Rare Galba Denarius

Nice, I still have no Galba's

I think i found one
https://www.acsearch.info/search.ht...cy=usd&order=1&company=40&auction=213&lot=800





Also I found yours on Wildwinds as RIC 191




so it looks like the same coin is listed as RIC 190, 191 and 193, which is right?

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

My coin is ric 193. Ric 190 has a different bust style and 191 has a clockwise legend rather than a counter clockwise legend.

The example on wild winds is in fact my coin. I have compared the 2 photographs and there can be little doubt that my coin is the same one Wildwinds has listed as ric 191.

Thanks for finding that!

Click on Galba and scroll down to ric 191 here . You will see that 191 has a clockwise reverse legend and a different bust style.
http://www.ancientcoins.ca/RIC/index.htm

I trust this source because if you search for Galba ric 191 on acsearch you will find the same coin type as the above reference with the clockwise reverse legend.

Also, scroll down on the following page to see examples of ric 193 from the British Museum and Berlin collections.
http://numismatics.org/ocre/id/ric.1(2).gal.193?lang=nl

 

Nice Galba upgrade @Orfew

My only Galba to date is an as. A nice denarius is on my wish list to get along with Otho and Vitellius I already have


Galba, As minted in Rome AD 68
SER BALBA IMP CAESAR AVG PON M TR PPP, Laureate head of Galba right
Rome seated left, SC in field
10,60 gr
Ref : Cohen #182

Q

 

Thanks for your comments. I didn't have an Otho and I decided to put a low bid in on an aureus rather than a denarius: which is still very expensive. This is from a Stack's summer auction, 2004, lot# 20. As you can see there is a small spot which was described as dirt or encrustation in the catalog on the obv near 6:00. As it turns out this is dirt, actually appears to be a bit of dried leather, not an encrustation. I decided to leave it on as one day someone may want to do an analysis to see exactly what it is.

At the time, after collecting ancients pretty seriously since finishing grad school in 88, this was my 1st Roman gold coin. To date I only have 3 Roman gold pieces.

 

@Gallienus

Thanks for the extra information. The Otho portrait is what attracted me to the coin. I like keeping an eye out for an upgrade to my existing Otho. You can see the obverse in my avatar.

 

It has been both a little frustrating but also quite a bit of fun to try to find a reliable source which would allow me to accurately distinguish ric 190 191 and 193 from each other.

I found this site below which is the only one I have found which has examples of all 3 coins.
Scroll down to ric 190.
http://davy.potdevin.free.fr/Site/galba.html

In brief:
ric 190-Globe at point of bust on the obverse, HISPA-NIA clockwise legend on the reverse

ric 191-No globe at point of bust on the obverse, HISPA-NIA clockwise legend on the reverse

ric 193-No globe at point of bust on the obverse, HISPA-NIA counter-clockwise legend on the reverse

All of this assumes that the above site is reliable.

If it is reliable I think I can make the following points accurately

1. My coin is ric 193
2. An apology to @arnoldoe The coin he showed in the link below may in fact be ric 193 and not as stated on the site ric 190. (Note the direction of the reverse legend)
https://www.acsearch.info/search.ht...cy=usd&order=1&company=40&auction=213&lot=800
3. It appears that the Wildwinds site may be in error. (Again this assumes that the first site I posted with all 3 coins is accurate). Under their listing for ric 191 they have a photo of my coin (which I now assume is ric 193). Ric 191, according to the first site I posted, has a clockwise and not a counter-clockwise reverse legend.

Thanks to any who have been following this and thanks to those who have helped along the way.

These coins sure can be interesting!

Anyone else have a similar story about tracking down an attribution?

 

Wow, sweet coins Gallienus (those are yummy!!)

