Beggars can't be choosers when it comes to those rare coin types you may not see again. That certainly is the case with my latest addition - a bit more wear than I'd like, but enough details remain to make it fairly pleasant in hand. And of course it didn't break the bank! Vespasian Æ As, 10.68g Rome mint, 71 AD Obv: IMP CAES VESPASIAN AVG COS III; Head of Vespasian, laureate, r. Rev: S C in field; Victory adv. l., with trophy RIC 324 (R2). BMC -. BNC -. Acquired from Praefectus Coins, September 2020. A rare As struck during Vespasian's great deluge of bronze in 71. The reverse, sans legend, features Victory advancing left carrying a trophy over her right shoulder. This unique type would not be repeated again and judging by the rarity it was sparingly struck. Missing from both the the BM and Paris collections. I couldn't pass this up considering I have not seen another in trade and may not for a long time. Plus, I like the portrait. The placement of S C so low in the reverse field when there was plenty of room to play with is intriguing. Post your worn rarities!
Magnificent example, @David Atherton. If you've got something on the BM and the Louvre, that just Gets to be Good Enough. This is one I posted a while ago, but it's too much along the same lines as yours not to post again. And if that wasn't being lazy enough, I'm copying and pasting the description from that post ('No Century for Old Men'): Charles III le Simple, King of Francia 898-923, or Hugues le Grand /Hugh Magnus, Dux Francorum 936-956. (Father of Hugues Capet.) AR denier, Senlis. Rev. (In two lines, crosslets above and below): SILVA NECTIS (the 'N' ligated with the 'E,' and the final 'S' retrograde); medieval Latin for 'Senlis.' Obv. 'KAROLVS' monogram --or 'HVIIO DVX' around a small cross (?). +GRATIA D-I REX. Depeyrot 915, Nouchy 268 (if Carolingian); Duplessy (Feodales) 6, Legros 44 (if Robertian.) I only know of the Legros citation from this listing by Leu Numismatik: https://www.acsearch.info/search.html?id=2313689 ...Sure, I want it to be Hugues le Grand, but without a better eye, it's a tough call. On the other hand, even in its present state, there are enough nuances to suggest Hugues over Charles le Simple. On the reverse, the ligated 'NE' at the beginning of the second line, rather than an 'IE,' distinguishes it (like the example from Leu Numismatik) from any Carolingian issues I've seen. Similarly, enough of the obverse, 'GRATIA D-I REX' legend is discernible to establish that it's not retrograde, as much of it is on the Carolingian ones I can find in print. Meanwhile, the only examples of Senlis in Dumas (Fecamp) have a completely different legend, presumably from later in the century than either Charles or Hugues (6598-9).
@Bing, Yesssss! Having seen this once, in some now-distant context, it's a joy to see it again. Regarding the legends, it's got The Works.
Just enough lettering to positively ID: Drusus Son of Tiberius Bronze As Rome mint, A.D. 21-22 Obv: DRVSVS CAESAR TI AVG F DIVI AVG N Rev: PONTIF TRIBVN POTEST ITER, encircling SC RIC (Tiberius) 45 28mm, 9.4g.
I suppose this is a good time to bring out a little group collage of my Antonian fleet coins. "These unusual coins are examples of Mark Antony's "fleet coinage," a series of bronzes in multiple, clearly marked denominations issued shortly after Antony's marriage alliance with Octavian, the nephew of Julius Caesar. The exact dates, the nature and purpose of the series have been the subject of much debate. David Sear places the commencement of the series in the summer of 38 BC at a still unidentified Eastern mint. The coins were struck in the names of Antony and three of his admirals - L. Sempronius Atratinus, M. Oppius Capito, and L. Calpurnius Bibulus, and falls into two distinct series, "heavy" and "light." Most of the coins depict overlapping, confronting or Janiform portraits of Antony and Octavia, his wife and Octavian's sister. A few also show Octavian, in a clearly subsidiary position. Reverses almost all feature nautical themes--galleys under full sail, or figures in chariots drawn by hippocamps. The admiral's names, themes, and the combination of Greek and Latin letters indicate the coins may have been used to pay sailors in Antony's fleet, and were intended for circulation in his Eastern realm. An intriguing feature of the series is the range of denominations, all Roman, all clearly marked in Greek letters. They range from a large bronze sestertius, previously a small silver coin, marked HS in Latin and the Greek letter-numeral D, or four, indicating a value of four asses. Next comes an unusual denomination, the tressis, or three asses, marked G; then the dupondius, two asses, marked B; and the as, marked A. The series is completed by two fractions, a semis and quadrans, marked S and with three dots (three unciae) respectively. The coins are found in two series, a heavy and a light and it has been suggested that some were struck at Tarentum where part of Antony’s fleet was based during the joint action against Sextus Pompey in 37-36 BC. Although this experimental coinage was short-lived and very rare today, it is interesting to note that the great currency reform started by Octavian, after he had taken the name Augustus and become the first Emperor of Rome, resulted in a bronze coinage using exactly the same denominations as Anthony's fleet issues."
All three of these coins represent the fourth known examples of their types. The orichalcum coins are dupondii, not sestertii. Beggars can't be choosers:
I regret the weak date (COS III), but find the condition of David's rarity quite acceptable overall. RIC pl. 29, 324 illustrates only the rev. of the Vienna specimen of this coin; from a different die than David's example. Oxford also has a specimen, according to RIC; perhaps acquired from me c. 1990 along with the rest of the pre-193 section of my first collection. I don't recall for sure whether or not I had this type, and my inventory of the coins sold is packed away in a box so not easily consultable.
