388 AD Theodosius I gold solidus 4.40g, 20.26mm

This is, as you later suspected, Theodosius I rather than Magnus Maximus.  A solidus of "Mag Max" would be a great item to find - Kipling included him as a character in "Puck of Pook's Hill" with a vividly-drawn, if fairly historically inacurate portrait.  He's a good bit scarcer, in general, than Theodosius I, but the coin we're looking at today carries an "R2" rating in RIC, so it's pretty scarce as well.

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

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.

'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'

'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

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'.

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.
This one will be CCI 04.2470'

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'

"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 '

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 Keith's and Chicago Ron's full Celtic staters

Left example 5.64g 16mm CCI 05.0212
Right example 5.54 g 17mm CCI 05.0213

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 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

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.

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.

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!

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.

The Victory reverse is interesting in that it appears at the time the iconography was shifting from the Classical deity Victory to the Christian angel symbology - but at this time is still to be interpreted as Victory advancing left carrying wreath and palm.'

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.
This series was current from about 250-260 A.D. and these "AE3's" (medium sized bronzes, 17-22mm) are among the very most common Roman coins known - however, they're not so common in Britain, I suppose, since Roman involvement in Britain was about done-for by that time. Unfortunately there isn't enough visible in the exergue (space below the "ground line") on the reverse to be able to tell the mint from which this specimen comes, although it looks like it might become visible with careful cleaning'.

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
As you probably noticed, there is almost no legend on the obverse. All that ever made it onto this undersized flan is the "...B C" at 4:00 or so - and it's too bad, too, because the detail of the coin is so good and crisp otherwise - but the legend never made it onto this coin in the first place - the flan was too small for the dies. The "...B C" indicates that it was struck for someone before they had become emperor. Unfortunately, there are 4 suspects and we will never be able to be completely sure which it is. Three of Constantine the Great's sons:
Constantine II
Constans &
Constantius II,
also:
Delmatius - a cousin - but Delmatius is pretty rare, and it's fairly unlikely that's who it is.
All four used this reverse in the 335-337 A.D. time-frame.
My best guess is that it's Constans because his shorter name could account for the seemingly broad spacing of the couple of extant letters.

FL IVL CONSTANTIVS NOB C
CONSTANTINVS IVN NOB C
FL IVL DELMATIVS NOB C
FL CONSTANS NOB C

are the most common forms of their names for this series. Also, unfortunately, the exergue similarly failed to make it onto the coin, so I can't tell you at which of the myriad of operating mints it was struck, either.

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.

Huge Roman Sestertius
19.11g, 31.1 mm

'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.

I have never heard of "Memoriae Damnatio" on a coin of Faustina - but perhaps in Britain things were different? I'm thinking perhaps this might have something to do with the Antonine Wall? Or some campaign during the time of M. Aurelius that was very unpopular?'

'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'.

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.

Your coin shows the allegorical personification of the city of Constantinople on the obverse, helmeted and with spear over shoulder and had the legend made it onto the undersized flan, would have read CONSTANTINOPOLIS. The reverse, anepigraphic but for the exergual mint mark, shows Victory on prow of a ship left. In your specimen, Victory holds an unusually prominent palm-branch (I think) - usually, she holds a spear and leans on a shield.

Mark

'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

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

'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'.

Mark

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).
Now, on the downside (for the ID) - Trajan reigned for 20 years during a time of exceptional internal peace and prosperity in the Roman Empire.
During Trajan's reign, the Empire achieved its largest size, measured in geographical area His reign saw literally thousands of different types of coins struck, most of which circulated until they were worn smooth, this being the era of the "Adoptive Emperors" with financial stability for nearly a full century enabling these coins to stay in crculation so long. Many call this the "Golden Age" of Rome. Since there is so little by way of detail visible on the reverse of your coin, I doubt it's going to be possible to say much more than that it's an As of Trajan, since there is so little to distinguish it from the hundreds of other possible Trajanic reverses.

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

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
at: DN CONSTA - NS PF AVG for this issue. The new, silver-plated AE Centenionalis series replaced Diocletian's much reduced and abused Follis as a part of the monetary reforms of 348 A.D.
and managed to produce some fairly nicely sized and well-worked coins before succumbing to the same economic pressures that did-in the Follis.

