BMC 151/RG 823 – just a case of bad digestion?

[Permaneder]

One coin auctioner I am wary of for other reasons is peddling this (25.4 mm, 9.6 g – allegedly) as an "attractive example" of RG 823/BMC 151. Now, "attractive" wouldn't be my choice of words, although the image of Gallienus throwing up all over young Valerianus's face might be regarded by some as amusing in its own gross way; but that aside, it seems to me that the coin has all the markings of a very poorly cast bronze – especially the excess metal that seems to be splashed in blotches all over the place. The only other explanation I can think of would be that Gallienus was feeling really unwell the day they took his portrait. If I'm wrong correct me, please!

(Just for the record, it's not a coin I am even remotely considering buying – fake or not, I find it repulsive.)

Best regards – Permaneder

[dwarf]

There is nothing wrong with the style of the coin.
I suspect that the patina is not original.
Wether the coin as such is a cast cannot be determined just with this photo.

Personally I think this coin to be original - anything else only with the original object

The coin is common. Prices vary as to style and condition - what else

Regards
Klaus

[Mark Fox]

Dear Permaneder and Board,

I am not exactly certain which surface irregularities have you concerned besides the "amusing" one, but the "splash" of metal behind Valerian senior is actually the letter 'Α' of ΑΥΤ(ΟΚΡΑΤΩΡ).  You can see the letter more clearly on this coin with a die-identical obverse (but different reverse):

https://www.acsearch.info/search.html?id=3052618

The squashed looking letter on the coin you showed was caused by an uneven strike, evidence of which can be seen on the reverse as well, which, along with the defining features of the coin's edge, enables us to predict rather comfortably that the coin has a die axis of 6h. 

As for the other areas of excess metal, I feel they are remnants of corrosion deposits and/or the coin's patina before the coin was stripped and repatinated.  Some chemical like Acetone or even rubbing alcohol may help to bring out the truth of the matter if the present "patina" is less than a patina (such as a paint).     

In any event, the bottom line is that the coin itself is very likely genuine.  In my experience with the seller, I have had little cause to be alarmed over his offerings of Roman provincials and Greek bronzes, other than tooling/smoothing issues which are easy enough to see and avoid.             

I hope this helps.


Best regards,

Mark Fox
Michigan

[Permaneder]

It is indeed a very common coin, so much that I've seen a number of other specimens myself (there are a few on the market right now, even), and I am fully aware that coin prices tend to vary according to condition; I find neither disturbing. The blotches I do, on the other hand.

[Permaneder]

Dear Mark and Klaus,
thank you both for your replies. The blotches and splashes I am most troubled with are those above of the leftmost crown on the obverse, apparently oozing from the palm in such a way that the palm itself is engulfed in it, the one above the middle crown and amidst the five spheres, and the ones between the second and third crown. Residual patina from a scrubbing could provide a logical explanation I had not thought of. As for Aὐτοκράτωρ beginning with an A, it wasn't much of a concern to me (I am a fair bit more versed in Greek than I am in coin business).

[Mark Fox]

Dear Board,

Sorry for the delay in writing this tiny follow-up, but it was revealed to me that was very mistaken in who I thought was the seller of the coin.  That being said, I am even more convinced now that the coin is genuine, based on what I have seen of his/their wares to date. 


Best regards,

Mark Fox
Michigan