![]() |
Metal detecting holidays in England with the Worlds most successful metal detecting club Twinned with Midwest Historical Research Society USA |
|
Celtic gold and Roman bronze coins 150BC to 450 AD |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
New Roman/British silver coin page click here New seperate Roman gold page click here Use our new searchable databases to find Romano British silver and gold coins by any key word |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
In 55 B.C. the Roman general Julius Caesar conquered France (At the time the country was called Gaul, and the Romans called it Gallia). The Gauls fought hard against the Romans and had been helped by their friends in Britain. Caesar was upset by their assistance and decided to teach the Britons a lesson.
Julius Caesar made two attempts to invade Britain, first in 55 B.C. and then again in 54 B.C. Both times the British warriors and the rotten British weather made his army give up and return to Gallia. Nearly a hundred years later in 43 A.D. the Emperor Claudius sent another army to invade Britain. This time the Romans were successful, Roman Britain had begun!
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Comments and ID's against Roman coins are from our expert Mark Lehman who also lectures on the subject in the USA Comments and ID's against Celtic coins are from Dr Philip de Jersey who runs the National Celtic Coin Index |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Coin denominations of the Roman Empire The
aureus was the main gold coin of the Early Empire, and its minting
was under the direct control of the Emperor. Under Augustus, the currency
was such: Solidus SILVER Coins Denarius Quinarius
Follis Centenionalis AEs
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
![]() ![]() |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
'It's
a very nice example of one of the rarer Clacton types - only just over
20 of the basic type (VA 1458) are recorded, and there are some variations
within that group (mostly in minor elements of decoration, and in particular
the form of the 'flower' beneath the horse)'. It will be CCI 04.0481.
'70BC |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Gallo-Belgic E stater, c. 56 BC. It's class 2 of the type, listed in Van Arsdell as VA 52. This will be 04.0476 in the CCI. |
Cunobelin
Gold full stater 10 to 40 AD, CCI 03.0811. |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||
![]() ![]() |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Celtic
stater of Addedomaros 37 - 33 BC
CCI No 04.0678 'this is a very good example, both sides nice and sharp. I'm doing some detailed work on the dies of this type at the moment, there are quite a lot - something like 25-30 obverse dies and maybe 50 for the reverse - so it must have been quite a sizeable coinage, probably produced over a number of years. Somewhere between about 45 - 25 BC is probably a reasonable guess'. |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
![]() |
![]() |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Celtic gold stater Norfolk wolf type 65-45 BC found by Alaskan Todd
'CCI No 04.0681 is the Norfolk wolf. Another nice coin, c. 50 BC. The basic type is common (over 300 coins) but there are minor variations in the design, and this appears to be a rare variant with a sort of stick below the wolf rather than the usual crescent and pellet. I haven't checked through all the records but from memory there are no more than half a dozen or so from this die variant'. |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Gold stater
Dubnovellaunus 70BC found by Boston Al |
Celtic 1/4 stater found by Alaskan George "it's
an early (perhaps c. 50-40 BC) quarter stater, possibly produced in
Essex. |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Hard to imagine the skill required in those days to to put two thin gold sheets over a bronze inner. Contemporary forgery of 'Clacton' type gold stater circa 70 BC |
Celtic
AE probably Kentish - boar right, pellet in ring below - ? Horse galloping
right |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||
![]() |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
![]() |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Cunoblein stater hoard with corn and horse design found by Virginia Brian(g)From left to right CCI 04.0477 'classic A' series, VA 2027-1. Generally believed to have been the last major series of his gold, so probably dating from the 30s AD. There are three or four matches for this particular pair of dies in the CCI, among the c. 100 of the basic type. The decoration at the base of the corn-ear is a bit more showy than usual. CCI 04.0478 'plastic A' series, VA 2010-3. Believed to have preceded the classic type, so perhaps from c. 25 - 35 AD. About ninety of these are recorded here, and again there are a number of matches for both of these dies, including at least one coin in the British Museum (BMC 1819 in Hobbs's Catalogue of Iron Age coins in the BM). CCI 04.0479 'linear' series, VA 1925-1. The earliest of these three, perhaps from c. 20 AD, and a little rarer, with about 60 recorded here. Again there is a coin in the BM from the same pair of dies, BMC 1783. There are a couple of rather unusual features to the dies - although not clear on your example because of the position it has been struck, there appears to be no V on the end of CAMV, and there's also a mark - perhaps some kind of privy mark - after the CVN on the reverse, you can just see the top of what looks like a letter I between the N and the horse'sfront legs on your coin. |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Gallo-Belgic
E stater, c. 56 BC. It's class 2 of the type, listed in Van Arsdell
as VA 52. This will be 04.0476 in the CCI. |
'Based
on the portrait, it appears to be either Didius Julianus or Pertinax.
