I had started a recent debate about whether decrepit rarities are better or beautiful common/affordable coins. I was all ready to post about my newest coin, a Constantine IV from Rome which isn't in bad shape, but was ugly one day one, but Marc Breitsprecher's lightning fast shipping fooled me again! It's my Marc B order which arrived first. A note about decrepit coins. Like with all my hobbies, I have zilch desire in resale; they're solely for my own enjoyment, so who cares if a rarity or expensive coin is decrepit? One can always pick up a better example and have two! While a fairly worn coin, I'd grade it about aF/VG, the picture makes it look super porous, which it isn't in person. One doesn't notice any porosity in person; it's a cleaned, worn coin. It looks better in person. I consider myself to have excellent taste in the types of coins I collect, but on a regular person's budget (basically up to $1,000 in optimal circumstances), I don't really have a commensurate budget. So if this type of example pops up for a want, I'm on it! I like my coins large and in charge, but I deeply enjoy Denarii of Sulla to the end. Title: Octavian, as Sole Imperator (31-27 BC). AR Denarius / Actian Arch Attribution: RIC I 267 Uncertain Italian mint Date: 30-29 BC Obverse: Anipigraphic, bare head of Octavian right Reverse: Quadriga, facing, set atop triumphal arch (the Actian Arch) with architrave inscribed with IMP CAESAR Size: 18.09mm Weight: 2.63 grams Description: (my grade: aF/VG). I'm sure fellow CT members have much nicer examples. Post away! I bought a couple of throw-ins. I don't really like coins of the late empire, but I always wanted a Valentinian AE1. You probably guessed why; they're fairly large coins. I prefer the mints of the Western empire, but beggars can't be choosers. That brings up a point; what's the proper search terms to use if I want to search out AE1? There's so many different terms for them, AE1, AE 1, Maiorina, etc. Title: Valentinian I (AD 364-375) Æ Follis / Emperor Attribution: RIC IX 2 Heraclea Date: AD 364-367 Obverse: DN VALENTINI-ANVS P F AVG, pearl-diademed, draped and cuirassed bust right Reverse: RESTITVTOR REIBVBLICAE, emperor standing right holding labarum and Victory; SMHA in exergue Size: 27.77mm Weight: 7.95 grams Description: good Fine+ The third; a placeholder. I needed a coin of Tiberius Apsimar, and I didn't think it would last long when it popped up, so I hopped on it! It's a hard coin to photograph, but in hand it looks less atrocious. It's kind of a dull, brown coin. The original collector probably wasn't far off when he said Fine. There's actually more detail in person, believe it or not. Anyway, it was a placeholder; a coin to tick the box of Tiberius Apsimar. Attribution: Sear Byzantine 1395 Syracuse mint Date: AD 698-705 Obverse: Tiberius standing facing, holding globus cruciger and long cross Reverse: Large M, palm branch to either side, SCL below Size: 21.75mm Weight: 3.73 grams Rarity: 6 my grade: VG, but looks less awful in person. Mom's grade (who hasn't seen this coin): slag heap. (she calls all Byzantine coins that). Did Byzantine rulers of this time have the Christopher Columbus/Renaissance era-man hairdo?
Typo, "...bad shape, but was ugly one day one, but.." is meant to be ..ugly from day one.." Drat, my hands are too wet to open the other package. I'll have to wait until tonight. We do not want a repeat of the Great Bronze Disease Debacle of 1999.
