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

Roman silver Coins

Denarius
The denarius was the main silver coin, in fact the main denomination, of the Roman Republic. Under the Empire, Augustus controlled the minting of the gold and silver denominations, and the denarius continued. Under Nero the weight and fineness of the denarius dropped, and this cost-cutting practice was continued under successive emperor. By the reign of Caracalla, the denarius was about 40% silver, and the new antoninianus was introduced. The denarius continued, but was gradually phased out, first becoming bronze, and then disappearing after serving the Romans for almost 400 years.

Quinarius
Silver quinarii, or half denarii, were minted sporadically throughout the Republic. Its minting became more regular under the Early Principate and, under Augustus, it was worth 8 asses.

Antoninianus
This coin was introduced by Caracalla and worth twice that of the Denarius, but it actually only had about 1 1/2 of the denarius's silver content. Both the Antoninianus and the denarius continued for some time until the denarius was phased out. Gradually, over the Third Century, the silver content of the antoninianus dropped, until it was merely silver washed bronze coins. At this time, it is considered to be an AE coin.
Image Not Yet Available Argenteus
This silver coin was first minted by Diocletian as part of his monetary reforms. It lasted until the reign of Constantine and replaced the old denarius, for it was roughly the same fineness and weight of the early denarius.
Image Not Yet Available Miliarense
This silver coin was worth 1/18 of a solidus, and was introduced by Constantine late in his reign to replace the argenteus.

Siliqua
Another silver coin introduced by Constantine, and worth 1/24 of a solidus. Originally it was 1/96 of a pound of silver, but his son, Constantius II reduced it to 1/144 of a pound of silver.

'The "Aha!" moment has arrived. The coin is not of the Flavian Dynasty after all - it's Galba - and a very rare coin!

I had been laboring under the misconception that Galba struck no coins with counter-clockwise legends - had been told so by folks who should know - but I suppose they were referring to the coins' obverses - however, as I check RIC I, I find that even obverse CCW legends aren't unknown for Galba - from the mint of Tarraco in Spain - and yours has one. Now Galba is a rare bird - any Galba is - but the Spanish mint pieces are rarer still, and with the CCW legends, rarer still!
So I hope you're not displeased that it took me so long to figure all this out - but I have not only never handled or seen one of these in person, I didn't even know they existed, and some of the best-known numismatists on the web didn't know it either.

Your coin, dating c. April, through late 68 A.D. is RIC vol I, #13. The obverse legend reads counterclockwise from about 4:00: GALBA - IMP and shows his laureate bust. The reverse reads CCW from about 9:30: DIVA AVGVSTA and shows the deified Livia (yes, that Livia, if you recall "I Claudius") standing left, holding a patera (ritual libation dish - full of poison?) and a scepter. This coin is accorded a frequency rating of "R2", meaning there were only about 10 - 15 recorded specimens at the time the book was written (1984).

Woo Hoo! What a find! The British Museum probably already has one, but despite its state of preservation, this is a very valuable coin!'

Mark

It's a denarius of the Emperor Vespasian (69-79 AD), minted in Rome AD 75.

Obverse:
IMP CAESAR VESPASIANVS AVG
Vespasian, his laueate head right

Reverse:
PON MAX TRP COS VI
Pax seated left, holding olive-branch, left hand at side.

Thanks to Jan de Veen of the UR forum for ID

Beautiful Roman silver ID by Mark Lehman 2.72g, 18.19mm

Marcus Aurelius in 163 A.D

This one's almost too easy.

This denarius would be easily recognizeable from its realistic portrait of the youngish Marcus Aurelius in 163 A.D. just after his elevation from Caesar under Antoninus Pius (138-161 A.D.) to Augustus in his own right, even if it didn't have a single letter of legend showing.
However, this one is so clear that I can give you a multiplicity of references for it.
- RIC III, 70,
- C/RSC 526,
- Cf. SR 4925.
This obverse legend was used only during this one year (Dec. 10, 162 - Dec. 10, 163), and the reverse legend: 'PROV DEOR TRP XVII COS III" recapitulates the date of 163 A.D. by proclaiming his 17th yearly renewal of tribunician powers along with his 3rd consulship (which occurred in 161).

This is a great example of how well-dated some Roman coins were. In the case of those emperors who didn't necessarily renew TR P, Imperium, etc, all on the same date as the commencement of their Consulships (if any), it is possible to date some coins to a frame of months or even weeks.

2.03g – 17.7mm

'obviously don't have to tell you that this is Vespasian, but this one is so nice and clear that I will give you chapter and verse from the standard references - no uncertainties with this one!

15 minutes later:
Hah! - I read that last sentence with a new personal appreciation of the word "hubris". This was no simple lookup!

First, this combination of obverse and reverse does not go together - this coin should not, strictly speaking, exist. That should have been my first clue - that, or maybe the low weight at 2.03 gm, or MAYBE the spots of core-exposure. This is a fourree. A contemporary counterfeit, made to deceive. A copper blank was wrapped with silver foil and struck with dies made to emulate types found on denarii..Mulings of obverses and reverses that do not belong with each other are common on fourrees. This piece may be even more interesting for being an ancient forgery than it would have been had it been official.
I have in my own collection a fourree denarius of Otho with a reverse of Vespasian - inscribed like this one: COS ITER TR POT (but with a different type) Evidently, the second consulship of Vespasian was a popular subject for forgers' dies, and also, that was a time of particular activity for those involved in this risky business.
My best guess is that it was manufactured around 72-75 A.D., and probably made the trip from Italy to England - I'm not familiar with this sort of imitative from England, although AEs of the Julio-Claudians were extensively - and crudely - imitated in the Isles.

Cool find, still, even if it did lead me a merry chase!'

Mark

4thC Roman silver

RBS ROMA / Shewolf & twins city commemorative from the mint of Lugdunum (Lyons, France) - it would date to about 335-337 A.D. being the smaller module issue - the larger ones (c. 18 + mm) are the ones from
333-335 A.D.

'It would have been silver-washed, originally - the alloy itself might have contained a percent or two of silver as well, but not nearly enough to make the coin look silvery on its own. Except for the silver or billon argenteus of the era, there were no silver coins, per-se, in circulation - silver-washed bronze or copper evidently filled-in as token coinage at a good bit above its intrinsic value with the silver wash to indicate that it took the place of silver. Unfortunately, little to nothing survives from contemporary records and no even knows what these were called as a denomination, or what relationship they stood to the gold and other base denominations.
These, and the equally common "CONSTANTIOPOLIS" city commemoratives were issued simultaneously, and at about the same time as the "GLORIA EXERCITVS" - two soldiers flanking one or two standards - and they are even found paired with those reverses.'

Mark

1.96g, 15.61mm

'That's a "Legionary Denarius " of Marc Antony.
32-31 B.C. is when it was minted, but these, being of baser silver than the denarii of the early empire (and finer silver than the denarii of the 3rd century), seemed to stay in circulation for a very long time, first because they weren't worth turning in at a discount, and later because they were too valuable to turn in. They circulated widely in the Provinces, and in fact, are found in hoards up to 300 years later than their mintage-date. You can see this one is quite worn, so it probably had been around for a long time before it was lost. The obverse has a galley sailing (rowing) right (your photo is 90 degrees off to clockwise) and the legend: ANT AVG III VIR R P C. The reverse shows a legionary eagle (Aquila) between two legionary standards and names the legion between them as: | LEG | XI | which I believe, but am not sure this is. They're known for legions I through XXX (with a few missing). XI is a common legion, some are scarce, some rare'.

Denarius of Antoninus Pius, 138-161 A.D1.82g – 16.83 mm

Antoninianus of Postumus

'That's an antoninianus of Postumus - emperor of the Gallic Empire of Rome. The northern and western provinces split off on their own during the difficult and chaotic times in the 250's & 260's A.D. About the same time Valerian was being captured by the Persians - and subjected to various colorful humiliations - leaving his son Gallienus in sole charge of the empire, Postumus, who had been one of Gallienus' generals, was proclaimed emperor by his troops and found himself in a very favorable position of power. He therefore was the emperor of Spain, Gaul and Britain for almost a decade. His successors did not fare as well, and the Tetrici were eventually forced to abdicate in favor of Aurelian.

Interestingly, the Gallic Empire seemed to be wealthier than the empire at Rome, the quality of the Gallic coins is higher, as is their general level of silver - Postumus and successors managed to coin better silver, then billon, than did Gallienus under whose reign the antoninianus fell from an approximately 50% silver coin to a tiny, miserable, silvery-washed copper piece - some of the worst may not even have been silver-washed.

Your piece is the PAX AVG type and shows Pax standing left, holding an olive-branch and scepter.

With obverse legend IMP C POSTVMVS PF AVG it could be either mint of Lugdunum or Cologne, according to RIC, but there are many authorities who question the attributions to one or the other mint (assigning them on the basis of style) - it's probably best to say that the origin of most of the Gallic coins is unclear at best'.

Mark

Roman silver sent to Mark for ID 2.92g, 18.87mm

Julia Domna, the wife of Septimius Severus Rome c. 196 A.D

That's Julia Domna, the wife of Septimius Severus and mother of Caracalla and Geta. The denarius reads IVLIA AVGVSTA on the obverse and DIANA LVCIFERA on the reverse which shows Diana standing left, crescent moon on her shoulders, holding a long torchdiagonally with both hands. This is a product of the mint at Rome c. 196 A.D. - during the reign of her husband. RIC IV, I 548, RSC 27, SR ('88) 1835, VM 15. Although RIC rates it "scarce", I don't believe it's really any scarcer than most other relatively common types.

Nice find!

Mark

Denarius of Faustina I- 147AD

That's a denarius of Faustina I, wife of Antoninus Pius whom she married during Hadrian's time. She died in 141 A.D. after giving birth to numerous children, including the future Faustina II, wife of Marcus Aurelius.
This extensive posthumous series in her honor is mostly from 147 A.D. and later .
Obv: DIVA FAVSTINA. Draped bust rightr.
Rx: CONSECRATIO. Ceres standing left raising hand and holding torch.
SR 4593, RIC 382b, RSC 165a.

117AD Roman Hadrian silver coin

30AD Cunobelin Celtic silver coin

'further to yesterday's email, yes, this is a rare silver unit of Cunobelin. The type is in recent volumes of 'Coins of England' (no. 310) but isn't in VA or the BMC catalogue. I've attached an image of the best of the six we already have here for you to compare.
Judging from the style and the very classical griffin it's a late issue, presumably 30s AD. Findspots are in Essex (4 including yours) and Suffolk (1), ie in the Trinovantian territory rather than the Catuvellauni.

I'll record it as CCI 06.0523. Congratulations on a rare find!'

Your piece (a) isn't quite as clear, but it's still easily recognizeable as a denarius of Hadrian, Trajan's successor, who reigned 117-138 A.D. This is from the enormous COS III series. Hadrian was consul only three times so almost all the coins from the end of his period have COS III in their reverse legends - those with only COS III as reverse legend date to 125-128 A.D.
The Obverse legend is similarly simple, from the series with just COS III on reverse, the only Obverse legend was HADRIANVS AVGVSTVS - his laureate head right.
The reverse is a little more problematic, since this series was struck continuously in the years 125-128 A.D., thre are literally dozens of deities and personifications - we have only the object (caduceus? spear?) to go on and even it is unclear in the photo despite tweaking.
I am going to make a guess here - and further cleaning may reveal more detail which will change my interpretation, but on the off chance that the figure is holding a smallish, round shield before herself, that it is Minerva, standing left, legs together, holding small round shield low and spear. Aside from this, the only other possibility I see with the level of detail visible now would be Libertas standing left holding pileus (Freedom
cap) and rod.
Going with Minerva, this is RIC II 154, RSC 297 - if Libertas, it's RIC 175 or RSC 374

As I look at further references, I'm leaning more towards Libertas - we'll have to see whether she's holding out that right hand and if so, what's in it.

2.88g, 17.65

Silver Roman coin 14-37 AD

1.46g, 17.40mm

As dug

Early Roman silver coin in the 'cooker' to remove the horn silver crust 17.87mm, 3.01g

Yes, of course this is Faustina - that's pretty obvious. However there were 2 Faustinae, the wives of Antoninus Pius and Marcus Aurelius respectively. This is the 2nd, also known as "Faustina Junior". She and Marcus Aurelius were married in 145 AD. while he was still Caesar under Antoninus Pius and raised to the rank of Augusta in 147. So her coinage exists in several phases: those struck by Antoninus Pius before, then after becoming Augusta, those struck by Marcus Aurelius during her life, and those struck in her honor posthumously. she and Marcus evidently had a closer relationship than that enjoyed by most Imperial couples - Faustina accompanied or visited him throughout his military career in far-flung outposts while fighting the Germans. For this, she became known as "Matri Castrorum" - "Mother of the Camps". This piece was struck by Marcus Aurelius while she was still living, sometime between his elevation to Augustus in 161 and her death in 175. The reverse type, which is a bit hard to read in its present condition is "SALVS" - the allegorical personification of Salus ("health", but as in "the Health of the Empire" or "of the body-public", etc.) seated left feeding a serpent arising from a low altar at her feet. This is a pretty obscure reference for us at this remove in time, but it was full of important symbolism for the Romans. Whether at that point in time it was still occurring that the Vestals and/or other faithful Roman women fed actual serpents in ceremonies from which all men were banned, I don't know. Ceremonies of this type were important well into the Imperatorial era. However, the image of this ceremony remained a part of the Roman psyche and symbolized the "Purity" or "Virtue" of the Empire to the extent that it could interact with serpents and not be harmed.

Catalog - RIC III, 714 (of Marcus Aurelius), RSC 195, SR 5262.

Mark

27AD silver Divus Argusta

2ndC Roman silver coin sent off for ID

17.05mm, 2.79g

Mark Lehman just sent me this feedback & ID on the coin

Roman silver coin send for ID

Another silver Roman with green grunge' growing on it - sent for ID

18.65mm, 2.57g

Cooked Roman silver sent for ID 1.43g, 17.71mm

Best condition Roman silver I have ever seen dug- next to fresh water spring ! Probably an offering

Sent off for ID

16.3mm,3.39g

Roman silver coin sent off for IDAntoninus Pius (138-161) 2.92g, 17.49mm

Interesting Roman silver forgery sent for ID

2.36g, 17.33mm

2ndC Roman silver coin as dug and partially 'cooked' to reveal some of the detail 3.14g, 19mm

The Denarius is a poshumous commemorative issue in remembrance of Antoninus Pius, by Marcus Aurelius, c. 161, AD.  "DIVVS ANTONINVS / CONSECRATIO"; eagle on garlanded altar. 
It looks as though it should have a lot of good detail and may wind up a very attractive coin, given how unkind British soil seems to be to Æ's, at least.  It's a rather common type, but in the condition this seems to be, it's a quite decent find.

Mark

Roman silver coin - as dug and partially cooked - back in the 'cooker' to remove crust

2ndC Roman silver coin - 'cooking it to remove crust'

Your coin is definitely Antoninus Pius, 138-161 AD.  I believe the reverse is Victory standing left holding wreath in outstretched right hand and a long palm-branch in the left.  I believe the reverse legend is IMPERATOR II.  If it is Imperator II, a fairly common type, it dates to about 143 AD from the mint at Rome.

