| Author |
 Replies: 23 / Views: 2,131 |
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
1549 Posts |
It was mentioned recently that I have not been posting many new coins. That is because I have not been buying lately. That changed yesterday when I went to the Richmond Coin Club show (a small local affair). There were three dealers present with ancients and I bout some from each. This is a report of that event. My first section will show the two coins from one dealer. He had very little and refused to sell most of what he had because he had just got them and he wanted to study them and enjoy owning them for a while. We were however able to negotiate two coins. This seller is not an ancient specialist but recently bought a collection which included some nice coins and some obvious fakes. Who among you will tell me I should not have bought these two? They were the two most expensive coins I bought yesterday but you have to remember that I am a cheapskate. First is a radiate of Tacitus that closely duplicates a coin in my collection except for the officina letter. I will not go into why I wanted another of these but the coin comes with what I consider a neat story which has been told on these pages before. Who paid attention last time and sees what makes this coin 'different'?  The second coin from this dealer will be posted after lunch. When my wife calls me for lunch, coins wait. |
|
|
|
Pillar of the Community
 United States
1549 Posts |
The second coin from that first dealer also has been discussed on CCR since I have been here but I did not own the type. It is from the Carthage mint and shows the personification of Carthage holding fruit. Unlike most mintmarked coins the city name is not in exergue but part of the encircling legend 'KART'. This one is Maximinus II (they come from other rulers of his day) and should have a gamma in exergue indicating workshop 3. I'm not sure what is in that place on this coin but it does not look like a gamma. Ideas appreciated. Does anyone have one of these for comparison?  |
|
Pillar of the Community
3352 Posts |
How was your lunch?  Quote:
Who paid attention last time and sees what makes this coin 'different'? uh-oh (*awkward*) ... sadly, not me, but I will try harder next time!! dougsmit => so far, your coin purchases look great ... please keep 'em coming!!  |
|
Pillar of the Community
United Kingdom
2838 Posts |
Quote:
...should have a gamma in exergue indicating workshop 3. I'm not sure what is in that place on this coin but it does not look like a gamma. Is Maximinus II not workshop 4 (Delta) with 'I' in left field? Constantius workshop 1 (H in feild), Maximian 2 (I in feild), Severus 3 (H in field). I'm sure Jango has a nice example of a Maximian. Yours would be RIC VI 40b (p428) Cant remember the previous Tacitus discussion but both the reverse legend and the 'XI' strike me as different. Both nice looking coins |
|
Pillar of the Community
United Kingdom
2838 Posts |
Forgot to add I'm looking at the 'group II' coins not 'group III'.
|
|
Moderator
 United States
23731 Posts |
I don't recall the earlier thread either. They are both excellent coins, I especially like Carthage mint coins. The Tacitus is different with only one X.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United Kingdom
2100 Posts |
The single X is important. What's the weight?
I have been on the lookout for one for years and never managed to get one. That's because some people are hoarding them 8-).
Regards,
Martin
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United Kingdom
2838 Posts |
Is it higher content silver then or just an error / oddity?
Looked for the old thread but not found it.
Edited by bobbyhelmet
11/03/2012 2:24 pm
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
3229 Posts |
Doug, I like both of your coins. Very Nice! Wish I could offer more...there is so much to learn... Maridvnvm and Bobbyhelmets comments make sense to me. Should the exerge be XXI making this an error? I also think that the Maximinus II looks like it could have delta in the exerge. IMHO. |
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
1549 Posts |
XXI means 20 parts copper mixed with one part silver. Xi means half the copper was used with the same silver. There are also double rich metal coins marked IA (ten:1) from mints that used the Greek system KA instead of XXI but I don't have one of them. We may get lucky and have someone post an IA.
What I am not certain on is whether this was intended to be a double value denomination or a momentary attempt to make the currency better that did not last long. There are some other I coins that showed the ruler with a double crown making it much more obvious that the coin was special.
Im away from my books right now so I'll have to check that RIC reference later this evening. While these were the two most expensive coins from my show batch, they are not the nicest or most interesting in my opinion. Usually I go to a show and buy a $50 coin for $40 and a second for $60 so it all works out in the end. What hurts is when you buy a $5 fake and pay $50 for it. That is why I don't buy $500 coins instead of ten $50 ones. More of the $500 coins I see worry me.
