I came across some extra cash, so I have decided to go after a type I've always wanted ever since making 5th century coins one of my specialties, but currently don't have: the VRBS ROMA FELIX type. I found two and that's where my dilemma comes in. Both have their pros and cons, making it difficult for me to chose. The first is the first one of the two that I found. It has the emperor's name mostly complete on the obverse, and has a clear officina and mintmark, making this coin completely attributable, a plus in my book, especially with the coins of this era. Details in the design are missing, but for the price it is pretty good. The second is a very nice example of this type. Yellow patina that accent the details, nearly full reverse (with complete emperor on the reverse). This one would have been my automatic choice were it not for one flaw: emperor's name is gone, preventing a full attribution. This type was minted in the name of Honorius, Arcadius, and Theodosius II. While Theo II is out of the picture (right hand side of the obverse has "IVS" as opposed to "SIVS"), I can't tell at all from the photo whether it is Honorius or Arcadius (something that will always bother me if I bought it). So in short, for me, its basically choosing between full attribution, or looks. They are both around the same price (first coin is a bit cheaper). I am wondering what you all would go for if in my shoes, thanks!
Neither. The surfaces on the first one are bad - a deal breaker for me. And, as you said, the second one is missing too much of the legend for a full attribution. Save up a little more cash for a better example, or get a different type.
I agree with Bill. If the missing attribution bothers you, you will never be happy with it. While I completey understand buying a real rarity with some issues you may not be 100% comfortable with, (my "tin foil" piece eg), what we are talking about here is not a rare coin. They are sold all of the time. I would hold out for a piece you are comfortable with. Its your collection, and if every time you look at a piece with contempt or sadness, its not doing you any good, you know? I guess I am saying is if this was a Johannes with surface issues, but you know its the best example of this rare coin you can afford, I would be happy with it. If its something pretty common like a Honorius, where you can locate problem free examples for just slightly more money, (ie affordable), I would hold out for that. Just my opinion.
I guess I'll pile on. I wouldn't buy either. However, if you are determined, I suppose I would take the second coin just for the looks.
RIC lists the Honorius as C. I assume you disagree with that rating. I would buy either or both coins at my price but your comment of having extra cash enabling the interest suggests these are not $5 coins. Big prices for rare coins requires identity and a certain amount of clarity. With full legends (not just identifiable), these would be rarities. As they are, I would buy them out of a junk box or live without. I agree with the call to pass.
Is there a way of narrowing down the attribution on the second? Because that's a nice little coin. If it were inexpensive, I'd probably get it.
Wouldn't hurt to wait for a better one I guess, so I'll leave these two for now, thanks guys. Among the other varieties of Vrbs Roma Felix, I figure its common, but this type overall I found is pretty scarce, at least in better shape like these two. Nope , mintmark SMROM, OF in left and T to right, with pearl-diademed bust, narrows it down, but not to one ruler (or even one RIC # - if it did I would probably buy it, even though the emperor is unidentifiable).
None of them. Wait for better Either you are a specialized collector and wouldn't bother too much with consevation considerations but would want a full attribution to fill a gap Or you are in the "oneofeachemperor" mood and would like the best example you can afford Q
