A little help do ID this Constantinus coin? 1 1

[blackfoxDJ]

Hi, 

Have this for many years and want to have a more precise id.
What I was told is that it's a Constantinus II follis, c. 337-340, reading:
CONSTANTINUS IVN NOB C
GLORIA EXERCITVS
SMTS<something>  (the S in TS looks like a Greek sigma depending on how I look at it...)

Is that right? Any catalog code?
Also, how do you grade it? I have not a clue about ancient coins.
Thank you.

[JKK]

Need weight and diameter.

[blackfoxDJ]

42 minutes ago, JKK said:

Need weight and diameter.

it's about 17mm x 1.9mm
Don't know the correct weight. My scale has no decima point for grams. it read 3g / 0,1 oz, could be anything between 2.3 and 3 g...

Edited July 2, 2020 by blackfoxDJ

[MN1]

At a glance it looks like one that I also have.  A Constantine I "Glory of Army".  The actual mint period for this would be 330-333 AD if the same coin.  I found many dealers give Constantine's time as emperor 307-337 AD instead of the mint period.  I'm not a professional grader by any means but a rough guess on a numbers scale I'd say anywhere between a 2 and a 6 based on what I can make of the photo.  On a positive note you have a round coin and not one with a chip out of it.

[MN1]

At a glance it looks like one that I also have.  A Constantine I "Glory of Army".  The actual mint period for this would be 330-333 AD if the same coin.  I found many dealers give Constantine's time as emperor 307-337 AD instead of the mint period.  I'm not a professional grader by any means but a rough guess on a numbers scale I'd say anywhere between a 2 and a 6 based on what I can make of the photo.  On a positive note you have a round coin and not one with a chip out of it.

[MN1]

Found some additional info for you.  My initial thoughts were incorrect.

Maxentius Constantine the Great Enemy Ancient Roman Coin Castor & Pollux i44780

Maxentius – Roman Emperor: 307-312 A.D.
Bronze Follis 24mm (6.04 grams) Ostia mint: 309-312 A.D.
Reference: RIC 35 (Ostia), S 3776
IMPCMAXENTIVSPFAVG – Laureate head right.
AETERNITASAVGN Exe: MOST – Castor and Pollux (the Dioscuri) standing, facing each other,
each holding horse by bridle.

 

[JKK]

2 hours ago, MN1 said:

Found some additional info for you.  My initial thoughts were incorrect.

Maxentius Constantine the Great Enemy Ancient Roman Coin Castor & Pollux i44780

Maxentius – Roman Emperor: 307-312 A.D.
Bronze Follis 24mm (6.04 grams) Ostia mint: 309-312 A.D.
Reference: RIC 35 (Ostia), S 3776
IMPCMAXENTIVSPFAVG – Laureate head right.
AETERNITASAVGN Exe: MOST – Castor and Pollux (the Dioscuri) standing, facing each other,
each holding horse by bridle.

 

That head does not match the OP's coin. For one thing, the OP's coin has the pearl diademed (looks like draped, cuirassed) bust right. For another, he says his weighs at most half what the coin pictured here weighs. I'll see if I can devote some time to looking it up.

Edited July 7, 2020 by JKK

[blackfoxDJ]

8 hours ago, JKK said:

That head does not match the OP's coin. For one thing, the OP's coin has the pearl diademed (looks like draped, cuirassed) bust right. For another, he says his weighs at most half what the coin pictured here weighs. I'll see if I can devote some time to looking it up.

Hi,
 

From Not in Ric site (http://www.notinric.lechstepniewski.info/index.html) I was told that it would be a RIC VII 199, Thessalonica, as it can be found here (https://www.wildwinds.com/coins/ric/constantine_II/t.html)
 

not from the same die of course.

Opinions?

thank you

 

[JKK]

6 hours ago, blackfoxDJ said:

Hi,
 

From Not in Ric site (http://www.notinric.lechstepniewski.info/index.html) I was told that it would be a RIC VII 199, Thessalonica, as it can be found here (https://www.wildwinds.com/coins/ric/constantine_II/t.html)
 

not from the same die of course.

Opinions?

thank you

 

Doesn't match. Look at the cuirass on the original--doesn't resemble this one.

[JKK]

Okay. BORTE: bust, obverse legend, reverse legend, (reverse) type, exergue.
What we think we can see and have gleaned so far:

High likelihood of Constantius II, AE3. If so, that trims it down to about 900 possibilities. Using Aorta:

• B: 10: diademed (pearls) bust right, draped, cuirassed.
• O: 2-10: CONSTANTIVS _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ (give or take a character, and bearing in mind that PF AVG is a very likely ending but by no means the only possibility)
• R: ? wholly illegible; will have to be inferred from reverse type associations
• T: 101: (looks like) Soldiers standing on either side of two standards, each holding spear, resting hand on shield
• E: 16: _ MT _ (Thessalonika is the only reasonable possibility)

We learn that all the B10s have O19: DN CONSTANTIVS PF AVG, or O25 (even further divorced from what we see). That's a big problem. There is simply no good reason to imagine we're missing a DN before the emperor's name; it makes me at least wonder if we should in fact look at Constantine (the IVS easily could be VNS). So we take what we know and surmise, and check into Constantine II. He struck an AE3:

• B: 7 (he has only about twelve of these, yay)
• O: 3-13 (all those are 7, CONSTANTINVS IVN NOB C)
• R: 27? Going by association with T73, GLORIA EXERCITVS passes the logic test (soldiers pictured) and the association test (found on many issues together), so I'll believe that provisionally, and yes, it matches with B7 and O7
• T: 73 (yep, fits)
• E: 14 Major drag, because the ten reasonable matches are all SMK_ or dot SMK_ (E06; Cyzicus). The very clearest  letter in your exergue is the T, and there's no way it's a screwed up K.

