Ancient Coin Worth Holding? 0

[pogohatesme]

If this is the wrong section for this thread I apologize. I wasn't really sure if I should post here or the Ancient Coin section. I received this in a 2x2 and the only detail written on it is 'Ancient Rome". I have no clue where to begin even attempting to look this up as there are so many. I know there is a glare in the pictures but I had to use the flash to be able to get any kind of detail for you all. To me, this is in really rough shape and probably.bot even worth the 2x2 it came in. But then again being new what do I know? Hahaha. 

So what is the deal with this coin if anyone can tell? What coin is it? Is it worth anything? Worth holding on to? Thanks for the help once again.

[JKK]

It's a very tough ID, as in problematic, but if you get me weight and diameter I'll at least be able to tell you the era and denomination.

[pogohatesme]

@JKK yeah I wonder about the difficulty in ID'ing it and sorry for not thinking about the weight and diameter. 

Unfortunately I do not have a scale to weigh it, but holding it and a  1941 Mercury dime in hand, the Ancient coin feels a tad less..if that helps. The diameter is 17.35 mm ( to my unskilled best of measuring). 

[JKK]

Well, that'll get us started. The diameter puts it as an AE3 (bronze small change coin, second up from the smallest of the late Imperial era). most times, when they're nice, one can get them for $10-12 unless it's a rare emperor. The only part we can make out worth a *spoon* is the reverse type, which looks to me like the emperor raising the kneeling woman (typically comes with a reverse of GLORIA ROMANORVM). That reverse seems most common under Valentinian I, Valens, Gratian, and Valentinian II. Now comes the fun part, when you get to look through Wildwinds to see if you can find an AE3 image under one of those four emperors that is otherwise a match for the diameter and other stuff. Link goes to Val I. Make sure you click to display the thumbnails. Welcome to ancients--once you have done this, it'll give you an idea of what is involved.

[pogohatesme]

Thanks for the guidance. It's much appreciated. 

[JKK]

1 hour ago, pogohatesme said:

Thanks for the guidance. It's much appreciated. 

No problem. Odds are the reverse legend is as described. You won't make out much of the obverse legend; look for shape of the bust, which looks draped and cuirassed, right. By that era, they no longer made much effort to engrave a legit likeness of the Augustus.

[pogohatesme]

6 minutes ago, JKK said:

No problem. Odds are the reverse legend is as described. You won't make out much of the obverse legend; look for shape of the bust, which looks draped and cuirassed, right. By that era, they no longer made much effort to engrave a legit likeness of the Augustus.

Actually if you don't mind, when looking through some of them, the reverse looks to me like Emporer dragging captive as opposed to the description above. I just want to make sure I am looking at this right.

[JKK]

7 hours ago, pogohatesme said:

Actually if you don't mind, when looking through some of them, the reverse looks to me like Emporer dragging captive as opposed to the description above. I just want to make sure I am looking at this right.

Could easily be, and I don't mind at all. I didn't look very hard because I knew that a full ID was unlikely, but you might be right. Good work on looking at enough coins to consider that. What's really a drag is we can't see the exergue (an area at bottom reverse containing the mint mark), but we get what we get.