When I want to ask for coins Archaeological who is the person who can answer?

Contemporary copies were quite common along with fourees and barbaric copies.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

Barbaric copies were contemporary copies, as they were struck around the same time as the official coinage that they copied. I prefer the term "unofficial coinage" to the confusing (and generally erroneous) term barbaric coinage-- is it barbaric because of the style or because it was struck by barbarians or for barbarians etc.

 

How would anyone be able to tell anything from these photos taken from more than a meter away from of heaps of uncleaned coins? - Show us a few legible close-up photos of similarly crude pieces which you believe to be of official origin and we might have some basis for discussion.
There is no "disgrace" to having ancient copies - they are not "counterfeits" of any sort - they were a very significant part of the overall monetary picture. Ancient copies are ancient coins, Q.E.D.
We can thank our snobbish and uptight Victorian numismatic forbears for feeling that such coins were beneath their notice, sweeping under the rug the entire field of contemporary copies with pejorative and dismissive terms like "Barbarous fabric", which, unfortunately, make many modern people think that there is some sort of connection to barbarians. Not so - the ancient contemporary copies were overwhelmingly made and used in the same places and by the same people who used the official coinage.
If you look at these so-called "barbarous" pieces, how do you think folks in those days could possibly mistake them for official pieces? If anything, they were likely more aware than we of what the official article should look like. If there had been any intent to defraud, it would have failed miserably with typically undersized copies which didn't even come close to matching the style of the prototypes.