Why the high price?

[Valentinian]

This is a very common type with a surprising auction result:

https://www.biddr.com/auctions/savoca/browse?a=5087&l=6200073

That coin is not from a rare mint. It is in very nice condition, but that is not unusual for an VRBS ROMA coin. Can anyone hazard a guess as to why the PR is ten times as high as might be expected?

[Harry G]

I might be wrong, but the mintmark looks a lot longer than usual 

[CPK]

It is a very rare and interesting mintmark variety not listed in RIC - a specialist's coin. I believe it was purchased by a fellow NF member.

[Victor_Clark]

This coin is not in RIC for this combination of workshop letters. It has ΔE versus the normal Θ for workshop 9. Sometimes ΔE was used for workshop 9, instead of Θ, as some people at the time considered Θ the symbol of death because theta was the first letter of the Greek word for the personification of death- Thanatos

 

this is the normal Antioch 91

 

 

 

and yes, I overpaid. I hate it when someone bids multiple times until they finally beat your bid, instead of just bidding once what they are willing to pay; so I threw common sense out the window and kept bidding.

 

 

plus this example is much nicer than the one I sold a few years ago

 

Edited October 13, 2024 by Victor_Clark
added picture of Antioch 91

[Heliodromus]

The theta/thanatos superstition at Antioch ended in 330AD (D+E seen up until then on campgates), but D+E just squeaked onto this first issue VRBS ROMA, thereby becoming the last issue to include it. This first SMANT vs SMAN issue is generally scarce, and the VRBS ROMA and CONSTANTINOPOLIS types aren't even listed in RIC, although both exist.

Here's my $43 specimen (from 2014) !

 

[Roman Collector]

That is a beautiful specimen of the type and the story behind its officina mark is very interesting. This ain't @Victor_Clark's first time at the rodeo and he recognized something special for which he was willing to pay a premium. Sadly, he got into a bidding war with another collector who also recognized its historically significant officina markings. 

[Ancient Coin Hunter]

When you get what you want it's worth it. Who knows how much time we have left on this earth. One like it may not come up again anytime soon. Congrats Victor.

[mcwyler]

Not just urbs Roma and campgates.

Maybe this link will work?

 
https://www.numisforums.com/topic/7550-roman-numerals-for-5/?do=findComment&comment=98824

[Heliodromus]

5 minutes ago, mcwyler said:

Not just urbs Roma and campgates.

Yes - this D+E marking at Antioch was initiated under Probus when the mint first expanded to 9 officinas, and was then used until this final appearance in 330 AD.

 

[John Conduitt]

That's a fantastic mintmark. Mintmarks can be surprisingly expensive. I've gone very hard after the MSN mintmark on otherwise very ordinary London bronzes a couple of times and still lost out - they ended up going for around £6k! Perhaps I lost to Bill Gates...

[KenDorney]

Already answered, but if one takes the time to look more closely at coins there will be interesting differences.  There are a lot of interesting things going on with a cuirass, especially with the decorations.  On this example here a combination of my fanciful imagination, lighting, and likely a filled die gives us what looks like a classic example of a butterfly or bee flying across the chest.  If you squint real hard you will see it!

[Tejas]

Interesting, I didn't know about this mintmark.

I'm glad to hear that overpaying happens to others too. I overpaid on the coin below. It is a common type, but I fell in love with the portrait and I was apparently not the only one. I think it is one of the most beautiful portraits of Constantinus II on any coin, and I value the coin for that, but I also know that I would not get my money back if I decided to sell it.

 

Edited October 15, 2024 by Tejas

[Humilau]

On 10/14/2024 at 12:33 PM, Heliodromus said:

Yes - this D+E marking at Antioch was initiated under Probus when the mint first expanded to 9 officinas, and was then used until this final appearance in 330 AD.

 

This officina started with the movement of some Serdica mint workers to Antioch. It also originally began as IX, but was very quickly switched to E+D.

[hotwheelsearl]

I can only hope that the fully silvered vrbs can sell for more then the $10 I paid for it lol

[Heliodromus]

47 minutes ago, Humilau said:

This officina started with the movement of some Serdica mint workers to Antioch.

How do we know this ?

 

[Humilau]

5 hours ago, Heliodromus said:

How do we know this ?

 

There are some places that acknowledge this transfer. I believe its most likely to be one engraver to Antioch and the rest to Siscia. I believe the first was Alföldi to note the transfer, but Weder and Estiot also acknowledge and accept this. King agrees that there has been Serdican influence, but couldn't make the call due to Weder's only illustrated example. Estiot will mention this transfer quite a few times within her paper on the 4th Eastern Mint. The IX piece of Antioch is also known from one example to Estiot, at least when she mentions it as a "coin d'assai" in her paper on the 4th Eastern Mint. Although, I have recently discovered a second which is now in my collection. The other part of Serdica's engravers will end up at Siscia forming the 7th officina, the most notable piece showing this transfer is the DEO ET DOMINO of Siscia. 

Mint structure under Probus is a painfully complicated ordeal to say the least. 

Edited October 17, 2024 by Humilau

[Coinmaster]

@Victor_Clark, @Tejas

Very nice and interesting coins, congrats!
I always say to myself: 'Long after the price is forgotten, the quality will be remembered!'