Featured A hybrid Roman Republican denarius -- could it possibly be real?

Discussion in 'Ancient Coins' started by DonnaML, Aug 6, 2020.

  1. abc123

    abc123 Active Member

    Sorry for my silence but I've been assembling a desk for my wife this weekend that is taking WAY more time than it should. Anyway, I thank you @Sulla80 for calling my attention to the GHF auction example of a properly paired CIIII coin with open torque. I've been looking at many other coins and am developing a hypothesis that may help explain this. I want to think it thru a bit more and look at all the coins again with fresh eyes before posting. Stay tuned.
     
  2. Avatar

    Guest User Guest



    to hide this ad.
  3. robinjojo

    robinjojo Well-Known Member

    Personally, I would not get too hung up on specific gravity. Ancient coins, while often remarkably accurate when it comes to weight, can be affected by other factors, such as the mixture of alloy, debasement at the mint, plating and other strategies attributed to baser motives on the part of mint staff and authorities.

    Fundamentally if the coin is expensive and you feel uncomfortable owning it, return it. It is not the last Roman Republican denarius on the face of the planet for sale, and there will be plenty of opportunities to buy other examples, matched dies and mis-matched dies. If SP will swing your decision one way or the other, by all means do it.

    David Sear is a good source for authentication and his fees are fairly modest. If he condemns the coin, you'll have solid backing to return the coin, but given the high reputation of the seller, I am sure that is not necessary.
     
    DonnaML and +VGO.DVCKS like this.
  4. DonnaML

    DonnaML Well-Known Member

    The specific gravity wasn't really what convinced me it's a fourree (although, as I said, the fact that it was so much lower each time I tested it than the other Republican denarii from the same time-period that I tested for comparison purposes was more important to me than the raw SG number itself). The low weight was also an important factor. But what convinced me was the evidence @abc123 posted, including (1) a non-hybrid example he found on acsearch with CXXIII on both sides, with a reverse die that doesn't come close to matching the hybrid; since Crawford says there was only one die per control number, that certainly militates against the genuineness of the coin I bought; and (2) most importantly, the photo he found on Gallica of the BnF copy of the hybrid that's identical to mine, with the surface broken off at a spot in Ceres's hair and copper showing through. If one hybrid RR denarius is a fourree, than its identical sister is almost certainly a fourree as well. The questions of who created these hybrids (an official mint worker?) and why he exercised his obvious skills to the end of creating and striking hybrid fourrees, are interesting. But not enough to make me want to keep it, since I've been offered a full refund. As you said, there are other Crawford 378's -- and other RR denarii if a 378 I particularly like doesn't turn up -- in the sea! If the dealer offers the coin for sale again, someone else can buy this mystery.
     
    Last edited: Aug 9, 2020
    +VGO.DVCKS and rrdenarius like this.
  5. DonnaML

    DonnaML Well-Known Member

    The new Schaefer materials are up today (see https://www.cointalk.com/threads/ri...project-now-online.363367/page-3#post-4729994), but, unfortunately, the Marius Capito issues (Crawford 378/1a, 1b, and 1c) appear still to be missing. So I can't look for any further examples of the CIIII/CXXIII hybrid, or of the coin with CXXIII on both sides.

    In any event, it won't be my problem anymore soon. I've made what feels like my final decision to return the coin, and will bring it to the post office on the first day that it doesn't feel like it's > 100 degrees out, and I think I can cope with the hour's round-trip walk that's required!
     
    Sulla80 and +VGO.DVCKS like this.
Draft saved Draft deleted

Share This Page