Spent several days researching on-line and here at CT using keywords. About 700 images later and stumped where to go next, having done due diligence to at least try... I was gifted this coin in 1987, the price tag was still on it...$4.95. It is 15 millimeter diameter and weighs 1.62 gram...a very small bronze or copper coin. Here are the pics: CONSTAN?? on the left obverse, VSPPAEO on the right obverse side, I take to mean a Constantine I, II, II or some other related, I just can't find a match. VICTORIAEDV? on the left side reverse, with SNTSE at the bottom. The reverse design is "Two victories", I think...and an "altar" was mentioned in a similar coin. The reverse close-ups: Close-up of the reverse design: Pretty well worn, I have posted all I know about it. Any help to get me to a link that will help me id it will be gratefully appreciated. Thanks for your time and attention in advance...Spark
Constantius II Ob: CONSTANTIVS PF AVG R: VICTORIAE DD AVGGQ NN Mint mark:SMTSE(Epsilon) Thessalonica I'll look for a reference.
Constantius II CONSTANTI-VS PF AVG LROSDC (laurel + rosette diademed, draped and cuirassed. These have one ()-shaped laurel leaf between each rosettes down the head.) VICTORIAE DD AVGGQ NN SMTS Epsilon Thessalonica RIC VIII Thessalonica 99 Rarity: c2 (very common) 15-16 mm 347-348 AD To see how it found it quickly... here's a page filled with many useful spreadsheets for common Roman coins: http://www.catbikes.ch/coinstuff/coins-ric.htm Go to the "VICTORIAE DD AVGGQ NN and VICTORIAE DD NN AVG ET CAE(S)" link... you kind of need to know what you're looking for... Sort... then you get your attribution. Then go to: http://www.wildwinds.com/coins/ric/constantius_II/t.html Look for the mint of Thessalonica and RIC 99... and you find this listing... with this coin photo: PS: all of these years later... the price is maybe a little optimistic... but it's a piece of history invaluable to those with the interest to learn more!
@Orange Julius ...you, my man, are absolutely amazing! Thank you so much! This was the my first ancient Roman coin, so this got to be the first one I researched. Thanks again for the info and for pointing me in the right direction...Spark
It is just one opinion but I see coins that lack the letters necessary to separate one CONSTAN----- from another as severely flawed and not worth the lofty price of $4.95 in old style dollars. In the lower price brackets there is a lot of price influence from the lowest price of any coin the seller will carry. I see it a lot like a restaurant that charges $4.95 for a cup and allows you to refill it as many times as you wish with 'free' beverage. Today, few dealers admit there is a coin that would sell for $5 and many that never go as low as $100. I call this the 'nuisance price' or what they charge for the bother of making it available. Mine is a different workshop (delta=4). I paid $5 in 2000 which was too much for the coin but I wanted it since it was ex. Bavarian Collection and came with the original envelope and tag. Today, nothing has changed. The 1700 year old coin is worth less than the 100 year old envelope.
I'm not sure if you meant that the OP did not have enough letters, but the -VS on the right side is enough to confidently ID this as Constantius II and not Constans.
@Orange Julius ...here is what I have using your info. This is a draft, I’m still looking thru the links...Spark edit...pic not uploading...creating new thread...Spark
Yes, the ID is there but when a coin is as common as this, coins that rely on 'insider knowledge' for ID and have zero eye appeal simply are not worth $4.95 then or now. That brings us to the question of what is the proper price for ancient coins that have nothing to recommend them other than being an ancient coin. Certainly there are those among us who make a living selling such coins (often in generic plastic slabs marked with an ID like "Constantine era") to people who know nothing about ancient coins but want to own one. We can debate whether they are preforming a public service or scum preying on the ignorant just because there is a sucker born each minute. At least these are usually genuine ancient coins. Most of us have made worse mistakes.
I get what Doug is saying about people who set values on coins for more than they're worth, just because the coin is 1750 years old. But I don't think that matters here, as your vantage point is different. While the 'value' if you are looking to resell it would probably be what you paid or less, the value to you is what matters. We spend money on a lot of things that do nothing for us. If this coin fosters an interest for you, or your kids, or others in history or just coins, it's worth the $4.75 and probably more. Plus, it's just cool to have an ancient coin. Here's my first coin that I spent $7 or $8 on... it's probably not worth what I paid but to me it has a lot of personal worth. It has multiplied into 1500 or so coins and a lifelong hobby. I'd say that's worth $7 or $8. Constantius II Siscia RIC 352
OJ covered it well. I dislike beginner posts which have the prime question "What is it worth?" In all things we can decide if we must piece out the costs or take them as a whole. When I buy a ream of paper, do I expect each sheet to pull its weight or do I write off the ream as a cost of doing business? I would get a lot more enjoyment out of this list if I would learn to ignore all discussions of price/value. The fact remains that the only was to realize 'value' is to sell the coins. If we want to continue having them, the market value is meaningless. I could not make a living selling coins.
I agree. But I think the reason we hear so many newbies ask about value is that--at least in my own case--when first starting out, we find it so amazing that a 1700-year-old coin can be bought for $5. It's another way of asking "Is this real?"
