I read many times here accounts about your experiences with misattributed coins. I admit that it's a very thrilling feeling to discover in an auction listing a wrong description that can transform an ordinary coin in a very special one. We always ask ourselves: "Am I the only one who noticed the mistake ? Will I be able to get the coin cheaper than it's real value ? I thought it would be fun regrouping all our stories in one thread, wouldn't it be ? So let's begin with my latest: Prologue October 1978, England Two amateur detectorists discovered, just to the south of the late Roman walls of the small town at Cunetio in Wiltshire, a hoard of 54,951 Roman coins. There were, among other coins, 7198 specimens minted for the emperor Victorinus. After the hoard was acquired and analysed by the British Museum, one coin was listed for the first time; it was the only known example of a SALVS type from the Cologne mint with the obverse: IMP CP VICTORINVS PF AVG. The new reference number would be Cunetio 2565. August 1980, England The owner of a small farm, during a work of topsoil stripping, found a hoard of approximately 2800 roman coins in a Severn Valley Ware jar at Hatton Farm, Child's Ercall. The majority of the pieces were from the Gallic Empire era. The second specimen of Cunetio 2565 was found among the other coin with the same obverse die. August 2021 While browsing through an auction listing, I noticed a coin of Victorinus described as a common RIC 67 IMP C VICTORINUS PF AVG. But I have the bad habit of never trusting the attributions of auction houses and always double-checking them. To my surprise I discovered that the legend of the obverse was rather IMP CP VICTORINVS PF AVG. I didn't recall such a legend on any coins of this Emperor, and after examining carefully the portrait it seems it could be an early one, from the first issue when he looks more "chubby". So I had to research deeper to find an explanation, and as usual I used the Mairat study "The Coinage of the Gallic Empire". Here's what I discovered: Possibly an engraver's mistake mixing the legend of issue one and two. For a better understanding, I'll show the 2 examples cited by Mairat in my collection: IMP C PI VICTORINVS PF AVG (1st issue) IMP C VICTORINVS PF AVG (2nd issue) I believe my new acquisition is an obverse die-match with the two other coins discovered in England. By the way, the seller who consign the specimen I bought is also from UK...Here are the three coins side by side for a better comparison. The Cunetio hoard coin now owned by the British Museum (you can here admire the quality of the photography... oh! I almost forgot this is a little countryside museum...Please BM, hire @dougsmit !) By chance, we also have the plate coin's picture in the Mairat study ! Now the Child's Ercall specimen: And my new misattributed coin: (20mm 2.56g) IMP CP VICTORINVS PF AVG So that was my story, now it's time to tell me yours. Please show us your misattributed coins !
I have one coming in the mail that is pretty cool (at least to me). Putting this here as a place holder until it comes. It's not in the greatest shape but it is definitely identifiable. It was listed as Constantine IV but is not Constantine IV
Amazing find - congratulations! My latest misattributed coin is this one (NOT Caracalla ) Spoiler: Who is it? Elagabalus, more on this coin in my Notes: Son of Caracalla.
That's quite a find, @Ocatarinetabellatchitchix, and a fun idea for a thread. This is perhaps the best misattributed-by-the-auction-house coin in my collection -- a rare dupondius that was listed as a sestertius. Including shipping and all fees, it was still less expensive than taking a family of four to the movies. There are four known examples of this coin: 1. Paris specimen cited by Cohen and Strack, 2. Naples specimen cited by Strack, 3. Münzhandlung Basel (Auction 1), June 28, 1934, pl. 29, 1171, 4. My specimen: Faustina Senior, AD 138-141. Roman orichalcum dupondius, 16.19 g, 26.1 mm, 10 h. Rome, AD 140-141. Obv: DIVA AVGVSTA FAVSTINA, bare-headed and draped bust, right. Rev: CONSECRATIO S C, Funeral pyre in three stories, set on base, ornamented and garlanded, surmounted by Faustina in biga right. Refs: RIC 1189; BMCRE p. 236 *; Cohen 187; RCV --; Strack 1238.