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.
The idealized personification of the emperor stands boldly (perhaps remindng Yanks of a certain famous painting of George Washington crossing the Deleware River in the snow), he holds a radiate (Sol or Helios' radiate crown) Phoenix and a labarum (legionary banner with the Christian Chi-Rho symbol on
it) - deftly blending pagan and Christian symbolism, foot (in mastery) atop the prow of a galley steered by Victory - you gotta love it! The legend is the well known FEL(icitas) TEMP(orum) REPARATIO - "Happy days are here again" (actually it's closer to "[to] the return of happy times", but not so much closer that "happy days are here again" is way off the mark) Before settling into the overdone, stereotypical "Soldier spearing fallen horseman" type, the FEL TEMP series produced some other interesting types - I'm also fond of the type showing the Emperor leading a young barbarian forth from a hut under a tree (or dragging him - depends on who you read...)

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?
This type in this size dates from the earlier emissions, post reform - mostly in the 348-351 A.D. timeframe before the AE2 (larger) module was completely replaced by the AE3's (smaller).
Some folks call this denomination a "Centenionalis", although this terminology, like most of what we think we know about the denominations after about 310, is theoretical at best - it may also or alternately have been called a "Majorina" - or it might have been neither. We know the names of these denominations, but frustratingly, we don't know with certainty the coins to which they refer.

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.
Cybele is seen here riding a lion - typically you'll see her either enthroned, flanked by her lions, or driving a trimuphal chairot pulled by lions. She's wearing a turreted headdress, and carrying a drum (also a typical attribute) and scepter.

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.
Obv: (all off-flan, unfortunately, but should be:) L AEL AVREL COMM AVG P FEL. Laureate head right.
Rx:: (Also just about all off-flan) MATRI DEVM CONSERV AVG / COS VI PP (in
exergue) S - C (in fields)
Cybele, "towered", facing, riding right on lion and carrying drum and scepter

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
animals) In this time-frame, he also had himself portrayed wearing the lion-skin headdress of Hercules (and Alexander the Great) on his coins with reverse type of Hercules' club - so, he was pretty well out there by the end of his reign. http://www.stoa.org/gallery/album95/CommodusHerc

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
A.D.) It's actually a bit heavy to be an As, so it might be a Dupondius - however I can't see any traces of the radiate crown which would distinguish the denomination as a Dup...
The reverse seems to be a "trophy" - a pile of arms & armor ceremonally set up after a battle in commemoration - a fairly common reverse for Trajan..

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

it's Maximinus II, as Caesar - not to be confused with either Maximian or Galerius, both of whose legends are extremely similar-looking. And also, no relation to Maximinus I, "Thrax", from nearly a century earlier.
It's a follis, and a nice, big, earlier one - before they were scaled-down to the size of a newpence.
This one is a product of the mint at London, too - always desirable.

RIC vol VI, London, # 89a, Summer, 307 A.D.
Obv: GAL VAL MAXIMINVS NOB C. Laureate draped and cuirassed bust right.
Rx: GENIO POP ROM. Genius (of the Roman People) standing left holding patera and cornucopia.
Exergue: PLN (?) this is where I have some issues on the basis of what I think I see in the photograph - it looks to me like "SLN" - and that would work if London had been striking in more than a single officina at that time - so SLN would indicate second officina, but, according to RIC, they weren't striking in two workshops in London at this time- so, maybe I'm just not seeing it correctly - it looks like an "S" to me although it should be a "P".

Mark

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:

Constantine I
Constantine II, as Caesar
Constantius II, as Caesar
Constans, as Caesar.

Constantines I & II are head and shoulders more likely than the other two.

The only really clear letter is the "V" at 1:00 or so - this could be as in:
ConstantinVs Max Avg
Constantinus iVn Nob C
Fl Cl ConstantiVs Nob C
but very unlikely to be:
Constans Nob Caes or Constantis Nob C

This is a GLORIA EXERCITVS reverse, the earlier type with two standards between the two soldiers, although I suspect it's either a contemporary copy (a good possibility) or from the very end of the 2-standard era for these on the basis of its small module - for this era, 18mm or so is more appropriate. In general the 2-standard Gloria Ex's date to the period 330-335 A.D. Some mints switched over to the single-standard type as early as late 333.

There isn't enough clear exergue showing to comment on which of the 13 Imperial mints might have produced it - if, in fact, was produced at an official mint.

Mark

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.

The obverse shows Tacitus' radiate cuirassed bust right - the legend is too unclear for me to try to quote it, and there are many possibilities, give or take a letter here and there - suffice it to say, it begins with IMP, contains the word: TACITVS, and ends with AVG - but the devil, as they say, is in the details.
The reverse - which took a while to make sense of - is probably PAX AVG (it could be PAX AETERNA or PAX AUGUSTI - but these are much less likely from the letter-spacing) Pax is standing left, holding an olive-branch and scepter (although, given how vague the reverse is, if RIC gave "seated" as a possibility I'd say that was a potential interpretation, and if you said you saw a cornucopia in there too, I guess I wouldn't argue - but RIC only says "standing" and "scepter", under all the Pax varieties.)

