Icerain's lead in fit my situation so well I decided to appropriate it. On any other day I might have titled this 'Grade this Junker' of 'Nice "for this" type'. Sometimes I find myself buying coins because I see something in them that outweighs the fact that they are faulty. With people, we are told to look for the good and not be bothered by handicaps. In many cases I believe that attitude allows buying coins that are not mint state. I have a pet peeve about dealers who grade coins based on comparison to other coins and add the phrase 'for this' rather than admitting that the coin is a junker. My last purchase of 2014 and first arrival of 2014 is one of those 'for this' coins. It my be the best example in existence (I have seen worse), I make no claim on that but it does have a couple things going for it that others I have seen don't. Constantius II, AE4, 1.42g, Rome mint (RMP*) Falling Horseman 3 ' reaching' RIC 316, page 278 volume VIII. On the good side, this is a great late Rome portrait from a time when the mint output was pretty much garbage. The reverse scene would be nice were it not for the flat strike on the head of the barbarian which is the important part since we want to be able to describe his headgear. I like the way both shields are shown from the edge without a second side making an oval as we usually see on these. You say, "He's grasping for something nice to say about this piece of garbage." I admit that would be the standard take on a coin like this. Posting this in this way is to encourage someone among you to post your RIC 316 with full strike and full legends just to make me look the fool. Please do. This coin illustrates the question of what we are to do in terms of collecting philosophy. One answer is only collect things that exist in fleur de coin (better than mint state 5/5, 5/5 for those who like the new style grading). Another is to represent in our holdings the best examples we can find even if the best examples are closer to bargain bin rejects than things the high end dealers will fight over. This is a matter of Philosophy of Collecting. I like this coin but REALLY hope one of you posts an example with a full head on that horseman so I can see what I'm missing.
I really like the obverse ... and actually, the random flan is also very cool (oh, and the coin-colour rocks) ... I "like" the coin (I'm not sure if I'm supposed to like it, or if I'm supposed to shun it?) 2015 is already too confusing (man, 2014 was sooo much better ... *sigh*) => there's no place like home, there's no place like home, there's no place like home!!
I am almost certain I was offered several thousand of the coins from this group last year and sadly didnt buy them. It was a mistake. They are mostly if not all, AE4 size, and in many cases, as with most AE4 coins were struck on small flans, but they were beautifully preserved...... I love this coin. I have one from this group and will photograph and post when I have a chance.
I only have one FH (as you probably already know) ... but I always love showing it (ummm, it does have a very sweet "full head of both horsemen") ... does it count? ... it really does have a very cool and animated reverse, eh? (man, I absolutely love this coin)
The closest I have is a RIC VIII 267 from the Rome mint. It too is a junker, but one I like. Actually, I like yours better for the same reasons you have already mentioned.
It's a very nice coin "for this type". I take no issue with that assessment. It seems that quality control at the Rome mint was far below that of other mints during this period. Does anyone know the reason why? I don't have any Falling Horsemen from Rome, but I have these three equally scrappy coins that are in fact, very nice for their types, considering they were all minted in Rome...
As Falling Horsemen go, it is a little junker. As the last of the Rome mint Horsemen, I am happy to have it. Dane of Wildwinds said there are 2200 variations on the type. Of them, I suspect half are available in FDC and most of the rest are at least a bit more presentable than this. Steve's example is a nice coin of a mint and date that allows nice coins. There are absolutely gorgeous Antioch mint AE2 coins that make my best look lame. The only market for a coin like this Rome would be to those who have an AE2 with great detail and want to illustrate just how far down the hill they had gone in just a couple years. Section 11 of the link below covers the replacement of coins like my two Antiochs with coins like my new example. http://www.tulane.edu/~august/handouts/601ccdoc.htm You might find other sections of this paper interesting especially if you are into how there came to be so many of these coins made and hidden away. The standard penalty for not cooperating is listed as death. If you buried the coins until the emperor changed, you might be able to profit. It was a risk many seemed to take.
Here's a nice FH of Gallus. I no longer own it, and I'm sorry I sold it, but I suppose I had to learn that I'm a collector, not a dealer... Here's one that went to a YN. Nothing particularly special about it, but all the detail is there... And here's an AE2 that's on it's way... I've seen the best of the best of the best of Antioch, and would very much like to own one of those perfect coins, but they come with steep price tags. I've seen a couple over the years, selling for around $300, but couldn't seem to pull the trigger.
A friend sent me this image of a coin in what he calls his 'keepers'. If I worked real hard, I could find a couple faults. Antioch did good work.
It came much faster than mine ( my last purchase of 2014 was also a FH but wont be the first I get of 2015 i fear) I new the coin was rare, but didn't even notice the shields til pointed out to me. Antioch FH are my favorite of the mints, though I've seen other mints have awesome examples. Here a some of my ae4's Rome Antioch
