Romulus Augustus Bronze Coin Die

... why would you find a Libius Severus and just nonchalantly toss it back in a pile instead of keeping it safe???

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

None of this makes any sense.

 

While I find the period very interesting, I'm a large module coin lover and even the tiny AE4's are hideously expensive for the cool emperors.

Gold isn't that expensive for the Eastern emperors. One can find affordable Zenos, etc.

I do have an unusually attractive Theodosius II AE4, purchased from Allen Berman many years ago. I have maybe a half dozen AE4s in total, and my Libius Severus is in execrable condition.

And my uncleaneds; epic fail - I'm not very good at it mine are from the days where the 'best information' was olive oil soakings. What a mess.

 

I’m giving benefit of the doubt, for some reason. There’s really no excuse for bad photos, especially if you’re one who regularly deals with “once in a lifetime” finds of 4-figure coins.

your pictures look like this:

where you attempt to the put the lens as close as possible to the object, which is pointless as it turns into a featureless blur.


I’d much rather you do this:


where you take a picture at arms length

and then this:

where you crop it to fit.


I much prefer a poor resolution image than a featureless mess.

 

you made an account posing as an expert to post in your thread to convince people your bulgarian trachy was a super rare byzantine emperor...

and I saw your thread from four months ago asking whether some obvious cast fakes were genuine lol


Zero ethics and zero ability.

 

How can you tell that the "expert" was really him, with a phony account?

 

Guess but it seems likely..
-expert happens to have his first post detecting OPs ultra rarity
-I would think if it was actually an expert he wouldn't mistake what is obviously some random Bulgarian coin for an ultra rare coin.... Its so far off that I don't see how anyone with any knowledge on coins could come to the same conclusion as the "expert"
- OP seems to have a history of seeing things that aren't there..

 

.

 

And the experts hometown was Hameln, where the rat catcher of the brothers Grimm operated.

 

To be fair, the books referred to appear to be real, and to have been written by a real person: https://www.worldcat.org/search?q=au:Joppich,+Stefan.&qt=hot_author

Whether they are well-regarded, or Herr Joppich is actually regarded as an expert, are different questions, of course. They are certainly discussed as such in this Forvm thread: https://www.forumancientcoins.com/board/index.php?topic=70094.msg438930#msg438930

 

yes, book appears legit,

but I still don't see how someone who wrote a book on these would randomly sign up to a forum to claim that that the two coins below are the same..

 

The first coin is the same coin I posted earlier today. Its 14th century Bulgarian trachy, at least, purported.

 

None of the accusations and negative assumptions about my character or lack of knowledge are true. I started collecting ancients by cleaning uncleaned coins in 2001. I started buying and selling pounds of uncleaned in 2003 or 4, until my dealer ("uncle" Ernie) started undercutting the price points I needed to make a minimum profit. I am no fool. I am no scammer, nor troll. When I say I have something or had owned something in the past, I am nearly 100% positive, but I can be dissuaded if presented with counter evidence that it more closely matches another coin. Whether you believe me or not, I have been identifying very worn and corroded coins correctly for over 20 years, and I know when a coin is too far gone to be identified. I was taught how to do so mainly by the members of the Ancient Peddler's former mailing list and weekly private auctions. With just one notable exception, your responses have hurt me deeply and changed my opinion of you in particular and to a lesser degree, this forum in general.

Regarding the Mankaphas, I posted to Zeno because I had no idea what it was. I only knew it was not a common Byzantine issue as people were saying. The expert seemed sure it was the ultra-rare 1204/5 Mankaphas issue. I did NOT have a fake account at Zeno.ru. AFAIK, the expert was who he claimed to be. I Had NOTHING to do with it. In Arnoldoe's post, the two coins pictured are different. Mine (top images) was "supposed to be" the 1204/5 issue and the other (bottom images) is the much more common 1188/9 issue. However, see next paragraph.

To Quant.Geek, as I stated previously, I can be dissuaded by counter-evidence. I have no reference for Bulgarian Scyphates, so I honestly may have identified it as Bulgarian if I had a reference. I still know very little about medieval Bulgarian coins. I have, however, after a long search, seen images of the 1204 Mankaphas issue and there is a very close match. I didn't know how similar they appear to the Bulgarian issues. It is possible you are correct. I don't know why the expert was so sure, but he was.

