Message:

<p>[QUOTE=&quot;dougsmit, post: 2933277, member: 19463&quot;]2017 was a really, really big year here - I mean really. I added 118 coins to my catalog and a small handfull that was sold through John Anthony or given to people I thought might enjoy them more than I would. I the end, my collection grew by 20 coins unless I win something in the one sale remaining on my list for the year. I had said I would not post my Best of 2017 list until closer to the end but I now realize that none of the lots I might win are of the level that would bounce any of my current ten so I might as well go public now. I am assigning an order here but realize that there might be a little room for movement in some of these. I do not expect many or any of you to agree with my selections or the order. That is as it should be.</p><p><br /></p><p><br /></p><p>The main reason for this being a big year in terms of coin count was my win of two AK collection bulk lots totaling 59 coins in the Triton XX sale in January. Four of the ten favorites came from that group. More could have but the list would bore most of you even more had I listed ten Severans. What follows is a countdown from 10 to 1, I know I do not post the kind of ID data and information from Wikipedia many favor. I have the RIC or other appropriate numbers for my coins but I simply do not see why they would make my descriptions better. Instead, I prefer to tell &#039;why&#039; these coins made me say that 2017 was a very good year.</p><p><br /></p><p><br /></p><p>10. Kyzikos, AR fraction 550-480 BC 7mm, 0.24g Tunny fish / incuse</p><p><br /></p><p>[ATTACH=full]712754[/ATTACH]</p><p><br /></p><p>Last and least when it comes to mass is my one and only refugee from the X6 collection. I remember when Steve bought it being impressed by the fine detail on the body of the fish. Kyzikos placed a small tunny fish on many of their larger denominations as a minor device with their boar forepart but here tunny swims alone. I have some doubts about the propriety of the seller provided denomination &#039;hemiobol&#039; and see the possibility it is a ¼ rather than ½. Good coins often ask questions that may not be easily answered. I like small Greek silver.</p><p><br /></p><p><br /></p><p>9. Otho AR tetradrachm, Antioch 69 AD 14.9g Eagle</p><p><br /></p><p>[ATTACH=full]712755[/ATTACH]</p><p><br /></p><p>My largest silver coin of the year is this portrait tetradrachm of Otho. These coins are several times the size of the Rome mint denarii which are many time more popular. I am sure that these tetradrachms would be more popular I the portrait style were even a little like the style used at Rome but here we see a face one might term &#039;normal&#039; and people prefer the other style. If I had the year to live over, I might not buy this coin because rare persons from the Twelve Caesars&#039; cost more that I prefer to pay. This coin was a bit cheaper because it has field scratches that were mentioned when it was slabbed by NGC. When I got it, the slab had been removed but I got the label pointing out its faults. To me, this is the best kind of slabbed coin. Formerly. It came from a show dealer who I have known for nearly 30 years and was happy to point out the scratches just in case I missed them. Did I buy this coin because it ws scratched? No, but were it not for the scratches and the fact that NGC mentioned them, I would not have afforded the coin. </p><p><br /></p><p>8.&nbsp; Julia Domna AR denarius Barbarous mint 3.34g Venus from rear</p><p><br /></p><p>[ATTACH=full]712756[/ATTACH]</p><p><br /></p><p>I have many examples of the common and popular Venus reverse from the standard mints but this coin is a good silver (not plated) copy in very unofficial style. I found it charming even though I did not buy the AK collection lot that included it because of it. It seems a bit special when a coin can rank #8 and be something of an accidental purchase.</p><p><br /></p><p>7. Constans AE3 Siscia mint 1.97g Phoenix</p><p><br /></p><p>[ATTACH=full]712757[/ATTACH]</p><p><br /></p><p>How is it that I felt OK paying $65 for a late Roman coin with scratches and obviously smoothed fields? Certainly I had better FEL TEMP REPARATIO coins with the Phoenix. I always wanted one of these and always hoped I would find one in a $10 junk box owned by a dealer who saw nothing special. I didn&#039;t. It was owned by a specialist dealer who knew what it was. Now I hope I will upgrade it with one from a junkbox. What makes it special? Siscia often duplicated the Greek numeral officina number with a letter in their local language. These letters usually were placed at the end of the mintmark. On this scarce issue, the Siscian &#039;A&#039; was enlarged and placed in the reverse field. Is that a good reason to pay $65 for a $10 coin? I thought so to the point it made #7 on my list. It might have raked higher were it undamaged but, probably, not much higher. After all it is not really something I collect to that minute level. There is no explaining what makes a coin attractive to me.</p><p><br /></p><p>6.&nbsp; Diocletian AE antoninanus London mint under Carausius PAX AVGGG</p><p><br /></p><p>[ATTACH=full]712758[/ATTACH]</p><p><br /></p><p>I had been wanting a Diocletian struck by Carausius to go with my Maximianus and Carausius coins with the triple G reverse legend where Carausius was trying to work his way into the good graces of his Imperial &#039;brothers&#039; while pointing out there were three Augusti (AVGGG). It didn&#039;t work. I bought it for about 1/3 what it brought in a CNG sale a few years ago. Perhaps that was because I bought it from a dealer whose name includes mention of Low Price??? Perhaps not??? The coin is strongly struck with terrible centering losing the MLXXI mintmark which I would really like to have on flan. The portrait is about as nice as I have seen on these. I doubt this will be the last coin of the type I will buy. Maybe the next one will be well centered with a poor portrait. Only time will tell.