The obverse legend is too indistinct for me to be to be certain of the details, and the presence or absence of a single letter here and there would be all the difference there is between the possibilities, but this could be either Cf. RIC V, i Mint in Gaul, 33-44 or Mint of Ticinum, Cf. 146-149, or Mint of Siscia Cf. 186-7.

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.
It's a bit difficult for me to check die-links from here but I'll try and have a look when I get the chance.

Here's hoping for a few more in the autumn!

Best wishes
Philip'

Severus Alexander 222-235 A.D.

This one is an As too, but has neither enough legend nor a characteristic enough portrait for me to be sure which of the two most likely candidates it is, but I believe it's either Severus Alexander 222-235 A.D. or Gordian III, 238-244. Both were "boy emperors" who came to the throne in their teens and were both around a relatively long time as mid 3rd century emperors went - long enough for there to be a significant body of coins for both of them. Also, the one letter on the obverse which appears to be clear seems to be an "A" - and could fit into either of their names in about that position. I'm afraid I can't tell what's happening on the reverse of this one. Sorry I can't give you much more than that on the basis of the photos.

3.36g, 20.26mm

'This is a "City Commemorative" - when Constantine moved his capitol to Constantinople in about 330 A.D., he issued coins in honor of both Constantinople and of Rome. This one is the CONSTANTINOPOLIS type with
the personification of Constantinople in helmet left with spear over her shoulder. The reverse has no legend but shows Victory standing in the prow of a vessel, holding a spear and leaning on a shield. These were issued in a couple different waves. The earlies ones were larger, heavier and of better workmanship than the later types. This one probably dates to c. 335 A.D. or later - I can't read the exergue, so I can't tell you which mint it's from'

Magnentius 350-353 A.D 1.57g, 17.71mm

This seems to be either a centenionalis which has been extensively chipped making it smaller than it started out, or perhaps it's a half-centenionalis. Since none of the obverse legend remains, it could be either Magnentius or Decentius and I won't be able to tell which of the two (although Magnentius' coins are far more common). This
older-Augustus/younger-Caesar brother combo was around briefly in the 350-353 A.D. time frame. Having power only in the European West, their coins only come from the Gallic & Italian mints, plus Siscia. The reverse type is: VICTORIAE DD NN AVG ET CAES. with two Victories holding a shield between them inscribed: VOT V / MVLT X over a cippus, or short columnar altar. It's their most common type, although the two of them are
not, in general, what you'd call really common finds.

Gallienus 260-268 A.D 2.49g, 20.72mm

'is a mid-late 3rd century AE antoninianus. The denomination was introduced, in good silver, in 215 by Caracalla - it contained one and one-half denarius' worth of silver but was tariffed as 2 denarii - things only got worse from there. Quickly debased, by the time of the crisis of the 260's, it was completely copper with a silvery wash (which seldom survives). The later 3rd century "Illyrian" emperors like Aurelian and Probus restored the coin to a better size and alloy, and although still silver-washed, the process was better so it stuck better. Eventually, it was phased out in Diocletian's reforms in the late 280's, but a new, wholly AE "radiate" fraction of the follis was retained with exactly the same reverse types as the former antoniniani. I guess everyone was so used to having copper radiates that they just continued the general module as a different denomination.
You hazarded a guess that this was Tacitus, and as much as I hate to disappoint you, that's unlikely, since Tacitus, Florian, Carus, Carinus, Numerian, and the other last few emperors besides Aurelian and Probus in the era before Diocletian and the Tetrarchy were all relatively short-lived, so their coins tend to be a bit scarcer. My best guess here is Gallienus - I'm afraid I can't tell the reverse type aside from saying it appears to be a standing allegorical personification of some sort. It would date to his sole imperium, after his father and co-emperor, Valerian I, was captured by the Sasanian Shapur I in 260 A.D. - so the most likely time frame here is 260-268 A.D'.

Magnentius ID 3.28g, 19.93mm

This one is either Magnentius or Decentius again - and again, no legend is visible so there's no way to be sure which of the two it is, although Magnentius is a good bit more likely. This is another Centenionalis, and shows clearly the sympathies of the Western Augustus and Caesar for Christianity - there was a good bit of disagreement over just how good an idea Constantine's choice of Christianity was at the time. The Chi-Rho reverse on this and the contemporary double-centenionalis left little doubt about the official position of Magnentius & Decentius.

