John060167

thats pretty fast, overnight international..! What was the cost?

Ive had good experiences with FedEx, mostly took 2-3 days usually. Only once did a package come overnight, which was a pleasant surprise..!

Cheers

Well, here is one hell of a pickup:

Dionysius I (405-367 BC)

AR decadrachm, 36mm, 41.16g, 9h

struck 405-390BC, Gallatin R.III/C.IV

Reverse signed by Euainetos

Obverse: Charioteer, holding kentron in extended right hand and reins in left, driving fast quadriga left; above, Nike flying right, crowning charioteer with wreath held in her extended hands; below heavy exergual line, military harness, shield, greaves, cuirass, and crested Attic helmet, all connected by a horizontal spear; AΘΛA below.

Reverse: Head of Arethousa left, wearing wreath of grain ears, triple-pendant earring, and pearl necklace; Σ[Υ-ΡΑ-Κ-ΟΣ]-ΙΩΝ behind hair, four dolphins swimming around, EY-AINE along lower edge.

Definitely a dream coin for many of us, I never forget my first time handling the type. This one is particularly great since the obverse is so well struck and centered, without any die rust which is so prevalent for the decadrachm series. The reverse is a bit rough due to find patina but will be conserved soon anyway. Still, on the reverse, you have a beautiful portrait of Arethusa, designed by none other than Euainetos who signed the die right below her bust, below the dolphin. 

Euainetos’ decadrachm design is considered to be the more famous of the two types of decadrachm, against Kimon’s-they were copied much more than Kimon’s dies in other ancient coins afterwards. Euainetos’ dies are characterized as giving off an idealistic “nature goddess” vibe. In comparison, Kimon’s dies are characterized as a more realistic “Syracusan socialite” vibe, with her hairstyle likely influenced by the contemporary Syracusan ladies around at the time (I have shared one just below to show the difference).

It seems that Euainetos was likely an apprentice to the diemaster Kimon- it was Kimon’s coinage that came first. Also, Euainetos’ decadrachm is more common than Kimon’s decadrachm today too, with both more examples and more dies of Euainetos known. Possibly total about 1000 syracuse dekadrachms are known today from both Kimon, Euainetos and unsigned varieties. 

Here is a size comparison between the decadrachm and different prominent coins, from left to right:

Syracuse decadrachm, Peace Dollar, Walking Liberty half dollar, Athens tetradrachm

Do you have any dream coins in your collection, or one you wanna get one day? Please share!

Cheers!

Those are very cool, quite rare empresses indeed! I dont have either, but I do have Mr. Diddy J himself 🙂

AR denarius, 15.8mm, 2.72g, 11h

Obv: IMP CAES M DID IVLIAN AVG; laureate head of Didius Julianus right

Rev:PM TRP COS; Fortuna,,draped, standing left, holding rudder set on globe in right hand and cornucopia in left.

RIC IV 2a

Cheers and congrats!

2 hours ago, Kali said:

Impressive, wonderful additions.

thanks!

1 hour ago, Salomons Cat said:

For the first coin, that was also my first thought. But I think that you can classify it as an original, with some porosity, when you hold it in hand 🙂
It is ex CNG 2004 and 2023.

Great explanation and context! 😊  Impressive coins

Ahh, I was unsure what the reply meant…yeah, I believe it is just corrosion, not casting bubbles.

Cheers!

Hi all, 

Two newer pickups I’d like to share-both Caligula denarii!

