Any specific reason to doubt the authenticity of this Apollonia Pontika Anchor/Gorgoneion Drachm?

X

Your Medusa looks quite similar to the one on a coin posted by another collector on Facebook. The reverses are rather similar as well. I am not sure if that similarity is a good sign or a bad sign in terms of the two coins' authenticity!



Edited to add: Also at least somewhat similar to these: http://www.forgerynetwork.com/asset.aspx?id=E8YTju~x~YGP0= and https://www.forumancientcoins.com/board/index.php?topic=76886.0

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

Apollonia Pontika drachms were sometimes struck over "Parion" gorgon/cruciform drachms. I think I see that in yours, what do you think? Here is another overstrike, and I am convinced it was done on a "Parion":


Apollonia Pontika. 15mm. 3.24 g

 

I don't suppose you have any thoughts about my coin, posted at the beginning of this thread? I know that your article that I cited focused on the Apollonia Pontika diobols with Apollo on the obverse, but I'm sure you've seen plenty of the Medusa drachms too!

 

I gave it a thumbs-up on Facebook.

I was trying to come up with a new organization of these but my plans have stalled because I misplaced my copy of Topalov.

 

Thanks. Re Topalov, I bought the Kindle edition (the English translation) for $5.95 on Amazon. It's the equivalent of more than 400 book pages, but I don't know how much is missed by omitting the portion in Bulgarian.

 

@DonnaML, thanks for the comparisons. This thread and the related earlier one on these coins has me wondering due to the prevalence of fakes.

Here's the coin you found posted on FaceBook and my coin side by side:







There are definite similarities, and some differences. The face seems to be slightly more oval on my coin. There appears to be a clear casting seam on the edge of the FaceBook coin that is not present on mine. The FaceBook coin does not appear to be convex on either side, which may be more evidence of being cast vs being struck. The anchor side of my coin is clearly convex. (I know that many of the fakes were struck as well.) The crayfish on the FaceBook coin has six legs and mine has 8- which ironically for mine is a possible concern area on the list you posted, though they are not "finely rendered." (Crayfish are decapods- so the engraver, to be accurate, should have shown four pairs of walking legs and a pair of pinchers! The three pairs of legs makes me think of insects!)

I bought my coin at auction from Savoca Coins. I found these two coins sold in Heritage Auctions that had a similar style as mine, including 8-legged crayfish. The second photo (of a coin that also has "golden-brown" toning- another possible warning flag on the list you posted) is attributed to NGC.

https://www.acsearch.info/search.html?id=2325489

https://www.acsearch.info/search.html?id=6977514

What do you think? Is mine of the same style as these? Do you think all or any of them are authentic?

@Ed Snible, would you, or any other experts, comment on my coin? Thanks!

 

I have the Kindle _Topalov_ in addition to the printed one. It isn’t a translation, it’s a summary. There are a lot of coin photos on the Bulgarian pages that don’t appear in the English pages. I can’t tell you how many, because I can’t find my copy! I was up in the attic for an hour looking for it. I would rather have the Bulgarian coin table than the English summary.

Carl, no one has accused that type of being forgeries. It would be nice to see a die study for them, linking the large number on the market will old-collection examples. Most examples have been heavily cleaned and are difficult to judge, even with a loupe.

 

Thanks for explaining. I did notice that there seems to be a paucity of actual coin photos in the English Kindle edition -- I think there are fewer in the entire "summary" (not counting photos of arrowheads, etc.) than there are in Reid Goldsborough's two articles on the subject, plus yours as well. I'm sorry you can't find your copy of the original; good luck in doing so. I imagine that it would be quite expensive to replace.

 

An interesting comparison, @Carl Wilmont. I think the question of whether there's a casting seam on the Facebook example (I assume you're talking about the reverse) may depend on whether you see the dark area on the left as a raised area above a casting seam, or a flat area beneath (and put in shadow by) the raised edge of the coin -- what you see as the casting seam. In other words, it seems to be an example of the Necker cube effect.

Did you look at the coin forgery network example at http://www.forgerynetwork.com/asset.aspx?id=E8YTju~x~YGP0= ? If so, what do you think? (I also gave a link to a post on the forumancientcoins discussion boards, but one may have to sign up as a member to be able to see the photo.)

 

"CFDL" had several periods where huge numbers of genuine coins were being condemned. The link to the actual post is gone so we can't read the rationale. The forgerynetwork summary says "David Sear in Greek coins and their values, Vol. 1, p. 165, 1655 describe only obverse type with A to right and crayfish to left."

That isn't a valid condemnation, there are many of genuine examples with A to the left, such as http://numismatics.org/collection/1944.100.15546?lang=en that Edward Newell donated to the ANS in 1944.

