Likely fake Ptolemaic gold tetradrachm

[Matt Kreuzer]

Ptolemaic gold tetradrachms are rare.  They are actually much scarcer than the corresponding octadrachms.  Genuine gold tetradrachms reliably weigh about 13.90g.  However, here is an example that was auctioned recently.  [Seller information removed by admin]

[Broken link removed by admin]

Note that it weighs 13.40g, far below the usual weight standard.  The reverse has only one cornucopia, instead of two.  This "new" type is offered as an extremely rare single cornucopia type.  However, Svoronos (written 1904-1908) lists none of this type.  Of course, new varieties can exist. 

Concerning.  However, a single feature makes this coin a bigger problem.  The reverse seems to be a die match for "Christodoulos the Counterfeiter" plate Q #521.  Svoronos wrote this book after his book on Ptolemaic coins.  As I understand the situation, Svoronos had access to example of the work of Christodoulos captured from the forger's workshop.  With a die link to the forgeries, low weight and no link to genuine coins this coin has little chance of being genuine.

I emailed [Seller name removed by admin], with no response.  I thought this group would have something to say. . . .  Am I missing anything?

Matt Kreuzer

[Lloyd Taylor]

Link doesn't work for me. Better to post the image and details or use the Direct URL attached to the image:

http://www.acsearch.info/record.html?id=17397
GREEK COINS
AEGYPTUS
 

Tetradrachm or 1/2-Mnaieion (Gold) 145-116 BC, Alexandria. Struck in memorial of the deified Arsinoe II under Ptolemy VIII, 145-116 BC. Diademed and veiled head of Arsinoe II right, wearing stephane and ram's horn, sceptre over far shoulder, behind 'K' / / APSINOHS - FILADELFOY. "Single" (!) cornucopia tied with the royal diadem. Svoronos, Pt. cf. 1500 (double cornucopia); SNG Cop. -. 13.40 g.
Extremely rare "single-cornucopia" type. Nice coin with high relief, extremely fine

The reverse of the rare Egyptian Tetradrachm in memorial of Arsinoe II usually shows the double cornucopia. Our coin is an extremely rare variety with the single cornucopia instead of the common double version. Not one specimen of this rare single cornucopia variety was recorded recently in auctions.

Estimate: 20000 CHF

[Lloyd Taylor]

I know absolutely nothing about Egyptian gold coinage.  However, I would have thought 13.9 gms of gold would be a denomination much greater than a tetradrachm, which is roughly the same weight in silver?  I understand a Ptolemaic drachm to be to a 3.6 gms of silver weight standard and that gold was worth roughly ten to twelve times as much as silver in the  ancient world. Such being the case, this coin would be equivalent 40-48 silver drachms in value, which is a bit more than a tetradrachm? How do I reconcile this?

[Matt Kreuzer]

Good question Lloyd.
The ten to one ratio of gold to silver was pretty rigid, so at this time (allegedly c. 150 BC) a 14g gold coin was worth 10 14g silver coins.  We call it a tetradrachm, because it weighs four drachms, but the Ptolemaic name is likely to have been something else.
Matt

[Lloyd Taylor]

Good question Lloyd.
The ten to one ratio of gold to silver was pretty rigid, so at this time (allegedly c. 150 BC) a 14g gold coin was worth 10 14g silver coins.  We call it a tetradrachm, because it weighs four drachms, but the Ptolemaic name is likely to have been something else.
Matt

Thanks... I thought I must have been missing something in the description of it as a tetradrachm, which is apparently used for want of a better term in this instance.  In the Hess-Divo description I notice it is also termed alternatively as 1/2-Mnaieion a term which I assume reflects more closely what it may have been termed at the time?

As for authenticity, I really don't have the expertise in this series to comment with authority.  The closest I could find is a full Mnaieion with a similar control on the obverse, but a double cornucopia reverse.  Stylistically the differences between the two coins (other than the single versus double cornucopia) appear subtle and not out of the range I would expect to be attached to the normal variance in die engraving and skills of celators.  As the Hess-Divo attribution notes: The reverse has only one cornucopia, instead of two.  This "new" type is offered as an extremely rare single cornucopia type.   If this rare reverse die matches an established fake as you suggest then it is pretty condemnatory. Can you post an image of "Christodoulos the Counterfeiter" plate Q #521 for comparison purposes?

