robinjojo

Alexandrian coinage, whether Ptolemaic or Roman provincial is a wonderful field to specialize in, and I wish that I had the discipline to concentrate on that city alone, but my generalist collecting inclinations divert me in myriad directions. Alexandrian Roman provincial coinage maintained a generally high level of artistry, especially over the first and second centuries AD. I think this is due to the city's large Greek population. It is these Greek die cutters that we have to thank for the wonderful provincial Alexandrian coins that grace our collections. Here are a few, which I have posted before: Claudius and Messilina, BI tetradrachm, Alexandria, 41 AD. 14.1 grams Nero, Bi tetradrachm, with Tiberius on the reverse, Alexandria, RY 13 (66/7 AD). Köln 187-9 12.54 grams Hadrian, BI tetradrachm, Alexandria, RY 20 (135/6AD). Emmett 879. 24mm, 12.86 grams Sabina, BI tetradrachm, Alexandria, RY 15 (130/1 AD). Cologne-1262; Dattari-2063; BM-918; RPC-5774 (9 specimens). 12.84 grams Antoninus Pius, BI tetradrachm, Alexandria, RY 3, (139/40 AD). Eirene on reverse. Milne 1638 25 mm,13.42 grams Gallienus, BI tetradrachm, Alexandria, RY 14 (266/67 AD). 10.22 grams

Speaking of Kerry, I wonder what this campaign button from 2004 would fetch on eBay? Should I get it slabbed? 😉

A period piece: And a period coin, generally speaking: Italy, Tuscany, Livorno, Cosimo III, Pezza della Rosa, 1684. Davenport 4216 25.74 grams

Not all the time. I've negotiated prices in the past for some items on eBay, but the "sold" price is the listing price. Yes, the $33K owl has been relisted. Perhaps the seller closed the listing for some reason, perhaps a offer outside eBay, and then relisted shortly thereafter. Who knows?

I totally agree. Yes, it has been sold, but for how much? The sold listing price is showing $33K, but my experience with eBay is that sometimes sellers do not display the actual sale price, so that owl might have been purchased for $33K or less....

The owl offered on eBay for a $33K asking price is a very nice example. In the NGC scheme of things, with numeric grading for strike and surface condition, I suppose a "5" for surface condition is warranted, though I am not in favor of this approach. Is it a "5" for strike? One can argue that the centering is excellent, while another can argue that most of the all important crest is missing, due to the normally narrow flan and broad obverse die. So, should it be maybe a "4" or "4.5" for strike? The other factor with these coins is style. Sure, there are lots of classical standardize owls out there with a "wow" factor for strike and condition, but many are just plainly unattractive in terms of style. Many are flatter in relief, or have less sophisticated engraving. The $33K falls into this category, I think. The obverse die was engraved in lower relief. The overall modeling of the face is only so-so as these coins go. For comparison, here's a classical owl that, in my opinion is more attractive stylistically. This coin is a compromise in terms of visible obverse detail, but the portrait is sensitively engraved, even with the slight frown. Also, the strike is not razor sharp, but very good nonetheless, and there is some wear at the high points. Color is also important and a matter of personal taste. The coin below would probably be graded by NGC for surface as a "3" or maybe "4" because of the toning. There are thousands of these owls out there, and I find this strike/surface condition and "star" marketing gimmick by NGC a distraction at best and a detriment at worst to the hobby of collecting ancient coins, but the lure of the slab is undoubtedly a drawing card for many collectors and investors. In the end, of course, it all comes down to personal taste and personal financial resources.

How about a buyer offer of a 90% discount, plus a set of spark plugs for a 2013 Mazda 3? The spark plugs could clinch the deal! https://www.ebay.com/itm/355464842575?itmmeta=01HPQAVQMHEFZTGK63VS6MCN08&hash=item52c35b0d4f:g:6DgAAOSwGtRlzRTm&itmprp=enc%3AAQAIAAAA0KC%2FHyuKiJiG%2FC8xOcIJX%2B867wKuscRs1i9m542L429CWoAs6udeWEv%2Fvh7mT5FeOU1fyAyWydPFl95YPJciw%2BNK9MPLHmGO4sdq7AW38SENlI7H%2BCHB%2FIZzlyFVGWjSv76e618Z2%2BxSjWmTh7F0NHH8gwDYNa95%2Fzss9i%2FmvH91BAc3YvJgjjoNcA4%2FYDEEyHtdnVeTUcNs9T4OT%2F70Gk0sWbELU0Amped0BSFO0zIP0lapUMU94VDDN8Yj5F%2FEMnWoWxu7Uor%2F8aHykMlw3%2Fs%3D|tkp%3ABk9SR6r67uq1Yw

Apparently this coin is fairly rare. Does anyone have other examples?

