We all know that the so-called "barbaric imitations" are generally of "low" artistic quality. The celators who made these tended not to be officially trained artisans, and were often illiterate. Therefore, you often find blundered legends, atrocious busts, and only a semblance of an official appearance. In addition, they often have the following features: 1. feature a radiate bust 2. features Constantine's VLPP type 3. Very small 4. Very "ugly" and blundered. Here are two examples of low artistic quality imitations: Ruler: Tetricus II(?) Diam: 14mm Weight: 1.9g This one features: small size (an average radiate of the Tetricii was often 16-20mm), and a rather ugly obverse. Curiously, the reverse is pretty average of the Tetricii. Compare to an official Tetricus II: Ruler: Constantine I Diam: 15mm Weight: 1.6g This features: blundered legends, and poor quality engraving on both sides. Constantine had a flat shovel-face, and the two victories on the rev see to be sharing a pint. Compare to an official Constantine VLPP with rather attractive and detailed engravings. --- Ruler: Constantius II(?) Diam: 12mm Weight: 0.8g This features: extremely small size and weight, no legends, and very primitive line-drawing style of the fallen horseman. Compare to an official FTR of Constantius II: Sometimes, however, you have excellent imitations that fall into two categories: 1. Extremely accurate recreations of official types. Some consider these coins to be actually counterfeits or forgeries, since the style emulation is so close. 2. Extremely stylistic and abstract designs. These are similar to the "ugly" types in that they blunder the legends and designs, but have such an endearing style that they have their own value in their abstractiveness. The "ugly" type probably used an inexperienced or untrained celator; the "abstract" ones likely used a local artisan trained in local Briton/Celtic art, and adapted his style into an emulation of the Roman. Example of Category 1: Ruler: Constans Diam: 24mm Weight: 4.4g This style is so fine that I initially assumed this was an official Arles issue. However, the rather alien-like appearance of Constans, and the unusually large emperor figure on the reverse, plus strange-looking lettering points this towards a very fine, but barbaric imitation. I think we could call this a "counterfeit" since it looks so good. Compare to an official Constans galley: Ruler: Constans Diam: 21mm Weight: 6.1g Curiously, the imitation/forgery is actually larger in flan size, by a while 3mm. These two coins should have shared the same module size, but the official one is rather smaller. However, it is significantly (20%) heavier, so I guess it evens out. An example of Category 2: Ruler: Constantine I Diam: 19x18mm Weight: 2.9g This features a gorgeous, abstract and stylized design. The legends are completely blundered, but are present. This is a coin where the celator was obviously a highly talented artist in his own right. He basically took inspiration from the official model, and adapted and inserted his own Celtic(?) flavor into the coin! The end result is an absolutely stunning, endearing and high-quality coin. The celator must have been proud of his creation, contrasted to the rather awful examples shown up top. Compare to an official Constantine I VLPP: Ruler: Constantine I Diam: 17mm Weight: 2.2g Again, curiously, the imitation outsizes and outweights the official issue! However, the imitation has no silver while the official is likely a low-silver content billon alloy. Thanks for reading this long post. Please post your favorite imitations!
That’s goegeous. The celator was obviously very skilled, just not in the imperial fashion. I also like the reasonably attempt at a legend, and a nice bold mint mark!
Those are all cool examples - I love imitatives, from ugly to beautiful and from close imitations to wacky. This is probably my favourite VLPP: Quite nice style but very unofficial. My newest imitative is this Gallienus, which definitely falls on the wacky and ugly side of things: But I love it!
Oh, Wow, these are all great examples. To my horror and dismay, I can't find pics of any of mine. But, @hotwheelsearl ...or anyone else who cares to comment, is the transition from the mostly Gallic radiates to the dominant Constantinian prototype as seamless as that? I've seen some, at least, of the latter attributed to a relatively little known Germanic tribe, vaguely just east of the southern Rhine. ...Granted, it's sounding as if at least some substantive scholarship has been done on this since then. ...And what about the imitations of prototypes later in the 4th century? ...It's already smelling as if I should take another look at someone's (--Sorry, and Thank you) thread on this subject, maybe a couple of weeks back. Meanwhile, as you noted (as did other people here --or at least, this will be intuitively obvious to y'all), the level of abstraction, in capable hands, can be beautiful in its own right. At this or that interval, there's a 'tipping point,' where one aesthetic is effectively replaced by another. ...As in, 'we're not in Kansas anymore.' They called the Cubists 'ugly,' and the Impressionists before that.
While much more common in the late Roman period, there are unofficial, solid (not fourree) denarii from all periods. Some are more base than the real thing; some are just as fine. Antoninus Pius (the dark patches are encrustations on top of the surface) Faustina I Commodus Septimius Severus Julia Domna Caracalla Usually we think of plated coins as being poor style. Some are not at all bad and a few are hard to separate from the official. However, just as with the solid group, the more familiar you are with the official coins, the more obvious it is that these are 'wrong'. Sabina Septimius Severus Domna Caracalla
When it comes to late Roman imitations, I find it quite difficult to draw the line between official and 'barbarous' with some of them! Just focusing on the truly abstract, a couple favorites include: Sri Lanka Roman Imitation Obverse: Emperor’s diademed bust right, traces of garbled inscription around Reverse: Imitation of Gloria Exercitus two soldiers and standard reverse type Struck 5th century AD, 14mm, 1.35g; Mitchiner ACW #5165ff Eastern Europe, Celtic Imitation of Roman Thessalonica Obverse: Heads of Janus Reverse: Two centaurs rearing in opposite directions, garbled Greek legend beneath Struck 1st century BC, 16mm, 1.81g; SNG ANS 804-5
Some very interesting and funny imitations. That's the kind of sub-set I might consider putting together, but Hey ! I have so many already ! My only one Q
Not sure if this qualifies as "elegant", but it's certainly abstract. I call it "Celtic Potato Head". Æ19x17, 2.26g.
