So a couple of weeks ago I’m sitting in bed flipping through eBay on my phone when I see “Billon Centenionalis Constantine the Great Rv. VOT XV FEL XX R P.” I immediately recognize that it’s a rare reverse type for Constantine. I confirm this impression with a quick VCoins search that showed two examples of this coin for Constantine, $275 and $780—many times the “Buy It Now” price of the eBay coin. So of course I click. Then about 10 seconds later I take a closer look at the coin itself. It’s not Constantine. It’s Licinius. The coin had been misidentified by the seller, and I was too busy looking at the description to look at the coin itself! I thought about trying to cancel the purchase since I collect Constantine, not Licinius. Obviously a Constantine collector will want some Licinius coins, but I’m not invested in getting rarities of him. But apparently this coin is pretty rare for Licinius too, so I’m torn between keeping it and putting it back on eBay to get my money back or even do a little better, if it’s as rare as it seems. It’s got good detail, but a little pitting mars the obverse. I don’t have RIC to hand, but I think it’s RIC VI ROME 223. I *think* it’s rated R5, though the RIC ratings are outdated. But anecdotal searches seem to confirm the relative scarcity or rarity of this issue. @Victor_Clark would know. Perhaps the best way to find out is put it back on eBay. At any rate, post your Ooops coins, or coins that ended up being different from what you thought you were buying, for better or worse. Otherwise, some Licinius coins will do!
I'm not nearly as interested in RIC rarity ratings as many but I do like coins that are 'different' like yours with the RP mintmark on the same line as the XX. I also like coins of Constantine struck by mints under the control of Licinius or vice versa or just about anything else that makes the coin just a little special. Why did I buy these? I may not rememeber now but I did know once.
Your coin is RIC VII Rome 221. It is a scarce type, though I have seen several examples sold over the last few years. Here is a link to a post with some examples and prices realized-- http://www.lateromanbronzecoinforum.com/index.php/topic,262.msg594.html#msg594
I am sure we all have coins that we bought by mistake. This one below I got, well, I dont know how. I bid early and low (below the estimate or so I thought), but was surprised to see it hammer for $475. It may be that I meant to bid $175, I have no idea. But, its mine now, though I have little interest in the series. 258, Lot: 241. Estimate $150. Sold for $475. This amount does not include the buyer’s fee. PTOLEMAIC KINGS of EGYPT. Cleopatra III & Ptolemy IX Soter II (Lathyros). 116-107 BC. AR Tetradrachm (24mm, 14.11 g, 12h). Alexandreia mint. Dated RY 9 (109/8 BC). Diademed head of Ptolemy I right, wearing aegis / Eagle standing left on thunderbolt; LΘ (date) to left, ΠΑ to right. Svoronos 1670; SNG Copenhagen 353. Good VF, some scratches on the obverse, light deposits in the devices.
That is exactly the way I feel about the Ptolemy VI and X above. My only excuse is I bought them a long time ago (the fourree VI from a dealer then doing business under the name Victor England before there was a CNG). The X is ex jewelry. At the time, I thought any Greek coin was an upgrade to my collection but I got over that. You probably have a better chance getting $475 out of yours than I do getting $160 (in 1980's dollars) for my pair. At least you have an excuse.
It happens from time to time. My biggest problem is not being able to identify LRB coins because of the significant amount of wear on them when one buys in unidentified hoards. Typically about 35% of the coins in the unmarked hoards I have purchased have been slugs, pretty useless for anything. I don't toss them, but they are a bit maddening. I've got a bunch of Licinius coins, too. One helmeted type on the obverse is fairly nice. I'll post a photo of it when I get a chance. I've also got one radiate type of Licinius which seems to be pretty scarce. Haven't been able to find the type on wildwinds, may actually be worth something above and beyond your typical Licinius.
I agree with Victor and any 4th century emporer with that reverse is scarce. I was fortunate to acquire this Constantine II(need a better pic) Constantine II Mint: Rome 320 AD AE Follis Obvs: CONSTANTINVS IVN NOB C, Laureate draped and cuir. Revs: VOT X ET XV F PR, in three lines within laurel wreath. 19x20mm, 3.22g Ref: v. RIC VII.209 As far as I know this variation is unpublished. For mistaken identities that was my first post on CT. I thought I had a majorian but @Greg Heinrich properly identified it as Johannes Johannes Mint: Rome 423 to 425 AD AE 4 Obvs: DN IOHANN-ES PF AVG, Draped and cuiassed right. Revs: SALVS REIPVBLICE, Victory advancing left, holding trophy over shoulder and dragging captive. Christogram to left. 11x12mm, 1.12g Ref: RIC X 1920
i purchased this coin from vcoins seller by mistake.. i wanted a coin of tiberius ii constantine....and somehow my brain switch maurice tiberius for tiberius ii constantine. thought about cancelling my order, but i look at his coins and did find he had a tiberius ii, so i just had him add it to my order and got both.
This one. Not only did it not really fit my collection, I determined it was fake when I got it in hand.
I purchased this Trebonianus Gallus provincial back in the day, because I thought it looked cool. As was pointed out to me by my learned colleagues here, the gunk on the coin isn't some weird natural encrustation, but sand that has been thickly added during a restoration attempt (does anybody know how to remove this?) I do like the type, but would prefer to find a more "honest" coin to replace this with. Other "oops" coins would be a couple from Zurqieh and Athena before I became wise to the fact that these guys add gunk to create yellow and orange "sand patinas" respectively. Looking at my purchases recently, I've become a much better buyer. I'm not buying crap anymore and I have some pieces I'm quite proud of.
You mean like this? Ah, yes. Honestly, I think those guys really would sell more coins without the Cheetos patinas. But they must think it works. I'd love to get some of the Judaean Procurators from Zurqieh, but they've all been sprayed. Drives me crazy.
Ha - exactly like this! And they didn't declare that they'd sprayed my coins, which is a consumer fraud. That said, at least the coins were genuine and otherwise ok.
Removing the fake patina may disclose a condition worse than the patina. That's a choice the owner must make: keep it the way it is with fake patina or clean it and possibly have a coin in poor condition. I have a couple I purchased that I suspect have fake patina added, but I'm not willing to take the chance. This is one of them (although this came from a dealer in South America which I believe is no longer in business): AUGUSTUS AE As OBVERSE: DIVVS AVGVSTVS PATER, radiate head left REVERSE: S-C either side of large altar, PROVIDENT in ex. Rome 22-30 AD 10.5g, 28mm RIC 81 (tib)
