COINS BY CITY: An Alphabetical A to Z of Coinage

Steve, That's WAY Cool!!

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

AUGUSTUS
AE Dupondius
OBVERSE: IMP DIVI F, back-to-back heads of Agrippa, wearing rostral crown, & Augustus, bare
REVERSE: COL NEM, crocodile chained to palm, wreath with long ties trailing above. Nemausus (Gaul) 20-10 BC
13.1g, 26mm
RIC 155


AUGUSTUS
AE Dupondius
OBVERSE: IMP DIVI F P-P, back-to-back heads of Agrippa, in rostral crown, & Augustus, laureate
REVERSE: COL NEM, palm tree curving to left, crocodile right chained below, wreath to left of palm tip with long ties trailing to right
Nemausus (Gaul) 20-10 BC
11.97g, 26mm
RIC 159

 

SEPTIMIUS SEVERUS
AE 16
OBVERSE: AV KAI CE CEVHPO, laureate head right
REVERSE: NIKOPOLITWN PROC ICTRO, crescent and one star
Struck at Nikopolis, 193-211 AD
3.1g, 16mm
BMC 17


SEPTIMIUS SEVERUS
AE 18
OBVERSE: AY K L C CEVHROC, laureate head right
REVERSE: NIKOPOLITWN PROC ICTR, Crescent and three stars
Struck at Nikopolis, 193-211 AD
3.4g, 17mm
Varbanov 2554

 

ELAGABALUS
AE26
OBVERSE: AV K M AVRH ANTWNEINOC, laureate, draped, cuirassed bust righ
REVERSE: VP NOBIOV ROVFIOV NIKOPOLITWN PROC ICTRON, Serapis standing left, holding sceptre and raising right hand
Struck at Nikopolis ad Istrum/Legate Rufus, 219 AD
12.22, 27mm
Moushmov 1443; AMNG 1900; Varbanov 4057


ELAGABALUS
AE26
OBVERSE: AVT M AVRH ANTWEINOC, Laureate head right
REVERSE: UP NOBIOU ROUFOU NIKOPOLITWN PROCI-CT-PO-N, eagle standing facing, wings open, head left with wreath in its beak
Struck at Nikopolis ad Istrum, 218-222 AD
14.13g, 26mm
Moushmov 1433

 

LICINIUS II
AE Follis
OBVERSE: DN VAL LICIN LICINIVS NOB C, helmeted & cuirassed bust left, holding spear & shield
REVERSE: IOVI CONS-ERVATORI, Jupiter standing left, chlamys across left shoulder, holding Victory on globe & leaning on sceptre, eagle with wreath left, captive right; X over II Mu in right field; SMNB in ex.
Struck at Nicomedia 321-324 AD
3.0g, 19mm
RIC VII 49


CRISPUS
AE3
OBVERSE: D N FL IVL CRISPVS NOB CAES Laureate, draped and cuirassed bust right
REVERSE: PROVIDEN TIAECAESS Jupiter stg. l., chlamys across l. shoulder, leaning on scepter, holding Victory on globe. In field to l., palm branch; in field to r., dot A; in exergue, SMN
Struck at Nicomedia 317 - 320 A.D
2.92g, 18mm
RIC VII 32

 

I truly love all these posts!!

And, I'm after a left-facing (but, unfortunately, unhelmeted) Licinius I and II as well Bing!

 

I own 5 licinius II coins and all are left facing. Some are wearing helmets, some not.

 

Actually, Bing, I meant I preferred a helmeted left-facing Licinius II, but my bid is on a better grade example than I already have, which is also helmetless. I do not have a left-facing Licinius I at all.

I want your helmeted examples!!!

 

Oh.

 

Is it just me or does this coin look kinda iffy?
Wear on the coin doesn't seem to match that of rim on the flan. There are also some devices possibly created by casting bubbles, especially in the recessed areas on obv.

I hope the coin was bought from certified sources steve.

 

here are my byzantine coins of nicomedia

anastasius i half follis



phocas half follis




heraclius follis

 

Someone more experienced will hopefully weigh in with a more knowledgeable assessment, but I'm not seeing what you see regarding inconsistent wear. I can't say I see casting bubbles either.

 

Well, I wouldn't say that I'm more experienced, but I am the concerned parent of this coin ...

Hi brassnautilus => man, I always love hearing people's feedback regarding my sweet coins (it helps keep me honest)



The coin that you're referring to is one of my oldest ancient coins (meaning that I bought it quite a while ago when I was first starting-out on my ancient adventure) ... I love this coin and consider it to be one of my feel good sweeties!!

As I stated, I love hearing coin-feedback on my coins (good and/or bad), but I fear that you may be mistaken regarding your claims that this darling lil' sweetie is not who she claims to be ... this nymph is all that and a bag o' chips, my new coin friend!!

Firstly, I bought it from my favourite dealer (an amazingly knowledgeable dude that has a keen eye for sweet coins and an even keener eye for spotting fakes ... the dude is money)

Secondly, I have paraded this bad-boy in front of many knowledgeable folks at this coin site and at my previous coin site (where they now refer to me as Voldemort) ... ... and during these parades I've received nothing but reassuring comments like .... "Sweeet!!" ... "Whoa, look at that dawg!!" ... oh, and my personal favourite => "You're The Man, brother!!"

