It was a toss up......

Earlier in the year I was browsing PeteB 's fabulous site akropoliscoins and come across two coins I absolutely love and could not choose between them both coins I would love in my collection, the first was this beauty......
Titus.79-81 AD. Dupondius. Æ 27mm, 17.19 gm, 6h. Rome mint. Obv: IMP T CAES VESP AVG P M TR P COS VIII. His radiate head, left. Rev: S-C flanking the Meta Sudans. Recesses in its mid-section contain statues of male figures. Athletes?. RIC II.1, #205, p.211.
Macrinus. 217–218 AD. MOESIA INFERIOR. Nicopolis ad Istrum. Æ (27mm, 12.39 gm, 6h). Obv: AV K OΠΠΕΛ CE—VH MAKPINOC, Laureate, draped and cuirassed bust right. Rev: VP AΠ ΑΓΡΙΠΠΑ ΝΙΚΟΠΟ—ΛΙΤΩΝ ΠΡ—OC ICTPΩ, closed city gate, two battlemented towers at front corners of city wall, one such tower in back wall. AMNG —. Like Varbanov 3345, but laureate, draped and cuirassed bust, seen from behind. A new variety. Not in Hristova-Hoeft-Jekov, but will be added to the new addendum. Glossy dark green-black

The other was this stately type from Macrinus, with the three tower version of the Nicopolis ad Istrum city gate. Oh well every now and again we have to make hard decisions so I tossed a coin and picked the Macrinus...
Let's see your Nicopolis ad Istrum Beauties'.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

Like it, thanks to Fortuna you made the right choice

 

To me the sad part is, I believe, you could resell the Titus for a profit immediately while the Macrinus' Nicopolis issues as a whole are the sort of coins that might take several decades to offset the retail to wholesale gap. According to my computer, I currently am harboring 94 coins that are ex. PeteB. The last four are still on his site marked sold. Several times I have made the same choice against Titus that you did. Financially that may have been a recurring mistake but there is something to be said for having a thousand coins in the collection rather than just one. Rather than showing the requested Nicopolis, I'll show those four most recent from PeteB.
Septimius Severus and Clodius Albinus, Pautalia


Septimius Severus, Amasia, Pontis


Julia Domna, Callatis


Caracalla without Geta, Stratonicaea, Caria


Everyone knows I prefer interesting to high grade. I'm not sure how each of these beat out the Titus. That must be it, the coin is too high grade for me.

 

Amazing Meta Sudans! Bummer that Mussolini in his infinite wisdom bulldozed the thing.

 

Beautiful new pickup...love that reverse!


Elagabalus, Moesia, Nicopolis, (AE 26.2mm., 10.76g.), Laureate, draped and cuirassed bust r./ Rev. Tyche standing facing, looking l., wearing kalathos, holding rudder and cornucopia. RPC VI.1 789.

 

The reverse type of that Macrinus is very cool, @Ancient Aussie!

One of my favorite coins of Nicopolis features Glycon:


Gordian III, AD 238-244.
Roman provincial Æ 27.1 mm, 12.33 g, 9 h.
Moesia Inferior, Nicopolis ad Istrum, Sabinius Modestus, legatus consularis, AD 241-244.
Obv: ΑVΤ Κ Μ ΓΟΡΔΙΑΝΟC ΑVΓ, radiate, draped and cuirassed bust, right.
Rev: ΥΠ CΑΒ ΜΟΔЄCΤΟV ΝΙΚΟΠΟΛЄΙΤ | ΩN ΠPOC ICTP, Nimbate figure of snake-god Glycon, coiled in two coils, rising up, head right.
Refs: Hristova/Hoeft/Jekov (2018) 8.36.22.4 (same dies); Varbanov 4146; Moushmov 1488; Mionnet Suppl. 2, 708; AMNG --; BMC --; Lindgren --; Sear --.

 

My only one…


RI Diadumenian 217-218 AE26 Nicopolis ad Istrum Homonoia stdg

 

...very nice AA! man, if that reverse doesn't lQQk like the pattern for later medieval castles, there ain't one!

 

Stunning coins @Ancient Aussie And those reverses!
I can't tell you how excited I get looking at coins from Nicopolis ad Istrum!

MOESIA INFERIOR. Nicopolis ad Istrum. Septimius Severus (193-211). Ae. Obv: AV KAI CE CEVHPOC.
Laureate head right.
Rev: NIKOΠOΛIT ΠPOC ICTP.
Ithyphallic Priapus standing left, revealing himself. Varbanov 2327-8. Good fine. 2.35 g.18 mm. Purchased from Numismatik Naumann Dr. F Jarman collection: Mints of Romthe Roman Empire. March 2021

 

I had the exact same thought: when we see something like that, we automatically think "medieval," but there were fortresses and city walls that looked like that all over the Roman world. And beyond, for all I know.

