1st of 2021 - Ancient Error - Licinius I

Discussion in 'Ancient Coins' started by Andrew McMenamin, Jan 6, 2021.

  1. furryfrog02

    furryfrog02 Well-Known Member

    Here is a cool Claudius II die clash that was given to FFIVN when we first started collecting ancients.

    Claudius II
    268-270 AD
    Obverse: IMP CLAVDIVS AVG, radiate, draped, cuirassed bust right
    Reverse: AEQVITAS AVG, Aequitas standing left, holding scales and cornucopiae.
    Claudius II, AD 369-370,.jpg
  2. Avatar

    Guest User Guest

    to hide this ad.
  3. Caesar_Augustus

    Caesar_Augustus Well-Known Member

    Quite right. How silly of me. I have corrected the image.
  4. Andrew McMenamin

    Andrew McMenamin Well-Known Member

    To be clear, I'm no student of errors, but that looks to me as if a piece of the die chipped off. Nice coin. Cheers, Andrew
    Caesar_Augustus likes this.
  5. dougsmit

    dougsmit Member Supporter

    We should pay attention to see which mint operations made the most mistakes. Certainly Claudius II has a lot of die clashes

    but I think there are more in the Severan period. Of course I have more Severans so it is no surprise I might have these two die matched ones.
    rl5660bb1999.jpg rl5670bb2030.jpg

    The Rome mint of Constantine had their share of double strikes. Some of you might recall my double strike with (doubled) reverse die clash.

    What is your favorite type of error?
  6. furryfrog02

    furryfrog02 Well-Known Member

  7. Andrew McMenamin

    Andrew McMenamin Well-Known Member

    As an edit, now I see the obvious in the first coin. Thanks.
    Last edited: Jan 7, 2021
  8. Caesar_Augustus

    Caesar_Augustus Well-Known Member

    Double strikes :)
  9. Valentinian

    Valentinian Supporter! Supporter

    Doug is right, as usual. Error coins can be of interest in US coins where almost all are struck correctly and double strikes are very unusual. But, in ancient coins "errors" of that magnitude (on the OP coin) are all too common and collectors generally avoid them as serious detractions. It begins to be interesting when they look like this or worse:

    ClaudiusIIstrikeO.jpeg ClaudiusIIstrikeR.jpeg

    Claudius II, 268-270.
    Even so, this piece does not have the value of a well-struck regular coin of Claudius II. Double stuck coins are curiosities, but ancient-coin collectors have lots to be curious about besides "errors".
  10. Andrew McMenamin

    Andrew McMenamin Well-Known Member

    I'm being educated, and believe me I appreciate it. I had a stroke several months ago, and I'm (re)learning a lot. I just returned to Coin Talk yesterday, so I'm relearning that there are a lot of exceptionally knowledgeable resources on Coin Talk. I only have one other ancient error. I "try" to specialize in Constantine I, and augment that collection with those people linked with his history. I thought this coin might be a nice educational tangent in an exhibit. Maybe I'm off in left field but that's how i'm (re)wired, good or bad. I just get great joy in collecting. Thank you for sharing. Regards, Andrew
    DonnaML and furryfrog02 like this.
  11. Victor_Clark

    Victor_Clark standing on the shoulders of giants Dealer

    here's a Constantine I obverse brockage that should have had a VLPP reverse. I kind of wish I had kept
  12. Kentucky

    Kentucky Supporter! Supporter

    WOW, welcome back!
    Andrew McMenamin likes this.
  13. Victor_Clark

    Victor_Clark standing on the shoulders of giants Dealer

    'Crispus_.png This coin has been overstruck and it looks official. If official, it is very rare. The undertype is not really visible, but it might be an IOVI type issued 321- 324, but since London is further than these might have normally circulated and pretty far outside of the territory of Licinius, maybe an earlier issue like a Sol type.

    CNG description

    Crispus. Caesar, AD 316-326. Æ Follis (22mm, 3.44 g, 6h). Londinium (London) mint. Struck AD 324. Laureate head right / VOT/X in two lines within laurel wreath; PLON(crescent). RIC VII 291; C&T 10.01.005. Dark green-brown patina, flan crack, overstruck on an uncertain issue of a larger module. VF.
  14. Victor_Clark

    Victor_Clark standing on the shoulders of giants Dealer

    Coin #139
    21mm 4.0g
    overstruck on Licinius IOVI

  15. Victor_Clark

    Victor_Clark standing on the shoulders of giants Dealer

    I like these unofficial VLPPP struck over official coins. The undertype is Licinius and looks like RIC VII Siscia 11.

