Overstruck denarius or die breaks?

[akeady]

This arrived yesterday, from a recent Tintinna auction.

It was sold as Cr. 228/1, but it's more likely Cr. 228/2 from 140 BC (the difference being whether the obverse legend reads XVI or X - there appears to be a shadow of an X and no other letters, but it's hard to see).

In any case, it's either overstruck on an earlier coin or has some die breaks on the obverse which add to Roma's face.

It weighs 4.00g and is about 19/20mm in diameter.

Anyone hazard a guess as to the undertype or is it a couple of die breaks?

Thanks,
Aidan.

 

 

 

[Etcherdude]

I’ll say overstruck 

[Phil Davis]

I think it's overstruck Aidan, although I wouldn't care to guess what the undertype might be. A die break this severe should be evident in less extreme form on other examples; I don't think it is, although I haven't done a very thorough search.

[Etcherdude]

All the "artifacts" are in the concavity of the die.

[antwerpen2306]

I agree, it's overstruck.

Try to be sure for the Crawford number 228/1 has 7 obverse and 10 reverse dies, 228/2 48 and 60 but I am afraid you are right.

Hereby my denarius with XVI ,Cr228/1

[akeady]

Thanks, all!

Overstruck, it is!

I have the Cr. 228/2 already - actually, I probably have 2 of them now 😄   I'll try the RRDP to see if I can make a positive ID 🙂

This is my Cr. 228/2:

ATB,
Aidan.

[DonnaML]

Definitely an X, not an XVI. Nice coin anyway!

[Valentinian]

Die breaks!
The vertical lines on the face of Roma project outward, as die breaks would. The weight is right for a denarius, and Romans are known for letting old coins circulate, so there is no excuse for an overstrike. 

[Phil Davis]

10 hours ago, Valentinian said:

Die breaks!
The vertical lines on the face of Roma project outward, as die breaks would. The weight is right for a denarius, and Romans are known for letting old coins circulate, so there is no excuse for an overstrike. 

Silver overstrikes weren't at all common in the period, but they aren't unknown either. There was at least one in the Goodman Collection.

[red_spork]

McCabe in RBN 2018 lists a number of denarius overstrikes, many from around this same period. Some important pages copied below, but check the link for the full details.

[akeady]

13 hours ago, DonnaML said:

Definitely an X, not an XVI. Nice coin anyway!

I think it's an X, mostly because they're more common, but I can't see much - maybe part of one letter which could be either an X or a V.

ATB,

Aidan.

[Valentinian]

56 minutes ago, red_spork said:

McCabe in RBN 2018 lists a number of denarius overstrikes, many from around this same period.

So, Red, do you think the OP coin is an overstrike? 

[red_spork]

52 minutes ago, Valentinian said:

So, Red, do you think the OP coin is an overstrike? 

Possibly. I'm not certain either way but I don't think an overstrike can be completely discounted yet. Most cases of denarii of this period that appear to be overstruck are either just a double strike or die damage, but I think it's worth trying to investigate and prove it one way or the other in all cases. If I had time today I'd be looking for a die match which is usually the easiest place to start.

[DonnaML]

2 hours ago, akeady said:

I think it's an X, mostly because they're more common, but I can't see much - maybe part of one letter which could be either an X or a V.

ATB,

Aidan.

I have no doubt that's an X: look carefully in the area you circled, and you'll see where the two arms of the X cross in the middle. It's much easier to see if you reduce the size of the image; as enlarged, it's way too blurry,

[Severus Alexander]

Here are a couple of obverse die matches from acsearch (one and two), different reverse dies:

Clearly a 228/2, then.  No sign of the extra cheek metal on these, though you can see the extended line at the bottom of the nose, which could be a small early die break. All three have the somewhat wonky hair in common.  Overall I'm inclined to think the OP coin has a die break that was fairly quick to develop on a die near its end.  The damage was particularly obvious, and it was therefore removed from production rapidly.

Edited September 22, 2022 by Severus Alexander

[akeady]

Thanks, Severus & Donna.

It certainly looks like a match for those two.   Where I thought I saw an X doesn't match the orientation of those - one line which I thought might be part of an X is close to horizontal, while these above and all on CRRO, have a line running roughly Northwest to Southwest.   So, I suppose it's just not well struck.

I have another unusual denarius that I must photograph.

ATB,
Aidan.