Both emperor's coins are quite rare'. |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||
![]() |
![]() |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Cunobelin
tribe full stater AD 40 found by Boston Al |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
![]() |
![]() |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Celtic
gold 1/4 stater Addedomaros Floral Trinovantes tribe, 30 BC found by
Billericay Mark
'CCI
No 04.0680 is the quarter stater, VA 1623. Probably an issue of Addedomaros,
so similar date to the stater VA 1620, although since there's no inscription
we can't be certain. The style of the horse is very like other coins
of Addedomaros though so it's a reasonable guess. Just under 60 of
these recorded' |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
![]() ![]() |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Minted by Arcadius, ruled 383 to 408 AD; this coin was issued between 15th May 392 to January 17th 395 and could have a 10% silver content. Found by Cal Charles | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||
![]() (b) |
![]() |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
'This is an example of the Clacton 1/4 stater - it's not listed in VA, but there's one in the British Museum catalogue, at BMC 192 (where it's incorrectly attributed to the Corieltauvi). These coins were virtually unknown until the 1980s, but we now have records of more than 50 of them, predominantly from Essex, and it seems certain to be the quarter stater type associated with the full Clacton stater. There is strong Gallo-Belgic influence, as you mention - the obverse seems to be copied from the 'three men in a boat' design found on the imported Gallo-Belgic quarter staters, while the reverse is indeed nearly identical to the Clacton stater type. Its date is probably c. 50 BC. This one will be in the Index as CCI 04.2136'. found by Manhattan Gary |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
||||||||||||||||||||||||
![]() |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Dubnovellaunus
Late 1st BC to Early 1stC AD Full Celtic gold stater found by Texas
Dave
Cunoblein 40AD - 1/4 Gold stater found by Boston Bud 'many thanks for these, they're both very fine coins. The Dubnovellaunus stater is VA 1655-5, and will be CCI 04.2295. We have records of just under 100 of the basic Dubnovellaunus stater type (VA 1650-1655); it can be very difficult to split them further without studying the individual dies, because key motifs such as the inscription are often off the edge of the flan, as here. In fact this example is struck a long way off-centre on the reverse, since it's unusual to see just about the whole of the motif beneath the branch under the horse. The Cunobelin quarter is rarer. It's actually the so-called 'plastic' type, VA 2017 (CCI 04.2296). The key to its identification is that it's the only Cunobelin type which has CAM CVN on the obverse, rather than the usual CAMV. We have records of just 17 other examples. There are also other, rarer subtypes, which have A or AGR on the reverse coupled with this obverse'. |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Celtic Cunbelin bronze 1/4 stater found by Vegas Mike Celtic Coin Index as 04.264 |
Morini ' boat tree' type c 70BC Celtic quarter stater 'As
you say it is the Morini boat/tree type. The closest catalogue reference
would be Van Arsdell 69-1, though as you realize it's not quite the
same, but has all those extra little crosses around the boat. This
is not particularly uncommon - we have at least 60 or 70 examples
of this among the 700 or so of the basic quarter stater type - but
it is quite unusual to see them as well displayed as here. It's arguable
that this variety ought to be given some sort of separate catalogue
entry, but for the time being it falls into the VA 69 bracket. |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||
![]() |
![]() |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
1stC BC
Roman silver coin forgery |
'unfortunately,
one can't even see if there is a laurel wreath or diadem that might help with vague dating. My first impression is that it's post-Constantinian, but that's in the realm of "clarevoyant attribution" rather than being based on any firm evidence' |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Roman Republican denarius, Crawford 390/2 Moneyer:l.Lvcreti Trio, Mint Rome 76 BC obv:laureate head of neptune facing right with trident over shoulder, behind is a control mark. rev winged boy on dolphin speeding right,below L.LVCRETI border of dots TRIO 3.73g, 18.08 mm. |
4thC Roman bronze 'Your coin is a "BEATA TRANQVILLITAS" altar type and appears to be from either London or Trier mint - the exergual mintmark is too vague in your picture to be sure - these date to the early Constantinian era, pre 324 A.D' |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||
![]() |
(snr) |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
"Silvered"
AE follis of Constantius I (Constantine the great's father) as Caesar
c. 295-305 A.D. The Obverse inscription is (probably) [FL VAL] CONSTANTIVS
NOB C - his laureate and cuirassed bust right. The reverse inscription
is GENIO POPVLI ROMANI "(To) the genius (spirit) of the Roman
People" with Genius standing left holding a patera in his right
hand and a cornucopia in his left. Unfortunately, I can't make out
the mintmark - in the exergual space on reverse - under the "ground
line" upon which Genius stands - so I can't give you a definitive
attribution - if you can make out letters in this area, let me know
and I'll give you RIC # and exact dates. 'The series in general is universal, ie: this type was struck at all mints in the empire for several years during a general re-tooling of the money system - so in great numbers, but certain officinae at certain mints striking for certain personages may be considered common, scarce or rare. It's certainly "important" in its greater British context since Constantius' victories in the area were instrumental in getting him promoted to the Tetrarchy in the first place, and by extension, his son Constantine the Great and his whole brood who would dominate the scene for the next 50 ' Information
kindly supplied by Mark from the UAC
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Addedomaros 37 - 33 BC found by Dakota Dennis 'a very nice example of the Addedomaros spiral stater, VA 1620. Lots of them about now (150 plus) but this is a very decent example - though as usual without a trace of the reverse inscription, all off the edge of the flan. VA's dating is a bit unrealistic, I would suggest anywhere between 45 and 30 BC, but certainly a little later than the Gallo-Belgic stater you recorded before. This one will be CCI 05.0196. |
'This
appears at first glance to one of two possible coins - either an early
Byzantine-era pentanummium (c. 525 A.D.), or a fragment (or barbarous
imitation) of a centenionalis of Constantius II or Magnentius (c. 350-355 A.D.) with a large Chi-Rho (X + P) monogram style Christian symbol on the reverse'. |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||
![]() |
![]() |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
GLORIA
EXERCITVS - soldiers flanking single
legionary standard - of some member of the family of Constantine and so dates to about 335-340 A.D |
'Tetricus
I, 270-273 A.D. and appears to be Spes advancing left holding flower and hitching skirt - Cf. Sear RCV, 3181' |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Large Roman in great shape 11.97g - 30mm Neronian VICTORIA AVGVSTI S C dupondius 'It would date to 50 AD to 68 AD based on date of minting but keep in mind that by the time the coin traveled all the way to Britain and acquired as much wear as it enjoys, it was probably deposited in that field where your guy found it 20 to 30 years later and possibly as late as Hadrian's time (117 AD plus.) (These things circulated a long time sometimes.) The rarity of the coin is certainly in the "scarce" category' |
Chicago Ron's 2nd full Celtic stater 5.30g 16mm CCI 05.0267 |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||
![]() |
![]() |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Chicago Keith's and Chicago Ron's full Celtic staters Left example 5.64g 16mm
CCI 05.0212 |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Addedomaros type 45- 30 BC 17mm 5.50g not in any major reference book Canadian Rod 'This will be CCI 05.0283. What is unusual about it is that the reverse is struck quite far off-centre, so that much more of the inscription is visible than is usually the case. Although the initial A of Addedomaros is not visible (at least I can't make it out on this image), what you can see then reads DDIID working clockwise round the top of the horse - with the first two Ds represented by the Greek letter theta (so with a bar across the middle), then the II representing the fourth letter, E, then a conventional D for the next letter. And obviously the rest of the inscription would carry on round in front of the horse's head and beneath the cornucopia under the horse. It is more common to see these coins offstruck so that the lower part of the design is visible, and relatively very rare to see the early part of the inscription as you can here'. CCI 05.0283 |
Addedomaros 45- 30 BC found by Mass Linda 19 mm 5.45g CCI 05.0285 |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Addedomaros
45- 30 BC found by Canadian
Rod 17mm 5.42g sent to CCI for logging |
Addedomaros 45- 30 BC found by Mass Linda 18 mm 5.62 g CCI 05.0286 |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Addedomaros type 45- 30 BC - 5.53g 18mm Veggie Mike CCI 05.0290 |
Addedomaros type 45- 30 BC 5.62g 17mm Mass Linda CCI 05.0291 |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Addedomaros type 45- 30 BC 5.63g17mm Mass Bruce 'The 'burnt' one is curious, can't really tell whether a lot of that will clean off or not from the image. It's interesting that so far, most of the coins are really quite worn - which suggests that these coins had been around for a while before they were buried. So subject to further finds etc, at the moment I'd guess a burial date somewhere round 20 BC, perhaps even a few years later'. CCI 05.0293 |
Addedomaros type 45- 30 BC 5.57g 16mm Mass Bruce CCI 05.0292 |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
'local
imitation of a Nero ANNONA AVGVSTA CERES sestertius in very crude style
- the portrait less so than the reverse. The portrait looks like Nero,
but he had a fairly limited group of reverse types and the only likely
possibility for a standing figure next to a seated(?) one is the Annona
type'. |
3rd
century product - of excellent style - although you show the reverse
rotated 90 or so degrees clockwise - it may also be unofficial, but
the relief is unusually high for a "barbarous radiate".
The reverse is probably meant to be a peacock flying right with a
person riding it - this is a memorial style, the peacock bearing the
person off to "heaven" or wherever. Say around 260-275 A.D.
(?) I believe would be a safe guess. I think there are coins struck
posthumously for Valerian by Gallienus with this reverse, I know there
was a type or two Valerian struck for his late wife Mariniana with
a similar reverse, but that's no woman on the obverse and women were
never portrayed with radiate crown. This is problematic, because at
the time of Gallienus, Britain was part of the Gallic empire, so you
might need to look under listings for Postumus or his successors to
find a closer match
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
'This
coin seems to be an official, though highly worn sestertius of either
Vespasian or Titus - I think I can see "VES.." in the obverse
inscription from about 9:00-10:00. Since they both were portrayed looking
nearly alike and Titus used VESP in his inscriptions, it would be difficult
to say which of the two it is from your photo, but you could fairly
safely date this to the 60's & 70's A.D'. |
Trinovantes Clacton Celtic gold 1/4 stater 50 BC 1.29g 14mm CCI 05.296 'yet another very interesting coin. This is a Clacton quarter stater, unlisted in Van Arsdell but in the British Museum catalogue (in the wrong place, with the Corieltauvi) as BMC 192, and in 'Coins of England' as no. 42. These coins were almost unknown in the late 1980s, but there are now about 60 of them recorded here, mostly from Essex and Suffolk. The reverse design is basically the same as the better-known Clacton stater (VA 1455), while the obverse has yet another interpretation of the three men in a boat design, here with two 'men', and sometimes looking like a human face. Unfortunately not readily visible on this one, though you should be able to pick out the outline of the boat. Of those 60 or so examples, possibly as few as two are struck from the same reverse die as this coin, which has several large flaws and is probably from late in the series (as the use of a nearly plain obverse die also suggests). Both of the earlier two coins came from Suffolk, one from Ipswich and the other near Alderton. The type probably dates to c. 50 BC and was definitely a production of the Trinovantes. |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||
![]() |
![]() |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
45 BC Addedomaros
Celtic gold coin 5.58g,
15.72mm CCI 05.0752 found
by Mass Bruce |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
![]() |
![]() |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Morini
' boat tree' type c 70BC Celtic quarter stater 1.41g, 11.0 mm sent to
CCI for logging found by Atlanta Mike |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
![]() |
![]() |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
45 BC Addedomaros Celtic gold full stater found by Texas Gary 5.45g, 18.78 mm 'thanks very much for these, nice to see another Addedomaros after a gap of a few weeks! This one will be CCI 05.0749. The obverse is good, looks like one of the earlier dies in the series with the pellets between the arms. It's interesting that this one is that much further from the bulk of the other coins; it still fascinates and puzzles me, trying to work out exactly what sort of site you've got there, or what the precise pattern is behind the deposition of the coins'. |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
![]() |
![]() |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Celtic gold 1/4 stater of the Cunoblein tribe 1stC BC to 40AD.(Biga type) head facing left found by Wis Paul 1.38g, 10.89 mm
'another cracking little coin. It is the biga type as you say, still quite rare: we have just over 20 of the quarter recorded. I had hoped to have a look at the dies in comparison to the rest of the coins in Oxford this morning, but ran out of time and I'm now back in Guernsey again. That'll have to wait a while, but in the meantime it looks as though it's one of the later strikings of this type, because of the simplified CAMVL inscription on the obverse. The earliest examples have each letter very clearly defined, but they soon merge into what looks almost like a zigzag on some coins. Saying it's a 'late striking' is all relative of course: it's possible that the biga type was struck over a very short period, perhaps even just months and certainly unlikely to be more than say five years or so, sometime around 8 - 13 AD I would estimate. It'll be CCI 05.0688 |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
![]() |
![]() |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Chicago Ron's 'Snettisham' type ? Celtic gold full stater 5.85g - 17.05mm 'Having seen this one I've had to think again about 05.0680, the Whaddon Chase type I wrote about earlier. Although quite different in their individual style these are probably both the same variety of WC stater, actually listed as VA 1498. This is a rather puzzling type because it's not clear whether it really belongs to the WC group or - as you suggested - the Snettisham type. There are 18 examples of it here and those with findspots are a mixture of Essex, Suffolk and Norfolk - on that basis it could arguably be either WC or Snettisham. In terms of style, they are perhaps among the very last WC staters rather than being the first Snettisham, which appear to have been based on the Whaddon Chase design. In terms of date this might only be a difference of a few months, and almost certainly not more than a few years, so it's perhaps unreasonable to expect we'll be able to tie it down quite so neatly. CCI 05.0687'. |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
![]() |
![]() |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Wis Dave's 1/4 Uninscribed Celtic gold stater 1.43g, 12.98mm 'Yes, this is interesting. It's an uninscribed quarter stater, traditionally attributed to the Atrebates (in the South Thames) but almost certainly a North Thames issue. We have records of about 25 of them, and without exception they've come from the North Thames area: it was previously attributed to the Atrebates because of the style, which resembles their uninscribed quarter staters with a wreath on the obverse. The date of this quarter would be around c. 45 BC, I would estimate, so like the Whaddon Chase it could be just a little earlier than the Addedomaros coins. It is catalogued in Van Arsdell as VA 260-1, but not only wrongly as Atrebates but also listed as silver. Many of the surviving examples are struck from the same pair of dies, which develop some fairly major flaws, especially on the reverse; the lack of many dies suggests this wasn't a very big issue, in comparison to the Addedomaros spiral for example. If I remember rightly there are one or two examples of this type in the huge East Leicestershire hoards which came up about 3 years ago, but mostly they're Essex/Suffolk area. This'll be CCI 05.0683'. |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
![]() |
