Dietro

Traiano e il Circo Massimo

Fri Mar 12, 2010 9:09 pm I have been e-mailing privately about this coin, but since there now appears to be some discussion of it on the list, I will post my observations to the list. I checked for a match for that spelling error in the following sources :     * Coin archives pro     * RIC     * BMC     * LOS SESTERCIOS DEL IMPERIO ROMANO     * Plus a few of the listings of known fakes. I could not find any match. I could also not match the reverse die to any (with our without the spelling error). I looked at a lot of reverse dies on these, and every one of them was significantly different. There is a large range in how the reverse design is drawn. But what is fairly consistent, is that the reverse inscription is symmetrical on all dies. By this I mean that the first and last letter are directly across from each other. On the coin in question, the last letter is slightly higher than the first letter. But if that missing R were to be inserted, it would move the inscription into perfect symmetry. While I can find no reason to condemn the entire coin, this missing letter and positioning problem causes me to wonder if the coin has be reconstructed along that edge, and that they missed that letter in the reconstruction. There are a few other problems with the coin, including the actual shape of the column, which might also point to tooling or reconstruction work. I am not 100% certain the coin is genuine, but I also have only seen the image so cannot make a proper determination. I lean towards to being an authentic coin which has had considerable work done to the reverse, which could include tooling, smoothing, in filling with some material (possibly resin or plastics), and possibly reconstruction of missing parts (the left side of the inscription. Reasons I think the coin may be genuine. The obverse style is extremely good, a perfect match to the styleof one of the celators who cut several of the other obverse dies I observed. If the coin is not genuine, it would have to have been cast from an original coin, but it does not appear to be a casting on the image. There is significant signs of smoothing of the fields and some parts of the portrait. Then it appears an artificial patina was  applied. That is more likely to be seen on a worked on genuine coin, than a fake. There are two bumps on the reverse that are problem bronze disease corroding and expanding just below the surface, and there is a third area in the upper right that appears to be a similar bump that had erupted out and is now covered over. A casting of an original coin with those bumps would reproduce such bumps and that corrosion area, so this is sort of a neutral feature, but on a casting they could touch up that corrosion area in the molding process. In the lower right of the reverse there is what appears to be a chip in the patina and there appears to be a red or brown cuprite inside the chip. That would suggest there is a genuine patina still present in that area. But without having seen the actual coin, but rather just images, there is a lot of guess work here. Robert Kokotailo

Dietro