A Victoriatus born out of desperation

Behold, my Victoriatus has arrived safe and sound from Europe. It is as expected, uncleaned with dirt and hoard patina sticking to its surfaces, yet the metal that shows through all appears to be of good quality and in a good state of preservation.

Anyway, I shall leave it as is with the hoard patina. No cleaning for this beauty.


Here is the coin in question. Excuse my feeble attempts at photography:


Roman Republic
AR Victoriatus, Anonymous, ca. 211-208 B.C.
Uncertain mint(traditionally, Vibo Valentia).
Laureate head of Jupiter right. Border of dots
Victory standing right, crowning trophy with wreath; between, VB; in exergue, ROMA. Line border. Crawford 95/1a
Notes: Traveling Roman Military Mint in Southern Italy

Why is this coin important? What history does it tell? This coin was minted on campaign as the Roman army attempted to strike back and recapture parts of Southern Italy, after a series of catastrophic military defeats less than a decade prior.

When this coin was struck, the might of the Roman army laid dead, Hannibal moved with impunity over most of Italy, and some of Rome's allies wavered. This coin would have been minted to purchase the loyalty and manpower of Rome's remaining allies in Southern Italy as the Roman war machine prepared to finally challenge Hannibal once and for all over control of the southern Italian Peninsula.


The men who would have been paid with this coinage were likely from cities in the south that remained loyal to Rome, and would have received these coins as payment for their service in battles such as the Second Battle for Capua, which resulted in Rome's victory and recapture of this strategic and important southern Italian city, or the disastrous Battle of Herdonia, where Roman blood flowed so freely it watered fields downhill for miles.

In all likelihood, the only reason we have this coin was because its owner buried it prior to a battle, hoping to return, and never did. You can tell it never saw much circulation at all.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

Congrats on scoring that OP-Victoriatus

man, this never gets old, eh? ... I love ancient coins!!

Anonymous AR Victoriatus
(Rome mint)
Date: After 211 BC
Diameter: 17.9 mm
Weight: 2.9 grams
Obverse: Laureate head of Jupiter
Reverse: Victory standing right, crowning trophy
References: Crawford 53/1
Characteristics: Good style, perfect centering and high grade …
It was voted best of type in Forvm galleries in 2014 (and might still hold the title?) ... I don't frequent Forvm
From the Professor James R. Eaton Collection





*edit*

I found this sweet ol' link ...

http://www.forumancientcoins.com/gallery/displayimage.php?pos=-110720

 

No hoard patina for you? Still a very nice and desirable specimen. It could almost belong in a museum exhibit. Very nice, my Canadian friend.

 

Nice write up and coin Sallent.

I need to get back to posting back ground history rather than just a photo of a coin. Makes it just that more interesting

 

Nice coin, Sallent.

Nice toning, Steve. I didn't realize you also had some coins from Professor Eaton's collection. Cool-- I like that the coin was collected in the 1800s

Serious question about "hoard patina"-- what does that term mean in relation to silver coins? I have some idea what it means for a bronze coin or copper coin but a silver "patina" (toning) is generally black (tarnish), although I guess it would vary depending on the exact alloy. Patina isn't a term I'm used to seeing when discussing silver coins.

https://www.forumancientcoins.com/numiswiki/view.asp?key=Patina

The OP coin appears to have some surface encrustations, perhaps atop horn silver. At what point after the initial cleaning (when the silver coin is removed from the ground) is the cleaning deemed enough? I wonder if the finder of this coin cleaned it a only a little or whether he/she cleaned it substantially before deciding it had been cleaned "enough".

 

I wouldn't call it horn silver. The encrustations are mostly a reddish dark layer of dirt, and it is flaking off or had flaked off in some areas revealing pristine surfaces below. The rest of the dark areas are deep toning, but otherwise pristine silver.

@red_spork got one from the same hoard and his is cleaning up nicely. I chose not to clean mine.

 

nice sharp details on that one sallent! the dirt on the surface does look pretty loose.

 

Great coin, I love the look of the hoard patina!

 

For a silver coin, this is what I would call hoard or find patina, even if patina is not the proper word. A surface that apparently has not been touched since it was discovered.


The OP coin has certainly been cleaned, just not down to bright surfaces. I would describe it as having encrustations, but attractively so.