![]() |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Ark Gary's second 45 BC Addedomaros Celtic gold stater 5.50g, 16.35mm CCI 05.0679 |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
![]() |
![]() |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Illinois Tim's 45 BC Addedomaros Celtic gold stater 5.63g, 17.96mm CCI 05.0678 |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
![]() |
![]() |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Chicago Ron's Celtic gold stater 'Whadden Chase' type 5.95g, 17.68 mm The Whaddon Chase stater (yes, it is that type) will be CCI 05.0680. These coins are probably not very much earlier than the Addedomaros staters - it all depends really on when one dates the Addedomaros issue. It seems fairly certain that the Whaddon Chase staters could be from the later stages of the Gallic War, say about 54 BC at the earliest; they could be a little bit later, but are unlikely to be after say 40 BC at the very latest. If Addedomaros's spiral staters are his latest stater issues, then they could be somewhere around 30-25 BC, so perhaps up to 25 years later than Whaddon Chase. It just depends where each type fits, and we don't have an exact idea. I suppose it's true to say though that there is almost certainly a minimum of ten years between them, and more likely 20. One of my colleagues recently suggested that the WC staters were issued by Cassivellaunus, to pay off Caesar during the Gallic War. They certainly seem to be found mostly in the territory of the Catuvellauni (so this one would be a bit further east than usual . The main catalogue reference for this type is VA 1476 in Van Arsdell's 'Celtic Coinage of Britain'. They're relatively common (300 or so recorded) but a lot of these are finds from the original WC hoard, found in Bucks in 1849. |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
![]() |
![]() |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Ark Gary's
45 BC Addedomaros Celtic gold stater 5.55g, 16.02mm sent to CCI for
recording
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
![]() |
![]() |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
45 BC Addedomaros Celtic gold full stater 5.51g - 19.05 mm found by Ohio Mike This one will be CCI 05.0667. As you say, a very well-used reverse die. I think I recognize the die - after looking at these quite intensively over the last year or two, the individual dies start to become recognizable. The obverse is on the other hand pretty sharp, and must have been struck from a fairly fresh die.' |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
![]() |
![]() |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
45 BC Addedomaros Celtic gold full stater found by Florida Don 'this one's a real cracker! Certainly one of the best I've recorded in recent years, with just a little wear, as you say. The quality of the engraving is also extremely high - I'm sure these must have been among the first dies engraved for this type. The horse's muzzles which I mentioned last time are particularly neat here, it's really unusual to see them quite so clearly. I also suspect, though I haven't worked out how to prove it yet, that the coins with the pellets between the spiral arms are the earlier examples of this type. I'll record this one as CCI 05.0655' |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
![]() |
![]() |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
45 BC Addedomaros Celtic gold full stater found by Ark Gary 'Well, this is a nice one, and as you say with those intriguing symbols above the horse visible. What they seem to be is three horse's muzzles - on some dies they are virtually identical to the muzzle actually on the horse. Curiously, at roughly the same time that Addedomaros was using this motif on his staters, so was Commios, down in Hampshire. In fact since Commios is generally dated a little earlier than Addedomaros, it's not impossible that the latter encountered one of Commios's staters and decided to copy this feature. It quite often appears blundered, which suggests that the die engravers didn't always know what they were looking at. I'll record this one as CCI 05.0603, and I look forward to more! |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
![]() ![]() |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
'VA
2029, one of the rarest of Cunobelin's stater types with the left-facing
classic style horse. We have just thirteen others of this type recorded;
this one will be CCI 05.0666'. |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Celtic
quarter stater Gallo Belgic 70 BC found by Canadian Rod VA 69-1 CCI 03.0203 |
#That
would be "ARA PACIS" The Altar of Peace. It's just a large,
squarish object that corresponds pretty well to the blob on your coin.
Positive ID for Nero. According to RIC, the years the type was minted
were 65 & 66 A.D. and only at Lugdunum (modern Lyon). Some sub-types
are considered "common" some less so, but I doubt we'll ever
be able to read enough of the obverse inscription to say more than that
it's the ARA PACIS type'. Mark |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||
![]() |
![]() |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
4thC Valens - 364-378 A.D Roman bronze with the info supplied by Mark at the URF 'That
is the emperor Valens - 364-378 A.D. Obverse inscription DN VALENS
PF AVG diademed, draped and cuirassed bust right. The SECVRITAS REIPVBLICAE
AE3's of him and his brother are very, very common. His brother Valentinian
I who pre-deceased him in 375 due to not waiting four hours for brother
Valens to arrive, hoping to claim the "glory" for his imagined
"victory" at Hadrianople for himself, is one of the classic
hubris stories of the later Empire. Valentinian and hiis legions were
ridded down by the Gothic cavalry employing their new invention -
the stirrip - and anihilated. One of the greatest disasters to befall
the Empire at this time I can't make out the mintmark on the reverse
- perhaps some cleaning would reveal sufficient tops of letters in
the exergue to tell you what mint produced this piece. |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
![]() |
![]() |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
4thC Roman bronze - Comments from Mark Lehman 'That's
an easy one - up to a point. It's Constantius II, (377-361 A.D.) DN
CONSTANTIVS PF AVG. Diademed, draped and cuirassed bust right. The
reverse type is FEL TEMP REPARATIO - roughly translated as "Happy
days are here again". The reverse shows a soldier advancing left,
spearing a fallen horseman. As inappropriate as this juxtaposition
of legend and scene might seem, the thought that foot-soldiers could
unhorse and kill "barbarian" cavalry was comforting enough
to those for whom this propaganda type was issued. |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
![]() |
![]() |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
GLORIA
EXERCITVS - 2 soldiers standing, facing, holding spears in outside
hands and leaning inside hands on shields, flanking a single legionary
standard with a chi-rho Christogram on it Info supplied by Mark
Lehman |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
