This new acquisition was listed as a Germanic imitation of a siliqua of Julian II of the Lugdunum mint. Only 1.37 grams and 16.5 mm diameter. The sharp-nosed portrait caught my eye. After purchase I noted some siliqua from the Lugdunum mint have a somewhat similar portrait, so perhaps this is not so distinctive. Perhaps it is official? I am now unsure. Please chime in with your opinion, and add your siliqua whether official or unofficial examples.
I sure do like Julian II as he was the last Roman emperor to fight the good fight, but I am sorry to say I do believe your coin is a modern forgery. Here's my holled Constantius II
That's neat. I personally wouldn't know for sure as to whether it's imitative or official. Certainly an interesting era, and ruler. I got my first (and still only) siliqua not terribly long ago. Guess who. Roman empire: silver siliqua of Julian II, ca. 360-363 AD; found in 1887 in the East Harptree Hoard Obverse: DN FL CL IVLI-ANVS PF AVG; draped, cuirassed. and pearl-diademed bust right. Reverse: VOTIS/X/MVLT/XX in wreath with medallion in center containing eagle; TCONST mintmark in exergue. Issuer: Julian II ("the Apostate"), Roman emperor (361-363 AD). Specifications: Silver siliqua, 17 mm, 1.98 g. Struck at Arelate (now Arles, France- which was named Constantina at the time, hence the "TCONST" mintmark). Grade: Very Fine, toned. Reference: Arles RIC-309, T. Provenance: ex-Gert Boersema Ancient Coins, Hasselt, Netherlands, via VCoins store, 12 July 2020.* Notes: This coin was found in 1887 with a hoard of 1,496 pieces in the village of East Harptree, Somerset, England. A laborer named William Currell was digging to find the source of a spring when his pick struck the vessel containing the coins. Subsequent research indicates the hoard was deposited sometime around 375 AD. It included 718 coins of Julian II. This emperor earned his nickname "The Apostate" because he attempted to reverse the Roman conversion to Christianity, and to revert to the traditional pagan religious practices. In the long term he was unsuccessful, however, and was destined to be the last non-Christian emperor. He died in the Battle of Samarra against the Sasanian Persians in 363 AD. Comments: I was already interested in acquiring a coin of Julian II, since I had been reading about the transition from paganism to Christianity. I also had never owned a siliqua before. Roman bronze coins of this era tend to be common, but these silver siliquae are generally rather scarce. The coin was appealing enough on its own merits, but with the addition of a well-documented hoard pedigree from over 130 years ago, I found it pretty much irresistible.
Bummer, if so. Again, I wouldn't know the difference between ancient imitation and modern forgery a lot of the time.
Actually, that's a good point. Calls into question - who would be counterfeiting an ancient imitation to begin wtih?
Looks to me as if all the VOTIS V siliquae show Julian II without a beard, or at least I haven’t found any exceptions thus far. If this is true, then a bearded VOTIS V siliqua with a misspelled mint designation would seem likely to be imitative, or fake. The flan crack suggests it was struck, unless forgers can fake that too. I am going to assume no. So was it struck by a modern forger, or an ancient forger. How can one tell the difference? Should I send it to a third party grader? If yes, to which one?
