Featured ALL Ancient Coins are Worthy of Study

One of the great benefits provided by private collectors to the study of ancient coins is the attention paid to relatively common coins that are of humble preservation. Large institutions, such as museums, have a hard enough task properly attributing and photographing their rare / high quality items and as such the low quality coins (like the ones below) would stand very little chance of being published individually online.

However, to an individual collector these little slugs are beautiful pieces of history and well worth the time it takes to take high resolution photographs and post them on a forum or website. My long term goal is to photograph all coins in my collection (not just my favorites!) and get them cataloged on my future website. Below are five previously unattributed coins I received as Christmas presents from family which I just now have gotten around to looking into further. Hopefully you all can get some enjoyment, as I have, out of looking over these ugly little misfits.

........................................​

Roman Empire
Probus (AD 276-282)
AE Antoninianus, Siscia mint, 4th officina
Dia.: 21 mm
Wt.: 3.1 g
Obv.: IMP C M AVR PROBVS P AVG; Radiate bust left, in imperial mantle holding eagle-tipped scepter.
Rev.: SOL INVICTO; Sol driving quadriga left, holding whip and globe and raising hand; XXIQ
Ref.: RIC V-b 774

Note: The lack of the F in the obverse legend differentiates this from RIC 767. It is difficult to read the coin in the area of concern but on close inspection and with an extrapolation of the spacing of the existing letters I am reasonably confident that the obverse legend reads IMP C PROBVS P AVG.

........................................​

Roman Empire
Aurelian (AD 270-275)
AE Denarius, Rome mint, 1st officina
Dia.: 18.5 mm
Wt.: 2.2 g
Obv.:IMP AVRELIANVS AVG; Laureate, draped bust right.
Rev.: VICTORIA AVG; Victory walking left, holding wreath and palm, captive at food left. A in exergue
Ref.: RIC V-a 73

Note: If I am correct in identifying the mark in exergue on the reverse as an A this coin would be attributable to the 1st officina of the Rome mint as above. If not, other mints / officina would need to be considered. Based on a review of the style of the portrait in comparison with others struck at Rome (1st officina) I am comfortable with the above attribution until shown otherwise.

........................................​

Roman Empire
Divius Claudius Gothicus
AE Quinarius(?), possibly struck at irregular mint in Gaul
Dia.: 17 mm
Wt.: 1.8 g
Obv.: DIVO CLAVDIO; Radiate head right.
Rev.: CONSECRATIO; Eagle standing left, head right.
Ref.: RIC V-a 266(var)

Note: This coin is considerably lighter than what would be expected of an antoninianus. RIC mentions that small coins of the DIVO CLAVDIO / CONSECRATIO type were commonly struck at irregular mints in Gual where Claudius Gothicus was held in high regard. RIC does not mention how these coins might have traded against the full weight antoninianus though it does mention that Cohen may have categorized some of these coins as quinarii.

........................................​

Roman Empire
Aurelian (AD 270-275)
Dia.: 18.2 mm
Wt.: 1.5 g
Obv.: Radiate, draped bust right.
Rev.: IOVI CON-SER (?); Emperor standing right, (holding sceptre?), receiving globe from Jupiter, standing left holding sceptre.

Note: This is a difficult coin to attribute for several reasons.

1. The obverse legend is unreadable. AVRELIANVS AVG seems to be evident from the fragments of letters but I am unsure if there is and IMP at the beginning of the legend.
2. The reverse legend seems to be IOVI CON-SER which would be consistent with the reverse image of Jupiter presenting the emperor with a globe. However, what should be the “O” in CON at 12 o’clock on the reverse does not look much like an O to me.
3. The mintmark is difficult to read. The letter at the bottom right in the exergue is either a P or a D. It is possible the the mintmark is *P which could possibly make this coin attributable to Siscia. If I were pressed on a specific attribution I would go with Siscia mint RIC V-a 225A.
4. The weight of the coin is very light.

........................................​

Roman Empire
Helena (AD 325-330)
AE3, Heraclea mint, struck ca. AD 324-328.
Dia.: 19.8 mm
Wt.: 1.3 g
Obv.: FL HELENA AVGVSTA; Diademed, mantled bust right, wearing necklace.
Rev.: SECVRITAS REIPVBLICE; Securitas standing left, lowering branch and raising hem of robe with right hand.
Ref.: RIC VII Heraclea 95. Mintmark SMH Epsilon.

Note: This coin retained a great deal of its legend and as such was not difficult to identify in RIC (maybe a little more challenging than I thought... see below). However, the weight is lower than other coins I was able to find. I have seen this type referred to as a follis but I have chosen to refer to it as an AE3 until I can do some additional reading into the weight.