A very informative and interesting coin and write-up, @Ocatarinetabellatchitchix I appreciate all the hoard information too. Nice work. Here is my misattributed mystery to share. It was sold on eBay as an Antoninus Pius as featuring Honos, RIC 772, which it is not (RIC 772 is a sestertius). So what is it? I figured it would be pretty easy to figure out, but I am having a lot of trouble with it. The reverse standing figure holding a cornucopiae has COS IIII to the right of her - and this limits the possibilities greatly, with most other standing around types having COS IIII spread out over both sides. Not very clear in my photos, there is an X to the left next to her head - part of XIX, I think. The closest match I could find was a variation of a dupondius, RIC 952, Pax standing. This I found in a Roma auction on acsearch that really looks like mine (E-Sale 47, Lot 680, 28.06.2018): Antoninus Pius Æ As. Rome, AD 154-55(?). ANTONINVS [AVG PIVS] P P IMP II, laureate head right / [TR POT XIX(?)] COS IIII, Pax standing left, holding [branch] and cornucopiae. RIC 952 var. (dupondius); cf. BMCRE p. 336, † (dupondius). 9.76g, 24mm, 7h. https://www.acsearch.info/search.html?id=5109514 If this is not "it" then I am stumped. If it is it, I guess it can be considered rare (not in RIC anyway). Not especially thrilling, but it sure has been keeping me busy. Any other suggestions certainly welcome. In another recent misattributed eBay incident, here is one that is easily solved. It was described as an ancient Indian coin! Ho ha! I was thrilled to nab it for five and a half bucks: Justinian I Æ Half Follis Year 13 (539-540 A.D.) Cyzicus Mint DN IVSTINIANVS PP AVG, helmeted, cuirassed bust facing, holding cross on globe and shield, cross to right / Large K; cross above, ANNO left, XII/I right, Y/Z below. SB 208; DOC 187a; MIBE 121. (10.61 grams / 30 mm) eBay August 2021 $5.53 Notes: “The K on the reverse doubles as the denomination mark (20 nummi = half follis) and the initial letter of the mint mark KYZ” Classical Numismatic Group, Inc. Electronic Auction 303, Lot 446 29.05.2013 Somewhat peculiar thing about this one is how the obverse die covers the whole flan (a big 30 mm) while the reverse die is considerably smaller.
If you'd ask me: Is it Caracalla or Elagabalus ? My answer would have been: it's surely the portrait of Caracalla...I also notice this sentence when I research on RPC online: Reign: Uncertain Persons: Caracalla or Elagabalus (?)
It could be. I've been staring at this a lot and I can't see "prongs" for a radiate crown on my example, but the wear and thick patina make this an unsure observation (and my old eyes!). Here is an OCRE (from the British Museum) example of RIC 802 Here is my coin again: The thing that gets me about Pax/Honos for the reverse figure is the clothing - mine seems to be floor-length, where as Honos' gown (or whatever it is called) curves up above his ankles. The fold hanging down from the arm holding the cornucopia is different too - Honos has a cape-like sweep, whereas mine hangs down in a separate fold. These clothing attributes seem to be fairly consistent with the Pax/Honos types. But I am not sure enough about this to make the call. Then there is the reverse inscription - I think I see an "X" from "POT XIX" near the figure's head. But there is so many off-center/patina gunk/wear issue, I might be seeing things: Thank you for your help on this!
I do not own these, but they are my favorites from among the many, many misattributions of Parthian coins that I've seen through the years. This first was slabbed as a very common Sellwood 78 drachm: Pacorus (formerly Vologases III). However, it is a much, much rarer Sellwood 83 (Unknown King III), likely worth well more than $1,000. And here is a bronze dichalkous of Vologases III (Sellwood 79.50), listed as a Byzantine seal! LOL!
I am watching an auction today for an item that will hammer in about 2 hours. I twideled my fingers about as long as I could and then hit a few bid buttons on low priced items. One of the coins was misattributed. The seller put a lot of words in the description to have a coin pic that did not match. Roman Republic Sextus Pompeius Magnus Pius (circa 42-38 BC). Sicily Ae As (31 mm 21.78g ) Obv: MAGN, Laureate Janiform head of Pompeius the Great. Rev: PIVS, Prow to right; below, IMP. Syd. 1044; Woytek Arma et Nummi p. 558; Craw. 479/1. There are plenty of dots on the coin. I know that is a bad sign.
Hey Bob, have you ever thought of offering your services as a consultant for Parthian coins' attribution to NGC ?
I have purchased three misattributed coins in the past 12 months, all at auction from top tier companies. Misattribution is not always a good thing. The first was an example of this solidus, which was attributed to an uncertain Germanic tribe. This picture is from the IBSCC Bulletin on Counterfeits. It appears the Uncertain Germanic Tribe was located in Lebanon in the 1960’s. The auction house responded to my concerns in a most gentlemanly fashion which included a prompt refund. I have seen two other examples for sale in the past year, so caveat emptor. I call your attention to the dot below AVG on the obverse, the idiosyncratic style of the “S” on both the obverse and reverse, the retrograde “N” in CONOB, and the rather masculine style of the face of Constantinopolis. The next misattribution I have previously shared here. A solidus of Anastasius which was not identified as Ostrogothic. https://www.cointalk.com/threads/recent-cng-auction-win-ostrogothic.381892/#post-7656048 The last was a rather fairly minor misattribution, but a good story. This aureus, in an auction by Leu: Incorrectly identified the figure on the reverse as Bonus Eventus, even though it looks distinctly female. Brief investigation revealed the original (not my coin, if it need be said) “Triton XIX, Lot: 560. Estimate $10000. Marcus Aurelius. As Caesar, AD 139-161. AV Aureus (18.5mm, 6.75 g, 6h). Rome mint. Struck under Antoninus Pius, AD 148-149. AVRELIVS CAE SAR AVG P II F, bare head right / TR POT III COS II, Fides, draped, standing right, holding two grain ears in lowered right hand and holding basket of fruit on raised left. RIC III 445Aa (Pius); Calicó 1930 (same dies); BMCRE 692 (Pius); Biaggi 874 var. (bust type). EF, lustrous, a few miniscule marks. Portrait struck in high relief.” So the goddess is Fides, not Bonus Eventus. Fides is translated as faith, but in Latin connotes mutual and reciprocal fidelity, as between parties to a contract, husbands and wives, and soldiers and the Republic they serve and protect. It is my good fortune to have an fitting repository for an emblem of Fides. After thirty years she has more than earned it.
