Message:

<p>[QUOTE=&quot;Hrefn, post: 7444716, member: 115171&quot;]I would be very grateful for opinions on this next coin. </p><p><br /></p><p><br /></p><p><br /></p><p>[ATTACH=full]1291401[/ATTACH][ATTACH=full]1291402[/ATTACH]&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; This is IMO a barbaric Solidus modeled on one of emperor Phocas (602-610 AD.)&nbsp; Mass is 4.52 grams.&nbsp; This came from a Stack’s mail bid sale 15 April 98, lot#19 where it was described as from an “irregular mint.”&nbsp; Earlier this coin was part of NFA Auction XVIII part II lot #739,&nbsp; associated with the Guy Lacam collection (whether this coin was in Lacam’s collection, or just part of NFA’s sale isn’t entirely clear to me.) Appears similar to some pseudo-imperial solidi of the Avars, but not a perfect match. </p><p><br /></p><p>12/2020:&nbsp;&nbsp; I submitted this to ANACS and just received it back from them.&nbsp; They graded it AU50 and believe it is a Constantinople mint product.&nbsp; On the basis of style, the eccentric diadem larger than the emperor’s head, the retrograde R in PERP on the obverse, and the misspelled VCTORIA on the reverse, I believe they are wrong.&nbsp; Although misspellings on dies from the capitol mint are not unknown (I have a Solidus of Justinian I #26 which reads DNISUTINIANUS) poorly spelled and lettered inscriptions on dies for the gold coinage are rare in my experience, at least through the end of the reign of Constans II in 668.&nbsp; A major mistake on both the obverse and the reverse die seems unlikely to have come from the capitol mint. </p><p><br /></p><p>Anyone have an opinion?[/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