Mark 

Another typical example found here

"fourree" silver-over-copper denarii

Fascinating find Roman silver forgery coin showing exposed copper core which swelled and forced off one face of the coin. Shows clearly how the forgery was constructed

As dug

Teresa's Roman silver starting to 'cook' up nicely - sent to Mark Lehman for ID

This is a denarius of Hadrian (117-138 AD) who did some building in your part of the world as a part of his program to consolidate the governable parts of the expanded Empire left him by his predecessor Trajan.  Trajan, if you will recall, was the emperor under whose reign the Roman Empire reached its largest size, so Hadrian, being a practical sort of fellow, trimmed-off the ungovernable places (Like the lands won from the Parthian Persian Empire) and did what he could to make other areas as practical to be goverened as possible.  In Britain, as you know, this meant building and maintaining a string of fortresses and garrisons, all connected by a wall across the narrowest part of your island to keep the increasingly Romanized south from overmuch depredation from the "barbarian" north.
Being a hands-on sort of ruler, Hadrian made it his business to visit every part of the Empire at least once during his rule.  Often his coins reflected his journeys, almost like "official postcards" from his travels around the Empire.

This piece shows a personification of Africa - the Romans were big on putting human faces onto abstract concepts as a part of their well-developed system of personifications - as a woman reclining at ease against a rock, wearing an elephant-skin headdress and holding a scorpion and a cornucopia, a basket of corn-ears and fruit at her feet.  Africa represented a nearly never-ending source of exploitable riches for the Romans, the fertile areas of the north provided a major portion of the grain without which the Empire would not have had the bread for its "Bread and Circuses".  And indeed Africa produced an unending supply of exotic beasts and people to populate the circuses as well.

The personification of Africa appeared on Roman coins of all denominations towards the end of Hadrian's relatively long reign - your piece dates to about 136 AD.  RIC II 299, RSC 138.
This is a somewhat scarce type and considered very desirable.

Mark

'Cooked'

Great detail on this broken Roman silver - sent for ID

The one with the concave break is a Trajan (96-117 AD) Fortuna Redux Denarius - Fortuna seated left holding a rudder (visible at her feet) and cornucopiae. The reverse legend refers to Trajan's victorious campaigns against the Parthians. The land acquired in these victories was the first that Hadrian "got rid of" - gave back to the Parthian Empire in the interests of peace - in his reign which succeeded Trajan's - but it was part of what brought the Roman Empire to its largest size in lands held. This occurred under Trajan, at just about the time this type was struck - the later part of Trajan's reign - around 116 AD, give or take a year.

I'm not sure yet about who's on the one with the convex break. The portrait makes me think it's probably Flavian era (Vespasian, Titus & Domitian, end of the 1st century AD) I'll need to try to tweak the images a bit to get a better idea from these photos, but a "post-cooking" photo would probably give me more clues.

Mark

As dug

Cooking

Almost 'cooked - just re sent it back off to Mark for a further ID

2ndC Roman silver coin - 'cooking' it to remove crust

This is probably a Flavian (Vespasian, Titus or Domitian) but it is a similar reverse with sacrificial implementia.  This one has "TRI POT" (Tribunicia Potestatum or the Tribunician Powers) across the bottom of the reverse, and that's a common reverse type for the Flavians. 

Other emperors used the sacrificial implements as a reverse type. So I can't be certain who it is until there's a bit more obverse detail to go on. I can tell you that they're often associated with issues for the Caesar - the "heir apparent" - (if there is one) so I'd make a guess there's a good chance this may be Titus, but I believe Vespasian used this same reverse.

When you've revealed some obverse details I should be able to tell you better what you've got here.

Mark

I'm not certain which (if any) member of the family or reference number I might have quoted you before, but as far as I can tell this is Vespasian - the missing part of the obverse legend would be" [IMP CAES VESP AV]G P M COS IIII.
None of the other Flavians used this exact reverse type, AVGVR / TRI POT. 
It's from the mint at Rome and dates to 72/3 AD.  RIC II 42; SR 2282.

Mark

As dug and partially 'cooked' sent for ID

1stC Roman coin - straight into 'cooker' to clean off crust

What you have here is a denarius of Trajan, 96-117 AD.  It was during Trajan's time that the Roman Empire achieved it greatest overall size - it would never again be so large.  Although Hadrian and others of Trajan's successors were quick to lop-off some of the further flung and less easily administered and defended areas, Trajan's rule ushered-in the era of "The Good Emperors"  The 2nd century, therefore, was noted for a general condition of relative peace and prosperity the likes of which would not be seen again (arguably, even in our own time).

This specific piece has "Genius" (Genio Populi Romani - the genius or motivating spirit of the Roman People) standing left holding a patera - a sacrificial vessel for pouring libations - and a cornucopiae.  The legend on the reverse, as is often the case on Trajan's coins, cites only "The Senate and The People of Rome" and the statement that Trajan was "The Optimum Prince".

The obverse legend (which is somewhat unclear on your specimen, so far) will be the typical 2nd century "laundry list" of titles: IMP TRAIANO AVG GER DAC P M TR P COS V P P.

The catalog references for this piece are: RIC II 181; RSC 395. 107 AD

Mark

Sent to Mark Lehman for ID

This of course is the "Gaius & Lucius Denarius" of Augustus.  One of the most common pieces surviving from the 1st century, there are many who feel this piece actually was more likely to have been the so-called Tribute Penny (if, in fact, the episode in the Gospel of Matthew ever took place) than the Tiberius Denarius usually marketed as the "Tribute Penny".
Gaius and Lucius were Augustus grandsons by Agrippa and Julia - he had great hopes for them to succeed him, but both died young - poisoned as a result of family intrigues if you subscribe to the "I Claudius" plotline for the early Julio-Claudian era. 
The reverse shows, of course, Gaius and Lucius standing facing with a pile of arms on the ground between them and the jug and lituus - priestly implementia -  between their heads.  The reverse legend - C L CAESARES / AVGVSTI F COS DESIG PRINC IVVENT - names them Princes of Youth and consuls designate.

These were produced at the mint of Lugdunum (modern Lyon) 2-4 AD. RIC 207, RSC 43, SR 1597.

Mark

This is a major fragment of a silver Antoninianus (2 denarii) of, I believe, Philip I (244-249 AD) I can't quite figure out exactly what's happening on the reverse, but it seems like it may be a presentation scene with a deity or personification presenting a wreath or a Victory figure to the Emperor.

Mark

2ndC Roman bronze coin sent for ID

This is a denarius of Septimius Severus, 193-211 AD.  The title in the obverse legend - L SEPT SEV PERT AVG IMP III - dates the piece to 194 AD.  The reverse type - PACI AVGVSTI - shows Pax seated left holding an olive-branch and a cornucopaie.
References: RIC IV 37, RSC 359.

Severus was the less-famous father of the infamous emperor Caracalla.  Severus died while on campaign in Britain, where he'd been strengthening defenses and rebuilding Hadrian's wall since 208, in York, on February 4, 211.

His death left sons Caracalla and Geta to share the throne as co-emperors, but Caracalla's plans didn't include giving power or advantage to his younger brother on whom he had wasted no love.  On the premise of a meeting of reconciliation with Geta held at a family villa soon thereafter, he had arranged for his bodyguard to attack and fatally stab Geta, who subsequently died in their mother's arms.  Nice folks.

Mark

Crusty Roman silver sent for ID

I'll have to meditate on this one a bit.  It ultimately may not be possible to ID it with any certainty, but at the moment, I don't have even a glimmer of immediate recognition.

Mark 

Amazing detail after 'cooking' on this crusty Roman silver fragment - sent off for ID

Checking my references for the Flavians, this type - ANNONA AVG. Annona enthroned left holding a bag of corn-ears in her lap - was struck for both Vespasian and Titus as Caesar in 78/9 AD.  Both used legends which would put the word CAESAR in the position in which it's visible on the obverse.  If you can detect any trace of a "T" before the CAESAR, then it would be Titus.  If you believe there is nothing at all before the CAESAR, then it is Vespasian.

Titus : T CAESAR VESPASIANVS
Vespasian : CAESAR VESPASIANVS

So I can't be 100% certain for whom it was struck (I think it's Vespasian) but the date and everything else would be the same except for a single letter in the obverse legend, and, of course, whether the bust was intended to portray father or son.

It's not possible at this point to be certain, but it is quite possible that this piece was at least halved in antiquity, in order to make change - perhaps even quartered, although the upper, curved break seems more likely to be accidental while the lower one looks more as though it was made with a chisel or other blade.

Mark

Ad dug

'Cooking'

Just about 'cooked'

2ndC Roman silver - straight into the 'cooker' to remove horn silver crust - R

Hadrian (117-138 DA) with Victory on the reverse.  A more detailed ID will have to wait for more legend to be revealed.

Mark

I stand with my original identification - Hadrian / Victory - but there are a few things I can add, now.  The obverse legend is IMP CAESAR TRAIAN HADRIANVS AVG - quoting his official name which contains the name of his predecessor and adoptive father, Trajan.  The legend on the reverse is P M TR P COS III meaning Pontifex Maximum (head of the state religion) holder of the Tribunician Powers (ie: leader of the Plebeans as well as the Aristocracy) Consul for the 3rd time.

This allows us to date this piece.  Although Hadrian (117-138 AD) was consul only 3 times with his 3rd consulship coming very early in his reign, he was eligible to use "COS III" at any time after the fact - so that only brings the spread down to 119-138 AD.  Not too much help in and of itself.  However, this particular use of his list of titles dates specifically to the earlier part of his reign, c. 119 - 125 AD.  This particular type is part of the series issued specifically in 123 AD.

The reverse of this piece probably refers to a specific military victory rather than to "Victory" as an allegorical personification of an abstract virtue.  I don't know Hadrian's history well enough, however, to tell you what campaign or battle this might be commemorating.

Mark

2ndC Roman silver - straight into the 'cooker' to remove horn silver crust - S

On the strength of the portrait I'm willing to say that I'm almost positive that this is a denarius of Trajan (96-117 AD) and if so, this style of portrait tended only to be used relatively early in his reign (c. 96-100 AD).  I don't think I'll be able to tell you much more on the basis of the seated figure on the reverse. The nearly complete lack of legend on both sides - what little is visible is not of any help - will probably prevent me from making a positive ID. I don't know which personification or deity this is supposed to be.  I'll have a quick look through a list of types, but I rather suspect that there will be more than one which vaguely fits this description.  The one thing we have in our favor for a closer ID is that a figure seated to the right is somwhat unusual, most will face left.  The objects she is holding - a scepter and olive-branch (I think) - usually are Pax's attributes

Mark

Wierd silver Roman laminating badly as dug - sent off for ID

16.59mm, 1.42mm

Although in this shape with no remaining legends and a deteriorated portrait, about all I can do is make an educated guess.

I believe this is most likely Trajan - 96-117 AD - and the reverse type, which is clear enough to be certain about, is Fortuna.  She's depicted standing left holding a rudder and cornucopiae.

Fortuna was one of those "evergreen" reverse types, like Pax, and might turn up on the reverses of virtually anyone from the first 3 centuries of the Empire.

Mark

Ad dug

Cooking

Please let me see this when it gets a bit cleaner - I believe it is Magnentius, a short-lived usurper in the West, 350-353.  His silver is pretty rare.  This is the same fellow a lot of whose Centenionales you found and had to declare as a hoard last year or the year before.  Are you certain this is silver?  This type is quite common in Æ, but this is a very, very rare type in AR - and in fact, this would be an unpublished variety of Light Miliarense or a formerly completely unknown type of Siliqua (if it is silver and it is Magnentius).

Mark

4th/5thC Roman silver coin sent for ID

Yes, it looks like one of the officially clipped siliquae created to agree with the size and weight for use as Sceattas.  There seems to be just enough of the bottoms of the letters on the left for me to say that I have a strong suspicion it's Valens - 364-378 AD.  If it is Valens, as I suspect it is, this VRBS ROMA reverse was struck with longer mint marks at only 4 mints - Trier, Lugdunum, Aquilea and Siscia. Rome struck it too, but with only 2 characters in the mint mark.  I can't be quite as sure about making a determination of the mint mark from a few random serifs as I think I can for the obverse legend, but based on what seems to be the centering of the mint mark, I believe it's more likely to consist of 6 characters than 4, meaning it's more likely to be from Siscia than any of the other 3 which used 4-character mint marks.

Mark

As dug

Cooked

This is in fantastic shape out of the ground and silver from the late centuries is hard to find - 'cooking' it to clean up the detail

Just sent it off for ID

16.99mm,1.16

This one pretty much has to be Julian II, but so far I have been unable to find this precise combination of obverse and reverse in RSC - I'm not all that familiar with volume V of RSC since all the later silver (mostly Siliquae) is an order or three of magnitude more rare, in general, than the silver Denarii and Antoniniani of earlier centuries.

I need to dig in the listings a bit more to confirm what I think about which emperor it is, but this is a Siliqua from the mint in Lyon France, then known as Lugdunum.

After a bit more work, this seems to be an unpublished variety of obverse legend for Julian for this type (VOTIS / V / MVLTIS / X) at Lugdunum.  I need to dig around a little more, but it's looking very like this is the case, since RIC VIII seems to agree with RSC V that this combination of legend and reverse type hasn't formerly been recorded.

Mark

'cooked'

2ndC Roman silver coin sent off for ID

This is another of the so-called "Tribute Pennies" - a denarius of Tiberius - he struck basically only this one type of denarius throughout his entire long (24 year!) reign between 14 & 37 AD.  The reverse is PONTIF MAXIM - referring to Tiberius' position as the head of the State religion, and the seated figure is generally accepted to be his mother, Livia.  If not, it's some generic personification - there are a couple theories which it might be, but generally people say Livia for the reverse.

Mark

2ndC Roman silver coin - cooking it - sent for ID

From my first glance at the profile of the portrait, I said to myself "Hadrian", but the legend - which is semi-readable - appears to say Antoninus Pius at first glance - but on magnification, it seems more likely to be one of Marcus Aurelius' obverse legends (Antoninus Pius was Aurelius' adoptive father and the name part of his official title) - until I look at it in a different rotation - now I'm back to thinking it's Antoninus Pius

Basically, I'm really curious to see what comes out of the cooker - this is too vague to tell, so far.

Mark

1stC Roman silver coin sent off for ID (John L)

'cooking it'

This is definitely a denarius of Domitian (81-96 AD).  I should be able to tell you a lot more about it, including being able to date it rather closely, once you have cooked it a bit.  It seems to have a "laundry-list of titlature" as the reverse legend, so it should be very closely dateable - but it's a little "occluded" at the moment and I'm not 100% sure what I'm seeing.  The reverse type is Minerva with spear - Minerva was a particularly favorite deity of Domitian's and appears on lots of his coins. I'll tentatively date it to 90/91 AD, but that might change when we can see more detail.

Mark

3rd C Roman silver coin - straight into cooker (John) - sent for provisional ID

19.72mm, 2.74g

There's not quite enough detail in the right places (close, though) to tell you with certainty any more than you already know - it's a billon antoninianus, and as such either has to date to the later 3rd century if official, or the mid-3rd century if a contemporary copy.

If that obverse legend turns out to read as it appears it might at this point, it would be a Gallic Empire piece from Victorinus - but on the basis of this photo, that's half guesswork at best.

Send me another photo when the obverse legend begins to become more defined and I'll tell you a lot more about it.

Mark 

Roman silver coin - in the 'cooker' to remove crust (Terry)

4thC Roman silver coin - needs cooking to ID (John L)

I'll have a quick look through volume V of RSC a bit later, since silver of this era is so much more scarce then the silver of other eras that I am quite a bit less familiar with it all.  However, my first question would be - are you sure this is silver?

There does appear to be enough detail for a relatively definitive ID.  I'm not recognizing the name-fragment at 2:00-3:00 obverse, but that will be easily enough supplied.

You seem to be working a far richer area these days - in both the sense of numbers of items found and of the relative wealth of the Roman-era residents.

Mark

2ndC Roman silver coin - into the 'cooker' to clean up - sent to Mark Lehman for provisional ID (Min)

At this point, it appears to be a Flavian - Vespasian (69-79), Titus (79-81), Domitian, (81-96) -  but I can't say much more at the moment.

Mark

I'm pretty sure I told you this was one of the Flavians - Vespasian or Titus most likely - and although I am still unsure which it is (I suspect it's Vespasian who has a similar issue from Lugdunum, but with a different obverse legend) the reverse is now clearly visible as a type copied from Augustus and Agrippa - Neptune standing left, foot on rock, holding dolphin and trident..

Unfortunately I don't have a really clear example of this reverse type on an official Roman issue coin, but I have this fairly close copy on a Limes Falsa As of Agrippa - http://www.stoa.org/gallery/album90/mark_agrippa_as_1

Okay, after doing some more research, I can  now be certain that it's Vespasian - the obverse legend should be IMP CAES VEST AVG P M COS IIII - which would match-up the "...AVG P M..." which we can see on the obverse in the correct place in the legend.  The reverse legend should be NEP RED, and although I can't be 100% certain from what's left on the coin, given the lamination issues, it appears that this reverse legend would work as well.
This would be from either the mit at Rome or Antioch (more likely Rome) 72/3 AD, and I would need to change the reverse description to "holding acrostolium" rather than dolphin, but the reverese devices came out really clearly on this, luckily.

Mark

PS - here's a pretty reasonably clear example of the same type in use by Hadrian 50 years or so later - http://www.stoa.org/gallery/album92/ML03_Hadrian_Neptune_sest

Cooked debased Roman silver coin - sent off for final ID now I have cleaned up obverse

Now that you have it more cooked, I can see what the major problem was with my original guesswork.  This isn't Tetricus or any of the Gallic emperors.  Although I still can't read the legend with any certainty, on the strength of the portrait, I'm 90+% certain this is Philip I "the Arab", 244-249 AD.  It also seems to be a higher-silver alloy than would be found in a Gallic Empire piece 20 years later. This alloy would be consistent with the time-frame for Philip.
Here's a very similar-style Philip portrait on a billon antoninianus - I don't have anything this degraded photographed at the present time, but I think you'll be able to see why I believe this is Philip.

http://www.stoa.org/gallery/album102/ML_24_Philip_I_Nobilitas_ant

Although any detail I thought I saw on the reverse seems to be gone now, it may be that the reverse is something like this SAECVLARES piece issued for the Millennium of Rome in 248 with a cippus - or low column or plinth design.

http://www.stoa.org/gallery/album102/ML_25_Philip_I_Saeculares_ant

Mark

'Cooking' this sucker for over 3 months and it is almost finished

This one is easy - it's a very nice specimen with clear legends and details -
it's Marcus Aurelius (161-180 AD)  Obverse legend: M ANTONINVS AVG ARM PARTH MAX
The Reverse legend: TRP XX IMP IIII COS III dates it specifically to 166 AD. 
PAX (in exergue) Pax - or Peace - standing left holding olive-branch and cornucopiae could occur anytime as a popular general personification of a Roman virtue, but the obverse legend which titles him Victor of Armenia and Parthia would similarly date it to the period 166-9 AD even without the laundry-list of dated titles on the reverse.

References, RIC 159, RSC 435, BMC 401.

Mark

4thC silver washed Roman coin - sent for ID - cooking it to clean off crud

2ndC crusty Roman silver coin - 'cooking' to remove crust

2ndC Roman silver coin - cooking to remove crust

The first piece is an antoninianus of Gallienus - 253-268 - from the later part of his reign.  It was during his reign that Roman "silver" coins finally became so debased that they could no longer masquerade as silver without an exterior wash or plating of silver.  Obviously I can't tell you what the reverse type is.  Gallienus was probably the most prolific coiner of different reverse types in the Empire - there are over 1000 types listed for him in RSC, for example.

4thC Roman washed silver coin - sent for ID

the 2nd piece is too crusty for me to get much out of it, although the obverse legend retains a couple of legible letters, I haven't been able to quite place them into an Imperial title for anyone in particular, yet.  I'll get back to you on this.

Given a 2nd look, I believe this might be Postumus - or a contemporary copy of one of his types - the founder of the so-called Gallic Empire.

Roman silver haord reported to Colchester museum

Fantastic! - That's a really wonderful find.

What I can tell from your photos is this:
- They are all siliquae
- the 3 obverses which have enough detail to be identifiable are all Honorius - 393-423 AD.
- The reverse type for all of them (again, so far as I can tell from those which have recognizeable features) appears to be VIRTVS ROMANORVM - Roma seated left holding Victory on globe and inverted spear.
- Only one has any useful amount of visible exergual mintmark - it is either MDPS (for Milan) or AQPS (for Aquilea) - I can't quite be certain from the one photo with legible fragments, but my guess would be Milan since it is less scarce than Aquilea.
- There is a possibility that one more of the pieces might be cleaned to reveal more detail in its exergual mint mark (photo # 1)

Whether these are small because the mint was skimping on silver (a distinct possibility) or whether they have been officially clipped-down to the weight of a Saxon Sceatta is not something I can even make an educated guess about since even if I had weights for the coins in their uncleaned state, I don't know what the standard deviation from the expected weight should be, etc, (nor do I know what the expected average weight of unclipped specimens would be - but I could probably find out).

Here's a fairly complete and readable specimen of the same type (and possibly/probably the same mint) from my own collection:

http://www.stoa.org/gallery/album83/10_Honorius_Sil_MIL?full=1

Regards

Mark

Your coin hoard is interesting and important.

The coins are Roman, of course; and apparently silver. The coins are a denomination known as a siliqua. Some of them had been clipped to remove silver from the edges. Such tampering with the coinage was a very serious offence, and could only have taken place on the scale it is found in Britain when the Roman hold on the province had relaxed early in the fifth century AD.

Clipping was done to create a pool of silver bullion from the currency of the state that could be used by private individuals for their own ends: treason, in a word. Conventional wisdom has it that the clipping of coins was actually done to mint more unofficial siliquae and so make the pool of currency stretch a bit further at a time when no more bona fide Roman coinage was reaching the province.

Paul R. Sealey
Curator of Archaeology

1st/2nd C Roman silver coin - 'cooking' to remove crust

I can't give you much detail about it in this condition excpt to say that it's centuries earlier than the siliquae. 
It appears to be a Tiberius PONTIF MAXIM denarius, the so-called "Tribute Penny", however.

Mark

As dug and 'Cooking' Roman silver - still more to do yet and then I will resent it to Mark Lehman

The details are still a bit fuzzy, but I can tell you that it's a denarius of Hadrian (117-138 AD.) and the reverse type is TELLVS STABIL. A woman - the personification of Tellus - standing left holding a plow-handle and a rake - 2 corn plants protrude from the ground behind her. This is a product of the Mint at Rome in 133 AD. The obverse reads (or should read) HADRIANVS AVG COS III P P - and if you study it closely, you can tell that it does have that legend.



Mark

Cooking 2ndC Roman silver coin - the obv shows how thick the crust cooking off is

Cooking 2ndC Roman silver coin - another example of how thick the crust cooking off is

As dug and cooking pictures

Penn Dennis' crispy Roman silver is start to 'cook' up after being in the pot since March 2012 !! Still more crust to remove yet but I sent it off for ID.

the obverse legend is DIVA FAVSTINA ("the deified" Faustina) and portrays her in the usual way with a fairly elaborate hairstyle, somewhat swept up in the back with a small bun at the top of the head.
The reverse legend is AVGVSTA and the figure is Ceres - the allegorical personification of the grain supply (remember bread and circuses? - this was the bread half of that formula portrayed as a demi-god) holding a torch and a scepter.  Ceres was a common reverse type for the AVGVSTA series and is potrayed with eight or ten slightly varying combinations of attributes, torches, scepters, bunches of grain-ears plus various hand gestures - raising, holding fold of drapery, etc. are paired up in many different permutations.

Faustina Sr.for him - a posthumous piece (as is the majority of her coinage) for the wifeof Antoninus Pius. She died in 141, only 3 years into Antoninus' longreign, and had significant posthumous coinages struck in her honor, first byAntoninus Pius, then later by Marcus Aurelius - her son-in-law.


Mostof Faustina Sr.'s coinage is not divided easily into date-groupsby type - the same types being issued over a fairly long period. Generally her posthumous coins by A. Pius are dated to "after 147AD." It was in 147 that her daughter, Faustina Jr, wife of M. Aurelius,assumed the title of "Augusta" and it is presumed that this was the occasion for the beginning of her posthumous coinage.

Mark

Cooked Roman silver sent for ID

This one came out quite clear.  It's Antoninus Pius (138-161) and the reverse type is FORTVNA AVG - which would be easy to tell even if the legend did not have the few clear letters with telltale wide spacing like this one displays.  The rudder and cornucopiae attributes are almost exclusively the adjuncts of Fortuna.  This coin was meant to be dated by the obverse legend, but the portion stating the Tribunician year is mostly off flan making it illegible.  However, this type was issued only in his 23rd & 324th Tribunician year, so we can date it to near the end of his reign 159-161.

Mark

Very crisp 4thC Roman silver sent for ID

Wow, very nice.  This is, of course, a Siliqua of Valentinian, I 364-375.  From the mint at Arles, it dates to the earlier part of his reign, 364-7.  The reverse type is RESTITVTOR REIP - (Restorer of the Republic - pure propaganda) and shows the emperor standing facing, head right, holding a labarum with Chi-Rho symbol and Victory on globe. The OF - II in the field indicates the 2nd offiicina or workshop of the mint, the star above the II is a sequence mark.
The exergual mint mark reads CONST - this mint mark is one that confuses many beginners.  Although it appears to name the mint at Constantinople, Arles was renamed Constantina in honor of Constantine II beginning in 328. The name reverted to Arles in 340 upon the death of Constantine II, then was restored to Constantina when the city was re-captured (from Magnentius) by Constantius II in 353, and retained that name until the mint ceased producing bronze coinage in the mid-5th century.
The main references to cite for this piece are RSC 18 and RIC IX 6a7.

Mark

Interesting find yesterday, is it silver, debased  or washed ?  Not attemping to clean it until I know it will not be damaged. - Mindy

Roman silver coin sent to Mark Lehman for ID

Can you see exposed copper on this one?  I believe it is a standard (official issue) silver (at least 50-60% or so) denarius of Marcus Auelius (161-180) so you might want to check to be sure that it's not just profoundly tarnished and possibly cleanable silver. 

There is an entire class of cast (generally, rather than struck) denarii and a few earlier antoniniani which were made by impressing genuine coins in clay to make molds.  They can be surprisingly close to the originals, particuarly as castings go, and when found in perfect condition may retain a very thin silvery outer layer, but generally appear to be strictly Æ.  These are mostly found in the Balkans and the era in which they were commonly produced was from about 200-250 AD - at least the protoype coins from which the molds were made tend to be from that era - coins predominantly of the Severan dynasty.  These are incorrectly referred to as "Limes Denarii" - and although this is a terrible name for them (it conflates them with the class of "Limes Falsa" undersized, struck contemporary copies of Julio-Claudian Æ from Britain and Northern Gaul - with which they share virtually no qualities other than both being contemporary copies) they have now been referred to by this term long enough that it has achieved a certain legitimacy and it would probably be impossible to convince the market in general to stop using this misnomer-name for them.  These Balkan Æ denarii used to be quite scarce until the 1990's when huge quantities of coin began to reach western markets from the former "Iron Curtain" countries like Bulgaria, Romania, the countries of the former Yugoslavia, and the most south-western of the nations formely part of the Soviet Union like Ukraine.  Now they are not exactly "common", but just about everyone has seen them in person now and most folks I know have at least a few of them sourced from lots of uncleaned coins alongside Roman Provincial and Constantinian-era material.

I'm not saying this marcus Aurelius cannot be a contemporary copy, but unless you're certain it isn't silver, I'd assume it's a regular Mint of Rome product.
The prototype (if it is a copy - or what it actually is if my hunch is correct) would be IMP M ANTONINVS AVG as the obverse legend, laureate head right / and PROV DEOR TR P XVII COS III for the reverse, with Providentia standing left holding a globe and cornucopiae.  RSC 525; RIC III 73.
This combination of obverse & reverse legends allows us to date it quite specifically to December 162 - December 163 AD - or approximately 30-40 years too early for the Balkan Æ denarii.

For comparison, here's a pretty early (the prototype dates to 198 AD), so-called "Limes denarius" of Septimius Severus:
http://www.stoa.org/gallery/Chaos-and-the/03_Sept_Sev_Denarius_Pax 

This probably would have been at least silvery-colored originally, but by the time we see them, they almost always appear to be Æ, like this one.

There is also a class of struck fourrees from this same general era - often mistaken for official issues, they are "silver-washed" (I explained recently why this is also a misnomer but won't repeat it here) at a time before the silvering process had been used on any official Roman coins - that practice didn't occur until the 260's under Gallienus.

This "plated" Julia Maesa denarius can be seen obviously not to be an official denarius from a standpoint of style and workmanship as well as fabric, but unlike the fourrees of the 1st century BC & AD, the Æ core is not wrapped in a silver foil - rather it appears to have been created by surface enrichment:
.
http://www.stoa.org/gallery/album97/ML_07_J_Maesa_Pudicitia_fourree

It should look like this:

http://www.stoa.org/gallery/album97/ML_06_J_Maesa_Pudicitia_den

Let me know what alloy the Marcus Aurelius turns out to be - if it is a Balkan copy, it would be the earliest example of the type I've ever seen.
"Conventional" (foil-wrapped, struck) fourrees of Marcus Aurelius are not completely unknown, but they are very unusual.

Mark

Roman silver coin - sent for ID before cooking - Ron

The only place I can find the reverse legend (which is about all that I can make out on this piece at this point) is on denarii of Septimius Severus and Caracalla. (c. 193-217)  It reads: PART MAX PONT TR P IIII - it should show 2 captives seated at the foot of a trophy.

So yes, this should definitely be pretty good silver (unless you have some reason to suspect a fourree, it should be better than 50% at any rate) and a candidate for cooking.  When some of the crud on the obverse falls away, I should be able to tell you whether this belongs to father (Sept Sev) or son (Caracalla) - or someone else.

This is also interesting in that you have shown me very little material from the Severan Dynasty overall - it's made itself pretty obvious by its near complete absence from the record of coin-types you've found, while Severan coins, in general, are not at all scarce anywhere else.

Mark 

Roman silver forgery - sent for ID

Great relic as it shows clearly the two sheet of silver over a bronze core

Now that is some real "core exposure".  This is actually quite the "exploded diagram" of a textbook 1st century fourree.  The copper core was wrapped in a significantly thick silver foil with a layer of flux applied under the silver which was then "soldered" to the core by annealing.  Usually, you only see holes in the foil -"core exposures", although I have occasionally seen an empty silver shell (or approxiamtely 90% or one, at least) from which the copper core has been completely corroded away and lost.

This appears to copy a denarius of Vespasian, although it could as easily be meant to be Titus - the beginning and end of the legend having been lost makes it impossible to be sure, but the portrait favors Vespasian.  The reverse seems to be COS ITER TR POT with Aequitas standing left, the scales she holds are lost just below the break in the silver.  This reverse is an exclusively Vespasian type, but it's not at all unusual for fourrees to mule obverses with "inappropriate" reverses.  In fact, I used to own a fourree of an Otho denarius (see photo below) with this same Aequitas COS ITER TR POT reverse, so this doesn't prove it's not Titus either.  

Vespasian's 2nd consulship began in 70 AD, so this piece can't date to much later than 80 AD without the reverse being so anachronistic as to have caused suspicion.

Mark

1.01g,16.44mm & 1.0g,13.59mm

Amazing find - the before and after clipped Roman silver hoard coins that now weigh the same as the larger one is really thin.

Ill Tim found both together

I doubt rather seriously that any clipping of Æ coins went on in the later Roman Empire - it just wasn't worth it any more than trimming a sliver of paper off a banknote would be.  Still, many folks insist they have "clipped" examples of Æ coins.  What they typically have is an example of a smaller denomination struck with the dies intended for a larger denomination or simply on skimpy flans - so skimpy that the coins so produced wind up so much smaller that they may be mistaken for a different denomination.

These however, seem to be silver. So, rather than some enterprising merchant shaving slivers of silver from coins passing through his hands, what you have here is 2 different denominations representing 2 different time-frames - and the smaller of the two was created officially rather than serruptitiously. 
The larger is a typical siliqua of Honorius, 393-423, it seems to be from the mint at Milan - the exergue, if I'm reading it accurately, is MDPS. 
The other mints striking siliquae for Honorius were at Trier - TRPS; Rome - RMPS; Ravenna - RVPS; and Aquilea - AQPS so if the exergual letter look more like one of those, in-hand, that would be where it was produced.

The smaller piece is an example of what happened to much of the circulating stock of siliquae after the Romans packed-up and left - it was officially cut down to the size and approximate weight of a Saxon Sceat. I'm not 100% certain that the smaller one is also of Honorius, despite the similarity in portrait. Arcadius, Theodosius II and Constantine III struck the exact same reverse and there was significant overlap in their years of rule.  I can't be completely certain from the little seriphs which are all that remain of the letters, but I would hazard a guess that it is Honorius.  Theodosius can often be mistaken for Honorius and vice-versa due to the O's.

Mark

1.44g, 13.25mm - Covered with thick horn silver crust

Chicgao Ron found a 3rd that is really thick with horn silver crust.

2ndC Roman silver coin sent for ID - cooking to remove crust (Ed) - resent for update on ID

We will need to see what appears on the obverse - particularly in the legend - before I can be completely certain who this is beyond "an Antonine woman".  It's highly unlikely to be Faustina Sr. since the main body of her coinage is posthumous and the reverse type - PVDICITIA - would be a quality or virtue only of a living woman.  I suspect Faustina Jr. for the following reasons:

The shape of the head and the hair style seem to strongly suggest the Antonine era, and although it could be either Faustina Jr. (issued under Antoninus Pius or Marcus Aurelius), Lucilla or Crispina, the length of the obverse legend suggested under the encrustation is likely only on a coin of Faustina Jr.
Although PVDICITIA is a reverse type which could appear on any Imperial wife's coinage and did, in fact, appear on at least 75% of Imperial wives' coins, in a quick search I found this exact posture of Pudicitia only on a denarius of Faustina Jr.

But we'll have to wait and see what the cooker reveals on the obverse.

Mark

Now that we can read (or at least puzzle-out) the obverse legend well enough to be certain that it reads: FAVSTINA AVGVS-TA AVG PII F = "Faustina, Augusta, Devoted Daughter of the Emperor"   She was honored as Augusta in her own right when her mother died in 147, this was several years before before her husband, M. Aurelius was made Augustus (161). She married Marcus Aurelius in 145 and died a few years before him in 175. 

We can now be certain that this is a lifetime issue for Faustina Jr. which was issued by authority of her father, Antoninus Pius.  This issue dates to 156-7 from the mint at Rome.
From his ascencion to Augustus in 161 onward, her later issues of coins, both lifetime and posthumous types, were issued by authority of her husband.

This is an unusual form of obverse legend and is almost unique to this specific type, although this type is not considered particularly scarce. References include: RIC III 508a; RSC 184; BMC1092; and SRCV 4707.

Mark

Roman silver coin fragment sent for ID

The silver fragment is from a denarius of Septimius Severus, 193-210 AD.  I can't tell from the remaining features what the reverse type may have been - and Sept. Sev. was a very prolific issuer of different reverse types on his denarii.

Although the device might appear to be a highly unusual tubby personification, I think this is the result of encrustation appearing to be part of the relief.  From the couple of letters visible at the lower left, it might be "PROVIDENTIA..." but generally a standing representation of Providence will be holding a wand and/or pointing at a globe at her feet.  It's not impossible that this was what was originally happening on this coin's reverse, but it's one of those "best guess" situations at this point.

5thC Roman hammered silver coin sent for ID

1.08g, 20mm dia

It's obviously Theodosius - you can read his name quite easily.  The question remains, though, "which Theodosius?" Theodosius I who was part of what I like to call "The Valentinian Dynasty" reigned during the late 4th century.  His dates were 379-395.  Then there's Theodosius II from 402-450.

This one - VIRTVS ROMANORVM - with Roma seated left holding Victory and spear with mint mark MDPS would be Theodosius I from the Mint of Milan.  These are not easily datable to specific years or groups of years - the same type was minted throughout his reign and during several others including that of Theodosius II.  Theo II, however, did not strike at Milan - and his coins are far scarcer. The references for your piece are RIC IX 32a and RSC 57b.

Mark

2nd C Roman silver coin sent for provisional ID - cannot ' cook' this coin as it is part of new hoard I just reported

2.98g, 19.30mm

This is, I'm sure you're aware, sort of a nearly-impossible challenge.  However, one thing that "pops out at me" is that the bust appears not to be wearing any crown - no laurel, diadem or radiate is visible, neither are there any perceptable "wreath ties" hanging behind the head/neck.

Although the portrait - at least in this vague configuration - does not particularly resemble him, what first comes to mind is Constantius Gallus.  He was a short-lived cousin of the sons of Constantine who, never advancing beyond Caesar before he pissed-off Constantius II sufficiently to relieve him of his head altogether, was only ever portrayed bare-headed - as was the custom for Caesars after the death of Constantine I.

Here's an example of a Constantius Gallus majorina with unbroken legend:

http://www.stoa.org/gallery/album167/39_Gallus_FTR_CYZ_1 

A lot of his coinage shows him with a legend broken by his head, but as you can see, the legend is continuous around his head in the example above - this was also a post-Constantinian tradition for new Ceasars or Augusti - the minor or associate was shown with a smaller portrait head accomodating an encircling legend.  When he had achieved a certain seniority, his portait was enlarged and the legend broken to accomodate it:

Later in his short reign, he was portrayed thusly:

http://www.stoa.org/gallery/album167/41_Gallus_FTR_ALE

 Other folks who were portrayed bare-headed who might be likely to show up in your digs are the brothers Magnentius & Decentius - it was they whose coins formed the bulk of one of the earlier hoards you dealt with - a couple years ago.  They tended to be portayed with serious "helmet-hair" as part of a mullet - a very silly-looking hairdo, IOW.  Julian II was Caesar for a relatively long time before his relatively brief time as Augustus - his coins as Caesar also portray him bare-headed.

http://www.stoa.org/gallery/album167/50_Julian_FTR_ARL

Of course, if my initial impression of a bare-headed portrait turns out to be mistaken, all of the preceeding becomes relatively meaningless.

Mark

2ndC Roman silver coin sent for ID - cooking to remove crust (GaB)

I guess I didn't get back to you on this one - I can't be 100% certain since the obverse legend is all but illegible and the back of the head could be any one of half a dozen young late 2nd-early 3rd century Imperials, but I believe this is a youthful portrait of Caracalla - probably when he was still Caesar under his father, Septimius Severus (195-198).  The reverse type is plausible for Caracalla Caesar - PIETAS Piety standing left sacrificing over small altar and holding box of incense.

If the obverse leged becomes clearer with cleaning, I suspect it will be "M AVR ANTON CAES PONTIF" - the single really clear letter of the obverse legend - the "O" - is in the correct place for this to be the legend. 

Mark

Roman silver coin sent for previsional ID - needs a cook to remove crust

I'm afraid I can't narrow this one down very much at this time - there are just too many profiles which might possibly match up with this fairly generic and soft-focus, bearded portrait.  The obverse legend is no help in its current state.  The reverse is too generic to call it for any one ruler with whom it's associated.
I think it could be just about any of the rulers from the 2nd half of the 2nd century - Antoninus Pius, Marcus Aurelius, Lucius Verus, Commodus, Albinus, Septimius Severus - it's even vaguely possible that it might be one of the really rare folks from the interregnum, Pertinax, Didius Julianus, Pescennius Niger, etc. 
So about as close as I feel comfortable calling it at the moment would be to say: "ca. 150-200 AD" - it's probably in there somewhere.  Let me see new photos when it starts to drop some of the encrustation - all it should take is a clear view of a few of the right letters in the obverse legend to pin it down.

Mark

3rdC Roman silver forgery sent for ID

Can you see a visible area of exposed copper core on this piece in-hand?  I can't see any obvious core-exposure in your photos and I don't really see this piece being a contemporary copy or ancient counterfeit at all.  It appears to be a fairly good-quality silver Antoninianus of one of the last group of pre-Gallienus emperors. Philip I, Trajan Decius, Trebonianus Gallus, Volusian, Hostilian, Aemilian, etc.

There is too little obverse legend and the portrait is a bit too generic - radiate bearded man right - and nothing about the reverse which would allow us to say "Oh, that's a reverse type used by so-and-so" It's another standard, generic standing female personification holding a cornucopiae and could be on anyone's coins.  it's unlikely that we will be able to make a really positive ID here.

Mark

2ndC Roman silver coin sent for ID

2ndC Roman silver coin - cooking to remove crust

2ndC Roman silver coin - needs cooking to remove crust

2ndC Roman silver coin - needs cooking to remove crust

Cleaning up Roman silver coin - sent for ID Col John

What you have here is a silver Siliqua of Gratian, (367-383) the young son of Valentinian I, elevated to Augustus at the age of 7.  This piece is from the mint at Trier, the exergual mint mark is TRPS•  References are  RIC IX, 27f-1; and RSC 86a. This type with Roma holding Victory and a scepter rather than the inverted spear Roma generally holds in her left hand on VRBS ROMA Siliquae dates to the period 367-375.  
The type with a dot following the mintmark is considered somewhat more common than the same type with a mintmark lacking the terminal dot.  RIC scales the frequency as "common", and RSC quotes a fairly low estimated "market value" (£ 50 in VF - although this first edition was released in 1987 so it's natural that by now the listed "prices" are more useful to indicate a general scale of scarcity vis-a-vis demand than as an actual guide to prices one would expect to see or pay).

However, considering Roman coins in general, Siliquae are far scarcer than, say, Denarii.  I've heard it said that you'll see at least 100 Denarii for every Siliqua you'll ever see - and although I haven't strictly "kept score" or otherwise checked empirical statistics, I'd say that's probably about right. 

It's a very nice piece which I expect will be quite nice looking after some minor, light cleaning - I wouldn't try to take all of the darker tone off the fields as it will be slightly more valuable with the more "naturally toned" looking appearance that it's probably possible to achieve by gentle cleaning of this very light darkening.

Mark

Cooking 2ndC Roman silver coin sent for quick ID

My first reaction was to say Trajan from the shape of the head, but then looking at the face more closely, I begin to wonder if it's not one of the Flavians - Vespasian or Titus particularly, or a younger portrait of Domitian. I believe that what we can see of the obverse legend from 2:00-4:00 reads ...[P] M TR P - so that is not particluarly specific to any one ruler.  The Tribunician power was almost a guaranteed office of the emperor.  I could check to see which emperors used legends which ended in ...P M TR P which will generally also have the rest of the laundry-list of Imperial titles continuing on the reverse.

I can't quite make out what the figure is doing on the reverse and what, if any, attributes may be associated.  It might be either the Roman numeral II or part of a III or IIII we can see from 3:00-4:00 on the reverse and that would be likely to be the consular number - it was more normal for an emperor to have been consul a few times - very seldom did they hold this office more than 4 or 5 times - so that doesn't do much to narrow-down the field.

Let me check the legend lists and see if I can narrow down the possibilities any by seeing who among them used an obverse legend ending in P M TRP.

Mark

2ndC Roman silver coin - needs a good 'cook' to remove crust

Just a quick word - I'll need more time to tell you about the reverse (and figure it out) but this is an antoninianus of Salonina, the wife of Gallienus, 253-268.  This was the period in which the Empire really went off the rails and it was only by the skin of their teeth that Gallienus next two successors managed to pull things back together enough for the Empire not to fragment and dissolve right then.

Mark

About all I can tell you on the reverse of the Salonina is that it appears to be a personification standing and holding a cornucopiae. The orientation of your photo of the reverse appears to be at around 1:00-1:30.  There are either hints of lettering around 10:00 in your photo which make me think it might be "CONCORDIA", but they might just be coincidental spots and stains which appear possible to be letters at this point.

If the reverse of this gets any cleaner, I can probably tell you more about it.

2ndC Roman silver coin - needs a good 'cook' to remove crust

Don't feel too bad about the silvering - it very seldom survived more than a year or two in circulation and is even less common on dugups.

Gallienus (GALLIENVS AVG) was the first emperor to allow an official silvering program - before that it had been strictly a counterfeiters' art - and was used to silver-plate jewelry, etc. They got better at it in subsequent decades as virtually all the Roman "Silver" coinage had just the thin "wash" - not really a wash, it was typically crated by acid "pickling" of the flans, pre-strike, to remove the casting fire-scale and bleach the outer layer.  It also resulted in dissolving some of the surface copper and leaving a fine network of microscopic silver "beads" on the surface.  When struck, this spread out into a continuous layer only a couple molecules thick (not unlike the extremely thin copper coating on US one cent coins - which have been made of zinc since 1983 - the copper is mainly stabilized by a super-hard, thin, polymer-plastic varnish coating)

This "billon" Antoninianus has Laetitia on the reverse (LAETITITA AVG) - she holds a wreath and typically an anchor in the left hand - although not visible in this representation.  This may be a later die-state in which the thin shaft of the anchor had been polished off the die.

By the fabric, this piece probably dates to 265-7 while the reference, Mint of Rome, RIC V, i 226, RSC 424 carries a date of 262-3. This may, however, be a later issue that is essentially the same as an earlier issue.  The range of antoniniani of Gallienus is enormous - there are literally thousands of cataloged types and the occasional un- or mis-cataloged type is not too unusual.

Mark

2ndC Roman silver coin - cooking to remove crust - sent to Mark Lehman for his views

'Cooking' Roman silver to remove crust

2ndC Roman silver coin - needs a good 'cook' to remove crust

5thC Roman silver siliqua of Honorius

Mark

Roman silver coin forgery  

Although "fourree" silver-over-copper denarii are not terribly uncommon, they tend to be seen more in the Republic and early Imperial era, however.  Those silver foil-wrapped copper cores, the foil sealed to the core with flux and the whole package struck with dies was the "standard" for counterfeits - ie: fakes made to deceive and pass current as good silver denarii for a long time.

The reason that this coin seems so thin is that it's the way they were made.  The Romans were already (and had for some time been) experiencing the shortage of silver which would extend well into "modern" times (taking the long view) and was the reason that medieval deniers all tend to be such fish scales.  This is a siliqua of Honorius.  Honorius was one of the last of the Western emperors and the one during whose reign the Visigoths sacked Rome in 410 AD.Honorius ascended to the purple at the age of 9, in 393 AD, so you know there was someone else behind the scenery pulling the strings.  He was actually around for a pretty long time as rulers went (and they mostly went) in those days.  He survived until 423 AD. but isn't known for much of anything except happening to be in power when Rome was invaded.
I see I gave you some good history, but little on the coin itself.

Mark

If I'm interpreting the bottom seriphs of the obverse letters correctly (and I'm pretty certain I am) this is Honorius - D N HONORIVS P F AVG. with reverse, VIRTVS ROMANORVM - Roma seated left on cuirass holding Victory on globe and spear. This one, as significantly clipped as it is (it quite possibly was "officially clipped" in order to bring its weight into line with Saxon Sceats circulating in the late 5th and 6th centuries) has lost all traces of the mint mark.  This type and denomination was only minted at the "western" mints, Trier, Milan, Rome, Ravenna and Aquilea, Constantinople struck the Vota types of Siliqua - range of possible years, 397 - 408 AD. considering the production of all mints - since Trier is very rare, 402-408 is a more realistic time-frame for the VIRTVS ROMANORVM Siliquae.

Mark 

4thC Roman silver coin sent for ID

I cannot clean this coin as I just had another one break into 3 pieces - too thin and poor quality silver. This one is already fragmenting at the edges

Fascinating 4thC Roman silver find sent for ID - The structure of this coin under my scope is tiny silver granules very like the Saxon silver pennies that are too brittle to clean. Sent to Mark Lehman for his views. The last Saxon silver we sent we sent to our goldsmith for fixing came back in 8 pieces as it fell apart.

This is more commonly seen in silver than in Æ's - although the occasional base-metal piece will have gone so granular as to become brittle and easily broken. It's one of the many things that can happen to coins during their long diagenesis.
In some cases, if it can be detected before the coin breaks, it can be remedied by heating the coin red-hot. This re-randomizes the molecules which had become aligned while it was buried. "Crystallization" is a misnomer because all metals are microscopically crystalline in their solid states - this brittleness occurs when most of the molecules line up "parallel" to the normal crystaline structure and the silver and copper in the alloy begin to separate into separate "packets".



This is a siliqua of Theodosius I, 379-395, probably from Trier. The reverse type is VIRTVS ROMANORVM with Roma seated left holding Victory on globe and spear. I believe the mintmark is TRPS, the only other mint striking this type was Milan and that mintmark is MDPS, but the Trier pieces are more common. This gives you something you can look for, however, if you do any cleaning





Mark

2ndC Roman silver coin - needs a good cook to remove crust

Beauty 2ndC Roman silver coin sent to Mark Lehman for ID

This is, of course, Hadrian - I'd be surprised if you couldn't recognize him by his portrait - Although part of the obverse legend is off-flan, it's HADRIANVS AVG COS III P P.
The reverse is a very simple MONETA AVG - with the personification of Moneta standing left, holding scales and cornucopia.
It probably was issued to celebrate a liberalitas - a general gift of money to all the citizens of Rome (to the free male citizens, at least).

This is an issue from 137 AD (very late in his reign) from the mint at Rome. References would be RIC II 256; RSC 965 and SRCV 3507.

Mark

2ndC Roman silver coin fragment sent to Mark Lehman for ID

The fragmentary denarius is either Vespasian or Titus as Caesar, 69-79 AD. (they both used the full name "[...V] ESPASIAN [VS...? AVG...? DIVI F...?]" in counter-clockwise legends on denarii.) That's exactly all that is legible on the fragment - lucky for us because it contains a lot more useful specific information than we could have otherwise hoped for on such a tiny fragment.

Crusty 2ndC Roman silver coin - needs a good cook to remove horn crust

The other piece shows a lot of detail - in sort of a "dumpy pointillist" manner - but none of the legends are clear enough to get even a single letter.

From the thick-necked, "chunky" appearing silhouette (or what it's looking like to me) this might be one of the Flavians, or even, possibly, Nero (or Galba or Vitellius). Its reverse appears to be an enthroned/seated deity, personification or person facing left and posibly holding an object of some sort in its extended right hand (Zeus holding eagle? Pax holding olive-branch?), but there is not much else I can say about it.

It should be interesting to see, as these clean up (possibly a longish process, it would appear) just how close my shots-in-the-dark came.

Mark

Crusty 2ndC Roman silver coin - needs a good cook to remove horn crust

Trajan or Hadrian - I can make out "...[A?, R?] IAN..." on the obverse and the silhouette could be either of them, I guess.  On the reverse I believe I can make out ...COS II[?] which would make Hadrian a little more likely

Mark

Cooked Roman silver coin sent for ID

Chris,
Nice Nerva! - he's not one of the more commonly-seen emperors.  I can't recall whether or not I've had another Nerva to ID from the Colchester gang.  His coins are not necessarily "rare", but his reign lasted only a year and a half, from 18 September, 96 to 25 January, 98. So his coins do tend to be scarcer than those of either Domitian who reigned for fourteen years, 81-96 prior to him, or Trajan who logged over nineteen years between 98-117, right after him. Consequently his coins tend to sell for a bit more than either of them.  The elderly statesman's reign amounted to no more than a brief interlude in a succession of long-lived emperors - from Vespasian through Commodus - ie: throughout the second century during what was arguably "The Golden Age of The Roman Empire". However, the part he played was to be of outsized and crucial political importance. He was the first emperor since Julius - and the first in a series of six emperors who followed suit - to adopt his successor rather than leaving the question of succession up to the vagaries of heredity, infirmity, war and murder, as had been more common in earlier years.

This piece was struck at the mint in Rome, Jan.-Sep. 97. 
Obv: IMP NERVA CAES AVG P M TR POT. Nerva's laureate head right.
Rx: COS III PATER PATRIAE. Simpulum, aspergillum, jug and lituus - the emblems of the augurate and the pontificate.
RIC II 24; RSC 52; SRCV 3023.

Mark

1st to 2nd C Roman silver coin sent for ID - needs a good cook to remove crust

4thC Roman silver washed coin - needs cleaning to ID	Roman silver hoard coin - reported as hoard to museum
Roman silver hoard coin - reported as hoard to museum	Roman silver hoard coin - reported as hoard to museum
2ndC Roman silver coin - needs cooking to remove crust	2ndC Roman silver coin - needs cooking to remove crust
5thC Roman silver coin fragment	2ndC Roman silver coin - needs cooking to remove crust

 

5thC Roman silver coin used by the Saxons to resemble a sceat and used as a pendant

Sent to Mark Lehman for his ID

I told you I’d get back to you on this one – so far as I can determine from the very few legible letters, this is a siliqua of Gratian, 367-383 AD, the obverse legend should be [D N] GRATIA[NVS P F AVG]. The reverse type is VRBS ROMA with Roma enthroned left holding Victory. The mint mark is fairly unclear, but I think it may be AQP[S] for the mint at Aquilea.
Having two holes would tend to indicate that this piece needed to be “fixed” in its position, but the orientation of neither the obverse nor reverse seems to have been of importance. The holes are pretty large and silver coins were used a lot less often for this, but coins so holed could be sewn to a leather jerkin for a bit of DIY “scale” armor. Or perhaps it was part of a bit of jewelry of some sort which needed to attach at two points as part of a necklace or bracelet.

Great double busted Roman silver sent for ID - needs a good cook to remove crust

I’m going to need to see this one as it progresses, but on the basis of the family resemblance of the portrait and the fact that the obverse legend appears to be counter-clockwise, it seems very likely to be one of the earlier Julio-Claudians – Julius through Claudius. Send me photos when it’s been cleaned a bit, and I can probably tell you a lot more when the “reverse” becomes legible and/or the portrait on the reverse is clearer and more recognizable .
Mark

Roman silver fragment sent for ID

I can’t be 100% certain on the basis of so little, but there were very few denarius-issuing emperors who used “COS VIII (or VIIII?) in their coin legends.
Then there’s the curly hair – too bad we can’t see if this ruler is bearded.
My best guess at the moment is Antoninus Pius (139-161) he had curly hair, a long straight nose, and was portrayed that way. He also used his consulship numbers through VIII and VIIII (not sure if this fragment is the very end of a legend, or whether it might have the tag-end of P.P. – or even be one of the few in which the consulship number is in the middle rather than at the end of the reverse legend on a denarius.
The other possibility would be any of the Flavians (Vespasian, Titus and Domitian, 69-96) all of whom had 8th consulships (Domitian had a 9th noted on coins) and said so on denarii.
One problem I have with the Flavians is many of their obverse legends were counter-clockwise while the legend on the fragment appears to be clockwise.
If you’re going to cook this, send me an “after” photo and I’ll see if the currently mainly illegible obverse legend fragment can be found in the legends of any of the possible denarii of the aforementioned emperors.
Cheers,
Mark

Roman silver coin - sent for ID - needs cooking to remove crust

Chris,
I can’t quite get a read on the mint mark – it will probably come clear with a little cooking - but otherwise, it’s pretty obvious. In that era, only Constantius II was around long enough to celebrate a “VOT / XXX / MVLT / XXXX”. The vota years don’t necessarily correspond to the actual length of reign and some emperors tended to jump the gun and do their ceremonies up to several years early – I guess so they wouldn’t need to do it later…
Constantius II, as Augustus, 337-361 AD. Silver silique “the vows of 30 (years)” being completed, he is swearing to “honor the new vows of 40th “anniversary. He didn’t live long enough to celebrate that 40th Vota, but he’s one of the very few emperors who were around long enough that they could have competed a vota for 30 years.
Mark

 

2ndC Roman silver - needs cooking to remove crust - sent for ID as is an interesting legend under the reverse figure

This is one of the early “adoptives” – I’m guessing Trajan or possibly Hadrian – the letters you see in the exergue are describing the device since the long string of titles of the emperor is continued on the reverse “SPQR OPTIMO PRINCIPI…” etc.
There are a number of denarii of this basic type – the allegorical personification is named in the exergue while the rest of the concentric legend is a continuation of the laundry-list of titles which overran the available space on the obverse.

Okay, now having cracked a book, I can tell you with fair certainty this is a Denarius of Trajan – at least I’d be surprised if it turns out not to be. The bit in the exergue is “ARAB ADQ” marking the acquisition of Arabia in c. 106 – the reverse shows a personification of Arabia standing facing holding branch and bundle of cinnamon sticks, camel at her feet to left. This type dates to c. 113 AD.

 

Mark

2ndC Roman silver coin sent for ID

It’s sort of unfortunate that it appears the finder began scraping off the encrustation because it tends to make the legends much harder to read at this point, but on the basis of what I think I see on the obverse, letters suggesting “…M ANTONINVS…” that can sort of be made out between 7:00 & 10:00 on the obverse, I think this may well be a Denarius of Marcus Aurelius, either late during the time he was Caesar to Antoninus Pius or early in his rule as Augustus – this based on the short, neat beard as opposed to the long and scraggly-tending beard in his later portraits. It might also be Antoninus Pius – I give a couple possible comparative examples below. Unfortunately, silver was never a specific goal for me in collecting, so the examples I have are sparse and nothing that matches yours exactly. The obverse of yur piece also appears to have been somewhat double-struck – you can see doubling in the nose – and that is seldom good news for legend readers.
The reverse seems to be a typical Adoptive/Antonine period “laundry list” of titles, TRP number, number of Consulships, etc.
On the reverse I believe that is Roma standing left, holding a small figure of Victory and spear or scepter.

This is from early in M. Aurelius’ time as Augustus

http://www.stoa.org/gallery/album94/ML03_M_Aurel_Providentia_den?full=1

This is Antoninus Pius as Caesar (briefly) under Hadrian and the portrait somewhat favors the profile on your coin:

http://www.stoa.org/gallery/album93/ML01_A_Pius_Caes_Diana_den?full=1

And yours stitched and sized in the same format:

If the details become clearer under further cleaning, send me photos and I’ll be glad to take another shot at it for you.
Mark

4thC Roman silver coin sent for ID

This is a silique of Arcadius, 383-408 AD. It’s from the mint of Milan, 397-402 AD.
D N ARCADIVS P F AVG -- VOT / X / MVLT XV // MDPS     

This is quite a decent piece

Mark

2ndC Roman silver coin - needs cooking to remove crust

Although I really need the diameter to be 100% certain with as little legend as is legible on this one (although I’m pretty certain it’s from the mint of Thessalonica) I feel sure enough to say I think it’s a SPES REIPVBLICE reduced majorina of Constantius II. After the end of the “fallen horseman” reduced majorinae, ca. 355, these skimpy and typically crudely struck and undersized majorinae were struck by both Constantius II and by Julian, as Caesar. They are the last gasp of the original generation of the majorina denomination which was introduced as an Æ2 (much larger) in 348, immediately before the reforms of Julian II restored a Constantinian-sized centenionalis with a Vota reverse.
For comparison purposes, the lower photo is of an much better than average specimen of this type by Constantius II – the best I’ve ever held.
Yours may have the potential to be pretty nice, too if it’s not killed in the cleaning process:

Constantius II, 337-361 A.D. Æ3/4 reduced bronze majorina
17mm, 1.93gm, axis: 6:00. Mint of Siscia, 355-61 A.D.
Obv: DN CONSTANTIVS PF AVG. Diademed draped and cuirassed bust right.
Rx: SPES REIPVBLICE. Constantius standing left, holding globe and inverted spear // ASIS*.
RIC VIII 396, LRBC 1246, Cf. SR 4011, VM 105.
These belong to the time-period you might call “the hairy edge” of the Roman occupation of Britannia – within a generation Romanized Britannia was under attack from all sides and it was only a matter of time before all who were able fled to the continent along with the last of the Roman legions.
Mark

2ndC Roman silver coin - needs cooking to remove crust

Roman silver coin - needs 'cooking'to remove crust

16mm,3.12g

Hoard 1 - 3.17g, 17mm

Faustina the elder, wife of Antoninus Pius and mother of Faustina the younger. Posthumous issue by Antoninus pius, Faustina died 141 so it dates between 141-160. Reverse is too profoundly encrusted to determine type, although it might have the legend AVGVSTA (if so, the photo is upside-down) otherwise, it’s a legend ending in “AVG” and could be any of literally dozens of types.

