I love this, but I only just pulled the trigger after considering it for a long time. It's a contemporary imitation of a Nerva denarius on a good flan, but in crude style. I'm told early contemporary copies are rare, and it was quite cheap. Here's the thing, though: how can anyone know it's 'right'? Nothing is easier to forge. You just make a new die vaguely in the style of an original. I bought it from a dealer I trust, but he can't possibly be absolutely certain either. If I could *know* it was genuine I'd happily have paid a lot more. I'll enjoy it in the hope it's real, but I'll never get rid of that nagging uncertainty. I'd love to see other early contemporary imitiations. If you have them, post them.
Nice coin!Great style!good price... I had this on my watch list @vcoins. Personally I think it's real,modern forgers IMO would recreate an image much closer to the original denarius.
From the image, I say authentic. And I would love to have this coin, if for no other reason than that portrait. Ya gotta love that Roman nose on Nerva. And on your coin it is front and center.
Cool! I have no reason to doubt that it's ancient. I'm waiting for this Nerva to come in the mail. Nerva, AD 96-98 Roman AR denarius, 16 mm, 3.39 g Rome, Sept-Dec AD 97 Obv: IMP NERVA CAES AVG P M TR P II COS III P P, laureate head right Rev: IVSTITIA AVGVST: Justitia, draped, seated right on low backed chair, feet on stool, holding long straight scepter in right and branch extended in left Refs: RIC 30; Cohen 103.
I agree with everyone else...and I LOVE all the posts, especially the OP!!! I have several of Nerva but currently lack any contemporary imitations.
Please tell us the weight of the coin. Are edges okay (free of filing marks or casting seam)? There is a fair amount of detail loss in the portrait and some pearls on the surface. Do you think it's an ancient cast or struck from ancient, imitative dies? It looks more cast than die struck to my eye. But I'm at a considerable disadvantage looking at just a photo.
3.09g. I think imitiative dies; the style is a bit too crude. The legend is in fairly high relief and sharp; wear to the portrait is consistent with circulation. If loss of detail was due to casting, I'd have thought letters would be weaker than this.
I had actually changed my mind about the lettering before you posted my quote. Lettering seems okay. Weight seems a bit light, but not horribly so. I do see small pearls in various spots on the surface. I assume the coin has signs of striking in hand - flow lines etc?