</p><p><br /></p><p>5.&nbsp; Caracalla without Geta AE34 Stratonicaea 23.25g, Hecate</p><p><br /></p><p>[ATTACH=full]712760[/ATTACH]</p><p><br /></p><p>I have wanted one of these for a long time. I like all of the big bronzes from Stratonicaea but extra special are the ones defaced in compliance with the order of Caracalla to erase all images of Geta following his murder in 211 AD. Surfaces on these coins are rarely good. This is no better than average. The large coins were rarely well struck with legible legends. This is not good in that respect. The coins usually bear a countermark between the portraits and this one is unclear and takes a nip out of Caracalla&#039;s nose. So, why did a coin with so many shortcomings make it to #5 on my list? Where&#039;s Geta?</p><p><br /></p><p><br /></p><p>4. Septimius Severus AR denarius 193 AD, LEG VII CL</p><p><br /></p><p>[ATTACH=full]712761[/ATTACH]</p><p><br /></p><p>This coin currently rests at #4 but it has a strong case for at least #2 and a (better?) chance at #118 (dead last) depending what I learn and think I learn in the future. The coin is a low grade, poor metal denarius from the legionary series. The style is just a bit odd. Legion VII is one of the less common legions. There are &#039;extra letters&#039; in more than one place which might be explained if the coin were overstruck on another denarius. So, what do I have here? If this is a barbarous mint doublestrike in low grade, rank #118 is generous. If the letters upside down at obverse bottom can be read as “NIGE” and the coin is overstruck on a denarius of Pescennius Niger, #4 seems conservative. The British Museum has such an overstrike. Theirs is certain. Mine is just a dream.</p><p><br /></p><p>3. Caracalla AE drachm Alexandria 25.28g, Zeus seated L KB</p><p><br /></p><p>[ATTACH=full]712762[/ATTACH]</p><p><br /></p><p>Another AK coin is this drachm of Caracalla. Severan coins of Alexandria are not common. Drachms are less common than the billon tetradrachms. Caracalla bronzes are lss common than those of his parents. Most listed are given R5 and this type is known for years 21 and 23. I believe the remnants of the right side date letter are more likely to be a B than Gamma but whichever, the coin is one I am not likely to have otherwise. That was good enough for #3.</p><p><br /></p><p>2.&nbsp; Julia Domna AR denarius &#039;Emesa mint&#039; VICTOR IVST AVG Victory seated</p><p><br /></p><p>[ATTACH=full]712763[/ATTACH]</p><p><br /></p><p>Comedian Rodney Dangerfield was famous for saying &quot;I don&#039;t get no respect!&quot; My #2 is the numismatic equivalent. The type was listed by Cohen as #250 from a specimen still in the French National Collection. References since then discount the coin as an unofficial hybrid with reverse of Pescennius Niger or Septimius Severus despite the fact that it exists for neither of those emperors. Traditional scholarship refuses to accept as official and coin of a woman that uses a reverse only appropriate for a man. The coin shares an obverse die with other &#039;Emesa&#039; reverses. It is not barbarous. I thought I was very lucky a few years ago when I had to buy a lot of 34 denarii to get my first specimen (full legends but poor surfaces). This, my second, came as one of a group of 32 in the AK section of Triton XX. All three are die duplicates. I wonder how many coins I will buy to get a third. The people of France could give me theirs but I doubt that will happen. I do not know if there are others besides the three I know but I am OK with having two......for now. It is not my most rare coin but I still respect the coin enough to be sure it belongs to someone who will protect it.</p><p><br /></p><p><br /></p><p>1.&nbsp; Julia Domna BI tetradrachm Alexandria, 211 AD, LK, Caracalla and Geta shake hands</p><p><br /></p><p>[ATTACH=full]712764[/ATTACH]</p><p><br /></p><p>My favorite coin of 2017 now falls at #2 overall only led by the coin I declared my #1 on my website twenty years ago and have no plans to go back on my word.</p><p><br /></p><p><a href="http://www.forumancientcoins.com/dougsmith/feac6.html" target="_blank" class="externalLink ProxyLink" data-proxy-href="http://www.forumancientcoins.com/dougsmith/feac6.html" rel="nofollow">http://www.forumancientcoins.com/dougsmith/feac6.html</a></p><p><br /></p><p>The coin (another AK specimen) is dated LK (year 20) of Septimius Severus which began at the end of August, 211 AD. Caracalla murdered Geta in December of that year ending the appropriate period for the coin to be issued. I believe this is the only coin showing the two boys together that was issued after Septimius died. The obverse die is known to have been used on coins of year 18 (if you allow for a bit of doublestriking that makes the ID less than obvious). Later Domna tetradrachms of LK use a different die with the hairstyle shown at Rome for coins under Caracalla. Private correspondence suggests that this is the specimen listed in Emmett (R5) but that does not prove there are not others. In any event, the coin fits in my sub-specialty of coins relating to the relationship of Caracalla and Geta. It is not my only Alexandrian coin of Julia Domna but it is, for now, my favorite. I hope it will not be my last.</p><p><br /></p><p>What will 2018 bring?[/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