correct attribution?

Discussion in 'Ancient Coins' started by ken454, Apr 14, 2015.

  1. ken454

    ken454 Well-Known Member

    did i get this one right??

    RIC7-155-obv.jpg RIC7-155-rev.jpg RIC7-155-horz.jpg
    Constantinople Commemorative. 330-335 AD. AE follis.

    Obv: CONSTAN-TINOPOLI, laureate and helmeted bust of
    Constantinople left, wearing imperial cloak, holding
    reversed spear
    Rev: GLOR-IA EXERC-ITVS dot, two soldiers holding spears and
    shields with one standard between them, o on banner, CONSZ
    in ex.

    RIC VII Constantinople 155, rated R4.
     
    Okidoki, stevex6, Ancientnoob and 4 others like this.
  2. Avatar

    Guest User Guest



    to hide this ad.
  3. John Anthony

    John Anthony Ultracrepidarian

    Attribution looks good to me. This a scarce type, the muling of Constantinople and Soldiers/Standard. Nice find. The bust looks barbarous, but the rest of the coin is in official style - an odd combination.

    I do not have one of these, but I do have the VRBS ROMA type muled with soldiers/standard...

    VRBSstandard.jpg
     
  4. chrsmat71

    chrsmat71 I LIKE TURTLES!

    cool coin ken, that is kind of a different style for roma on the obverse.
     
    ken454 likes this.
  5. Bing

    Bing Illegitimi non carborundum Supporter

    I believe JA is correct. This looks to be barbarous and a very nice pickup.
     
    ken454 likes this.
  6. Mikey Zee

    Mikey Zee Delenda Est Carthago

    I also agree with all that's been posted...A very cool and interesting piece!!!!
     
    ken454 likes this.
  7. ken454

    ken454 Well-Known Member

    thanks guys! the seller was a little vague on his attribution of this one so i was hoping i got it right, i've acquired a fondness for the commemoratives, think i'll be adding more of these to my ancients in the future...
     
  8. John Anthony

    John Anthony Ultracrepidarian

    The rarest mule of them all is Constantinople with VOT XX MVLT XXX reverse.
     
Draft saved Draft deleted

Share This Page