From a reputable dealer, I (very) recently purchased an aUNC Constantine II. CONSTANTINE II, 317-340 A.D. This coin was minted 330-331 A.D. as Caesar, at ancient Rome mint, 17.5 mm maximum diameter. 2.61 grams. Obverse; CONSTANTINVS IVN NOB C, laureate, cuirassed bust right. Reverse; GLORIA EXERCITVS, Two Roman Soldiers holding spears and shields, two legion standards Between, R(wreath)S in exergue Reference; R.I.C. VII Rome 351 (Scarce). (Seller's photos.)
A test: My coin is a $5 to $10 example. Yours is fairly $20 and some would go $40. Do you see differences between them that explains the 4x gap? If not, they are both $10 coins. The difference between a 1958 Lincoln cent and a 1909 is only significant if you know dates and mintmarks. Answer: If the difference between mint cities does not matter to you, it does not exist. If the last didgit of the mintmark being off flan does not matter to you, there is no problem. With the info placed on slabs alone to go by, what is the difference here?
Topcat, Love that coin of Constantine!! I've been grabbing a few of these types myself....and probably will be doing so for a while to come. You just can't beat the price for such high-grade ancient coins. Not anywhere as nice as yours but.... A recent example of one of mine---Constantine II:
My only example of this emperor: Constantine II, AE follis(19mm, 3.1g). Trier. 323-324 AD. CONSTANTINVS IVN NOB C, laureate head right / CAESARVM NOSTRORVM around VOT X within wreath. Mintmark STR in exergue. RIC VII Trier 433
i forgot about this recent picked up... Constantine II, 337-348 AD O: CONSTANTI-NVS MAX AVG, R: GLOR-IA EXERC-ITVS, dot ASIS star in ex. Siscia mint, RIC VIII Siscia 79, 17 mm, 2.0 g
Great choice Topcat. I almost pulled the trigger on that coin myself, and I don't certainly don't need any more examples of the type.