I have to say I believe you are overvaluing that reverse at $10 but the obverse makes up for it. It brings up a question some of us have faced. What do you do when a coin becomes available that fits your collection but does not exist in a grade you would prefer for your collection. I suppose we could note that the Alegandron coin is better so we could have entered a bidding war that would have sent JA's kids through college but I'm glad you got the coin anyway. I do not have a Laelianus and will not unless I find one like my Marius which was in a coin store in a place I was passing through clearly marked Claudius II and priced accordingly. The seller told me how he bought the ancients he had from a widow that came into his US only shop so I know he made a profit on it anyway. I might have had to tell him if he had come off as a nice guy. More appropriate for this thread is my Volusian from Alexandria R5 (one or 2 known to Emmett) and great portrait but ruined by bronze disease. Yes, it has the best portrait I have seen on a Volusian from Alexandria. Yes, it was $10. Is it collectible? It is to me. I have a few other coins that are possibly unique and feel that refusing them because of problems would be the same as throwing them in the trash. I could not do that. Thanks for saving Laelianus.
Very cool coin @zumbly congrats on such a nice and rare one. When it comes to wagons just be careful lest you jump on one and find it to be filled with Hussites.
You can show us some of these coins... we won't tell . You're probably right, and I guess that leaves things open for me to eventually upgrade to a real $10 (or even $20 if we're allowed to dream!) reverse .
Congrats on the Laelianus!!!!! Love the portrait!!! I really want one of these someday. I do have a Marius:
nice coin Z.. i don't have one of him yet, as with several others, but i'm inclined to think the "wagon" rather as a boat, cause i tend to go "overboard" rather than just falling off
Wow ! Wow ! and Wow ! for that Laelianus portrait @zumbly ! The dude is still on my list and will remain there for a while I guess as they don't come up so often. I can pile on with my Marius however Marius, Antoninianus - Mint #2 : Köln or Mainz MP C M AVR MARIVS AVG, radiate, draped and cuirassed bust right VICT - ORIA AVG, Victory walking left, holding wreath and palm 3,2 gr Ref : RIC # 17, RCV # 11124, Cohen # 21 (20Fr), Schulzki 7a Q
Awesome new addition! Great obverse for a Laels. I 2nd @ominus1s sentiment. Since I started collecting I haven't gone that long without an acquisition. But I've certainly gone overboard on some! I have all Gaelic emperors, save for Domitianus ii (just waiting for that magical 3rd coin to show up) and Aureolis (though I don't know how to tell the difference between he and Postumus). Postumus Romano-Gallic Emperor, AD 260-269. Æ Irregular mint – "Mint II". 2nd bronze phase, first period, AD 264-266. Radiate, draped, and cuirassed bust right / Pax advancing left, holding branch and scepter LAELIANUS 269 CE. Antoninianus (19 MM, 2.66 gm). Mint city II (Cologne). Radiate and cuirassed bust right / Victory advancing right, holding palm and wreath. RIC V 9; AGK 1c; Gilljam dies IX/54 Marius 269CEAE Antoninianus, Colonia lint (Köln), 269 18 mm / 2.47 g IMP C M AVR MARIVS AVG Radiate, cuirassed bust right R/ VICTORI - A AVG Victory standing facing, head left, palm in left hand, wreath in rightRIC V, 17; C.21, Elmer 638
Way to fall of the Wagon Z! I didn't even remember who that cat was until you mentioned the troops killing Postumus because he wouldn't let them wreck that city. Man, the wagon has been brutal this year...I'm even seeing it my dreams.
Nice coin to leap off of the wagon for. It must have been the week for wagon spills. It's been too long but I made a couple of Sicilian purchases today. I'll post pics when they come in. Excited to be back.
Nice coins. The Gallic usurpers are an interesting group. I did luck into an Aureolus in an undescribed lot off eBay a while back - about $2. Although it says Postumus on the obverse, from what I can figure out, because of the reverse, it is Aureolus. It is one of my favorites in my collection: Gallic Empire - Aureolus (usurper struck for Postumus) (267 A.D.) Milan Mint - Antoninianus IMP C POSTVMVS P F AVG, radiate, draped & cuirassed bust right / FIDES EQVIT, Fides seated left holding patera and standard; P in exergue. RIC 377, Cohen 59; Sear 10938. (1.91 grams / 18 mm)
Thanks to Mike for linking to my page on Aureolus. I conside his name attached to coins little more than a ploy of dealers to sell coins. They are the issues in the name of Postumus from the Milan mint. Aureolus was the main man of Postumus in that city at that time but most emperors with branch mints had someone in charge so we have to decide where to draw that line. IMO, Vetranio issued coins with his own name on them as well as coins in the name of Constantius II. That places him in a special status which dealers abuse by listing the Constantius inscribed coins as Vetranios as well as those that read Vetranio. I prefer we limit that term to coins with Vetranio's name. I believe it would be better to call the Aureolus coins "Postumus, Milan mint" or "Postumus by Aureolus" but neither of those terms would sell a coin to collectors who want only one coin of each ruler. The Milan coins use reverses honoring the cavalry most having EQVIT of something similar on the reverse. My page shows two examples. Rarely, we see full legend, well struck examples. Most look like a siege coinage (which they were) and are very collectible IMO without making up labels to boost sales. Question: When Septimius Severus was out of town dealing with civil wars in the East, Plautianus (father of Plautilla) spent time in Rome playing like an Emperor which eventually led to his downfall. Should we label the issues in the name of Septimius from this time coins of Plautianus so each of you needed to buy one for your ruler set? That seems silly. It differs from Aureolus in some ways but not others. Where do we draw that line?