Otho experts - Please comment on my NewP

STONE

So, I recently picked up this Otho Denarius. I took a big gamble because I have not been able to match this die combo to any other Otho pieces (i.e. especially the reverse design).
The obverse is the standard IMP (M) OTHO CAESAR AVG TR P and the reverse is PRINCEPS IVVENTVTIS around the Altar.
It's weight is 3.47g. Coin show's some pitting and scratches.


(Princeps Iuventutis means first of youth or first amongst the young

Forum Ancient Coins
Princeps Juventutis was a name of dignity even in
the most flourishing days of the republic. It was an
honorary appellation given to him who took the
lead of the greater and lesser boys appointed to
perform a part in the game of Troy (ad ludum Troja).
The prince of the youth was, in the earlier times,
the chief of the Equestrian Order. Under the empire,
and from the very commencement of that monarchical
form of government, this title, although simply
honorary, appears to have been given, as an
apanage, to such young princes of the imperial family
as were destined to reign, and was sometimes
conferred on them at a very early age. The dignity in
certain instances accompanied that of Caesar.


Given the bio I have read about Otho it is certainly possible that Otho was perceived/destined to become Caesar some day.
So, this reverse is theoretically conceivable for Otho. Although, still, I have not seen another Otho Denarius with this reverse.
Again, it's not too unusual for new dies/die marriages to be discovered/reported for Roman emperors. Although it is my thinking
that emperors with shorter reigns (such as Otho) had a more limited quantity of dies/die marriages and therefore numismatic
examples would be better known/reported in numismatic circles.

From further investigation, this reverse is a very close match to that seen on Domitian issues - same design and inscription.
As you probably know, Domitian was Caesar very shortly after Otho's short reign. It's theoretically possible, although I have
my doubts, that the Rome mint forgot to destroy one of Otho's obverse dies (especially a year or two later) after his death
and accidentally (or maybe even intentionally) used it to strike a Domitian issue using a Domitian reverse. Therefore creating
a Mule?

I don't think it is a counterfeit/fourree due to the pitting showing a solid silver center.



So, what do I have here?
1) New Otho die marriage?
2) Mule (Otho/Domitian)?
3) Other (counterfeit/fourree, etc.)?


Thanks in advance for any insight you can provide

Aethelred

I am no expert on ancient coins and certainly no expert on the coinage of Otho, so my opinion should be taken as that and nothing more.

To me the coin appears VERY suspect. The bust does not look like anything I have ever seen on a genuine coin of Otho, I can't think of a reason this reverse type would have been used (it certainly was NOT issued under Nero or Galba). In addition to the the surfaces do not suggest a genuine Roman coin at all. I suspect a modern fake, the weight is in the correct range but that is all this coin has in it's favor.

STONE

Thanks. You hit on some areas I purposely did not mention above.

The Bust looked vaguely familiar for it's rounded shape, but slightly different from the others I compared it to.
Some of the lettering looked more crude than usual, especially the 'S' in CAESAR.

I do know that modern counterfeits are intentionally damaged to show that they are full silver, and to hide
modern manufacturing marks.

NiceCurrency

rather crude and bubbly, strange portrait

I'm no expert in ancient coins, but this one raises a lot of red flags...

bronzemat

Have a feeling its fake too. Post it on the fake section on www.forumancientcoins.com and they can tell you more if it is.

STONE

<< <i>Have a feeling its fake too. Post it on the fake section on www.forumancientcoins.com and they can tell you more if it is. >>


On it

bronzemat

Saw it, give to them time to reply, sometimes its fast, sometimes its slow.

SmEagle1795

Looks fake to me, even though the weight is correct as has been mentioned. If you don't get any responses on Forvm, message the member "jmuona" there - he is the foremost expert on all things Otho

bronzemat

They replied, Barry Murphy said its a fake with a legit reason.

lordmarcovan

I'd have thought fourree.

But I suppose it's just a counterfeit. Which begs the question of how old a counterfeit. It does kind of look ancient to me.

Strange piece, but interesting. I suppose if it's modern, they did a good job of scuffing it up.

PS- I just went and read the FORVM thread about it, so I'll link it up here.

TPRC

Great thread and great analysis on the link. I would never have considered this a fake.

nicholasz219

I appreciate learning about the reasons fourees were done and or what the "angle" was in getting money out of forgeries. In the days of standard coinage/paper, it is pretty easy to understand that if you make something that looks like everything else ($100 bill) and pass a fake for a real note, now you have many $ profit. With many circulating issues from many different emperors and designs, knowing that a counterfeiter would use an old design style to try and pass off a coin as a higher silver content coin is fascinating. I appreciate stumbling into threads like this because I just do not seem to have the stamina to read pages upon pages of posts in one sitting.