Hello, I have this really nice Probus Antoninian but I can't find it in RIC or elsewhere. Anybody there who knows about it??? Obv: PROBVS P F AVG. Radiate and cuirassed bust right. Rev: ADVENTVS AVG / R wreath Δ . Probus riding horse left, raising hand, holding sceptre and treading upon bound captive to left. Weight: 4 gr. Diam.20.79 mm Could it be RIC Vb, p.35, no. 158?
I'm not sure about attribution of your coin, but here is a similar one of mine with a different mint mark. PROBUS Antoninianus OBVERSE: IMP PROBVS P F AVG, radiate cuirassed bust right REVERSE: ADVENTVS AVG, Probus on horseback left, holding sceptre & right hand held high in return salute; at left, under hoof, a captive looks on, R-thunderbolt-Z in ex. Struck at Rome, 279 AD 3.3g, 21mm RIC 155
While I have not checked carefully the die of your coin - there is something about the style that looks a bit odd to me. I suggest you take a close look at this report: https://www.forumancientcoins.com/fakes/displayimage.php?pos=-7462
I don't understand this..... Rome mint regularly used Greek letters as officina marks across multiple different issues....
@gsimonel You are actually on the right track, even if inadvertently. If you look at the exergue, a couple of things stand out. The delta for example is a near perfect triangle. Most deltas I have seen look like the example in @maridvnvm’s post above, with the corners blunted, with a small hash across etc. Also, the exegural line it self along with the alignment of the letters and wreath in the exergue are very straight which is unusual. Finally, the wreath in the center is so well executed that it begs for attention. Most I have are like tiny knots with nowhere near that level of detail. And I’ve been burned by fakes before too because I realized or found out a little too late something that others picked up on right away. It happens.
My Probus Horse is cut in half... RI Probus 276-282 CE Ant 21mm Rome mint captive on ground Riding Horse in ex R-Thunderbolt-Z RIC 155
Some fakes are correct style since they were made from genuine originals. Some use dies cut in modern times but struck in a way that looks authentic. Some show evidence of being cast or pressed rather than struck in the 'ancient' manner. Some would fool no one while others start arguments among experts. My first clue that the Probus below was fake shows in my photo but did not show in the seller's smaller one. You can not just say a coin is good because the style is right or because it is obviously struck or because it 'feels' or 'smells' right. Unfortunately you can't say a coin is bad with perfect certainty in some cases but finding identical twins down to little bumps and scratches with exact centering and wear patterns is always a bad sign. My money was refunded on the coin below. I'm telling you this coin is a modern fake. Don't say you believe me unless you also say why you do and what I should have seen before I bought the coin. The answer is below printed white on white. If you drag/select the line below it will be revealed. The proof was found in one of the online fake databases that had a couple others exactly like this one down to the last dimple.
I see what you mean @dougsmit. I see a few casting bubbles behind Probus near the ties of his crown and a couple of faint ones near the very center of the reverse above the handshake. The question is whether I would have caught it before I bought it.
I'm not sure I can distinguish casting bubbles from crud that was buried with the coin - so I might have ignored the crustiness behind Probus' head. The missing AVG could be some sort of clogged die or flan crack? I dislike the patina which looks a bit painted on to me and unusually olive/yellow so I might guessed - "recently improved" before "cast fake". Interesting that this Gorny & Mosch coin also has the dots behind head:
