| Author |
 Replies: 24 / Views: 3,381 |
|
|
|
Pillar of the Community
Russian Federation
5174 Posts |
I think I might as well post those two little coins in this thread instead of a separate identification one, because in this condition and photo quality there's probably no way for anyone to attribute them... Bought in 2016, those photos taken in September 2017. I could swear I had better pics, but I must have misplaced the files at some point. Seller claimed that the coins were Vandalic, and was sufficiently convincing that I paid around $15 for the pair (a really large amount as far as my collection is concerned). In retrospect, I'm not sure why I believed him. They sure aren't official, though, so there's that, I guess? I no longer have the diameters, but I just measured the pattern on the background item, and the circle centers are 8 mm apart. I think this makes the coins 12x10 mm and... 11x11 mm maybe? Somewhere around there. Small AE4 size, anyway.     ...I wonder if there's anything to discuss. Terrible coins, terrible pics. I really got swindled that day. At least they're definitely barbarous, though. |
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
1315 Posts |
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
7066 Posts |
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United Kingdom
2100 Posts |
I have just added this one:- Constantius II - AE2 - Barbarous imitation of RIC VIII Heraclea 082 Obv:- D N CONSTANTIS P F AVG, Pearl diademed, draped & cuirassed bust right Rev:- FEL TEMT OHIIIRATIO, Helmeted soldier left, shield on left arm, spearing falling horseman; shield at ground to right. Horseman turns to face the soldier, and reaches his left arm up towards him. He is bare headed. Minted in Heraclea (G | _ // .SHHA). Reference:- Imitates RIC VIII Heraclea 82 (C2)  and here is the prototype.  |
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
7066 Posts |
Excellent additions, Martin - and great photos to boot.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
Russian Federation
5174 Posts |
Any comment on my pair? Or should I post them in a separate thread?
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
1554 Posts |
@january1may The term "Vandalic" is much overused in the trade. More marketing than history, imo. In his work on Vandal coins published in 1911, Warwick Wroth identified several parcels of small AE with African and Sicilian provenance as belonging to the "Vandalic period" (though not necessarily to the Vandals themselves). Most of those coins are now regarded by academics as simple local imitations or in some cases, products of official Roman mints. Not so in the marketplace where many ragged difficult-to-ID late AE are dubbed "Vandalic" and given a healthy markup.
On your first coin, the obverse legend begins DN IV..., perhaps Justin or Justinian? The second begins DN ARC..., almost certainly Arcadius. To my eye, they appear more mis-struck and/or worn than "barbarous". However, the stylistic line between official and unofficial among the small bronzes in the later empire is subjective.
Edited by Kushanshah
10/07/2019 01:19 am
|
|
Pillar of the Community
Russian Federation
5174 Posts |
Quote:
The second begins DN ARC..., almost certainly Arcadius. True, but the other side looks like it starts with DN as well, and I didn't think that was a reasonable Arcadius reverse legend. Is it? As for the first coin, that reverse didn't look like it had a non-imitative legend at all. But maybe it was just a really mangled official one; perhaps they do get that bad (especially by 6th century). |
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
1554 Posts |
Overstrikes and multiple strikes can really jumble things up. They could could really be anything and you're right, the last photo is probably the obverse of the 2nd coin with DN and a cuirassed shoulder showing.
|
| |
Replies: 24 / Views: 3,381 |
First Page
Posted 10/06/2019 11:51 am
