This first coin is a new acquisition and in buying it I have broken one of my own rules (which now are downgraded to guidelines). I bought this coin from ebay from a dealer with a bit of a repuation. I have seen him referred to here as "Mr. LowRating/HighPrice" so some of you know who I am talking about. Because I don't like his trading practices he has been on my purchase blacklist. I saw this coin and broke my guidelines and made a lowball offer at about 20% of his asking price. I must admit that I was a little suprised that the offer was accepted. Surprisingly for such a highly (self) rated professional numismatist the coin was mis-attributed. Here is the coin in question.... Septimius Severus denarius Obv:– IMP CAE L SEP SEV PERT AVG, laureate head right Rev:– BONETAE (sic) AVG, Moneta standing left, holding scales in right hand, cornucopiae in left Minted in Emesa. A.D. 193 Reference(s) – RIC - (unlisted cf. 359A, which is MONETAE scarce citing RD). RSC -. BMCRE -. This coin has plenty of issues but is still of interest for a variety of reasons. It has been harshly cleaned. There is a find mark (dig) on the reverse from the A of BONETAE through the head of Moneta. So how confident am I with the reverse reading? VERY. The reverse is a die match to an example in my collection linked with the AVG II C sub-series. This die link evidence is useful in starting to build a chronology for this complex set of issues. This is my reason for the new purchase. Which also occurs with the correctly spelled MONETAE The obverse die from the OP is one that I have elsewhere in my collection and leads me to some wild supposition. Could the engraver of the reverse legend have started a BONI EVENTVS as on this coin (or even BONA SPES) legend and got as far as BO and then had to go on a shift change. When he returned they had moved over to making Moneta reverses and simply carried on? Martin
I am guilty of this as well. Sometimes we cannot pick and choose from where a coveted coin is purchased. Think of the coin as being rescued and placed in its proper home rather than dwell upon the seller's less than stellar reputation. Congrats!
I am not convinced this is a simple mis-spelled word. It is true, such a spelling can be easily explained. Simple mistake, maybe the celator was engraving the "M" sideways, who can tell. But look closer and you will see that the figure is clearly wearing a kalathos. That can also be easily explained by an inexperienced celator, but it does make one think, does it not?
