Fake Galla Placidia solidus?

[Hydatius]

Here's a question for those who have a better understanding of how modern fakes are created than I do. I offer up this example of a solidus of Galla Placidia (RIC 10.1333).

The first two photos show the same coin (Coin 1) from two different auctions. The third example (Coin 2) is a coin that has just appeared in an auction. My first reaction to Coin 2 is that it is a cast of Coin 1. It has none of the surface characteristics of a real coin that can be seen on Coin 1 and the legends and devices are all a bit thinner and weaker than on Coin 1. The edges are very uncharacteristic of a legitimate western solidus as well. You can compare the coins by putting all three in a photo viewer and quickly switching back and forth among them. The major problem that I observe is that much of the specific detail of the obverse and reverse devices of Coin 2 is subtly different from Coin 1. Dies of this period differ enormously from one another, so this isn't an example of similar, but different dies. Different dies are REALLY different and quite obvious.

So the question is, Is it likely that modern forgers would cast a coin and then rework ('enhance') it in this way, or am I just being paranoid and is there any way that the dies that produced Coin1 could have also produced Coin 2 in the fifth century? I have seen a number of fifth century solidi with this characteristic 'thinness'/'weakness' of the legends and devices and they all strike me as forgeries, but they have been sold as ancient.

Richard

[Joe Sermarini]

I agree that the bottom pic does look very suspicious.

[Joe Sermarini]

Any other opinions on the bottom coin?

[*Alex]

I do not like the way that the shield goes right through Victory's arm on the reverse. On the other examples I've looked at Victory's arm is quite clearly in front of the shield (as it should be). But I am only making an observation because I don't know enough about these coins to determine whether they are fake or not.

Alex.

[Hydatius]

I do not like the way that the shield goes right through Victory's arm on the reverse. On the other examples I've looked at Victory's arm is quite clearly in front of the shield (as it should be).

In the full-sized photos you can see that her hand is right at the bottom left of the chi-rho, so it does extend over the front of the shield, but certainly not as much as usual (to the middle of the chi-rho), as you say.

I include below a coin I have a lot of doubts about that is a mule: it was struck (or cast, as I suspect) from a much later obverse die/mould (2020, from the late 430s; first photo) combined with this reverse die/mould (1333, from the early 420s; second photo). If either 3 above or 2 below is fake, that would certainly cast more doubt on the other specimen. If 2 below is not a fake I cannot explain the condition of the die in relation to the other examples posted here and above. Lots of thinking out loud here.

Richard