Is this an Electrum Hekte (1/6th Stater)? Hard to attribute these coins! Opinions?

A coin I found in one of my first bags of 1,000 uncleaned, ca. 2005. I know everyone thinks a brass coin is gold at some point, the old cliche, but I've been sitting on this coin 5 years, gone through thousands of others, and I still think so. I'm not a real expert, just a hobbyist who sometimes gets deeper into a few coins.
For those who are unfamiliar, these were common coins all over the Greek world around 500-400 BC (please correct me if wrong), and some of the first coins, period. Mostly they are pretty crude, just with geometric stuff like squares on the reverse, sometimes a lion or eagle on the front.
See the wilwinds page on unidentifiable electrum coinage: http://www.wildwinds.com/coins/greece/ionia/uncertain/t.html
Mine is extrmely ugly, and not as "brilliant" as electrum should be. When I got it, I just rubbed the dirt of and this is what I got. There is a distrubing green/brown clump that I couldn't remove from the reverse. And it's not obvious. So I have my doubts. Should it be so rough and "dull" if it's really EL?
But, in favor of the electrum hypothesis:
Dimensions: 13 or 14mm, 2.8 grams (within the range, though a bit high).
I even went so far as to measure the specific gravity or density of the coin: 14.0 grams/cubic centimeter. Right in the range for electrum. I don't have the scientific equipment, so I did a DIY test, so that figure is open to doubt. (The average of repeated measures.)
(Density or specific gravity:
Less dense, less valuable materials:
Brass and Bronze are about 8.5, depending on alloy (min 7.4 – max 8.9). Copper about 8.9.
Denser, more valuable:
Silver 10.5. Gold 19.3.
Electrum 13-16 grams/cubic centimeter.)

Obverse:


Reverse:


Side:

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

I see the lion head right on the top two and left on the bottom two. If all are the same item with different orientation and lighting this just proves we see what we want to see. I have never seen one that looks this bad and would have expected electrum to have weathered differently but have no experience to back up that thought. Unless you specific gravity test is off, it hard can be anything else but I'd stop short of saying the item is identifiable as is. A serious reservation is how the coin could be overweight and look that bad. Were it mine, I'd keep it as an educational item but would not be able to sell it as what I thought/hoped it was. One serious student I know calls a coin like this a 'ghost'.

 

Good answer!

Yeah, it's really funny what you say about seeing the lion head with either orientation! We're neurologically programmed to see not only "what we want," but simply "faces" (human, otherwise), in abstract images, so that's a great note.

Also agreed--not for sale! I would never sell anything unless I was absolutely positive.

Plus, my specific gravity measures were based on a pretty crude DIY tool. 1: an oral syringe to find when the water tension breaks on a 1/8 teaspoon that had perfectly straight walls and base, 2: using marks on a thin plastic tube; and using the average of five measures each--I actually blogged on the probability theory behind this elsewhere. The range was too wide to be reliable: 0.1-0.35, though probability/measurement theory suggests I can say what average is, there is a wide range of possible error +/-! Thanks Adolphe Quetelet the astronomer (1835) and the "normal distribution"! So definitely could be wrong.

Same Doug Smith as the one whose site I used (still use) to learn about ancient coins when I got into selling them in the early 2000s, I assume...? Not sure if we've ever talked before, but I appreciate your reply. So unless David Sear himself comes down with a positive ID, I take your opinion as the gold (EL?) standard.

I didn't say anything to the seller at the time, because I didn't want to be one of "those people," but maybe I'm the only person to actually find a gold--well, possible electrum--coin in a bag of 1000. I think it's almost unanswerable....

Is it really THAT overweight? I've seen ranges of 2.3-2.9... There were different "standards" everywhere, right, and some places would've weighed a hekte at 2.8, wouldn't they? I remember an academic-style paper on that--[PDF] The Electrum Coinage of Samos in the Light of a Recent Hoard-- though the link is broken now (still shows up in google, though). Euboic, Samian, Phocaic, Ionian standards, etc.? I think I understand this concept correctly, but I also noticed the heaviness as the first thing that made it seem like something other than a legit hekte.

Definitely just an "educational" coin, an oddity, that I'll keep in my permanent never-sell collection. Ancient fourree (sp?) has always been my guess.

