Ancient Roman (various denominations, dates, etc.)

Hello guys,

Although my username implies that I only collect US coinage, I’m trying to expand my knowledge to other fields of numismatics.

I would greatly appreciate ot if anyone can give me an ID for each of the following coins and an approxomite value. I tried searching online but am having difficulty finding these coins.

Thanks in advance!

Coin A:
Coin B:
Coin C:
Coin D:
Coin E:

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

I will tag @lordmarcovan and ask him to move this into the ancients forum. You will get great info and advise there.

 

Here are the last two (wouldn’t fit in my first post):

Coin F:
Coin G:

 

Being a cursory collector of ancients, I want to see the advice you get.

 

..don't ask for much do ya....

 

Those are amazing coins... what an awesome find!

 

A. Roman Republic Didrachm
B. Julius Caesar Denarius (plated, smoothed)
C. Trajan Denarius, Aequitas
D. Vespasian Sestertius, Judaea Capta.
E. Trajan Sestertius, Fortuna (heavily tooled and smoothed)
F. Antoninus Pius Sestertius, Salus (repatinated)
G. Valens Solidus.

This should get you started, though many here may give you full descriptions and references. This seems to be a small collection of popular types, but mostly heavily flawed. Prices, well, all over the board on these due to problems.

 

I noticed the tooling on the Trajan as well. The Caesar denarius also gave me pause. That one if unaltered would command a high price. Hint: I don't have one.

 

How are you sure these are problem coins? What's the 'giveaway' in this case? I appreciate the IDs.

 

OK. Sure. I have some time right now so I will help out for you and anyone else who probably doesnt know what to look for with ancients (and keep in mind that if you love them now, you will love them later, even if I point some things out).

A. This coin is a very good grade, and is very popular. Despite any problems it has maybe the highest value of the lot. You can see of course the flan crack, and it has some obvious corrosion. Its possibly smoothed, but that might be the photo.

B. This is a plated coin, meaning it is an ancient forgery, a copper core with a silver coating. Aside from that it has some corrosion, some core showing through in spots and the obverse appears to be smoothed.

C. Nothing wrong with this coin (to me) other than wear. Honestly, I like the toning and the residual adhesions which make it attractive (to me anyway).

D. Other than wear and corrosion, its not too bad, but the photo makes it look as if it is tooled.

E. This coin is heavily tooled and smoothed, and not done very well. Most collectors of ancients either will not buy these or only pay a token amount as a space filler.

F. Its hard to say with this one. It might be a fake, or just corroded and re-patinated. It exhibits an awful lot of what are called casting pimples, so it may be a repro or just the photo.

G. Well, its hard to say on this one because I dont like to condemn entirely on a photo, but it may be a cast. It appears to have clear casting seams on both obverse and reverse edges.

Just my opinion, but I've been an ancients dealer for 30 years.

 

Thanks for sharing. Your post was very informative.

Just one last question -

What do you mean by "tooled" and how can you tell if a coin is "tooled"?

 

Its when someone in modern times basically takes a 'tool' and re-engraves the coin to create detail on a worn coin where it was not before. Think of a 'Hobo Nickel'. Its making something where there wasnt anything before. Thus, it may be an ancient coin, but it isnt original. It's something new. As I mentioned, some people might buy these as a 'place holder' or if they just cant afford the real thing, but for me and others it would have a value of maybe 10% or even less depending on who much it has been altered.

 

And smoothing is just tooling on the background surface?

 

I don't know why I feel passion for all these coins. I close my eyes to all their problems whatever they might be.

 

How can you tell the A. Pi is repatinated, @Ken Dorney? Is it the dustiness/fuzziness around Salus and a bit on the obverse?

This coin looks OK to me. I suspect the "pimples" are just corrosion.

 

@Ken Dorney Thanks for detail info. very interesting write up and helps in learning coins and tooling a lot. What do you think of this vespasian coin? Is patina looks natural? Do you think it is authentic or tooled?

 

I’m 99% sure that the “pimples” that Ken pointed out are corrosion.

I have enough general knowledge to know when a coin is cast and after examining the A. Pius Sesterius, I’ve determined it isn’t a cast reproduction.

I’m also fairly certain the patina is legit. It looks much better in hand. The original photos aren’t that great. I’ll post more when I get home.

 

Tooling is different than smoothing. Smoothing generally refers to smoothing corrosion in the fields, and that Trajan has a lot of smoothing on the reverse. It also has tooling, most noticeably on the reverse head of the seated figure, it's cartoonish and very noticeably not the correct style. If someone tooled that area they likely enhanced other areas as well...

The patina on the AP is almost certainly not original, you can see on the reverse it has a lot of odd color combinations going on, and the Vespasian is likely not original although well done. Just from experience I would say over 50% of decent ancient bronze has been repatinaed at some point, it's just a part of the cleaning process. Generally price is dependent on how nicely it was done. I would consider the re-patina on the Vespasian to be well done and would not ding the coin for it, whereas I would not purchase the AP for any price.

A couple years ago there was an exhibit on ancient Greek bronze statues that came through the National Art Gallery in DC. It was a fascinating exhibit on many levels, but part of my interest was being able to see a lot of confirmed ancient bronze patina. It's very distinct and hard to reproduce chemically.

 

@beef1020 Thanks for details. So does vespasian looks fake? is it out of style?