JRhino

18 minutes ago, Ten-Speed said:

Die crack is when the die from which coins are being minted develops a crack. After this happens every coin after shows this crack on the coin (even though the coin itself is not cracked). It may help identify a variety and it can be very helpful in determining the "die state" of a coin. The die state shows whether the coin was recently minted from a new die or was minted later after the die has gradually worn itself down. In the American Journal of Numismatics I've seen die state studies as part of articles and I think some of these were about ancient coins. If my memory serves me correct @Valentinian wrote an article in this journal on die states.

Early American Coin collectors can become fascinated with die cracks as they can help to identify varieties and die states.. From 1793-1836 in the USA,, each die or parts of the die were hand made so there are many varieties of coins where one obverse die has been used with one or several reverse dies. Hence each is a separate variety.

Since modern coins are machine-made and more durable, die cracks if they happen are. not as frequent as on on the early coins. Colonial coins re studied similarly because of all the different dies.

Thanks for your info and I hope this helps. I hope there will be other postings here as I'm not an expert on this and others could provide a further explanation how this is studied which might this topic become much more fascinating.

Thanks very much for the explanation, very interesting. 

6 minutes ago, Ten-Speed said:

Did you have this professionally done or was it a kind of "informal conservation"? I ask because I've seen a good number of coins that are split in half, and the price is always right, and I'm tempted to buy one but I'd rather have them together than in two pieces. Your coin kinda looks like it has a big die crack on it like an Early American Cent (EAC). Such coins may be precious to their owners, as I'm sure your coin is to you.

I glued it myself with a tiny bit of cyanoacrylate. The two pieces were found a few metres apart and only at a shallow depth. It was most probably hit by a plough. 
Not that familiar with all the terminology, when you talk about a die crack what do you mean exactly? 

1 hour ago, John Conduitt said:

I don’t think the ‘counterfeits’ were necessarily poor silver. They weren’t counterfeits in the sense of criminals copying official coins for profit. They were unofficial products when coins were in short supply. Late 4th century counterfeits (siliquae) are in as good silver as the official coins. But at this early stage of Carausius’s reign it’s all very murky - who was producing what and why. Carausius wanted to appear legitimate and so wanted high purity silver, so the coin fits with that. But the style of this coin doesn’t suggest it’s official. So who knows.

Thanks John, I understand what you are saying. I’m not a coin expert, just a detectorist who enjoys learning as much as possible about the items I find, so thanks for the clarification. Others have suggested that it is likely to be genuine and that sloppy legends and execution are typical of Carausius.

Also had this email from Dr Sam Moorhead:

8 hours ago, John Conduitt said:

I'd go with Dr Sam Moorhead on this, that it could well be a 'counterfeit', although at the time (286-8) most Carausius coins could be counterfeits as the styles are all over the place. He usurped power in northern Gaul and Britain where he had no mint or treasury, so goodness knows how he produced his coins. He may have allowed semi-official issues to be produced. Later he seems to have worked it out and the issues are more obviously official.

Thanks for the reply. I had an XRF test done on it and it appears to be genuine as it’s made of Silver 91.2%.

7 hours ago, Harry G said:

That is a very interesting coin! The lines are a bit blurry when it comes to barbarous / official issues of Carausius, and this looks like it is a bit of both. The legend is blundered, and the style is quite crude, but it looks like it's made of silver, which barbarous issues typically aren't. Perhaps it was overstruck on an earlier denarius to make sure it has good silver quality?

I don't own any Carausius denarii (unfortunately), but here are a few of my "barbarous" antoninianii of Carausius.

IM[P CARA]VSIVS P F AVG / Radiate bust of Carausius facing right

[PTO(?)]IIIIC, σ+∩ in exergue / Wolf facing right, suckling Romulus and Remus

 

 

IMP CARAVSIVS [AVG] / Radiate bust of Carausius facing right

PA[X A]VG / Pax (?) standing, facing left, holding spear and shield.

Thanks for the reply. I recently took the coin to an auction house to have it valued, they also did an XRF test on it. It came up as 91.2% Silver, 3.2% Copper, 2.4% Iron and 1.6% Lead. According to Dr Sam that would mean it’s an official issue.

Looking a bit better now it’s been glued back together.

4 minutes ago, wuntbedruv said:

I consult professionally on matters relating to conservation and suchlike. My advice would be to either leave the piece as it is (broken) OR at the very most have a professional conservator re-join the two fragments using an appropriate adhesive (i.e. conservation grade). I would not recommend going down any other route or via any individual who will 'restore' the find by hiding the fact it has broken - this is part of the life history of the object and should not be obfuscated. As a collector, I would pay more for the piece if it were broken in two or broken but obviously re-adhered in a sympathetic matter as opposed to being completely 'restored' to its 'original' appearance with all signs of a break removed.

A very nice, important and academically significant find - well done on getting it recorded!

Thank you for your comments. I agree, the break may well of been done at the time and be part of the history and interest in the coin. I’m not looking into a full restoration that hides the break.

This is the write up by Dr Sam Moorhead:

2 hours ago, CPK said:

What a find! Metal detecting, I presume? The detail is fantastic!

I'd look into getting it professionally repaired. It will still not be worth as much as if it had never been broken, but for sure more than it is now, in two pieces.

Yes, metal detecting. The two pieces were found about 5 metres apart.

I recently found this new type of Carausius denarius. I’m curious to know how much its value has been affected by it being broken in two? Obviously it isn’t worth as much as it would be if whole but it is still unique. It has also been suggested that it may have been a contemporary copy and that the break may have been made deliberately to check for a copper alloy core.