The first one:

Caligula (r. 37-41)

AR denarius, 18.5mm, 3.62g, 6h

RIC I 2

struck after 18 March, 37ad-Lugdunum mint. First emission

Obv: C CAESAR AVG GERM PM TR POT COS; bare head of caligula right

Rev: Radiate head of Divus Augustus flanked by two stars

The second:

Caligula (r. 37-41)

AR denarius, 17.5mm, 3.41g, 4h

Unpublished in RIC

struck 41, Lugdunum mint 

Obv: C CAESAR AVG PON M TR POT IIII COS IIII; laureate head of Caligula right

Rev: SPQR PP OBCS in three lines within oak wreath

What makes this pair special is that they are Caligula’s first and last issue denarii, respectively! After Caligula ascended the throne in 37, the first issue he made depicts his great grandfather Augustus,  advertising his legitimacy. The first coin above is an example of this type. Advertising his blue blooded heritage would be a trend in his coinage-of the precious metal issues he made, Augustus, Agrippina (his mother) and Germanicus(his father) are depicted. It was important to do this since he otherwise lacked military/political accomplishments, unlike his predecessors.

Upon his accension, Caligula also recieved the corona civica for “having saved the people”, presumably from Tiberius’ tyranny. This was put on Caligula’s silver coinage in both 40 and 41. The corona civica reverse types are the rarest reverse type of Caligula’s denarii. The issues from 40ad are cataloged as RIC I 28, and differ from the much rarer 41ad issue by only the TR POT & COS year. The issue from 40 is TR POT III COS III, and from 41 is TR POT IIII COS IIII. These 41ad issues would be his last, as on 24 January 41, Caligula was assasinated. Due to how early in the year he was assassinated, not many issues from 41ad are known,  RIC only catalogued two reverse types in silver. The rest, including the coin I have, are unpublished. Afterall, the mint did not have so much time to make 41ad dies, and they legends especially in the TR POT & COS portions seem quite sloppy-it makes me wonder if instead of making fresh dies, they used dies from 40ad and just added an extra I ?

Anyway, truly fortunate to have added these two to my collection, my julio claudian set is growing! 😋

Do you have any coins you believe are relevant somehow? Lets see that coin porn! 😉

Cheers!

14 hours ago, Topcat7 said:

Lovely coins.

 

Not an AR Tetradrachm, but a Perseus none-the-less.

 178-168 B.C. PERSEUS, Kings of Macedon, SNG Cop. 1275

interesting type! who is depicted on the obverse?

On 6/13/2023 at 3:33 PM, kirispupis said:

That's an astounding pickup! These coins are stunning and you've acquired one of the best examples.

Perseus is a bit late for my collection, but I do have this one from his great-great-grandfather.

Kings of Macedon, Antigonos II Gonatas (277/6-239 BC)
AR Tetradrachm (31mm, 16.85g, 3h)
Amphipolis, c. 274/1-260/55.
Horned head of Pan l., lagobolon over shoulder, in the centre of a Macedonian shield. R/ Athena Alkidemos advancing l., preparing to cast thunderbolt; crested Macedonian helmet to inner l., monogram to inner r. HGC 3, 1042.

beautiful tet, i want one like that for my set!

On 6/13/2023 at 2:01 PM, Deinomenid said:

Congratulations!

There was some strange bidding around that section, maybe after the high price of the Philip V just before.  Out of curiosity,  is the eye ok when held in hand?  It's very different to the one (apparently same)  from  Triton.  I know caused a bit of worry despite it being NAC.

Black-eyed version of same coin here -

 

 

 

the eye is great, they just cleaned some deposits off the coin which resulted in it looking much better! a beauty for sure now.

cheers

Got this coin in the last NAC auction:

 Perseus, 178 – 168BC.

AR Tetradrachm, 30mm, 16.96 g, 12h

Struck 174/3BC,  Pella/ Amphipolis mint

Obv: Diademed head of Perseus r., slightly bearded. 

Rev: ΒΑΣΙ – ΛΕΩΣ / ΠΕΡ – ΣΕΩΣ Eagle standing r. on thunderbolt, with open wings.  Above, monogram, in r. field, MI and below, Φ. All within wreath. 

SNG Copenhagen 1266. Mamroth 8. De Luca 101d (this coin-illustrated(?)).

Ex CNG 81, 2009, 374 and Triton XVI, 2013, 307 sales. From the RCM collection.

