I need some help and your expertise here... I bought an AE Victoriatus (normally AR), as it was unusual, and not silver. I did a little research, and have gotten a few answers but do NOT feel they are concrete. There seems to be a few out there because there have been commentary on them. I purchased this well below what a normal AR Victoriatus would cost, so I felt it was a reasonable risk. Roman Republic AE Victoriatus Anonymous issue after 218 B.C. (15.7 mm, 2.21 g, 11 h). Rome mint. Obv: Laureate head of Jupiter right Rev: in ex ROMA, Victory standing right, crowning trophy. Ref: Sear 49; Crawford 44/1; Sydenham 83; RSC 9 (exc struck AE) Ex: RBW Collection QUESTIONS: - Is this a contemporary fake / fouree? - Is this a "debased" Victoriatus, since Romans used them with trade with Magna Graecia, and not within the Roman sphere? - Is this a mint employee making a mistake or screwing around at lunch-time? - Anything that I may be missing, or not asking? - Other thoughts and / or your constructive opinions? Thanks for your kind help!
I would think it is an ancient fake. I think it might have once been plated or intended to be plated possible core of a fouree. The patina on the bronze looks authentic at least from the photo, and since there is no special mark between the reverse figures I would assume this is the common reverse variety, would make ancient fake a likely candidate. I think with the right amount of plating this coin could have been brought up to tolerance.
Thanks! The design seem SO close to official Rome mint dies... In hand, I see NO hint of silvering, although my camera seems to pick up EVERYTHING...
Yep, a fake...an ancient one though. Those Roman forgerers did a great job copying genuine coins. Perhaps they stole old dies from the mint to do the job, as some ancient fakes are so good that the only way to distinguish them from the ancient originals are the places where the silver plating has flaked off to reveal the true nature of the coin.
Likely a fouree core but are you absolutely sure it isn't simply heavily patinated? I have seen victoriati that were of good silver(meaning not fouree) from 2.2 grams all the way up to almost 4. Neither the denarii or victoriati of this period were as tightly controlled as those of later times and occasionally it seems like you encounter ones that aren't fouree but are still debased more than the norm. If I were you I'd take a very hard blade and try to scratch a very small area of the edge to see what the inner metal below looks like. Use a microscope even, to minimize the area. Silvery? Likely official. Bronze-y? Likely fouree.
Might want to do @red_spork suggestion on the rim of the coin. It would be a shame to leave a mark on the obverse or reverse of that coin
Fouree core is my guess, but remember that these were significantly less fine than denarii. They tend to be "bronzy" in hand, so it wouldn't surprise me that you might find one that has patinated like bronze, ie., accruing mineral deposits by oxidation.
A fourree of that period should have thick enough silver that there would be more detail loss if this were a silverless core. I tend toward the idea of a low silver alloy coin hoarded with bronzes. Proving the metal to the ore still would not prove the origin of the coin. Did RBW collection items not come with any explanations or did he just buy everything and not address questions like the oe raised here?
Another thought, this was the latter time of minting RR AE Litrae, Half-Litrae, and Quartuncia... Perhaps hammering one of those flans using Victoratus dies? Just thinking...
I know I saw a fouree core of a quadrigatus where it was noted on his tag that the he had discussed with the former director of the British Museum and he had told him that it was a fouree core. RBW usually noted anything odd about coins on his tags(as well as in the margins in his auction catalogs), though it's possible that he simply considered this one a fouree and only put down AE. Here's one of the more interesting ones of his I have. It actually took him a bit to figure out the ID apparently and the seller I purchased it from put the wrong one down even(The correct one is the "Sow 121/6" at the bottom):
oh neat coin, whatever the heck is going on. that was my thought, surely RBW made a note of this coin somewhere.
This is the Envelope that came with it. (Besides the attribute from the seller.) I assume it is RBW's: And, the flan looks very similar in size to my RR Litrae and Quartuncii... And, it has almost exactly the same patination as one of my RR Litrae (for whatever that is worth...)
Here's another from the same lot, also said to be a fouree core: http://www.worthpoint.com/worthopedia/republic-fouree-quadrigatus-janiform-425871973 Anyone got a copy of Elsen 64? Would be interesting to see the lot description.
