First Page
Posted 04/29/2013 12:07 pm
I didn't think I had anything unusual that I hadn't recently posted
I figured wrong .....
When I purchased this 12 years ago on ebay for a extremely 'modest' amount I was so thrilled that I neglected to notice something very obvious.
AE Sestertius Nero
Obv. Laureate bust of Nero right
Rv. Nero on horseback accompanied by a second horseman
Sear #1957 RIC 170 (Rome AD64)
26.38 grams 34mm
sounds about right ....
Well as we say in New England "Eventually .... The dawn will break over Marblehead"
It can't be from Rome
It has the distinctive 'dimples' associated with the 'Balkan' AE provincial issues on both sides.
This one is curious.
I bought it from the same dealer in ancients back around the same time.
I probably paid too much (a rare thing)
It certainly looks odd doesn't it ?
I have shown this piece to several highly knowledgeable collectors and dealers.
The unanimous consensus is that it is genuine.
But as can be seen ..... something rather important is missing. The reverse is quite flat. In fact I placed it on a surface flat to several millionths and it shows a minor convex shape (a few thousandths) which probably reflects the surface shape of an anvil circa AD64.
I figured wrong .....
When I purchased this 12 years ago on ebay for a extremely 'modest' amount I was so thrilled that I neglected to notice something very obvious.
AE Sestertius Nero
Obv. Laureate bust of Nero right
Rv. Nero on horseback accompanied by a second horseman
Sear #1957 RIC 170 (Rome AD64)
26.38 grams 34mm
sounds about right ....
Well as we say in New England "Eventually .... The dawn will break over Marblehead"
It can't be from Rome
It has the distinctive 'dimples' associated with the 'Balkan' AE provincial issues on both sides.
This one is curious.
I bought it from the same dealer in ancients back around the same time.
I probably paid too much (a rare thing)
It certainly looks odd doesn't it ?
I have shown this piece to several highly knowledgeable collectors and dealers.
The unanimous consensus is that it is genuine.
But as can be seen ..... something rather important is missing. The reverse is quite flat. In fact I placed it on a surface flat to several millionths and it shows a minor convex shape (a few thousandths) which probably reflects the surface shape of an anvil circa AD64.
