Play my game

I had some free time this afternoon so I played. Tomorrow is a coin show so I hope not to have any free time then!

The image below shows six images from four different subjects (two obverses have matching reverses, two don't). The game is to tell me which of the images does not belong with the others. Three coins have one specific thing in common but one of the four is odd man out. Which is the oddball? Feel free to identify any you can and even place the reverses with the obverses. Obviously you need to state what it is that the three share than the fourth does not. Do you consider this obvious? Impossible? Those who don't like games probably have left before they read this far. Click on the image to enlarge it. These are uncropped as shot close ups all taken today with the same ringlight setup.


Left to Rt: 1 ====== 2 ====== 3 ====== 4 ======= 5 ======== 6

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

4

 

2

 

I will ignore answers with no explanations (what is the difference?). I am leaving for supper with the family so take your time.

 

Looks like fun. I'll give it a go but it will take some time

 

I have no clue, but look forward to finding out.

 

Ok will take a little time for me to dig deeper. I need to look at some full coins.

However, off the bat just from looking I would guess coin 1, only subject that doesn't appear to have a beard. Hard to tell on the last one if that is a beard or a chip, but 1 appears to be smooth shaven.

Hey sometimes it is the obvious.

 

7

 

I'm about to eat dinner but I noticed that three portraits have a high flattened cheekbone while #2 has a rounded less pronounced one???

One is wearing a false beard???

 

Given that I haven't looked at Severan Imperials from a specialist standpoint, but knowing that Doug is enamored of Eastern mints, my starting assumption is that this puzzle revolves around distinguishing Rome mint emissions from Eastern mint emissions.

If that is correct and given the four coins, one is probably from Rome, one from Emesa, one from Laodicea-ad-Mare, and one from Alexandria.

I'm not sure why two reverses were included but suspect that either there is some artistic clue between Rome vs Eastern, or that the reverse deity/person/personification in one or both is specific its respective mint.

1 (reverse) is a female (I don't know who but not Roma, not Alexandria)
6 (reverse) is a male (Genius sacrificing??)
Reverse 1 looks like it goes with obverse 4, based on fabric
Reverse 6's obverse match, if it has one in the composite,not sure; maybe obverse 2

If these general assumptions are correct so far, then the puzzle is to determine the odd man out, which would be the coin struck in Rome.

I know that several of you can identify the mint by portrait style but I cannot do so yet. Obverse 2's portrait style looks more familiar to me, so that is my guess for the Rome mint.

So, my guess is that obverse 2 (with reverse 6?) is a Rome issue and is the odd man out.

Every assumption I made is probably wrong... except for the obvious fact that Doug is an Eastern Severan Nut.

 

Looking at the obverses again, now I think #3 looks more Rome-y, or at least like an earlier portrait where he looks more like Clodius Albinus.

At this rate, I will have changed my answer to each coin within the next hour

 

If I have to answer anyway, well number 2 has a totally different mouth.

 

Image 5 paired with image 6. Apollo on the reverse.
Image 1 paired with image 4. Aequitas on the reverse.
I think Image 2 is linked to the other two for reasons I will keep to myself for now but I believe that there is a cuirass involved.
Image 3 is the odd one out in this crowd.

Now I wait to be proven completely wrong.

 

Well, I should have said 5 not 4 but I don't have the foggiest idea

 

It is much more basic than anything said so far. None of the coins here are from the mints usually called Eastern Severan. Unless you have confused me greatly, no detail mentioned so far is correct except for Martin's post which I believe shows he knows the complete answer There most certainly is a cuirass involved. Everything he said is correct and I appreciate his tipping it off to me with the cuirass comment rather than blowing it out of the water. The rest of you will be embarrassed, I hope.

Now that you have that part, someone tell me why image #3 (the second head) is substantially and significantly different from the others. As a hint, I will show my regular 2 sided photo of the coin in image #3.

 

The style is quite different, particularly the eyes and nose, and maybe the perspective of the bust is slightly different. But I dont think that is the answer.

 

I believe that I have the entire answer and chose my words quite carefully to avoid "blowing it out of the water" as I can see what Doug is doing here and where the educational element fits in. I must admit that I saw it immediately but I think that says more about me and the way I process data than it does anything else.

 

Oh well, I gave it my best shot from a "what do I know about Doug" standpoint since I only know the basics of Imperial coins.

Do you mean that the portion of the portrait, as shown, is in some way substantially different from the rest? I'm not seeing any differences which appear significant, only the minor artistic variations which come from different engravers. In the odd man out portrait he appears to be gazing slightly downward and the others have his pupils pointed straight ahead, but I doubt that has any meaning.

If the reason third coin is the odd man out has something to do with what isn't shown in these pictures, the odds of my ever finding the answer approach zero .

The third coin has a fantastic portrait though. Great hair

 

I'm no specialist in the area, but #2 and #3 look like Rome mint portraits to me, the other two don't. I have no idea how #3 is the odd one out, and the whole cuirassed thing is throwing me off. I wasn't aware Rome issued any cuirassed Septimius busts.

 

This post has been an eye opener for me. I expected many people to catch it like Martin did. It proved several things. First, it showed that it is dangerous o look too closely and rely too much on magnifiers and microscopes. If I had asked the same question showing the entire coins would it have been better? I attach the full images of the other three coins below but will leave them as thumbs so you can decide if you want to click on them or not. Below them is the answer. Read if and when you wish.

The coin in image #3 is Rome mint of Septimius Severus and is the highest grade portrait coin of his that I have. I regret the reverse centering but I definitely would not have afforded it were the reverse as nice as the obverse.

The other three coins were cut by the same artist working in a mint located in what we now call Bulgaria. His name is Slavey Petrov, a faker of fame in the 1990's. His coins were struck from hand cut dies in a style that is just plain wrong for the coins he copies. His coins were struck in silver salvaged, I am told, from old European coins. They are all in the same style as each other so his copy of the Pescennius Niger (#5 and #6) from the East is too similar to his Rome mint Pertinax (#4 and #1). The answer here is #3 was the only genuine coin shown; the rest are modern fakes. They are not high tech deceptive fakes but they are the sort of thing appropriate for sale in gift shops. Slavey claimed he did not work to cheat people but to make things for collectors who could not afford the real ones. He copied only rare coins. The Septimius here is rarest of the bunch with lion skin bust (Martin called it cuirass which is stretching the point). Harvard has an aureus with the lion.
http://www.harvardartmuseums.org/art/195903

The Pescennius is most frequently seen offered as real and i the worst of his products. The style is wrong (too good), the metal is wrong (too pure) and the fabric is wrong (too thin). I paid $4 each for these back in the early 1990's. There are currently openly identified examples for $12-$20 meaning the rate of return on my investment in these mint state beauties is greater than any of my real coins from that period. Coin #3 cost me $150 in 1994 so a 4-5x increase would make it have to be worth $600-$750 to have kept up. Is it? Was it then? These are the questions that make the hobby as we know it.