Hi. I just received this charming coin of Emperor Probus. It weighs 4.20 g. and has an original tone and reverse as well. I also heard that such coins with mint mark XXI in exergue contain about 5 per cent of silver in their bronze alloy. I appreciate always your useful and educative comments. Thanks.. Charles
Probus Obv:– IMP C M AVR PROBVS P F AVG, Radiate and cuirassed bust right Rev:– CLEMENTIA TEMP, Emperor standing right, holding sceptre, receiving Victory from Jupiter standing left, holding sceptre Minted in Antioch (Gamma in centre field, XXI in exe) Emission 2 Officina 3. A.D. 280 Reference:– RIC 922 Bust Type C compare with my officina E example below.
Remark? No. We just like showing coins. These also come without Victory but with a long, eagle tipped scepter. Probus always has a lot of minor varieties.
Gorgeous coins, fellas ... my Probus coin is not quite as strong as your sweet examples, but he is wearing a pretty fancy outfit!
Just to bring this thread down to reality. This one is a cast fake. Why would someone fake such a cheap coin? I don't know but this is documented in the online resources dot for dot in the fields. The master is a real coin so if you are patting yourself on the back saying you recognized the style was wrong, perhaps you don't know Cyzicus. The seller refunded my $10 and let me keep the coin. Buy from guys like that until you become infallible.
Some nice Probus coins. And I would have been fooled by that fake Doug. Yes, the style looks different, but Probus had so many differing coins. Anyway, here is one of mine: PROBUS Antoninianus OBVERSE: IMP PROBVS P F AVG-Radiate, draped and cuirassed bust right REVERSE: CONCORDIA MILITVM Exe: /XXIVI - Probus standing left on right, holding scepter, receiving wreath from Victory to left Struck at Siscia, 277 AD 4.2g, 21mm RIC V 666
Could you please explain the meaning of the Roman letters in exergue. We can read XXIVI instead of XXI. Was is still struck in Antioch ? Does it have any relation with the possible proportion of silver melted purposely in that coin? Charles
The XXIVI coin by Bing comes from Siscia rather than Antioch. The XXI is the same for both coins and is the value mark. In this case the VI is workshop 6 in Sicia. Your Gamma is workshop 3 from Antioch. Martin
Workshop ordinal number systems ran into problems when two words needed started with the same letter. Secundus (2) got the S so Sextus (6) had to seek elsewhere for a way of saying sixth and chose VI. Different mints did things 'their way' so we have to learn their codes. Antioch used Greek letters so 2 was B leaving the S available but it does not stand for sextus since they were not using ordinals but it just happens that the Greek numeral for 6 looks a lot like an S (usually the lower curve is smaller and less curved). Some of this may be more clear if you read my page: http://www.forumancientcoins.com/dougsmith/officina.html
Thank you for these abundant information. Still I'm wondering whether the value mark XXI could hint to the proportion of silver in those bronze coins ?? Charles
You missed the point. XXI is not a mark of value of the coin but of the ratio of silver just as you suggest. The Romans did not do percentages as we do but considered this XX parts copper mixed with I part silver which would be 4.77% or one part TO 20 parts not one part IN 20. Destructive assays should show the coins to be a bit under 5% silver. For the record, there are a few larger post reform folles made with the same alloy and marked. Diocletian below: Even more unusual are a few coins made with double silver and marked XI (Tacitus below).
