Just Another Constantinople Commem, Yawn (Not Quite)

Yeah, might as well go for the whole enchilada.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

It is a lovely looking example. I suspect that it is gilded in much more recent times for some reason. That doesn't detract from it being a lovely looking coin and a talking point.

 

Here's a not-so-attractive example of gilding:


EGYPT, Alexandria. Hadrian
year 22, CE 137/8
billion tetradrachm, 23 mm, 12.3 gm
Obv: AVTKAICTPAAΔPIANOCCEB; laureate head right
Rev: ΠPONOIA; Pronoia standing left, holding phoenix and sceptre; KB left
Ref: Emmett 881(22), R1

The words "lipstick" and "pig" come to mind . It's interesting though, so it followed me home.

 

I have this Constantine the Great in my collection that has been deemed by a variety of respected dealers as likely having been resilvered in relatively recent times (maybe in the 1800s). I have no reason to doubt them. Thereason they don't think it is amore recent treatment is that the silvering has since toned and also has a golden hue.

 

JA => I am kinda wishing that I'd snapped it up when I had the chance (man, I must have thumbed-by that baby a hundred times thinking to myself, "I already own a pretty good example of this commemorative-type, so I'll leave it for now" => stupid, stupid, stupid!!)

... sadly, I don't have a sweet gold-gilded example to toss into this thread (stupid!)



Oh, and your new photos look sweet (the colour was fairly close to Pierre's original photos, eh?) ... pretty coin

 

Thanks Steve. Yeah, he takes very good pics. Like I said, I'm very happy with the coin. It may have been gilded recently, but there's also a good chance the plating is original. Analyses of the metals Romans used in plating their coins show that the alloy frequently wasn't silver at all, but various combinations of tin, copper, and antimony. So who can say for sure?