Perseus was the last king of Macedon ,  the son of Philip V,  who had his own wars with the Romans (The First and Second Macedonian Wars). Following Philip V’s death, Perseus took the throne and eventually continued the struggle against the Romans in the Third Macedonian War in 171BC, but in 168BC was defeated and following this, Macedon would be annexed by Rome. Following his defeat, Perseus was allowed to live his remaining days in Rome in comfort, but died in 166BC.

This example is an attic standard issue, an earlier issue made by the magistrate Zoilos, who was known through some issues of Philip V and the issues of Perseus. The earliest issues bear a signature below the bust and are the most sought after issues of Perseus,  but following these initial issues only a monogram on the reverse at 12h was placed, signifying it was Zoilos who issued them. Perhaps putting his full name right below the bust was considered too bold of a move for a magistrate, so the earliest issues were changed to reflect this. As time went on and the war started, Zoilos retired and the tetradrachms degraded in style and also were reduced in weight, as can be seen by later issues. Whilst still very beautiful and desirable issues, the toll of the war can be seen on these amazing issues nonetheless. 

Overall, the tetradrachms of Perseus are known for their super realistic and finer style portraiture, which really drew me in to picking one up. Definitely one of the more beautiful types of hellenistic coinage in my opinion!

Please share any coins you feel are relevant!

Cheers!

PS: Here is a video if you wanna see: https://imgur.com/a/aiYoFr5

On 5/7/2023 at 7:37 PM, Simon said:

JOHN II BILLION TRACHY NOMISA IV DOC 10 Constantinople SBCV-1944
OBV IC XC in field
Bust of Christ bearded and nimbate, wearing tunic and kolobion, holds Gospels in l. hand. Pellet in each limb of nimbus cross.

REV Bust of emperor wearing stemma, divitision,collar piece and paneled loros of a simplified type; holds in r hand scepter cruciger and in l. gl.cr

Size 29.10

Weight 4.9gm

DOC lists 20 examples total with weights from 2.59gm to 5.00 gm and sizes from 28 to 30 mm. It has two variations A and B , both are equal in rarity , the difference is a stroke on shaft on type B.

This coin is very heavily silvered, it was part of a hoard that was once thought to be electrum, it is not, just very heavily silvered.

So well silvered! I haven’t seen many that look so silvered like that, is it quite rare or am i just not educated enough?

On 5/8/2023 at 12:27 AM, TheTrachyEnjoyer said:

theodore I Laskaris

 

John III Vatatzes

 

John III Vatatzes

 

Michael  VIII Palaeologus 

 

Michael VIII Palaeologus with Andronikos II

Beautiful silver trachy collection, i’ve seen a bunch of trachies with large flan cracks, should one be worried about the larger flan crack trachys being particularly fragile?

Cheers!

On 5/6/2023 at 11:39 AM, Hrefn said:

Manuel I, likely struck 1160-64.  With St. Theodore, a military saint martyred in the early 4th century under Galerius or Licinius.   His legend as a dragon slayer is older than St. George’s. 

The question in my mind is which Saint Theodore is intended.  There is Theodore Tyron, “the Recruit” from the Latin word tiro.  English probably gets the slang word tyro from this, which is equivalent to “newbie” or “noob.”   There is also Saint Theodore Stratelates, “the General.”    Scholars differ on whether there were two different Theodores, or just the one.  Manuel and Theodore are both portrayed manu ad ferrum, hand on sword hilt.                                                                               Purchased from Solidus Numismatik, in Munich, Germany 9/23/2016   

The next one is a brand new purchase from the recent Heritage auction, so new it hasn’t arrived yet.  There are several interesting elements about this coin.  The OBV shows the Theotokos, the  Mater Theou with an icon of Christ.  Theologically, this is a visually powerful image of the centrality of the viewer’s attention onto the Christ, the object of worship.  

The REV shows the Archangel commending Isaac II, whose name is crystal clear on this specimen.  I think the pendilia on the emperor’s crown are meant to be Chi-Rho’s, which I have never seen described before, and would be rather exciting if true.  Comments invited.  