On the matter of weight the Mnaieion listed on on acsearch were struck to within 1% variance (0.26 gm) of 27.8 gms.  Yet the 1/2 Mnaieion you posted is 3.6% underweight (0.5 gm) against the standard (13.9 gms).  Gold coins were always struck to extremely tight weight standards and the Hess-Divo example at first sight appears to fall outside the expected norm. Not proof, but suggestive of a problem, as you have noted.

http://www.acsearch.info/record.html?id=413653

PTOLEMAIC KINGS of EGYPT. Arsinoë II, wife of Ptolemy II. Died 270 BC. AV Mnaieion – “Oktadrachm” (26mm, 27.84 g, 12h). Alexandreia mint. Struck under Ptolemy VI-VIII, circa 170-116 BC. Diademed and veiled head right; lotus scepter behind head; K to left / Double cornucopia bound with fillet. Troxell, Arsinoe , p. 67, 8; Svoronos 1498; SNG Copenhagen 322. EF, lustrous.

[esnible]

The obverse of Christodoulos #521, the reverse of #520 perhaps?

The dies themselves can be seen in my scanned / translated copy of Svoronos' book at http://snible.org/coins/christodoulos/

[Matt Kreuzer]

Lloyd and Ed,

Thank you for your help in posting these photos.  From the sources listed above, readers will be able to reach a conclusion and / or discuss.  I appreciate the help.

Matt

[PtolemAE]

The obverse of Christodoulos #521, the reverse of #520 perhaps?

The dies themselves can be seen in my scanned / translated copy of Svoronos' book at http://snible.org/coins/christodoulos/

The die looks similar but it would be nice to see a nice hi-res scan of that 'known fake' before trying to assert it is an absolute die match to the auction coin.

It's a peculiar thing.  A skilled forger could easily fake something that 'exists' for 'easy money', but perhaps would enjoy the fun or challenge of creating a fantasy that doesn't really exist and passing that off.

Tks,

PtolemAE

[Lloyd Taylor]

The obverse of Christodoulos #521, the reverse of #520 perhaps?

I think Ed has nailed it in this assessment.  The veil and ear of Arsinoe have a number of distinctive characteristics that match exactly that of obverse Christodoulos #521.  The finer detail can similarly be mapped with high confidence to the Christodoulos obverse #521. The same can be said of the distinctive elements of the termination of the cornucopia, the grapes, the form and width of the diadem/fillet and its terminations and the placement of legend letters which map exactly to reverse Christodoulos # 520.

It is interesting to note that what Hess-Divo describe as a diadem around the cornucopia is described as a fillet by others.  Yet on all but the Hess-Divo example it is actually a broad band of material resembling a diadem, whereas on the Hess-Divo coin it is a thin string like affair resembling a fillet.  Mixed nomenclature is not the problem. Rather, that the Hess-Divo coin bears a diadem/fillet of a type and style that is anomalous in comparison to all authentic Ptolemaic gold issues of the type bearing a cornucopia (or two) bound with a diadem/fillet (refer to the GNG Mnaieion posted above to see the difference in this design element).  This is yet another pointer to fakery.

There is no doubt in my mind that this coin is from the same Christodoulos dies noted by Ed.

The 3.6% discrepancy to the gold weight standard, coupled with the fact that the single cornucopia is unknown in authentic coins with the Arsinoe obverse are further condemnatory facts. 

The weight of evidence is that this coin is most likely a fake. 

Others may disagree, but my confidence in this assessment is as close to the 100% level as one can get without physical side by side comparison of the coin with an authentic example. This is far from the level where I could give it the benefit of the doubt.

[Lloyd Taylor]

It's a peculiar thing.  A skilled forger could easily fake something that 'exists' for 'easy money', but perhaps would enjoy the fun or challenge of creating a fantasy that doesn't really exist and passing that off.

Not a fantasy in the sense that it is grossly removed from the real thing and thus readily discerned as fake.  Rather, it is sufficiently removed in detail (the single cornucopia) to make it more readily passed off as a great rarity, if not a unique coin.  The obsession of some collectors with rarity and uniqueness can lead to other considerations being overlooked and thus make it more readily accepted that a true copy.  Plus it increases the price likely to be achieved, if you can get away with passing it off as an authentic item. 

[Lloyd Taylor]

It's a peculiar thing.  A skilled forger could easily fake something that 'exists' for 'easy money', but perhaps would enjoy the fun or challenge of creating a fantasy that doesn't really exist and passing that off.