I see the date now. Yes, the year is 5, not 4. I was a bit confused since I was looking for the usual two character combination for the date. It is interesting that the year is spelled out.

Thanks. Where is the date located in the legend?

Found it! Volume: II №: 2503 Reign: Domitian Persons: Domitian (Augustus) City: Alexandria Region: Egypt Province: Egypt Denomination: Æ (25 mm) Average weight: 7.19 g. Issue: LΔ = year 4 (AD 84/5) Obverse: ΑΥΤ ΚΑΙΣΑΡ ΔΟΜΙΤΙΑΝΟΣ ΣΕΒ ΓΕΡΜ; laureate head of Domitian, right Reverse: ΕΤΟΥΣ ΤΕΤΑΡΤΟΥ; bust of Ammon, right Specimens: 2

Yes, that's possible. I'll check RPC. Thanks

I checked RPC online but could not find a match for this coin, which is quite crude and worn. I think the reverse depicts Serapis, but I am not sure about the date. Does anyone have information on this coin? Thanks! 11.02 grams

Bummer! In the past I received some really nice group lots from Roma - some rally good buys there. I guess CNG and other US auction houses and dealers will hence forth be the only group lot sources for US collectors.🙁

Omelet anyone? Really, though, this is an extraordinary discovery. https://www.theguardian.com/science/2024/feb/12/roman-egg-found-in-aylesbury-still-has-contents-after-1700-years

Wonderful owl-related coins posted in this thread! Attica, Athens AE 14, 130-90 BC. HGC 4, 1734; Kroll 1993, no. 100. 4.19 grams Southern Arabia, Qataban, hemidrachm, c. 350-300 BC. 2.54 grams Northern Arabia, Lihyan Kingdom, silver tetradrachm, 2nd-1st centuries BC. 13.02 grams As for "superb", this classical standardized owl is only EF, but a good portion of the crest is visible, which makes it rather attractive. Attica, Athens, tetradrachm, 440-404 BC. 17.18 grams

Here's a late addition. This small figurine is part of a group of jadeite figurines that appeared on eBay around 2004-05. As far as I can determine they were produced in the 1990s. Dragon-Turtle jadeite figurine, circa 1990s. 98.1 grams

China, 50 cents, Kirin Province, 1899. K 388 13.12 grams China, Sinkiang Province, Tael (Sar), No Date (1905). Y 7 35.39 grams Annam (Vietnam), Minh Mang, half tael (5 tien), 1820-41. Ex Louis Teller. Davenport-113; km 188. 19.4 grams Annam, Minh Mang, piastre, year 15 (1834). Ex World-Wide Coins of California. SCH-183 27.4 grams Japan, trade dollar 1877 Meij,i year 10. Rarest date Davenport 275 27.19 grams

AI technology can be a tool to further research in archeology, as shown in this article. https://www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-68221243

Here's a crude, generally dark and scratched didrachm from Gela - not much to look at here - but purchased a relatively fair price at $75.00. This is the first coin that I've owned from this city. The centering is not bad, but the strike is uneven. This coin was struck on a narrow lower weight flan, so the obverse legend, below the man-faced bull has been cut off. Sicily, Gela. didrachm circa 490/85 – 480/75 BC. Jenkins, Gela 88 (O27-R45); HGC 2, 363. 7.99 grams

Those VAT charges are very odd. Here's a invoice for one of the Commune metals, purchased from Issoire Philatelie last month. No VAT charges.

Thanks As a rule I avoid, or at least try to, going beyond the occasional cleaning with distilled water for a bronze coin. But, as this was a $15 coin, it was worth "improving" its color. Perhaps in another 500 years it will look even better!

Sometimes I purchase a coin because it is a good buy, but also it gives me a "project" in terms of improving its appearance without too much intervention. Here's a $15 acquisition from eBay, a crude and crusty follis of Justinian I, seated type, of Antioch. Justinian I, follis (40 nummi), 529-533 AD, Antioch, officina Δ. Sear 214 16.86 grams Obverse: Justinian seated facing on throne, holding scepter and globus cruciger right /Reverse: Large M; cross above, star to left, crescent to right; Δ in lower middle; +THEUP in exergue. This coin when it arrived was harshly cleaned, with much bare metal showing on the high spots. A brief treatment with diluted liver of sulfur evened the color to a great extent. Of course I will note on the coin's label that it has been repatinated. Edit: I noticed that the cruciger has an extra smaller cross above the larger one, something I don't see on my other examples. I guess this is one of the eight varieties.

Not for me. If I were to work in that capacity, the first thing I'd do is slab myself (Cause of death: self slabbing).

Thank you so much!