Misak33: Osobně si nemyslím že to je moderní falsum, pochází z velice staré sbírky.
Ani při podrobném zkoumání jsem nic podezřelého neobjevil, ale jak jsem psal výše, není to můj šálek kávy.
Uvítám další názory.

Quintus Labienus razil v Sýrii nebo Malé Asii raritní denáry, ale o ražbách jeho otce jsem nikdy neslyšel 😕

Hledal jsem to vsude, nikde jsem nic podobneho nenasel. Tak sem se zeptal na FORVM (snad ti to nevadi) a tam to bylo presunuto mezi fake coins a v komentari bylo ,,modern fake,,. Ale je mozne ze to bude videt nekdo jinak.

Díky kluci.

milstr: me to prijde divne uz od pohledu.. nevylucuju, ze to muze byt neco z 19. stoleti, stara sbirka u antiky je argument s nulovou vahou, ve velkem se padelalo uz za renesance😞

Tak jsem se dival, co by to mohlo byt a o mincich Tita Labiena se vedly diskuse hodne v 2. polovine 19. stoleti (ze bych to takhle od boku trefil?🙂 ), ale vetsinou jsou popsany jako aureus nebo denar. Konkretne k tomu mame:

In the Chronique there is an engraving and a description by
M. J. Cumano, of Faro (Portugal), of a denarius of Titus
Labienus, the father of Quintus, whose coins are well known.
On the reverse is the representation of a town, with the legend
CINGVLVM, a town built by Titus Labienus at his own expense
(Bell. Civ. i. 15). M. A. de Longperier has appended a note
expressing some slight doubt of its genuineness, and it is much
to be feared that it is a modern forgery. It would answer well
to assert that it was found at Munda, for, if the piece was true,
Spain is the only place where it could have been struck. The
piece must be seen and examined before numismatists can accept
it as genuine.
(zdroj: NUMISMATIC CHRONICLE, 1868)

In Mr. Bosanquets cabinet is a neat — but very suspicious — denarius of the T. Labienus who deserted Caesar. It has a fortified city on the reverse, over which is inscribed CINGVLVM. It will be
recollected that the Picene town of Cingulum was beautified at a lavish expense by Labienus, yet was one of the first to open its gates to the Dictator. T. Labienus was father of the above Q. whose son, from his bitter partisanship, was dubbed "Rabienus" by the imperial party. An aureus with the above reverse brought only £2 10s, at Mr. Samuel Tyssens first sale in 1802, where it was marked unpublished — which shows that its authenticity was doubted.
(zdroj: Northumberland Smyth; ATIA (Plebeian), 1856)

Pak jsem ale nasel jeste zminku v Thesaurus numismatum Romanorum.. z roku 1605. Popisuje se tam aureus Tita Labiena.

Ted se podivejme na minci. Ocividne to neni ani aureus ani denar. Provincni razba tohoto typu muze byt vzhledem k dobe, kdy zil Titus Labienus (pozdni republika) vyloucena.Triens nebo quandrans uz vubec ne, jak motivove, tak z praktickych duvodu je to uplne mimo. Napr. by tam muselo byt LABIENI na reversu misto LABIENVS na aversu, kazdopadne on nebyl urednik, ktery by mel povereni razit mince.

Zaver: jde o moderni fantazijni minci, je mozne ze pochazi uz z 1. pol. 19. stoleti, o cemz svedci diskuse o podobnych denarech v 50. a 60. letech 19. stoleti, pricemz vzdy jsou oznaceny jako podezrele. V literature po roce 1870 uz zadne zminky o mncich Tita Labiena nejsou.

dula: jak rikal Misak, mince z 4. stoleti. Pri tomhle stavu (hluboko pod zaraditelnosti do sbirky byt zacatecnika) a beznosti tech minci je ale jejich identifikace ztrata casu.

po case zas jeden denarek do sbirky:
Rim-republika, T.Carisius, r.46 pr.n.l.

Obrázky:

Klidne jste ho mohl dat do chlubirny🙂.

nechtel jsem rusit prezentaci zviratek 😉