Is this a Tetradrachm - Nero (Antioch Mint) ?

Hello everyone.

I picked this up a few weeks ago at an estate cleanout / consignment store that I visit weekly. It was listed as $5 but I asked the owner if he could cut me a deal since I was buying other numismatic things, so I saved $1 on it....

Anyway, I did a search for this coin on Numista, and this is as close as I could find to what my coin looks like:

Tetradrachm - Nero (Antioch Mint)... Link on Numista

Please double-check my research skills. I think the little typed note that came in the plastic bag behind the coin is throwing me off since it states different years (54-68 AD vs. Numista's 82-83 AD). But after looking through Numista's search for "tetradrachm" this is as close to matching the photos as I could get.

Thank you so much!

Obverse:


Reverse:


Note:

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

My first impression is that it is a modern copy of a Nero tetradrachm. It appears to have a casting seam on the edge and looks much more coppery than a silver coin of this type should.

 

Looks like a modern cast copy of a Nero (54-68 AD) Antioch tetradrachm. Note the overall cast appearance, tiny raised areas (such as in Nero's eye) that indicate damage to the mold, and also the fact that the original coin was silver, not bronze. Still, at $4, not such a bad deal.

 

Looks fake to me too because of the seam.

 

Agreed with others, looks fake.

 

Fake.

 

Agree. Sorry

 

In addition to the coin being a fake, the information insert is off. This can be seen where it states, "Incidentally, there are many historians who believe Nero had Rome burned so he could blame it on the Christians." It's not so much that Nero had Rome burned so he could blame it on the Christians but rather that they may have been blamed in its aftermath as a scapegoating measure.

Some speculate that he caused the fire to make room to build his Domus Aurea villa. There are a lot of speculative causes regarding the cause of the fire but one arguing that it was done with the purpose to assign blame on one particular group is one of the least credible explanations I've heard of for it.

 

For comparison: This is my Nero Tet that I purchased from a respected member here:


Antioch, Syria
Nero Regnal year 8, Caesarian year 110, (AD 61/62)
AR Tetradrachm 25 mm x 14.05 grams
Obverse: NERWNOS KAISAROS SEBASTOU, Laureate bust right, wearing aegis.
Reverse: Eagle standing left on thunderbolt, palm branch before, H/IP behind.
Ref: RPC4182
Ex: @Ancientnoob

 

I fell for this fake, but luckily got a refund:

 

Well, dang. That's a bummer.

Thanks for the input everyone, and for the photographic back-up.

Do you think it's worth going back to that store and informing them that they sold me a fake? They're relatively new to estate cleanouts and they check e-Bay to get an idea on numismatic prices for the stuff they sell in their store....

 

For $5? Nah, keep it. If you get a refund, they may sell to someone else who will think they got the deal of the century.

 

It was only $4. But I didn't mean to return it for a refund. I had thought about doing it, but didn't want to put a fake back in the case for someone else to buy.

I'll mention it to them the next time I go there. I'm usually there every Saturday just to check if they got new numismatics in.

 

I have an almost identical one, yours is in a little better condition. Just curious if you weighed it? Would you weigh it and let us know the weight!? Thanks!

 

He hasn't been on the board since 2018.

 

I know, but neither was I and I'm back! lol