So I need a bit of help deciding on which Zeus-Ammon to add to my collection. While I would love to add all 4, its just not possible $$$ wise and I am having a horrible time trying to make my mind up. I might be able to squeeze 2 if I do not go for the first one. I have a preference for shiny silver so the first 2 are terribly appealing, though I love the horn detail in the last 2. Trajan - Ammon $167 Commodus - Ammon $99 Commodus - Ammon $99 Commodus - Ammon $125
I'd go with Commodus #2. I have a regular Zeus Commodus (177 - 192 A.D.) Egypt, Alexandria Billon Tetradrachm O: M A KOM ANTW CEBEVCEB, laureate head right. R: Head of Zeus right, LK Z at sides. L KZ=Year 27=(186/187). 11.25g 23mm Köln 2227; Dattari 3892; Milne 2665 = Emmett 2563.27.
I don't collect Ancients but if I had to choose I'd get the Hadrian because the details look sharper.
Personally I'd go for Commodus 3rd, because I can't resist a well-preserved and nicely-toned ancient bronze. But ultimately you have to decide which will make you most happy.
My advice: when in doubt, follow your heart, not your purse. If the coin is in your collection for, say, 20 years, what's a few dollars more or less...? FWIW: I love the Zeus- Ammon on the Trajan!
This is toned billon and has clear legends. The $99 bright one is second but not as nice even for the price. Last place is the toned $99. Mine was part of a group lot but probably I would not have bought it separately due to the missing legends (LK) reverse left.
Alrighty, so I stated I would update after the buy from legion-coins and overall I'm trying to be as fair as possible. So main things, was the coin Authentic? Yes, nothing about it tells me otherwise. Was it shipped safely and in a timely manner? Yes everything arrived Ahead of time and well packaged and protected. Was it what you were looking for? Yes and No, while it is a Zeus - Ammon, the toning and composition are different. As I stated in the OP I have a attraction to silver which is why I was originally attracted to the coin. In guessing something happened with picture lighting. Not 100% Any issues with the seller? No, he was very accomodating and understanding. Would I buy again? Yes, for me personally, I don't see an issue with him or the merchandise but I may ask for updated pics or recent pics just to avoid any kind of confusion in the future. And thus, here is the coin
Are you saying the coin is actually bronze or is it just more heavily toned than what you expected? I've noticed that when I photograph a coin outdoors it often looks very different from how it appears indoors.
I'm very surprised that the seller did not state what it was made of. I think you would be justified in returning it for a refund.
My preference in coinage is silver but if im going to build a Ammon collection, I realize I will need to add bronze. The seller was understanding and we worked something out. I'm not a expert in photography so I can't not say what happened with the picture.
I really like the 2 bronzes.....I see they are from the Hermanubis Collection...I picked up an Antoninus Pius not long back from the same collection... https://www.acsearch.info/search.ht...usd&company=
I'm not actually surprised... I would've been surprised if it were silver colored. With it being an Alexandrian tetradrachm, it's actually billion, a low percentage of silver with bronze. Progressively the percentage of silver got lower and lower. Also some individual batches can fluctuate in that mixture a little bit (or how "mixed" the metals were within the coin). Up until Antoninus Pius, they had a more silver appearance: By Marcus Aurelius, they seem to lessen in that silver appearance with a lower silver content and more grey appearance (mostly early reign) and some bronze or black toned appearance for some as well (you can see some specks of silver on the surface, not being very homogenous metals): Commodus struck many tetradrachms in large numbers, the sizes shrunk a tad, and the silver content seems to deminish a tad as well. Most will be black toned or dark brown toned, and more rarely mottled grey in appearance. I'm sure you saw that in your research. A good paper to read on the subject is Coinage and the Roman Economy in the Antonine Period: the view from Egypt (link to pdf) by a great line-up of expert authors, Howgego, Butcher, Ponting, and Heuchert. Here is a table illustrating the decline of silver content of the period in comparison to the fineness of the Imperial denarii: And it really is a bummer that the seller's photos were not true-to-life in hand. He must've left them that way or did it intentionally as to show the detail of the coin, as dark toned coins typically are hard to shoot and maintain fine details. Who really knows... I feel for ya, man!
