Home World & Ancient Coins Forum

Papal Cast

This uniface medal looks better in hand, but remains a bit rough.

Honors flysis Income beezis Onches nobis Inob keesis

DPOTD

Comments

  • 291fifth291fifth Posts: 23,898 ✭✭✭✭✭

    Is it possibly an electrotype?

    All glory is fleeting.
  • thisistheshowthisistheshow Posts: 9,386 ✭✭✭✭✭

    I like it. Can you tell us more about it?

  • harashaharasha Posts: 3,079 ✭✭✭✭✭

    Is it possibly an electrotype?
    I don't know. I had not thought of that. But if so, why a uniface?

    Can you tell us more about it?
    A beautiful version of this cast is discussed at
    https://exchange.umma.umich.edu/resources/6177/view

    Honors flysis Income beezis Onches nobis Inob keesis

    DPOTD
  • TitusFlaviusTitusFlavius Posts: 317 ✭✭✭

    @harasha said:
    Is it possibly an electrotype?
    I don't know. I had not thought of that. But if so, why a uniface?

    Each side of a biface electrotype is produced separately, before the two halves are joined together. If this is an electrotype, it either wasn't joined with the other side, or perhaps no reverse was made, if it was made to be displayed in a setting where it couldn't be freely handled, and only the obverse would be visible. A separate reverse electrotype could have been made to include in the display, or maybe the uniface obverse was intended to be displayed just by itself.

    "Render therfore unto Caesar the things which are Caesar's; and unto God the things that are God's." Matthew 22: 21
  • Namvet69Namvet69 Posts: 8,624 ✭✭✭✭✭

    What a profile on this guy! No smile? Peace Roy

    BST: endeavor1967, synchr, kliao, Outhaul, Donttellthewife, U1Chicago, ajaan, mCarney1173, SurfinHi, MWallace, Sandman70gt, mustanggt, Pittstate03, Lazybones, Walkerguy21D, coinandcurrency242 , thebigeng, Collectorcoins, JimTyler, USMarine6, Elkevvo, Coll3ctor, Yorkshireman, CUKevin, ranshdow, CoinHunter4, bennybravo, Centsearcher, braddick, Windycity, ZoidMeister, mirabela, JJM, RichURich, Bullsitter, jmski52

  • No it's not an electrotype. This piece pre-dated that process by hundreds of years. Casting is the norm for these renaissance era medals. Maybe @Iosephus can offer some insight

    Highly enthusiastic about world coins, contemporary circulating counterfeits and unusual stuff <3

  • 291fifth291fifth Posts: 23,898 ✭✭✭✭✭

    @WorldCoinsDmitry said:
    No it's not an electrotype. This piece pre-dated that process by hundreds of years. Casting is the norm for these renaissance era medals. Maybe @Iosephus can offer some insight

    But an electrotype may have been done, not in the late 1600s when Innocent XI was pope, but later when the process did exist. A good electrotype would pick up the cast surfaces.

    All glory is fleeting.
  • @291fifth said:

    @WorldCoinsDmitry said:
    No it's not an electrotype. This piece pre-dated that process by hundreds of years. Casting is the norm for these renaissance era medals. Maybe @Iosephus can offer some insight

    But an electrotype may have been done, not in the late 1600s when Innocent XI was pope, but later when the process did exist. A good electrotype would pick up the cast surfaces.

    Ah, I see what you mean. It appears to be a genuine cast 17th century medal. I did not realize exactly what was being discussed :)

    Highly enthusiastic about world coins, contemporary circulating counterfeits and unusual stuff <3

  • IosephusIosephus Posts: 872 ✭✭✭

    This appears to be an aftercast of the original uniface medal by Girolamo Lucenti; that is, a cast of a cast (of a cast ...?). Each generation away from the original will degrade in quality, and this piece shows the general softness, loss of detail, and notable flaws that would not be present in the original (compare to the example that harasha linked). Also, it would be unusual to make an electrotype of such a later piece.

    That being said, I'm sure the medal is still quite impressive in hand, with a diameter of around 90mm.

Sign In or Register to comment.