Hello all, Just came across these two Roman coins (according to the attribution on the 2x2) and was curious if someone could help me learn more about them (denomination, authenticity, grade, rarity, condition, and yes, finally, ballpark value.) I am highly skeptical of the grade of both coins being MS64. Photos: Coin 1 (information on 2x2) Roman (219 AD) AR Antoninus Elagabalus (assuming that's the ruler on obverse) Felicitas Standing Left (reverse) Weight: 5.44 grams Diameter: 20.5-21.5 mm Coin 2 (information on 2x2) Roman (227 AD) AR Denarius Severus Alexander Pax Running Left (reverse) Weight: 2.13 grams Diameter: 19-20.5 mm Thank you for your help!
Not rare, but very nice - quality condition. I find modern condition descriptions do not apply well to Ancients.
Not to horn in, but I think a big factor would be the hand-striking being more hit-or-miss than machine striking.
Hello @stldanceartist. Welcome to Nvmis Forvms Ancients. I'm not an expert in ancient Roman coins, but I have a large number of ancient Roman coins in my collection, so I know a few things about ancient Roman coins. The information on the cardboard holders may be correct, but I'm not certain. Anyway, it's a good starting point. The coin on the left seems to be an antoninianus, because the Emperor is wearing a radiate crown. The coin on the right seems to be a denarius, because the Emperor is wearing a wreath. Both coins are an alloy of silver and a base metal such as copper, tin, or lead. I'm not expert enough, to know if the coins are authentic, from photos. I don't see any obvious signs of fakes. 1 way to check for authenticity, is to look at the edges of the coins. Authentic examples were struck, not cast. If the coins have a casting seam on the edge, or file marks where someone tried to hide a casting seam, then the coins may be cast, which would make the coins fake. Another way to check for authenticity, is to search for similar coins on ACsearch : https://www.acsearch.info/ To view the larger photos, you have to register with your email address. To view the hammer prices, you have to pay. To figure out the market value, you can search for the coins on Vcoins, which is a reputable marketplace where many dealers sell ancient, medieval, and modern coins : https://www.vcoins.com/en/Default.aspx In the ancient coin market, condition (wear) is important, but eye appeal is even more important. Style, strike, condition/wear, tone/patina, historical interest, and rarity are all factors which determine the value of an ancient coin. I can't tell the exact condition from the photos. Often ancient coins have been cleaned, because often ancient coins come out of the ground covered with dirt. Therefore, cleaning is considered just fine, for most ancient coins, as long as the cleaning is done reasonably well, without visibly damaging the coin. For bronze coins, if some nice looking patina is on the coin, then that increases the coin's value. For the above searches, you can search as follows. Elagabalus antoninianus "Severus Alexander" denarius There are Coin Talk Ancients members, who know way more about ancient Roman coins than I do. Perhaps some of them will see this thread, and add their opinions about authenticity and market value. It may take a few days.
I've never used the MS grading approach for ancients. All of the gradations within the MS grading system, which I find baffling, just won't work for hammered coins produced thousands of years ago. I'm even hesitant to apply "mint state" to an ancient coin, since the mode of production back then often produces coins that have uneven strikes, were made with worn dies and often varying degrees of metal quality, not to mention environmental factors. So for ancients I'd call a very nicely struck well detailed coin uncirculated (based on wear) or VG or Fine or VF or EF, with additional information about the coin's qualities. Ancient coins really demand descriptive grading rather than simple numbers, in my view.
The good news is that there are no seams on the edges of either coin - both look like what I'd expect a hammered coin to be. Kinda like if you smash some cookie dough down and the edges split irregularly... After a quick search, it appears I did very well in terms of purchase price, so I don't have to worry whether I overspent (don't really deal with ancients much.) I do notice that there are various weights for different pieces - does that make a difference in value (again, I'm not really worried about value, just asking to learn - honestly they are just kind of cool to own so I'll be putting them in my collection) or are they assumed to be within a certain range of tolerances, and anything within that range is considered acceptable? I'm in the process of moving, so once I get my photo setup working once again I'll post some followup images. In the meantime, here are some (hopefully) better images to work with (I am instantly reminded of how difficult it is to get a cell phone to take good coin photos)
I think ancient coins were adjusted for weight pretty carefully within one mint. From mint to mint, there might be differences, however I don't think any specifications survived. If I'm not mistaken, we don't even know what the coins were named...
Weights can vary because for these low value coins the mint merely needed to strike x amount per pound. So, if the rate was 100 coins per pound, some might be overweight and then some might be underweight. The important part at the end of the day, was that 100 coins were produced from the amount of material...not how much each individual coin weighed. Despite this, the Romans were remarkably consistent.
