A remarkable ancient imitation

[Gallienus]

I'm guess that the VLPP coinage types are what used to be referred to as AE 3's and sometimes folles?

Did the silver content increase with the maiorina denomination?

[Victor_Clark]

17 minutes ago, Heliodromus said:

I think in general there are two motivations, which would apply at different times.

1) Simple fraud - trying to pass a cheap imitation of a coin as the real thing, whether that's a fourree or base metal VLPP.

2) Coin shortage - unofficially produced coinage, not trying to be deceptive about what they are made of, where it'd seem the only profit to be had was the difference between production cost and the value they were accepted at (i.e. seignorage). Minims might be a good example of this.

 

Yes, I talk about that on my page--

https://constantinethegreatcoins.com/barb2/

 

and another reason--

Firmicus Maternus, who lived in the fourth century, even said that an alignment of the stars and planets influenced forgery. Maternus was probably wrong, though!
 

"Mars allots 20 months to Mercury. When Mercury accepts these months he rouses certain dangers from things written, or he inflicts loss from forgeries. But often he will have enemies destroyed in various ways. If Mercury and Venus are in conjunction, in square aspect, or in opposition, they indicate the crimes of forgery and counterfeiting, especially if Mercury is found in the house or terms of Saturn."         Ancient Astrology: Theory and Practice 35:6.

[Gallienus]

Thanks, I'll link to your page on Constantinian bronze coinage.

Unfortunately I only have one AE on Constantine, issued very early (306-307).  Hopefully I'll be able to find a maiorina at the NYINC this month!

Eventually improved metals analysis methods may be able to shed more light on official issues and 'imitations'.

[Sulla80]

A remarkable portrait of Titus, @Valentinian!  Here's a favorite fourre - you can see the oxidized copper peaking through in several spots.  Amazingly true to the official coins - perhaps stolen dies? M Lepidus squashed below the Basilica makes it easy to see reverse die matches - so far I haven't found another one (at least not one that isn't a fourree)

ACSearch image search:

[Valentinian]

In the 1990s I seriously collected ancient imitations and studied them. Lengthy trips to numismatic libraries in Oxford and Cambridge (England) allowed me to find most of the relevant reference works, which in 2000 I wrote up as a bibliography on this webpage:
http://augustuscoins.com/ed/imit/imitationrefs.html
for my webpages:
http://augustuscoins.com/ed/imit/
Since then I have not kept up with scholarship (unless in The Numismatic Chronicle or The American Journal of Numismatics). My reference-work page has Victor's site on it and a few others, but may well lack good sites and articles. If you know of any, please be so kind as to message me with citations. I'd like to bring that page up-to-date.

Here is one of my favorite imitations:



19 mm. 3.56 grams.
Augustus, prototype struck c. 20-19 BC. RIC Spain 54a "R2" page 45. 
Aureus of this type: BMC I 359a, page 64. The style is very close to that of the aureus of this type on plate 7.10.

Members have asked in this thread about the motivation for making imitations, and good answers have been given. My main page answers it too. The link is, again:
http://augustuscoins.com/ed/imit/
 

Edited January 3 by Valentinian

[Heliodromus]

22 hours ago, Gallienus said:

I'm guess that the VLPP coinage types are what used to be referred to as AE 3's and sometimes folles?

Did the silver content increase with the maiorina denomination?

The follis, better referred to as nummus (a follis was a bag of coins), was the bronze denomination introduced by Diocletian's coinage reform, and also used during Constantine's reign. They started out big, and ended up small, at one time being of AE3 size ... AE3 is only a size, nothing more, and therefore in my opinion is not a very useful term!

The nummus, when originally introduced, had ~5% silver content (which represented ~85% of it's value!), but by the time Constantine introduced his SOLI INVICTO type in 310 AD, which preceded the VLPP, the silver content of the nummus had declined to much less (1-2% ?), and by 318 AD when the SOLI INVICTO series ended, the size of the coins had also reduced to AE3 (~19-20mm).

The VLPP reverse type, and various others, was introduced by Constantine as part of a coinage reform c.318AD, and was still of AE3 size but now of a much higher 4-5% silver content, which seems to imply it must have had a much higher value, effectively a new denomination (sometimes called the centenionalis).

Hopefully that explained the relationships between AE3, follis/nummus and VLPP !

By the end of Constantine's reign in 337 AD the silver content of his bronze coinage had again decreased to something fairly minimal, although the coins were still "silver washed", and I think this minimal silver content generally continued until the FEL TEMP denominations (3 of them) were introduced in 348 AD. I believe the "maiorina" was the name used for the largest FEL TEMP denomination (i.e. fallen horseman and galley reverse types), which had a newly increased silver content of 3% as well as being larger than the preceding coins.