........................................​

Well that is all I have for now. Please post some of your humble examples that you had fun studying and researching. Also, feel free to post your examples of any of the above emperors or empresses as well as provide any additional information or corrections to my attributions above.

Thanks for reading!

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

..ha!...most all of mine fit that description..

 

Curtisimo, You exemplify the meaning of numismatist . You're not a hoarder / accumulator, and you give substance to the title of your thread. Your photos are excellent BTW.

 

That was a fantastic article. I'm glad to see you are loving and appreciating even the most humble of coins.

I'll just shared my Helena, which part of the reason I got was because the portrait reminded me a little of my mom when I was a small child.

 

These were $0.50 each, but I gleaned some interesting and useful study from them!

 

@Curtisimo I love your article and I totally agree with you.

Jochen

 

The following coin is part of a scarce sub-series of the output of the eastern mints of Septimius Severus. These coins have reverse legends that end with II COS.

Septimius Severus denarius
Obv:– IMP CAE L SEP SEV PERT AVG II COS, Laureate head right
Rev:– BONAE SPEI II COS, Spes standing holding flower and lifting skirt
Minted in Emesa, 194 - 195 A.D.
References:– RIC -. RSC -. BMC -.

2.53g, 20.31mm, 0o



Given the issues with the coin I was struggling to fully read the obverse legend and originally attributed it as ending AVG II C, which is a known legend variant but the dies didn't match those known for AVG II C. I discussed the coin with Curtis Clay and he asked me to send him a plaster cast of my coin, which I did. He was then able to confirm that the obverse die is a die match to a coin from his own collection which Curtis bought from Michael Kelly's collection.

Obv:– IMP CAE L SEP SEV PERT AVG II CO-S, Laureate head right
Rev:– FORTVNAE REDVCI II COS, Fortuna standing left holding rudder and cornucopia



This obverse die was previously only know from the single example owned by Curtis. The obverse die match allowed the reading of the obverse legend to be confirmed as AVG II CO-S. This brought the number of known examples of the obverse legend variant to two with two different reverse types.

A few years later I was able to obtain the following coin, which despite the many issues can be seen to be a double die match to Curtis's coin.



Both of my coins have issues but they are very special to me.

 

I couldn't agree more with the thread title. I have always and will probably always enjoy trawling through junky unattributed coins. Some of my most enjoyable hours in the hobby have been spent jumping down unexpected rabbit holes and warrens.

This unidentified freebie was given to me by a seller I bought a large group of equally junky LRBs from. The LRBs were educational, but this was the one I had the real fun with.

COMMODUS
AE19. 4.77g, 19.3mm. CILICIA, Augusta, 183/184 AD. RPC Online temp 6170 (Marcus Aurelius) = Karbach, Augusta p.54, 81 (same obv die). O: Laureate head of Commodus right, AV KOMODO [...]. R: AVGOVSTN(sic) ETOY EPD, horse standing right, head turned left; tree to left.
Research Trivia: The city of Augusta (near Adana in modern day Turkey) was founded in AD 20 on the eastern Cilician plains and named after Livia, widow of Augustus. It was built in a loop of the river Seyhan between some low hills, and its ruins were only discovered in 1955. Unfortunately, the site was never excavated as that same year, the Seyhan Dam was completed and the ruins disappeared beneath its waters.

This one was from an uncleaned lot. For four years, I'd pick it up every now and then and try to attribute it without success. When I finally did, it was definitely a happy day at Chez Zumbly.

DOMITIAN
AE24. 10.02g, 24mm. JUDAEA, Ascalon, dated CY 189 (AD 85/6). RPC II 2211; Rosenberger 115. O: Laureate head left. R: Tyche-Astarte standing left on galley, holding scepter and aplustre; altar to left; to right, dove standing left above ΘΠP (date).

This A-Pi was another glorious unattributed Provincial I enjoyed hunting down and researching. With only "MЄ" of the reverse legend visible, I spent hours looking through countless Provincial Tyche reverses issued under A-Pi. You can't tell me there are more fun things to do than that.

ANTONINUS PIUS
Rare. AE27. 5.09g, 27.2mm. PHRYGIA, Apameia, circa AD 138-161. SNG von Aulock 3495. O: AV KAI AΔPI ANTΩNЄINOC, laureate bust right. R: [AΠA]-MЄ[ΩN], Tyche wearing polos standing left holding cornucopiae and rudder.

