I once bought a coin that I knew was overpriced just because it was a die link to a coin I already owned (for a rare die, not a common one! ) Here is an earlier thread questioning whether die links indicate a forgery: https://www.cointalk.com/threads/evalutaing-die-duplicates.284035/ But I am talking about links for coins that the owner is certain are genuine (at least beyond reasonable doubt). Doug Smith has a very informative site where he show images of six die linked coins of Septimius Severus from the mint of Emesa. He write that, in order to find those six, he had to sift through tens of thousands of coins (mostly in the form of images in auction catalogues and dealer sites, presumably). The die links he found were for six coins with matching obverse dies. Each of the six carried a different reverse type. For my collection I have managed to find five obverse die links for coins of Elagabalus, all from different reverse dies but three with the same reverse type. The coins with the same reverse type are all from different reverse dies. One of the coins is a die duplicate of a coin in the British Museum. They are all obverse die links to a coin in Vienna. So the total number of linked coins for this particular obverse die is seven. I'm sorry I don't have my own images of all of these at the moment, so I will refrain from posting images for now. However, if you have images you would like to share and there seems to be some interest in this thread, then I will take some photos and post them.
My coin above shares the same reverse die as one sold at a Savoca auction below. Antiochus Hierax Mint: Alexandria Troas AR Tetradrachm 242 to 227 BC Obvs: Diademed head of Antiochus Hierax with prominant cheekbone. Revs: ΒΑΣΙΛΕΩΣ on r., ANTIOXOY on l., partially nude, with slight drapery on thigh, Apollo seated l. on omphalos, testing arrow and resting l. hand on grounded bow that has pellets that symbolize the handle. Horse symbol in exergue and two control monograms in left field. 29x30mm, 16.35g
Eraviscan coins have many die links, almost all Eraviscan coins can be die linked to each other.. some die links... coin 1 has the same obverse die as coin 2 2 has the same obverse die as 3 3 has the same reverse die as 2 4 has the same obverse die as 3 5 has the same obverse die as 4 6-7 is the same obverse die as 5 (now with a die break) 8-11 all have the same reverse die as 7 and 12 has the same obverse die as coin 11 Also.. for Byzantine coins.. There was a hoard of 264 Byzantine Solidi all from the same obverse + reverse dies found in 2008.. https://www.academia.edu/2904817/A_single_die_solidi_hoard_of_Heraclius_from_Jerusalem
Wow, fascinating hoard! I wasn't aware of this, probably because I don't collect Byzantine. Are the Eraviscan coins yours? I'm wondering if you were seeking out these coins because you were able to link them, and that is something you were intrested in studying, or if they are so rare that there were so few dies and the links are inevitable. Maybe some of both?
There's a useful discussion of Eraviscan coins that touches on the question of dies and die links: https://www.cointalk.com/threads/new-eraviscan-coin.297951/#post-2767084
It is much easier to find die matches among rare coins than common ones. There are coin types that were made only from a single pair of dies so ever example will be a die duplicate (both side match). Die links (coins with one matching and one different die) are much more valuable since they can establish a relationship between the two dies and all the other coins that link to either side. Chances of finding duplicates or links of late Roman coins that were made by the millions week after week are slim unless you have access to thousands of specimens. There are many things to consider so you can not prove anything without really careful study. For example, if a hoard is found consisting of a thousand coins straight from the mint lost on their way to be a military paychest, it is possible that all thousand could have been made the same day from the same dies. This would be hard to duplicate with coins that had been spent a couple times and mixed with other coins. I believe that serious collectors should try to learn the differences between die characteristics and differences that occur due to striking, wear, corrosion etc. On the page benhur676 so kindly mentioned, I posted 'quiz' image asking student/readers to name the die links and die duplicates in the image. The answers are below the image so you can cheat or not as you see fit. Click to enlarge. Answers below after a little space: Answers: Obverses: A=G; B=H; D=E=F; J=K Reverses: A=G; C=F; D=E; B=H Therefore coins A&G, B&H and D&E are die duplicates (both sides match). Dies of coins I&L are not linked to others shown.
I think that the most reverse dies I own tied to a single obverse die is 5. I know of at least two more reverse dies tied with this obverse owned by others.
I was wrong. I can do better. I own 9 reverse dies combined with a single obverse die (I have double die matches making an additional 2 coins). There is one other reverse die known to exist with this obverse and my search for that reverse die continues.