Thirdly, the coin looks and feels awesome in-hand ... it's a beauty!!

Finally, when I was first starting out with these ancient coins (5 or 6 years ago), I was very skeptical that I could buy a coin that was 2500 years old for less cash than I could buy one of my cool Dominion of Canada coins ("how could this be?", I thought to myself) ...



... so, I sent all/many of my coins on a long journey to David Sear's California Ranch for a thorough cavity-search and authenticity verification!!

... and as expected => this sweet lil' trooper returned home with its authenticity-diploma tightly clutched in its lil' coin-hand (man, I was so proud of the lil fella!!)

Anyway ... thanks again for raising the flag and pointing the finger at my poor misunderstood coin (given enough time, I'm sure that it'll get over the trauma of this whole ordeal)

Cheers, coin-brother

 

Hi, steve,
I'm no where near as experienced as others, and that's probably why I raise more questions, because I am unable to differentiate many similar features. So you shouldn't feel alarmed if I had pointed something out, much of that comes from inexperience itself.
That said, part of my work is closely associated with casting of different materials, so I might observe things that can be overlooked by others, from time to time.

Here are what I have noticed on that coin:
For how worn the image and letters were, we see certain places where the rim showed sharper lines.
In this particular area there's also the little ridge (between purple arrows), could had resulted from a cracked or damaged die of course.
There are a few pimple-like protrusions, although they can be result of horn silver formation, next picture will show why I thought they were perhaps placed bit too conveniently.
I didn't circle out the indentations in this area but you can locate a few, they don't always mean something though.

You can find those pimples in other areas of the rev. but they are bit more concentrated on the obv.
I'm not familiar enough with this coin type to comment on style or gained/missing devices but the indentation between eyebrow and upper eyelid isn't all there, and ear looked bit stuffed.
On this cap you can also see "pimples", some concentrated in recessed areas, where they were generally smooth indented line?


Anyway, just some observations. Probably not worth giving any thought, especially if the coin was already confirmed by experts.

Cheers

edit: I didn't see your comment below the cartoon. Since it was already examed by sear you can definitely ignore what I've said. I'm sure they have powerful enough magnification to see compression of surface material, and can tell if those pimples were horn silver, something that's only of concern when they aren't differentiated.

 

Hi brassnautilus ... hey, thanks again for continuing to analyze my coin (now you've got it crying!!)

just jokes

Although your microscope detective work is impressive, I am still very confident that this coin has been viewed by at least two collectors/pros and passed with flying colours ... "hopefully" you are merely misinterpreting the objects that you're viewing? ... example



However, I guess we can never be 100% sure that our coins are authentic unless we carbon-date 'em or perhaps travel-back through time and snag them directly from the ancient mints, right?

... but I certainly don't want to turn a blind-eye to your comments, so I made the attempt of doing a wee bit of stevex home-photography (NOTE => my photography skills often muddy the waters even further) ... here is an example of one of my previous home photographs ...



aha, I made myself laugh => but hopefully these next home-photos will give you more info (if the coin is still looking shady, then perhaps I'll give you bus-fare and you can take my coin to Dave's ranch and scrap it out with The Man?)




Ummm, sorry Z-Bro .... please ignore this car-crash-distraction and continue to post your N-coins

 

Well, if we're still sticking to the 2-day per letter 'rule', then "N" only starts tomorrow and we still have all day to hear more comments. Or if you like you can even start a new thread for it so it might catch the attention of some who may not be tuning it to this thread. For the record, the rim still looks good to me, though I'm interested in what others have to say about what brassnautilus has said about the little zits on your coin.

 

=> seriously? ... wow, I was hoping that my home-photos would end the debate?!

NOTE: my photos show that those marks aren't "zits" ... they are merely areas/dings reflecting light ... when brass blew-up the original seller's photos they became somewhat grainy and merely gave the illusion of bumps (my photos clearly show smooth, good metal surfaces on this coin => no zits, my coin-friends) ... man, now you've got my back-up!



Ummm, this sweet baby of mine is actually listed on Wildwinds (Batman listed it prior to me purchasing it ... please see link below) => SNG ANS 327

http://www.wildwinds.com/coins/greece/campania/neapolis/t.html

 

I would certainly follow this topic in a new thread.

There are so many fakes around, it is good to know what to look for. It is also good to know how signs can be misinterpreted. Photographs in particular can show all sorts of anomalies that are not visible under a microscope.

A healthy debate can be very educational.

 

It did occur to me that it may just have been photography and lighting, but I've seen tiny raised bumps like what brass seemed to be pointing out on Greek and RR silver before including some of my own, and never thought they were casting bubbles. That he has some experience in 'casting stuff' (sorry, probably a technically wrong and horrible term to use - no offense intended), makes me curious about what it is he's seeing.

 

Hey, I am usually the first dude to agree with "if there is smoke, there's fire" ... and as I stated earlier, we'll never be 100% sure of our coin's authenticity => but in this case, a nod from Batman and David Sear are certainly good enough for this guy!!



Sorry Z-Bro => this will hopefully be my last item posted ...



*click on it* => Shabammm!!