Message:

<p>[QUOTE=&quot;Roman Collector, post: 3172851, member: 75937&quot;]Thank you, [USER=19463]@dougsmit[/USER] , for your input. There is something fishy going on with that delta and I had been pondering this ever since I got the coin.</p><p><br /></p><p><a href="https://www.cointalk.com/threads/everything-you-never-wanted-to-know-about-a-4-1-2-assaria-provincial-from-tomis.298925/" class="internalLink ProxyLink" data-proxy-href="https://www.cointalk.com/threads/everything-you-never-wanted-to-know-about-a-4-1-2-assaria-provincial-from-tomis.298925/">As you&#039;ll recall</a>, I am familiar with this denomination and have a 4-1/2 assarion coin from Tomis with a Nemesis reverse type. It&#039;s easy to identify when the 1/2-symbol (&lt;) appears separately:</p><p><br /></p><p>[ATTACH=full]815852[/ATTACH] </p><p>Gordian III, A.D. 238-244, and Tranquillina.</p><p>Roman provincial Æ 4-1/2 assaria; 28.92 mm, 15.89 g, 7:00.</p><p>Moesia Inferior, Tomis, Magistrate Pontianus, A.D. 241-244.</p><p>Obv: AVT K M ANTΩNIOC ΓΟΡΔΙΑΝΟC // [C]ABINIA (TP)AN / KVΛΛINA, confronted laureate, draped and cuirassed bust of Gordian right and diademed, draped bust of Tranquillina left.</p><p>Rev: MHTPO ΠONTOV TOMEΩC, Nemesis standing facing, head left, holding arshin (rod) and sling, wheel at feet; Δ - &lt; (denomination) in fields.</p><p>Refs: AMNG I 3537; Varbanov 5701; Moushmov 2279; Cf. SNG Cop 305.</p><p><br /></p><p>While the ligate form is very clear on your example, I wish it were clearer on mine:</p><p><br /></p><p>[ATTACH=full]815853[/ATTACH] </p><p><br /></p><p>Pick (AMNG I*, p. 897) notes two types in the collections he examined, with two different obverse dies and two different reverse dies.</p><p><br /></p><p>[ATTACH=full]815857[/ATTACH] </p><p><br /></p><p>While the differences between the obverse dies is not relevant to the discussion at hand, note the main difference between the reverse dies: AMNG I 3546 has no mark of value (&quot;ohne Werthzeichen). </p><p><br /></p><p>In an effort to see the mark of value on my coin more clearly, I did a search at acsearchinfo and found three examples in total; two are die matches (obverse and reverse) to my coin:</p><p><br /></p><p>[ATTACH=full]815861[/ATTACH] </p><p>H.D. Rauch, Mailbid Sale 10, <a href="https://www.acsearch.info/search.html?id=282467" target="_blank" class="externalLink ProxyLink" data-proxy-href="https://www.acsearch.info/search.html?id=282467" rel="nofollow">lot 217</a>, March 2, 2006.</p><p><br /></p><p>[ATTACH=full]815854[/ATTACH] </p><p>CNG, e-Auction 278, <a href="https://www.acsearch.info/search.html?id=1242430" target="_blank" class="externalLink ProxyLink" data-proxy-href="https://www.acsearch.info/search.html?id=1242430" rel="nofollow">lot 183</a>, April 25, 2012.</p><p><br /></p><p>And, after examining these specimens, I am quite convinced that [USER=19463]@dougsmit[/USER] is correct here that the mark of value is a ligate Δ&lt;.</p><p><br /></p><p>The third example appears to have no mark of value in the left field. However, there is some irregularity where one might have been and I wonder if the die was reworked to remove the mark. At any rate, it was struck from completely different dies than my example or from those described in AMNG I (different breaks in the obverse and reverse inscriptions from AMNG I 3546).</p><p><br /></p><p>[ATTACH=full]815862[/ATTACH] </p><p>Künker, Auction 83, <a href="https://www.acsearch.info/search.html?id=137687" target="_blank" class="externalLink ProxyLink" data-proxy-href="https://www.acsearch.info/search.html?id=137687" rel="nofollow">lot 1183</a>, June 17, 2003.</p><p><br /></p><p>Given that this coin exists both with and without the Δ&lt; mark of value, I wonder if the one without such a mark represents the usual tetrassarion denomination so as to distinguish it from the one with the half-assarion surcharge, which is clearly so marked.</p><p><br /></p><p>Interesting stuff to ponder on a quiet Sunday morning.</p><p><br /></p><p>*Imhoof-Blumer, Friedrich, Pick, Behrendt, et al. <i>Die Antiken Münzen Nord-Griechenlands</i>. Druck Und Verlag Von Georg Reimer, 1898.[/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