Denarius

[Taikonaut]

Hi All,

Are these two the same coin?

Coin 1

 

Coin 2 obverse

 

Coin 2 reverse

[PWA 1967]

Looks like it.

With the first images they have been lightened which will bring out a lot more detail than the one that is more natural below.

Although i am not familiar with the coin 

[Taikonaut]

Is this Vespasian or Titus?

[Sleepy]

I think it's Vespasian, he had his 6th Consul in 75 AD, Titus had his 6th in 77 AD when Vespasian was still Emperor (69 - 79), also Titus's bust wasn't quite so ugly. However after saying all that the inscription COULD read, starting at 5 o'clock going anti clockwise, T CAESAR IMP VESPASIANUS, which would make it Titus, but the T CAE bit is very worn and I can't make it out very well.

[Taikonaut]

This coin of Titus with Cos V which should be AD 76. I think it is Titus as Caesar but struck under the reign of Vespasian

http://www.museuarqueologia.pt/?a=3&x=2&i=247

 

Edited June 11, 2017 by Taikonaut

[Sleepy]

It could be a coin commemorating Titus's 6th Consulate, issued during the reign of Vespasian hence having his bust. 

[Rob]

Is the top one not a cast of the bottom coin or are they both iffy?

[Taikonaut]

7 hours ago, Rob said:

Is the top one not a cast of the bottom coin or are they both iffy?

Its from the Jeff Michniak Collection.

I thnk it could be the way it was photographed and different lighting. 

[Peckris]

Yes, the top one definitely looks suspect especially compared to the lower one.

[Coinery]

I was just about to say the same thing! At least one or both are a bad un, they are definitely not the same coin photographed under different lighting conditions!

[Colin G.]

Crud is clearly visible on the darker coin which is not in the top example which either screams of "at least" one being a fake or the original has been scrubbed

[Taikonaut]

Here is the information of the top coin which others said might be a cast of the bottom

http://www.forumancientcoins.com/catalog/roman-and-greek-coins.asp?radd=1&vpar=18&zpg=86769

The description says it was once polished and could be the case as do many ancient silver coins, the first image suggest this might be the case. Though when the coin was sold it may no longer look polished as the photos suggest.

The second image shows what appear to be the same coin with natural looking age and appear sharper. However there are many similarities including the shape, wear, fan cracks and other minute details to conclude that they are indeed the same coin. What we are seeing is a coin may have been aged naturally (since the coin came from a old collection it might be an old photo) or artificially professionally aged. When a coin has been "aged" it can appear sharper.

Edited July 17, 2017 by Taikonaut

[Coinery]

On 17/07/2017 at 0:13 PM, Taikonaut said:

...to conclude that they are indeed the same coin.

Not for me, Sir!

[Taikonaut]

7 hours ago, Coinery said:

Not for me, Sir!

I have aged more than a few ancient silvers and the before and after can look very different. What you cant change is the shape, cracks and most obviouse strike details and wears.

Edited July 19, 2017 by Taikonaut

[Colin G.]

You can also reverse your argument, that each ancient coin should be unique in appearance with unique identifiers and yet you have images of two that are identical, the roundness of the lettering varies, which would imply the top coin is a cast of the bottom. I am with Stuart on this one steer well clear!!

[Taikonaut]

I'm the owner of the bottom one but I also think they are the same coin as the top one.