Quintillus - unpublished or tooled?

[Rupert]

I just came across this Quintillus antoninian (but didn't buy it). The type VICTORIAE GOTHIC seems to exist for Quintillus, though it is much rarer for him than for Claudius Gothicus. But the obverse puzzles me. Both the beginning (IMP C QUIN...) and the end (PP AUG) are completely unknown to RIC (IMP QUINTILLUS PF AUG would be expected), and the lettering also looks clumsy and may be remade IMHO, while I would not doubt the style of the rest of the coin (or was the emperor's eye re-engraved too?). I'm looking forward to hear your opinions.

Rupert

[mauseus]

Hi,

Certainly tooled from a Claudius II "SPQR" coin. The obverse lettering is a give away plus the SPQR mark ceased to be used fairly early in the reign of Claudius.

Regards,

Mauseus

[Gladius]

I belive the coin is a RIC 87 like this: [LINK REMOVED BY ADMIN] - the SPQR mark is smoothed away on the CNG coin and it is thus erroneously described.  The P P in the obverse legend is an engravers error for P F, the C in IMP C QVIN...is probably an error too.  But it is most definately a genuine Qvintillvs, not an altered coin of his brother.  Can't say much about whether it is unpublished or not, certainly quite rare.  Best regards, Finn Johannessen

[Rupert]

RIC Quintillus 87 does describe the coin with SPQR, like on Claudius' coins, that's correct. So this is not a sign for an altered coin. But the obverse lettering style certainly is. The question for me is just: Has a coin of Quintillus with good portrait but bad inscription just been incorrectly "enhanced", or did they make a Quintillus out of a Claudius?

Rupert

[mauseus]

Hi,

Finn knows his stuff with this area and I'll quite happily bow to his knowledge. I'm just surprised at the resurrection of "SPQR", plus the anomalies of the obverse legend.

Regards,

Mauseus

[Robert_Brenchley]

Quintillus' bobble hair isn't as clear as it sometimes is, but it is there, so I doubt whether this is Claudius!

[Gladius]

I have now received the information that the coin is unpublished with this obverse legend.  Best regards, Finn Johannessen

[Rupert]

Yes, sure, but - sorry, I'm still the advocatus diaboli around here. I still don't believe the obv. legend is original. The shape of the letters doesn't convince me at all.

Rupert

[Gladius]

I rest my case.  Best regards, Finn Johannessen

[Rupert]

No problem, let's just agree that we disagree on this coin. Maybe a second specimen will turn up, and you can prove me wrong. So far, however, I don't regret that I let this unpublished coin go. And who knows me also knows that this is a most unusual thing!

Best regards,

Rupert