the way, if you're ever in upstate New York, the Corning Glass Museum is well worth the visit. We took the kids up there on a road trip once, back in the day. (I do NOT miss driving 5 hours with 4 kids in the car!) The exhibit of Roman glass was particularly interesting to me.

You were just looking for an excuse to post a picture of all those coins weren't you? 😍

But I think your question has too many complex variables to be answered accurately. For one, I think you're comparing the fiat values of Roman currency in the 1st century to the bullion values of the metals today. Remember that when silver coins were circulating in the modern world, their fiat value was considerably higher than their bullion value. Once the bullion values started approaching the face values and coins were hoarded rather than spent, governments worldwide transitioned to base metals. Likewise, the fiat value of the Roman coins had to be considerably higher than their bullion values.

Another incalculable problem is the question of the cost of mining metals. It's much easier to mine and refine metals with modern technology than it was in the ancient world. On the other hand, ancient mining and refining was done by slaves which would have greatly reduced labor costs - you only need to keep slaves alive and well enough to function. It's definitely a case of apples and oranges.

Looking forward to this very much!

1 hour ago, DonnaML said:

Only if they're MS-70 with a CAC sticker -- whatever that may be!

I think it's like one of those little stars your piano teacher put on your music when you played a piece really well.

He's moved on to collecting state quarters by now.

14 hours ago, kirispupis said:

It was a trip to Petra that sowed the seeds for my ancient coin collection.

Those are beautiful images of Petra. I hope to visit someday myself. And your example of the Aretas IV bronze is quite good - full, round flan, well-centered, complete inscription. You can't do much better.

13 hours ago, John Conduitt said:

I wonder if some Celtic peoples also didn't give women a lot more status and power. Boudica's daughters were meant to inherit the Iceni Kingdom but the Romans prevented it.

Unfortunately, Celtic records are almost non existent, so we just don't know. There were occasional prominent leaders like Boudica, and certain graves of royal women have been discovered, but almost all information about Celtic social structure comes second-hand from the Greeks and Romans, who of course considered them barbarians. The Nabataeans were nice enough to leave us plenty of papyri, monumental inscriptions, and coins, although they did not write down any of their history. There was no Nabataean Homer. Like many other ancient cultures, they likely had a strong oral tradition of story-tellers that traveled from one city to another, reciting their myths and genealogies.

11 hours ago, Parthicus said:

Here's a scarcer early type, a very Hellenistic AE19 of Aretas III (87- 62 BCE), and minted in Damascus rather than Petra:

That's a really great example of a difficult type. These coins are not properly considered Nabataean, but rather Damascene city issues - a Nabataean king just happened to rule the city for a short time. The design follows the city issues of previous Seleucid kings. I'm going to compose a separate thread about the issues of Aretas III in Damascus, but for now I'll post a similar coin by the earlier ruler Antiochos VII, only because my coin of Aretas III isn't as nice as yours.

SELEUCID KINGDOM

Antiochus XII Dionysos, 87/6-84/3 BC.

AE21m 8.27g; Damascus Mint.

Obv.: Diademed head of Antiochos XII right.

Rev.: Tyche standing left, holding palm and cornucopia.

Ref.: HGC 9, 1331 

No sails, but this is my all-time favorite coin with galley...

C. Fonteius. 114-113 BC. AR Denarius (20mm, 4.0 gm). Janiform head of Fons or Fontus; D left, mark of value right, six pellets below / Ornate war galley sailing left, cosisting of three rowers and pilot. Crawford 290/1; Sydenham 555; Fonteia 1

It's a Roman Provincial issue of Nicaea in Bithynia. They were struck during the late Severan Dynasty through Gordian III. The spacing of the letters on the reverse suggests Gordian III. I can't tell anything from the obverse. See this coin for a comparison...

https://www.coinarchives.com/a/lotviewer.php?LotID=2377835&AucID=5845&Lot=1201&Val=f042c034b3432cbdc5fa967d672fae7f

Nice coin! I wasn't aware of the type.

This week I read a dissertation by Saudi scholar and women's rights activist Hatoon Ajwad al Fassi, entitled Women and Power in Northern Arabia: Nabataea. (Download at academia.edu here.) The author provides numerous examples from papyri, funerary inscriptions and coin evidence which demonstrate the unique role women played in the ancient caravan kingdom. She also advocates for women's rights in Saudi Arabia (a brave woman indeed), claiming that women in pre-Islamic Arabian societies enjoyed more freedom and autonomy than they do now. It's an interesting example of archaeology and ancient numismatics informing modern political discourse.

Nabataean women enjoyed a legal status which allowed them to own property (including slaves), conduct a wide variety of economic transactions without the guardianship of men, and inherit and bequeath estates. They had a great deal of autonomy and responsibility over family and clan life, including marriage, divorce, parentage, and custody. They also played significant roles as temple priestesses. No ancient society came even close to granting women the rights they enjoyed in Nabataea, except perhaps Palmyra, also a caravan culture. One reason for this social arrangement may have been the long absence of men on trade missions. Women had to keep the settlements running in good order while the men were away. Here is a selection of Nabataean coins from my collection that demonstrate the importance of women in Nabataea...

A sela, or drachm, of Obodas II, c. 30-9 BC, and a Denomination B bronze. Obodas initiated a coinage reform that included the queen's bust on every silver coin. Her name is not given in the inscription but we know her to be Hagaru. The bronze also presents the king and queen in jugate busts with double cornucopia on the reverse, a design that would become an idée fixe in Nabataean minting until the end of the kingdom...

