Classical Numismatics Discussion
  Welcome Guest. Please login or register. All items are guaranteed authentic for eternity! Please call us if you have questions 252-646-1958. Thanks for your business! Welcome Guest. Please login or register. Internet challenged? We are happy to take your order over the phone. Please call if you have questions 252-646-1958. Thanks for your business!


FORVM`s Classical Numismatics Discussion Board  |  Numismatic and History Discussions  |  Byzantine Coins (Moderators: vercingetorix, wileyc, Paleologos)  |  Topic: Another new Constantine XI 0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic. « previous next »
Pages: [1] Go Down Print
Author Topic: Another new Constantine XI  (Read 125 times)
glebe
Procurator Caesaris
Caesar
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 897


WWW
« on: April 21, 2017, 01:29:39 am »

Another previously unknown 1/8 stavraton of Constantine XI is now on offer in the market (top coin below).
The design is basically that of Bendall's siglum 6, as found on coins 135-151 in the Constantinople hoard  (the commonest individual type in the hoard).
However the dies are not the same as the hoard examples (bottom three coins below), so if this coin is genuine it is from previously unrecorded dies.

Ross G.
Logged

Obryzum
Caesar
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 657



« Reply #1 on: April 25, 2017, 06:37:34 am »

I am suspicious of the coin for the following reasons:

1.  The coin is unusually well-centered and evenly struck.  Few of the known specimens published in RN have both Christ's head (with the full nimbus) and the Emperor's full head both on flan and well centered.  By itself this is not dispositive, but it is a red flag.

2.  The coin shows even wear.  Most of the 1/8 stavraton Con XI specimens published in RN have a few high punch marks that show virtually no wear.   This one does not.  By itself this is not dispositive, but it is a red flag.

3.  The fingers on Christ's right hand are disproportionately large.

4.  Fields seem more flat than most specimens published in RN.   By itself this is not dispositive, but it is a red flag.

5.  K and C in fields are too obvious and distinct compared to most specimens published in RN.  If this is an "old cabinet" specimen,  how was it possible that nobody missed the K for so long?  By itself this is not dispositive, but it is a red flag.

6.  Edges are more uneven than most specimens published in RN.  There are occasional notches in the RN specimens, but most coins are generally smooth around the edges.  This coin is uneven in multiple spots.   By itself this is not dispositive, but it is a red flag.

7.  More surviving and evenly defined border dots than any other surviving specimen. By itself this is not dispositive, but it is a red flag.

8.  Other errors in iconography that should be familiar after a careful study of the known specimens
Logged
glebe
Procurator Caesaris
Caesar
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 897


WWW
« Reply #2 on: April 25, 2017, 04:19:27 pm »

Yes, I have little doubt that this is a modern copy, for a number of reasons.

The flat fields and the seemingly even wear suggest that it was pressed, like the similar "new' coin from not very long ago.

As Obryzum notes the border dots in particular are totally untypical.

The design obviously copies the Siglum 6 examples, although the die-cutter has made a mess of Christ's right arm, as Obryzum also notes, but the feature that really strikes me is the way Christ's beard is skewed to the right, which clearly imitates the same characteristic on the originals.  

Ross G.
Logged

Pages: [1] Go Up Print 
FORVM`s Classical Numismatics Discussion Board  |  Numismatic and History Discussions  |  Byzantine Coins (Moderators: vercingetorix, wileyc, Paleologos)  |  Topic: Another new Constantine XI « previous next »
Jump to:  

Recent Price Reductions in Forum's Shop


Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!
Page created in 2.533 seconds with 27 queries.