Domitian Bronze With Misspelled Name?

This is the first time I've seen Domitian's name misspelled on a coin (RIC 347), so is this just a sloppy fake, or the work of a very distracted die engraver?

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

Must have been this same dyslexic die-engraver that forgot a letter on the obverse inscription of this Domitian denarius:



Domitian, AD 81-96.
Roman AR denarius, 3.44 g, 17.2 mm, 7 h.
Rome, AD 91.
Obv: IMP CAES DOMIT AVG GERM P M TR XI (error; should read TR P XI), laureate head, right.
Rev: IMP XXI COS XV CENS P P P, Minerva advancing right, brandishing a javelin and holding a shield.
Refs: RIC 156; RIC² 724; BMCRE p. 336, note; Cohen 269; RCV --.

 

It's at auction (not ebay) with a current high bid of 1 GBP, and an estimated win of just 30-40 GBP. I'm not bidding on it, but is it proper for me to add a link here to the auction? It ends in just over three days.

 

Those are 'missing' letters, but what about 'extra' letters like on this CONSTANS.
(CONSTATANS)

CONSTANS RIC VIII. Arles 58 (Error)

 

Someone please correct me if I am wrong about this, but I think the general etiquette is to not point out specific auction listings until the auction has ended.

 

This misspelled Domitian just went for 35 GBP at auction. There is a correct example on ebay for $150, and another on MAShops for $140, and probably more elsewhere in those price ranges, so 35 GBP was a steal. That's probably why I'm not a collector, because I don't know why a coin with such a mistake on it doesn't generate any interest, regardless of the denomination, condition, etc.

 

I think spelling errors will generate more interest in modern coinage because they are much more uniform and standardised.

Ancient coinage has such dizzying variety that a spelling error seems pretty non important. That's not even taking into account the fact that ancients were hand struck, so no two coins are alike.

 

Actually, that price seems about right consider the wear on the coin.

Prices on eBay are irrelevant; they are all over the map. Ignore them.

I haven't seen the coin on MAShops, but my guess is that it's in better condition than the OP.

 

The one on MAShops is in better condition, but neither of them is stellar (I like the portrait more on the flawed coin). Here they are, side by side:



I know I don't have the finesse of a collector, so I'm probably not going to understand why one example sells over another. My mind just tells me that if I were looking for this particular Domitian, and I could get one unique to the examples everyone else has, I would want that one.

 

The one on the left -- in lower grade and with the misspelling -- has WAY MORE eye-appeal.

 

Yeah, from personal experience, that is purdy easy to do!

Question: Is it truly a spelling error, or is it a form of abbreviation / truncating a word?

 

Do you plan on collecting in the future? Why don't you collect now? Or do you collect coins from different categories? I can tell you my collecting interests have been all over the place over the years. At present, my favorite set is a 27 coin per century set which simply includes just 1 coin from every century. I love this set for the diverse history spanning all those centuries and populations.

 

Is it just me or does the OP coin look soft? I would PM the owner but since it's no one here I would just state that I do NOT think it was a good deal for 35£

 

No, I won't be a collector in the future, either. I don't collect now because I can't afford it, and that's okay by me. I still find ancient coins absolutely fascinating, as well as the people who collect them. I love ancient history, specifically Rome.

 

Especially if you can safely assume the portraitist and die engraver were the same guy, it's fun to see Domitian smirking over the omission.

 

Actually, I had the same question.

 

I have a "Domian" in my collection. Perhaps it is Domitian's lesser known, kinder, gentler, twin brother. ;-)

 

Despite the softness, I think the DOMIAN coin is authentic and was a good buy at $60 or so. Presumably the engraver paused after writing DOMI, then mistakenly continued as though he had already written DOMITI.

Spelling/copying errors are very rare on early Roman imperial coins, so worth acquiring if you see one and appreciate specialist rarities.

Even if the coin were a cast, which I do not believe, it is of official style so presumably represents a regular struck original and deserves addition in a footnote to RIC Titus 347.