ID/Authentication for Roman coppers/bronzes wanted! [gelöst]

My turn to ask the resident Antiquity experts for help!

I've had these three knocking around for some time and I almost forgot I even had them until they fell out just now. Don't remember how and where I got these since I don't normally collect ancients, but I want to get them identified and registered on my Numista collection anyway, if they're real:


Diameter is approximately 16mm, thickness almost 2mm, coin alignment, weight unavailable (because I have no scale at the moment) unfortunately.


Diameter is approximately 18mm at it's widest, thickness 2mm, medal alignment.


Diameter is approximately 23mm, thickness also ~2mm, medal alignment.

Thanks in advance!

I'm no expert but I'll try to help :)
If I read the mintmark right the first should be from Alexandria so one of those?:
http://www.wildwinds.com/coins/ric/constantius_II/_alexandria_RIC_viii_019.jpg
http://www.wildwinds.com/coins/ric/constantius_II/_alexandria_RIC_viii_018.jpg

The second one looks like Julian II but its hard to find the right mintmark, you could try it yourself here:
http://www.wildwinds.com/coins/ric/julian_II/i.html

For the third I got no idea.

Here's Numista catalog links. Not 100% perfect matches, but the closest I could find
https://en.numista.com/catalogue/pieces103292.html
https://en.numista.com/catalogue/pieces24669.html (I have a poor condition example of this one myself)
https://en.numista.com/catalogue/pieces101254.html (Obverse description is describing the reverse, someone should fix that...)

Thank you both profusely for your replies!

Now my questions are:

1) For the 1st and 3rd coins, which year line do you think each coin belongs in?

2) Just to be clear, they are all authentic, right?
(I think so, but just making sure)

3) I know this is probably extremely clichéd to hear from someone who helps out on the ID forum as much as I, but what, if any value have they?
(Assuming it's going to be "whatever someone will pay for them".)

Again, thank you so much!

They all should be real, I dont think those coins get faked. Also the patina looks very real and the only reason why those coins are possibly produced in modern times would be as replica for kids or "collectors" , so why faking patina/corrosion?
The value should be low on all of them. I cant talk about the rarity of special coins and mintmarks but I experienced coins from Constantius II as the most common roman coins you can find on the market. The other 2 are too damaged to be of interest for people who would pay high prices. Even in better conditions the prices from most of those roman small copper coins are quite low.
But I guess the "whatever someone will pay for them" answer is the best way to skip those thoughts .

1) That's tough, because none of the ones I linked are a perfect match.
--first coin: Yours has a mintmark of SMALA, but appears to have a dot after it
--second: The link shows a mintmark of HERACLA, I can't read yours but it looks different. But there wasn't anything else in the catalog even close.
--third: Your guess is as good as mine as to what the symbol between their legs is, but I see just a symbol, no dot. However at the bottom yours looks like XXI-star but there's no star in that link. Again, just the closest I could find.

If I want to catalog my coins when I can't find a perfect match, and without enough info for a new entry, I usually just add a public comment with it, something like "unsure of mintmark"

2) second and third are for certain authentic. On the first the lettering looks a bit odd to me, especially given the otherwise excellent condition of the coin. But it's probably authentic as well, very common emperor and reverse design.

3) no clue on those EXACT mintages. If I had to guess, $5 for the first one and $1 for the other two.

Alright, thanks for everything, you two!