robinjojo

This is a typically crude and crusty coin, which I think was produced during the reign of Diocletian, RY 2. I'm having problems with the obverse legend, which in parts look like blobs of metal. It appears to begin with AK. The succeeding letters are hard for me to discern. The ending letters appear to be OCCEB. LB (year two), with an eagle, with a wreath in its beak, facing right and a palm left are on the reverse. The weight is 7.02 grams. The portrait style seems somewhat different from what I encounter for Diocletian, but these portrait styles seen to run into each other during this period of the The Tetrarchy. I really appreciate any input/opinions regarding this humble and no doubt common coin. Thanks

I used to have an arrangement with a coin dealer to purchase coins that total at or above the sales tax exemption in California, I think at the time it was $1,000. The coins purchased were below the $1,000 cutoff, so when the coins arrived he would include a bullion gold coin to make up the difference. This is one of them, valued at $65 at the time. Australia, George V, sovereign, 1919 Perth Mint.

Perhaps this might help: https://guichet.public.lu/en/citoyens/immigration/nouveau-resident-luxembourg/arrivee-luxembourg/declarer-biens-personnels-douanes-demenagement-pays-tiers-vers-Luxembourg.html I'm staying in Cupertino. I think the city has a deal with Apple's "spaceship" headquarters that residents can come along for the ride if it ever departs for points unknown....😉

Oh well, the grading conundrum, which has been an aspect of numismatics for many decades, amplified over the past few decades by the MS system on the world/US side and, even more recently by the NGC grade, strike/surface rating system. are all part of a scheme to think up more grade categories or states as a means to make more money. Virtue, expanding knowledge or promoting the true meaning of numismatics, that of collecting coins as a way of learning history and human societies, are not the objectives of slabbing coins or the pushing the near obsession of grading by numbers that is so rampant for many collectors of modern and ancient coins. But, to each his or her own, as noted. I started collecting Morgan dollars back in the late 70s to early 80s, got turned off by the grading and hype, not to say the monotony of the designs and endless VAM varieties. I switched to world coins in the early 80s. Back then the grading was very straightforward: fair, good, very good, fine, very fine, extremely fine, almost uncirculated and uncirculated. The European grading system was more conservative, so an EF there would most likely grade as an AU in the US. This system suited me admirably. How nice it was to purchase a German wildman thaler in VF, with a nice strike and toning for what seemed to me a reasonable price. Many of the modern coins that I collected were cobs, and they really defy any numeric systems of grading or really an kind of grading with any accuracy, being wonderfully crude as they are! But, alas! Slabbing spread from US to world coins and now we have what seem to me hair-splitting grades for really modern coins. I've mostly moved on to ancients, avoiding slabbed coins unless they merit my attention beyond being encased in plastic. However, slabbing has been a major growth industry within ancient coin collecting, especially for the massive amounts of classical owls that have flooded the market for the past several years, but other coins as well. But I have never had an obsession to own "the finest known" or "top of population" or MS 71.55689. I guess that makes me very old school, but a coin, with all of its history, virtues and flaws, in hand is definitely my preference.

The important thing to keep in mind, I think, is that technological innovation, especially innovation that has a major societal impact, such as the Industrial Revolution, is that it comes with positive outcomes and a dark underbelly: vastly increased availability of goods (food, clothing, household utensils, etc.) leading to a burgeoning middle class, and at the same time an explosion of industrial workers whose economic lot was dire, until the appearance of trade unions. Technology has advanced through the 20th and into the 21st centuries with an increasing pace of benefits and costs. The airplane has led to a transportation revolution that has shrunken the planet, while at the same time giving us the carpet bombing of World War II and the atomic bombs dropped on Hiroshima and Nagasaki. Now, in the middle of the Information Age, technology in the form of AI, social media and search engine platforms are giving us information at our finger tips, retrieving data that would have required hours of research at a library. But, it has also created silos that provide reinforcing feedback of personal beliefs and prejudices, supported by fake videos, images and voice messaging. With this technology, literally, reality is being altered to a point where there is widespread disagreement over what it actually is. In the not-so-distant future, it will be, for example, to easily create a convincing image by almost anyone of a "discovered" ancient Roman or Greek coin, submitted with a convincing narrative behind it, perhaps with a convincing video featuring a well-known authority, with the use of an AI app. Maybe I'm overblowing the perceived threats, but they are certainly worth considering. I do hope that regulations in the US are instituted to set up rail guards for this technology, though I am sure that they would be ignored by bad actors.

For all of its innovation and ease of use, I just get a feeling that technology, headed most recently by the leapfrog advances of AI, is coming at a cost. That cost is our ability as human beings to communicate among ourselves, to have direct contact and to think rationally and independently. Now I think AI has definite promise in the areas of health care, climate modeling and scientific research, to name three. Already this technology is helping researchers process data on a volume beyond human capabilities in very short timeframes. I suppose it is fun to have an AI app construct a Roman coin with an unlisted reverse, much in the same way as having an app create an essay based on rudimentary input. But I am cautious and cling to old ways, no doubt partially due to my stubborn personality; shoot! I don't even own a smart phone. But it has been my experience that the pace of technological innovation outstrips the ability of society to cope with the changes the often come in crashing waves, swamping us with unforeseen consequences. For now I'm sticking to my books, online searching through Google and, oh yes, my cordless phone. I hope that I am not offending anyone, but that's just the way I feel and think....