![]() |
![]() |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
'In
your photos, I can't make out any of the obverse legend or even see
a clear profile of the portrait. My guess, from what little I can see
is that it might be Antonine-era: c. 140-180 A.D. The reverse has a
"generic" standing female personification holding a cornucopia
in her left arm, and I'm not altogether sure what she's holding in her
right. A scepter, a long torch, a caduceus, a standard - any of those
are possible, and with only a couple of letters visible, we could only
tell which personification it's meant to be by the "attributes"
- what she holds, that is. The S - C in the lower fields could be found
on just about any Imperial AE of the era - it merely means the Emperor
was paying lipservice to the powerless Senate by saying the bronze was
issued ex senatus consultio - by the permission of the Senate. Info supplied
by Mark Lehman |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
'It's almost certainly 3rd century by the radiate crown on the obverse - it looks nothing like a 4th century "post-reform radiate". I'm not making out any legends or the reverse type on that one, either. What is the diameter in mm? I'd say, depending on diameter, that it's either an official antoninianus from the darkest hour of the Empire - Gallienus-Claudius Gothicus - 260-270 A.D. or a contemporary (so-called "barbarous radiate", although I dislike that term - the folks who made and used them were no more barbarians than the Italians) imitative radiate' Info form Mark
at the URF. |
'The "celticbronze" is actually an early Roman Provincial As or Semis from Spain - Costulo, I believe. That's probably a bull on it. This could belong to either what's know as the "Romano-Celtiberian" series from the time of the Republic (2dn-1st centuries B.C.) or could be as late as Augustus/Tiberius in the 1st century A.D'. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
300-305 A.D Maximian - Constantius I 'These
are both folles (sing.- follis, plural-folles) dating from approximately
300-305 A.D. Both from the Mint at London which eschewed exergual mintmarks
during this era. Maximian's obverse legend is: IMP C MAXIMIANVS PF AVG. He is laureate and cuirassed. Constantius' obverse legend is FL IVL CONSTANTIVS NOB C, noting that his status was less than Imperial at this time - he would briefely be emperor before dying of illness in Britain in 307. He is also laureate and cuirassed. I would assign Maximian to RIC VI, London 17, and Constantius to 22 of the same series. Both these coins originally had a silvery wash over the copper to indicate that they were to be considered part of the silver series. The Maximian is rated "Common", Constantius "Scarce" in RIC, but both are in exceptional condition (as I'm sure you're aware) particularly for field-finds in England. I would limit any cleaning to a bare minimum on these, exposing only the highlights of legend and devices, leaving the fields encrusted for contrast - "earthen highlights" - common for mideast finds, this would be brilliantly unusual for native, British coins. Nice pair of finds, guys!! Mark |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Huge Roman Sestertius
'A
little tough to be sure from the images, but I believe that's Faustina
II, the wife of Marcus Aurelius. If you rotate the obverse image 90
degrees clockwise, you see the characteristic hair-bun at the back
of her neck. also, what's visible of the legend is probably: FA [VST]
INA AVGVS [TA]. I can't really tell who the personification on the
reverse might be. She was married to M. Aurelius in 145 A.D. and died
in 175 A.D., So if this isn't a "DIVA" posthmous type, and
it doesn't seem to be the sort struck under Antoninus Pius, this would
date to 161-175 A.D. |
'This
is an AE sestertius of Faustina Jr., Wife of Marcus Aurelius, issued
after her death in 175 A.D. She died while accompanying her husband
on a journey to the East. Mark Lehman |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||
![]() ![]() |
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Possible
Roman lead token |
70BC Morini 'boat tree' Celtic gold 1/4 stater 1.45g, 11.61mm CCI 06.0187 |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
'many thanks for these. The Gallo-Belgic 'boat tree' quarter will be CCI 06.0187, and the Clacton quarter 06.0188. The G-B quarter is a lovely coin, looks very sharp. There is a distinctive class of these which have all the little crosses around the 'boat' - they're not uncommon, but not always as nice as this. The Clacton quarter is one of those where the wear on the obverse makes it look as though there's a face - and perhaps the Celts who saw the coin thought that too, although it is based on the same boat that appears on the Gallo-Belgic coin. Again it's not particularly rare, at least not anymore - there are a good dozen or more from this obverse die, and probably this reverse too although it's difficult to be sure from this image'. |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
50BC Trinovantes Celtic gold (Clacton type)1/4 stater - 1.13g, 13.71g CCI 06.0188 |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
50BC Gallo
Belgic Celtic gold stater 6.24g - 16.58mm CCI 06.0190 |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
North Thames type Celtic gold stater 5.54g - 16.93
'many thanks for this one, a rare one indeed. It's an example of VA 1509, also in the BM catalogue (BMC 350) and no. 34 in 'Coins of England'. It usually has a couple of S shapes on the obverse, although I can't see any traces of them here - the obverse is sometimes worn though. It seems to be a North Thames type, to judge from the few provenances available, but there are only six examples previously recorded so it is a rare type. I would guess quite early too, perhaps 40s BC. Certainly one of the best Celtic you've had so far, thanks! It'll be CCI 06.0195'. cheers |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Roman 1 - 2.20g, 19,14mm
- Roman 2 - 0.92g, 12.43mm Roman 1 'small-module follis of one of the members of the family of Constantine - and a perfect example of what I refer to as "Murphy's Law of Ancient Coin Legends" - the part that is most important, if there's any question who it is, will be the part that is missing. I can easily say who it isn't - it's neither Constans (wrong letter on the end) nor Constantius II (too early) - what I can read on the obverse is "...ONSTANTI.." but this could be either Constantine I or II. The reverse is the "SOLI INVICTO COMITI" type and shows radiate Sol standing left raising hand and holding a globe. It's from Lugdunum by the prominent "L" in the exergue (SLG, probably), and, looking in RIC, I see from the S - F fieldmarks that it's too early at 313-14 A.D.to be Constantine II.' Roman
2
'I am not going to be able to tell you who or where-from on this one
- but your reverse image was upside-down again. It's a GLORIA EXERCITVS
(Glory of the Armies) with 2 soldiers, holding spears in outer hands
and resting inner hands on shields, flanking 2 legionary standards.