    Attached Files:

    Last edited: Jan 7, 2021
  16. Victor_Clark

    Victor_Clark standing on the shoulders of giants Dealer

    Here is an interesting unofficial overstrike. It is an IOVI undertype, which was issued A.D. 313- 315. This type was demonetized after the monetary reform in A.D. 318, which introduced the VLPP in bronze. Normally, the unofficial VLPP are circa 17-18mm, close to the official issue; but this coin, struck on an IOVI flan is almost 22mm. So, because of the size and crude overstrike, everyone would have known that this was unofficial, but it seemed it was more important to at least attempt an overstrike, rather than continue to circulate an unaltered IOVI.

    It looks like the undertype is Siscia 7 (third picture below)
    IMP CONSTANTINVS AVG; laureate head right.
    IOVI CON-SERVATORI; Jupiter standing l., chlamys across l. shoulder, leaning on sceptre and holding Victory on globe in r. hand; eagle with wreath to l. on ground; in right field ?.
    in ex. SIS

    The CNG description--

    "Constantine I. AD 307/310-337. Æ Follis (21.5mm, 4.06 g). Contemporary imitation. Uncertain mint in the Danube basin. Struck circa AD 320s. Helmeted and cuirassed bust right / Two Victories standing vis-à-vis, holding inscribed shield on altar. Overstruck on an a Siscia mint follis of Constantine I. Sergeev 232-7. For undertype cf. RIC VII 3 (Siscia). Green patina. In NGC encapsulation 4530021-005, graded Ch AU, Strike: 3/5, Surface: 3/5, light smoothing. Remarkably clear undertype. Very interesting"= Contemporary imitation_ Uncert_' - auctions_cngcoins_com.png
    Last edited: Jan 7, 2021
  17. zumbly

    zumbly Ha'ina 'ia mai ana ka puana Supporter

    This one with the standards swapped and the eagle facing right seems a little less common.

    Constantine I - AE Follis Standards Aquila Rome 2607.jpg
    AE Follis. 4.37g, 24.2mm. Rome mint, AD 312-313. RIC VI 351a (R). O: IMP CONSTANTINVS P F AVG, laureate, draped, and cuirassed bust right, seen from behind. R: S P Q R OPTIMO PRINCIPI, aquila with eagle facing right, between two standards, left surmounted by a wreath, right surmounted by a hand; RT in exergue.
  18. zumbly

    zumbly Ha'ina 'ia mai ana ka puana Supporter

    As far as double strikes go, this is one of my favorites...

    Claudius II - FJ Coll Pax Siscia DblStk 2557.jpg
    AE Antoninianus. Double struck on obverse. 2.87g, 20.7mm. Siscia mint, end AD 269 - early AD 270. New RIC V/1 Online temp #746. O: IMP CLAVDIVS AVG, radiate and cuirassed bust right. R: PAX AVG, Pax standing left, holding olive branch and long transverse sceptre.
    Ex Finn Johannessen Collection (purchased from Ancient Treasures, 30 Oct 2004)
  19. Spaniard

    Spaniard Well-Known Member

    Don't know if you class this as an error but the Human Resources department didn't check out this engravers credentials as he'd obviously failed Latin!
    Licinius I AE Follis 20mm/3.43gr (Emperors name Misspelled)
  20. dougsmit

    dougsmit Member Supporter

    I have too many 'favorite' errors. This overstrike mimics a Constantius Gallus with laurel wreath but it is actually the remnant of the Constantius II showing through. Can you see evidence of the overstrike on the reverse? I deeply regret the surfaces on this one. The odd shaped head is from a slight rotation of the two dies. There is an extra N above the head. Is this an error or were the boys playing around at the mint?
  21. Andrew McMenamin

    Andrew McMenamin Well-Known Member

    Wow! That is one cool coin.
Draft saved Draft deleted

Share This Page