It seems to me that the indigenous groups are seeking a financial share in any sales of the San Jose salvage, whenever that occurs. The details are murky.

I tend to agree. At best an agreement with the indigenous groups might be reached whereby they receive a percentage of the revenue from any sale that the Colombian government raises from the sale of any of the coins that they own from the San Jose. It is a solution, probably half-baked, but better than nothing. Here's more information on life in Potosi during the silver boom, which lasted centuries, albeit drastically diminishing by the by the end of the 18th century. https://www.theguardian.com/cities/2016/mar/21/story-of-cities-6-potosi-bolivia-peru-inca-first-city-capitalism#:~:text=to western Europe.-,At its peak in the early 17th century%2C 160%2C000 native,or Seville at the time.

From today's Guardian. https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2024/mar/29/bolivia-shipwreck-colombia-treasure

Though probably not. Ferdinand VII was a Bourbon, descended from Philip V, nephew of Louis XIV of France. I had to rummage through the boxes, but was able to locate the imaginary bust 8 escudos Ferdinand Vii, Santiago. This coin is in an old ANACS slab from the early 1990s (came that way). Chile, Ferdinand VII, 8 escudos, Santiago, 1811 FJ. Imaginary bust. KM 72

The included soil might actually be quite high quality for growing stuff!

I haven't rolled out this coin for a while: Spain, Segovia, Philip IV, 50 reales, 1635 R.

I've seen owls from the Middle East with green deposits. I'm sure this occurs elsewhere as well. The deposits reflect the environment in which the coins have been stored for centuries, even thousands of years. The green encrustations on silver coins must be the result of other neighboring minerals or objects oxidizing, creating over a long period the buildup of deposits on the coin, with the help of moisture. I've actually seen a few instances where this has led to a seller describing a silver coin as a fourrée, even though the coin is actually silver with green (copper) oxide deposits on parts or all of the coin. Removal of the green deposits and analysis of the coin (surface condition, any signs of plating breaks, weight, etc) usually resolves the question for or against the fourrée attribution. Here are three Sassanian drachms and a follis of Maurice Tiberius (separate purchase) that I picked up out of group at the February show in San Jose. The two drachms to the left had some black deposits, probably horn silver that were relatively easy to remove. The follis, very nice as-is, is part of the group photo and was not cleaned.

Lovely coin!

Nice coin! My experience with these large, impressive coins is that price is determined on rarity, condition, strike and size. Collectors pay a premium, it seems, for the truly massive bronze coins of Ptolemy IV, some measuring 46mm and weighing up to 90 grams or more. Those examples are much scarcer based on my experience. Here's one of my so-so examples. It displays very much the same surfaces as the OP coin: a little porous and with a somewhat uneven strike. Egypt, Ptolemy IV Philopator, AE Drachm, Alexandria mint. 222-205 BC. 66.15 grams

A beautiful coin and nice photos!

I agree. The problem with these coins is that they tend to come from conflict zones, so any possible chance of location, hoard size, composition, etc. is virtually impossible. This was very problematic even in the best of times in the Middle East. There is evidence from studied hoards, such as the Syria hoard o f1989 and the Iraq hoard of 1973 that points to multiple sources for these imitations, including official, such as the pharaonic owls issued by an apparently unnamed pharaoh to pay Greek mercenaries fighting the Persians. There are others, more localized and probably a mix of official and private origins. The weights of the imitation owls span a wide range, but I think in a region where coins of Attic, Phoenician and shekel weight circulated in a great mix, this would be a logical outcome. I imagine that there would be a great incentive for a local authority to require the turning in of Attic weight owls, melt them and issue imitations at the shekel weight and pocket the profits. This actually happened almost 1,900 years later in Potosi, Bolivia under Philip IV of Spain, but in that case the method of fraud by the assayers and mint officials was debasement.

In my disorganized quest to acquire anything round or roundish, made of some sort of metal and appears older than I am, here's a new style Athenian tetradrachm from the time of Sulla (86-84 AD). Just an overview of Margaret Thompson's plates indicates that lots of these owls appear to have been produced under Sulla, driven it appears by our old friend economic necessity. He needed all the money that he could lay his hands during the war with Mithridates and his allies which included Athens. Having starved Athens into capitulation following a brutal siege in 87 AD, he spared the city from total destruction, merely sacking it, a time-honored practice. These owls were issued in the ensuing few years following the fall of Athens. The owls produced during his occupation are quite distinctive both in their obverse treatment of Athena and the owl on the reverse. The engraving styles can range from good to crude attempts, compared to prior new style owls, indicating that die engravers of varying artistic abilities were employed by the mint. Coins had to be produced quickly, to meet Sulla's demands, a very familiar situation. I've been looking some time for a decent type owl from this turbulent period in the histories of Rome and Greece. What I ended up with is a midrange coin grade-wise. The French firm graded it as an EF. There is no way that this coin is anywhere close. I don't know why they do this, but if you get beyond that issue and just judge the coin on its own merits and faults, good purchases from them are still possible. To me this coin grades Fine, maybe a good Fine for wear with good centering, given the narrower flan. There might also be a case of worn dies, especially on the obverse. A beauty it is not, but it is quite a historical coin. This coin is one of the cruder examples, struck on a typically narrower flan, resulting is some detail off the flan, but the centering is decent. The weight is within the range of other examples listed in the Thompson catalog. The closest match with the Sulla new style owls in the Thompson plates is 1303a. Athens under Roman rule, new style owl, 86-84 AD. ΛAYPIA M[E]TAΛΛA monograms on reverse. Month "A" on the amphora (quite weak). Sulla, Group I, Thompson 1303a. 24mm; 16.43 grams Perhaps this coin is a die match, at least of the obverse, for 1303a? Here's the Thompson catalog photo:

