I havent bought a new ancient in 2 months so this is my first one in awhile. Its also the first one outside of the Severan Period I normally get. I liked it mainly for the reverse. I know its a common coin but dont care. Pictures are close to what it looks like in hand. Bronze AE 3, RIC IX 14a, xvii, aVF, 2.935g, 17.7mm, 0o, Siscia mint, 24 Aug 367 - 17 Nov 375 A.D.; obverse D N VALENTINI-ANVS P F AVG, pearl-diademed, draped and cuirassed bust right; reverse GLORIA RO-MANORVM, emperor dragging captive with right, labarum (chi-rho standard) in left, M left, * / P right, BSISC in ex; nicely centered
The reverse is quite nice and the ID is clearly correct. It is not everyday that we see a common coin treated so well when it comes to cataloging.
Yeah. great rev. I have a couple, but they are over cleaned or heavily carodded. and not fully attributable. Nice grab!
The 2nd coin (though a bad pic its not much better in hand) is one I'm not sure if its Valens or Valentinian. The other is Valens and easier to i.d.
I'd call it Valens also. Because of the longer name, there is a tendancy for more of the name Valentinian to be on the left side so most coins splitting after VALEN will be Valens with the other side reading -SPFAVG while Valentinian is more likely to be VALENTINI-ANVSPFAVG written in smaller letters to get in all that extra. This is not 100% safe to trust but when you have a coin that is not certainly IDed, it may be better than nothing.
Thanks for the replies. I learned quick when I got into ancients that legends are very important to show. My coin posted here I figured had decent centering. Its also my first bronze ancient. Im happy
I'll attach a Valentinian to make the point: All you need is one letter or bump TINIANV to show the coin is not Valens. Most coins will have one side or the other clear enough to make the separation possible.
They're all wonderful. Some of my favourites "look like dung". Can't explain why they are favourites. Don't care.
