Well, I bought them in early December, but they arrived today. So the first to add to my collection in 2021. Coin #1: The first I'll share in not confused on for attribution. And though it's an interesting any not-to-common type (Emmett 3272; only 6 different coins on ACSearch; a couple appear more than once), I bought it for the graffiti. There is written on it on the right of the reverse what appears to be old museum catalog numbers: 54 873? Do you see something different than the 4? 571 873? Do you have a coin with similar teal/seafoam museum writing? Coin #2: This second coin I thought would be easy, but it's proven to not be. I can't find another example like it online. It has the obverse of RIC II, Part 3, 2nd ed., 371 with the more verbose legend IMP CAESAR TRAIAN HADRIANVS AVG, circa 120-121 AD. The reverse, though, doesn't match the reverse of that type, but rather RIC II, Part 3, 2nd ed., 2990 with the more sparse legend of just COS III circa 124-127 AD, and no LIB PVB across fields. Can this just be chalked up to simply being a mule separated by a few years? Do you have any other references that this could appear in? What are your thoughts? Happy coining!!
Nice start in 2021 ! I also both a coin with a similar number written directly on the coin. I tried to buy some other coins(photos attached) with numbers - from the same German dealer - but unfortunately I lost on bidding. I still regret the Apollo revers.
It's almost unbelievable that museums -- or collectors? -- once thought it was a good idea to write accession numbers directly on coins. Writing numbers on the bottom of a vase is one thing; this is something else entirely! I can't tell whether that's a 54 or 511, I'm afraid. The coin is still nice, but the number on it is very strange. The second one is a beautiful coin.
I feel the same way. It would be cool if it could be linked back to the museum that had it in their collection but what were they thinking?!?!
@Justin Lee both are very nice coins for starting 2021 On the first one I read 571873 - guess that the first seven is higher up because, as there is no space below, the person couldn't write it aligned with the adjacent numbers
Great coins! I especially like the Maximinus! Here’s my coin bought just for the numbers. Oops... posted, forgot to add the photo, now can’t find it... I’ll add it later.
I have a few coins that than inked numbers and agree that it would be most interesting to know where they were when inked. I do not hold the numbers against the coins as it is but would certainly say knowing the name of even the smallest museum a hundred years ago that used that style would be most cool. Does anyone know of any example of any collection that can be identified by the ink style? We all know the Gonzaga stamps (shown on CT before) but I do not know any example of a museum that is known to have done this let alone one of the coins I have. 18 or 81 in red paint on fourree: 47 in white ink
Really interesting coins @Justin Lee ! The writing on the first strikes me as very practiced calligraphy of the type I usually associate with 19th century writing. I’m pretty confident in the first character and last 4 characters as 5?1873. I wonder if the last 4 digits could be a year. Museums often seem to catalog by sequential number for that year followed by the year it was added. I am also curious if the “?” might not even be a number. Perhaps a symbol or archaic letter form. We don’t use the “long s” anymore but when written it is routinely shown higher than the surrounding text just as the mystery digit. I imagine other letters could have been as well in old calligraphy. Thus it could be something like “5th coin added to “?” sub-collection in the year 1873.” All just guess work of course. I hope you eventually find out about it. It’s pretty cool.
If the number is painted in ink it could suggest that the coin has been in a collection for a long time, since this was a method generally used 80 -100 years ago. The number 18 on dougsmit's fourée could also suggest to some people a Nazi numbering, since the number 18 was associated with Hitler… I have a Hadrian denarius where a number was etched on the reverse, have shown it before in this thread: https://www.cointalk.com/threads/ancients-post-your-hadrians.236881/page-46#post-3662674 Don’t know what is worse, a painted or an etched number…
Here's one with a label sloppily glued directly to the coin... I assume it was numbered at some stage..
Yea, I was considering it could be a raised F or similar. Good call out! And I like the idea of the last 4 digits to be the year... 1873... Pretty old! Edit: or maybe that isn't alphanumeric at all and is instead a slash to separate month from year? And the little horizontal part of the symbol is just spillage or bleed at the edge of Asklepios' beard from making the vertical stroke. Could it be 5/1873?
