Message:

<p>[QUOTE=&quot;LukeGob, post: 8334072, member: 73885&quot;]And while I&#039;m at it, I&#039;ve been itching for an excuse to post another similar find. This time Theodosius II. [ATTACH=full]1477446[/ATTACH] [ATTACH=full]1477447[/ATTACH]</p><p>1.6g; 15mm X 14; 0° axis; MM off-flan, traces of letters, just enough to tell <i>something</i> was there. </p><p>Ob: DN THEODO-SIVS PF (VG?) </p><p>P.-Diad. Dr. &amp; Cuir. R. (no star behind bust, no crested-helmet &amp; spr &amp; sh.)</p><p>Re: CONOR-(my guess)DIA AGV</p><p>2 Emp. (Not nimbate) Stg. F., each holds Gr. Spr. in outer hand &amp; supports long cross Btw.</p><p><br /></p><p>The Re is pretty much that of a rare AE2 stuck for Val. III &amp; Theo. II for distribution in Cherson (Esty-75). But the Ob of that type has a crested helmet &amp; spr &amp; sh. And it&#039;s larger &amp; more massive. At this size, it&#039;s reasonably similar to the 2 types I went on about in the preceding reply (Esty-51 &amp; 52). But those do not have a cross btw the 2 Emps., they either hold a globe or each have a Gr. Sh., AND the Ob has a star behind the bust. Plus there&#039;s the Re Leg., which seems to match the AE2 (E-75). The style is similar too, and the Leg.s on both sides of E-75 are usually somewhat blundered &amp; sloppy, like this example. Ditto for Leo I, Zeno &amp; Ael. Verina, for whom similar AE2s were stuck for the same region. </p><p>&nbsp;&nbsp; &nbsp; This coin is a little crude; but not 5th C. imitation level crude; &amp; it&#039;s a bit large &amp; massive. Plus, in-hand, you can tell it was once a nice coin. The people I purchased it from have a bad habit of zapping coins &amp; applying a fake patina, as they, unfortunately, did to this one; but what it once was is still apparent enough. </p><p>&nbsp;&nbsp; &nbsp; I&#039;ve had it a while now &amp; the more I look at it, the more it looks like a smaller version of the AE2s with a MM of CON that were struck for Cherson. But that is just very unlikely. Most likely it&#039;s just a unusually nice imitation amalgamising Esty-51/52 &amp; E-75. But... maybe not. That just doesn&#039;t quite fit either. </p><p>&nbsp;&nbsp; &nbsp; Feel like I&#039;m missing something obvious (I&#039;ve considered it being a fake, &amp; I don&#039;t think that&#039;s it), so I&#039;m crowdsourcing the inter-webs for ideas. What say you, better numismatic-minds than mine of Cointalk?[/QUOTE]</p><p><br /></p>

Your name or email address:

Do you already have an account?

• No, create an account now.
• Yes, my password is:
• Forgot your password?

Stay logged in