Poor Isaac II had a tumultuous reign which culminated in his deposition and blinding by his older brother, Alexios III.  Isaac’s son, also named Alexios (the IV) escaped Constantinople to appeal for aid from the West against the usurping Alexios III.  The forces of the Fourth Crusade were stuck in Venice, and subsequently in Zara, because they were short of the funds promised to the Venetians for transport to the Holy Land.  An agreement was struck amongst the Crusader leaders, Venice, and Alexios IV to divert the crusade to Constantinople and return the blinded and imprisoned Isaac II to the throne.  In return, his son Alexios IV promised the full monetary and military assistance of the Empire to further the aims of the Crusade.  

The Crusaders succeeded in restoring Isaac and his son to power in August 1203,  but soon discovered that the promised assistance was not promptly forthcoming.  Isaac and Alexios IV had neither the financial nor the political means.  Further political turmoil in Constantinople ensued.  In February 1204,  Isaac was killed (or died of mistreatment) and Alexios IV the son was imprisoned by yet another usurping Alexios, the Vth, nicknamed Mourzuphles.  The Crusaders insisted on the restoration of Alexios IV, but Mourzuphles had the youth executed and told the Crusaders to depart without their promised payment and aid.  

The Crusaders and Venetians attacked the city and took it on 12 April, 1204, this time as conquerors.  Sadly, a large part of the city had burned in the siege and the preceding turmoil.  

 

There are bronze or billon tetartera attributed to Isaac II and Alexios IV during their joint reign in AD 1203-4.  Given the financial and political circumstances, I would be surprised if there are any precious metal coins of their reign, or that of Alexios V.

 

 

very beautiful coins, i especially love the design of the archangel on the second coin. I find the stylization on well preserved coins of this era to be pretty interesting , and yours seem to be of great quality. congrats on the win!

Hello everyone!

Here is a new coin I got, a pretty exciting piece for me as I rarely get coins quite like this! 

Empire Of Nicaea

Theodore I Laskaris (r. 1208-1222)

AR Aspron Trachy, 31mm, 3.36g, 6h

struck 1208-1212, Nicaea Mint

Sear 2064

Obverse: IC-XC (barred), Christ Pantocrator enthroned facing, wearing nimbus cruciger with pellet in each branch of cross, pallium and colobium, holding book of Gospels in lap; Two pellets on stock to either side of throne.

Rev: ΘΕΟΔΩPOC ΔEC-Π-OT ΘΕΟΔΩΡΟC, standing facing figures of Theodore I (on left), wearing crown with pendilia, divitision, loros and sagion, and St. Theodore (on right), nimbate and wearing military dress, each holding sheathed sword in outer hand; both grasping grounded staff surmounted by eight-pointed star between them.

Ex. CNG eAuction 537, lot 610 (26 April 2023)

Ex. Gasvoda Collection

Ex. CNG eAuction 455, lot 456 (30 October 2019)

Ex. JB Collection

Ex. CNG eAuction, 121, lot 223 (24 August 2005)

I’ve found late byzantine coins to be quite interesting with their scyphate shape and stylized designs.  I have a specialist trachy friend who keep on showing me all these different trachies & so I had to get another one, theyre just so cool! This particular one is an AR aspron trachy, although it is also categorized as electrum in some cases as it is 80-90% silver and the rest gold from what I have read. This was struck after 1204, when the Byzantines lost constantinople to the crusaders, so it is from one of the rump states. Personally i am really drawn into the design of the issue, Christ is very well struck on the obverse and the reverse depiction of the two Theodores is quite sharp.

Here is a comparison shot to other common AR issues, an Augustus denarius & an Alexander III tetradrachm. As you can see the diameter is pretty large even next to the tet, and the trachy looks to be of high purity silver as well, not much gold it seems.

Does anyone else have any cool AR or EL trachies? Please share!

Cheers!

6 hours ago, seth77 said:

There are a few things that may help us understand these coins better:

1. They are likely very early, at the very least contemporary with the first siliquae issued for Valentinian and Valens after Valens was elevated in late March 364 very close to Constantinople; they also share the same reverse design with those siliquae.