Funny (?) story: A dealer told me that his Licinius II was rare and the only coin of that ruler he had seen. I then showed him two other Licinius II in his stock both marked Licinius I. I guess he figured anyone wearing a helmet had to be soldier and not a 5 year old kid.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United Kingdom
2838 Posts |
I'd certainly pay $50 for the Tacitus! I suspect it was a lot more unless the seller didn't know what he had. Hadn't come across these before but would have noticed it was different had I came across one. Read a few papers online now so have learnt a bit, must say, unless its silvering your coin does look a lot more silver than most XXIs. I'd always thought the XXI and KA thing was 'disputed', it always seemed to make sense to me and surely these XI and IA coins with their 9% (ish) silver content prove it beyond reasonable doubt? I was going to post a web picture of an IA coin but I think one of our members may have one, when I searched I landed on one of his web pages and dont want to steal anyones thunder so will wait  |
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
4253 Posts |
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
1549 Posts |
I believe the best 'evidence' that XXI refers to the aloy rather than a denomination (20 of these is worth one of those) is that there are some post reform AE1 size folles with the XXI as well and metallurgic tests average around the 4.77% that 20 to one should show. Today we tend to look at mixes as a percentage of the whole rather than the Roman way of add 20 or this to one of that so an XXI coin should be less than 5% since the silver was 1/21 of the whole.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
1549 Posts |
Quote:
Yours would be RIC VI 40b (p428) Right you are. How I got over in the next group and why the whorkshops shifted when the #4 man became #3 is a bit beyond me. Thanks! |
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
1549 Posts |
Dealer #2 was one to whom I was returning the Republican denarius I bought last month. I am 90% sure the coin is fake but not absolutely sure of anything beyond I could not sell it to someone and feel right so it is better to return it now since the seller is willing to take it back. The problem is that he did not have that dollar amount in coins I want at prices I'd pay. This dealer is expensive to my tastes on many coins but I'd rather overpay a bit than keep the fake (if it is) and I don't feel right asking for a cash refund when I'm not 100% sure. The fist half of the needed $100 in trade value was easy. I found a Licinius II that I did not have and that I thought was good looking. I might have balked at paying the cash price but the coin would sell many places for the price and I wanted it. The second half was more a problem since the dealer keeps his coins in stapled flaps that really make it hard to tell what you are getting. Both of the other coins looked better under the cellophane. I do know that I will be buying very few coin packaged that way in the future. The Licinius looked good out in the air but the Helena and Constantius II surfaces were better hidden under wraps. I selected the Helena because it is a late Pax Publica type an all of my other coins of hers are the more common Securitas type. It only comes with workshop E and half of that letter is off flan here. It is not much of a coin but it is better than other things he had in the price range and I was unwilling to select something that the packaging prevented exam and that I would have to pay inflated prices for as well. The last coin was a Constantius II galley type that I could tell had problems but I thought showed some nice detail. Unwrapped, the detail looked better and the surfaces looked worse. This coin has as nice detail on a galley as I could ever want but the mixed black and copper surfaces and the damage to the portrait make it no coin to brag about. This brings up the question of whether you shoul buy a coin like this for the nice boat or hope someday to find one with equal boat and equally perfect surfaces for ten times the price. Unlike most of this dealer's coins, I felt the price was fair so home it came. I told myself that I was going to buy fewer but nicer coins this time but so far I have only been about half successful. Below are the three coins from Dealer #2. Would you buy one or all? If I had it to do over again, I'd skip this dealer and buy more at dealer #3 coming up later but I really wanted to return that denarius (fake or not).    |
|
Pillar of the Community
3352 Posts |
I think all three coins are very "eye-appealing" ... sure, there may be a few iffy sides to the three coins, "but" I really liked coin #1 (great comforting eye-appeal) and I really liked the reverse of coin #3 (the galley is sweet)  ... I can't really answer the question until I see "dealer #3" ... but so far, I really like your purchases (plus, you unloaded the "Old Maid" so you have that possibly-fake denarius off of your back => well played) ... => keep 'em comin' ...  Edited by stevex6
11/03/2012 6:53 pm
|
| |
Replies: 23 / Views: 2,131 |
Posted 11/03/2012 1:18 pm
