Jump to content

Snacking... need some help confirming ids....


Recommended Posts

Every now and then (far too often) I get distracted looking at coins and buy things that aren't in any way core to my collection. I bought the following four coins in a lot. The Gallienus panther from the "zoo series" is generally problem free but that isn't what caught my eye with this lot. It was the other three coins (1 x Claudius II Gothicus and 2 x Gallienus) that caught my eye as I liked the look of the problems that they exhibit that caught my eye. Each seems to exhibit issues from the point of manufacture. The mints must have been rushing coins out and quality control went out of the window. Coins from this period with manufacturing issues seem to be more prolific than at any other time of the Empire. The lot of four coins was extremely cheap (less than the price of a "meal deal" from any chain burger joint of your choice) and the education had from them has already more than paid the price of the coins.

Obv:– GALLIENVS AVG, Radiate head right
Rev:– LIBERO P CONS AVG, Panther walking left
Minted in Rome (B in exe). A.D. 260-268
Reference(s) – Göbl 713b. RIC V Part 1, 230

Hard, green surface adhesions

3.31 gms, 22.72mm. 0 degrees


The next three coins are the ones I could use some help with confirming my readings / attribution and the interpretation of the manufacturing issues with each.

Claudius II Gothicus, Antoninianus

Obv:– IMP CLAVDIVS AVG, radiate, cuirassed bust right
Rev:– VICTO[R]IA AVG, Victory standing left holding palm in left and wreath raised in right
Minted in Rome.
Reference:– RIC 105 ?

Lateral (vertical) double strike evident on reverse. This has led to the odd looking arm holding the wreath, the R has been lost from the reverse legend but is more clear with the double exergue. It almost looks as though the left side of the reverse is from one strike and the right side of the reverse is from the other strike. If there is a mintmark then I cannot make it out. There seems to be something under the lower exergue line but I cannot make anything from it.

3.65 gms, 23.10mm. 180 degrees


Gallienus Antoninianus

Obv:– GALLIENVS AVG, Radiate, draped bust right
Rev:– INDVLGENT AVG, Indulgentia seated left, holding branch and sceptre
Minted in Rome. [//P].
Reference(s) – RIC 205 ?

Here it looks as though the flan was oversized for the die leading to the areas from about 180 degrees to 225 degrees on both sides not having enough material to fill the die leading to the lack of detail in these areas. I believe that this is what is known as a flat strike. The reverse flan even seems to be convex leading to a hollow in the centre. The strike was strong enough to cause a flan crack.

I am not sure on my interpretation of the bust type. The lack of material here makes a definitive reading difficult for me. I would normally interpret this as Radiate, cuirassed but have leaned towards Radiate, draped and cuirassed.

2.70 gms, 25.29mm. 0 degrees


This is my most confusing of the four.

Gallienus Antoninianus

Obv:– GALLIENVS AVG, Radiate cuirassed bust right
Rev:– ABVNDANTA (sic) AVG, Abundantia standing right, emptying cornucopiae
Minted in Rome (B in Left field). A.D. 260-268
Reference(s) – cf. RIC V Part 1, 157. cf MIR 573

Again the oversized flan seems to have led to a centre flat strike. This time however the lack of detail in the centre of the obverse is nothing compared to what is going on on the reverse. Here we seem to have lost the entire top half of Abundantia. There is though a ghostly outline of what could be a clashed die showing the remnants of the bust where the top half of Abundantia should be. Again the force of the strike has cuase a flan crack. In this case however the crack, whcih has gone through both sides at the edge of the coin also goes part way through the reverse of the coin on the diagonal. The coin does not appear to be fragile but I don't think it would take a great deal of force for the coin two fall in two.

3.20 gms, 24.68mm. 225 degrees


I would appreciate any thoughts on my readings, attributions or interpretations.....


  • Like 4
  • Thinking 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Create New...