 

Edited January 4 by Heliodromus

[Phil Davis]

3 hours ago, Sulla80 said:

 Amazingly true to the official coins - perhaps stolen dies? M Lepidus squashed below the Basilica makes it easy to see reverse die matches - so far I haven't found another one (at least not one that isn't a fourree)

 

 

More likely transfer dies than stolen ones I think.

[Edessa]

Agrippa, died 12 BC. Æ As (26mm, 6.45g, 5h). Barbarous copy of a Rome mint, posthumous issue struck under Gaius Caligula, AD 37-41. Obv: M AGRIPPA L F COS [III]; Head of Agrippa left, wearing rostral crown. Rev: S-C across field; Neptune standing facing, head left, holding small dolphin and trident. Ref: cf, RIC 58. Near Fine, nice surface and great patina with cute barbaric style. Said to be ex-Frank Robinson but no ticket.

[Orange Julius]

This is a fun topic! I’ve always like this imitation Nero.

It's an ancient Gallic (maybe?) imitation of the common Victory and shield coins.

It would have the legend:
IMP NERO CAESAR AVG P MAX T P P. (It's there but written backwards, copied directly from an example on to the die without thinking of the resulting coin having the mirrored impression... you can see the ...ESAR AVG P MA...)

[Coinmaster]

Also of interest are the coins from the civil war in 68-69. Many coins of this period are fouree with a copper core. However, silver shortage seems to be the reason for this, not forgery.

[justus]

On 1/3/2025 at 6:54 AM, hotwheelsearl said:

why anybody would make an imitation of a low-value reduced FTR to begin with is beyond me. This is like the counterfeit US 1 cent coin I found when I was a kid. Why.....

 It's not a VLPP-Imitation, but a Follis-Imitation with "FEL TEMP REPARATIO, soldier spearing fallen horseman" on the reverse.

[hotwheelsearl]

5 hours ago, justus said:

 It's not a VLPP-Imitation, but a Follis-Imitation with "FEL TEMP REPARATIO, soldier spearing fallen horseman" on the reverse.

Correct, I thought I had posted this was an FTR but I suppose I made a typo.

[Valentinian]

Here is another ancient imitation. This one is of Commodus/Fortuna.

18 mm.  6:30.  2.87 grams.

 A wonderful and vigorous portrait of Commodus, excelling some "official" portraits.
    L AEL AVREL CO-MM AVG
    /PM TRP X I[MP]-COS VII[I]
    Fortuna seated left, holding rudder and cornucopia
    Hybrid.  Obverse legend of AD 192, reverse of 185-188.
    BMC 22 plate 97.2 has a similar reverse legend PM TRP XIII IMP VIII with this type.
Several pieces have similar reverse but with with FORT RED in exergue. See plate 96.4 and 95.5 with close reverse legend PM TRP X IMP VII COS IIII PP

 

[Tejas]

The term imitation is an umbrella for very different types of coins, including 1. ancient forgeries (including fourrées); 2. imitations produced by local authorities to alleviate coin shortages, especially during periods of hyperinflation (e.g. in the Gallic Empire), 3 private imiations produced for private payments, when official coins were scarce and only available at a premium. 

In addition, there are other imitations, which were produced outside the Roman Empire, by various barbarian peoples. This is the most sought after type of imitation and sometimes imitations of the type 1-3 are misattributed to this category to attract interest.

This category includes, for example those imitations produced by the Goths to imitate the Roman practice of donativum, for the rewarding warrior retinues. The coin below, from my collection falls into this category:

 

Imitation of Probus aureus (RIC 831)

Obv.: Helmeted bust with spear and shield

Rev.: Quadriga

Found: Khmelnitzskaya oblast, Tchemerovetsky raion

Weight: 5.82 g (without the loop)

 

This coin is no. 249 in the catalogue by Oleg Anokhin. However, since the coin was cataloged the loop was removed and the coin was cleaned.

Referenz : http://barbarous-imitations.narod.ru/index/241_320/0-610

 

 

Edited January 10 by Tejas

[Hrefn]

@maridvnvm I have to correct your interpretation of this coin.   The Roman is clearly attacking an Ankylosaurus.  This coin confirms my thoughts about the long-suppressed true story of the fall of the Roman Empire.  It also supports my theory that the Ankylosaurus invasion was largely horse-borne.  

       

[balmora90]

Here's my imitation of Constantine follis from Siscia, love that barbarous portrait and partly blundered legend

[justus]

On 1/10/2025 at 12:46 AM, hotwheelsearl said:

Correct, I thought I had posted this was an FTR but I suppose I made a typo.

...and I forgot 
 "a beautiful specimen"!