2. The design points to a first issue, the head to left points to a special emission, what was special at that time?

3. Silver was already at that point mainly an attribute of the emperor's relationship with the military and with the foederati, not usually common in the regular markets and economic life. Siliquae were likely struck for direct imperial needs for army matters, rather as it had been the case before the crisis of the 3rd century with denarii being a common economic fixture struck continuously for both regular domestic markets and military needs. That means that they circulated less and were less a mean of economic flow and more a mean of storing wealth. I have read a few papers that indicated how scarce siliquae are in regular Roman urban contexts compared to their presence in borderland hoards and beyond the imperial limes, especially in 'Germanic' contexts. This is also the period when church silverware becomes rather common, possibly due to secondary use of silver coin.

So when we put these things together, an image starts to form, at least in my mind: these coins were struck in the spring of 364 after Valens had been elevated and likely before the two emperors left Constantinople towards Mediana to settle the partition of the empire. Since both the weight and the obverse indicate a special emission, I think it likely that they were issued to celebrate the elevation of Valens and the presence of both emperors in the capital (these coins are just from Constantinople).

But why were they made at a different weight standard? This is the pre-355 standard during Constantius II, an emperor that was a model for the brothers and after 370 for Gratian too. Such was the reverence that Constantius commended during the Valentinian dynasty that Gratian made it especially important for his own image the fact that he married Constantia, the posthumous daughter of Constantius II. I think that there is a possibility that these special coins were struck intentionally on that earlier standard to mark both the celebration of the empire having two Augusti (as it seems that the army requested) and the connection of this new regime to that of the Constantinian dynasty.

Great insight, thanks for sharing! That all makes a lot of sense,  they very well could be a special issue, although I do wonder how a heavy siliqua would fit into the post 355 system like you said…what face value would it have, or would it be traded based on weight? Also Ive seen issues for these by Gratian and Valentinian II interestingly, so the argenteus had a longer lifespan than I intially assumed (shared below)…maybe that could shed some light on these.

http://numismatics.org/ocre/id/ric.9.aq.24

http://numismatics.org/ocre/id/ric.9.lug.42

On 5/4/2023 at 8:42 AM, Heliodromus said:

I've never really understood the silver denominations of this time period either, with so many co-existing denominations (light siliqua, siliqua, miliarense, heavy miliarense during Constantine's time). The siliqua and miliarense seem to have been plentiful and part of regular coinage, while the heavy miliarense at least seems to have been an unusual denomination (perhaps only issued for donatives?).

I'm not sure what the best sources are for monetary values. From my notes I have Diocletian's original argenteus tariffed at 1/24 of his 1/60lb aureus, and then a bit later when Constantine I began issuing regular silver coinage c.320 AD his renamed "siliqua", at same 1/96lb weight as the argenteus was then only worth 1/24 of his 1/72lb solidus, but then we also had the higher valued miliarense at 1/72lb (same weight as the solidus).

Maybe the siliqua and miliarense served different purposes, since it doesn't seem to make much sense in terms of a single transaction why it would be useful to have two coins of fairly similar value. Do we even know whether silver coinage at this time routinely traded at face value, or just by weight?

The silver coin weights had dropped a bit by Valens time, but whatever rationale supported multiple denominations during Constantine's time may well have been the same during this later period too.

 

Yes, the denominations of this time are confusing! For example, I wonder the rationale of having the miliarensia (heavy and light, 14:1 & 18:1 ratio), when the siliqua is 24:1. This means a heavy miliarense = 1.714 siliquae & light miliarense =1.333 siliquae… a strange ratio in my opinion, especially the heavy miliarense…why not round it off and make it 12:1 and 16:1 respectively (so a heavy miliarense =2 siliquae, a light miliarense =1.5)?

