A little while ago I posted this coin in the cleaning advice thread. It was incredibly corroded when given to me by an archaeologist friend, covered in hard mineral deposits that even a dental pick couldn't touch. So I turned to glue as a last resort, and revealed a far better coin than I expected underneath. Harsh, but it was the kind of coin that most people would have no hope at all for. At any rate, I just got around to trying to figure out what it was, and lo and behold, I think it might be something very unusual. It is an Arcadius Salvs Reipvblicae from Aquileia, but when I put the devices into Helvetia's RIC table, I saw that it apparently has an R5 rating in RIC (only one other known example). It's worn, with an uneven patina, but I'm still surprised. If my ID is correct, it is RIC IX Aquileia 58c var, with a cross in the left field, and an AQ mint mark. It's hard to photograph (using an iPhone, at least) due to the reverse wear and uneven patina, but I tried to illuminate it better by taking a shot lit from the side. It's much easier to make out in hand. Is my ID correct? And if so, what should I do with it? I don't want to risk harming it for further cleaning, but I feel sad that the patina came out so unevenly, possibly due to how I removed the crud. Ren Wax might bring out more detail, but I wonder if the uneven patina might tone if left out for a while. There's still a mineral deposit on the obverse left field that I'm afraid to touch. On the other hand, I comfort myself by thinking that someone at some point culled it because of its condition, and that it'd never have seen the light of day otherwise... Obverse: DN ARCADIVS PF AVG, diademed, draped and cuirassed bust right Reverse: SALVS REIPVBLICAE, Victory advancing left, trophy on carrying trophy and dragging captive, cross in left field, AQ in exergue (?) Minted at Aquiliea, 388-393 AD, 11mm, 0.82g
There's space enough for another letter after the Q (probably P or S) and corrosion enough to have had it obscured. So the safe bet would be 58c
That's why I'm asking for opinions. I wish I could photograph it better. There is definitely space, but I don't really see any trace of lettering there. I can't find another AQ mintmark to compare it to, to see what they look like. I guess it comes down to whether one sees a cross or Chi Rho as well.
I believe you are correct that these are kinda rare; however, if you have one and I do as well, just how rare could they be? Mine is from Alexandria ARCADIUS AE4 OBVERSE: D N ARCADIVS P F AVG, diademed, draped bust right REVERSE: SALVS REIPVBLICAE, Victory advancing left, trophy over shoulder in right, dragging captive with left, chi-rho left field, ALE Gamma in ex Struck at Alexandria, 392 AD 1.1g, 13mm RIC IX 20c
I have RIC IX right now in front of me and Dane's spreadsheet is wrong, RIC 58 does not have a chi-rho in left field but rather a tau-rho (a monogrammed cross/staurogram), which is also visible on your example.
Guess it isn't so unusual as I was led to believe, then. Thanks for helping, anyway! Still pretty cool to find something under such a hopeless looking coin.
RIC also notes the AQ and cross in left field, but I don't think anyone else has seen that coin since and could confirm that it exists. It might exist, but isn't it more likely that a regular RIC 58c with certain defects or corrosion spots might have been mistaken for an irregular variation even then?
COOOL Glue-Coin @SeptimusT ! Nice work, and Arcadius is always a tough capture. I have a few Arcadii: old collector's mark on reverse... lucky 13? RI Arcadius AR Siliqua 383-408 CE Roma Seated l holding globe with Victory; VIRTVS ROMANORVM RIC 106b RI Arcadius AE2 383-408 CE Emp stdg Standard and Globe RI Honorius 393-343 AE3 15mm Arcadius and Honorius Stdg (WHICH one is Honorius??? They just look so alike...)
I have a nice little Arcadius SR AE4. Arcadius, AE4, 388-392 AD O: D N ARCADIVS P F AVG R: SALVS REIPVBLICAE, Victory advancing left, dragging captive, Tau-Rho in left field. CONS? in ex. Constantinople mint. RIC IX Constantinople 86. 11 mm, 1.5 g
I also have this other little Arcadius from Antioch with a real desert patina (I know because I partially cleaned it): It’s pretty cool how much detail can fit on something this tiny, and makes you appreciate whoever carved the die. At any rate, regarding the subject of this thread, I’m thinking of applying some Ren Wax to bring out the detail, since it shows up better wet. I doubt that patina will darken any if left out, and I don’t want to mess with chemicals to artificially darken it. At least there’s no bare metal, just uneven patina.