The 2-standard type are the earlier form with this legend and date to
330-335 or so. Again, it's a member of the family of Constantine - could
even be Constantine himself, but there doesn't appear to be any usable
legend on the obverse of this one at all'. |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
That
one's easy - that's a Constantinopolis city-commemorative. When Constantine
the Great moved his capitol from Rome to his newly-rebuilt city of
Constantinople, there was a large series of parallel "Urbs Roma"
(to help appease "jilted" Romans) and "Constantinopolis"
coins issued from all mints. Originally issued around 330 in great
quantities, then declining in size and numbers, they were revived
after Constantine's death in 337 when the succession was somewhat
in doubt - so that individual mints didn't have to declare for the
various contenders. As small as your is, it probably dates to just
before or sometime in the decade after Constantine's death. |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
![]() ![]() |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| What
I can tell you, despite the lack of detail, is that this is a dupondius
of Trajan, 98-117 A.D. Luckily, in the early 2nd century A.D. the Romans
were still doing high-quality, representational work and Trajan's profile
is unmistakeable. The denomination, "dupondius" (two asses)
is indicated by the spiky, radiate crown of Sol - by this time, any coin
displaying this sort of headgear can be assumed to be a double-denomination.
particularly since the "S" of the obligatory "S - C"
(Senatus Consultio - "by consent of the Senate" - an official
and fondly held myth that the Senate still had any say in matters like
the small-change supply at this point in the Imperium) virtually all imperial
AE's carried seems to be in the correct position this way. I still can't
quite make out who or what is being portrayed here, and since Trajan was
around for quite a while - nearly 20 years - there are literally hundreds
of possible reverse types for dupondii. A complete WAG might be Hilaritas,
who is usually portrayed holding a long palm branch. Mark |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
![]() |
![]() |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Vespasian
AD 69-79 |
Antoninianus
of Carausius. |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Septimius
Severus 193-214 AD Denarius debased silver (b) found by Arkansas Gary |
Constantine
III AD 407-411 |
Bronze
Sestertius Marcus Aurelius 161-180 AD |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| This
time you have two unofficial coins. I've been trying to move away from
the term "barbarous" in describing these because it's an outmoded
and rather pejoritive term coined by elitists of an earlier age - as in
"Barbarous Radiate" - when, in reality, the folks who made and
used these coins were no more barbarous than those who made and used the
coins they imitate. But whether you use the term "Contemporary Counterfeit",
"Unofficial Imitative", "Ancient Forgery, or "Barbarous
Radiate", that's what the first one is. I can't tell from your photo
whether the radiate portrait is bearded or not, but the prototype for
this coin would most likely have been an official, Gallic Empire antoninianus
of Tetricus I or II - "Dad" being bearded, and "Junior",
clean-shaven. At this size and weight, adequate for even an official coin
of the era, it is unusual to see such crude and illiterate work - that
usually appears on the smaller ones which didn't try nearly so hard to
imitate the prototypes in general. Whether these were counterfeits made to decieve (seems unlikely dunnit? what with this level of workmanship), filled a general need for coin in an era of chaos when official coin was unavailable, were the equivalent of "Plantation Tokens" - scrip used in large Latifundia - farming estates - and/or were meant to be exchangeable for regal coin when it became available again - well, we just don't know. They might have filled any of these functions, all of them, or "none of the above". At any rate, the prototype for this specimen, as far as I can tell, was the SPES AVG type common to all the Gallic Emperors. This shows Spes - allegorical personification of "Hope" - advancing left, holding a flower and hitching the hem of her skirt. If the bust proves to be beardless, you can say it was copied (loosely) from Tetricus II, if bearded, it could copy, in about this order, Tetricus I, Victorinus, Postumus, or - far less likely - Laelianus or Marius, both of whom were extremely short-lived. The second, broken one is also probably unofficial. It's a bit harder with the coins of the Severans to be certain. The prototype, if it's not actually official, is a denarius of Septimius Severus dating to about 211 A.D. The coin, were it whole, should read "SEVERVS PIVS AVG" on the obverse and "P M TR P XVIII COS III PP" and shows Jupiter standing left, holding thunderbolt and scepter, between two children (Caracalla and Geta, presumably) - RIC 233, RSC 539. This one is a bit more problematic to tell whether or not it's official. You say it's AE, right? The Severan denarii underwent significant debasement so that some issues of even irrefutably official specimens may appear to be billon or even AE after millennia in the ground. There also exists a significant body of high-quality copies in AE, some lightly silvered, which seem to be unofficial. Since these have been appearing in larger numbers in recent years since the use of metal detectors has become commonplace, particularly in Eastern Europe, they have been - probably wrongly - conflated with the "Limes Falsa" lightweight, crude AE's in imitation of the AE types of the 1st and earlier 2nd centuries A.D. found along the "Limes" or borders of the Empire. The name "Limes Denarius", although a misnomer, has been applied to these so often that it has stuck. Here again, although we know that these AE denarii are more or less faithful copies of silver prototypes, and we know that they were both struck and cast in various places - we even have numerous molds and forgers' dies - we don't understand the role, if any, they may have played in the official monetary system. Were they copies made by semi-Romanized folks just outside the reach of empire? - folks who had become accustomed to the use of coin but who did not have access to official supplies? Were they a form of military scrip meant to keep large quantities of precious metal from falling into enemy hands in the event of a defeat - and presumably redeemable in good coin at some future date? Were they out-and-out counterfeits? Were they particularly debased official issues? (well, the cast ones probably weren't) Or did they fill some, as-yet unknown function? They might have done any or all of these at various times and places. Or, your coin might just be lower-grade silver and completely official. Mark |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
'That,
my friend, is a "Judea Capta" As of Vespasian - a highly desirable
coin in any identifiable condition - what a find for digging in one's
garden!. It commemorates the final putting down of the 1st Revolt in
Judea (Masada, and all that, the burning of Solomon's Temple, etc, etc,
the Jews carried off in bondage to Rome to build the Coliseum financed
by the treasures of Jerusalem, etc, etc.) - a job finished by Vespasian's
son Titus after Vespasian was called-away from the effort to restore
order and become emperor in the chaos in Rome following Nero's demise. |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
![]() |
![]() |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
'perhaps
after a bit of cleaning might allow a somewhat more accurate ID, I
believe the first one is a FEL TEMP REPARATIO from the late 350's,
early 360's A.D. - most likely Constantius II - The posture of the
soldier leaning left into the spear with which he is dispatching the
unhorsed persian/barbarian is unmistakable. 12.74mm,2.1g |
Roman bronze likely to be Marcus Aurelius (particularly as Caesar under Antoninus Pius) Lucius Verus, Commodus or Septimius Severus. Most likely, I think, would be Aurelius. His dates as Caesar run from 138-161 A.D. and as Augustus from 161-180' 22.63mm,4.76g |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||
![]() ![]() |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
This
is what has normally been referred to as a "Barbarous Radiate"
- and I say "normally referred to" because I really don't
like the term. Too many people lack the semantic subtlty to distinguish
the difference between "Barbarous" (referring to style) and
"Barbaric", thinking, perhaps, that Conan, Korgoth and their
buddies are the source of this sort of material.
