| Author |
 Replies: 15 / Views: 1,662 |
|
|
Pillar of the Community
1121 Posts |
My eyes are hurting and there are pages of Constan? Can someone help by pointing me in the right direction to attribute this coin, please? AE 18 mm and wt 3.1 gm   Thanking you,
|
|
|
|
Pillar of the Community
 1121 Posts |
Constantius I ?
I am thinking London RIC VII 160 (or possibly 170)
Edited by Topcat7
10/17/2014 03:40 am
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
1045 Posts |
I am away from my computer at the moment and viewing this from my phone. Neither Constans nor Constantius I issued this type, it is Constantine I
I can't decipher the 3 other important facets (mint mark, altar type, bust type) to narrow it down to a particular RIC # but I am sure others will have some insight.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United Kingdom
1569 Posts |
You will never soar like an eagle if you hang around with turkeys.....
|
|
Pillar of the Community
1121 Posts |
The whole reason for putting this up was to get help to identify this common coin.
I have been doing it all day (various coins) and now I come to this one.
The reason that I asked for the help is because with my limited knowledge I am tripping over myself.
I can read Constantius on the coin but on Wildwinds there are three or four listings for Constantius (0, I, II, III,) There is also a Constans, and several more Constantines. (Sorry, Biancasdad, I referred to Constantius from the coin, rather than Constantine from the listing. An example of my confusion.)
Now a 'new' collector like me can read Constantius on the coin (legend) but I find a very near match on Wildwinds under 'Constantine'. Now those that know more than I do (most everyone) will understand this, but it just confuses me, (along with all of the Caesars not just Julius AND all of the Cleopatras when the only one we ever speak of is Cleopatra VII, apparently).
MetDet71 I shall happily look there, unfortunately I am not familiar with all of the correct 'descriptions of 'Victory With Wreath' etc. to do myself much good. Also the reverse is not as clear as I would like, and the Obverse is confusing enough without getting into the variety of reverses this early in my education.
There is so much to learn (for all of us). I can only ask for your patience. (I do offer my (limited) help in those rare situations that I can see that it might help, so it is not all 'one way'.
Back to this coin.
Perhaps someone will comment on whether I am on the right track for this coin by looking at London RIC VII 160 (or 170), and letting me know, please?
Edited by Topcat7
10/17/2014 06:57 am
|
|
Pillar of the Community
1121 Posts |
The legend on the Obverse appears to read Constantius XX(?)
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
1045 Posts |
No worries topcat we have all been in your shoes at one time. With your coin I can't make out the mint mark so I can't confirm or deny if it is from london, but what I can say for sure is that this IS Constantine the Great. The legend may look like it says 'CONSTANTIUS' due to 1700 years of corrosion and/or physical morphing of the actual metal but you can be sure the actual obverse legend should read IMP CONSTAN_TINVS MAX AVG. As I said before, this particular reverse type has endless varieties that are distinguished by the many different types of altars, bust types, and mint marks If you have never seen this site you should check it out. If you scroll down to the VICTORIAE LAETAE PRINC PERP reverse type and download the spread sheet you can easily see which emperors issued this type but more than that you can see all of the bust types (and descriptions) as well as all of the altar types (with neat little diagrams). http://www.catbikes.ch/coinstuff/coins-ric.htmHere is an example from the Trier mint just because it shows the legend and reverse design so clearly. (not saying your coin is from Trier though)  PS. Please keep posting pictures and asking any questions , everybody learns from it. It is a win win for all cheers Edited by Biancasdad
10/17/2014 08:38 am
|
|
Moderator
 United States
23731 Posts |
Hang in there Topcat, given time it will all make sense. This series was issued by Constantine I (The Great) and his sons Constantine II and Crispus it is known as the VICTORIAE LAETAE PRINC PERP (VLPP). Most of this type will be issued by Constantine I so that's where you should start your search. We are fortunate to have as a member and expert on all coins of Constantine and his family, Victor. I'm sure he will be along to help. You should add to your list of links his excellent site. http://www.constantinethegreatcoins.com |
|
Pillar of the Community
3772 Posts |
Doesn't look like the mint would be London.
Clearly a 'D' or top of either 'P' or 'R' in 3rd(?) position.
Without doing some conservation work in the exergue, my best guess would be PTR for the mint-mark, making it a Trier issue.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
1121 Posts |
Thanks to everyone. I have looked at the links provided (and I have saved several of them).
I am not sure how PTR can mean Trier (Germany?) if STR means Trier or is that simply a spelling mistake?
Haven't heard from Victor, yet, but I am hoping that I shall.
I did check out the link that I was provided with and there was a lot of information there, but I couldn't find a lot of coins to refer to, (I may not have looked in the right place).
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
1045 Posts |
The "TR" is for Trier the P and S denote which officina (workshop) the coin was produced at within the mint region. In this case P = prima denoting the primary or first officina S = secunda or second officina Another link you may want to have gander at and bookmark for future reference  http://www.forumancientcoins.com/nu...mint%20marks |
|
Pillar of the Community
1121 Posts |
Thanks for that. That clears up a lot for me. See, it is all learning. MetDet71 suggested http://www.tesorillo.com/aes/_rev/index102i.htm which I found very interesting and quite informative, but I haven't a clue how to use the information I found there. I haven't been collecting long but I already have over 1200 coins, and while almost all of them are 'attributed' (at least as per the seller's advices), especially the 'recent' ones, I only have a few 'ancients' left to 'attribute'. PishPash tells me to (from now on) only buy coins with good 'pictures' and I think that she might have a valid point, so I have determined to only buy Roman coins that can be easily 'read'. (Early Greeks might be a little different though.) I can see where those 'reference' pages would be of great help, but first you have to be able to 'read' what is in front of you both on the coin and on the page, so when I get the last few coins identified, I should have enough 'stored' knowledge to get myself by with only the odd call for help. Well, we live in hope. |
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
1045 Posts |
You are welcome and I completely understand what you are saying.
Everyday another piece of the puzzle will fall into place. We all take different paths but the journey is what makes it all so rewarding!!
Edited by Biancasdad
10/18/2014 05:17 am
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United Kingdom
2100 Posts |
Even with this degree of wear there is enough evisdence to idetify the mint from the stype of engraving as belonging to Trier. The mint styles are quite distinctive. Here is a Ticinum mint example I bought recently for comparison.  Regards, Martin |
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
1045 Posts |
Wow Martin that is a real cracker.
Well centered, well struck, exquisite details and a lovely patina like icing on a cake.
Congrats
|
|
Pillar of the Community
1121 Posts |
I am not sure as to what "Even with this degree of wear . . ." means. It looks like it is straight from the mint.
Now that's the sort of coin I will have to start buying.
|
| |
Replies: 15 / Views: 1,662 |
|
Posted 10/17/2014 04:57 am