Oh, and good job by the rest of you coin-grinders (there are several super examples)

Galba? ... ummm, yes think I have a very humble ol' example (I love this coin)

Galba, Æ As
Rome mint
68-69 AD
Struck circa October 68 AD
Diameter: 27 mm
Weight: 10.6 grams
Obverse: Laureate head right
Reverse: LIBERTAS PVBLICA, Libertas standing facing, head left, holding pileus and rod; S-C across field
Reference: RIC I 328

 

Nice Galba stevex6, is that patina black like mine?

 

Yes, it's a sweet-n-dirty ol' thing!! => it's a very rugged example

 

My Galba Sestertius:

Rome, October 68;
37 mm / 25,33 grams;
RIC 387, BMCRE 68,
this coin illustrated in E. Gutierrez Guinea,
El Valor des Sestercios, fig. 17.1.

 

You definitely have some nice stuff @Julius Germanicus

 

Once had a pretty Galba, but traded it for something else (don't even remember what )...

 

@Julius Germanicus ---You seem to be on one heck of a roll with the 12 Caesar types (not to mention other 'rulers')---or have you been holding out on us

Huge congrats again!!!

 

That is a nice addition to your denarii collection, orfew.

I have a few coins of Servius Sulpicius Galba in my collection, as well. Specially like the variation in bust styles portrayed in his coinage.

 

Nice job @Orfew !

My Galba is pretty ruddy. I may look for an upgrade...

RI Galba AE Obv-Rev.jpg

 

@Barry Murphy need your opinion!

IMO, you should send this to NGC. In an authentication seminar an authenticator at the DC ANACS taught the class this code that they used in the lab to rate the authenticity of the coins they examined:

2. Counterfeit.
3. probably C/F
4. Possibly C/F
5. NO OPINION
6. possibly OK
7. probably OK
8. Genuine

I see nothing on your coin that screams genuine. So I'll rate it a 3. Let's see if I made a lucky (?) guess at your expense.

 

I have to admit, it does cause me a bit of concern the more I examine the photo...but I find even after examining the fake registries I'm still unsure, especially since I'm not anything near an 'expert'...... and not having the coin in hand is always a problem. I'd send it to Sears for reassurance----unless the more astute can make a determination from the photo.

Personally, I generally pass on anything that raises any doubts (my Nero denarius a recent and foolish exception LOL), legitimate or imagined, and wait for another.

I hope it passes scrutiny but so many fall through the cracks, regardless of what Seller/Auction they originate from.

 

Brutal ... again, unless a member has some sort of solid-proof, or at least an example or two showing that a coin may not be authentic, then they should probably hold their comments and merely watch (oh, but your theoretical rating scale from that coin-seminar is fricken awesome!!)

Coincidentally, I use that same "technical-scale" of yours for a lot of other life situations ...

2. Total dog
3. Two-bagger
4. One-bagger
5. Kinda cute
6. I'd do 'er
7. Total babe
8. Goddess

2. There is no way that she's pregnant
3. She's probably not pregnant
4. Man, I doubt she's pregnant, eh?
5. Well, I guess she could be pregnant?
6. I vaguely remember wearing protection
7. Ummm, what's protection?
8. There I was ... man, she was a Goddess!

 

Hmmm I use your first scale also... but it always starts at #5...


I always wonder why we have Modern collectors so busy trying to force a modern scale and ratings system on Ancients...

Kinda like Round-Hole-Square-Peg thing? Didn't we get "EDUCATION" on this when we were young???


http://giphy.com/gifs/baby-blocks-fuck-it-J2zwN64xc4wgw

 

We discussed this yesterday in the ancient forum when a member who is not often seen here (ditto for me) and is not an expert on ancients (ditto for me) made some comments about the authenticity of a posted coin. I defended his actions while also condemning them. Your statement above is true. That is why I chose to state I have no opinion on the coin at the beginning and the end of my post. The reason I posted was to provide another defense of the other poster by pointing out things I saw on the Galba that relate to all types of coins. Nevertheless, I see that in spite of my disclaimers, I gave an opinion that cast doubt on the coin.

From now on, I will ask for an explanation for what I observe, as that's how we learn. With that in mind, do any of you have an example of a high grade ancient with circular die polish?