Most Overpriced Ancient Coin

I think @dougsmit hit the nail on the head, not only for ancients, but for modern coins as well. How many non-collectors carry a walking liberty half, just because it is an interesting coin. I first honestly meant to carry an Alexanderan Tet around with me as a pocket piece.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

I totally agree! My theory as to why the Jannaeus coin was selected as the favorite candidate for Widow's Mite is because of the symbolism on the coin. The star shape (wheel) and the anchor are both Christian symbols. I think the better candidates are the coins from the time of Valerius Gratus.

 

The Ptolemy IV coins from Paphos, Cyprus that are reattributed as Cleopatra VII, must be among the most overpriced.


The obverse portrait is now often given as "Cleopatra as Isis"...

Unless I see KΛEOΠATPAΣ on the coin, I won't believe it's really Cleopatra ... although Forvm continues to advertise these as coins of the famous Cleopatra - based on a widely discredited book.

Always be suspicious when an attribution is "X as Y". There was a recent thread on "Caesonia as Salus" coins from Spain. The same deal.

 

Great to read your post, @Trebellianus and I agree with you. The Christian connotation linked to many ancient coins is a stretch. The Domitian coins featuring the trophy of arms on the reverse are often marketed as Judaea Capta coins. I think @David Atherton 's theory that the Domitian coins are more likely commemoratives of victories in Britain is a solid one. An interesting marketing campaign is how Indo-Scythian drachma are often sold as coins of the Wise Men.

Anyway, after all—these attempts to link Biblical history with certain types of coins is what opened the fabulous door of ancient coin collecting for me so I can't knock it too much.

 

This "reattribution" is highly suspect by many serious researchers TBH. It is only from one, not so well respected, book. I collect coins of hers, (portrait coins especially), and have quite a few of these Cypriot issues, but I never really count them seriously as one of my Cleo VII portrait coins. Maybe yes, maybe no. In hand, they really do have identical flans as the non-portrait coins of Cleo VII from the same mint, but that could just be they didn't change flan production for 200 years. I just don't know.

I will say I lost some respect for some sellers who now sell these as Cleo VII without mentioning the controversy in the attribution. Shame on you Frank.