 

Very nice coin sallent, a witness to a dramatic time in the history of the Roman Republic after the dramatic losses at Cannae and Trasimene.
A beautiful coin.

 

As you can see from the first image I posted and from this one below, 3rd century Roman legionnaires would have looked very different to what we are accustomed to. At that time every property owning citizen had to serve and buy their own armour and weapons. There was no standardized army like there was during the last 70 years or so of the Republic.

If you were a poor farmer, you might be a skirmisher wearing no armour. If you were slightly better off, you might have been able to afford a proper shield, helmet, and maybe a chest and back round or square bronze plate that covered part of the body, and those well off would have had full body chain mail vaguely similar to the armour of the later Republican time most of you are familiar with.

As the armour would have varied tremendously due to owner's ability to pay, the battlefield must have been very confusing indeed.

The one thing the Romans did have though was training and discipline. That's what made the real difference.


Roman soldiers Circa 270 BCE.

 

Very nice write-up and pics!

I have a few from around then:


RR Anon 211-206 BCE Victoriatus STAR (filled in pentagram) Sear 49 Syd 233a Craw 105/1 Very Rare


RR Anon AR Victoriatus 211-206 BC Jupiter Dioscuri Sear 49 Craw 44/1


RR Anon AE Victoriatus after 218 BCE Rome mint Ex RBW Anon Jupiter Victory crowning trophy Craw 44/1 Syd 83 Sear 49 possible fouree

 

ummm, no thanks ... I'll stick with what I got



Oh, cool examples, Gandalf (I love your AE example => sweet green-eye-appeal)

 

I am fine with Nemo's definition of 'Find Patina' even if 90% of it is caked on dirt rather than some chemical compound. I tend to suspect that many of our really well toned silver coins today were cleaned in the past - perhaps even a century ago - and have darkened to look natural in the sense of Morgan dollars that have been toning for that same time. My recent purchase of Alexandrian tetradrachms included coins provenanced to the Dattari collection of over a century ago and coins with sales listed more in the 50 year range. They were not the same color/tone. Were they dark when Dattari owned them or did he bathe them all in 1900 era dip? I have no idea. My preference on coins like the OP is to leave them as they are if they are attractive and this one is. There are plenty of ugly coins we can play doctor with before we need to mess with fixing what is not broken.

About 15 years ago at a Baltimore show, I got to see a large plastic bag filled with Athenian tetradrachms all having 'Find Patina'. I also saw another bag of coins of the same type with what I would call bright silver surfaces. Most buyers preferred the silver colored silver coins. I suspect both groups had recently looked the same. I also suspect that most of the 'Find' ones have been cleaned in some way since I saw them.

Alegandron's coin is the kind that gets me in trouble. Were it my coin, I would be gnawed at by the question of being fourree. My guess is no. If it were a fine silver issue, I'd probably plop it in lemon juice on the theory that I would learn something but these Victoriati could stand a little more finesse and that is not my strong suite. I don't want to advise people on what to do with their coins under such circumstances but I might point out that it is easier to overclean a coin that it is to neglect it.

 

Ok, bottom line, throw all your ancient silver in a bucket of lemon juice. If they float, they be witches.

Just kidding. @dougsmit makes a great point. When I was starting out, a coin like my new Victoriatus would have either received cleaning, or I would have avoided it altogether. I can definitely see why collectors prefered the shinny tets instead of the uncleaned.

However, some collectors age like a fine bottle of wine, and tastes mature. These days I'd prefer an attractively dark toned or even encrusted coin like the one I bought.

As someone else mentioned, the coin was probably lightly cleaned before I got it, but I won't be doing any additional cleaning to remove any of the encrustation. I want the dirt and other materials on the coin. Let whomever gets if after me decide if they want to clean it completely, but I won't be responsible for ruining the look. Once you remove the original soil and minerals from the coin, you can't get that back. It is lost forever. It's been with the coin for 2,200 years, let it remain with the coin for a little longer at least.

 

I won this on auction where it was questioned as a mystery if it were a fouree or an official issue struck with bronze instead of silver.

It is suggested that I should clean it? Strip off the patina? If I clean it, what would be the best approach?

 

I wouldn't dream of doing anything to this coin, let it remain a mystery! I think you'll only ruin it. Fouree or official, I've never seen one like that!

 

leave the European dirt alone very cool coin congrats

 

Leave it alone, it is glorious as it is.