I'm slightly cheating here because someone else did the hard work of finding most of these die links but my imitative semis(black background) from Spain is part of a die-linked series of at least 8 obverse dies and 10 reverse dies as described in "The Unofficial Roman Republican Semisses Struck in Spain" by Pere P. Ripollès and the late Richard Witschonke. My coin's particular die pairing(represented by the added red line) was not listed in the paper but both dies were listed and its obverse die was only known with a single reverse die, so my coin allows both dies to now be linked to this larger series of die links. My gut feeling is that there are probably more links out there waiting to be found as there are many un-linked dies in very similar style to the linked dies, but only time will tell. Full res image of my coin:
I can link the reverses from the 9 above to other obverse in my collection too.... BONI EVENTVC - to this rare AVG . CO obverse die The IVST VG can be linked with the earlier A.D. 193 obverse die This obverse can then be linked to... These reverses can then be onward linked to other obverse dies e.g. CERER FRVG II COS (which is a rare reverse die) with this AVG II C (a rare obverse die) I could carry on and on with this chain.... I have other reverse with this obverse and other reverses from above linked to other obverses
Perhaps we can note that it is possible to collect 'just one' coin of a series or type but when you open the 'bag of chips' we call numismatics, you really must eat the whole thing down to the last tiny crumb. After we assemble all those links, the urge hits to see if you can figure out which ones were made first using die wear or progressive cracks. After we find an order of two coins, we have to look for clues whether all the uses of a die were at one time or do we see any suggestion that it was brought out of retirement at a later date following a period of inactivity. It is fine to collect individual coins that interest us but never get to the point you think you have all the answers. We don't even have a complete list of the questions. A good start is try to figure out where your coin falls in relation to the others made at the same time or shortly before and after. In this thread, Martin has shown some very rare (scary rare) coins. We are glad to see what we know to exist but we can not stop wondering what will turn up next.
You're not cheating as long as you acknowledge the source. It's research! And you're expanding our knowledge of the series by illustrating a previously-unknown die link. What I find very helpful in understanding the relationships between dies is to see them in the form of a graph showing their relationship. It's like a genealogy chart. Put all your relatives in a list format and yeah, you get that they're related. But the relationships are so much more comprehensible when placed into a family tree with graphical connections. It's like the difference between a list describing the physical features of a place and studying a map. The map helps bring the place to life by orienting the landscape. Here's a question I have about references like this: are the numbers for the different obverse and reverse dies (for example: O1, R5, etc.) randomly assigned by the author of the reference? In other words, does a particular reverse die being labeled as R1 or R2 depend on the order the author decided to place them in? Or is there a more systematic way to determine this?
Here is Die Link Report of "Divi Series" by Joachuim Blay Detrell. "Navigate along the largest die-link chain never [typo?] built. Coins involved = 2166. The largest chain links: 2020 coins." This site hyperlinks all die-linked coins.
Generally the numbers will be more-or-less randomly assigned based on the order the dies were identified when the study began but will be renumbered before publication so that if you arrange them into a diagram like the one over on the right you have as few overlapping lines as possible. In theory, if you have most or all of the dies represented in your study and enough coins to find most or all of the die links, arranging them and sorting them in that way can allow some insight into mint practices or alternatively if it isn't possible to create any such arrangement because there are so many die-links, that too can lead to interesting insights. In the study above in particular, the coins and dies were sorted into 7 basic groups so the first few dies were group A, the second series of dies group B and on and on and on, but within each group the dies are arranged alongside other linked dies in such a way as to minimize overlapping lines.
Excellent information. Thanks for the insight. So one of the most important considerations in numbering dies is clarity of visual representation, which makes sense to me. I see that your coin crosses several lines in the diagram, since the authors of the study hadn't considered yours! But it does draw attention to your coin over all the rest, since it breaks the pattern.
There are too many considerations to give answers to many questions that will hold for all issues. Some mints may have used one die pair until there was a failure and then replaced the failed die but never used more than one set at a time. Other mints may have had several teams working side by side but may not have used the same pairings of dies on Tuesday that they used on Monday. That system would make it harder to assign an order. I have one obverse die used with six different reverses and have seen coins that linked to at least a dozen different mates. We need to be careful when studying such a system to understand that there may be more than one way to explain that evidence. Recently Curtis Clay demonstrated at least to my satisfaction that some striking teams shared one obverse die with two reverses at the same time. This explains some reverse doublestrikes where the two were from different dies but the obverse showed no doubling. This also makes sense since reverse dies probably would heat up more from striking and benefit from the 'rest'. We don't 'know' everything we would like but testing such theories against the evidence is a beneficial tool to understanding our subject. It is a big mistake to assume that something proven for one mint at one time would be the same at another mint on another day. The old saying about wishing to be 'the fly on the wall' so we could observe what was going on applies here. There are no records, no diaries of mint workers and no certain proofs of so many things in ancient numismatics. We do the best we can.
