I've contemplated posting each of these separate, but, as the title suggests, none are special enough to warrant their own thread. These are coins I got in late August and early September CLAUDIUS AE As OBVERSE: TI CLAVDIVS CAESAR AVG PM TR P IMP P P, bare head left. REVERSE: Minerva advancing right, holding shield and brandishing a javelin, S-C across fields Struck at Rome, 50-4AD 10.5G, , 9.7g, 28m RIC 116 CONSTANTIUS II CRISPUS AE3 OBVERSE: ILV CRISPVS NOB C; laureate head right REVERSE: CAESARVM NOSTRORVM; VOT X in wreath; ΔSIS wreath in exergue Struck at Siscia 321-324 AD 2.9g, 18.5mm RIC VII Siscia 178 PROBUS Antoninianus OBVERSE: IMP C M AVR PROBVS AVG, radiate & cuirassed bust right. REVERSE: MARS VICTOR, Mars advancing right, bearing trophy & spear. Mintmark III Struck at Lugdunum, 277 AD 5.1g, 23mm RIC 37, III Can anyone identify the Constantius II?
That's a nice virtual crappy-tray, my friend!! ... just jokes ... => the Crispus and the Probus are probably both better than my examples ... oh, and an As of Claudius is always a winna-winna!! Congrats on four more great additions to your gigantic Bing-hoard!!
Well I like three of them very much. I agree with Steve on the as of Claudius - any coin of his in F or better is worth getting, on scarcity alone. The Crispus and Probus have nice details and great character. I don't care for the Constantius II, though - sorry! Too rough, and no mint mark. Not that I don't have a handful of coins like that - I do, but they came in larger lots where a dealer wanted to get rid of them by combining them with better coins.
I have to agree with JA on this one. I have a thousand ugly coins but the ones I value are the ones that show something I can not show easily with a better coin. Lets look at an example: This Falling Horseman is almost as bad as Bing's new one but has just enough mintmark to read Constantinople. I would have bought it even if the CO were gone because what makes it IMO collectible is the legible obverse right legend identifying the coin as Constantius Gallus while the portrait is clearly wearing a diadem which can not be on the head of Gallus who was only Caesar and always shown with bare head. Sure I'd rather have this coin in EF+ but it is what it is. It turns out that all that it is is an overstrike with the headgear provided by one parent and the legend by the other. That means it is not important in the grand scheme of things but just a novelty---one I'm happy to have in the abysmal grade because it may be the best one I'll ever see. Falling Horsemen are a dime a dozen in terrible shape. We can take interest in being able to ID the coin by style but the correctness of our guess is not confirmible with certainty. I'll guess Constantinople with about 50% certainty and could rule out at least 10 mints with 100% certainty but that is not really an ID. The coin is a genuine ancient coin identifiable with 100% certainty to emperor Constantius II with certainty and could be a valued addition to the collection of someone who has no ancients and and a budget allowing spending a dollar per coin at the most. The others here are, like Bing said, less than special but, like JA said, worth having to a collector (like Bing, JA and I) who can overlook the faults and see the "nice details and great character."
I think the Probus and the Crispus coins are worthy of their own thread but the other two including the Claudius I are pretty worn. Don't get me wrong, I still like them. Like most people here, we all have coins in about equal low grade.
Everyone has already said it all. And I especially like the Crispus and Probus---terrific details. As for the Claudius, I have one in a similar condition......and a Tiberius as well; both seem to have something I still find appealing.
i'm new at this so the 1st two i would not purchase, the fallen horseman i recognized because i recently bought one, the Claudius i would not have been able to identify, the Crispus an Probus are more my speed, very nice, easily identifiable, nice addition to any collection.... (BTW, is that a typo on Crispus: OBVERSE: ILV.....
what everyone else said! but yeah, that probus is pretty dang nice...i'd snag him up for sure! i have quite a few coins i haven't thought worth posting, i received one just the other day. i'll try and post a few here.
Just for the record, the Constantius II was a gift for buying the Probus coin. I wouldn't have bothered, but when it's free...... You are correct. A typo. Thanks for the heads up.
My low grade, 'nothing special' examples of Tiberius and Claudius, as mentioned above (they were among my earliest 'Bronze' purchases...Asses?):
Hi. I didn't intend to post this coin, but it seems it could fit this thread. I bought it yesterday for 12 dollars. It's a billon tetradrachn of Emp. Caracalla weighing over 12 g. Belling 9- SGI 2649. Do you think it's a good buy?
For the price, I'd say yes, but I would have preferred the obverse had as much detail as the reverse and wasn't as much off the flan.....of course, but then the price would have been higher. Perhaps, some light cleaning might help???
here's a coin that isn't so nice, but going rate for the type and has an interesting history. Bulgaria, Ivan Stratzimir, 1360-1396 AD O: Czar enthroned. R: Bust of Christ. Greirson 388, 18 mm, 0.8 g here's a nice one, that i can't afford...just to show what it looks like..not exactly the same but very similar. this is the last, or one of the last, coins of medieval bulgaria. you may remember this coin, a few of us have them. this is a bulgarian coin of ivan alexander and michal asen iv. ivan alexander was ivan stratzimirs father, michael was his brother....killed in battle with the ottomans. after ivan alexander, his remaining kids squabbled over bulgaria and the ottomans finished them off..they finished off ivan himself in 1396. ivan strazimir son, constatine ii, ruled at least portions of bulgaria until shortly before his death in 1422. seems there is debate over as to if 1396 or 1422 is the official end of medieval bulgaria, but either way...there wouldn't be bulgarian coins minted again until the late 1800.
Very nice, 'CHRS' That's an interesting array of 'medieval' Bulgarian coins---the continued influence from the 'Byzantine' to the later middle ages is quite clear.