Some further thoughts and questions on this subject, admittedly from the perspective of someone with no experience of the Ptolemaic AV emissions:

1) Does a 1/2 Mnaieion coin of the Arsinoe/Cornucopia type exist outside of the Christodoulos fabrications? 

Searching on acsearch only reveals full Mnaieion coins and my sense (rather than knowledge) of things is that it would be unusual for the Ptolemies of this period to issue what effectively amount to fractional gold issues.  The gold issues were essentially ceremonial, rather than functional currency, and because of the ten fold uplift in value of gold versus silver by weight they were not a means of daily exchange.  What purpose then a 1/2 Mnaieion emission?

Can others clarify the situation with respect to the existence or otherwise of authentic 1/2 Mnaieion AV issues of this type?

2) Christodoulos in creating a 1/2 Mnaieion AV may have been influenced by some other Greek silver coinages where the smaller or half denomination is indicated by a truncation or a  portion of the design on a larger denomination coin.  This occurs on some Greek silver, but not as far as I know on gold issues.  In this case, if the full Mnaieion emission bears two cornucopia, then Christodoulos may have reasoned that collectors of unique rarities might be more receptive to the fact that the previously unknown 1/2 Mnaieion of the type would bear a single cornucopia and this became the basis of his fabrication? 

This is pure speculation, but it may explain the Christodoulos "fantasy" that PtolemAE notes.

[Matt Kreuzer]

It's a peculiar thing.  A skilled forger could easily fake something that 'exists' for 'easy money', but perhaps would enjoy the fun or challenge of creating a fantasy that doesn't really exist and passing that off.

Some further thoughts and questions on this subject, admittedly from the perspective of someone with no experience of the Ptolemaic AV emissions:

1) Does a 1/2 Mnaieion coin of the Arsinoe/Cornucopia type exist outside of the Christodoulos fabrications? 

Searching on acsearch only reveals full Mnaieion coins and my sense (rather than knowledge) of things is that it would be unusual for the Ptolemies of this period to issue what effectively amount to fractional gold issues.  The gold issues were essentially ceremonial, rather than functional currency, and because of the ten fold uplift in value of gold versus silver by weight they were not a means of daily exchange.  What purpose then a 1/2 Mnaieion emission?

Can others clarify the situation with respect to the existence or otherwise of authentic 1/2 Mnaieion AV issues of this type?

2) Christodoulos in creating a 1/2 Mnaieion AV may have been influenced by some other Greek silver coinages where the smaller or half denomination is indicated by a truncation or a  portion of the design on a larger denomination coin.  This occurs on some Greek silver, but not as far as I know on gold issues.  In this case, if the full Mnaieion emission bears two cornucopia, then Christodoulos may have reasoned that collectors of unique rarities might be more receptive to the fact that the previously unknown 1/2 Mnaieion of the type would bear a single cornucopia and this became the basis of his fabrication? 

This is pure speculation, but it may explain the Christodoulos "fantasy" that PtolemAE notes.

Lloyd, a "gold tetradrachm" c. 13.9g with this type and double cornucopia of exists.  It is Svor. 1500, and certainly of the same style as Svor. 1498-1499, gold octadrachms of c. 27.8g.  c. 150 BC.  It is rare.  Here is a link to one:
http://www.acsearch.info/record.html?id=9302

Svoronos and Christodoulos were contemporaries.  So perhaps Christodoulos knew of this coin when he made his own?  Or not . . . 

The Alexander the Great distater, stater, (some) half and quarter staters have the same design. 

And two prior Ptolemaic issues had gold tetradrachms, with designs shared with the larger octadrachms.  The Theon Adelphon gold with two heads on each side had one (Svor. 604).  These are fairly common.  And then the Ptolemy III portrait gold issues of the early reign of Ptolemy IV had some (Svor. 1118) of the same design.

It's hard to get into the mind of the counterfeiter.

Matt

[Lloyd Taylor]

Matt - Thanks for the clarification.  Somehow I overlooked this example of a 1/2 Mnaieion in my search.  That full and half denominations in AV have the same design is not unusual in the broader Greek series. That the design is a truncated version on the half AV denomination is unusual, from my albeit limited knowledge, but not uncommon on some early Greek silver fractions. 

So why would Christodoulos do a single cornucopia on the 1/2 if he knew of the authentic type?   As you say:

It's hard to get into the mind of the counterfeiter.

[PtolemAE]

The obverse of Christodoulos #521, the reverse of #520 perhaps?