We still haven't identified it, mainly because we aren't 100% sure which emperor, but we can try some possible descriptors as working guesses:

• B: diademed (pearls) draped, cuirassed bust right
• O: CONSTANTINVS (IVN NOB C?)
• R: GLORIA EXERCITVS
• T: Two solders standing on either side of two standards, each holding spear, hands on shields
• E: _ MT _ , which just about has to be Thessalonika

If you dig through the emperors from Constantine I--I would start with his AE3 folles post-317 CE--limiting it to those where the obverse legend could include one of the CONSTANTI____ variants, matching the reverse type and legend, and seeking only Thessalonika examples, you should be able to get this down to a question of which oficina made this. Your key tell is on the bust: the cuirass detail on your coin is really quite nice. The image must match that amount of cuirass showing and its style.

Good hunting.

 

[James_OldeTowne]

My guesses:

Thessalonica
Obv: CONSTANS NOB CAES
Rev: GLORIA EXERCITVS
Exergue: SMTSD

RIC VII, 201

[blackfoxDJ]

16 hours ago, JKK said:

Okay. BORTE: bust, obverse legend, reverse legend, (reverse) type, exergue.
What we think we can see and have gleaned so far:

High likelihood of Constantius II, AE3. If so, that trims it down to about 900 possibilities. Using Aorta:

• B: 10: diademed (pearls) bust right, draped, cuirassed.
• O: 2-10: CONSTANTIVS _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ (give or take a character, and bearing in mind that PF AVG is a very likely ending but by no means the only possibility)
• R: ? wholly illegible; will have to be inferred from reverse type associations
• T: 101: (looks like) Soldiers standing on either side of two standards, each holding spear, resting hand on shield
• E: 16: _ MT _ (Thessalonika is the only reasonable possibility)

We learn that all the B10s have O19: DN CONSTANTIVS PF AVG, or O25 (even further divorced from what we see). That's a big problem. There is simply no good reason to imagine we're missing a DN before the emperor's name; it makes me at least wonder if we should in fact look at Constantine (the IVS easily could be VNS). So we take what we know and surmise, and check into Constantine II. He struck an AE3:

• B: 7 (he has only about twelve of these, yay)
• O: 3-13 (all those are 7, CONSTANTINVS IVN NOB C)
• R: 27? Going by association with T73, GLORIA EXERCITVS passes the logic test (soldiers pictured) and the association test (found on many issues together), so I'll believe that provisionally, and yes, it matches with B7 and O7
• T: 73 (yep, fits)
• E: 14 Major drag, because the ten reasonable matches are all SMK_ or dot SMK_ (E06; Cyzicus). The very clearest  letter in your exergue is the T, and there's no way it's a screwed up K.

We still haven't identified it, mainly because we aren't 100% sure which emperor, but we can try some possible descriptors as working guesses:

• B: diademed (pearls) draped, cuirassed bust right
• O: CONSTANTINVS (IVN NOB C?)
• R: GLORIA EXERCITVS
• T: Two solders standing on either side of two standards, each holding spear, hands on shields
• E: _ MT _ , which just about has to be Thessalonika

If you dig through the emperors from Constantine I--I would start with his AE3 folles post-317 CE--limiting it to those where the obverse legend could include one of the CONSTANTI____ variants, matching the reverse type and legend, and seeking only Thessalonika examples, you should be able to get this down to a question of which oficina made this. Your key tell is on the bust: the cuirass detail on your coin is really quite nice. The image must match that amount of cuirass showing and its style.

Good hunting.

 

Wow, lots on detective work here.
Pictures can be deceiving, so what I do can positively read looking the coin with 2.5 mag., now that I know what to look is:
Obv: CON__TANTIN_ ???? NOB C
Rev: ? - __XER - ??,  it would be GLORI -A EXER - CITUS. Positive about _XER not _XERC above the soldiers. 
Mint: SMT(S?)?

Browsing this page, looking for Thessalonica coins wiht _XER - reverse, it all narrows down do RIC VII 199,
There are 9 variations of it here: http://numismatics.org/search/results?q=exer+-+citvs+AND+material_facet%3A"Bronze"+AND+mint_facet%3A"Thessalonica"+AND+reference_facet%3A"RIC+VII+Thessalonica+199"

this one the seems to be most  similar to mine:

http://numismatics.org/collection/1944.100.13064

Getting closer?

 

[JKK]

If it were me, I would be looking through Wildwinds Thessalonika AE3s for one with a bust showing as much cuirass as yours. That may even end up telling you the oficina, which would be a big help, and I think would probably nail down the obverse legend. You're on the right track, though. I think the obverse legend guess is plausible and that the reverse is a lock because it is so associated with this common reverse type.