More recently, I've been starting to work on a small pile of "BCD Incerta" (stuff BCD gave up on or couldn't be bothered with). They're going to keep me busy for years. Here's one of the promising ones I feel I'm close to nailing...

 

Geta, Nikopolis ad Istrum - Nemesis standing by Wheel.





A tough coin to attribute because of the lack of obverse legend. However there is a portrait match on wildwinds and the reverse is relatively well-preserved. Great article @Curtisimo !

 

@Curtisimo, a collector that is also a numismatist is a lofty goal that thankfully you have achieved. Hopefully this thread will be full of like-minded souls.

A humble coin I had fun researching? This common Vespasian modius denarius comes to mind.

Vespasian
AR Denarius, 2.92g
Rome mint, 77-78 AD
RIC 980 (C). BMC 217 corr. RSC 219.
Obv: CAESAR VESPASIANVS AVG; Head of Vespasian, laureate, right.
Rev: IMP XIX across field; Modius, standing on three legs, containing one ear of corn upright, then two ears of corn bending r. and l. with poppy in between and two ears of corn hanging over the sides
Acquired from Münzen & Medaillen, July 2018. 'From an old Swiss collection'.

A rare variant of the modius type with poppies in between the corn ears. The variants with poppies tend to have longer corn ears than the common examples without them. The poppy in the Roman world was often a symbol of abundance and fertility, so it is quite fitting to see them symbolically stored in a modius alongside corn ears. NB: BMC 217 has the poppies on either side of the upright corn ear.

 

Does anyone know of researchers using coin images from collectors to further their studies? Is Is there a way we as collectors can somehow positively impact historical or numismatic research? I couldn't agree more with your opinion @Curtisimo - "ugly" coins are still artifacts.

In my other collecting passion, I just finished photographing my military token collection and want to publish it online (I have to learn how to do this first). Individually they aren't worth much and would likely never be individually photographed or studied.

 

I have something of a pile of coins in this category. Many were unknown to me when I got them but some have turned up in better shape in Martin's collection or elsewhere. These are a few of my Emesa problem children. Overall my Alexandria denarii are at least as bad bt my love for them is a subject for a different thread on a different day.

The Domna below is not in the finest condition but what really makes it difficult is the doublestriking. The obverse die did not read MNIA.AVG at the right but the coin appears to. Perhaps someone has a less messy example of this coin but they have not shared it with me yet.


There is nothing wrong with preferring perfect coins but when it comes to rare coins we have to decide if we have it in our hearts to love our children who look like us or just the ones who take after their mother.

One of my favorite coins also presents one of my greatest mysteries. The obverse die of the Domna Alexandria tetradrachm from year 20 (LK) is very much like a die known used with a year 18 (LIH) reverse. My coin shows some possible doubling in the area that makes me uncertain that they are the same die. Emmett only lists one tetradrachm from year 19. I would love to see/own a coin using this die bridging the years. Did they make so few coins that one die was enough? Emmett gives R5 status (one or two?) to about 30 Domna tets. He also lists a half dozen common ones (R2, R3 and R4) from the beginning to the end of Domna's time on the scene. Doing a die study from so few coins would be difficult if all the coins were in good condition. They aren't. TIF shared this image from Dattari-Savio with me. Coins can be hard to read but pencil rubbings ????????


Edit: I got the idea of this from TIF. I attribute the differences at the back of the neck/shoulder to doubling on my coin.

 

Great thread and coins all! @Curtisimo you are more patient than I!

I do tend to hang on to coins that are either an unexpected rarity, or that I can't identify. I did offload a large portion of my low grade coins a while back, but some I can't part with:

Claudius II, FIDES EXERCITI
Fides standing left, head left, holding vertical standard and transverse standard (or maybe a trophy?)
Unpublished variant of RIC 34 - EXERCITI instead of EXERC or EXERCI


I've posted this one before; still a favorite!
Gallienus AE Antoninianus
GALLIENVS AVG, radiate bust right
DIANAE CONS AVG, stag walking left, cross in exergue (actually a slanted X)
Rome mint, 10th officina
RIC 179 (var left, X)

This one raises the question... engraver's error, or a subversive Christian working in the mint?


Constantine the Great, Campgate follis from Arles
PROVIDENTIAE CAESS / T*AR

Campgate mules are not unknown from this series, but not from Arles, as far as I have been able to tell. Furthermore, the 3rd officina at Arles only struck for Crispus and Constantine II during this time, so how did they even get a Constantine obverse die?


