Earlier today (about 12 hours ago), I bought a few ancient coins (from a guy who was so good in selling them that he got me to buy much more than I wanted).
Approximately, you can think I paid $10 per coin (this is not the actual breakdown, but it results in a sum very close to reality, and the actual figures would've been far too confusing). Coin #1 is late Roman, rest are (probably) Greek.
Note: some of these might be far more common in my country than in UK/USA. Not that I care
What I was told I bought:
1. Arcadius/Salus small copper (supposedly fairly decent as these issues go)
2. Panticapeus chalkos, 4th century BC
3. Seleucid Antiocheia aurichalkos, 3rd century BC
4. Olbia dolphin, 7th/5th century BC (former date told by the guy I bought it from, latter by another guy I showed it to)
What I think I actually bought (after some googling):
1. Arcadius/Salus AE4?, probably Constantinople mint
2. Panticapeus tetrachalkos, circa 210 BC (Anokhin 145)
3. no idea really (apparently there's no such thing as a Greek aurichalkos)
4. Olbia dolphin, circa late 5th century BC
What they look like (to me anyway):
1. [...]ARCADIV[S?...], portrait in middle/SALVS REI[...], CO[...] in exergue; 14x12mm
2. Bow and arrow, ПANTI below/bearded head right; 16mm (and thick)
3. Figure sitting on chair holding scepter? behind, lots of fancy Greek script (see note) on sides/bearded head [Zeus?] right; 18mm (and almost as thick as #2) - oh and it's also yellow(ish)
4. Vaguely dolphin-shaped flat piece of copper, linear-ish protrusion along one side; 30x9(?)mm
Note: I can kind-of read TIOXE on right of figure and TPOПOЛE on left; there are several other letters I can't reliably read, and several dots I can't assign to any letters
...Hope you might be of any assistance
(also in identifying #3). If you wonder, no, I haven't taken any photos and/or weighings (not yet anyway).
Posted 06/08/2013 6:47 pm
(and this computer doesn't seem to have a photo editor decent enough to crop an image properly, and they're too big to be cropped immediately on the optimizer, so some photos might actually be smaller than they should've been - that especially applies to #2).
