Here is a fun little coin that may (or may not) be an imitation of a Tetricus I radiate with Pax reverse. Have a look - 16mm X 18mm, 2.53gm To me, the style of the portrait is very good and looks official. The lettering on the obverse raises two issues (i) the size and style of the lettering is not uniform and (ii) "PF" seems very clearly rendered as "DE". The legend seems complete, but the DE could be an indicator of imitation, or perhaps just an illiterate engraver copying a coin where those parts of the letters were missing? The reverse to me looks really close to official style, notwithstanding the weird looking arms. This was sold as an imitation but I lean towards official with a screw-up at the mint. Let me know what you think and pile on the barbs! Our friend @Valentinian has a nice discussion on these on his website. http://augustuscoins.com/ed/imit/BarbarousRadiates.html
It's a little crude. Id say it's a nice barbarous type. The reverse does look pretty close to official though. Overall it's a nice little coin.
That has got to be one of the finest imitations I’ve ever seen. The Pax reverse honestly looks significant better than many official versions!! grest pickup. I love it
I am of the opinion that for the Gallic Empire, particularly with Victorinus and the Tretrici, the differentiation between official and barbarous is meaningless. Who can say what made a coin "official" during this time? It appears they all circulated together and were all equally accepted as legitimate coinage for financial transactions. I am guessing that if anyone was able to strike a coin in the name of the emperor, that was fine with them.
Good point @gsimonel - I suppose it didn't really matter. Apparently there was a shortfall of central government issued coins so many more antoniniani were needed by the populace. One can't really see how these coins had much purchasing power, but who knows?
Well, there were certainly official coins and unofficial imitations. But did anyone, including the government, even care about the difference at the time? My point is that, although this was often an important distinction during much of the Roman Empire, and it's certainly important to collectors today, but I'm not convinced that it was an important distinction within the short-lived Gallic Empire. Another point is that it might be easy to make this distinction at the extreme ends of the differences, but it's probably not possible to make a confident distinction with many of the coins from this time. There's probably a lot of overlap between sloppily produced official coins and carefully produce unofficial ones. If I call either of these coins "official" am I guilty of the numismatic equivalent of "false precision"? Tetricus I Augustus, A.D. 271-274 Bronze Antoninianus Gallic Empire, unidentified southern mint Obv: IMP C TETRICVS P F AVG Rev: PAX AVG - Pax standing left, holding olive branch and vertical spear RIC 100 18mm, 2.9g. Tetricus II Caesar, A.D. 273-274 Augustus, A.D. 274 Bronze Antoninianus Gallic Empire, unidentified southern mint Obv: C PIV ESV TETRICVS CAES Rev: SPES AVG - Spes, walking left, holding flower and raising robe RIC 270 20x18mm, 2.5g.
That is an excellent example. I agree it is an imitation, remarkably well done. I think there is a significant distinction between barbarous radiates and official Gallo-Roman coins. Yes, some imitations are nearly as well-produced as official coins, but I think there was an official mint (or mints) that struck coins for the government in the name of the emperor, and there were many tiny unofficial "mints" (some in the archaeological record) making their own coins for profit or to supply more coins for a monetized economy. A look at http://augustuscoins.com/ed/imit/BarbarousRadiates.html shows some official prototypes that are much different from obvious "barbarous" pieces. Where to draw the line is tricky, but there is a line. An official Tetricus II. 20-19 mm. 2.65 grams. RIC V.II 270 Sear III 11292
+1 VICTORINUS, Antoninianus Treveri, 270-271 3.65 g - 19.5 mm S 11170 - C 49 - RIC Vb 114 IMP C VICTORINVS PF AVG, Radiate bust right INVICTVS, Sol advancing left
Here are two Tetricii from @tenbobbit! The first one I believe is an official, albeit ragged Laetitia. This second one I think is an imitation. I say that due to the "III" for "M", and the objectively cruder Laetitia reverse. However, both of these could very well be official. I just feel like the lettering on the second one is just a bit more crude.
I see Valentinian added an official Tetricus II above - here is a definite imitation I just received in the mail today 15mm 1.54gm. A nice portrait on this one as well but they were struggling with the letters.
Here are some more barbs in the Tetricus I line - radiate and bearded. And two Tetricus IIs, radiate and unbearded. A bit alike, they are. I bought this in a JAZ auction two years ago. The reverse was described as Hilaritas standing left, holding palm branch and cornucopia. Imitating RIC 80. Text IIII. This one, apparently from the emperor 'STOICVS', shows Spes doing a little dance, waving a branch.
Something I'm curious about - are there any reference books about barbarous radiates? As far as i can tell, this is one of the only areas of numismatics that hasn't been catalogued & studied.
There are few collector resources but a number of academic papers, archaeological & hoard reports, etc. Perhaps the best place to start is George Boon's 'Counterfeit coins in Roman Britain' in Coins and the Archaeologist (2nd ed), John Casey & Richard Reece eds, London: Seaby, 1988, pp. 102-188. Boon provides excellent bibliographic notes which can serve as a springboard. I will advise caution on anything published before about 1960. Those often include wild speculation regarding dating, long taken for granted but since disproved.
As far as I know, there are not any books. Over a decade ago I wrote this page about references on imitations of all kinds (not just barbarous radiates, but including barbarous radiates): http://augustuscoins.com/ed/imit/imitationrefs.html It has the references for my web pages on ancient imitations: http://augustuscoins.com/ed/imit/