Log in or Sign up
Coin Talk
Home
Forums
>
Coin Forums
>
Ancient Coins
>
A Bit of Assistance with This Victoriatus
>
Reply to Thread
Message:
<p>[QUOTE="red_spork, post: 4619861, member: 74282"]Your victoriatus is an early one, a <a href="http://www.stevebrinkman.ancients.info/anonymous/AnonymousVictoriatii.html#53-1" target="_blank" class="externalLink ProxyLink" data-proxy-href="http://www.stevebrinkman.ancients.info/anonymous/AnonymousVictoriatii.html#53-1" rel="nofollow">Crawford 53/1</a>. Not quite the earliest victoriatus, but one of the earliest emissions, circa 214-212 BC using dating proposed by <a href="https://www.openstarts.units.it/bitstream/10077/24668/1/debernardi_lippi_TooBig_online.pdf" target="_blank" class="externalLink ProxyLink" data-proxy-href="https://www.openstarts.units.it/bitstream/10077/24668/1/debernardi_lippi_TooBig_online.pdf" rel="nofollow">Pierluigi Debernardi</a>. If you look at that first link you'll see there are many similarities between 44/1 and 53/1 but your coin has the neat engraving style of the obverse and the wing style of the reverse that is the hallmark of 53/1. Some coins are very hard to place between the two series because there is ultimately some continuity. Here's a 53/1 from my collection that is similar to yours:</p><p>[ATTACH=full]1143928[/ATTACH]</p><p><br /></p><p>It is my opinion that the earliest victoriati are probably just a little bit earlier than the initial denarius issues. The marks you see on some of them are basically a form of mintmark as you have deduced, but like the early denarii and bronzes, it's a little bit more complicated than just a mintmark in some cases. Sometimes it is purely a mintmark, for instance the "L" issues attributed to Luceria, but some mints used multiple marks over time, or minted anonymous issues and marked issues. Some of the anonymous issues came before the issues with marks, but some anonymous issues were much later, in fact one of the latest issues of Victoriati, Crawford 166/1, is an anonymous issue with no mark, so you can't necessarily assume that no symbol means an early issue.</p><p><br /></p><p>When it comes to attributing these anonymous issues, style is always the key and the website I linked above is probably the best guide out there for attributing them. There are a few issues that are either very rare or which were only recently discovered that aren't listed, but overall it covers the issues that anyone who isn't a specialist is likely to need to identify.[/QUOTE]</p><p><br /></p>
[QUOTE="red_spork, post: 4619861, member: 74282"]Your victoriatus is an early one, a [URL='http://www.stevebrinkman.ancients.info/anonymous/AnonymousVictoriatii.html#53-1']Crawford 53/1[/URL]. Not quite the earliest victoriatus, but one of the earliest emissions, circa 214-212 BC using dating proposed by [URL='https://www.openstarts.units.it/bitstream/10077/24668/1/debernardi_lippi_TooBig_online.pdf']Pierluigi Debernardi[/URL]. If you look at that first link you'll see there are many similarities between 44/1 and 53/1 but your coin has the neat engraving style of the obverse and the wing style of the reverse that is the hallmark of 53/1. Some coins are very hard to place between the two series because there is ultimately some continuity. Here's a 53/1 from my collection that is similar to yours: [ATTACH=full]1143928[/ATTACH] It is my opinion that the earliest victoriati are probably just a little bit earlier than the initial denarius issues. The marks you see on some of them are basically a form of mintmark as you have deduced, but like the early denarii and bronzes, it's a little bit more complicated than just a mintmark in some cases. Sometimes it is purely a mintmark, for instance the "L" issues attributed to Luceria, but some mints used multiple marks over time, or minted anonymous issues and marked issues. Some of the anonymous issues came before the issues with marks, but some anonymous issues were much later, in fact one of the latest issues of Victoriati, Crawford 166/1, is an anonymous issue with no mark, so you can't necessarily assume that no symbol means an early issue. When it comes to attributing these anonymous issues, style is always the key and the website I linked above is probably the best guide out there for attributing them. There are a few issues that are either very rare or which were only recently discovered that aren't listed, but overall it covers the issues that anyone who isn't a specialist is likely to need to identify.[/QUOTE]
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
Coin Talk
Home
Forums
>
Coin Forums
>
Ancient Coins
>
A Bit of Assistance with This Victoriatus
>
Home
Home
Quick Links
Search Forums
Recent Activity
Recent Posts
Forums
Forums
Quick Links
Search Forums
Recent Posts
Competitions
Competitions
Quick Links
Competition Index
Rules, Terms & Conditions
Gallery
Gallery
Quick Links
Search Media
New Media
Showcase
Showcase
Quick Links
Search Items
Most Active Members
New Items
Directory
Directory
Quick Links
Directory Home
New Listings
Members
Members
Quick Links
Notable Members
Current Visitors
Recent Activity
New Profile Posts
Sponsors
Menu
Search
Search titles only
Posted by Member:
Separate names with a comma.
Newer Than:
Search this thread only
Search this forum only
Display results as threads
Useful Searches
Recent Posts
More...