In my thread title I'm borrowing a line from Doug in another thread. At the risk of coming across like a Doug Smith groupie, I think he couldn't have put it better when he said, "You have to know you will not get them all so you can only lean back and enjoy the ones that come your way." Here's one that I actually would have never bought myself - not particularly rare or valuable, poorly cleaned (not by me), ugly scratches on the obverse, and pretty crude-looking to boot. Yet when I found it in a batch of uncleaned ancients I received as a birthday present when I first started collecting, I ended up having hours of fun with it. NERO AE18 JUDAEA, Ascalon. Struck 66/67 AD, RPC I 4889. O: Laureate head right, CE and altar before. R: War deity Phanebal standing facing, holding harpa and round shield with palm frond, AC to left, OP (Year 170) to right. I enjoyed trying to nail the attribution, and enjoyed even more researching the coins of Ascalon and how to read their dating, reading up on the history of the city, the period during which the coin was struck (Ascalon sided with the Romans during the First Jewish-Roman War), and the god depicted on the reverse (Phanebal was specific to Ascalon, possibly a composite of Tanit and Baal, and apparently quite a nasty piece of work). Sadly, despite the enjoyment I got out of this coin, I quickly discovered uncleaned coins mostly don't work for me. I'm not zen enough for it. Ardously cleaning what will largely be a bunch of crusty old culls just seems like a surefire way for me to end up a crusty old cull myself. Anyone else have a particular coin that just came their way, or that they had rediscovered in their collection that they had a memorable moment leaning back and enjoying? Z.
Cool ol' coin, Z ... oh, and a neat idea for a thread!! Unfortunately, I am at work right now, so I'm unable to access my coins, but I have a coin that fits this thread's criteria (a coin that ended-up being more interesting than when I first purchased it, thanks to another collector-folk's keen ancient-eyes and knowledgeable comments) ... I'll try to remember to post it later-on this afternoon ...
Do you have RPC, and is the reverse type associated only with coins in the time of Nero? Because I'm having a hard time making out the date, which should be AOP if the attribution is correct. I only have SNG ANS for issues of Ascalon and this type isn't listed for Nero, but that reference has a lot of missing coins.
I don't have RPC, but this one for Nero came up in Wildwinds for Ascalon, with OP as the date (but translated to 56/57 AD in the Wildwinds which I believe is incorrect - OP should be Year 170, and work out to 66/67 AD?). The date on the coin is a little clearer than in my pic. I don't believe there is an A in front of the O, though. Here is one from acsearch : http://www.acsearch.info/record.html?id=217077 Wildwinds has examples of this reverse type for Nero through Trajan, but I believe the RPC online database for the Antonines has examples for Antoninus Pius as well. I recall reading that the Phanebal reverse appears on Ascalon coinage from Augustus to Severus Alexander.
Sounds good to me, but there were several different Phanebal reverses, hence my question as to whether the harpa/shield/palm version was exclusive to Nero. I often wish coins from this region were less crudely made. As rough as your coin is, it's a higher-grade example. I've seen scores of Ascalon issues, before and during Roman occupation, that are barely recognizable.
Interesting topic. Sometimes I do like just pulling out "favorites" and looking them over. My problem is my "favorites" change depending on my collecting mood. They might be a Shapur drachm, or a early Chinese spade, or a big old Ptolemaic bronze. Sometimes it might even be, (gasp), some of my US coins like a type 1 buffalo nickel or a flowing hair silver dollar. This is a primary reason I never sell, because my tastes change depending on what I am interested in at that moment. I always want to own some coins that fit my current interest category.
wow, that's a great uncleansed lot coin! i clean some just for kicks, i know full well most will be culls, but i enjoying doing it. kind of relaxing for me really. but man, are most bad... this is my grading scheme for 75% of them and certainly don't merit "fair" for a grade absolute turd: these aren't even worth donation, don't think that i could actually prove they're coins. turd: i'll donate them to forum to give to teachers. i think i can make out a fallen horseman...pretty sure....maybe.
Sorry for the delay => work (geeesh!!) ... anyway ... here is the coin that I was referring to: JULIAN II AE1 (Double Maiorina) A.D. 362 – 363 Arelate mint, 1st Office Diameter: 26 mm Weight: 9.2 grams Obverse: DN FL CL IVLIANVS PF AVG. Pearl diademed, draped and cuirassed bust at right Reverse: SECVRITAS REIPVB. Bull standing right, 2 stars above, wreath at end of legend. PCON in exergue Reference: Originally stated as being an RIC VIII 316 I thought this coin was very cool when I first purchased it ... but I absolutely loved it when Doug Smith stated: => I thought that was very cool (thanks Doug)
We each can decide if having minor variations that are unlisted or marked as scarce means anything to us. I generally don't pay extra for such things but enjoy discovering them when they come along. It is always nice when we buy a coin and then find out that it holds some upgrade surprise. My example of the moment is the coin that arrived today so I may not have researched it enough to understand the situation. I bought the coin for a silly reason and paid relatively little. It is a reduced follis of Maximinus II from a mint I lacked for him (Nicomedia). The real reason I bid on it was the super swirled cape worn by Jupiter. Yes, that may be an odd reason so we will say I liked the style and the price was right. As we are wont to do, I got out RIC and tried to catalog the coin. I could not find it. Most of Maximinus' IOVI coins have an eagle at his feet but the very last issue, RIC 79 page 568, has no eagle but has a large star (it is a plate coin) in the left field. This coin has no star and no eagle so I guess it is unlisted. The eagle free variation is the last coin listed in RIC volume VI. Volume VII starts with coins after the death of Maximinus so this must be one of his last coins. Does any of that make the coin special? Not really. I bought it because it was something not unattractive with a feature I liked (the swirl) and it was $16.24 postpaid. Being unlisted was an extra feature and what qualified it for this particular thread. One might ask just how many coins of the tetrarchs I really need. The surfaces could be better but when I see some of the things out there (I'm thinking uncleaned coins mostly) this 21mm follis does not seem all that bad. For beginners among us: This coin is of Maximinus II. Be careful to separate him from Maximianus and Galerius who also used the name Maximianus. These two have an extra A in the name. Maximinus II spelled his name like the emperor that followed Severus Alexander much earlier (which explains why we add the II to his name). Like Galerius his legend here includes GALerius VALerius so you will see a certain number of his coins listed incorrectly as Galerius by those who fail to note that there is an A missing. There are other places where the Romans set traps to snare collectors unwilling to read each and every letter but this is one that trips up a lot of new collectors and careless dealers alike.
http://www.acsearch.info/search.html?search=similar:202045#7 A little research shows several coins like mine with no eagle and no star but the sellers listed RIC 69b which clearly states "eagle at feet to l." It seems my coin is not defective but RIC is.
Now that you point it out, the swirled cape is a neat feature I would have overlooked. I haven't been looking at Roman Imperials lately, but this makes me want to take a fresh look.
I agree. I look at this period occasionally for examples for my "art neavou(sp?)" Mini collection. I should keep an eye out for these.