 

I know nothing about the Coin Forgery Network -- I'm familiar only with the fake coin reports on Forum Ancient Coins -- but if that was the basis, that's absurd! Sear has never purported to be a comprehensive catalog of all types. Both Topalov and Goldsborough cite and depict many coins with the A to the left and crayfish to the right. The left-hand placement of the A (as on my coin) was apparently more common at certain times than others. Also, never mind 1944: BMC 15 Mysia, published in 1892, lists several examples on which the A is to the left and the crayfish is to the right. See Nos. 8-10 at pp. 8-9:

 

[QUOTE="


Carl, no one has accused that type of being forgeries. It would be nice to see a die study for them, linking the large number on the market will old-collection examples. Most examples have been heavily cleaned and are difficult to judge, even with a loupe.[/QUOTE]

@Ed Snible, thank you for commenting on this coin.

@DonnaML, yes, I believe what I thought I was seeing with regard to a casting seam on the reverse of the FaceBook coin was due to an optical illusion. I can see the other visual interpretation, which is likely the correct one, of a convex reverse. Fun with the Necker cube effect- reminds me of the amusing Magic Eye books which contain autostereograms!

 

I bought a couple of those for my son back when they were popular. I probably enjoyed them more than he did!

 

@Ed Snible, if you want to spend the money, I see two copies of the 2-volume Bulgarian edition of Topalov's book available for sale online, one for 152 Bulgarian Levs, and the other for 78 Euros -- both of which convert to approximately $87.00. See https://bibliophilia.eu/apollonia-pontica-contribution-to-the-study-of-the-coin-minting-of-the-city and http://booksfrombulgaria.com/COINS/coins.htm (No. 1-26).

I also notice that Topalov's book is listed as one of the sources for the (new?) database for Moesia inferior, Thrace, Mysia, and Troas at the corpus-nummorum.eu website. A search for coins from Apollonia Pontika yields 125 results, including many anchor/Gorgoneion drachms and Apollo/anchor diobols. See https://www.corpus-nummorum.eu/coin...diameter_from=&diameter_to=&mints=15&range=90 .

 

Thank you for window shopping on my behalf. I spent an hour in my attic today looking for Topalov. Did not find it, but found Svoronos' L' Hellenisme Primitif De La Macedoine. I have wanted to look something up in that since 2017.

For new collectors starting out: buying a book because you can't find your copy is a road to madness. If you must store books, store them by subject and label all four sides and the top of the box. Don't give in to the temptation to put unrelated books together because you have room.

Unfortunately I have room for about 100 numismatic books in my home office but I own 200 books and 300 catalogs. I keep an inventory of my books at https://www.librarything.com/catalog/esnible/yourlibrary but don't yet have an inventory of the catalogs.

 

I have recently bought this Apollonia Pontica drachm because I saw several types here on CT and I think it is one of the iconic Greek coins.

Is there any doubt regarding its authenticity?

My attribution, based on wildwinds
Apollonia Pontica, Thrace. AR drachm. ca 420-300 BC. Facing gorgoneion, mouth open, and with protruding tongue. / Upright anchor, crayfish in right field. (No "A"). SNG BM 150-152; SNG Cop. 453; BMC Mysia 2-3.

 

Did you compare it to the photos of fakes (and genuine types) at the links I provided earlier in this thread? I don't have the time to do it for you right now, and they're not in my head the way they were six months ago.

 

After studying the links you posted I think my attribution is wrong.
https://web.archive.org/web/20141115000124/http:/medusacoins.reidgold.com/apollonia.html
Closest match appears to be type 2 (the key - oriental eyes) - but I am a little worried about the description in the article "but here she has slanted "Oriental"-looking eyes, a characteristic frequently seen in the New York Hoard fakes"

 

It does look like Type 2, and Goldsborough makes clear that it's an authentic type, but that (along with Type 1) it's one of the types that the New York Hoard fakes were patterned after. So it could be real, and it could be fake. I certainly can't tell the difference. My only suggestion would be to go through all the examples of fakes posted at http://www.forumancientcoins.com/fakes/, if you haven't already, and see if any of them is a match with yours.

 

Thank you for checking, I appreciate it. Also appreciate the big amount of info you provided in the opening message.
I think my coin was harshly cleaned (not by me) and on the reverse I can't say there is something in the left side of the anchor. I suspect there isn't (although in Type 2 there is a little symbol I can't distinguish)


The absence of an A was the reason initial attribution was (incorrectly) SNG BM 150-152; SNG Cop. 453; BMC Mysia 2-3 as it was the only example in Wildwinds with crayfish on the right and nothing on the left.

I also checked the fakes list and couldn't find any match - this should be a good sign.

I bought this from a reputable auction house, but I am starting to wonder why didn't the price rise a little more in the auction, as I was expecting.

This coin and the Mysia Kyzikos bull/lion type made me interested in Greek coinage, it would be a shame to have a cheap copy.