I am not totally sure if the coins traded at face value although I would assume so. By the end of the 4th century, the weights of siliquae esp in the west were quite inconsistent, I have seen some as low as 1g for apparently unclipped pieces…the quality control was bad. I feel the only way people would’ve accepted such coins was if they were traded by face value!

It is possible the argenteus was an attempt to reintroduce some denomination (maybe a “reduced light miliarense?) along with the existing reduced siliqua and miliarense, but I really have no idea..only speculating. Fun to think about and look into though.

Cheers!

On 5/4/2023 at 7:09 AM, Al Kowsky said:

John, Nice score 😊! I can't offer any info on your research search, but pictured below for comparison is a siliqua of Valens I scored several years ago. 

 

beautiful coin, from the east harptree hoard! i have a siliqua from the hoard, of julian ii from lugdunum …these siliquae tend to have a certain patina. oldest “provenanced” coin of my collection. i feel ive seen others youve had like this on cointalk as well.

cheers!

1 hour ago, Sulla80 said:

More Roman Egypt.

Severus Alexander :

Roman Egypt, Alexandria. Severus Alexander. AD 222-235. BI Tetradrachm (23mm, 12.38 g, 12h). Dated RY 13 (AD 233/4). Laureate, draped, and cuirassed bust right, seen from behind / Dikaiosyne standing left, holding scales and cornucopia; date to left, palm to right.

 

Next: a coin that you consider "fine style"

Fine style coin:

Sicily, Entella 

“Siculo Punic” issue

AR tetradrachm, 24.5mm, 16.86g, 6h

struck 320-300BC

Jenkins 165 (O49/R148)

Next coin: siliqua

Hello all!

Here is a new pickup I have, an issue of emperor Valens-the so called “argenteus”.

Valens

AR argenteus, 19.5mm, 2.90g, 6h

Struck 364-367, Constantinople mint

RIC IX 11e.1

Obv: DN VALENS PF AVG, Pearl diademed, draped, and cuirassed bust of Valens facing left

Rev: VOT V in two lines within wreath, with large central jewels. CONSA in exergue

This example is a pretty great quality one, and a rare variety of a rare denomination-he is left facing! This coin, like many argentei, have a wreath reverse, which I love for its simplicity and beauty. Mostly blast white with a hint of color, came from CNG’s recent eAuction but also has CNG provenance going back to 2000!

This is an interesting denomination, as it was issued alongside the “reduced” siliquae of the era. Apparently the denomination didnt last long since there are only issues known of Valens, Valentinian, Gratian & Valentinian II from what I know so far. They were mostly struck in Constantinople, but you also find some examples from Nicomedia, Lugdunum & Rome. 

The “argenteus” is mysterious. I wonder, why were they issued and what were their intended value? The weight of a “argenteus” is similar to a pre-reform siliqua, but siliquae, both before and after the reform, were tariffed at 24:1, so how did this weird denomination fit into the system of the time?

The standard weight of an argenteus is ~ 3g, & the standard weight of a reduced siliqua is ~2.2g. We know the siliqua was tariffed 24:1, so 24 siliquae to a solidus. A standard argenteus is about 1.36x heavier, translating to a ratio of about 17.6 : 1. What is interesting is that this ratio is similar to the “light miliarense” ratio before Constantius II’s reforms, which was tariffed 18 : 1. Is it possible the argenteus was intended to be replacement for that? 

Does anyone know of any research on the denomination? Id like to hear your thoughts on this interesting denomination and please share any info you have on it (as well as related coins!)

Cheers!

8 hours ago, Octavius said:

 A selection of denarii of Caligula...

Two with his mother Agrippina, one with his father, Germanicus , and one with his great grand father Augustus...

That’s one awesome collection you have there! Is Caligula one of your favorites?

Cheers

1 hour ago, Roman Collector said:

Wow, @John060167! That's quite an acquisition for your collection! I only have provincial issues of Little Boots. This one is my favorite.