 

Hoard 2 – 2.89g,18mm

Trajan, 96-117, Mars advancing left carrying trophy and holding spear. Not enough of the reverse legend is clear to date it accurately, but the reverse reads something like this: P M TR P (xxx) COS (x VI) P P  S P Q R – This seems to be the only piece which does not date to the Severan era in this batch.

Hoard 3 - 3.46g, 17mm

Posthumous issue for Faustina the younger by her husband Marcus Aurelius – Faustina II died in 175 and M. Aurelius outlived her until 181 – so that’s the time frame, 175-181. Again, the reverse is so profoundly encrusted that it’s not possible to determine the reverse type

 

 

Hoard 4 – 2.48g,15mm

Julia Domna, wife of Septimius Severus and mother of Caracalla (and Geta) so her coins’ time frame is 193-217. Obverse: [IVLIA] AVGVSTA. The reverse is IVNO [REGI]NA Juno standing left with peacock at her feet. This type was issued at both Rome and Laodicea (in the mid east) they can only be told apart by style – this appears to be a Rome mint product.

Hoard 5 – 3.28g,18mm

. (young) Caracalla ANTONINVS PIVS AVG / FELICITAS AVGG. Felicitas standing left holding caduceus and cornucopiae  (the 2 G’s indicates two co-Augusti, Caracalla and Septimius) Mint of Rome 205 A.D., RIC 124, RSC 64.  

Roman 2nd/3rdC silver hoard

Mark Lehman's initial ID below with poor quality pictures taken on the guys cell phones. I just sent him larger pictures for better ID.

Okay, the top left (obverses) is Julia Domna, wife of Septimius Severus – probably issued by Severus, there is another group of coins in her honor struck by Caracalla. This appears to be the fairly common JVNO REGINA, Juno with peacock reverse, but the legend is only partial due to the smallish flan not presenting enough room to strike-up all of the reverse.
Top right is Trajan – I’m sure I don’t need to go into detail about who he was and what he did.
The Trajan has a typical reverse of Mars walking right with spear and carrying trophy – it may be able to be dated fairly closely if I can get a little more detail since it has the typical “laundry list” of offices held and the number of times they had been held. Usually this is enough to place them within a year or two, but some combinations of offices which didn’t renew at the same time of year allow them to be dated within months. It’s quite worn and may be as much as a century earlier than the latest of the other four.
Bottom row left is a posthumous issue for Faustina the Elder – wife of Antoninus pius. The reverse is too obscured by encrustation for me to be able to tell what’s happening, but there seems to be very good remaining detail on this piece in general so when cleaned it should be easy to read and identify.
In the middle is a very youthful portrait of Caracalla with the FELICITAS AVG reverse I noted in the earlier email.
On the right is another posthumous Faustina denarius – given the encrustation I can’t be 100% certain whether this is the Elder or the Younger Faustina – I think it’s the Elder. Like the other Faustina, the reverse is too encrusted to tell what’s gong on there.
Something to keep in mind with these posthumus coins of the Imperial women of the Antonines is they were issued in a couple of different emissions, first under Antoninus Pius and then later by Marcus Aurelius. There are also both lifetime and posthumous coins for both Faustinas. That tends to make it a little complicated, so I would really need to be able to read the legends and see the details a good bit better to say exactly who issued these two and when.
I still look forward to better photos as and if they’re cleaned.
Mark

Hoard 6 - 3.06g, 18mm

Caracalla as Caesar – 195-198. Obverse legend is probably [M AVR ANTON] CAES PONTIF. The reverse is PRINCIPI IVV[ENTVTIS] Caracalla in military garb standing left holding baton and scepter, trophy to his right. Mint of Rome, 197, RIC 13, RSC 505.

Hoard 7 – 3.18g, 18mm

Septimius Severus, 193-212.  [SEVERVS] PIVS AVG / [VICT] PART MAX Victory walking left holding wreath and palm, Mint of Rome, 204.

Hoard 8 - 3.17g, 17mm

.  I think what little of the portrait is visible suggests Antoninus Pius, 139-161 – reverse totally obscured but seems to be a figure (possibly Victory) standing or walking left holding object (wreath?) in outstretched right hand.

 

Hoard 9 &10 – 6.91g,17mm (one coin dia)

only part of one coin’s obverse is visible, it looks like it may be “[A]NTON[…] indicating probably Caracalla, reverse is two standing figures and legend is too badly obscured to read, but I suspect it’s a duplicate of # 6 and the reverse is PRINCIPI IVVENTVTIS.  9b reverse is FELICITAS AVG, Felicitas likely standing left holding caduceus and cornucopiae and obverse is too well covered by 9a to be readable at all. Both pieces are almost certainly from the Severan era since that’s pretty much when all the others are on the time line, except for Trajan, of course, and Antoninus Pius. The Severan era included quite a few individuals, both male and female, between 193-238.

 

Mark Lehman's initial ID below with poor quality pictures taken on the guys cell phones. I just sent him larger pictures for better ID.

Okay, the top left (obverses) is Julia Domna, wife of Septimius Severus – probably issued by Severus, there is another group of coins in her honor struck by Caracalla. This appears to be the fairly common JVNO REGINA, Juno with peacock reverse, but the legend is only partial due to the smallish flan not presenting enough room to strike-up all of the reverse.
Top right is Trajan – I’m sure I don’t need to go into detail about who he was and what he did.
The Trajan has a typical reverse of Mars walking right with spear and carrying trophy – it may be able to be dated fairly closely if I can get a little more detail since it has the typical “laundry list” of offices held and the number of times they had been held. Usually this is enough to place them within a year or two, but some combinations of offices which didn’t renew at the same time of year allow them to be dated within months. It’s quite worn and may be as much as a century earlier than the latest of the other four.
Bottom row left is a posthumous issue for Faustina the Elder – wife of Antoninus pius. The reverse is too obscured by encrustation for me to be able to tell what’s happening, but there seems to be very good remaining detail on this piece in general so when cleaned it should be easy to read and identify.
In the middle is a very youthful portrait of Caracalla with the FELICITAS AVG reverse I noted in the earlier email.
On the right is another posthumous Faustina denarius – given the encrustation I can’t be 100% certain whether this is the Elder or the Younger Faustina – I think it’s the Elder. Like the other Faustina, the reverse is too encrusted to tell what’s gong on there.
Something to keep in mind with these posthumus coins of the Imperial women of the Antonines is they were issued in a couple of different emissions, first under Antoninus Pius and then later by Marcus Aurelius. There are also both lifetime and posthumous coins for both Faustinas. That tends to make it a little complicated, so I would really need to be able to read the legends and see the details a good bit better to say exactly who issued these two and when.
I still look forward to better photos as and if they’re cleaned.
Mark

I’ll do what I can to describe and date them on a coin-by-coin basis, but the ones that are totally obscured by deposits and/or corrosion products that weren’t able to be ID’d before are still obscure.
- 1.  Faustina the elder, wife of Antoninus Pius and mother of Faustina the younger. Posthumous issue by Antoninus pius, Faustina died 141 so it dates between 141-160. Reverse is too profoundly encrusted to determine type, although it might have the legend AVGVSTA (if so, the photo is upside-down) otherwise, it’s a legend ending in “AVG” and could be any of literally dozens of types.
- 2. Trajan, 96-117, Mars advancing left carrying trophy and holding spear. Not enough of the reverse legend is clear to date it accurately, but the reverse reads something like this: P M TR P (xxx) COS (x VI) P P  S P Q R – This seems to be the only piece which does not date to the Severan era in this batch.
- 3. Posthumous issue for Faustina the younger by her husband Marcus Aurelius – Faustina II died in 175 and M. Aurelius outlived her until 181 – so that’s the time frame, 175-181. Again, the reverse is so profoundly encrusted that it’s not possible to determine the reverse type.
- 4. Julia Domna, wife of Septimius Severus and mother of Caracalla (and Geta) so her coins’ time frame is 193-217. Obverse: [IVLIA] AVGVSTA. The reverse is IVNO [REGI]NA Juno standing left with peacock at her feet. This type was issued at both Rome and Laodicea (in the mid east) they can only be told apart by style – this appears to be a Rome mint product.
- 5. (young) Caracalla ANTONINVS PIVS AVG / FELICITAS AVGG. Felicitas standing left holding caduceus and cornucopiae  (the 2 G’s indicates two co-Augusti, Caracalla and Septimius) Mint of Rome 205 A.D., RIC 124, RSC 64.  
- 6. Caracalla as Caesar – 195-198. Obverse legend is probably [M AVR ANTON] CAES PONTIF. The reverse is PRINCIPI IVV[ENTVTIS] Caracalla in military garb standing left holding baton and scepter, trophy to his right. Mint of Rome, 197, RIC 13, RSC 505.
- 7. Septimius Severus, 193-212.  [SEVERVS] PIVS AVG / [VICT] PART MAX Victory walking left holding wreath and palm, Mint of Rome, 204.
- 8.  I think what little of the portrait is visible suggests Antoninus Pius, 139-161 – reverse totally obscured but seems to be a figure (possibly Victory) standing or walking left holding object (wreath?) in outstretched right hand.
- 9a. only part of one coin’s obverse is visible, it looks like it may be “[A]NTON[…] indicating probably Caracalla, reverse is two standing figures and legend is too badly obscured to read, but I suspect it’s a duplicate of # 6 and the reverse is PRINCIPI IVVENTVTIS.  9b reverse is FELICITAS AVG, Felicitas likely standing left holding caduceus and cornucopiae and obverse is too well covered by 9a to be readable at all. Both pieces are almost certainly from the Severan era since that’s pretty much when all the others are on the time line, except for Trajan, of course, and Antoninus Pius. The Severan era included quite a few individuals, both male and female, between 193-238.
That’s about all I can do with these photos, I hope it’s enough for you.
Mark

Hoard 11 – 2.67g, 19mm

Your photo of the reverse is upside-down – the legend is VOTA PVBLICA – who’s on the obverse is a bit more challenging question, although it looks like one of the youthful Severans.
More books cracked: Geta, Caesar ( 198-209) [GETA CAES] PONT COS youthful bare-headed and draped bust of Geta Caesar, right, seen from behind. VOTA PVBLICA, Geta, togate standing left sacrificing over tripod altar. Struck 205, RIC 38b; RSC 230

 

Hoard 12– 3.07g, 20mm

. Julia Domna, wife of Septimius Severus (193-217) IV[LIA] AVGVSTA draped bust right / HILARITAS Hilaritas standing left holding palm-branch and cornucopiae, Caracalla and Geta as children to her left and right. Struck 208, RIC 557; RSC 79

 

 

Hoard 13- 2.70g, 19mm

Vespasian (69-79) [IMP C]AESAR VESPASIANV[S AVG] (counter-clockwise) laureate head of Vespasian right / TR POT X COS VIII naked radiate figure standing facing atop rostral column, struck 79.  RIC (119 old vol II)- 1064-5; RSC 559. It should be obvious that this does nt belong to the same hoard/loss as all the similarly encrusted Antonine and Severan denarii from up to a century and a half later.

Hoard 14 – 3.28g,19mm

Septimius Severus (193-211) SEVERVS AVG [PART MAX?] laureate head right / [VICT AETERN?] Victory hovering left holding garland above shield set on base. Struck 200, RIC 170; RSC 670.
There are a couple of different legends found with this reverse type, I believe Vict Aetern is the most likely.
Mark

 

Just sent Roman silver hoard coins 11 to 14 off to Mark Lehman for ID

 

 

 

Roman silver hoard coin - reported to museum and sent for ID 2.80g, 19.10mm Casey Hoard coin 15 – silver denarius Issuer unable to be determined specifically, but appears to be a younger person, therefore most likely one of the younger Severans and during a time with two Augusti (AVGG in reverse legend) so likely to be a young Caracalla or Geta as Augustus – Note: on basis of # 16, this more likely to be Plautilla, to whom Caracalla was briefly married, 202-205. Reverse:  CO[NCOR]DIA AVGG Concordia standing left holding patera and scepter.

Roman silver hoard coin - reported to museum and sent for ID 2.82g,14.65mm Sal4 Hoard coin 16 – probably a match for coin # 15, both have the same reverse type and the portrait clearly appears female here, so probably Plautilla, Caracalla’s wife 202-205 AD.