From the time of Obodas' reform, no silver coin would be minted that did not include the bust of the queen, a unique paradigm in ancient minting. Here is Aretas IV, 9 BC - AD 40. Again, the queen's name is left out of the inscription, but we know her to be Huldu. In AD 16, Aretas would marry Shaqilat I, whose name would appear on the coinage, as it does on the reverse of this Denomination C bronze...

When Rabbel II took the throne in AD 70, he was merely a boy, and his mother served as regent. She is pictured on the drachms and bronzes of this period and named as the queen mother on the drachm. It was obviously important to the Nabataeans to establish the matrilineal legitimacy of the new king. Notice that the women on Nabataean coins are invariably veiled...

When Rabbel married his sister Gamilat in 76 AD, she appeared on the coinage as the new queen...

Two commemorative issues. When Aretas and Huldu's first child was born in AD 4/5, the event was celebrated by a coin that featured the ubiquitous double cornucopia, a palm branch, and her initials. She was Phasaelis, who would eventually be married to Herod Antipas and suffer the ignominy of a scorned bride when the Judaean king fell in love with his brother's wife Herodias. It's instructive to note that Aretas was willing to commemorate the birth of his first girl child on a coin. He did not strike any coins to commemorate the births of his other children, even the boys.

In AD 16, Aretas IV married Shaqilat I. (It is assumed that the previous queen, Huldu, died, although there is no record of the event.) The king issued a coin commemorating the wedding which shows him in full military regalia on the obverse, with the queen on the reverse, raising her hand in a gesture of peace and greeting. The queen appears in this friendly pose on several other coin types issued by Obodas II and Aretas IV...

Huh. That's odd. I'll send the admin a note.

Oh you want ugly, do you?

What a great idea. Those are splendid!

Here's a semis of Trajan, the type struck in Rome for circulation in Syria. Weird patina on this one. I wish it was all black. Maybe I'll spraypaint it.

You want a semi? Sure...

On 4/30/2024 at 3:52 AM, ambr0zie said:

From my last auction - a coin I paid 5 euros for (opening bid). It seems that other bidders did not like the flan problem at all - I personally think the artistry is more important. 

24 mm, 4,62 g.
Constantius II 337-361. Ӕ centenionalis. Antioch. 350-355 AD.
D N CONSTAN-TIVS P F AVG, pearl-diademed, draped and cuirassed bust of Constantius II right / FEL TEMP REPARATIO, Γ in left field, helmeted soldier to left, shield on left arm, spearing fallen horseman who is bearded and falls over the neck of the horse (FH4, clutching); ANϵ in exergue.
RIC VIII Antioch 135.

I agree. The scene on the reverse is very well executed and sharper than usual.

On 4/30/2024 at 8:49 AM, Roman Collector said:

I had the opportunity to upgrade my veiled and stephaned bust variety to this one, which had previously been sold in 2009 at Gorny & Mosch. It arrived in the mail yesterday. 

Faustina I, 138-140 CE.
Roman AR denarius, 3.39 g, 17.7 mm, 7 h.
Rome, 143-145 CE.
Obv: DIVA AVG FAVSTINA, veiled, draped, and stephaned bust, right.
Rev: Anepigraphic; Ceres, veiled and draped, standing right, holding vertical scepter in right hand and two corn-ears in left hand.
Refs: RIC –; BMCRE 328 corr.; RSC 297b; Strack –; RCV –; CRE 80.
Notes: BMC erroneously describes the bust type as veiled, omitting the stephane. This coin is an obverse die match to the British Museum specimen. Ex-Victor Wishnevsky; ex-Gorny & Mosch Auction 181, lot 2211, 13 October 2009. 

It happens to be a reverse die-match to the bare-headed bust type I have in my collection, proving simultaneous mintage of the veiled and bare-headed varieties.

Nice upgrade!

11 hours ago, JeandAcre said:

Brilliant.  Just Brilliant.  ...Am I right to think I remember a later Republican denarius commemorating victories over one of the correspondingly earlier kings --also with a camel in the lower field?

You're thinking of M Aemilius Scaurus, who basically extorted a bunch of silver from Aretas III around 57 BC, then went back to Rome and made denarii touting his "victory" over the Nabataeans. It's a story that deserves its own thread.

8 hours ago, Nerosmyfavorite68 said:

Question; why are silver coins of the Nabataeans scarce?  Were they melted down for the plentiful coinage of Trajan?

Yes, most were melted down after 106 AD. Some were overstruck, others converted to bullion I imagine, although there wasn't much silver left to harvest. By the end of Rabbel II's reign, the drachms were only .400 fine. Also, as an an addendum, here's a beautiful video of the Roman ruins at Bostra...

The answer may be simpler. There are numerous instances of neighboring cities issuing coins of similar types, either because of aesthetic influence, or commercial interchangeability. I'm old enough to remember growing up in a city somewhat close to the Canadian border (Seattle), and routinely finding Canadian currency in circulation, which in the 60's and 70's was accepted at face value. The pennies, nickels, dimes, and quarters were the same size and fabric as US issues, and you could even spend your Canadian paper money in the US if you had some left over from an trip across the border. If the mystery coin is from Gargara (and I don't know if it is), that may be at least part of the equation.

Awesome! First gold ancient coin = second greatest feeling in life. 😇

Tough break, but be sure to list it on FORVM's fake reports and/or ForgeryNetwork, if it isn't already there. It's important to keep the shysters at bay. I was recently stuck with three Toronto Group forgeries in a Canadian collection I bought. They are reasonably convincing, and they may have slipped through if it weren't for FORVM's fake reports. Fortunately the seller is willing to take them back...