Mysterious example of the silver coinage of Maurice Tiberius

[glebe]

Doesn't look cast to me, and I don't see a casting seam, just a flan with a clipped edge.

My guess is that the reverse resulted from a simple makeshift die used to complete an issue when the real reverse die broke with only a few flans left to go. The monogram would possibly be that of the mint master, certifying the coin as official.

That said, the lack of wear is a bit of a worry.

Ross G.

[Byzantofil]

I would not say that the coin in perfect condition, the mint lustre was only partially preserved -- around the letters of the legend and on the edges of the hair and the diadema ties of the Maurice’s portrait. Indeed, on one side the flan was lightly chopped off, apparently, the weight of the flan was adjusted to the norm.
Since the issue is clearly donative, it cannot be very wear.

[Joe Sermarini]

I think not a mint master's monogram nor a donative issue - rather, it is a modern fantasy and the monogram is probably the maker's initials, if it has any meaning at all.

[Byzantofil]

Although nowadays the level of skill of manufacturers of fake coins is growing, the style of Maurice's portrait, as well as the peculiarities of writing the legend (I will not go into details) are not similar to imitation. Please do not delete the topic. Sooner or later another similar sample will appear and the examination will confirm its authenticity. Progress in the production of metal detectors makes the discovery inevitable, sooner or later, Joe.

[Joe Sermarini]

It will take more than the discovery of another one to authenticate it.  Fake makers often make more than one.

[glebe]

Although nowadays the level of skill of manufacturers of fake coins is growing, the style of Maurice's portrait, as well as the peculiarities of writing the legend (I will not go into details) are not similar to imitation. Please do not delete the topic. Sooner or later another similar sample will appear and the examination will confirm its authenticity. Progress in the production of metal detectors makes the discovery inevitable, sooner or later, Joe.

What you really should be looking for is a genuine regular coin with a die match to the obverse of this piece.
On my theory these should be more common than the monogram version anyway.

Ross G.

[Byzantofil]

Respected G. Ross! Of course, from the very beginning I began to search for similar portraits of Maurice Tiberius on his silver coins.
The search is complicated by the relatively small amount of material. I didn’t find a full die match yet, but I found a very similar pattern in style. This is a major ceremonial siliqua with the legend of the second type (DN mAVRC-TIbE PP AVG), noted in the article: IL MILIARENSE CERIMONIALE Con annesso un catalogo completo delle varianti ad oggi note, A. Gennari, A. Ortu, A. Trivero Rivera e M. Cecchinato, in Monete Antiche anno XVI n. 91, gennaio/febbraio 2017, pp. 32-38, Libreria Classica Editrice Diana, Cassino 2017.
https://www.academia.edu/31294501/IL_MILIARENSE_CERIMONIALE_Con_annesso_un_catalogo_completo_delle_varianti_ad_oggi_note_A._Gennari_A._Ortu_A._Trivero_Rivera_e_M._Cecchinato_in_Monete_Antiche_anno_XVI_n._91_gennaio_febbraio_2017_pp._32-38_Libreria_Classica_Editrice_Diana_Cassino_2017

It is noteworthy that miliarense of this type have a feature in the writing of the letter: E instead  . The same type of inscription of this letter is repeated on the strange silver coin we are considering.
In addition, the style of the image shows, undoubtedly, the hand of the same die-cut master. Since the silver with a monogram is not cast (I state this with all certainty), this can be attributed to the group of short run donative coins.

[Byzantofil]

Compare on an attached image for clarity:

[Byzantofil]

In general, I should note that strange instances of Byzantine silver appear from time to time, and you should not immediately attribute them to fake.
For example, not so long ago, via respected CNG Auction was sold just such a strange coin for a very decent price of 4250 USD.
https://www.numisbids.com/n.php?p=lot&sid=288&lot=1780
What is it - is not clear. Perhaps some donative coin or a jeton related probably to Carthage coinage. Too fake?

[glebe]

Respected G. Ross! Of course, from the very beginning I began to search for similar portraits of Maurice Tiberius on his silver coins.
The search is complicated by the relatively small amount of material. I didn’t find a full die match yet, but I found a very similar pattern in style. This is a major ceremonial siliqua with the legend of the second type (DN mAVRC-TIbE PP AVG), noted in the article: IL MILIARENSE CERIMONIALE Con annesso un catalogo completo delle varianti ad oggi note, A. Gennari, A. Ortu, A. Trivero Rivera e M. Cecchinato, in Monete Antiche anno XVI n. 91, gennaio/febbraio 2017, pp. 32-38, Libreria Classica Editrice Diana, Cassino 2017.
https://www.academia.edu/31294501/IL_MILIARENSE_CERIMONIALE_Con_annesso_un_catalogo_completo_delle_varianti_ad_oggi_note_A._Gennari_A._Ortu_A._Trivero_Rivera_e_M._Cecchinato_in_Monete_Antiche_anno_XVI_n._91_gennaio_febbraio_2017_pp._32-38_Libreria_Classica_Editrice_Diana_Cassino_2017

It is noteworthy that miliarense of this type have a feature in the writing of the letter: E instead  . The same type of inscription of this letter is repeated on the strange silver coin we are considering.
In addition, the style of the image shows, undoubtedly, the hand of the same die-cut master. Since the silver with a monogram is not cast (I state this with all certainty), this can be attributed to the group of short run donative coins.