I think Ed has nailed it in this assessment.  The veil and ear of Arsinoe have a number of distinctive characteristics that match exactly that of obverse Christodoulos #521.  The finer detail can similarly be mapped with high confidence to the Christodoulos obverse #521. The same can be said of the distinctive elements of the termination of the cornucopia, the grapes, the form and width of the diadem/fillet and its terminations and the placement of legend letters which map exactly to reverse Christodoulos # 520.


...

I believe Matt Kreuzer was concerned about the *reverse* and that the obverse wasn't the focus of interest.  Maybe I missed something and *both* sides are of concern.

I'd still like to see large sharp PNG or BMP scans of the fake from the book before deciding.  Having done a *lot* of very tedious die comparisons (of Ptolemaic coins, so it happens) recently I've learned not to jump to conclusions about matches, esp. from a book-scanned photo this small and indistinct against the coin photo that is large and sharp and clear. 

We're faced with a possible $15,000 question here - I'd just like the clearest possible basis on which to make a judgment.

PtolemAE

[Lloyd Taylor]

We're faced with a possible $15,000 question here - I'd just like the clearest possible basis on which to make a judgment.

Price has no bearing on the authenticity determination. It is the confidence with which one can match distinctively unique characteristics of the design on the coins to a common die set that is the issue.  I have done many die studies and the match to Christodoulos 520 and 521 is highly convincing. The supporting images are of better than the average that is often used for die studies in numismatic research, many of which are even based on images of poor plaster copies of coins.  Then of course there are the other noted factors that have bearing on the matter of authenticity.  It is the weight of evidence that counts in the final analysis.

[PtolemAE]

We're faced with a possible $15,000 question here - I'd just like the clearest possible basis on which to make a judgment.

Price has no bearing on the authenticity determination. It is the confidence with which one can match distinctively unique characteristics of the design on the coins to a common die set that is the issue.  I have done many die studies and the match to Christodoulos 520 and 521 is highly convincing. The supporting images are of better than the average that is often used for die studies in numismatic research, many of which are even based on images of poor plaster copies of coins.  Then of course there are the other noted factors that have bearing on the matter of authenticity.  It is the weight of evidence that counts in the final analysis.

I'm underwhelmed by the quality of this evidence.  Might match, or it might not.  The suspicion merits a good close look, considering that reputations are at stake and the coin type itself is interesting enough to matter.  I'm just on the fence until I see a good photo from the book.  If folks use small lo-res photos for die matching exemplars then either they have better eyes or better imaginations than do I.

PtolemAE

[Lloyd Taylor]

If folks use small lo-res photos for die matching exemplars then either they have better eyes or better imaginations than do I.

Possibly correct on both counts. Thankfully freedom of thought allows each to his/her own opinion.... just part of life's rich diversity.

[PtolemAE]

If folks use small lo-res photos for die matching exemplars then either they have better eyes or better imaginations than do I.

Possibly correct on both counts. Thankfully freedom of thought allows each to his/her own opinion.... just part of life's rich diversity.

Oops - forgot another possibilty... they might make more mistakes   One might hope that a die match (or a mistmatch that's 'close') would be clear enough that folks could all agree.  But it is somewhat a matter of judgment so unlikely to satisfy all observers.

PtolemAE

[Matt Kreuzer]

Another dealer (one who is well-known for his sarcasm) emailed to suggest that the extra cornucopia weighed 0.5g.  No doubt, Mr. Christodoulos had the extra gold cornucopia on his dining room table.   

1)  The unique reverse theme of a single cornucopia (against the double elsewhere) makes this either unique or fake.
2)  The -3.5% weight is against the coin.
3 ) The die matches to seized Christodoulos dies, published by Svoronos in 1922 are against this coin.  The Svoronos plates are photographs of plaster impressions taken from the seized dies. 

So the evidence is reasonably overwhelming, to ME.  If YOU are unsure, please take some extra time reviewing the plate against the coin?  Extra time may be helpful.  Dan, please review the images here?

Matt

[Lloyd Taylor]

Matt,

To the list of evidence, add a fourth point; that of the inadequate portrayal of what is actually a meant to be  "diadem" on the reverse.  On the Christodoulos fakes this appears as little more than a string like feature with some poorly defined tassels attached to the ends, resembling more a fillet than a diadem. This is a marked contrast to the detailed portrayal on authentic types. In the Hess-Divo attribution that the terminology of a fillet rather than a diadem emerges. Of course this description more aptly describes that which appears on the Christodoulos fabrications than that on the authentic coins.

