Cladius II

One of my favorite mints and types.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

Wow, you guys have some amazingly sweet examples!!

Man, I always love seeing your Tets, TIF (your first Alexandrian Eagle is an absolute winner!!) .... and wow Doug, that's a very cool obverse you've got there!!

Geesh, I guess I'd better up my Claudius Gothicus game, eh? (my shabby example is definitely the slow kid in this class!!)

 

If you are a cheapskate collector it is not a bad idea to study up on which rulers coins are regularly perfect and which ones are rarely even presentable. Coins of CIIG are common but perfect ones are not so they are worth buying when you see one for only double the 'regular' price. The same goes for Quintillian but rulers like Severus Alexander are usually pretty well made so there is not as much premium when you go from nice to perfect. We have shown a lot of CIIG coins here but we have yet to show a gem. This will soon change when Aurelian straightens out the mints with his reform. His first issues are as poor as CIIG but things straighten out quickly.
http://www.acsearch.info/search.htm...&it=1&es=1&ot=1&currency=usd&order=0&company=
Scroll through the above 1400 coins and see just how few are really nice in strike, legend, workmanship and surfaces. The gold ones all are perfect. I suspect that line ran at 1/10 the speed of the ants.

 

Hello Claudius Coin Collectors. My mother-in-law travelled the world and had many trinkets from her journeys. This was amongst her estate belongings. I have done much research and although I can find what seems either the front or the back, I can't seem to find both on one coin. Can you direct me as to the age and value of this coin? Thank you.

 

For enthusiastic collectors of Roman Egyptian coins (like me ), that's a nice coin.

It's not Claudius II though, it's Diocletian. Although the pictures are small the coin is well struck and well preserved; the legends are readable.

Here's the full attribution for your coin:

EGYPT, Alexandria. Diocletian.
Struck in regnal year 7 (CE 290/291)
Obverse: ΔIOKΛHTIANOCCEB; laureate head right
Reverse: Zeus standing left, holding patera and sceptre; eagle left at feet
Reference: Emmett 4087(7), rarity rating 1 (common); Geissen 3250

 

Hello Cinderbuggy. This coin is incorrectly attributed. It's an Alexandrian tetradrachm of emperor Diocletian, not Claudius II. It's common, but slightly less common than some, Zeus standing, holding scepter and patera, eagle at his feet. Value, $40 or $50 bucks on eBay maybe, maybe more. It's in pretty good shape.

 

That's not a bad looking coin; however, I d not know the value of these. I whill check though.

 

Thanks everyone for your prompt replies. I look forward to hearing more.

 

=> man, ya gotta love those sweet Alexandrian coins, eh? (oh, and an eagle tossed-in for good measure)

 

So now I have to ask...what exactly is regnal year 7 (CE 290/291)? I would guess the shop where my mother-in-law purchased this coin had the information wrong by calling it Alexandria Claudius II 268-270? When I found it in her belongings, I knew this coin was something special. I put it in with other "special" things and just came across it again, today. Thanks again for your help

 

Regnal year 7 means the 7th year of Diocletian's reign. Quite a few Roman Provincial coins were dated this way.

 

I guess that makes sense. Is there a way of knowing the actual year or years this coin was made or in use?

 

It was made in 290-291 AD

 

Be careful. If you come here too often you will become addicted to acquiring ancient coins

 

Egyptian years began at the end of August (29th?) and an emperor began his second year on that date even if he had only been in power a day before that. Therefore, we see a date like 290-291 which means (in Egypt and only in Egypt) between 29 August 290 and 28 August 291. That would make some rulers to have a shorter LA and whatever their last number was than the rest and also possible for someone to come to power in late August, die in early September and have some coins dated LB. Emmitt has a chart that makes this all easy if you already understand it. Further, some, not all, junior rulers dated their coins according to the senior ruler's number so a Caracalla dated year 21 means that year for Septimius Severus counting from 193 rather than from his own date of 198. Since Alexandrian coins of Caracalla are extremely rare, this will cause us few problems. I'll show a coin here with Aurelian (right) credited to the first year of his reign LA and Vahabalathus (left) to year 4 (LD). Remember neither of these people were in Egypt at the time so I really do not know how they felt about it. In that part of the world in that year, Vahabalathus was more in charge so I assume the decision was made by one of his bureaucrats.



Of course you have to realize that all such conversions at that time don't allow for our more recent calendar manipulations (Gregorian vs. Julian) that caused some countries in relatively recent times to be saying it was one date while their neighbor was observing a different system. Eqyptians had leap years but I quite honestly do not recall how and when they added a day so I do not know how long LZ was in this case (nor do I consider that lacking one of my more major shortcomings; my being too lazy to look it up in Emmitt is less commendable). It is not unusual to see may dates for ancient history expressed as a range according to what system was being used and who was using it. Some Roman emperors, at Rome, upped their TR P number on the anniversary of their ascension while others did so on New Year's day. Do not expect dates in the standard Christian system until about a thousand years after we consider that antiquity ended. If you see a coin of Julius Caesar dated 44BC, rest assured it is a fake. I have known a lot of collectors over the years but can't recall one trying to fill out a year set for a long ruling emperor by TR P numbers or by Egyptian numbers although I have known a couple people that relished having last year of reign coins.

The fact that Aurelian died in September of his LZ makes all his coins of that year rare but his wife's coins dated LZ are common providing fuel for the theory that she ruled alone in the period before the election of Tacitus later that year. History on paper fails us here but coins fill in a piece of information in need of consideration.

 

I know...Scary thought. I will let all of you collect them for now. I do have collection problems. LOL

 

This so interesting. Prior to today, I never gave any thought to whether or not ancient coins exist. I barely even knew I owned one. Thought it was just a remake souvenir coin, although questioned it. Now I am almost an expert thanks to all the great answers here. LOL. I truly appreciate the information. It helps me understand so much.