| Author |
 Replies: 14 / Views: 1,600 |
|
|
Bedrock of the Community
United States
12057 Posts |
Used scanner instead of camera, coin looks better in hand. Forgot I had this stashed away. It was in a dealer's junk box 10+ years ago. It's about 17.4mm AE -- weight is 2.5 to 2.6g -- is it even real? Can't find a match. I suspect it may be fake, but the patina looks very real. Obv: IMP CONST/ANTI? (rest not clear), helmeted and cuirassed bust right Rev: Legend is mostly gone, but bears a strong resemblance to 2 Victories w/VOT PR shield on altar. But the lettering in the shield is hard to read, looks more like VQZ XX? Exergue is (mark) N, also weird. Altar has a very unusual design, too. Any thoughts? Fake/jewelry piece, or real coin?   Thanks in advance! Member ANA - EAC - TNA - SSDC - CCT #890 "Most of the things worth doing in the world had been declared impossible before they were done." -- Louis D. Brandeis |
|
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
3444 Posts |
Not my area of expertise really !
Good news is that it is genuine. Based on the reduced size I am guessing Constantius II circa AD 235.
The coin is a bit 'rough'. It is junk box material that would retail for a few dollars.
The later reduced folles of this period were produced in vast quantity. The types and varieties are quite extensive.
Someone else can give you the exact attribution.
|
|
Moderator
 United States
23731 Posts |
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
949 Posts |
I see no indication that the coin is fake.
It is indeed the two victories type with shield and altar between. The type is often called the VLPP reverse, for the legend Victoriae Laetae Princ Perp.
The shield inscription on your coin is normal (VOT / XX) and the altar decoration is a common X-bar, seriffed X with a short horiz bar through the middle.
I do not think the exergual mark is an N as you supposed, but I cannot see enough detail in the pic to allow me to read the whole mark. However, the "N-like" figure is in the center of the exergue, and it is tempting to attribute the coin to Antioch. However this coin type was not produced by any of the mints east of Siscia, so Antioch is out of the question.
Could we get a larger image of the reverse?
|
|
Pillar of the Community
Canada
1046 Posts |
hi and Happy New Year with all due respect i`m bidding on an older coin I know nothing about the images are poor though   if I do win it would be nice tobe able to know a bit tia |
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
1045 Posts |
One thing that we can say for sure is that this is Constantine the Great. Constantius II did not issue this type. Constantine II issued this type but not with "IMP" in the legend.
Certainly, some better pictures would help in narrowing down the exact reference as there is a mind boggling number of variations for this type
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
7066 Posts |
Quote:
if I do win it would be nice tobe able
to know a bit Tia, Probably Alexius I, 1081-1118 AD.     Edited by Kamnaskires
01/01/2016 8:15 pm
|
|
Moderator
United States
23731 Posts |
It does appear to be a Class K anonymous follis of Alexius I Sear# 1901.
|
|
Bedrock of the Community
 United States
12057 Posts |
Member ANA - EAC - TNA - SSDC - CCT #890 "Most of the things worth doing in the world had been declared impossible before they were done." -- Louis D. Brandeis |
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
7066 Posts |
I agree that this coin is a bit of an oddity. I am certainly out of my comfort zone here, but the shield held by the victories on these types should read VOT PR, correct? This is the single most illegible or poorly transcribed version of VOT PR (particularly the PR) I've ever seen. I have no doubt the coin is ancient, but wonder - despite the decent style of the victories - if perhaps this could be an unofficial/barbarous example.
|
|
Bedrock of the Community
United States
12057 Posts |
I did a bit of Googling and found out that there were apparently a lot of ancient copies of these made that had funky legends and inscriptions, perhaps this is one.
Edit: I got this coin back in the late 90's at a local (non-ancient) coin shop that I used to visit. He had a box labelled "unsorted/unidentified ancient coins, $3 each" and I bought this one because most of the others looked even more inscrutable, and on this one I could at least see part of a design.
Member ANA - EAC - TNA - SSDC - CCT #890 "Most of the things worth doing in the world had been declared impossible before they were done." -- Louis D. Brandeis Edited by paralyse
01/02/2016 01:13 am
|
|
Moderator
United States
23731 Posts |
Thanks for posting better pictures. I would agree that it is not an official issue. Though it is well made.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
949 Posts |
Barbarous for sure, now that I can see the details. The exergual inscription is a tipoff, not representing any official Roman mint, but the blundering of the rest of the inscriptions on both sides confirms it. Bob has it right that the shield inscription should read, "VOT / PR" (Not VOT/XX as I had said) but even this is compromised.
I agree that the execution of the engraving work is artistically good, but was not done at one of the official Roman mints. However, it is not a counterfeit in the sense of "fake." The term gaining acceptance in numismatic scholarship for this kind of coin is "imitative." It has been called "barbarous" because it appears to have been made by individuals not conversant in Imperial Latin, the usual language for inscriptions, as indicated by botched spellings and letter forms. However, hoard evidence seems to indicate that within limited domains coins like these circulated as a local currency, often filling in for an absence of sufficient currency from the official sources. This was particularly true in parts of the empire that were not always secured by a garrisoned military presence for one reason or another. Unlike the fouree coins of an earlier time, which tried to represent coins of greater value than their metal content would allow, these coins were often made to the proper metal standard for their periods of manufacture and use, at least for fabric if not always for module.
This is a nice coin that is truly ancient, and should be honored for the historical artifact that it is.
|
|
Bedrock of the Community
United States
12057 Posts |
I've got it back into a 2x2 now with the correct information -- thanks to everyone who replied for your help!
Member ANA - EAC - TNA - SSDC - CCT #890 "Most of the things worth doing in the world had been declared impossible before they were done." -- Louis D. Brandeis |
|
Moderator
United States
23731 Posts |
|
| |
Replies: 14 / Views: 1,600 |
|
Posted 01/01/2016 3:07 pm