Roman silver hoard coin - reported to museum and sent for ID 2.59g,18.02mm Sal2 Hoard coin 17 – Septimius Severus, 193-212 AD. Obv: SEVERVS PIVS AVG laureate head of Severus right Rx: FVNDATOR PACIS (“creator of peace” referring to Severus) Pax standing left holding olive-branch (and, probably, a cornucopiae, obscured by encrustation)	Roman silver hoard coin - reported to museum and sent for ID 3.33g,19.23mm Sal 1 Hoard coin 18 – Domitian, 81-96 AD. Obv: IMP CAES DOMIT GERM P M TR P VIIII (= 90 AD.) laureate head of Domitian right. Rx: IMP XXI COS XV CENS P P P Minerva standing left holding spear, left hand on hip
Roman silver hoard coin - reported to museum and sent for ID 2.82g,14.65mm Sal3 Hoard coin 19 – Antoninus Pius, 139-161 [IMP T] AEL CAES [HA]DR ANTONINVS laureate head of Antninus Pius right Rx: [A]VG PIVS P [M T]R P COS II // [P P] simpulum, lituus, jug, aspergillum and knife (not in that order) the priestly impedimentia 139 AD	Roman silver hoard coin - reported to museum and sent for ID 3.12g, 19mm Nick Hoard coin 20 – Commodus, 177-192 Obv: (probably…) [M] COMM [ANT P FEL AVG BRIT] laureate had of Commodus right Rx: P M TR P [XI?] IMP VII COS V P [P] // FO[R] R[ED] Fortuna Redux enthroned left holding rudder on small globe and cornucopiae; wheel beneath seat - 186 AD.
Roman silver hoard coin - reported to museum and sent for ID 2.37g,19mm Nick1 Hoard coin 21 – Sorry, there are limits to what I can accurately ID from photos – re-orientation is conjectural at best – there simply isn’t enough here to distinguish this from any other badly chipped and heavily encrusted denarius, although given the rest of this hoard, the Severan era is most likely for a date (193-238 AD.)	Roman silver hoard coin - reported to museum and sent for ID 2.55g,17mm Nick3 Hoard coin 22 – Posthumous commemorative issue by Antoninus Pius for his wife, Faustina Sr. (died ~ 140 AD) Obv: DIVA [FAVS]TINA draped bust of Faustina Senior right Rx: [AETER]-NITAS – reverse too obscured with encrustation to tell which of the two dozen or so scenes which were paired with AETERNITAS legend it is – although it might be “Providentia standing left holding globe and grasping veil which billows out behind her”. After 147 (and before 161) AD.
Roman silver hoard coin - reported to museum and sent for ID 17mm,3,50mm Nick2 Hoard coin 23 – probably Julia Domna (195-217) wife of Septimius Severus – however there were quite a number of Julias who had denarii struck in their names during the Severan era Obv: IVLIA AVGV[STA] draped bust of Domna (?) right Rx: sorry – not enough legible legend or device-detail here to say with certainty what the reverse type was supposed to be, but the couple of letters on the left could be “FELI” of FELICITAS (a common reverse type for her). Felicitas generally stands left holding a caduceus and cornucopiae, but none of the device is legible at this point. If so, ca. 206 AD.	Roman silver hoard coin - reported to museum and sent for ID 2.61g,18mm Fl Paul Hoard coin # 24 Apparently Julia Domna – (194-217) Obv: IVL[IA] AVGVSTA draped but of Julia Domna right            Rx: MATE[R DEV]M Cybele enthroned left, flanked by two lions, holding oliove-branch and resting elbow on drum – 198 AD.
Roman silver hoard coin - reported to museum and sent for ID 2.60g,19mm Buddy Hoard coin # 25 Septimius Severus, (196-212) Obv: SEVERVS [PI]VS [AVG] laureate head of Septimius Severus right RESTITVTO[R VR]BIS Roma seated left holding Palladium and scepter, shield at side, 207 AD	Roman silver hoard coin - reported to museum and sent for ID 3.05g,16mm Wendell Hoard coin # 26 Lucius Verus, co-emperor with Marcusa Aurelius, 161-169 AD Obv: L VERVS AVG ARMENIACVS bare head of Lucius Verus right Rx: [TR P IIII] IMP II COS II Mars standing facing, head right resting on spear and shield, 164 AD.
Roman silver hoard coin - reported to museum and sent for ID 3.23g,17mm Bobby Hoard coin # 27 Septimius Severus, 193-217 AAD. Obv: SEVERVS [PIVS AVG] laureate head of Septimius Severus right Rx: VOTA SVS-[CEPTA] XX Severus, togate, standing left, sacrificing over small tripod altar and holding scroll. 207 AD.	2 Roman silver hoard coin stuck together - reported to museum and sent for ID 6.50g,19mm Buddy Hoard coins # 28 & 29 You sent only photos of the obverses, without photos of the reverses I can’t tell you very much – 28 might be Marcus Aurelius […]ER M A(NT?)[…] but too little of the obverse legend is legible to be sure without a reverse to pair it with – might be Antoninus Pius, too – the profile of the portrait is also obscured Another possibility is Domitian, 79- 96, who often had “GERM” or “GERMANICVS” in the middle of his titles 29 is Septimius Severus (196-217) – SEVERVS PIVS AVG laureate head of Septimius Severus right – can’t say any more without seeing the reverse.
Roman silver hoard coin - reported to museum and sent for ID 2.35g,20.0mm Ron Hoard Coin # 30 Hadrian, 117-138 AD. Obverse HADR[IANVS] AVGVSTVS laureate head of Hadrian right       Rx: COS I[II] might be Genius (of the Roman People) standing left sacrificing from patera over small altar (off-flan) and holding cornucopiae – if so, it’s ca. 127 AD. The thing with this one is that the very simple “COS III” reverse legend was paired with literally dozens of reverse types and with so much of the flan missing, all I can do is guess based on what is more or less visible. Roman silver hoard coin No 31 - reported to museum and sent for ID 2.77g,17mm This one required me to take a leap of faith to interpret the reverse – I can’t unconditionally guarantee this ID, so what may be found under the crud could be significantly different - I am working mainly on the basis of the 5 legible letters at the end of the legend and virtually nothing else. It is, (of course) Caracalla as a very young Augustus once again; coin is ca. 202 AD. That fits-in well with the dating of most of the other silver hoard coins which tend to be from the earlier Severan era. Those significantly older are as worn as one would expect some of them to be – as in the case of the Domitian denarii that are at least as a century earlier than the bulk of the denarii seen so far. On another front, I don’t think the Æ coins you are finding in the same field have anything at all to do with this hoard, being from over a century later. Obv:  ANTONINVS PIVS AVG laureate and draped young-head bust of Caracalla right, seen from behind Rx: [PART MAX PON TR]P V COS two bound captives in an attitude of mourning seated back to back at foot of trophy I believe the central device on the reverse of hoard coin 31i s very similar to the reverse of this sestertius of Septimius Severus – and part of the same overall emission of coin: Mark Roman silver hoard coin No 32 - reported to museum and sent for ID 19mm,3.63g This one (# 32) wanted to give me a hard time. It wasn’t until I realized this was a fully encrusted silver denarius and not an  Æ semis or quadrans that I was able to get a clue who we have here. As it turns out, it’s Domitian, again – dates to 89 AD. These legends are a bit provisional, but they seem to fit with what can be seen in the photos. Obv: [IMP CAES DOMIT AVG GER]M P M TR P VIII laureate head of Domitian right Rx: IMP XIX COS XIIII CENS P P P Minerva standing left holding thunderbolt and resting on scepter It raises questions (for me) as to its connection to the rest of the “hoard” find because although it would not be the earliest piece by any great margin, none of the others are anywhere nearly so profoundly dirt/sand encrusted. Mark
Roman silver hoard coin 33- reported to museum and sent for ID 17mm,3.22g	Roman silver hoard coin 34 - reported to museum and sent for ID 3.00g, 20.0mm
Hoard coin # 33: Lucius Verus, 161-169 AD. AR denarius Obv:  IMP L AVREL VERVS AVG bare head of Verus right, Mint of Rome 161/2 AD. Rx: PROV DEOR TR P COS II Providentia standing facing, head left, holding globe and cornucopiae Hoard coin 34: AR denarius, issuer uncertain (obverse too profoundly encrusted to make out any detail) Obv: ?? (Maybe Julia Domna, 195-217 AD? She issued this type of Hilaritas reverse at Rome in 208 AD) Rx: HILARITAS Hilaritas standing facing, head left, holding long palm-branch; two naked infants/erotes standing facing, to either side of Hilaritas; one holds bottom of palm-branch, the other clings to Hilaritas’ leg. Mint of Rome, time of the Antonines (mid 2nd century AD) or early Severans (early 3rd century AD.) Although Hilaritas is not completely unknown on coins of male Imperials, she is far more commonly seen on the women’s coins.  Unfortunately, at this time, I cannot say even whether the obverse portrays a male or female Imperial personage. However, if I were a betting man, I’d say it is most likely to be a lifetime issue of Faustina Jr., Lucilla or Crispina – could be later, too – there are plenty of Severans who also used this reverse. … a bit later: Looking through listings in Sear RC&TV, I find that a Hilaritas with two naked infants is known for Julia Domna – this doesn’t mean it HAS to be she, but unless I spend an unreasonably long time looking through endless listings of denarii in RIC or RSC, I wouldn’t be able to rule out the possibility it’s someone else. it’s a pretty good bet – given the dating of most of the AR in this hoard so far – that Domna will turn out to be the person portrayed. If it is Domna, the two “infants” pictured probably represent Caracalla and Geta, although they were considerably older than “infants” at the time. I don’t know if there were any other children born to Septimius Severus and Domna – if so, these might be younger siblings of the feuding Imperial brothers. Mark Roman silver hoard coin No35 - sent for ID and reported as hoard addendum to museum 18mm, 3.11g Well, I can’t 100% accurately date it since the part which determines the date is obscured on the obverse (TR P year number at end of obverse legend) but this same type of denarius was struck for M. Aurelius as Augustus from 168-171, the only change being the TR P number on the obverse: M ANTONINVS AVG TR P XXIII (-XXV) if it’s XXIII = 168/9 AD. = RIC III 198 If it’s  XXIIII = 169/70 AD. = RIC III 211, or If it’s XXV = 170/1 AD = RIC III 230 Luckily the reverse is clear enough to be certain of the type and consular number (COS III). As for the obverse, it’s too encrusted to make out any legend and only part of the portrait is clear, but it looks sufficiently like Marcus Aurelius and little enough like anyone else using this reverse type to feel confident attributing the “Minerva right, brandishing spear and holding shield” to him – it was one of the “stock” types generally associated with him. I don’t have an exact copy to show you, but this is a somewhat earlier M. Aurelius denarius, struck in 158/9 AD. when he was Caesar under Antoninus Pius - and has the same sort of “stock” Minerva reverse: http://www.stoa.org/gallery/album94/ML01_M_Aurel_Caes_Minerva_den?full=1 Keep diggin’ those hoard coins – what is this, 35 so far in that clutch of silver from mid 2nd - mid 3rd centuries? Imagine what a find it would have been if these had not been scattered by the plow and were all still in a group in a jug or soil-cast of a pouch – I  wonder how many there were originally. Mark

Roman silver hoard coin addendum No38 - reported to museum

Hoard 38 – 2.87g, 18mm

Geta, Caesar, 198-209. AR denarius, Mint of Rome 203 AD
Obv: L SEPTIMIVS GETA CAES bare-headed draped bust of Geta seen from behind
Rx: FELICITAS TEMPOR Felicitas standing facing, head left, holding caduceus and cornucopiae.
RIC IV 9a, RSC 38a

Roman silver hoard coin addendum No39 - reported to museum

Hoard 39 -3.06g, 20mm

Julia Domna (W. of Sept. Severus) 193-217, AR denarius, Mint of Rome, 208 AD.
Obv: IVLIA AVGVSTA draped bust of Julia Domna right    
Rx: HILARITAS Hilaritas standing facing, head left, holding palm-branch; between two naked children
RIC 559, RSC 79

Roman silver hoard coin addendum No40 - reported to museum

3.17g, 19mm

Geta, Caesar, 198-209, silver denarius, Mint of Rome, 206 AD.
Obv: P SEPIMIVS GETA CAES draped, bare-headed bust of Geta right seen from behind
Rx: PROVID DEORVM Providentia standing facing, head left, holding rod and scepter (the scepter looks like a cornucopiae on the coin due to a die flaw, but it’s a scepter) globe at feet.
RIC 51; RSC 170

Mark

Roman silver hoard coin addendum No41 - reported to museum

0.73g,13mm

Roman silver hoard coin addendum No42 - reported to museum

2.99g,17mm

Nerva, 96-98 AD. AR denarius, Mint of Rome, Jan-Sept 97 AD
Obv: IMP NERVA CAES AVG P M TR P COS III P P  laureate head of Nerva right.
Rx: CONCORDIA EXERCITVVM  clasped right hands.
RIC 14, RSC 20.

Mark

Roman silver hoard coin addendum No43 - reported to museum

3.30g, 19mm

Caracalla, 198-217 AD. AR denarius, Mint of Rome, 205 AD.
Obv: ANTONINVS PIVS AVG laureate and draped bust of young Caracalla right, seen from behind
Rx: PONTIF P M TR P VIII COS II Salus enthroned left feeding serpent arising from altar
(If this is correct identification) RIC 82; RSC 422.

Mark

Roman silver hoard coin addendum No44 - reported to museum

3.22g, 19.13g

2nd C Roman silver coin - needs cooking to remove crust

4thC Roman silver coin - meeds cooking to remove crust

Yep, you’re right, not too much to go on.
If you’re certain its silver it might be a House of Valentinian REPARATIO REIP with emperor standing left, or it might be a very crudely engraved version of Roma seated left – from a broad time span in the 4th & 5th centuries
Or, it could be a contemporary imitation by some Gothic tribe.
Send me photos when/if you reveal any legend on either side – that would make a huge difference.
Mark

2ndC Roman silver coin sent for ID

This one is definitely Trajan as well – and I’ve cataloged about half a dozen of this type in the last couple weeks – Felicitas holding caduceus and cornucopiae. The photo below shows how similar it is, although the legends don’t match exactly – there was a whole series of “Felicitas standing” denarii, with altar, leaning on column, etc – this is the closest I have in saved photos

2ndC Roman silver coin sent for ID

This is a denarius of Trajan, so far as I can tell. At first glance I was not immediately familiar with the reverse type (odd, since I’ve been helping catalog an enormous Trajan specialty collection over the last couple of months, but then Trajan had a lot of types and I thought I hadn’t encountered this one before.)
It’s unusual for Trajan’s reverse subjects to be seated, reclining or recumbent to right – they are virtually always shown to the left.
Your denarius is commemorating Trajan’s victories in Dacia a personification of which is seated on a pile of captured arms.
It happens I have a photo of a similar specimen
http://www.stoa.org/gallery/album408/CR02_12?full=1

2ndC Roman silver coin - needs 'cooking' to remove crust

Antoninus Pius, 138-161 AD. AR denarius, Mint of Rome,
Obv: primarily illegible (legibility may improve with cleaning?) possibly IMP T AEL CAES HADR ANTONINVS laureate head of Antoninus Pius right
Rx: primarily illegible (legibility may improve with cleaning?) probably AVG PIVS P M TR P COS II priestly implementia, simpulum, lituus, jug, aspergillum and knife.
Possibly: RIC 39, RSC 101 (if my guesses about legends are accurate.)

Crusty Roman silver coin - 'cooking' to remove crust

Cleaned up mint - sent for ID

Elagabalus, 218-222, AR denarius, Mint of Antioch, 218/19 AD.
Obv: ANTONINVS PI]VS FEL AVG laureate, draped and cuirassed bust of Elagabalus right, seen from behind (we can’t tell if he’s wearing the infamous “horn” or not, it would have been on the chip if it were in the original portrait)  
Rx: FORTVNA REDVX Fortuna seated left holding patera and cornucopiae, wheel beneath seat.
RIC IV 189; RSC 47a  
The chip appears to be modern – probably from a plow-strike.
Mark

Interesting Roman silver coin sent for ID

Titus. AD 79-81. AR Denarius (17mm, 3.19 g, 7h). Rome mint. Struck January-June AD 80. Laureate head right / Elephant, wearing armor, standing left. RIC II 115; RSC 303

Mark

2ndC Roman silver coin sent for ID

This is Antoninus Pius, 138-161 AD, successor to Hadrian
AR denarius, Mint of Rome, 153/4 AD    
Obv: ANTONINVS AVG PIVS P P TR P XVII laureate head of Antoninus Pius right    
Rx: COS IIII Annona standing facing head left, holding grain-ears and resting hand on modius set on galley-prow
RIC III 231; RSC 291

Mark

Roman silver coin - reported as potential hoard

3.01g,19.55mm

Roman silver coin - reported as potential hoard

3.57g,17.04mm

Roman silver coin - non hoard

18.05mm,2.04g

Roman silver coin - reported as potential hoard

3.42g,17.98mm

2ndC Roman silver coin - sent for ID

2.88g,17.41mm

Very nice – I’m sure I don’t need to tell you this is Domitian since the name is so clearly readable on the obverse. He was Vespasian’s younger son and the last of Suetonius’ “12 Caesars”, that’s Gaius Julius through the Flavian dynasty, ~ the end of the 1st century AD. He also came to be hated and feared nearly on a level with folks like Caligula and Nero due to his increasing paranoia and reactionary policies.