Very similar indeed.

Triton XII-806 (2009)

Ross G.

[Byzantofil]

 
Respected G. Ross!
Many thanks to you for the link, I found this coin at the CNG site:
[LINK REMOVED BY ADMIN - DO NOT LINK TO COMMERCIAL SITES HERE]
But the most interesting thing is that the imposition of an obverse in a graphic editor program gave a complete match both of the dies! The difference in fine detail is caused by a weak struck with the slight blow in the case of a ceremonial miliarense. All the doubters can repeat my experiment for yourself.
The main thing is that both coins are unusually large for their time, the majority of copies of this ceremonial issues with palm branches are much smaller, which can be clearly seen in the illustration of the article that I indicated earlier.

[Joe Sermarini]

Since, as I have already said, I believe it is a cast fake, it should be a die match to a genuine obverse. This doubter, still doubts.

[Gert]

I thought I'd give my two cents on this coin, as I have some experience with Byzantine monograms. The obv. of this coin looks fine to my eye, although the rev. does have a modern feel, there's no way around it.

Still, I am curious about this:
1) you seem to have been in contact with Wolfgang Hahn on the monogram, and considering he's one of the world's foremost experts on Byzantine coinage, I am very curious what he thought of this coin.
2) you mention it came from the soil, which is a pretty good indication of authenticity. But how good is this claim? Anybody can say that, and over the years I have seen dozens of modern fakes that were 'found with a metal detector'.

Secondly, the monogram.
1) it has a weird shape below the A. The seal you show does not convince me as a parallel because the vertical stroke makes no sense. Iota is pretty much always implied in the monogram itself, and upsilon is always V, not Y in this time period. What did Hahn say about that? To me, the only explanation (if genuine of course) is that it is an abbreviation mark, which occurs as an S shape or slash forward. I have found two seals with a similar S below the A in Zacos/Veglery 1522a and b., but still this is meagre evidence.
2) The monogram can solve Pach/ for Pach(omios) but the name does make sense on a coin. It seems to be a name adopted by clergy. It can also solve Paul/ for Paul(os), but it would be weird with a duplicated V and I could find no parallels.
3) Pammach/ could fit as an acclamation for the emperor. It would be helpful if you knew any intstances where an emperor would be acclaimed 'Pammachos'. On itself, the solution would be anybody's guess.

Regards
Gert

[Joe Sermarini]

This is what a cast edge looks like...

[Byzantofil]

You know, Joe, this place worries me too. But my version was at first that it was a galvanocopy fused from two halves on some basis. However, research under a microscope at other places did not give a trace of a seam.
Most likely, the bulge in the photo - this is the deformation of the metal during minting. Once, I saw that someone laid out a photo on the same phenomena, only the coin was Roman.
There were no traces of casting, even such as vacuum casting, believe me.

[Byzantofil]

To Gert:

Dear Gert!

Wolfgang Hahn did not write me anything about his doubts about the authenticity of the coin. So I will not assure you of the opposite. He only expressed his vision of reading this monogram.

Vera Guruleva, keeper of the Byzantine coins of the Hermitage Museum, St. Petersburg, having looked at the photo of the coin, also doubted its authenticity, but because of the size of the coin. She was embarrassed by what I wrote about above — this milliarense is somewhat larger than other known specimens. In size, it is identical only to the CNG coin with which it is linked with a common (by all appearances) obverse die. The monogram reading in version from Vera Guruleva — is Pahomios (?).

Coin was found in the Caucasus, near the Besh-Tau mountain, at a depth of 40 cm, among fragments of ceramics. The person who found this coin for a long time tried to find out what exactly  he found, he was not going to sell, and there were no people willing to buy it. Everyone was afraid of an unusual type of coin.
Having personally seen the coin, I state once again — this is not a cast coin in any case, whether it is fake or not.
Here, I honestly stated to you everything that can be said at the moment about this mysterious specimen.

[vercingetorix]

I'm skeptical about this coin because of the strange shape of the edge and the fact that the reverse is virtually unknown and therefore we cannot confirm it. It is not a variety of Maurice's known ceremonial silver coinage either, being something completely unique. You claim that the coin was found in the ground in what sounds like a legit archaeological context but this is also an information we cannot verify. I was a museum curator years ago and if someone brought this coin for sale I would have passed for the reasons stated above.