Again, thanks for your opinion, it's highly appreciated.

 

Given the bloom of bronze disease on the reverse, the best you could hope for is a fourée hekte. But the "lion" that we're seeing really doesn't seem to fit the style I'd expect on any electrum. I'd rather attribute is an unidentifiable remnant of a bronze coin.

 

Thanks! More opinions = satisfying my years of curiosity!

Thanks for your reply Ardatirion! That's what I've felt since I first found it. The only way it fits the style of image is if it's been test cut countless times (probably because it felt like a fouree!!). That's why I finally tried to test the density--if my measure was correct (it could easily be wrong) then it can't be filled with AE... it would have to be filled with lead or some other really dense metal (they had that available, I assume). I'm not sure if that's actually broze disease though I wondered--it's really hard--rock hard--and couldn't be removed or "reshaped," and hasn't changed after 5 years. I think you and Doug together are right: it's something mysterious. I'm not too invested in whether its EL or not, since it is not such a nice coin, but it's just been in the back of my mind, nagging for years! These comments are really helpful in sating that nagging desire to "know." What I "know": I probably won't ever know, and it's an interest/oddity item to ponder. Thanks again!

 

It would be relatively easy to know but you don't want to know that bad. Cutting the coin in half right down the middle should expose the core showing either relatively intact electrum looking material or something else (copper?). I wouldn't do it.

I am the same one but quote what I posted on my index page:
"This page is very much a 'fast food' or 'pop culture' approach to the subject of ancient numismatics. I am an amateur collector and offer no guarantee of completeness or accuracy on any material on this site. I recommend that you research your questions rather than accepting blindly anything posted here. I also recommend you apply this same degree of care in using any other source material online or in hard copy. This site was intended to expose new collectors to an enjoyable hobby. No claim is made to serious scholarship. Serious numismatists are also welcomed here while they await publication of more proper and scholarly coverage of this material. Images posted on this site are taken from a variety of sources including my personal collection and several other private collections."

When I started my page, there was not a lot available online on ancient coins so what I believed might seem to bear some 'authority' that is not supported by a wallfull of sheepskins from accredited universities. Even today, it is easier to find information (online or in books) from those who think they know than it is to sort out which ones really do. Your 'Gold Standard' may be 'Fool's Gold'. Trust me; Don't trust me.

 

Expertise

Ha ha, I hear you.

You may be too modest, I don't know for sure, but I have a lot of respect for what you've done, putting out the information and contributing to this field.

Even if you don't have a PhD in numismatics (there is a university somewhere that does offer a numismatics program I believe), and I don't know what your education is, you've developed and helped others up their level of knowledge. Expertise comes in many forms, and in any case, I appreciate what you say.

I'm taking everyone's opinion seriously, and thanks for yours and Ardatirion's too! I got nothing from posting on Forum or my own blog (naturally, since it's a week old!), so this is the first time anyone but me has seen the thing.

 

Of course this is not an attribution or anything, but to me it looks an awful lot like a fourree core. I have seen many of them with traces of the outer layer still intact. As to what is was faking, since it appears bronze I would guess a silver fourree, since bronze would not be nearly heavy enough to pass for a gold coin once plated. The weight could be expained by maybe some lead in the alloy to trick people based on weight. I saw a gold fourree core once that was mostly lead.

My second guess would be a bronze, (brass) that has seen the worst for wear in time. I do not see any trace of a punchmark which is usually there somewhere in even the most unrecognizable electrum coins if I remember right. Doug can correct me on that.

Just my two cents.

 

That's a very informative point about the lead, since bronze/copper shouldn't result in that density.
I also like the cut it in half comment!
Great place this Cointalk! I'll have to start commenting since I've just joined.

 

I found it interesting that the early electrum coins with no type (just scratches on the anvil) had very distinctive (often three) punches while the lion types reverse had less of a design to the punch side and looked like a random rough bar end more than a die. Since I imagined I saw the lion, I was glad not to see anything on the reverse.

The whole matter was based on the specific density. I realize that there could be error in the measurement but your fingers should be able to tell the difference between copper and electrum just from picking up the thing and saying 'heavy'. You might ask a jeweler to perform a test for the presence of gold which would confirm or deny the electrum question. That would be less destructive than the cut in half method.