Jump to content

Thoughts on authenticity please


expat

Recommended Posts

Your opinions would be very welcome. It is not a lot of money but a genuine example would be pleasing.

Obverse: ARAGON., bust of King Jaime, crowned and draped, left.
Reverse: IACOBVS REX., cross of Caravaca.
 
 1.09g. 18mm.

JAIME I. (1213-1276 AD)

o82X3yFpYcd6zj7L4Gw9BZ5r9iqSqQ.jpg.a841018306e34c4e41bc89e4650d84ed.jpg

Edited by expat
  • Like 4
  • Heart Eyes 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

EMC v. 6 (The Iberian Peninsula; only volume I ever got my hands on) comes down pretty heavily on the side of Jaime I.  Pp. 678 to 679 (<--Plate 6), nos. 106-7, has two examples, the first with the same eye.  The listings for Jaime II (p. 682; Plate 7, p. 683) all feature a much more conventional, ovoid eye shape.

Solid example, btw!  Apart from the patch of legend weakness --well compensated, from here, by the really sweet toning and patina-- yours compares favorably to the two plates in EMC.

Here's my example, with the same eye.  To @John Conduitt's point, what would that be?  I'm wanting to think Meth, or something frighteningly synthetic along those lines.

image.jpeg.972aba43e1770108657870dcc0bbf685.jpegimage.jpeg.67f00c0e395a185c920390bbc319396c.jpeg

  • Like 6
  • Thanks 1
  • Heart Eyes 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 7/2/2023 at 3:45 PM, John Conduitt said:

I'm not sure what the difference is between James I and II, though.

The portrait style. James II has an actual mouth and his eye is not round:

MASpanienJamesIv.AragonDinero1.png.b089c8e90142ef053ad83ca20eedc9be.png

Kingdom of Aragon, under James I “the Conqueror”, BI dinero, 1213-1276 AD, Jaca mint. Obv: ARAGON; crowned bust of James I l. Rev: +IACOBVS : REX; patriarchal cross. 19mm, 0.80g. Ref: Crusafont i Sabater 1992, 318.

MASpanienJamesIIv.AragonDinero1.png.da8331bedcc5828f246f0100e5222950.png

Kingdom of Aragon, under James II “the Just”, BI dinero, 1291–1327 AD (struck ca. 1308 AD), Sariñena mint. Obv: ARAGON; crowned bust of James II l. Rev: +IACOBVS : REX; patriarchal cross. 18mm, 0.85g. Ref: Crusafont i Sabater 1992, 364.

 

Your coin looks perfectly fine to me.

Also, it would be very unusual to see good fakes of low-value medieval coins. Medieval coins are complicated and there isn't a huge market even for genuine examples. Most medieval forgeries that I have seen so far are either (1) fakes of highly coveted types (e.g. Charlemagne deniers or some Anglo-Saxon and "Viking" coins), (2) "historical" forgeries from the 18th/19th centuries (esp. a few Becker forgeries of medieval coins and the bracteates struck by Nikolaus Seeländer), or (3) replicas sold and produced at renaissance fairs and historical reenactment events. The first category of fakes is dangerous but usually concerns only high-value coins. The second is rare and these coins are typically sold as collectables in their own right, sometimes fetching higher prices than originals.  The third category is not meant to deceive and typically easy to distinguish from real medieval coins (lack of patina, use of base metal instead of silver, fantasy designs, etc).

  • Like 6
  • Thanks 1
  • Heart Eyes 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

40 minutes ago, Ursus said:

The portrait style. James II has an actual mouth and his eye is not round:

MASpanienJamesIv.AragonDinero1.png.b089c8e90142ef053ad83ca20eedc9be.png

Kingdom of Aragon, under James I “the Conqueror”, BI dinero, 1213-1276 AD, Jaca mint. Obv: ARAGON; crowned bust of James I l. Rev: +IACOBVS : REX; patriarchal cross. 19mm, 0.80g. Ref: Crusafont i Sabater 1992, 318.

MASpanienJamesIIv.AragonDinero1.png.da8331bedcc5828f246f0100e5222950.png

Kingdom of Aragon, under James II “the Just”, BI dinero, 1291–1327 AD (struck ca. 1308 AD), Sariñena mint. Obv: ARAGON; crowned bust of James II l. Rev: +IACOBVS : REX; patriarchal cross. 18mm, 0.85g. Ref: Crusafont i Sabater 1992, 364.

 

Your coin looks perfectly fine to me.

Also, it would be very unusual to see good fakes of low-value medieval coins. Medieval coins are complicated and there isn't a huge market even for genuine examples. Most medieval forgeries that I have seen so far are either (1) fakes of highly coveted types (e.g. Charlemagne deniers or some Anglo-Saxon and "Viking" coins), (2) "historical" forgeries from the 18th/19th centuries (esp. a few Becker forgeries of medieval coins and the bracteates struck by Nikolaus Seeländer), or (3) replicas sold and produced at renaissance fairs and historical reenactment events. The first category of fakes is dangerous but usually concerns only high-value coins. The second is rare and these coins are typically sold as collectables in their own right, sometimes fetching higher prices than originals.  The third category is not meant to deceive and typically easy to distinguish from real medieval coins (lack of patina, use of base metal instead of silver, fantasy designs, etc).

Thank you for that great info and your time to give it.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 3 months later...

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...