Domitian, (81-96) as Caesar under Vespasian, 69-79 AD. AR denarius, Mint of Rome, 79 AD.
Obv:  (legend CCW.) CAESAR AVG F DOMITIANVS COS VI laureate head of Domitian, Caesar, right
Rx: PRINCEPS IVVENTVTI Salus standing facing, head right, resting on short column and feeding from patera a serpent she holds in her arms.
RIC II 1084, RSC 384
My advice is to be careful not to overclean this piece – a little thinning of the deposits would help, but you’ll ruin this moderately valuable piece if you try to make it “shiny”.
Mark

Crusty Roman silver sent for ID

2.70g ,18.24mm

I won’t be able to tell you much about a piece at this level of legibility. As far as I can tell from what the outline of the portrait seems to be, it’s probably/possibly Antoninus Pius. No guarantee that’s correct and without more detail there’s really nothing I can add about the reverse, etc.
Mark

2ndC Roman silver coin - hoard addendum reported to museum

2.16g,17.34mm

4thC Roman silver coin - looks like a siliqua of Gratian, 367-383 AD - sent for ID

The reverse type is VRBS ROMA with Roma enthroned left holding Victory.

0.93g, 15.36mm

Crisp Roman silver coin sent for ID

2.62g,18.35mm

Hadrian, 117-138 A.D. AR denarius, Mint of Rome, 135 A.D.
Obv: HADRIANVS AVG COS III P P laureate head of Hadrian right 
Rx: ANN-O-NA AVG modius containing grain-ears and poppy
RIC II 230, RSC 170a

Nice one for a dugup in agricultural fields. You got this one more or less just in time before it suffered more significant degradation from the fertilizers and pesticides.
I don’t have one of this type myself (actually, I have little more than a sparse representative run of denarii/antoniniani/siliquae – I’ve always favored the larger Æ denominations

Mark

Roman silver hoard coin addendum No47 - reported to museum and sent for ID

This one is Caracalla, 198-217 A.D. AR denarius, Mint of Rome, 199 A.D.
Obv: ANTONINVS AVGVSTVS laureate youthful head of Caracalla right
Rx: SEVERI PII AVG FIL Caracalla in military garb standing facing, head left, holding Victory and spear, bound Parthian captive at his feet
RIC IV 45; RSC 589

Mark

Roman silver hoard coin 1 (RF)- reported to museum and sent for ID

Hadrian, 117-138 AD.
AR denarius, Mint of Rome, 123 AD.
Obv: IMP CAESAR TRAIAN HADRIANVS AVG
laureate head of Hadrian right (possibly drapery on left shoulder)
Rx: LIB PVB (in exergue) P M TR P COS III
Libertas seated left holding branch and scepter
RIC II 127; RSC 903; SRCV 3502

Mark

Roman silver hoard coin addendum No45 (PS) - reported to museum and sent for ID

2.56g,17.03mm

Commodus. Son of Marcus Aurelius, his sole reign marked the end of the era of “The Good Emperors”. He slowly went crazy, and by the end of his reign/life had convinced himself he was the reincarnation of Hercules and was regularly fighting wild beasts in the arena. This was not considered correct or appropriate behavior for an emperor, to say the least – plus he was an all-around shit to everyone, highly paranoid, and tended to have any foe, real or imagined, executed. He was portrayed, extremely inaccurately from an historical standpoint, as the main antagonist in the movie “Gladiator”. They made him evil enough, but nowhere nearly so bat-poo unhinged as he was in real life.
It’s a very interesting reverse – a far more ambitious composition than one typically sees on a denarius – platform scenes are far more usually seen on sestertii.

Commodus, sole reign, 180-192 A.D. AR denarius issued 186 A.D.
Obv: M COMM ANT P FEL AVG BRIT laureate head of Commodus right
Rx: FID EXERC (in exergue) P M TR P XI IMP VII COS V P P Commodus standing left on platform haranging three soldiers standing right before him; each holds a legionary eagle and shield.
RIC III 130; RSC 143; SRCV 5639
his reign came just before the beginning of the Severan dynastic era, so it’s in the right general time-frame for the hoard, so far.

Mark

Roman silver hoard coin addendum No46 (PS) - reported to museum and sent for ID

2.79g,18.68mm

Continuing with the theme of less-than-pleasant emperors:
This is Caracalla – son of Septimius Severus - also a feared, as well as probably deranged character. He was somewhat successful in terms of military conquests, but more typically by means of subterfuge, like inviting the opposing king and generals to a treaty parlay and killing them all as he did with the Parthians. He also introduced the debased silver double-denarius denomination we call “antoninianus”, a 2-denarius coin with 1.5 denarii worth of silver in it, setting the stage for the massive debasements of the later 3rd century.

Caracalla (198-217 AD), as co-emperor with Septimius Severus, 198-209 AD. AR denarius, issued 207 AD.
Obv: ANTONINVS PIVS AVG laureate head of Commodus right.

Rx: PONTIF TR P X COS II securitas enthroned right, at her ease in seat with cornucopiae as arms; head propped on right hand, holding scepter with left; small altar before her.
RIC IV 92; RSC 434; SRCV 6863

Mark

Roman silver hoard coin 2 (RF) - reported to museum and sent for ID

Probably Trajan, 98-117 AD.
AR denarius, Mint of Rome
Rx: P M TR P […]
Seated female, left (could be Vesta?)
Sorry I can’t get you any closer to a cataloged ID here – if you get a chance to see it after some cleaning, send me a photo and I’ll see what else I can add.

Roman silver hoard coin 4 (RF)- reported to museum and sent for ID

Hadrian, 117-138 AD.
AR denarius, Mint of Rome, 125 AD.
Obv: IMP CAESAR TRAIAN HADRIANVS AVG
laureate head of Hadrian right (possibly drapery on left shoulder)
Rx: LIB-PVB (across field) P M TR P COS III
Libertas standing facing, head left, holding pileus and rod
RIC II 128; RSC 907a; SRCV 3503

Mark

Roman silver hoard coin 5 (RF)- reported to museum and sent for ID

I suspect this is Hadrian too, (117-138 AD.) and possibly a “LIB PVB” AR denarius like




#4 above (on the basis of what appears to be a horizontally aligned “B” in the left reverse field), but there simply are not enough clear features to say any more at this point.
Again, if you can get photos of it in a cleaner state, I can probably be more specific.

Mark

Roman silver hoard coin 6 (RF)- reported to museum and sent for ID

I’m pretty sure this is Antoninus Pius (138-161 AD.) another AR denarius.
It’s also possible that it could be Marcus Aurelius as Caesar (concurrent with Ant. Pius, Aug) This is another which really needs more cleaning/conservation to say much more than this.

Roman silver hoard coin 7 (RF)- reported to museum and sent for ID

Antoninus Pius, 138-161 AD.
AR denarius, Mint of Rome, (ca 142 AD.?)
Obv: legend ends: [… AN]TONINVS
laureate head of Antoninus Pius right
Rx: PROVIDENTIAE DEORVM
winged thunderbolt (vertical).
the reverse type and the apparent obverse legend don’t “agree” – could be a mule of two different types? It’s 100% certain to be Antoninus Pius and I’m 99% sure it’s PROVIDENTIAE DEORVM winged thunderbolt
Rx: Cf. RIC III 80a, RSC 681; SRCV 4103

Roman silver hoard coin 9 (RF) - reported to museum and sent for ID

# 9
Almost certainly a Flavian, most probably Vespasian or Titus – ccw legend on obverse, “[…]PASIAN[…]” 10:00-8:00 obverse
I took a long look for something which might match the linear, blunt, semi-pointed object on the reverse. My best guess is that it would be the base of a trophy or a standard (vexillum), or maybe the bottom of a winged caduceus, but the [CO]S III (or maybe [CEN]S III ?) seems to be in the wrong location if it’s pointing down as would as the base of a trophy, etc. It might also be the leg of a short altar, but then there should be two of them parallel and the reverse is not obviously off-center enough for a 2nd leg to exist.
So this one’s got me stumped for the moment – if we get a photo post-cleaning/conservation it’s a lot more likely to be ID-able.
Mark

Roman silver hoard coin 8 (RF) - reported to museum and sent for ID

# 8 is from half a century or more prior to the other pieces in the “hoard” so far – which all seem to be of the adoptives and Antonines.

#8 – Titus, 79-81 AD.
AR "Supplicatio" Denarius* (your metrology here)
Mint of Rome, 80 AD.
Obv: IMP TITVS CAES VESPASIAN AVG P M (ccw)
Laureate bust of Titus right
Rx: TR P IX IMP XV COS VIII P P
Tripod-ALTAR surmounted by dolphin to right
RIC II, i 128 (Old RIC II 27a); RSC 321; SR 2518
*After the Vesuvius disaster in 79 and the great fire which soon followed in Rome in 80, coins of Titus and Domitian for a couple of years adopted reverses referring to Neptune (who also ruled earthquakes, and, I guess, volcanos) and the sea, in supplication to Neptune, begging, presumably, for less interesting times.

Mark

Tiberius Caesar Augustus was the second Roman emperor, reigning from AD 14 to 37

You have here two so-called “tribute pennies” – Tiberius basically only issued a single type of denarius in any quantity throughout his long (~ 23 years) rein so they’re really not in the least “rare” in the greater sense.
If it were not for the assumed biblical connection, these would be among the least expensive 1st century silver coins.
However, for whatever reason (personally, I think it was a brilliant piece of “marketing” on the part of a 19th century coin dealer) this type, which is actually fairly unlikely to have been circulating widely in the Levant at the presumed time – the Augustus, Gaius & Lucius denarii have a better chance of fitting the bill for the most likely coin – during the time the “incident” (if it was not pure allegory) occurred. This was the parable in which Jesus is asked a “gotcha!” question about money. He is famously supposed to have said words to the effect of: “see you this portrait – whose is it?” - “Why, Lord, Caesar’s portrait, of course” – to which he replied something on the order of, “So, render unto Caesar that which is Caesar’s and unto God that which is God’s” – ergo the coin, if the type were able to be determined, could be termed “The tribute penny”. A nice parable, at any rate, no matter how true or accurate it might be.
So, they are sought (and vastly overpaid for) by many, many non-numismatists who are impressed by the presumptive biblical connection. Therefore, these really fairly common denarii are among the most expensive early Roman Imperial coin-types to acquire. Due to their non-numismatic popularity, they bring prices more in line with the actual rarities of the Julio-Claudian era (like Caligula and Claudius, both of whose denarii are very difficult to find).
Although there are some who break this enormous issue up into presumed chronological classes separated by minor stylistic differences – Tiberius’ portrait aging, variations in the legs of the chair on the reverse, etc – they are generally referred to under a single catalog number.
RIC I, 26 and/or RSC 16.

Obv: TI CAESAR DIVI AVG F AVGVSTVS – laureate head of Tiberius right.
Rx: PONTIF MAXIM - female (presumed by many to be Livia) seated right holding scepter and branch.

Happy and successful hunting, now that you’re able to get back in the field.

Mark

1st C Roman silver coin sent for ID

Roman Imperial AR denarius
Geta, as Caesar, AD. 195-198
Mint of Rome, AD 202
Obverse: M SEPT GETA CAES PON
bare-headed draped and cuirassed bust of Geta, Caesar right, seen from behind
Reverse: SECVRIT IMPERII Securitas seated left holding globe and resting left elbow on throne
RIC IV 20; RSC 183a; SRCV 7169

Mark

1st C Roman silver coin sent for ID

Not much left here for me to go on for details – I can tell you what it is, but can’t give you any catalog #

Roman Imperial AR Denarius
Septimius Severus, AD 193-211
(probably) mint of Laodicea
Obverse: legend illegible, laureate head of Severus right
Reverse: legend illegible, Fortuna standing facing, head left, holding rudder and cornucopiae

Mark Lehman

1st C Roman silver coin sent for ID

Roman Imperial AR Siliqua (probably a single siliqua – no metrics and more than one possible denomination)
Julian II (so-called “apostate” or “philosopher”) AD 360-363
Mint mark illegible or missing, could be Lugdunum, Constantia/Arles, Constantinople or Antioch (if it’s a single siliqua) date could be either 361/2 or 362/3 AD (if it’s a European mint, more likely the earlier date; if an Asian mint, later date,)
Obverse: D N FL CL IVL[I – ANVS P F AVG] diademed, draped and cuirassed bust of Julian right
Reverse: [V]OT / X / [MV]LT / XX in four lines within laurel wreath.
RIC VIII (uncertain, must have mint to assign an RIC or RSC #); cf. RSC 146a-148d;
cf. SRCV 19123-19128 

Mark

2nd C Roman silver coin - sent for ID

It's Marcus Aurelius, as you probably are already aware - the long, pointed beard and curly hair should make this easily identifiable as Aurelius.
It dates to the emission of December 165 through summer 166 AD
Obverse legend is: M ANTONINVS AVG ARM PARTH MAX
laureate head right
Reverse: PAX (in ex) TR P XX IMP IIII COS III
Pax standing facing, head left, holding branch and cornucopiae
RIC III 145, RSC 434

Great detail on this 2nd C Roman silver - just sent for ID

Roman silver coin sent for ID

above is a denarius of Trajan, 96-117 AD.
Mint of Rome, 104-107 AD.

Obv: IMP TRAIANO AVG GER DAC P M TR P COS V P P laureate bust of Trajan right, drapery on left shoulder
Rev: S P Q R OPTIMO PRINCIPI Fortuna seated left holding rudder and cornucopiae
RIC II 178; RSC 481

Mark

2nd C Roman silver coin

Roman silver coin - sent for ID - 'cooking' to remove crust

96-117 AD.

This is obviously Trajan and very likely a denarius or Provincial drachma

It’s not easy to see, but this is another example of the so-called “Capitoline wolf” – the ancient bronze statue of the she-wolf. Self-explanatory to the typical Roman, it didn’t need the pair of suckling twins which added in the renaissance with which it is displayed today (in the Vatican? – not sure where, but it’s a famous museum).
Its use as a design, however, included the twins from an early time – coins were not the only place it might be seen – frescoes, “copycat” statues, even graffiti were common places to see it.
The she-wolf stands left, looking back at the twins suckling – on the common Constantinian-era AE’s, two stars are seen in the field above. I’m unsure what the large round feature is at 10:00 – it might be the head of a nail the remains of the point of which is visible protruding from behind Trajan’s head – or it might just be some corrosion, and that’s a big issue with this piece – as you can see three is a lamination issue, too.
I don’t know quite what to tell you for cataloging since the legend(s?) are pretty well obliterated. You say its silver (there are many AE coins of Trajan with wolf reverses), but without doing a line-by-line search through over 1000 listings of Trajan denarius types in the RSC, I don’t see this listed.
If I run across a listing, I’ll let you know. It might be a Provincial AR issue, too, again without any legible legend, it’s difficult to do a search in something like RPC as well.
Mark

Roman silver coin - sent for ID

This is a weird one to find in Britain! It appears to be a Roman Provincial issue from somewhere in the east. It seems to portray either Septimius Severus or Marcus Aurelius. Fun fact: Severus declared himself "adopted" by, and the heir to Marcus Aurelius' fame and auctoritas. Aurelius had been dead for almost 20 years, so he wasn't in any position to object. The "crown" he's wearing looks sort of like ivy leaves, so, maybe Dionysos? He's not usually bearded...
There isn't really enough clear lettering on the reverse - where we would generally look to find an "ethnic" - to tell where it's from, but if I had to guess, I'd say it looks to me like it originated somewhere around the mid-east / Mesopotamian longitudes.
I can't make out what (or who) the reverse device is supposed to be - I rotated the image all around, through 360º, and although that will usually help me get a handle on even vague reverses, I am drawing a complete blank as to what, exactly, we're looking at here.