Diocletian VICTORIA ROMANORVM from Antioch

[Victor]

I was looking through the upcoming Bertolami auction and noticed some sketchy offerings, but this one is ridiculous-- a Diocletian obverse paired with a Jovian reverse.  "Fine Art" indeed 

[Victor]

lots of tooling on this one

[Severus]

Hi, just curious if there is anything about the coin itself (the "Diocletian" from Antioch) that looks fake to you, other than the fact that it is not supposed to exist and that reverse sure does look like a Jovian maiorina (although I note that most of the ones I've seen seem to have a Christogram on the banner, and this coin does not).

Could this not be either a) a trial strike, b) a mistaken mule because the mint worker was illiterate or c) some sort of medallion instead of circulating coinage. If I wanted to argue c), I would point to the fact that the flan is twice the weight of a normal coin; Diocletian/Galerius won a huge victory over the Persians in 303, late in Diocletian's reign, so a commemorative medallion or similar would not be unexpected, and the reverse type is similar to the reverses struck for Maximinus II a couple years later that were unique to Antioch mint.   

[Victor]

Hello Severus and welcome.

There are lots of things wrong with the coin, which I probably see mainly because I am sure it is fake...the surfaces look really wrong though, the patina is artificial. Just by coincidence, the coin below is currently for sale on eBay. It is the same fake obverse paired with a tetradrachm reverse. At least the seller has it listed as a fantasy, though his description says maybe an ancient product-- which is not even a possibility.

[Severus]

OK, even *I* can see that ebay coin is an atrocious fake. The matching obverse to the Bertolami coin is pretty convincing evidence to me, so thank you for that very much. I had noticed that coin myself in the auction and was researching it, which is how I found this thread in the first place. Officially off my list!

One reason why I was maybe assigning a higher probability of it being at least ancient was another curious coin I own, from Maximinus II, a mule with an "as Caesar" obverse but a reverse from "as Augustus" (the style or lack thereof on the obverse might indicate an unofficial copy, also) and the "Diocletian" seemed similarly screwed up.

[Victor]

I own, from Maximinus II, a mule with an "as Caesar" obverse but a reverse from "as Augustus"

You mean everybody doesn't have one of these? 

I have a die match to your example


EDIT: These coins are fake

[Severus]

Knowing how Maximinus II wanted that 'Augustus' title, I would not want to be the poor mint worker who used a 'Caesar' die by mistake. I'm confident that this mistake was only made once, and predict that any future examples will also be die matches. 

[Victor]

I was reminded by a post made by Warren on another board, that the reverse is a known fake. I posted about my example 3 years ago and did not remember. 

[Severus]

The Diocletian coin at the top of the thread just hammered for £460, btw.

[Victor]

Well, as long as they don't check on the internet and find any of the posts now on several different forums about this fake; they may always be pleased with their coin.

Lech posted these two coins with the Diocletian obverse on FAC