Article in CoinWeek about Claudius I

One more -- the other common type besides the Libertas! -- that I didn't think I had a photo of, but found an old pdf of the dealer's listing on ebay from 2018. Thus a photo, lifted from the pdf, that looks worse than the coin itself!

Claudius I AE As, AD 42-54, Spanish Mint. Obv. Bare head left, TI CLAVDIVS CAESAR AVG P M TR P IMP / Rev. Minerva advancing right, brandishing spear & holding shield, S - C across fields. RIC I 116, Sear RCV I 1862, BMCRE 206. 26.7 mm., 8.99 g.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

Just back from my local dealer's where he has a huge bin of bargain stuff in cardboard holders - the usual copper stuff from the 20th century, mostly. I poked around, unenthusiastically, but then I found this:



Yep, that's the price - $0.50. A snack? Fifty cents won't get you a pack of peanut butter crackers out of a vending machine these days! Not a beauty, but not a total dog cookie either. Here's a photo I took at home:



It may be an imitative, but the portrait is pretty nice, I think, and the weight is a robust 10.77 grams (28 mm diameter,) which considering the wear and pitting is pretty decent.

A question: is this an as or a dupondius? OCRE is, once again, confusing me - with the legend ending in IMP, it is a dupondius? Everybody else seems to call both of these an as (Wildwinds, etc.).

http://numismatics.org/ocre/results...facet:"Minerva"+AND+portrait_facet:"Claudius"

RIC 100 dupondius: Obv. legend ends with IMP: TI CLAVDIVS CAESAR AVG P M TR P IMP

RIC 116 as: Obv. legend ends with PP: TI CLAVDIVS CAESAR AVG P M TR P IMP P P

 

Here's a Provincial Claudius (though I see it sometimes listed as Imperial) that I'm very fond of. I posted it recently on the "Follow the Game" thread, where I noted that the reverse references Legio X and XII of Augustus, whose veterans settled at Colonia Augusta Achaica Patrensis. I'm not great with Legionary history, but Andreas Pangerl claims the legions referenced are most likely Legio X Fretensis and Legio XII Fulminata:

Roman Provincial. Achaea, Patras [Patraea]. Claudius AE As or Assarion (11.56g, 25mm, 1h). Legionary Issue.
Obv: TI CLAVDIVS CAESAR AVG GERM. Head of Claudius left.
Rev: COL A A PATR X XII. Aquila between two standards.

Ref: BCD Peloponnesos II 2782 (this coin); RPC 1256, GERM (ex. 24 = possibly this coin, wrong photo and legend var?).
Prov: Ex-Peter J. Merani Collection, CNG EA 490 (21 April 2021), 70;
BCD Collection, CNG 81 (BCD Peloponnesos Part II, 20 May 2009), Lot 2782;
Frank Kovacs Collection (purchased from Kovacs, December 1996, “ex-Private Collection” per BCD's handwritten note).​

And an imitative Sestertius that was given the "NCAPR" countermark. Mattingly's BMCRE and Richard Baker (1984) were certainly exaggerating when they called it "the commonest of all countermarks" (Baker added a qualification, "commonest of all early countermarks," my emphasis). But it is certainly a very familiar one to anyone interested in countermarks. There is still disagreement about exactly what it means:

Roman Imperial. Claudius (Augustus, 41-54 CE) AE Sestertius (35mm, 21.84g, 6h). Contemporary imitation or Western “Branch Mint” [NGC], c. 41/2 CE or later. Countermarked under Nero or Vespasian.

Obv: TI CLAVDIVS CAESAR AVG P M TR P IMP. Laureate head right.
Rev: SPES AVGVSTA S C. Spes, draped, advancing left, holding flower in right hand and raising skirt with left.

