Ancients: Another Falling Horseman

so far, the ones listed in the post, are some really nice examples

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

Uncirculated and mint are not terms that get used with ancients by traditionalists like me. The coin is well struck, most were not, and relatively pleasing of surface. New collectors often think ancient coins have to look 2000 years old. Much better ones exist. I almost passed up the coin because of the large amount of off flan legends but it was sharp on the important part (LXXII) so I compromised and bought it. Ancient collectors rarely can insist on MS67 or better and the ones that do have very deep pockets.

 

You have me pegged. What I know about ancient coins would barely fill a thimble. But still I remain very impressed with the coin, I think it is beautiful.

 

Ee-heh-heh => You know me ... I rarely pass-up an opportunity to let my boys outside for a run around the yard!!

=> here is my example (apparently, I don't have any Roman numerals ... but I do have a a six-rayed "star")

CONSTANTIUS II SILVERED AE2 (Maiorina/Centenonialis)
Heraclea mint, 1st Office
348-351 AD
Diameter: Large size: 22 mm
Weight: 5.1 grams
Obverse: : D N CONSTANTIVS P F AVG. Pearl-diademed, draped and cuirassed bust to right
Reverse: FEL TEMP REPARATIO, soldier standing left, knee raised, spearing fallen horseman and is reaching backwards. Left field: Star. Mintmark SMHA in exergue
Reference: RIC VIII 67
Other: a great exemplar of this interesting coin, conserving full details including the 30% of the original silvering ... very strong relief

 

Steve's is a perfect example of the main problem with these. It is a great specimen but still has striking weakness in the mintmark and the chest of the soldier. The OP coin is a great strike but small enough flan to lose half of the mintmark letters and legends at the left of both sides. Finding a perfect strike on full flan without faults will take a bit of looking and a pile of cash. I don't have one.