Ancients- Like a 1000 Years Since I Bought A Roman

I wasn't looking for a Roman coin in particular but while searching I did come across a very nice Phillip the Arab I just couldn't pass up. The price was right and had been lowered several times. Why was no one interested in this coin? I don't know but man, I like it. I really like the nice fields and full heavy flan. The folks selling the coin on the 'bay apparently used a x-ray spectrophotometer to analyzed the constituents of the coin. The also mentioned that they had a state calibration certification for the scale used. Seems interesting so, I said "why not, the coin is pretty cheap."

Analysis says....

Ag = 69.47%
Cu = 28.88%
Pb = 0.84%
Au = 0.41%
Zn = 0.40%

Check it out.

I confirmed the attribution as

Rome, Italy
Philip The Arab
AR Antoninianus 24 mm x 4.3 grams
Obverse: IMP PHILLIPVS AVG Radiant, draped, cuirassed bust of Philip I.
Reverse: SAECVLARES AVGG-Tall thin cippus inscribe with COS III in two lines
Tall thin cippus inscribe with COS III in two lines
ref: RIC 24c, C193
Note: Celebrates the thousand years since the founding of Rome.Superb XF condition.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

It's a lovely coin, but I'm shocked that there is any gold in it whatsoever. Lead, copper and zinc, yes, but gold?? I wonder if somebody dropped their ring into the melting pot.

 

That's a nice coin. Having the metal content analysis makes it super cool!

 

I would suspect the gold is more of an impurity then a constituent. Gold is known to naturally alloy with copper. Who knows? Maybe Doug?

 

Surprisingly one of the main reasons I bought it.

 

Real nice one!

 

Wow, super coin! Nice toning and dead center on a big ol flan. Cool analysis too. What more could you ask for?

 

How come I didn't see this one??????

Great coin. Great addition info with the spectro-analysis. Good on ya!

 

Well done! Beautiful coin Anoob. LOVE that reverse!

The metal content breakdown is very cool as well.

 

Glad y'all like it. Figured the good 'ol Roman would get a rise out of you guys.

@ Bing - you might have been napping...

 

Yeah, at my age naps are a good thing. It's kinda like being a small child again. I need my naps!

 

I believe gold is a relatively common impurity in silver. I believe I recall owning a Sikyon once that had a small streak of yellow on the silver but I sold it to Bing. Of course it could be another coin and I'm just confused. Examine it very closely under strong magnification and see it it is the one, Bing.

Metal for coins came from different places with different impurities. It is one way fakers of high end coins might be caught but we always have the chance of a coin being added to the melt that would have altered the traces.

 

wonderful coin AN, I love the bust..interesting analysis as well!

 

I don't see it Doug, but I do not have strong magnification. I'm glad you made me get the coin out so I can appreciate it over again.

 

Great coin, gold is one of my favorite metals. does this coin have that gold shine to it or is it the way you took the pic,very cool...

 

Good looking coin, and its pretty neat you got the content of the coin.

 

I know analysis has its limitations (I imagine only the superficial layers of the coin can be assessed without cutting into the coin). Nevertheless, I find these studies to be fascinating. If nothing else, I don't think a modern forger would bother adding gold (however minuscule an amount) for a more convincing counterfeit of most low to mid-range coins.

Here are some interesting conclusions using analysis of coin compositions:

http://www.academia.edu/362473/H._G..._Roman_and_Eastern_Issues_Galux_16_Milan_2003


Good stuff,

guy

 

this study was early in the realization that studies based on surface readings were flawed. As a result they drilled a small hole in the edge of tested coins and used the material removed for the tests. The holes were then filled. The plates in this article show one example of a drill hole. At the time, I declined the opportunity to have my coins participate in this study. I believed then and now that the meaningfulness of such a study would require a much more careful separation of the subject coins than their separation by mint. I believe that Emesa mint coins of the earlier period (first legend examples) should not be averaged in with the later COS II legend coins. Doing so makes the assumption that these coins all came from the same metal source and, for that matter, that the traditional mint assignments were correct (i.e. that Laodicea old and new styles were both from the same place). Most of all I did not trust the repair of the coins to be such I could not tell it had been done. To this date, I have not seen a coin known to ave been sampled by this team so I do not know just how perfect their repairs were. Had I felt their study was structured better to answer the questions I had regarding some of the early Emesa issues, I would feel worse about not participating but I still do not see myself allowing my coins to be drilled.

 

Ancient Doug: Thank you for your insight into the study.

As technology improves, I imagine that there will develop an improved non-destructive method of analysis.

Till then, however, I don't think many people will be willing to "sacrifice" their coins (especially the higher quality ones) for science.

guy