L. Censorinus Republican Denarius - Underweight Marsyas...but Why?

One of my favorite ancients is the denarius of L. Censorinus with Apollo on the obverse and the satyr Marsyas on the reverse. Marsyas challenged Apollo to a musical showdown, which he lost, the penalty being that Apollo skinned him alive. For reasons not entirely clear, Marsyas came to symbolize freedom and for centuries a statue of him stood in the Forum near the Curia - a paunchy, bald, drunk, naked guy with a wineskin slung over his shoulder - what's not to like? In 82 B.C., this statue was featured on a Roman Republican denarius of L. Censorinus, one of the few RR with its own Wikipedia page (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Denarius_of_L._Censorinus).

Recently I purchased one of these from an eBay seller in Spain. The photos looked pretty good and the weight was clearly stated in the auction: 2.99 grams. The weight is the problem, but the price was right ($20) so I bought it. When I got it in hand, I hoped for a mistake in the stated weight, but alas, it weighs just a hair under 3 grams (I keep staring at the scale trying to make the numbers go higher, but it isn't budging). So is it a fake? If so, what kind of a fake? The coin in hand feels pretty good, if you know what I mean. The metal looks good, I see no casting seam. But that weight is pretty low. My avatar, which as you can see is very worn weighs 3.33 grams. Another one, my nicest, is 3.7 grams. This one is clearly light:







There are a few scenarios that I came up with -

1. Fourrée: But I see no sign of a base metal core - and with as much wear as it has, I would think a core would show by now.
2. Modern Fake: But why fake a fairly common coin only to make the reverse so off center that Marsyas has been decapitated? And why make it light?
3. Barbaric imitation: the style is so-so - from a lot of others I've seen online, this issue varies quite a bit in quality; but I wouldn't say my example is the crudest I've seen (but see below for what I think is a barbaric copy).
4. Official mint product, but underweight: Did RR denarii of this era come in at 3 grams or less?

There are fakes out there. One recently sold out of England - said to be genuine - that appears to be a barbaric copy - and it weighs 2.44 grams. Here is the reverse:



In this example, Marsyas appears to be in the grip of the monster from Alien. Also note the retrograde N. I rather fancied this one, but it attracted several bids and went for about $50. Right now on eBay there is a very dramatic fourrée example with massive core exposure on the reverse.

Sorry to go on so long about a fairly cruddy coin. I'm insomniac tonight and just thought I'd ramble on here...any thoughts are appreciated.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

What a bargain at $20, looks alright to me just worn and that's probably why the light weight but I see a lot of Denari of this era at around 3 grams.

 

From the images I don't think it's fake. It is, however, on the light side, but one has to take into account the wear of the coin. I have one that weights in better than 3.6g

L CENSORINUS ROMAN REPUBLIC; GENS MARCIA
AR Denarius
OBVERSE: Laureate head of Apollo right
REVERSE: L CENSOR, the satyr, Marsyas, standing left with wineskin over shoulder; behind him, column surmounted by draped figure (Minerva?)
Rome 82 BC
3.66g, 17mm
Cr363/1d, Marcia 24

 

Are we all looking at the same coin? It's underweight, the surfaces are grainy, the devices are mushy and there appear to be casting bubbles on the reverse. I say fake.

 

Yeah, I was afraid of that...but do you have any idea what kind of fake - ancient? Modern?

 

I think modern. It doesn't look like a fouree. You ask why someone would bother casting a common, off-center coin in a lower grade...the answer is to part you from your $20 on eBay. Not every fake aims for a big scam. Lots of little scams can add up to a payday where it's worth bothering with such forgeries.

 

I agree it's mushy which is not a good thing, but are you sure those are casting bubbles. I wasn't certain that they are.

 

No, I'm not sure - you can't be 100% certain from a pic. But the pic is all I have to go on. If I saw the coin for sale with those pics, I wouldn't touch it with a dollar.

 

The pics look ok, but not good enough that I would buy one of these that is that under weight. RR coins are known for wide variations in weight, but most of the ones I see are much heavier in weight - 3.7 - 4.1 grams. There are few outliers in the two placed I looked today (acsearch & deamoneta). This one looks to be outside the statistical norm.
I am not well versed in on line sources of known fakes, but for $20 how much research should you do?

 

I guess that depends on how many kids you have to feed! Lol.

 

Here are a couple new photos, taken from an angle for a better view (I hope) of the surfaces:





So what is the difference between casting bubbles and the effects of a worn, pitted die? I have cast fakes in my collection - a while back I deliberately bought a batch of Spanish 19th C. 5 pesetas for some research I was doing; they are quite obviously fake. I've obtained a few others - including ancients - by accident.

The reason I posted this one is that, except for the weight - which I realize is a very important factor - it "feels" pretty good to me. Hardly scientific, but that's why I went to the forum. (For what it's worth, I bought my first (real) RR denarius 30 years ago).

As for the $20, well, I prefer genuine coins. But I got to participate in an interesting conversation with pleasant, helpful & knowledgeable collectors. Priceless, as they used to say in the credit card commercials.

 

I have my share of $20 fakes, bought specifically for the purpose seeing them in hand. Whenever I've seen bona fide die pitting, it has always looked very irregular, almost like little groups of islands on a map. Raised, roundish bubbles are casting effects, which is what I see on your coin. But my experience isn't as extensive as others - take this as one man's opinion only.

 

I think you're right - the "pitted dies" vs. "casting bubbles" situation is debated by collectors - and we all hope for a pitted die. But my example looks more "bubbly" than otherwise. Thank you for the input.