My first coin of 2022 is a coin I purchased at auction. The coin was mis-identified as Galerius with all the attribution attached including a RIC number: "ROMAN EMPIRE. Galerius. AD. 305-313. Æ Antoninianus (6.74 gm; 25 mm). Cyzicus, 305-306. Laureate head to right / Genius standing left, modius on head, naked but for chlamys over left shoulder, holding patera from which liquid flows, and cornucopiae; KA in exergue. RIC 21b. Nice brown reddish patina. Well struck. Choice EF." I had my doubts about it's identification the moment I laid eyes on it and have since reattributed it to Maximinus II Daia. It's a nice, well detailed coin probably not worth what I paid when adding auction and shipping fees), but I'm happy with it. MAXIMINUS II DAIA AE Follis OBVERSE: GAL VAL MAXIMINVS NOB CAES, laureate head right REVERSE: GENIO CAESARIS Genius standing left, naked except for modius on his head & chlamis over shoulder, holding patera from which liquor flows & cornucopiae, MKΓ in ex Struck at Cyzicus 305-308AD 6.74g, 25mm Cyzicus RIC VI 35 Sometimes, one has to wonder about dealers to lazy to properly identify their inventory!
Aww, man. Sorry to hear. As long as you still are happy with it then that's all that matters. I think it's fantastic. Though, it is a beauty, it's not what they said it was nor what you ordered. If you're having buyers remorse I say reach out to the dealer and get a refund.
Definitely not the coin as identified. Still a nice looking Maximinus II. Solid 'stache. I have 2 GENIO CAESARIS of Maximinus II. Neither have quite as nice of a portrait as yours.
Nice coin, @Bing. Note that the obverse legend actually says MAXIMINVS, not MAXIMIANVS, an important "tell" along with the NOB CAES. Here's my Maximinus II Daia: Maximinus II (Daia) Caesar (nephew of Galerius) , AE Follis, 308-309 AD, Antioch Mint (2nd Officina).. Obv. Laureate head right, GAL VAL MAXIMINVS NOB CAES/ Rev. Genius standing left with chlamys over left shoulder and modius on head, holding cornucopiae in left arm and holding patera, from which libations flow, in extended right hand; crescent in upper left field and S [= 2nd Officina] in right field; GENIO CA-ESARIS*; in exergue, mintmark ANT [=Antioch]. RIC VI 103 (p. 631), Sear RCV IV 14725, Cohen 40-41. 25 mm., 6.90 g. And my Galerius as a contrast, which does say MAXIMIANVS: Galerius, AE Follis, 305-306 AD, Cyzicus Mint (4th Officina). Obv. Laureate head right, IMP C GAL VAL MAXIMIANVS P F AVG/ Rev. Genius, wearing modius on head, nude, chlamys draped over left shoulder, standing left, holding cornucopiae in left hand and pouring libation from patera in right hand, GENIO POPV-LI ROMANI; mintmark K Δ [K = Cyzicus, Delta = 4th Officina] in exergue. RIC VI Cyzicus 21b & 25a (pp. 582, 584), Sear RCV IV 14546, Cohen 81. 27.8 mm., 9.65 g. 12 h. Ex. Giovanni Dattari Collection (before 1923); Ex. Jesus Vico 2018.
I guess I wasn't clear in my ramblings. I knew before I ever bid that it was Maximinus II. And I am happy with it. The portrait is nice, but it was the detail of the reverse that made me bid on it.
That’s a nice coin! Cyzicus has a specific way of detailing the laurel that is unique during this time period. I can pick Cyzicus coins out of a line up with just this detail. Anyway, I like his well maintained “beard” and mustache too!
Here's a Galerius from 308/9 that shows a similar treatment of the laurel, notice how the end at the top of the head ends in a "C" shape... maybe not the best way to describe it but it is characteristic of Cyzicus at this time.
Maximinus Daia as Caesar (Alexandria): The same as Augustus (Antioch): ... with a nice desert patina worthy of A.'s or Z.'s workshops, but it doesn't come from them.
I'm glad you're happy with the coin - this is what matters in the end. I am quite annoyed when I see incorrect attributions from auction houses (like in your case, down to RIC number). I even had situation where I bought 2 coins from an auction, both totally incorrectly described - one "identified" as Geta instead of Caracalla and the 2nd a Caracalla but with incorrect description of the reverse, pointing to another coin. Since then I always double check and it's not a difficult job especially for Roman Imperials. Or at least most of them.
"Sometimes, one has to wonder about dealers to lazy to properly identify their inventory!" @Bing, this is so typical of sellers of medieval coins, from ebay to Biddr et al., that hearing about the same thing happening with ancients makes me sit up. Has to make me wonder what else people are doing (emphasis on 'doing') while they're ostensibly attributing them. Given which, I have to admire your philosophical attitude --especially since you knew what you were looking at in the first place.
James, The coin you bought is exceptional for the type without regard to the dealer's faux pas, especially the finely engraved reverse . It's an easy mistake to make, but the portrait style, reverse inscription, & light weight are giveaways . The coin pictured below had me fooled at first glance too , never the less, I was happy with the coin .
Very nice coin/ Bing Sometimes, it works to our advantage. Warin Global Auctions had a NGC MS-67 Hamburg 1877-J AV 5 Marks/ misidentified as a 10 Mark/ the holder also was wrong. The 5 Mark is way rarer/ so I stole it for good price.
Good one Bing.I had the same thing happen to me - a Maximinus sold as Galerius. Here are a couple: Genio Imperatoris (Cyzicus) And Genio Augusti (Alexandria)
@Bing.......That's a nice looking coin!..As you said it has lovely reverse detail but I also like the portrait syle....Here's different style from Alexandria..
@panzerman, your main point is spot on. There was a 'golden age' on French ebay, a decade and change ago, when sellers would list stuff with no attempt at attribution, averaging 25E per. That was where the spine, so to speak, of my French feudal collection came from. ...Still happens, just a whole lot less often than in the good old days.
