So I just found out that one of my first coins is rated R5. I'm sure its not all that valueable, but was pretty funny that I had it this whole time and didnt know:yes: C3: [Common] more than 41 coins known C2: [Common] 31-40 coins known C1: [Common] 22-30 coins known S: [Scarce] 16-21 coins known R1: [Rare] 11-15 coins known R2: [Rare] 7-10 coins known R3: [Rare] 4-6 coins known R4: [Very Rare] 2-3 coins known R5: Unique [only one in the collections examined] Constans AE3. 335 AD. FL IVL CONSTANS NOB C, laureate, cuirassed bust right / GLOR-IA EXERC-ITVS, two soldiers standing facing one another, each holding reversed spear and shield set on ground, two standards between them, SMANE in ex. RIC VII Antioch 89
Yeah, its the rating from Roman Imperial Coins VII http://www.forumancientcoins.com/numiswiki/view.asp?key=ric rarity edit: Notes: - Although RIC rarity is often criticized, better ratings are not available elsewhere. - RIC rarity is wrong for many individual coin types but overall they are fairly accurate. - Some of the RIC volumes are quite old and the ratings are dated. These volumes have many types listed as rare that are scarce at best, yet overall they are still fairly accurate. Most R5 coins are not unique but are very rare. Most R4 coins are also quite rare. - Older volumes were based on older collections that tended to have more Western mint coins and fewer Eastern mint coins. Since many coins are now found with metal detectors in Eastern Europe and the Middle East, the rarity of Eastern mint coins is more likely to be overstated. - Rarity of very interesting types and coins of very rare emperors are probably understated because extra effort was likely expended to acquire those types for the collections examined. - For RIC volumes that list the rarity of types by each officina the accuracy of rarity for the whole type is usually more significant and the least rare officina considered. Specialty collectors may, however, disagree and an R5 coin for a particular officina is probably very rare even if the type is not.
For those new to the concept: The mints of this period were divided into workshops which numbered up to 15 (at Antioch). Some mints divided up the shops so that certain coins were all struck by one shop while others used all shops for all coins. When a shop made a few coins of a type or for a ruler that they usually did not serve, a rarity was created. The coin in question is one of the most common of Roman coins if you consider the reverse design. The ruler is one of the very common sons of Constantine. Antioch was a very prolific mint so its coins are very common. There are many coins from workshop E or 5. What makes this one special is that Antioch E did not make a lot of this type reverse combined with this ruler. We don't always know why something like that happened. It could be an error or it could be that they ran out of usable obverse dies for another person so one day they made some for Constans. Is this a situation that will make you pay big money or lose sleep because you don't have one? That question is up to each of us to decide. A million collectors regret not owning a 1909S VDB cent but how many people do you think are lusting after a E shop Antioch Constans Gloria Exercitus? The coin is a neat find and belongs in the collection of someone who appreciates it but the chances of selling it for enough to buy an S VDB (which is probably 10,000 times as common. approaches zero. More: http://www.forumancientcoins.com/dougsmith/officina.html
I agree with Doug's post. I would add that rarity scales for "common" coins can be very misleading in RIC since they were based on collections. Think about it, major collections tend to focus on rare, important coins. THerefor, relativistically, they under represent more common coinage. It would be like looking at the Smithsonian coin collection, the British Museum, and ANS holdings. Comparing those collections you find out that a 1956 wheat cent is rare, since there is only one example of it in those three museums, but that coins of Cleopatra VII are common as dirt. I find your coin very interesting Randi, don't take it the wrong way. This is just an example of how RIC seems to overweight rare coin commonness, and underweight commoner coin rarity. I think your find would be an exciting start of a full set of those officiana's for that reverse type and emperor. You know what? If you complete that you may have one of only 3 or 4 complete sets in the world of them. Chris
Looking at other similar R5s that were priced at $15 and $50 I wouldnt expect this to be worth all that much. That kinda sounds like it would be fun. Though I'm sure the one I have will be the one I spent the least on I may think about doing that, then again I might find someone who needs it more than I do Randi \r(a)-ndi, ran-di\ as a girl's name is pronounced RAN-dee. It is of English origin. Feminine form of Randy, or short form of Miranda (Latin) "admirable". Randa is an Arabic name meaning "beautiful".
Sorry man, my bad, I have a friend of mine, (male), who spells his name Randi. Maybe that is why he hates his mother.....
Interesting thread. Quick question: Which rarity ratings do people use? I've seen the RIC II (2007) listed as follows: RIC II, Part I, Second Fully Revised Edition (2007) C2: Extremely common C: Common R: Rare R2: Very rare R3 - Unique [only one in the collections examined] http://www.forumancientcoins.com/numiswiki/view.asp?key=rare And a quick request: Please don't assume that most of us know what you are talking about. I appreciate Ancient Doug's explanations. :thumb: Except for a select few of you guys, most of us are clueless when it comes to some of the arcana of Ancient numismatics. Many well-known and respected Ancient historians have a gap in their knowledge of Ancient numismatics. They would like to ask questions, but they feel too intimidated to ask. I, on the other hand, am not afraid to ask "stupid" questions since I don't have a reputation to uphold in numismatics, Ancient history, or most anything else. :bart: So, please, please, please. Don't forget about those of us who are novice numismatists or those of us non-numismatists (as I am) who have an interest in Ancient history and appreciate the role numismatics can play to better understand it. guy
I am usually vague because a) I'm often mistaken and b) other members give much much better explanations than I do :yes: lets see if I can answer the question though I think used are the most recent ric vol. that corresponds with a specific coin.
