Please help. Its fabric to me seems real, no seam, great details—check—seems same size and weight of some medallions. Check again. Got it for a steal though so am naturally suspicious. Any help appreciated. Thanks, joe
Were that genuine, I'm sure it would be a five-figure coin. All genuine examples would have a well-documented provenance. I suspect you are looking at a "Paduan," a replica from a couple hundred years ago in the style of antiquity. Casts and aftercasts of Paduans abound. I suspect that's what this is. Interesting item, though.
you’re right, looks hundreds of years old, not thousands. Ill take it to a coin show to see what some say. I’m thinking i’ll sell for 200 plus, but that’s a long shot so I don’t mind owning since i paid under one hundred. My impression thus far is 1) it was die struck by a talented engraver but the talent of the artist is in question (not to me though); or 2) was cast but seam smoothed down then over a few centuries toned over so it appears to look like genuine Roman examples impressed on similar planchets/discs(?).
i can see a line in the center of the edge...lQQks to me anyway...may have been filed over..idk....it would be kool ifn it was legit...and certain paduans are very collectible too..
You know I'm bored my all this is it AUTHENTIC; IF it were a copy made of an important coin, then WOW! some unknown engraver is an artist! (That is, if it passed for real; no one was hurt really, if it circulated round all these years). I'm in awe of well educated true numismatists who can distinguish between authentic and false, yet I'm still in awe of false. Hey it's a hard world out there; perhaps I should begin a collection of fascinating falsehoods? I don't want bottom line to be burnt, but a true auction of false radically beautiful specimens might just be in order.
The legends and portrait styles aren't quite right - but i've seen far worse. Nice patina. I suspect they're genuine 19th century antique replicas.
It looks concave on both obverse and reverse. That is a giant red flag if true. Certainly not cast. If it was the Hadrian portrait would be accurate. And this is horrible.
Paduan, perhaps? Edit- aha, I see that's been brought up. That would be my best (admittedly-uninformed) guess.
I could buy into that theory, too. Definitely not ancient, but old. Might have some collectible value in that right.
I would keep it for the neat left-facing portrait of Aelius (I can see nothing wrong with that one style-wise), but never, never ever turn it around
Ugly Hadrian, but Aelius looks cool. If you can can stand to keep it at the price you paid for it, I'd keep it as a display piece. Kind of neat.
The obverse seems to duplicate an authentic Roman medallion die of Aelius, illustrated in the new RIC for Hadrian, pl. 217, 2931-2. I don't know what the forger based his Hadrian side on.
Thanks for replies. Yeah, probably 1800s or so piece. It has a patina on it that looks a few centuries old, like some of my older world bronze coins.
Really too bad about the Hadrian. The Aelius looks spot-on, and I think it's cool, especially considering the large size. Also, I like @GregH 's oxymoron: "I suspect they're genuine 19th century antique replicas."