Bag o Romans Update

I am between SMH and SMN for the mint Mark. When with H because it matched the coin I thought matched this one on wildwinds.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

Discerning between N and H in Nicomedian and Heraclean mint marks can be problematic because sometimes the engravers at Nicomedia didn't slant the crossbar very much, making it look like H. Likewise, the engravers at Heraclea sometimes slanted the crossbar just enough to make it look like an N.

Your mint mark clearly looks like SMN to me. However, even if it looked more like an H, we would know the coin was minted at Nicomedia because in this particular series, the Heraclea mint marks have the officina letter in exergue, after SMH, ie. SMHA, SMHB, SMHΓ, etc. Your mint mark only has three letters, and the officina letter, Є, is in the right field, which was the rubric for Nicomedia emissions.

 

Here's an example from Heraclea - note that there's a letter after SMH, although the strike leaves the letter unclear, maybe Γ. Also notice that some of these issues have a seated captive to the right of Jupiter and some don't. This coin does. Your coin doesn't. There are other varieties as well - no eagle, palm frond in place of eagle, just a globe with no Victory, etc. So when you're looking up references, you've got to be sure you have all the details on the coin correct.

 

Ok, got it. I didn't realize the letter E points to a mint. I will have to do a little more homework on that point.

You guys are too good to me. I don't know how to thank you.

G

 

Why would you want smaller pics?

 

Not a mint, a workshop of the mint. Sometimes they were numbered by Greek numerals. On your coin, Є, or epsilon, indicates the 5th officina. See the wiki article for an explanation of Greek numerals. You'll need to know how to read them if you keep going down the ancient coins rabbit hole.

 

Don't my current pics show up huge for everyone? As in way too big. If not, I don't need to make them smaller. I got the impression they were annoyingly big.

 

They work good for me.

 

Ok...I will check out the article. At this point I don't think I'm ever getting out of the rabbit hole. It's too much fun down here.

 

Ok. I guess I don't need smaller pics!

 

Here is the latest attempt at identifying the Bag o Romans coins. Hopefully, it isn't a problem if I just keep reusing this old thread:



SELEUCID EMPIRE.Seleucus IV 187-175 BC.AE.Mint of ANTIOCH ( 10.97g,21mm, 12h )

Laurate head of Apollo right, behind ME.
Reverse.ΒΑΣΙΛΕΩΣ ΣΕΛΕΚΚΟΥ, naked Apollo standing left holding arrow in right hand, left resting on tripod, inner left field contro mark ΔΙ.
Ref: SNG Spaer 877.

 

I don't see anyone complaining.

 

Nice! I love those Seleukid bottle-caps!

 

Call it a complaint if you wish but long posts with many similar coins can get confusing if it is not always clear which coin was being discussed. In this case, I saw JA's post making a correct point about Nicomedia before I had seen or taken note of the Nicomedia coin so I thought he was talking about the Heraclea one. Very shortly afterwards I figured that out but it is why I prefer one coin per thread posts unless the coins are being compared or have some relation to each other beyond coming from the same 'bag'.

Similarly, I am easy to confuse when someone does a pile on post and other folks start commenting on one coin or the other without quoting or making note of which coin they were looking at when they said 'nice coin' or 'fake' or whatever. I like to see other coins as much as the next person but I do like to be sure I know if we are discussing the same coin. The simple answer is to highlight a small part of the post you are commenting on and hitting reply:

After you look at a greater number of these coins you will see that some mint ID's are as easily made from clues like how each mint chose to show workshops. Some coins don't have a city mark but are quite distinctive because of some characteristic like where they placed a letter or what style letters they used. How do you learn this? Pay attention to coins as they appear before you. After 10,000 or so, you will see things with different eyes than before. That is why we value the opinions of people like Barry Murphy, David Vagi and David Sear (who sell those services) or a thousand dealers who provide them as part of what you pay for when buying a coin. Many of those guys handled more coins yesterday than some of us saw in photos last year (decade?). This is not a subject you cram for the night before the exam only to forget when the grade cards come out. Look at as many coins as you can in whatever way you can (in hand is a thousand times better but pencil rubbings have value, too). Keep an open mind to what you see and realize that you will make a few thousand errors along the road to enlightenment and ask as may questions as you are willing to hear answered. Realize that not all questions can be answered as simply as you might wish and "don't know" or "best guess" can be legitimate options.

 

By the time I post a coin here with an attribution I've probably had it wrong at least once. Although @dougsmit is dead on in saying it gets easier. Not that I'm making a hugely profound statement by pointing that out. That said, I've only seen a very small number of coins. So some limited sub-groups are easy for me to identify, and others coins are still like looking at an ancient coin for the first time.

I have the coins broken down into "types" by appearance, and purposely jump between groups so I don't allow the findings from one group to influence the others. Then there is the time spent on Vcoins, Augustuscoins.com, wildwinds, Doug Smith's site and several others (I don't want to miss a good site and insult someone here) just scrolling through coin after coin.

Asking questions is sometimes cheating in my opinion. Not that I haven't resorted to it at times. But, digging out the information on your own is the only way to truly learn, at least that's how I see it.

The coin with the temple on the reverse that I posted to the architecture thread is a perfect example. My post points out that I think it's Phillip II on the obverse, and thankfully, nobody confirmed or denied it. I'm going to figure it out and then post the findings here ( or at a new thread).

As for using this thread for the Bag o Romans attributions, I'm open to whatever makes it easy for everyone. My original plan was to keep it in one place as a running history of the event, going back to the actual give-away.

And as a final thought to this way too wordy post, I can't thank everyone here enough for the continued support. I try to be mindful of everyone's time by not using PMs at the drop of a hat. My guess is, even if I did, the core group here would be too nice to set me straight.

 

I’ve enjoyed watching your progress through this thread! Doug is correct that in most cases the “one coin, one thread” approach is usually optimal to keep things tidy and clear.

However, in some cases (like here, at least to me) the over arching story of someone fairly new to ancients tackling a bag of unidentified (to them) coins, is fun to follow.

This thread shows the struggles and triumphs of learning to attribute the common and not perfect coins many of us started with ourselves. Many people wouldn’t have stuck with it like you have, so I’ve enjoyed it!

 

the BEATA types began in 321 and rather than the war with Licinius this issue (and others) needs to be looked at in context of troubles with Germans on the Rhine.

my page on this- http://www.constantinethegreatcoins.com/barb/

 

Very interesting read, thank you!

 

Yep, really good stuff.

 

My wife reminds me all the time that I’m too stubborn and dumb for my own good.

Stubborn and dumb isn’t a good combo!