Constantine UNC , sorry about no reverse. Coin is vaulted up.

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

"Red. Follis", meaning "reduced follis". At various points in history, the follis was reduced in size and precious metal content.

Welcome to ancients, @HAB 28 peace$ !

 

Oh ok, I have always wondered what the heck it meant. It's actually a very nice quality Roman coin. Thanks again.

 

Can you take a photo of the reverse? Are you going to leave it in the slab or set it free?

Welcome to the board....

 

From my webpage on the subject:


Left to Right: Diocletian 10.6g c.300 AD; Galerius 7.9g 309-310 AD; Maximinus II 4.5g 313 AD; Licinius I 4.3g 313 AD; Crispus 3.4g 317-320 AD; Constantine I 2.4g 332-3 AD; Constantine I 1.5g 337 AD

The currency reform of Diocletian introduced a new coin denomination which we collectors call the 'follis' (plural 'folles'). Again this term was not used at the time of issue and we do not know what the Roman on the street called the coins. The first folles were large silvered pieces of the familiar 1:20 alloy. They were supported by the post reform radiate (not antoninianus) fraction discussed above and an even smaller laureate fraction. Both of these minor coins were soon discontinued. The follis began a steady decline in size until it was a fraction of its original size. Collectors call all these coins by the same name but occasionally use 'reduced follis' to point out that the coin is one of the smaller issues. Our examples demonstrate this decline of weight standards. Note that flan thickness causes some similar appearing coins to be heavier than others. Our Licinius example is thick enough to weigh almost as much as the Maximinus even thought the diameter is more nearly like the Crispus. The number of mints striking and a constant fluctuation of weight standards makes a confusing situation for collectors. 'Follis', essentially, means little more than 'coin'.

 

Without the reverse it's hard to identify, but "uncirculated"? Really? I have my doubts!

 

NGC uses grades like AU or Uncirculated for ancient coins, but this is just a marketing tactic. These grades only exist on slabs for collectors who insist on mint-state coins as a collecting principle. There is no such thing as a mint-state ancient coin. They have all been cleaned, some lightly, some more so.

This coin may indeed exhibit no wear from circulation in commerce (it's hard to tell from the image), but it has developed a patina over the centuries, and it has been cleaned of whatever dirt and mineral encrustations it may have had.

For this reason, the purists among us dislike the grade "Uncirculated." The connotations of the word simply don't reflect the reality of the coin.

 

You said it much better than I could.

 

It could some kind of grading tactic.. LOL

 

The coin has this pyramid looking thing on the back. The coin is in ridiculous good looking shape. I am not EVER gonna take it out of the slab. I don't do that, thanks for all the info.

 

Yours is a fine looking coin OP, so as a ancient collector it grades XF. People from other areas get in a huff when I grade their coins an XF, but to ancient collectors XF is equivalent to AU/BU for modern collectors. What we call VF modern collectors call a XF. F is about equal to F, and down the line.

Ancient collectors have been grading coins our own way for centuries. That is why it ticks us off when modern collectors try to use their grading scales on our coins. Why not learn OUR grading system? We were here grading coins before the first pilgrim shot a turkey, (not the same people, well maybe Doug, but as a hobby).

You know I am just kidding Doug, we all love and appreciate your contributions here.

 

For me, for a coin that old to look like that is truly amazing. That's why I bought it in the first place. I understand and agree with your grading system. In no way you can grade ancient coins the way they grade modern.

 

It's a very nice coin, to be sure. I'd like to see the reverse though. If you get a chance, take a pic and post it.

 

I thought you were serious.

Ditto. I'm not certain what a "pyramid looking thing" might be.

 

Phoenix on pyre?

 

I suppose......

 

Are you worried that touching the coin will damage it? Unlike modern uncirculated coins, ancient coins in general can be handled without any trouble. Just don't drop it onto a hard surface and it should be fine.

 

I'm guessing it's a campgate.

Edited: or what Medoraman and JA said

NGC's cert lookup doesn't show images for the many of this specific coin which were slabbed.

 

There are those among us who are totally against slabbing Ancients. I don't like them, for myself, but have no problem with collectors who want them and who will pay the extra for them. Anyway, my point is, even in a slab, you have to show us both sides of your coin. I'm surprised NGC didn't ID the coin in the first place.