Most people prefer to purchase undamaged coins, whether that damaged happened in antiquity or more recently. It's just generally a bad look. But sometimes damage tells a story, and is actually pretty interesting. In my case, we have a Constantine I Silvered Follis with an ancient crack in the planchet that is actually quite revealing. As a silver washed coin, this was nowhere near pure silver; in fact it was mostly not silver. Think of those .100 Mexican pesos from the mid-60s (they were basically copper coins with a silver wash - remind you of anything from the ancient world?) This coin looks pretty decent for a washed coin. The silver wash is very intact and it looks pretty good. However, there is a small bit of corrosion peeking out from the crack, which betrays the coin as having a significant amount of non-silver metal, probably copper. Constantine I Silvered Follis. 325-326 AD (RIC 34) OBV: CONSTANTINVS AVG. Laureate head right. REV: PROVIDENTIAE AVGG. Campgate with two turrets. SMKB mintmark. Cost: $15.22 Post your damaged coins
That's interesting, @hotwheelsearl . I like when coins shed light on the technical aspects of their manufacture. This post-abdication follis of Maximian Herculius has a bizarre flan flaw. The metal has been torn out on each side of the coin, leaving a pinhole through it that does not appear to be intentional. I suspect there was an issue when casting the flan before striking. Maximian, post-abdication, AD 305-306 Roman billon follis, 8.26 g, 25 mm, 1 h. Antioch, AD 305-306. Obv: D N MAXIMIANO FELICISSIMO SEN AVG, laureate bust, right, wearing consular robes and holding branch and mappa. Rev: PROVIDENTIA DEORVM QVIES AVGG, Providentia standing right, extending right hand to Quies standing left, holding down-facing branch and resting on scepter; I in field between them, ANT: in exergue. Refs: RIC 77b, Cohen 489, RCV 13414.
"Damage" pretty much describes the bulk of my collection, and so I find this to be a very interesting thread. Here is one of my favorites - a sestertius of Julia Mamaea with an enormous, presumably ancient, crack. So impressive, yet I didn't have to pay extra for it! Julia Mamaea Æ Sestertius (Mother of Severus Alex.) (222-235 A.D.) Rome Mint IVLIA MAMAEA AVGVSTA diademed & draped bust right / VESTA S-C, Vesta standing left, holding Palladium and scepter. RIC 708; Cohen 83; BMC 389 (21.04 grams / 31 mm)
My 'finest' damage resulted when someone dug out the countermark on this Stratinicaea of Septimius Severus and Julia Domna / Hekate. Normal removed countermark
Cool coin @hotwheelsearl. The Vitellius below has a big cut on the obverse. Don't know if the cut is ancient though.
The damage on this As of Claudius was interesting to me. The best I can ascertain is that it was possibly made because someone wore the coin on a necklace although the notches do not seem in any way new.
When it comes to damage, I have so much to share! So when does wear become so awful that it becomes damage? I think this sestertius of Trajan may answer the question. A sestertius for $8.99 but nobody would bid on it! I don't know why. It has one thing going for it: it is very, very smooth. Trajan Æ Sestertius (103-111 A.D.) Rome Mint [IMP CAES NERVAE T]RAIANO AVG GER D[AC PM TR P COS V PP], laureate bust right, slight drapery on far shoulder / [SPQR OPTIMO PRINCIPI], SC in ex., Victory standing left, erecting trophy against which two shields lean, and holding palm RIC 523; BMC 817. (22.08 grams / 31 mm) No, it's not better in hand...
Everybody's got some very "nice" coins here! Thanks so much for sharing. I'm glad that I'm not the only one who will accept damaged coins
I've shown it before, but I still love this Roman Republican denarius which was surely once a necklace or some other sort of attachment. It looks like the hole was made to showcase the bust of Mars, maybe as an amulet; part of the bronze attachment that would've kept that side facing is still stuck on the coin. It was a heck of a bargain, but I'd still choose it over a 'perfect' specimen any day. Q. Minucius Thermus Obverse: Head of Mars left, wearing crested helmet, ornamented with plume and annulet; remnants of bronze attachment around hole. Rev: Two warriors fighting; the left protects fallen comrade, the other wears a horned helmet; Q • THERM M F in exergue Minted at Rome in 103 BC, Crawford 319/1
Nice one, SeptimusT - I also have a holed Republican denarius, with some "love token" style engraving as well: Roman Republic Denarius L. Antestius Gragulus (136 B.C.) Helmeted head of Roma rt; monogram XVI below chin, behind, GRAG / Jupiter in quadriga left w. thunderbolt; below, L·ANTES; ROMA in exergue. Antestia 9; BMC 4029; Syd. 451; Craw. 238/1 On this coin, a new mark of denomination is used for the first time. Previous denarii had an X. The star shape on this and subsequent coins probably represents the numeral XVI as a monogram. Note: Holed with engraved CS on obverse right field; c. 18th-19th C. "love token."
This coin has an unusual scalloped rim: Bukhara city of Paykend/Paikend, circa 720-750s AD?, AE, 18mm, 1.31 g Obv: crowned facing head (Byzantine imitation?) Rev: "dancing man" tamgha. cf. Naymark, “Copper Coins of the Last Bukharkhudas”, ONS Journal 158, Winter 1998/9 cf. Central Asia » Soghd » Bukhara 'Dancing man' tamgha This was minted in the part of the world that is now Uzbekistan. The edge scalloped and the coin holed, apparently in antiquity. I suspect to make the coin a tool, for example for pastry-decorating. Someone on Zeno suggested this was a tool to remove fleas from hair. There are Roman coins with similar edge markings, for example the coins in https://www.cngcoins.com/Coin.aspx?CoinID=254865
