I just bought a new Nero. It was intended as an upgrade to my previous Nero coin; a Seleucid and Pieria minted in Antioch. Not that I didn't like that coin, it was just a bit smallish to be a good match with others in the 12 Caesars set I'm building. Also there was the fact that it's a provincial. Not that I'm prejudiced against them, but I was looking for the entire set to be Imperial. So I bought this As minted in Lugdunum. I was drawn to the patina, the fact that it is well centered, the uniformity of the flan and the facts that the legends are all there and for the most part clearly legible. I also was intrigued by the fact that it was a bare head portrait. These seem less common. And of course, the price was right. Yet I look at the portraits and I think I like the Antioch mint portrait better. My photos are somewhat deceiving in that they make the provincial look larger, when in fact it is quite a bit smaller than the As minted in Lugdunum. What do you ancient numismatists think? Please use this opportunity to post your Nero Coins and thoughts on collecting this Emperor. Nero; AD 54-68 AE Semis; Seleucid and Pieria, Antioch Mint; 19mm/7.2g OBV; CAESAR IMP NERO CL AV, laureate head of Nero right; lituus REV; SC within wreath. RPC I 4297, SNG COP.161 Nero; 66 AD AE As; Lugdunum Mint; 29mm/9.3g Obv: IMP NERO CAESAR AVG P MAX TR POT PP; Bust of Nero facing right Rev: SC in field; singed Victory walking left with shield emblazoned with SPQR (RIC 541)
It's hard to talk about an upgrade when the coins are so dissimilar. I like them both equally. I agree that the portrait on the provincial is better, but only because it's in a slightly higher grade, with a bit more detail. The portrait on the as is just as nicely-engraved, but worn down to F. At any rate, great overall coins.
Its not uncommon for provincials to have better artistry than imperials, especially after the first century. Maybe its just my eye, but to me the east seemed to have higher standards of artistic talent. Weird, I just got an example identical to your Lugdunum piece. My reverse is poorer, but my obverse might be a tad higher grade. I didn't really "buy" it, but rather got it in a lot of coins. I also own your first coin from Antioch. It was from a seller who still sells on Ebay, I lucked into it by seeing the BuyItNow about 4 minutes after he posted it, (complete coincidence). Its my favorite example of a black patina I own. Nice ones Race!
Thanks Medoraman. Great comments. I tend to agree, the artistry is more refined on the provincial. Ultimately though, I was looking for something that fit size-wise into the other Caesars in my set I'm building. Here's a better size comparison.
Whimsical thought...if you're a hard core republican you might view FDR as somewhat of a Nero.... Sorry Mods. I know...No politics!
Nero actually had a ton more support throughout the empire than most people realize, (probably more than Nero himself realized). For decades, false Nero's would pop up either claiming to be Nero or his heir. He was not hated by most Romans as the old saying would have us believe. Yes, he lowered the purity of the denari to help pay for Rome's rebuilding, but not nearly as badly or often as future emperors did.
I agree with other that I prefer the provincial portrait then the other, but I like both and there is no reason you can have two coins of the same emperor. Its hard to only just do one when some have lovely portraits or cool reverses. My neros which everyone has seen.
Isn't it curious that despite the difference in diameter between the two coins, the bust of Nero on the provincial is almost as large as the bust on the as.
I like the second coin Race, to get all your coins the same size for the 12 Caesar's set. the first coin is a awesome coin too!! How many Caesar coins do you have???
My observations about the two coins: (1) The provincial coin has been noticeably tooled in order to bring out the obverse legend and delineate the SC on the reverse -- note the "gutters" around the letters. It also appears that the obverse laurel wreath and reverse wreath have been re-engraved to give them higher relief. The as, on the other hand, appears to have been only lightly/moderately smoothed and is, in my opinion, a much more natural-state coin. (2) While the provincial's portrait might appear a little more artistic, the portrait on the as is reasonably good and doesn't appear to be stylistically much different from comparable asses: NERO AE As (7.56 g.) Rome circa 64 A.D. NERO CLAVD CAESAR AVG GER P M TR P IMP P P Radiate head of Nero right. Rev. GENIO AVGVSTI Genius naked to waist standing left, holding cornucopia, patera over lighted altar, I in exergue. RIC 215 (3) The surfaces of the provincial coin are very rough, whereas the imperial coin has fairly nice surfaces with almost no roughness or pitting. Overall, I personally don't like the provincial at all and would not keep it in a 12 Caesars (NOT Caesar's) collection.
Great commentary Ides. Exactly the kind of input I was looking for. My relatively new eye never would have detected the tooling on the provincial. I like your example. Outstanding detail.
Since I am out away from books, I have an excuse to show coins with minimal attributions. I tend to prefer Nero's Imperials to the Provincials I have but I know there are many better than the budget ones I have. Macedon Magnesia ad Sipylum Sagalassus, Pisidia Antioch
Wow, Bannon => those are absolutely fantastic coins!! (big-time, congrats!!) Ummm, I also have an example that I've always kinda liked ... Hey Bannon => awesome, awesome new pick-up!! (you rock, brother!!)
Man, I love it when Jonny Quest and Race Bannon are both in the same thread ... I'm gonna switch into my Hadji avatar for the rest of the day ... => oh, but because it is a holiday this weekend, I will be wearing my stunning Canada bathing-suit!! (Happy Easter!!)
I am honored Hadji! But I must say...from a purely aesthetic perspective...I like your Canada flag avatar the best.