Furthermore, a little research indicates that the reverse type, the double cornucopia bound together by the royal diadem, was a symbol of the joint reign of Ptolemy II and Arsinoe.  Under the circumstances, the presence of a single cornucopia on a coin bearing the head of a deified Arsinoe would be a marked dissonance in the royal iconographic tradition and thus improbable.


Regards
Lloyd

[Lloyd Taylor]

A diversion, related to my earlier question regarding the denomination and terminology for these gold issues:  The gold tetradrachm was known as a pentekontadrachm because it was equal to 50 drachms of silver when the ratio between the two metal was 12 1/2:1.  (page 122 of Alexander and the Hellenistic kingdoms - The Westmoreland Collection: Ancient Coins in Australian Collections Volume I by K. A.Sheedy, Australian Centre for Ancient Numismatic Studies  2007)

So we have the confusing terminology of a AV tetradrachm = 1/2 Mnaieion = 1 Pentekontadrachm  ..... take your pick amongst the numismatic confusion arising from associating the same weights of different metals with terminology associated with denomination.

[PtolemAE]

Another dealer (one who is well-known for his sarcasm) emailed to suggest that the extra cornucopia weighed 0.5g.  No doubt, Mr. Christodoulos had the extra gold cornucopia on his dining room table.   

1)  The unique reverse theme of a single cornucopia (against the double elsewhere) makes this either unique or fake.
2)  The -3.5% weight is against the coin.
3 ) The die matches to seized Christodoulos dies, published by Svoronos in 1922 are against this coin.  The Svoronos plates are photographs of plaster impressions taken from the seized dies. 

So the evidence is reasonably overwhelming, to ME.  If YOU are unsure, please take some extra time reviewing the plate against the coin?  Extra time may be helpful.  Dan, please review the images here?

Matt

No doubt there is doubt about the auction coin.

There are so many unique (some recently discovered) Ptolemaic coins, including precious metals, that uniqueness isn't a convincing factor in this evaluation.  That leaves us with possible die match to the known fake and a possible weight discrepancy as issues of valid concern.  Why can't we get a decent photo of the coin in the book?   It's a suggestive starting point for comparison but imho it's too small and blurry to compare small details clearly against the high quality photo of the auction coin.

Tks,

PtolemAE

[Matt Kreuzer]

"There are so many unique (some recently discovered) Ptolemaic coins, including precious metals, that uniqueness isn't a convincing factor in this evaluation. "

Dan,

I have a reprint copy of Svoronos' book on the fakes of Christodoulos.  The image is about equal to what Ed Snibble provided here.  I am suggesting that you take a few extra minutes to review them side by side.  Spend five minutes?

It is a Christodoulos fantasy for there to be only one cornucopia on the reverse of an Arsinoe II gold tetradrachm.  As far as uniqueness goes, you'd have to begin with a Ptolemaic coin that Christodoulos had seen long enough to copy, that Svoronos had not seen to place into his book.  They were contemporaries.  So that barrier is much, much more than simply some control mark, mint or year in a series that otherwise exists. 

Matt

[Reid Goldsborough]

Matt's evidence to me appears absolutely overwhelming. To say that we need more evidence is akin to saying we need more evidence of ... take your pick: evolution, global warming, the toxicity of cigarettes, a heliocentric solar system. Each of these were once theories, and to some still are. I've run into the frustration of getting ignored by a dealer like this, more so in the past than lately, but dealers are usually taken more seriously by other dealers than mere collectors. Perhaps other dealers should try contacting this auction house?

[PtolemAE]

"There are so many unique (some recently discovered) Ptolemaic coins, including precious metals, that uniqueness isn't a convincing factor in this evaluation. "

Dan,

I have a reprint copy of Svoronos' book on the fakes of Christodoulos.  The image is about equal to what Ed Snibble provided here.  I am suggesting that you take a few extra minutes to review them side by side.  Spend five minutes?

It is a Christodoulos fantasy for there to be only one cornucopia on the reverse of an Arsinoe II gold tetradrachm.  As far as uniqueness goes, you'd have to begin with a Ptolemaic coin that Christodoulos had seen long enough to copy, that Svoronos had not seen to place into his book.  They were contemporaries.  So that barrier is much, much more than simply some control mark, mint or year in a series that otherwise exists. 

Matt

Great you have the book - it should only take 5 minutes to do a high res scan of the book photo and post it so we can have a good close look.

FYI, at least one newly discovered Ptolemaic coin is as unexpected as this one would be.

PtolemAE