Caligula, AD 37-41.
Roman provincial Æ 20 mm, 6.74 g.
Peloponnese, Corinthia, Corinth, Ae. P. Vipsanius Agrippa and M. Bellius Proculus, duoviri, AD 37-38.
Obv: C CAESAR AVGVSTV, bare head right.
Rev: M BELLIO PROCVLO IIVIR / COR, Pegasus flying right.
Refs: RPC I 1173; Amandry (1988) XVII; BCD Corinth 405-6.

This one, though, never fails to make me laugh at its naive artistic style.

Caligula AD 37-41.
Roman provincial Æ 28 mm, 11.17 gm.
Carthago Nova, Spain, AD 37-38.
Obv: C. CAESAR AVG. GERMANIC. IMP. P.M. TR.P. COS., laureate head of Caligula, r.
Rev: CN. ATEL. FLAC. CN. POM. FLAC. II. VIR. Q.V.I.N.C., head of Salus r., SAL AVG across field.
Refs: SGI 419; Heiss 272, 35; Cohen 247, 1; RPC 1, 185; SNG Cop 503.

Cool coins, especially like the pegasus on the reverse, coins from corinth are awesome!

Cheers!

3 hours ago, Limes said:

That's a great denarius of Caligula. How did your previous one look like, since this is the upgrade?

Unfortunately, a denarius of Caligula indeed demands a big bag of money these days. Well, maybe not just these days. Anyway, I was lucky to score this budget example for a modest price. 

I love wreathed reverses, they are among my favorite designs, for their simplicity and beauty….I always seek ones like that out. Amazing coin!

Here is the example i upgraded from, still attractive but yeah…this example has Germanicus on the reverse, so it goes along with RIC 14, and has looking portraits despite its issues.

Cheers!

38 minutes ago, akeady said:

@John060167 also

Thanks - it was sold as fourree by CGB but maybe they were too hasty in condemning it.   I'll dig it up and maybe to measure its relative density.

ATB,
Aidan.

18 minutes ago, akeady said:

I've only one Caligula denarius and it's a holed fourrée.

Coin:	Silver (fourrée) Denarius C CAESAR AVG GERM P M TR POT COS - Bare head of Caligula right - Radate head of Augustus right, between two six-pointed stars
Mint:	Lugdunum (37 AD)
Wt./Size/Axis:	3.62g / 18mm / 6h
References:	RIC 2 BMC 4 Cohen 11 Giard/L2. 157 /13a
Acquisition:	CGB Online 23-Mar-2012

ATB,
Aidan.

Thats neat, thanks for sharing!

It has a great style & the surfaces have no breakage in the plating, & weight is on point for a silver issue! Is it really a fourree? Wonder if the “base metal” exposure is actually just deposit/dirt.

Cheers

Anyone likes denarii of Caligula? I do!

I really like collecting coins of infamous people as much as I do respectable, famous people…perhaps even more lol.

Here is an upgrade to my current Caligula denarius, a nice example with the portrait of Agrippina the elder on the reverse.

According to RIC, there is “practically no doubt” these issues were struck in Rome, although more modern authors contest this and say they were struck in Lugdunum. For RIC, the main difference between silver/gold issues struck in Lugdunum and Rome is that Lugdunum issues were struck only in 37-38 and show a bare head of Caligula, and later issues struck in Rome depict him with a wreath. So who knows where these were really struck!
 

Caligula’s precious metal coins are rare as he didnt reign too long for a julio claudian & his issues were melted down in mass after his death,  by Nero during his reforms & possibly as a part of his damnatio memoriae(?) So they demand a heavy premium, along with Claudius. 😞

Anyway happy to have this one! 

Have any coins of lil’ boots? Please share!

Cheers

Here’s my favorite wins from the Ramskold collection- lot 2808 and 2781 respectively 

Cheers!

9 hours ago, Broucheion said:

Hi @John060167,

That’s it. CATALOG NO. 134 — BUY OR BID SALE Closing at 5 PM on March 29, 2005, Lot #23.

- Broucheion 

oh wow thanks a bunch!!! Really appreciate you helping out 😊

John