I have this Marcus Aurelius sestertius that seems to be quite rare with the Laureate, draped head...Thanks to @Roman Collector for his detective work. Marcus Aurelius. AD 161-180. Æ Sestertius. Rome mint. Struck AD 171...(32mm, 24.68 g) Obv. Laureate, draped head right, IMP M ANTONINVS AVG TRP XXV Rev. Fides standing left, holding Victory and standard, FIDES EXERCITVVM COS III SC RIC III 997......Double die match to the only example in the British Museum Collection..
India - Shakya Janapada AR 5-Shana 6th-5th Century BCE 25mm x 21mm, 7.05g Obv: Central Pentagonal punch plus several banker's marks Rev: Blank Ref: Hirano Type I.8.29 19 known. Coinage from the Ghaghara Gandak River region Minted in the Shakya Janaprada during Siddhārtha Gautama's lifetime (Later became the Buddha) while he was prince, and under the authority of his father as King
I find it very satisfying to snag a worn rarity at a good price. Congrats! Here's my Galla Placidia to fit the category:
A fantastic coin David. Congrats! I think this one covers both worn and rare. A left facing denarius for Domitian. RIC 75.
I like this thread but believe the term 'worn' is being used in a different way than I would. Of the coins shown here, Bing's legionary denarius is worn with reasonable other faults that are expected on a VG coin. Spaniard's Aurelius is a nice coin, perhaps aVF?, and would be welcome in my collection were it common as dirt. Most of the rest have a problem (or several) that bother me a lot more than the wear shown. Let there be no mistake, I would love to have any of those Antony fleet bronzes but four of the five show separation of the ear from the head. The fifth, lower right, lacks ear but has a reverse that is clear under but has pitting and uneven color which are worse than the obverse weakness (wear, strike, or die wear???). I can only play here with several coins if we were expected to show low grade rarities but more of my coins are like David's Vespasian with problems of strike and surface texture. First, I do not know how many of these sestertii exist but Banti (I Grandi Bronzi Imperiali, IV-1 page 144 #12 listed it only from old catalog listings illustrated by a line drawing from Vaillant whose book was a century before photography was invented. The coin shows a funeral pyre with four levels as opposed to the 'common' version (Banti lists 2 and has a photo) which has five levels. In addition to mine, I saw a die duplicate offered a few years ago a bit nicer but my coin is rare with lousy surfaces and tooling to remove bronze disease. Wear, sure, but that is the least of the problems. I wish now I had bought the second one. It was better since it lacked the Bronze Disease excavation. My second example, among its myriad faults, certainly is worn but, fortunately, retains MP at reverse right showing that the die read INVICTO IMP rather than INVICTO IMP TROPAEA. The reverse design shows the trophy of arms quite common from the mint known as 'Emesa' but this one shows obvious Alexandria mint style. I repeatedly ask to be shown others but no one has taken pity on me and shown one. I bought this in 1994 from a dealer who did not know one mint from another (very common back then!). I paid $10 which was about ten times the value of the 'Emesa' coin in this condition. The seller was the kind of dealer that sold most things well over their value. By the time of his death in 1997, Roger Bickford-Smith was unaware of another. I considered giving it to him but am thankful today that I did not considering his early death. I still am unaware of another. I hope that, before my passing, others of these turn up so anyone who cares can have one (preferably nicer). Of the coins I have that have claim to rarity, these are the worst.
This is an 11th century (formerly silver-plated) dirham issued by a minor prince of a small town on the south side of Lake Issyk-Kul (now Kyrgyzstan). The obverse is much worn, though the reverse is better. However, it is (as far as I know) the only known example of this type. The present coin was treated in an article by Michael Fedorov, 'Qarākhānid Coins as a Source for the History of Barskhān', in The Numismatic Chronicle Vol. 169 (2009), pp. 269-286, as nr. 5 on page 278-280. I feel honored that it came to my collection. Only a very insignificant thing, but still, the only one known, and extensively described in that article, as well as discussed on Zeno (it is Zeno #18333). Silver-washed AE dirham Qarakhanids. Imad al-Din Inal Tegin as sole ruler in Upper Barskhan (on the south side of Lake Issyk Kul), 458 AH (=1066 AD). 21.5 mm, 5.20 gr.
@David Atherton - your coin certainly fits my definition of "worn + wonderful" and "rare" a nice bonus. Here's a coin that I put in this category:11.88g of "worn + wonderful", an Antiochus III large Seleucid bronze. On "rare", I am still puzzling over this coin which seems to be unlisted at the level of its reverse monogram which belongs to a longtime Antioch magistrate who was transferred to Asia Minor c. 203 BC [S.C. Part 1 Vol 1] - this also leads to some ambiguity in mint: Antioch? Uncertain Mint 55? possibly Sardes? Seleukid Kingdom, Antiochos III "The Great", 223-187 BC, AE, Antioch? Mint, Denomination A (quadruple) Size: 26.5mm, 11.90g Obv: Laureate head of Apollo right Rev: BAΣIΛEΩ[Σ] ANTIOXOY, Tripod; monogram above M to left Ref:Seleucid Coins (part 1) 971 (no monogram? or M?)
