A Quintillus Query

As usual I can't take a picture that looks like the coin in hand. This Quintillus looks smooth and darkly toned silver. The macro photo looks like a completely different coin. Hmm, a silver Quintillus, now that would be something.

Husband nagged me into doing a "density" test, I found these instructions

http://en.numista.com/numisdoc/measure-a-coin-s-density-27.html

My result was 7.29 absolutely nowhere near copper let alone silver. Just in case I was doing something wildly wrong, I tested a Constans coin. The result of that was 8.53 which is respectably close to the bronze rate.

I tested the coin with a strong magnet and there was no reaction.

So my question is, do I have a fake? Is there any other explanation? I know that the test is not 100 percent accurate, but the Quintillus result is way, way out.

The offending coin is below, and can I stress that it looks absolutely nothing like the photo!

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

Coin looks like the usual of him to me.


Quintillus
Æ(S) Antoninianus
O: IMP CM AVR CL QVINTILLVS AVG, radiate, draped bust right.
R: FORTVNA REDVX, Fortuna standing left with rudder and cornucopiae. Z in exergue.
Rome Mint, 270 A.D.
2.65g
18mm
Appleshaw hoard 305; RIC 19 var (cornucopiae)

 

I think DIY density tests and alloy estimations have such large degrees of error that you may as well throw a dart at a dartboard to determine the composition. Your coin looks like a typical antoninianus to me.

 

Yes.

 

Except that it doesn't look like the picture

 

The few ants of Quintillus I've handled had a fabric that suggested there was some lead in the alloy. I realize that's totally unscientific, so take it or leave it.

 

What does the coin weigh? Could it have been silvered (at the time of manufacture or by a creative person at a later date) and the silver has now toned? Regardless, I don't think color is going to give you the answer about authenticity or composition.

 

I'm wondering if the deposits around the devices are lighter than the metal and enough to skew results. A do agree that the number of things that can go wrong in such a home test makes the chance of good results a bit random.

 

I will take it thanks John, useful information.

 

There are a number of red deposits on the obverse. I have not tried to remove them.

 

TIF the coin weighs 2.55g.

 

I saw a Quintillus Aureus, back in NFA auction catalogue. Even in 1987 this coin sold for BIG $! Only hope is they find a hoard of them! or win the lottery.

 

From an old sellers photo (Heritage) where it is still slabbed, the weight is listed as indicated and it looks similar but this is a double denarius... my only example.

 

Interesting Mikey, same reverse as mine including the gamma in ex.

 

"Double denarius" is just a more expensive-sounding word for antoninianus, right? Or have I misunderstood the later empire denomination nomenclature?

 

Yup DD = Ant.

 

It figures that NGC uses "double denarius" on the label rather than the seemingly more common term "antoninianus". Double denarius sounds like the coin is inherently more valuable .

I'm new to the hobby though so perhaps "double denarius" was the more commonly used term in the past.

 

"Deuble dinarieus" fills the mouth a bit more when you're facing a potential customer !

Q

 

@Micky Zee do you have an attribution for yours?

I think I will stick with my RIC 33, I will put a few notes on the label and move on...........

 

Hi again Pish---I looked up my 'records' and I have it listed as RIC 33 per the heritage info...

Double denarius does sound a bit 'unique' although I also wonder whether that was an 'old' term for the antoninianus???