Message:

<p>[QUOTE=&quot;red_spork, post: 8455423, member: 74282&quot;]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&#039;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.</p><p>Surprisingly, while many of these overstrikes on Horse/Tanit bronzes are common, semisses overstruck on these are very rare. Crawford &amp; 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.&nbsp; It&#039;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 &amp; 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.</p><p>&nbsp;[ATTACH=full]1498390[/ATTACH]</p><p><br /></p><p>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</p><p><br /></p><p>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.</p><p><br /></p><p>By the way, if anyone here knows enough about Carthaginian bronzes to point me to a better, more specific reference for the undertype I&#039;d be very appreciative. I have not begun to try to attribute the undertype specifically because&nbsp; I really don&#039;t yet know enough about them to do that, but now that I have a few Roman bronzes overstruck on Carthaginian I&#039;m probably going to have to start looking for some references. As usual, feel free to post anything relevant.[/QUOTE]</p><p><br /></p>

Your name or email address:

Do you already have an account?

• No, create an account now.
• Yes, my password is:
• Forgot your password?

Stay logged in