These appear to be quite common, but just thought I'd post this picture of a Roman coin with a soldier slaying a fallen enemy
General info These are generally fom the era of Constantine's sons, I think maybe 4th century AD. It seems that there are many subtle variations, and sometimes the victim is a horseman; sometimes he sports recognisable headdress of a certain tribe. Recently I saw a detailed website about the variations. Some are more graphic than others. I am not aware of any where the Barbarian is getting the better of the Roman.
Perhaps a bit more info than you wanted: http://dougsmith.ancients.info/ftr.html Thee are among the most common Roman coins and there are hundreds of variations. There are students working on ID of several barbarian tribes show on the type and how can I omit mention of the very first page I did on ancient coins regarding the question of stirrups on one of these coins: http://dougsmith.ancients.info/notsev.html
And that's it. And that's the website. You've done an amazing job. I eat it up like French Fries. Love the methodical approach, and the illustrations are masterfully done.
Even though these are common, its one of my favorate LRB coins. I'd like to find a realy nice one for my collection someday
Randy: As these go 'really nice' means the earlier ones which are larger and offer more room for detail. Personally I'm fond of the Antioch mint coins which show up in all conditions and several variations. Unfortunately they tend to be missing some legend or having flat areas in the strike (as does my example shown here). I also like Alexandria but it has a very different style that many people might consider less appealing. The majority are Constantius II but it is worth looking at examples of Constans and Constantius Gallus (larger size ones) as well. The rarity of the bunch is the Falling Horseman reverse used by Magnentius. It is in the catalogs but I've not seen one offered.
Yeah I saw this one on your site, this the quality I'm looking for for I have a few large ones, but are pretty worn.(and bad photos )
I'm not the biggest fan of these types, but here's a contemporary counterfeit: Cast Imitation of Constantius II Fallen horseman type 355-361 AD DN CONZTAN-TIVZ PF AVC pearl diademed, draped, cuirassed bust r. FII THMI I-IDATIA, H in l. field soldier spearing fallen horseman Coin is cast in two parts. There's some other ancient coins with violent types. This is probably my most violent, rated R!: Pontos, Amisos AE29, 18.8g Amisos, 85-65 BC Head of Athena Parthenos r., wearing triple crested helmet decorated with griffin AMI-ΣOY Perseus standing facing, harpa in r. hand, Medusa’s head in l. Medusa’s body at his feet, monograms across fields Sear 3637, BMC 32
I can't say I see anything that would make me say that. Do you see wear or breaks I'm missing? I posted that picture to make the point that Alexandria portraits are different from other mints (more different - all mints are a little distinctive).
Let me start by saying I really don't know mich about ancients Although, the reason I suggested LDS was because the lettering around the coin, seem to be rough and they "streak" (for lack of a better term) off the end of the coin.
Let me start by saying I really don't know mich about ancients Although, the reason I suggested LDS was because the lettering around the coin, seem to be rough and they "streak" (for lack of a better term) off the end of the coin.
To follow Doug's statements, here are a Constantius II from Alexandria : And a Constantius Gallus from Siscia : Q