Personally, I am trying to replace the term "Barbarous" - with all its pejoritive Victorian assumptions and prejudices about artistic style - with terms like "Imitative" or "Contemporary Copy" that are not quite so value-loaded. Although we are not certain why, precisely, imitative coins appeared in great numbers in several eras, I think it's safe to assume that neither the people who made nor used these were barbarians by any rational definition. There are many theories and little hard evidence to the precise "why" of these coins - some better, some worse imitations of common, circulating Roman issues, but the "where and when" are both fairly clear - at the borders of Empire and approximately contemporaneous with their prototypes. One of the most fertile places and times for their production was mid-late 3rd century Britain and northern Gaul - during the time of the Gallic Roman Empire founded when Postumus split away from Valerian and Gallienus' tottering central Roman administration. This coins seems to have used a billon antoninianus of Tetricus I as its prototype. Since all we have for legend is "IMP........PF AVG" and a bearded portrait, it could also have been in imitation of several other folks - since all the Gallic emperors struck PAX AVG types. Indeed the Pax Avg type was the most common type among both the official and imitative coinages, and Tetricus' ants were the most commonly copied. Typically smaller and somewhat cruder (some have blundered or totally illiterate legends although some are as good as or better than their prototypes), these may have been emergency issues to replace dwindling stocks of regal coin when it became unavailable, they may have been "plantation tokens" on lage latifundia - meant to be circulated only locally and/or to be redeemed in regal coin. Or they may have been out-and-out counterfiets, made to deceive - however this seems unlikely since they are typically so much smaller and cruder than their prototypes. This piece is of fairly good size (these are found down to 8 or 10 mm diameter) and style, and might even be a crude official piece, but I strongly suspect it is a contemporary copy. Mark |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
![]() ![]() |
![]() ![]() |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
'Given
the size, weight and portrait, that would be an As of either Marcus
Aurelius or his son Commodus - of recent, if not particularly historically
accurate fame from the movie "Gladiator".Without at least
a few letters of legend to try to hang the ID upon, I'd say it's somewhat
more likely to be Aurelius. Their years:Marcus Aurelius - 161-180 A.D.Commodus
- 177-192 A.D. (but to have this, more mature portrait, if this coin
is Commodus, it must be from the later part of his reign. The reverse lacks the crucial bits that would show what the figure standing on the reverse is holding or doing. Whatever this might be, it seems to be taking place over an altar, so reasonable guesses might be Salus feeding her pet snake or Pietas sprinkling incense'. Mark |
Large
Roman bronze sent to our expert for ID |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||
![]() ![]() |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| 'That's
a reduced-module follis of Constantine I, "The Great". The reverse
reads: SOLI INVICTO COMITI and shows Sol, radiate, standing left raising
his right hand hand and holding a globe in his left. I can't quite read
the exergual mintmark in your photo, but from the field-letters S - F,
and the clear "N" at the end of the exergual string, it must
be MLN - for Mint of London, emission of late 315-early 316 A.D. The obverse is not clear enough to be certain which of many possible legend-variants it bears, but I think it's CONSTANTINVS AVG - which would make this RIC VII, London, # 43 (however, I could be wrong on the letter-count and it could be anywhere from # 43 through # 49) - rated "R2" - meaning that only about 7-10 specimens were known in major collections at the time of the book's publication in 1966 (but all the S-F/MLN's are rated "scarce", at least, for frequency) There are many folks who agressively collect products of the London mint, so this is one of the more desirable "common Constantinians" you have shown me'. Mark 2.42g, 20.46mm |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
![]() ![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
No,
it's not "Barbarous", it's an official issue of Rome - and
more interesting speculating how it got to Britain for this, since it's
Gallienus - almost certainly dating to his sole reign, 260-268 A.D.
after the capture of his co-regnal father, Valerian I, by the Persians.
Britain and Northern Europe were part of the break-away Gallic Empire
at the time, most likely under Postumus. Unfortunately very little legend
remains on that specimen to help pin it down specifically, and Gallienus
had, by far, the largest and most varied number of coin-types in the
3rd century. That appears to be a centaur, left, so my best guess would
be that the reverse legend should be: APOLLINI CONS AVG - a large series
which included a number of mythical creatures as the reverses. Mark |
Trinovantes Clacton type Celtic gold 1/4 stater 50BC 1.28g, 13.72mm 06.0492. Not much I can say about these except that the second one is probably the later of the two, struck from a rather more stylized reverse die. But 'later' in this context might only be a matter of days or weeks, I don't think these coins were struck over a very long period'. |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||
![]() ![]() |
![]() ![]() |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Trinovantes Clacton type Celtic gold 1/4 stater 50BC 1.26g, 14.04mm CCI 06.0491 |
Your
sestertius is of Marcus Aurelius, 161-180 A.D. I can't make out any
of the legends nor can I be certain which allegorical personification
is on the reverse, although I'd make a guess at Pietas standing before
a short, lighted altar and holding incense box. Withouth the details
a clear reading of the obverse legend would afford, I can't zero-in
on the exact time-frame. It's too bad, too, because usually these have
a "laundry list" of titles which will allow them to be dated
to within a year or two. |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||
![]() ![]() |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
'Although I can't
be certain about the reverse type, this is obviously a sestertius
of Hadrian - 117-138 A.D. The obverse legend of: [HADRIANVS] AVG COS
III PP places it among his later issues since he only held the PP
title post 128 A.D. and this legend is specific to 134-138 A.D. If,
as I think is likely, the reverse is "PAX AVG S - C" it
dates to around 135 A.D. However, there are several other standing
figures holing cornucompaie that it might be - if we could get a few
letters of the reverse legend, I oculd pin it down more specifically'. 20,96g , 28.77mm dia x 4.56mm t |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
![]() ![]() |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
1stC AD Roman bronze 28.44mm, 12.87g The quick answer is
that it's Trajan, 97-117 A.D. (Hadrian's predecessor) and so has every
good reason to be in Britain. Given the diameter and weight, it would
be an As - also, although perhaps just a tad heavy for an As at nearly
13gm, I see no traces of the radiate crown which would indicate that
it was a Dupondius (2 Asses). An interesting factoid about Trajan's coins: Not only did the Empire achieve its greatest size under his reign, the coins became longer-winded under him than any other ruler. Some of his sestertii have such an extensive laundry-list of his titles that they can have upwards of 75-80 characters in the obverse legend alone, then go on at even greater length on their reverses. For those of us who must type-up cards to go in coin-flips, Trajan's legends can be very challenging to fit onto a 2"x2" fliptag. I'll try enlarging, tweaking and rotating the reverse image to see if I can make any sense out of it, but, as I said, Trajan had so many reverse types it may be hopeless. Mark