 

Great choice! I would love to buy the Titus you decided to leave for the rest of us, but the Social Security payment I got this month is a bit short, especially because I have to use it to pay my June rent!

Here's my one Nicopolis coin:

Diadumenian Caesar, AE Tetrassarion (4 Assaria), 217-218 AD, Nicopolis ad Istrum [Nikyup, Bulgaria] Mint, Moesia Inferior, Statius Longinus, Consular Legate. Obv. Bareheaded bust of Diadumenian right, draped and armored, seen from behind, M OPEL DIADOV-MENIANOC K (OV ligate) [ = Marcus Opellius Diadumenianus, Caesar] / Rev. Artemis, wearing short chiton, walking right, holding bow in left hand and drawing arrow from quiver in right hand, hound jumping behind her left foot, VΠ CTA ΛONΓINOV NIKOΠOΛITΩN ΠPOC I / CTPΩ in exergue [ = Consular legate Longinus, (Governor) of the residents of Nikopolis on the (river) Istros]. AMNG I/I 1843 [Pick, Behrendt, Die antiken Münzen von Dacien und Moesien, Die antiken Münzen Nord-Griechenlands Vol. I/I (Berlin, 1898) at p. 467]; Varbanov I 3743 [Varbanov, Ivan, Greek Imperial Coins And Their Values, Volume I: Dacia, Moesia Superior & Moesia Inferior (English Edition) (Bourgas, Bulgaria, 2005) at p. 308]; Hristova-Hoeft-Jekov 8.25.13.3 [Hristova, H., H.-J. Hoeft, & G. Jekov. The Coins of Moesia Inferior 1st - 3rd c. AD: Nicopolis ad Istrum (Blagoevgrad, 2015)].*



*Obverse die matches the die classified as Obverse Die No. 9 in table entitled “Nicopolis ad Istrum - 4 assaria - die matches” (see http://www.diadumenian.com/Die tables nicopolis 4 assaria.html). It is an obverse die match to the two coins depicted at http://www.diadumenian.com/Nicopolis artemis longinus.html, the second of which was sold at Gorny & Mosch, Giessener Münzhandlung Auction 121, 2005 Lot number: 300. Coin is also an obverse die match to, inter alia, the coins depicted at https://www.cngcoins.com/Coin.aspx?CoinID=17248 and http://www.forumancientcoins.com/catalog/roman-and-greek-coins.asp?zpg=28570 .

 

><....ba-do0m tis!

 

Nice reverse on that coin @Ancient Aussie !

 

Here is my Nicopolis city gate:



26 mm. 11.79 grams.
Hristova and Jekov Nikolois ad Istrum 8.23.46.3
Price and Trell 58, no photo, but very much like the design of #86.
The Price and Trell book "Coins and Their Cities" discusses architectural designs on coins, mostly provincial coins. It is a very interesting subject, but I didn't go much further into it than this coin.

 

@Ancient Aussie

You were joking, I presume, that you let a coin flip decide between your purchase of a coin priced at $145,000 and another worth $500 or so?

Despite the approval from the British and Fitzwilliam Museums that PeteB reproduces on his website, I am unfortunately not at all convinced of the authenticity of his Meta Sudans dupondius of Titus.

In the first place, I think that both his example and the BM specimen that he shows in his discussion, which is also illustrated in the new RIC, pl. 99, no. 205, are identical modern casts. Note the identity of their centering on the flan and the details of their types and legends. I think Ted Buttrey was mistaken to see different reverse dies on these two coins because of a few small differences he thought he saw; because of the identity of everything else, these supposed differences will just be due to later tooling or different lighting and photography. The lack of sharpness of portrait and lettering on the obverse of Pete's coin (click above for enlargement) seem to me typical for a modern cast. The BM piece has been deliberately damaged, in my opinion, in order to mislead a prospective modern purchaser into thinking that it's probably authentic.

Now the obverse die of these two examples has the correct Rome-mint style. Presumably they are cast reproductions of a genuine dupondius of Titus whose original reverse type, apart from the letters S - C, had been completely recut. Unfortunately I don't find the same obverse die or a reverse die with the same size and placement of S - C in a quick search through RIC, BMC, and Giard's Paris catalogue. Hopefully our Flavian specialists will check their own COS VIII dupondii of Titus for the same obverse die and for a similar S - C combined with a genuine reverse type!

I was going to write: the Meta Sudans type of Titus is an old forgery, of which no genuine prototype exists as far as I know. So Cohen wrote in 1880: all Meta Sudans sestertii of Titus that I have seen are fake or doubtful. The BM acquired such a fake sestertius in 1913, BMC Titus 189, pl. 49.8 (rev. only), on which a head of Janus is shown atop the meta, spewing water left and right from both of its mouths! "Perhaps tooled on rev.", Mattingly correctly noted; in fact the reverse of the coin seems to be from the same die, completely recut, as an S - C Spes advancing sestertius also in the BM collection, no. 186, pl. 49.5; note the identical size and positioning of the letters S - C. Unfortunately this remade sestertius has found its way into the new edition of RIC, no. 165, both sides illustrated on pl. 96, though with the correct explanation in a footnote: "This unique coin has been tooled, so it is possible that the rev design was created in modern times by re-working (from a coin with Spes rev?)."