Finally, regarding the original subject, a Romulus Augustus bronze. I saw the letters ROMVLVSAV. I know for sure what I saw. To be honest, I didn't believe my eyes and had my wife (who didn't know the significance at all) tell me what she saw. The letters looked like they were covered with a light black crust. I dabbed a bit of oil on the letters, and they almost completely dissolved. i did not expect that at all (obviously). They are slowly coming back to focus and one day I might be able to prove it. I clearly see the VLVS and started this thread because I wondered if anyone else could. I understand the answer is "No", and none of you can see it. I accept that. Since starting this ill-advised and ill-fated thread, I have come to the conclusion, that while it still could be an actual bronze coin of the last emperor, it is more likely to be a copper core of a contemporary forgery of a rather common gold tremissis from the final emperor. It is slightly smaller and lighter than the tremissis, but the design is the same. The mint would be a deciding factor but it was never extremely clear and I currently can't make it out at all.

 

Regarding the expert on Zeno, I didn't know his response to my coin was the first post he made. I just checked and he has made many more posts on zeno.ru since then. No, it's not me.

I found his email address on this page: ZENO.RU - Member Profile. He has been informed of this thread.

 

That thread was on behalf of my sister. She is not a collector at all. She found the coins in a trash can at an elementary school where she works. I told her that they weren't my specialty, but I was pretty sure that they were cast fakes. Since I said that I was only "pretty sure", she wanted a second opinion. Then, tbh, she still didn't want to believe that they were fakes. Even after I sent her the photos of identical known fakes, she didn't want to believe it. No joke.

 

At the risk of sounding presumptuous I think that if David Sear were to have any doubts about this coin he'd reach out to me for an opinion. But I can't see him taking more than a glance at it to come to the conclusion that whatever corroded core this coin once was it had nothing at all to do with the reign of Romulus Augustus.

That you saw, or thought you saw, a legible string reading out part of his name and countermarks with AVG and CAESAR to boot tells me that 5th century coinage is an area you're almost certainly not very familiar with. In the who knows how many LRB I've come across I've yet to see (off the top of my head) a single coin showing what could be interpreted as an official countermark. Grafitti, yes, and restrikes and damage of all kinds, of course.

At least in the traditional usage, a countermark however implies that at some point a distressed mint took an already circulated coin and officially "refurbished" it to reintroduce it into circulation because doing so would be cheaper than making a new coin from scratch. That made sense to do on big Claudian coins during certain periods. These tiny AE4s on the other hand were essentially worthless on the day they were made. Also, if you think about it for a second, you have no choice than to come to the conclusion that the stamping of code by then fully half a millenium out of date is utterly implausiblle given that RA is literally the last gasp of the Roman empire! There were no more augusti or caesars. Hell, there weren't many coins being made at all. What for? The urban economy was gone and Italy had largely reverted to a subsistence agrarian civilization.

If I had to take a guess I'd say this is a Theodosius II on the grounds that if you really did see a bunch of letters and that there was a cross on the reverse that this is the most plausible issue: http://www.tantaluscoins.com/coins/169.php

Rasiel

 

Thanks for weighing in Ras. I don't know if you remember me but I was a newbie on Ancient Peddlers back before you started working on ERIC. I clearly understand what you are trying to say, but your assumptions are wrong.

This is complicated. I have to tell you for certain, it was not Theo II. It said DNROMVLVSAV. and I still clearly see the VLVS. It looks very much like this coin (especially the legend), https://www.wildwinds.com/coins/ric/romulus_augustus/RIC_3411.jpg however, it is a little smaller and a little lighter. I read that there is contemporary documentation regarding dies for bronze coins to be struck in Rome for RA, but that it was late in his reign, and they were probably never used. The book did not say what those dies looked like. At this point, until I know for sure what those dies looked lke, I am leaning toward the idea that I have a copper core of a fouree or counterfeit tremissis. It is currently the most logical attribution.

Regarding countermarks on LRBs. I have only recently started seeing them just every once in awhile. The face of this RA was almost completely wiped out by rectangular strikes, which flattened most of the reverse. They only barely missed the legend, as well as the back and top of the head (in the shape of an upside down L). I read every resource I can lay my hands on, so I KNOW already there is no documentation backing this up, but I'm not going to say I don't know what I am seeing, when I see perfectly rectangular boxes on the face of the coin and tiny letters AVG or CAESAR in the boxes, repeated side by side and end to end. I don't now why they would countermark LRBs, but occassionally they are there. Perhaps in this case it was to obliterate the false tremissis and/or so people could tell there was copper under the gold? I also have a Fausta with a mark on her mouth and another on her neck, perhaps Damnatio Memoria? The countermarks (and whether you believe they are truly countermarks or not) are beside the point, but I'm going to risk ridicule again and show you pics of the Fausta. CAESAR on mouth (because she lied), and AVG on the neck (because she died).

Moe

 

I understand you, but now do that with a 1500 yr old, 9mm, bronze coin that has been beat to crap.

Note - I would have said "nearly pounded flat by countermarks that barely missed the legend and left an upside down L where the back and top of the head is", but apparently nobody would believe that.