Pupienus opinion

Discussion in 'Ancient Coins' started by Ricardo123, Jan 23, 2020.

  1. Ricardo123

    Ricardo123 Member

    Hi friends. Could you tell opinion about Pupienus 21 mm and 5.83g. PATRES SENATVS
    Ric 11b. The seller is OK in the past but feel weird with this coin. Muchas gracias.
    B74A158F-A0B1-491A-94D4-D90E3C7BA0F7.jpeg
     
    Marsyas Mike likes this.
  2. Avatar

    Guest User Guest



    to hide this ad.
  3. ancient coin hunter

    ancient coin hunter Cogito Ergo Sum

    Hi.

    1) There appears to be flow lines off the lettering (a good sign of a strike)
    2) There are some pinpoint holes on the reverse (perhaps a sign of a cast, or just some porosity)

    So I'm torn on the issue of authenticity. Some other folks will be along I'm sure to help solve the mystery.
     
  4. Ryro

    Ryro You'll never be lovelier than you are now... Supporter

    I've seen a few pupi mcgupis in my short time collecting. Never seen one that style. And those craters are not a good sign...
     
    TIF likes this.
  5. Ocatarinetabellatchitchix

    Ocatarinetabellatchitchix Supporter! Supporter

    Good :No similar ones in the Fake Coins Report.
    Bad: Pits (holes) from corrosion are often irregular shapes and are often bunched together, pits from casting are mainly round. More pitting on one side than the other may be an indication of casting since the side that was up will contain more holes (but it isn't unusual for one side to have more pitting from corrosion too).
     
    TIF and furryfrog02 like this.
  6. Alegandron

    Alegandron "ΤΩΙ ΚΡΑΤΙΣΤΩΙ..." ΜΕΓΑΣ ΑΛΕΞΑΝΔΡΟΣ, June 323 BCE Supporter

    [​IMG]
    Pupienus CE 238
    AR Denarius 3g
    OBV: IMP CM CLOD PVPIENVS AVG, dr. laur. bust r.,
    REV: CONCORDIA AVGG, Concordia seated l. on the throne holding patera and double cornucopiae
    Seaby 6
    Ex CJ Martin
     
  7. Ryro

    Ryro You'll never be lovelier than you are now... Supporter

    Good golly Gandy!
    upload_2020-1-23_19-20-43.gif
     
  8. Alegandron

    Alegandron "ΤΩΙ ΚΡΑΤΙΣΤΩΙ..." ΜΕΓΑΣ ΑΛΕΞΑΝΔΡΟΣ, June 323 BCE Supporter

    Thank you. I regret it is such a “crappy” name for good looking bust on the coin.
     
  9. octavius

    octavius Well-Known Member

    I would think the flow lines trump the pitting holes, and so I would lean to thinking that it is genuine. However, I would still be hesitant buying a coin that I though only might be real.

    bTs25DcKEa98jwQ6L3om8zMZ6G7f4s.jpg
     
  10. gsimonel

    gsimonel Supporter! Supporter

    By the time to OP was minted, the silver content was very low. Being buried in acidic soil could lead to the pitting shown on the reverse. Moreover, there is a lot of pitting on the obverse, too, but it is obscured by all the black junk left on the surface. My guess is that the entire coin was covered by this stuff and most of it was stripped off chemically, leaving the rough, pitted surface behind.

    I haven't seen enough coins of Pupienus to comment on the style, but with such a short reign in such a tumultuous era, it's entirely possible that whoever engraved the portrait had no idea what Pupienus looked like and just went with a generic portrait.

    I don't think the coin is particularly striking, but if I wanted a bargain Pupienus for my collection (I hope it's a bargain) I would feel entirely comfortable getting this one.
     
    Alegandron likes this.
  11. Ricardo123

    Ricardo123 Member

    Tx to all for help !
     
  12. Finn235

    Finn235 Well-Known Member

    The apparent weakness of the strike bothers me more than anything. The mint workers at this time were among the best in the entire Imperial period (from a manufacturing standpoint, not necessarily artistry) and these are usually crisply struck in high relief - the OP coin doesn't appear to be.

    Pupienus antoninianus caritas mvtva avgg.jpg
     
  13. gsimonel

    gsimonel Supporter! Supporter

    True, but I think we are seeing preservation (and subsequent cleaning) problems rather than original manufacturing.
     
  14. Cucumbor

    Cucumbor Dombes collector Supporter

    I would be worried by the apparent pitting on the reverse of the OP coin, but more than that, genuine or not, I don't like its appearence and general look. Puipenus coins aren't that rare. I wouldn't buy that coin

    Formerly in my trays :

    [​IMG]


    Now replaced by this denarius :

    [​IMG]

    Q
     
Draft saved Draft deleted

Share This Page