This perplexing coin I found in one of the first junk lots I ever purchased; to this day I have not even been able to figure out which civilization produced it, let alone actually attribute it.
AE11, 0.77g
Helmeted bust right(?)
Vaguely Kushan-ish figure standing, holding thunderbolt and thingamabob


And from the dark depths of my own personal rabbit hole...

A common type 1.3 "curved head" except for the hair bun behind the ear - Here it is the more archaic six-pointed star when it should have been standardized to the four-pointed star.


Here the hair bun isn't there at all!



A very late-type 1.4, but the nostril is a dot; it is a crescent on every other coin in the entire series, yet no other part of the coin indicates that this is bridging the gap to 1.5. My guess is that this is not an official coin.

And of course, this one from an entirely unpublished series that I am working through the nuances to publish

 

In the interest of accuracy, your coin is not RIC VII Heraclea 79. It has a leading dot in the exergue which #79 does not. If your coin has a leading dot only, (which I suspect it does) it would be RIC 95 from Heraclea, but if it also has a trailing exergual dot (.SMHE.) it would be Heraclea 89. HOWEVER

I have some question about whether it is from Heraclea at all. On my screen the third character in the exergual mark looks like a K more than an H. In that case it would be from Cyzicus. In that case, with a leading dot, it is unlisted for leading dot only, but corresponds to RIC VII Cyzicus 49 with dots fore and aft, but would be from an unlisted officina.

So you still have some sorting out to do on this one.

Here is a link to a thread I posted last year showing some examples:
https://www.cointalk.com/threads/helena-style-show.316613/

 

Thanks @lrbguy . This is why CoinTalk is such a great resource. You are certainly correct about the leading dot and, I agree, it appears that there is a leading dot only. You may also be correct about the K vs H in the mintmark. When I first looked at it in hand I believed it to be a H but now that I examine the photos I’m not so sure. I will need to go back and compare to other examples and amend the OP accordingly. In the meantime opinions welcome.


Edit: On further inspection of other examples I’m going to stick with my attribution to Heraclea. Though I agree that the dot will change the attribution to RIC 95

An H attributable to Heraclea


A “K” attributable to Cyzicus - from what I can tell the “K” from this mint is pretty distinct from an “H” with the arms sticking out at a distinct angle from the stem.

 

You only have about 2 hours to edit the post, otherwise you'll have to ask a moderator to change it. You could always leave it to show future readers what can happen when a coin is posted, opinions are given, and minds are changed.

 

Probably my least attractive but one of my more significant coins is this one Drachm of Septimius Severus from the mint of Petra. In 1989 K. Butcher wrote an article in the Numismatic Chonicle in which he examined the 7 known drachms from the mint of Petra known at the time. At that time there were 6 drachms of Caracalla and 1 of Julia Domna. Currently there are 28 drachms that I know of 7 Julia Domna 3 of Geta 17 of Caracalla and this one of Septimius Severus. Even though the mint city is not explicitly named we know that these coins are from Petra because of the peculiar attributes given to Tyche. She is holding a stele or baetyl ( I like to call it the chunk of 2 by 4) in her right hand and a trophy in her left.
This coinage is interesting for a number of reasons. First at time of writing none of these coins have been found at Petra, the only two found on archeological sites are from Switzerland and England, and the majority of those found since seem to come from dealers who specialize in selling coins found in the Balkans.
The number of dies known for the series are as following Severus 1 Obv 1 Rev Geta 3 Obv 3 Rev Caracalla 8 Obv 8 Rev. Julia Domna 1 Obv 2 Rev. Even though their are two muled pairings 1 of Geta and 1 of Caracalla there are no examples of either reverse die being paired with a "correct" obverse.
As for dating it would seem clear that this coinage was initiated sometime before the death of Septimius Severus in February 2011. How long did this coinage last is difficult to assess.

 

The first three coins illustrated by Doug are part of my favourite sub-series. There are not many examples know for these coin and most of them have issues of one form or another.

I have two double die matches to the first coin, each with their own issues.



I have a double die match to Doug's third coin too....

A different reverse die of the same type.

His middle coin is one a need.....
I have others.....
This double die match


Various others each with their own issues...




And finally my favourite with this obverse die. The coin that started me with this sub-series.... A coin with less problems than the others.

 

Very good. This looks to me also like the path of least resistance, since most of the options for Cyzicus required attribution to an unlisted variety. A slight deformation of a vertical upright is still in range for being a letter "H", so that reading is supportable too, I think. In the end one has to have the coin in hand to cover all the bases, and it seems you have done that. Heraclea it is.

What intrigued me in all this is that the last couple of series from Heraclea for the Helena SECVRITAS issue are only listed for officina epsilon. That seems worth a further look, for another time.