I have found it increasingly difficult to find "buys" through auctions. It's a combination of fees (increasing) and increasing cash flowing into these venues that takes the fun out of them. It seems nowadays that the bidder with the biggest shovel and largest pile of money will prevail - time to return to bottom feeding, such as it is. Sometimes something interesting shows up on eBay, but that is "caveat emptor" land. Sometimes after sale or remainder lots offer some opportunity, depending on one's area(s) of interest. Have you seen the latest Aaron Berk podcast? That's number 42. He discusses the coinage of Lycia and mentions that this is an area that offers an opportunity to collect at an "affordable" level, but I must say the prices realized (what I could see) generally seem high. The coinage is quite interesting, though.

Yup, definitely a blowout! My bid of $190 was clearly an act of futility in retrospect.

This could be a situation where at least two highly specialized collectors of these coins got into a bidding war. I've been collecting imitation owls for the past several years, but I just don't have the means, or desire, to engage is such activity. Generally speaking almost all of my imitative owls are from the retail market, not auctions.

This coin hammered at $1,600, plus a 20% buyer's fee, for a total of $1,920. The estimate for the lot, typically "low ball" was $250. It is described as unlisted, which is very likely true, but I have seen many other imitative coins that don't easily fit into cataloged types. https://auctions.cngcoins.com/lots/view/4-D0YHSQ/uncertain-east-mid-late-4th-century-bc-ar-tetradrachm-20mm-1308-g-10h-imitating-athens-near-vf The fabric of the coin looks like one of those owls attributed to Mesopotamia that have recently appeared on the market, with a low weight of 13.08 grams (shekel weight). However, it could have originated elsewhere in that eastern region. Here's one of the owls currently on the market attributed to Mesopotamia (Mazakes). Note that his name, in Aramaic, is not present; instead there is the normal AΘE to the right. https://www.vcoins.com/en/stores/ancient_artifacts__treasures/4/product/mazakes_satrap_of_mesopotamia__ar_tetradrachm_imitating_athens__athena__owl/2029855/Default.aspx Here's an eastern owl, with "find" patina, that I acquired in 2016 that has a weight 13.8 grams, not as light as the CNG coin, but definitely in the shekel weight range, quite a wide one depending on local standards and period. Possibly Philistia or Phoenicia, imitating Athens, tetradrachm, late 5th to mid 4th century. 13.8 grams

Lovely examples! The bronze coins of Athens are very interesting and, I think, generally not appreciated as much as their more glamorous silver cousins. Those three examples are great coins. This is my only Athenian bronze coin, minted later in the second to early first century BC. Attica, Athens, AE 14, 130-90 BC. HGC 4, 1734; Kroll 1993, no. 100. cicada-owl on thunderbolt 4.19 grams Obverse: Cicada, viewed from top. Reverse: Owl standing on thunderbolt, AΘE to left.

I think the drawing of collectors and others to the classical owls is their availability and historical significance, but also the design which reflects the archaic roots of these coins, however well or poorly executed. Yes, the eye is not natural. That came later with the intermediate pi-style owls, which unfortunately have not garnered the attention given to the classical owls. I say unfortunately because these coins, crude and "dumpy" as they are warrant more attention by collectors. But, they do post date Athens' "Golden Age" and as such do not have the cachet of the classical owls. I love them, though, as well as the New Styles. After all, they are of the same lineage, going back to the earliest Athenian archaic owls of the late 6th century BC.. I agree with NewStyleKing that the owls immediately proceeding the New Style owls are very rare, and that there a general lack of information about these elusive coins. I would love to acquire a post Quadridigité style owl (circa 286 - 262 BC), but I have yet to see offered. Of course my search is quite narrow, limited to a handful of auction houses, VCoins, MA Shops and eBay.

I agree. The classical owls seem to have a "floor" price. Decent examples do seem to hover around the £400 to £550 hammer price range, while higher grade or coins with full or nearly full crest detail can go as high as £850 or so, plus the juice charged by the auction house. Slabbed owls, as always, command more and their price ranges can be all over the map. As has been commented many times in the forum auctions have become just too expensive for many collectors. The retail market is often the much better way to go when it comes to affordability.