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
![]() ![]() |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Really
crisp
4thC Roman bronze - sent off for ID 2.93g, 19.67mm You're
probably already aware it's Constantius II (337-361 A.D. - Constantine's
youngest son and longest-surviving of his successors)- although the
fact that it's his and not his brother's is not quite as obvious as
you might think - older brother Constans shared the purple with Constantius
until 350 A.D. and so had an almost equal number of the earlier types
of FEL TEMP REPARATIO's struck in his name. It's the fact that the
legend breaks where it does - DN CONSTAN - TIVS PF AVG - that shows
that it's Constantius rather than Constans - his legend would break The reverse
type is one of those marvels of Roman symbolic art - they packed a
lot of PR (some might say propaganda) into those reverse types. This
was really one of the few venues for official mass-media in the proto-literate
Roman era - which lacked any of the communication devices we take
for granted like newspapers, etc. Too bad the exergue is unclear - we won't be able to be certain about where it was minted unless a little careful cleaning in that area reveals some detail - I'll guess it's a Western European mint on the rather vague basis of "style". I was hoping the fact that there's no officina or sequence marks in the reverse fields might narrow down the list of possible mints some, but as it turns out, Antioch was the only mint which never struck this type without any fieldmarks. You didn't
specify a diameter this time, but using your fingers as a rough gauge,
I'm guessing it's around 22-24mm, right? Mark |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
1stC Roman 17.27g, 28.42mm dia, 4.51mm thick The "guy riding
the lion" is actually the Eastern goddess Cybele, whose cult
was popular in Rome in the later 2nd century. Her "consort"
(weird thing to call him under the circumstances) Attis, as the mythos
goes, castrated himself and well as performing a related - ahem -
amputation in order that he not be distracted in any way in the purity
of his devotion to Cybele - so it was a cult with eunuch priests -
whether, if the criticisms of the era are accurate and these ad-hoc
operations were actually carried out on the spur of the moment by
devotees in transports of holy ecstasy joining in the course of the
parades and processions this sect was fond of holding, is something
I tend to doubt - but the histories are, after all, written by the
victors and they got to say pretty much whatever they wanted to, eventually. Now, we come to the issues this coin presents - it seems, from the size, as though it should be an As - but this type isn't listed for anything in AE except Sestertii in any of my references - and actually, at 28+mm & 17.27gm, it's really too large and heavy to be an As of the era, so it pretty much has to be a Sestertius. I have several sestertii of Commodus very close to this in weight - less than 20gm - in my collection. RIC III, Rome, # 599
AE Sestertius - 191 A.D. It's pretty scarce,
too, rating an "R2" in RIC and carrying a retail estimate
in David Sear's RC&TV of 2-3 times as much as the more common
sestertii for this reign. Dating to 191, it's from the next-to-last
year of his reign - by this time he seems to have lost touch with
reality and was performing in the gladitorial arena on a regular basis
(mostly killing |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
1stC Roman 12.49g,26.6mm dia, 3.97mm thick The other, less-well
preserved coin appears to be an As of Trajan (98-117 See: http://www.stoa.org/gallery/album91/ML11_Trajan_Trophy_dup for a specimen from my own collection, similar to what I think this one is - Mark |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
![]() ![]() |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Great condition Roman bronze 307AD 6.45g, 27.98mm
RIC vol VI, London,
# 89a, Summer, 307 A.D. Mark
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
this is Constantine
I "The Great", dating to the period 325-27 A.D. Precise dating
will depend on a bit of cleaning of the exergual mintmark. |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Another nice 4thC Roman find 1.71g,14.57mm sent off for ID This
one doesn't really provide enough clear obverse legend to be certain
who it is - the "suspects" in approximate order of liklihood
would be: |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Roman
bronze Id'd 21.17mm, 2.58g it's an antoninianus of Tacitus 275-6 AD
Eventually,
I was able to determine that what we have here is an AE antoninianus
or "ant" of Tacitus, 275-6 A.D. This short-lived, elderly
(75 yr-old) emperor succeeded Aurelian and very quickly came to the
end of his own days after joining his army on campaign - the rigors
of life in the field quickly proved his health to be more delicate
than he thought. |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Mark |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
![]() ![]() |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Silver Roman coin sent for ID - 4.72g,18.99 Your piece is going to have to get a little cleaner or show a little more detail before I'll go out on any limbs with it, but if I'm interpreting what I believe to be the obverse correctly, I'm going to make a wild guess it's a Flavian - more likely Vespasian or Titus than Domitian - more than that I cannot say at this time. Mark |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
![]() ![]() |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Dubnovellaunus Late 1st BC to Early 1stC AD Full Celtic gold stater 5.44g,17.57mm - sent to Celtic coin index for recording Dubnovellaunus succeeded Addedomaros to the Trinovantian throne about 10-5BC and ruled for several years before being overthrown by the Catuvellauni under the leadership of Cunobelin 'it's a nice looking
coin. I'll record it as CCI 07.1130. Here's hoping for a few more in the autumn! Best wishes |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
5.73g, 17.13mm 'This is quite a rare type, as you no doubt appreciate. The best parallel is provided by three coins in the British Museum, listed in their catalogue as nos. 3353-55. It's one of a group of coins loosely described as the Snettisham staters, because several of the types were first recognized in one of the Snettisham (Norfolk) hoards of the early 1990s. The exact type is not in Van Arsdell although it's closely related to the North Thames types listed as VA 1500, 1502 and thereabouts. It is presumably an East Anglian type, although because of the stylistic similarities there must have been some very strong link between the producers of the Snettisham types and the North Thames types. Date c. 50 - 40 BC, I think. I'll record it as CCI 07.1164. ' Best wishes
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
![]() ![]() |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
1st/2ndC Roman bronze |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Small bronze coin Not ID'd |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
![]() ![]() |
![]() ![]() |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||
1st/2nd C Monster sized Roman bronze sent for ID - 11.02g, 32.44mm |
1st/2ndC Roman bronze coin |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||
![]() ![]() |
![]() ![]() |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||
1st/2nd C Roman bronze sent for ID - 12.97g, 27.94mm |
1st/2ndC Roman bronze |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||
![]() ![]() |
![]() ![]() |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||
1st/2ndC Roman bronze |
Mid 4thC Roman Barbarious radiate coin |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||
![]() |
![]() ![]() |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Mid 4thC Barbarous Roman bronze coin - English type |
Very curious Roman bronze that I initally thought was Saxon as it is the perfect size and thickeness of a sceat - Sent off to Roman expert for ID , 9.85mm, 1.21g. |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
coin |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
