Romismatist

Interesting. If the pendant truly did originate from the Conquistadores, then the style of the helmet would be different. The Conquistadores had a Morion-type helmet with upturned edges at the sides. This helmet is more reminiscent of Greek-style helmets, but it's still more a mash-up than representative of a true Athenian or Corinthian-style helmet, for example. I agree with @Dwarf and @jtlart that someone's trying to cash in big off of a rustic tourist trinket...

Here's one that's of the same vintage as your first coin. It's extremely basic, but circulated around the time of the Vikings and has the peck marks to prove it. I  think it's Bernhard I (973-1011) from Bardowick. A similar type in the past has been attributed to East Friesland.

Whatever it is, it is certainly of bizarre style and something that in my ~40 years of collecting ancients I have not come across before. My suspicion is that it may not be a coin at all, but instead a tourist trinket (I assume was worn as it is holed at the top). It may not be of recent manufacture based on wear and patina but the edges still look odd and the portrait type is very strange. Also the fact that there is no legend makes me think it was intended as a pendant and not for circulation as currency.

How about the Roman municipum of Brundisium? They had a pretty extensive semis issue...

Mark of value: "S" underneath head of Poseidon on the obverse (who is being crowned by Victory on the left), and "S" on the reverse between lyre and dolphin's tail on the right. The ethnic "BRVN" below the dolphin indicates an issue of Brundisium... Teate, Paestum and Bitonto all had similar bronze issues. The later "F" series coinage has an extensive (and collectible) series of symbols and magistrate initials. The symbol on this coin is a star in front of the dolphin's nose on the reverse.

This series dates to the second century BC, likely ending around the time of the Social Wars in 89 BC. The earliest issues are believed to have been minted in 215 BC.

4 minutes ago, expat said:

The engraving of his dies was certainly impressive. Certainly not surprising that they are collectible.

To my understanding I believe I have 1 fake. I base this on the extensive list of images of this type, even though there is not an example that exactly matches a die shown on the list of fakes.

Histiaia. Tetrobol circa III-II century BC, Euboia. AR 10.5mm, 1.55 g.
Wreathed head of nymph Histiaia.
Rev. IΣT – AIEΩN Nymph seated r. on galley; below, trident. BCD Euboia 387.

 

Yes, some experts believe that all of these Histiaia tetrobols with the "standing hair" type are fake, even though there are several different dies used to strike this type. 

Soaking in hot peroxide for several minutes should remove deposits but may remove any patina. 

LOL... all gold issues are on my want list but that will always be a fantasy lineup, as gold coins are perennially out of my budget. I'd love an aureus of Hadrian or Vespasian someday...

Thanks for sharing! Great stuff!

There is a Hercules countermark in the first link that @Marsyas Mike provided... it's also on an as of Agrippa.

Hercules
As of Agrippa: Head of Hercules (Melqart?) 29mm 9.0g, Countermark Martini Pangerl Collection 99

Hello Everyone,

Interesting research out from researchers from the Universities of Oxford, Cambridge, and the Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam who analyzed early medieval coinage from the Fitzwilliam Museum in Cambridge. They discovered that Byzantine bullion made up Europe's early adoption of silver coinage in the 3d to 7th centuries AD, but then the Frankish mine in Melle rose to prominence from 750-820 AD, supplying silver coinage in the UK and continental Europe.

https://phys.org/news/2024-04-early-medieval-money-mystery.html

9 hours ago, Postvmvs said:

I have a quinarius of Augustus that I unintentionally toned myself by leaving it in a paper flip for the last 20 or so years and forgetting about it, leading to iridescent blue-gold hues.

Apologies for the cell phone photos, at some point I need to invest in a proper camera setup. The coloring is much more striking in the hand.

Looked at your description. This quinarius has an "ASIA RECEPTA" reverse and was minted at an Italian mint (Rome or Brindisi) not Ephesus. It proclaimed the extension of Augustus' authority to Asia which was previously under Marc Antony. 

Fabulous, many thanks for sharing!

23 hours ago, DonnaML said:

@Romismatist, the answer depends on nature of the symbol, but it must have been issued sometime between 1832 (when hallmarks or privy marks were first added to restrikes) and 1965 (after which the specific year of the restrike was added to the edge). See https://blog.cgb.fr/une-semaine-une-medaille--n-19-,9151.html :

"01/09/2017

The medal market is not yet very well developed, but it was in the past... it seems that this market has been neglected by most French professionals. And in the absence of material offered to collectors, collectors were interested in other things!

