Recent Posts

#048

A new die combination and a rev. variant for Gordian III

Gordian III, AD 238-244
AE 28, 14.05g, 210°
obv. AVT K M ANTW - GORDIANOC
       Bust, draped and cuirassed, seen from behind, laureate, r.
rev. VP CAB MODECTOV - NIKOPOLEITWN PROC (OV and PR ligate)
       in r. field one below the other I / C / T
       in ex. RON
       Tyche in long garment and mantle, wearing kalathos, stg. frontal, looking l., holding in l.
       arm cornucopiae and in extended r. hand rudder set on globe
ref.: a) not in AMNG
       b) Varbanov 4243 (but Varbanov doesn't mention legend breaks!)
       c) not in Hristova-Hoeft-Jekov (2017):
           rev. No. 8.36.38.2 var. (without globe, and has legend break N - IKO)
           obv. e.g. No. 8.36.38.4 (same die)
ANE, Vcoins, May 2017

Best regards

David J Macdonald, Greek & Roman Coins from Aphrodisias, BAR Supp. Series 9, 1976.

It certainly looks like a good old coin with natural wear. I can't see any sign of casting. The imprints are sharp as for a struck coin and the flat surface wear is what I would expect. I have seen a few fakes and I don't think this is one - just, as you say, weird.

Does the wear look natural in hand?

I agree it doesn't look like the typical well-modeled Greek style found on most of these. This is one reason that I think it is a later mintage, You see the same change in style in  Ptolemaic and Syrian  T'drachms which are modeled on the earlier types but date from the later first century BC.

...In the sense that I suspect it is a cast fake.  The wear doesn't look convincing, though late tetradrachms can be weird.

The obverse looks totally wrong to me. 

Timka and I have just discussed that very question (no globe/globe) under Roman Coins!

Proportions, no, but the rider sure sits low in the swayback horse.  I'd have to see a few hundred Magnentius Lugdunum coins before I'd even think about where to draw a line between official and copies.  I have no rider type from this mint to compare but the later types seem to have much more refined style.

Hi Guys

Recently I got this tetradrachm of Lysimachus which has an unusual lozenge shape and weighs 14.7 grams - at least 2 grams less than typical. I can't see any signs that it has been clipped, shaved or broken and the wear doesn't really account for the weight difference. Perhaps the Romans made it to a different weight standard (Phoenician rather than Attic)?. I have seen Thracian T'drachms (Thasos type) that were made to a much lower weight standard under Roman rule.
)
The devices on this coin are for Mueller 207 and the example  shown at the botton (Thanks Wildwinds) is typical shape and weight.

If anyone knows more about it I would appreciate the info - Thanks, Dave