During my search on Emperor Philip, I found a silver antoninianus which has Liberalitas on reverse. It was struck in Rome and is currently listed as RIC 38 b. The following coin of mine is absolutely the same but it's made of bronze. I couldn't find a match. It weighs 2.68 g. Thanks for your comments. View attachment 744690
My 2 cents: Contemporary fake , once silvered , at least 1 gram underweight. interesting nice coin,especially if you own the original silver one.
I am very interested in this Bronze Philip antoninianus situation - I recently purchased one very similar and it puzzles me because it looks pretty legit, except for the metal. Whether or not this was counterfeit, "quasi-official" or a "limes" type, I have no idea. But I do not think they are particularly common, at least I haven't found many non-silver examples from Philip online. The weight is reasonable for a silver one (3.21 grams) and the style too looks decent. But it is clearly made of bronze (or copper) - you can see flecks of coppery color where the toning is worn away on the bust. There is no trace of silvering either: Philip I the Arab (245 A.D.) Antoninianus (Æ?) Rome Mint (4th Iss./2nd Off.) IMP M IVL PHILIPPVS AVG, radiate bust right /ADVENTVS AVGG, Philip on horseback left raising hand. RIC 26b, RSC 3. (Celebrates Philip's return to Rome from the East & Imperial accession). (3.21 grams / 22 mm)
i wonder if they could be lymes coins of Philip?..idk meself, i just purchased last nite a silver ant. annone avgg reverse weighing in a 3.6 gms. i'll post it when i gets it
There never were any silver antoninianii of Philip I. They were all billon--that is, a mix of silver and bronze. Both the ratio and the quality of the mix fluctuated over time and from mint to mint. Most of Philip's antoninainii, however, appear to be solid silver/billon, (as opposed to, say, the antoninianii of Probus or Aurelain, many of which look like bronze coins with just a thin silver wash). But the point is that because these are uneven and inconsistent mixtures, the appearance of Philip's antoninianii 1,600 years later can vary a lot. The fact that it looks like bronze or is underweight is not enough to condemn the coin outright. By the time you consider the possibility of the silver oxidizing, the buildup of deposits, and the leaching out of different metals due to the environment, be glad that you can recognize it as an antoninianus! Which is not to say that your coins are official. I can't say one way or the other. But I would caution you against jumping to any particular conclusion based solely on the appearance of the metal.
By "silver" in this context I mean silver-looking - like Alegandron's attractive antelope above. The definition of "billon" always kind of confused me - anything 40% or less? That makes everything from c. Septimius Severus onward "billon" which seems kind of broad to me (is 2% silver still billon?). Wikipedia was vague on this matter. In the case of Philip the Arab's antoninianii, I was interested in the differences in appearance and weight - and I have no theories as to why there were such variations (for weight, Doug's muffin batter analogy seems plausible to me). Some of the scholarly sources try to hard to nail down debasement figures that I think they miss the obvious point: that variation within the same coin type are so huge that it is really hard to nail down just when these debasements happened (and where, too). Anyway, here are my three Philip ADVENTVS antoninianii. The weights, from left to right are: 3.21 grams; 4.51 grams; 3.70 grams. The one on the left is the one I posted above, but in brighter light - it is very dark and looks like something all-bronze put out by Aurelian. The other two look a lot more "silvery". The middle one has a thicker flan (thus the significant weight difference). Styles all look "official" to me. Wear is roughly the same. 3.21 grams 4.51 grams 3.70 grams
Here is an nearly uncirculated Antoninius of Philip I looks like pure silver, but the silver contence is approx 40% and it dropped to 30% around 250 AD, further dropping to 20% around 260 AD. In 270 AD its 5% which I consider billon, Technically speaking all silver coins under 50% contence is billon. The romans used a technic to get the silver at the outside of the coin and leave the inside / core of copper.
+1 There is so much that can happen when you bury something in various ground for long periods of time. It is so much worse when you add the factor that a 20% silver coin may have a lot of things in that 80% that can react differently and leave different results. Not all are copper/silver. Adding lead, tin zinc and thing yet to be understood gained by recycling old scrap will require study. I would be interested in seeing what the coin measures now as opposed to what it was when made. The silver once there may have departed long ago. How do we prove that?
Neat coin! You'll be interested in @Valentinian's discussion of imitations (and possible imitations) from the first half of the third century, and here's his page specifically on Philip & family. And here's an existence proof of foil-type fourrées as late as Gallienus (joint reign):