However, Paris possesses what could be a genuine specimen of Titus' Meta Sudans dupondius, pl. CXXXI, no. 28 in Giard's catalogue, wrongly dismissed by him as a modern fake in my opinion, though Cohen 246 had accepted it as authentic in 1880. This coin is from different dies on both sides than Pete's specimen and the BM's. The obverse is VF and gives every appearance in the photograph of being ancient and struck. The reverse is rougher and more worn; I wouldn't exclude the possibility that it has been remade from another type, but am inclined to think that it is original, and so the first authentic Meta Sudans coin of Titus that can be found in modern collections. Hopefully our Flavian collectors will check their collections for these two dies too! If this Paris coin is authentic, that would strongly suggest that the reverse type of the other two specimens is also original rather than remade, though it wouldn't prove their authenticity, since both of them seem to be casts of another struck specimen whose present-day location is unknown.

 

Why would the “casts” survive but not the struck specimen “whose present-day location is unknown”?
So....it comes down to whether my coin and the BM’s are casts. In my opinion, my reverse is not the exactly the same as the BM’s. * And Mr. Richard Abdy and the late Dr. Ted Buttrey, both renowned experts in their field, did not think my coin or the BM’s were cast. Indeed, they felt originally that the BM example was struck, but tooled. They changed their opinions upon the appearance of my coin and changed the BM’s note to strike the word “tooled.” I trust their judgement.
* Edit: Dr. Buttrey wrote "However the reverses were struck from three separate dies (the nature and placing of the arches below the steeple).” So, two and possibly three separate casts?? Of what? A single authentic example “whose present-day location is unknown”?
Thus, while I hold Curtis Clay in my highest regard, I respectfully disagree with his opinion.

 

I am in no position to have a worthy opinion on the coin in question but I most certainly do have an opinion on how a cast might survive but not the struck original. One answer is prettier than the other:

1. Several of us have coins that have been in our possessions for over fifty years. I know at least a half dozen other collectors who can exceed that number and another who has purchased coins from private collections through dealers who do not run auctions or issue illustrated catalogs. We here are a bit unusual in that we participate publicly in open discussions of coins. Many collectors do not. We have no idea what they have, how long they had it or whether they bought it or inherited it from a parent.

2. The ugly answer is that many lives were lost in WWII when several great cities were bombed. Some works of art were moved to safety either by their owners or stolen by the opposing forces. Some were not so lucky. It would be nice to think that there is a 'Raiders of the Lost Ark' style warehouse that contains the coins looted or secreted away but the fact remains that some coins were in the wrong place at the wrong time. Some were probably melted intentionally; some in a ball of fire. Are there any war veterans still alive who are not open about what they took from enemy cities? Are there boxes of junk in countless attics that once belonged to someone who cared? It would be interesting to know how many unpublished coins exist that have not changed hands in the last century but were 'above ground' the whole time. Possibilities are endless.

 

Yes just joking, I drooled so much when I seen that coin I couldn't resist mentioning it, yourself and Pete both put forward convincing hypothesis on the coin and all I can say is I hope like all hell that this type exist and Pete's is authentic, if it is a fake or tooled it is a damn good deceiving job. Also some great contributions to this thread and fantastic coins you guys and gals are just great. Here is another of mine from the same city a bit later with only two towers.... the Celator must have got lazy or they knocked down the third tower
Nikopolis ad Istrum, Gordian III
Roman Provincial, Moesia Inferior, Nicopolis ad Istrum, Gordian III (238-244 AD) Æ 27 (12.43g) Sabinius Modestus, legatus consularis., City Gate, Obv.: Laureate and draped bust right. Rev.: Arched gate flanked by two roofed towers with arched windows in uppermost story. Varbanov 4182.HrHJ (2018) 8.36.46.1. Moushmov 1496 Rare! NGC XF.
Obv: AVT K M ANT ΓO;PΔIANOC .
Rev: VΠ CAB MOΔЄCTOV NIKOΠOΛЄITΩN ΠPO/CICTPON.

 

It is refreshing to see a thread where there is a difference of opinion but the discussion still proceeds with intelligence and class on all sides. This was an interesting read.

@Ancient Aussie , your new coin is simply fantastic my friend. I always know I’m in for a treat when I see a thread pop up with your name next to it. I have nothing to add unfortunately, I just wanted to share my congratulations on your new score.

 

That was the first thing I thought when I saw it.

Perhaps someone could post images of the other specimens?