Aurelian - 270-275 A.D

is a bit problematic. When I first looked at the reverse, I said "Aha! one of the Valentinian clan" c. 365-383 A.D. (although it's a bit late for Britain) because the reverse, at first glance, looks so much like the very common GLORIA ROMANORVM type they issued so many of - with the emperor dragging a barbarian and carrying a labarum, but as I look at the obverse, I'm pretty sure from what I seem to be able to read of the legend that it's an antoninianus of Aurelian - 270-275 A.D. I can't be all that sure of the reverse type, but it might well be one of the
numerous ORIENS AVG types of which Aurelian had many, showing Sol in various postures and holding various attributes. Aurelian is significant in that he pulled-together what remained of the empire at a time when
everything had gotten seemingly hoplessly fragmented - the Gallic empire in the northwest and the Kingdom of Palmyra in Syria were only two of the major issues he had to deal with - but deal he did, despite his advanced
age.

Constantine 335-337 A.D 1.38g, 14.06mm

is another GLORIA EXERCITVS - this one is from the mint at Trier, although I can't tell you which of the Constantinians is on the obverse. The ones with a single standard between the soldiers date mostly to the period 335-337 A.D. or shortly thereafter. This is probably one of the 3 sons of Constantine, probably as Caesar just before Constantine's death.

Huge 1stC Roman bronze "c. 150-160 A.D." 15.28g, 30.10mm x 4.25mm thick

As you say, there's little other than the main types for us to go on here, but my best guess is that it's Faustina I or Sr. (depends on who you read whether she's numbered or given seniority)
She was the wife of Antoninus Pius (138-161 A.D.) and died only 3 years into his reign, in 141 A.D. Consequently, very few of her coins date to her lifetime, but there is an enormous body of posthumous commemorative issues in her honor. She typically has this same characteristic hairdo which is what enables an educated guess, here. At the size and weight this would be an orichalcum Sestertius.
The obverse should read: DIVA FAVSTINA
I think the reverse might be Pietas standing left (legend: AVGVSTA S - C) , sacrificing from patera over short, lighted altar and holding box of incense in left hand, although it could be one of half a dozen different female personifications or deities standing left, holding some object in right hand. If it is Pietas, then it would correspond to: SR 4620, mint of Rome, minted sometime after 147 A.D. - you could say "c. 150-160 A.D." pretty safely about any sestertius in the AVGVSTA series.

Here's a similar sestertius from the same series with Vesta reverse, from my collection you can compare:
http://www.stoa.org/gallery/album93/ML_001_Faustina_I_Vesta_Sest

and this is a dupondius (a little smaller and from a different series) with Pietas reverse:
http://www.stoa.org/gallery/album93/ML23_Faustina_I_Pietas_as

Mark

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
Philip

well, I'm afraid I can't make any sense out of the dominant design element.  This one I was fairly certian was unofficial, and the reverse tends to reinforce this opinion.  The reverses were cruder, in general, than the obverses, and not unlike the Celtic coins of an earlier century, the types tended to break down to salient design elements which suggested the reverses of official coins - the looping left arm of Spes hitching her skirt, the outstretched right arm with olive-branch of Pax, etc.  what remains here is surely supposed to suggest a common reverse subject, but which one, I just can't say. 

Mark

Now, I'm guessing at the size and weight based on your fingers in the picture - some metrology might be helpful - this is approximately 27-30mm diameter - or the coin originally was that size before all the edge-chipping occurred.  We have a bit of legend at 10:30 obverse, - unfortunately it's a rather less than revelatory 'AVG', but knowing that AVG appears in the obverse legend at or near the mid-point might be very important in the deductive process.  Next, we have the standing deity or personification on the reverse, but more importantly, we have the fairly unusual occurrence of a legend written horizontally across the fields.

From the portrait, My first guess was Hadrian, but I found no across-the-field reverse legends for him which fit with the relatively few of his obverse legends having AVG in the middle.

Antoninus Pius, however, has a sestertius with obverse legend ANTONINVS AVG PIVS P P TR P and PAX - AVG (a plausible reading of your coin's field-legend) across the reverse field - COS III S - C - Pax standing left, setting fire to a heap of arms and holding a cornucopia.  Unfortunate there is so little design left to show the heap of arms, this is a rather ambitious coin-reverse.  Your coin seems a bit skimpy for a sestertius, and without measurements,  was initially tempted to say it's an As - however, no As with this type is known for Antoninus. Of course, I suppose that a coin that started out on the smaller side and then was mumbled about in the field by plows, etc, resulting in several visible generations of edge chipping could easily be reduced to this size.

So, my best guess is Antoninus Pius, Mint of Rome, 147 A.D. Brass sestertius. PAX AVG COS IIII SC - RIC III 777, SR 4201.