I recently acquired yet another very dramatic overstrike. The seller had it listed as a double struck coin but the horse was very apparent on the obverse and I quickly notied a very distinctive Tanit bust on the reverse as well. Below I've attached a photo sowing the coin in the normal orientation and then showing the coin so that the undertype is in its normal orientation. Sometimes these photos require a lot of squinting and moving the photo around to really see the undertype but this one is surprisingly clear. Surprisingly, while many of these overstrikes on Horse/Tanit bronzes are common, semisses overstruck on these are very rare. Crawford & Hersh only list a single example, McCabe lists a few more in the section on Group H1(Half weight overstrikes) in his paper on Anonymous bronzes and I was able to find none in the recent sales record. It's always hard to say for sure why the Roman mints made decisions like this, but it seems most probably that coins meeting the module preferences for a Roman semis(weight & die diameter) were probably in short supply where these were minted. Just looking at recent sales, it does seem that the smaller bronzes, which would have had smaller denominations overstruck on them, were much more common. Roman Republic Æ Semis(11.47g, 27mm). Anonymous, after 211 BC, mint in Southern Italy, Sicily or Sardinia. Laureate head of Saturn right, S behind/Prow of galley right, S above, ROMA below. McCabe Anonymous group H1(half weight overstrikes); Cf. Crawford 56/3 Overstruck on Carthaginian bronze with head of Tanit left/Horse standing right, head turned left. For overstrike, cf Hersh, Numismatic Chronicle 1953, 6; Crawford, overstrikes 31. By the way, if anyone here knows enough about Carthaginian bronzes to point me to a better, more specific reference for the undertype I'd be very appreciative. I have not begun to try to attribute the undertype specifically because I really don't yet know enough about them to do that, but now that I have a few Roman bronzes overstruck on Carthaginian I'm probably going to have to start looking for some references. As usual, feel free to post anything relevant.
Amazing find! I love Carthaginian coinage, this 27mm piece is probably one of the Trishekels you see a lot of on European auction sites. Around the time of the Second Punic War. I also suspect some Sardinian mint 19-20mm shekels to be struct over into early Republican Semis as well.
@red_spork Excellent historic overstrike! There ae a lot of Carthage AEs with head Tanit left / horse standing right! But it is possible to narrow it down a little more: 2nd Punic War issue, size 27 mm, weight 11.5 gm. Looking at RRC 56/3, it has linear borders, so the beaded borders on both sides must be the undertype. It may be my imagination, but the horse head is turned back to the left. No obvious pellets or Punic letters. @ArtDeco has the size and dates right with the AE trishekels, SNG Cop 340-345, but they tend to be heavier at 16-20 gms, have linear borders, and there should be a palm tree with the trunk between the legs. I think the AE dishekel, SNG Cop 345-348, would be the most likely candidate to be the undertype for your coin. 2nd Punic War dates, horse head turned back to the left, some have beaded borders, right weight range, 11-13 gm, a little smaller diameter at 23-25 mm, but maybe the flan got a few mm larger when overstruck. Here is my example: Carthage AE dishekel , 10.88 gm, 23 mm O: head of Tanit left wearing grain wreath, single pendant earring, and bead necklace; linear circle border R: horse standing right, head turned back left; pellet below, Punic “B” right; beaded circle border cf. SNG Cop 345-348 Check acsearch with "Carth* Tanit horse 345" for other examples. For references: SNG Cop North Africa vol 42 is still considered the standard for Carthaginian AEs. Alexanderopoulos J Les Monnaies de l’Afrique Antique 400 av. J.-C.- 40 ap. J.-C. Toulouse, 2000 has more varieties, but less images. Visona P “Carthaginian Coinage in Perspective." Am J Numismatics 10:1-27, 1998 is a good overview article.
Wow, how did I not see that before? Yes, its very possible that the overstrike could have reshaped the flan even larger. I think we have a winner here!
I think this is a winner. I may even be able to see a bit of the punic letter on the reverse, but the style of Tanit looks spot on and it makes sense that an overstrike would stretch the flan a bit. Thanks! I'll look into finding copies of these.
Great coin RS! I like over-strikes. My favorite is a small coin, 2.5 grams with an odd Janus head. I picked up one recently and have not been able to ID the under-type on a coin that is 17 grams. My guess it is a Sicilian bronze (corn ear) 200 BC or before. My pics on left. Vendor's pics. Corn-ear series. AE Quadrans, 214-212 BC, Sicily. Obv. Head of Hercules right, wearing boar's skin; behind, three pellets. Rev. Bull charging right; corn-ear and three pellets above; snake below; in exergue, [ROMA]. 17.17 g. 28.00 mm R. Rare. VF, brown patina, traces of overstriking and some weakness. Cr. 42/2=72/7
Very interesting OP coin! I have this Umayyad AE fals that was overstruck on a late Roman AE3 (you can see some of the original Roman letters at the edge on the obverse): This Parthian AR tetradrachm has its own interesting story. The main type visible is of Vonones I (8-12 AD), but the coin is overstruck on a tetradrachm of Phraatakes and Musa (2 BC- 4 AD), who had murdered Vonones' father (among many others). You can clearly see the face of Phraatakes on the reverse. A large percentage of Vonones' tetradrachms are overstruck on coins of Phraatakes and Musa; they may have just been a handy source of material, but I can't help but suspect that VOnones took some personal satisfaction in overstriking coins of the king and queen who had killed his father.
I've shared this one on another forum. The photo isn't recent (CNG e-Auction 116 [15 June 2005], Lot 56), but it's way better than the recent auction photo where I just won the coin (too recent to have received it, I'm really hoping I'll find it still looks like that, but something may have happened in the past 17 years!). The overstrike is what got me. Adranon Mercenaries (Sicily, Aetna area) AE Drachm (30mm, 26.1g) overstruck on a Syracuse Drachm. I loved how it gave the appearance of a helmet on Apollo (originally Athena's helmet) and the dolphins serving as a frame for the lyre: Just to show what the undertype looked like, here's another example from the CNG archive, oriented about how the undertype is on mine: I'm really interested to know the context of the Adranon mercenaries but haven't learned that much yet. Sounds like they may have been veterans resettled in that area by... Dionysios I (?). That's something I've always suspected. It came up as a side-topic during an ANS Long-Table in October 2021, in which Richard Beleson and David Hendin spoke about Bar Kochba coins, many overstruck on Roman AR Denarii (incl. one struck over a Vespasian Judaea Capta!). From my notes: Hendin suggested the Judaeans'/rebels' decision to overstrike was because they lacked minting infrastructure. I followed up (in text): "...was there also propaganda value in the choice to use Roman coinage for over-striking? It’s tempting to think the 'fabric' itself was symbolically important. (Obliterating their Roman oppressors.)" Answers: Beleson said he thought it’s about "what was available." Hendin agreed that it was a question of "availability and infrastructure." While tempting to think it was a motive -- and yes, they "may have gotten some thrills" with the overstriking of Roman coins and recognized it as such at the time -- it was "probably not a major motivation," above and beyond the "practical decision."