Generally, they (NGC) seem to do fine. This was a rare and potentially costly slip-up. I haven't assisted them, but have helped a number of coin dealers through the years.
Well I didn't expect for it to show up until next week but to my surprise, it was in the mail box this afternoon. Here is my misattributed coin: It was attributed as Constantine IV but if you enjoy Byzantine coins, you can see that it is instead Constantine VI with his mother Irene. The reverse shows Leo II (not well depicted on this coin), Constantine V, and Leo IV). It isn't the best looking coin out there...but for $20 for a coin featuring Irene, I don't think you can go wrong! Constantine VI and Irene 780-797 AD AE Follis, Constantinople Obverse: crowned busts of Constantine VI, unbearded, wearing chlamys, holding cross on globe, on left and Irene, wearing loros, holding cross-headed sceptre, on right, dot between their faces Reverse: crowned busts of Leo III, with short beard, wearing loros, on left, Constantine V, with short beard, wearing loros, in centre and Leo IV, wearing chlamys, on right, two dots to left and right, all above horizontal line beneath which is large M, X to left, N to right, A below
One misattribution that served me well is the drachm from Caesarea. Sold as a Donna which is common, but it is actually plautilla which is exceedingly rare.
Probably the rarest anonymous denarius I own was picked up from a Harlan J Berk buy or bid sale. This coin had actually been sold by HJB previously, published in multiple different places, and then popped up again almost 20 years later, identified as a common "Crawford 44/5"(the catch-all ID used to describe most anonymous denarii by sellers) and I was lucky enough to have just gotten home from work and spotted the sale within minutes of it being posted. At $250 the price was low enough that I didn't have to think too long before snapping it up, and that was good because 2 other collectors later told me they'd been waiting for this coin to reappear and would also have bought it without hesitation had they seen it first. Roman Republic AR Denarius(4.83g, 21mm, 10h). Anonymous. After 211 B.C. Uncertain mint. Helmeted head of Roma right; behind, X. Border of dots / Dioscuri galloping right; in linear frame, ROMA. Line border. Crawford -; Brinkman-Debernardi website 46(a)/1, example 2(this coin); Numismatic Chronicle 174(2014), "The Orzivecchi Hoard and the Beginnings of the Denarius", p. 85, fig 5.b(this coin) Ex Harlan J Berk Buy or Bid Sale 210, 6 February 2020, lot 116, ex Harlan J Berk Buy or Bid Sale 121, 10 July 2001, lot 266
Roman Republic Anon after 211 BCE AR Quinarius 2.12g Helmeted hd Roma - Dioscuri riding Craw 68-2b (listed as common Craw 44-6) RSC 3 ex Clain-Stefanelli
Some of my favorite misattributions This Seleukos tetradrachm was sold as Alexander III and hammered for under $150, I guess because of the scrape on the reverse This extremely rare (3 known) Lucius Caesar from Antioch was sold as Augustus This one was sort of attributed correctly, but not clearly enough that I managed to get an incredible deal. Quinctilius Varus with Augustus, Gaius, and Lucius, sold as "Augustus, minted under Varus" This one wasn't attributed, but I assume the auction house assumed it to be a Faustina II, because who in their right minds puts a Cleopatra VII in a low-end job lot?
Great pickups everyone......Here's an unknown Greek Bronze? Vardanes I (40-47 AD) AE Chalkous 11mm/1.8gr.. Obverse- Bust left with short beard, wearing diadem and spiral torque; hair in three distinct waves with earring visible; diadem pendants shown as three lines; circular border of pellets. Reverse- Monogram ΜΤΘ; legend as dashes Mint- Mithradatkart-Near modern Askabad in Turkmenistan. Ref- Sellwood 64 type variant (ΜΤΘ monogram) This is quite a rare type. Attributed by @Bob L
