Coins where the reverse is in significantly better condition!

[Steppenfool]

Worn or less intricately engraved reverse dies seem to be more prevalent, particularly in the later Empire. I remember reading that it was deduced that reverse dies were replaced much less often than the obverse ones, due to the image of the Emperor being the most important message of the coin. I want to see your examples where the reverse has somehow been struck stronger or better withstood the test of time! Here's mine!

 

 

Magnentius AE3. AD 350-353. DN MAGNEN-TIVS PF AVG, bare-headed, draped, cuirassed bust right, A behind bust / GLORIA ROMANORVM, emperor on horseback right, holding shield on left arm, about to throw a spear at a bare-headed enemy in front of the horse, shield and broken spear beneath the horse. Mintmark TRS crescent. RIC VIII Trier 271; Cohen 20; Sear 18798.

 

 

Edited August 7 by Steppenfool

[JayAg47]

With these two coins, it's the opposite. The obverse is much better than the reverse.

Alexander III
Life time AE half-unit, uncertain Macedonian mint.
Obv- Apollo
Rev- Prancing horse bellow and AΛEΞAN above.
336-323 BC.
Price 356

Caracalla as Caesar
Spei Perpertvae

Edited August 7 by JayAg47

[John Conduitt]

Almost all of mine have reverses that are either the same or worse, and most don't have good reverses at all, particularly in the C3 🤣

This is the nearest I get, and it might be down to wear rather than the die.

Valerian I Antoninianus, 258-259

Colonia Agrippina. Silver, 23mm, 3.49g. Radiate draped and cuirassed bust right; VALERIANVS P F AVG. Virtus-Soldier standing left holding Victory and spear; VIRTVS-AVGG (RIC V, 24 Var). From the Botley (Hampshire) Hoard 1994 of 1,395 coins, mostly radiates, deposited in 274. Portable Antiquities Scheme: IARCH-569EED.

 

[Nerosmyfavorite68]

A Byzantine follis of Anastasius I or Justin I which I encountered in an HJB pick bin would win.  The obverse was purely green fur from bronze disease, while the reverse was intact.  I don't know why I remember that coin, 30 years later.

[Steppenfool]

On this one, the reverse seems to have been less exposed to corrosive forces than the obverse! The lion skin is beautifully detailed.

 

Maximinus II AE Nummus. IMP C GAL VAL MAXIMINVS P F AVG, laureate head right / HERCVLI-VICTORI, Hercules Farnese standing right, right hand behind back, leaning on club covered by lion's skin with left; Β in left field. Mintmark SMN.

Edited August 7 by Steppenfool

[expat]

I assume corrosive elements in the ground of which attacked the obverse and left the reverse alone

 

[Orange Julius]

I love the reverse on this Gallienus, the obverse is a bit more worn and grainy.

[Qcumbor]

No doubt the reverse is far better than the obverse on that one

Q

[hotwheelsearl]

Gallienus's mint workers apparently loved to beat the death out of the reverse dies.

 

On the other hand, sometimes they didn't.

[AncientOne]

All the devices are there but the reverse seemed to fare much better. Or was it cleaned?

Troas, Alexandreia. Caracalla (198-217). Apollo Smintheus

Obv: MAVR[.] ANTONINVS. Laureate head right.
Rev: COL ALEXAND AVG. Statue of Apollo Smintheus right.
Bellinger A292.

[Cordoba]

Diodotos doesn't have hair anymore, but the reverse is still pretty nice to me

Greco-Baktrian Kingdom. Diodotos II, circa 235-225 BC. Tetradrachm
(Silver, 29 mm, 16.21 g, 7 h)

Obv: Diademed bust to right.
Rev: Zeus Bremetes advancing left, brandishing aegis and thunderbolt;
above eagle at inner left, monogram.
ΒΑΣΙΛΕΩΣ ΔΙΟΔΟΤΟΥ
Reference: Bopearachchi 6F; HGC 12, 22; Holt Series D, Group 8.

The obverse is pretty corroded, but the reverse is quite nice on this

Artuqids of Mardin. Qutb al-Din Il-Ghazi II, AD 1176-1184. Dirham
(Bronze, 34 mm, 14.94 g, 11 h), Mardin

Obv: Two Byzantine-style diademed and draped facing busts, resembling
the coins of Heraclius and his son; AH date in margin.
Rev: Name of Abbasid caliph, partial mint formula and name and pedigree
of Qutb al-Din Il-Ghazi II in five lines across field and in margins.
al-dirham mal'un man yu'ayyaruhu, "cursed is he who abuses this dirham"
Reference: Spengler & Sayles 32; Album 1828.2.

[CPK]

Interesting thread. It's usually the other way around. This Magnentius has a nicer reverse:

 

The reverse on this Constantine is a good deal sharper than the obverse.

[ambr0zie]

Quite a big difference in this Trebonianus Gallus tetradrachm 

... or this Hadrian Alexandrian tetradrachm 

This Julian double maiorina does NOT have a better reverse in terms of condition ... but the obverse is so ugly because the (unofficial) engraver was not the most talented guy from this tribe 

 

Unfortunate centering/die wear on an Aspendos stater obverse paired with a more decent reverse 

 

Constantiniana Dafne - the obverse is not that bad, but the reverse is a different league 

 

Poor strike on both obverse and reverse. But the obverse strike is that bad that Tatius looks bald. The reverse has the left half poorly struck, right half perfectly struck 

 

This needs no comments 

Edited August 8 by ambr0zie

[akeady]

This is always my example of bad obverse, good reverse - Augustus denarius, RIC 187a:

And the other way around - Augustus denarius, RIC 199:

No prizes for guessing which sides are facing up in the tray 😄

ATB,
Aidan.

Edited August 9 by akeady
Photos mangled

[Harry G]

This one's currently in the "eBay pile" but I think it fits the brief!

 Constantine I Follis - MARTI PATRI CONSERVATORI [Trier]