In any case, prices are often quite subjective, with few references available regarding the prices achieved. Period strikes are naturally more appreciated than later restrikes ... how can we recognize them? It would be relevant to recall the different hallmarks used in France. Adopted in 1832, this system of hallmarks has since been obligatory for medals. The edge must bear a hallmark which determines the period at which it was struck, as well as the nature of the metal; ZINC, COPPER, BRONZE, SILVER or GOLD for example.

Seven different hallmarks allow us to know the time of manufacture;

- the antique lamp is used between 1832 and 1841.

- the anchor (with a C) is used between 1841 and 1842.

- the ship's bow is used between 1842 and 1845.

- the hand is used between 1845 and 1860.

- the bee is used between 1860 and 1879.

- the pipe is used only in December 1879

- the cornucopia has been used since 1880.

Other geometric punches, in the shape of a square, diamond or triangle, are only brands of private manufacturers."

Wow, awesome information, very comprehensive as always @DonnaML! Many thanks! Unfortunately, it looks like my hallmark is probably a cornucopia, so the restrike is more modern than I would have liked. Oh well...

7 hours ago, DonnaML said:

I have no doubt that this is a genuine example of the 1805 Surrender of Ulm & Memmingen medal (some catalog numbers are Bramsen 433, Zeitz 56, Sammlung Julius 1414, Trésor Numismatique Vol. 18, No. 8.16, etc.). My only question would be whether it's an original or a restrike. If it has a hallmark-type symbol of some kind on the edge, then it's a restrike (the approximate year can be determined by the symbol); if the edge is blank then it's probably an original.

Thanks, @DonnaML! I had no idea of this distinction. When I look on the edge, there is indeed a hallmark-type symbol and the word "BRONZE", so I guess it's a restrike. Would these still have been struck around this period, or much more recently? Still a nice medal, in any event...

@Orange Julius, I'm exactly like you in that I don't have a lot of money to spend on coins so for the most part, I'm actively hunting on EBay for bargains and have been doing so for probably several decades now. Sometimes, like you mention, it's coins that are badly photographed or misattributed. Other times, it's coins that require significant cleaning... the gamble here is whether I have the skill to revitalize the lost glory of the coin.

An example in the latter category was this antoninianus of Volusian, which I've posted here previously. It was part of a hoard of coins which was found somewhere in Brittany a year or two ago.. something like 30 or so coins were all posted at the same time, all from the same period and with similar surface deposits. Here are the before and after photos... I was really pleased at how this one turned out... the portrait of Volusian is one of the nicest I have seen, and this was an emperor that I was chasing for some time, without success (apologies for my bad "after" bad photos).

In earlier times, I would be more zealous in going after badly photographed coins, and remember scoring a nice drachm of Taras for $50 that way which turned out to be quite genuine many years ago. On the misattributed side, my niche specialization of collecting Messapian mints from Magna Grecia sometimes yields surprises, like this Ae of Graxa which would normally hammer at auction for 2-3X the price I paid: 

Sometimes, it's just items that are posted in the wrong places, like this medallion of Napoleon from 1806, which was in with the true ancients that no one seemed to want. I bought it for $38 all in, which seems low, given that these can go for $150-200 at auctions. Not my area of collecting, but it seemed too good to pass up. Again, the piece appears to be genuine, based on others I have seen...

That being said, I have also occasionally been stung by a few fakes (which I now always report and get a refund). Most of the time, I wind up paying at or above the going market rate for most of my purchases as there are always others bidding up the coin (you only need one other person who wants it to snipe it at the very end). Still, given the crazy auction prices these days, combined with rich shipping and hammer fees, I keep coming back to look for those diamonds in the rough on EBay, despite the plethora of fakes and wading through much of the same crappy coins that never seem to find a buyer. It's definitely a marathon rather than a sprint!

Fascinating - thanks for sharing, I had no idea that this was how these coins were struck! Now at least I'm a little bit smarter...

Yes, an As of Hadrian was my guess as well c. 117-138 AD. Based on the profile, I'm leaning more towards Hadrian.

The style of both coins and their edges look ok to me. I think they're authentic but worn specimens.

I would agree with everyone here that it is definitely tooled. They did a good job though, and probably would be convincing to less experienced buyers. Caveat emptor! Thanks for the heads up.

I bought this lot in December 2021 for EUR 165. The Marius is on the bottom right. I probably overpaid as well...

Agree - it looks authentic to me as well.

Wow, not my area of expertise but they certainly know how to create an authentic-looking patina, even if the experts know the style is off. Caveat emptor...  

I wonder what happened to Titus on the chart. I guess he would probably be in the same quadrant as Vespasian...

I've also regularly won lots in their auctions with no issues so far. They have some great Magna Grecia Calabrian coins from major and minor mints (Taras, Brundisium, Orra, Graxa) which is a collecting area of mine.

looks authentic to me as well. Metal crystallization seems to indicate that it's genuine.