Recycling in the most cheapest way.

Hadrian AS Roma 134-38 AD Africa OSTROGOTHS. Uncertain king. Follis circa VI cent.

These value-marks of 42 (Nummi) on re-used Roman imperial bronzes are usually attributed to the Ostrogoths, but they may also have been applied by the Vandals in North Africa. Most of these marks are found on 1st Century bronzes, usually Nero, Galba and the Flavians.

Reference. very rare
RIC 841; C 147. BMC 1714. MEC I, 66 for countermark.

Obv. HADRIANVS AVG COS III P P
Laureate and draped bust right; in front XLII.

Rev. AFRICA
Africa reclining left, wearing elephant-trunk, holding scorpion and cornucopia; in front, basket of corn.

12.22 gr
26 mm
h

From the E.E. Clain-Stefanelli collection.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

Domitian, Roman Empire (revalued under the Ostrogothic Kingdom)
AE as/42 nummi
Obv: CAESAR AVG F DOMITIAN COS II, laureate head left, countermark XLII (42) in left field
Rev: VICTORIA AVGVST, Victory advancing right, standing on prow, holding wreath and palm branch, S-C across fields
Mint: Rome (struck 73-74 AD; revalued 498-526 AD)
Ref: RIC 677

 

Neat find, I have read about them on here before.

 

I always wonder about this attribution. Why would the Ostrogoths retariff them if they themselves invented the 40 denomination? I mean, just a few years after Romulus Augustus resigned, the Ostrogoths, (15 years before the Byzantines), introduced the 40 nummi denomination.

However, the Vandals always used 21 and 42 denominations, and never introduced a 40 nummi coin. Isn't it more likely these were Vandalic retariffs rather than Ostrogothic?

 

its an 42 nummi sestertius are countermarked LXXXIII 83

 

I always wanted one of these. Why does no one see fit to mention this reads XIIL rather than XLII? I doubt the meaning was any different from 42 but it seems odd. While I'm wanting, I'd really prefer an LXXXIII sestertius but that is not likely to happen.

 

Yes it reads XIIL or XIIV unlike 2e coin its done more roughly cut into, 2e coin struck into

 

oh cool, i want one of these also...i knew (basically) what it was right away, i remembered VK's coin...neato!

 

It makes sense, but evidence doesn´t support that. These are only found in Italy, not Africa. That´s why Vandal origin is in dispute.

 

They are usually found in two different "cutting styles" for some reason: crude or neat. This one would clearly be a crude type. The other one being more like @ValiantKnight ´s coin.

 

Altough I must say...I have NEVER seen a countermarked As or a Sestertius other than first century. This one is really intriguing.

 

Wow I have never seen on on a Hadrian. Me wants. Here is my Domitian.

 

Hi all!
There are my two coins retariffed by the Ostrogoths (or Vandals according to monetary system).
First one is Domitian As, ex Gert Boersema, and pictured in his article Early Roman imperial coins countermarked in late antiquity:



The other one is a Galba As:



Best regards

 

@Valentinianvs I would love the Domitian even without the retariff,

 

Welcome. I like not only the coins but your avatar as well (I am very much into the coins of this era also).

 

Great score, Oki. I have to admit I considered bidding on this coin as well because it was marked on a Hadrian travel series bronze. Glad it's going to a good home. I was scratching my head over why XIIL rather than XLII too.

 

here is a 7 nummi.

Host Coin:
Italy
Roman Empire
Claudius II Gothicus
AE Ant. 16 mm x 2.10 grams (s. AD 269)
Obverse: MP CLAVDIVS AVG, Radiate head right
Reverse FIDES MILITVM, Fides standing facing, head left, holding spear or sceptre in left hand and standard in right hand, epsilon in right field.
Note: Counter marked VII by Ostrogoths (AD 520-530)

 

Thank you Valiant! I will make a post with my avatar coin, and woth other late antiquity coins.