Ref: RIC (I) 99. Pangerl 60.
Prov: Ex-Richard Baker Countermark Collection, CNG EA 439 (6 Mar 2019), Lot 224;
CNG EA 483 (6 Jan 2021), Lot 408 (unnamed Al Kowsky consignment; CT Thread 334702); NGC Ancients, 2101304-007.​

Many accept it as a "validating" countermark struck under Nero's reign (some presuming "N" to be for Nero). But the Richard Baker Countermark Collection contained examples that led him and CNG's cataloger to conclude that it was stamped around the reign of Vespasian, and at multiple locations (some, perhaps, during the civil war). (I forget who Cataloged it for CNG, if it was @Ardatirion or someone else, but I think they've commented here about it.) EDIT: Yes, it was Ardatirion, per this comment (CT Post 4888886, 25 Sep 2020), in a very useful thread on this topic (CT Thread 354818, 10 Feb 2020).

Quoting CNG's text for this type from several coins of the Baker Coll.:

"Previously believed to be applied during the reign of Nero, a specimen in the Pangerl collection appears on an as of Vespasian, necessitating a later date for the series. Three distinct production centers can be identified for this issue, in Spain, Gaul, and Italy. The Italian type is distinguished by the frequent joining of the letters NC at the base." (E.g., EA 434, 189. See also CNG 111, 486 for a further refinement of dating.)​

CNG preserved that attribution in their later sale from Al Kowsky.

Baker must've changed his mind sometime after his 1984 article on “The Countermarks Found on Ancient Roman Coins: A Brief Introduction" (Journal of the Society of Ancient Numismatics [SAN] XV, 3: 52-58), since there he described in as applied under Nero's reign. (Available in HTML on ACCLA website, with a link to photocopy .pdf at the bottom of page.)

Colin Kraay, who is usually cited, believed the N was for Nero, and could claim a tradition to at least Borghesi in the 19th century, and including Mattingly's BMCRE vol 1. His (1956/1979) “The Behavior of Early Imperial Countermarks” (pp. 113-136 in Essays in Roman Coinage Presented to Harold Mattingly) is usually cited for this. (Essays Mattingly is a highly worthwhile volume if you can get a copy; I've got the 1979 reprint and love it.) He also discusses NCAPR in his brief German paper (1956), “Gegenstempel auf Überprägten Römischen Münzen,” in Schweizer Münzblatter [SMB] (6): 4-7.

 

Thanks for sharing the article! Here's an as of Claudius with the common Libertas reverse:

 

A most useful summing-up of this intriguing countermark, Curtis. That single Vespasian example causing the whole series to be questioned in regards to time-of-issue is interesting, but I am not sure a single example for such an abundant issue is enough to "necessitate" ditching the entire Nero-issue theory. It would be great to find more of these Flavian examples.

Here is one more thing that I also found intriguing when researching these - a comment about these countermarks being found in the vicinity of the Meta Sudans and Colossus (the Vespasian example is mentioned as well):

"The countermark NCAPR was applied to numerous orichalcum coins of the reigns of Tiberius and Claudius. NCAPR is most often explained as "Nero Caesar Augustus Populo Romano." Others believe NCAPR abbreviates "Nummus Caesare Augusto Probatus" or "Nero Caesar Augustus Probavit" (probavit means approved). Excavations of the Meta Sudans and the northeastern slope of the Palatine Hill in Rome indicate that this countermark was applied for Nero's congiarium (distribution to the people) in 57 A.D., which supports the Populo Romano interpretation. Varieties of this relatively common countermark are identified by some authors as applied in either Italy, Spain or Gaul. The countermark is not found on coins bearing the name or portrait of Caligula. Clearly any coins of Caligula that were still in circulation and collected for application of the countermark were picked out and melted down, in accordance with his damnatio, rather than being countermarked and returned to circulation. A NCAPR countermark has, however, been found on a Vespasian dupondius which, if genuine and official, seems to indicate the N may refer to Nerva, not Nero.

RB54866. Orichalcum sestertius, RIC I 115, BMCRE I 192, SRCV I 1854; countermark: Pangerl 1, VF, flat areas, Rome mint, weight 29.681g, maximum diameter 36.7mm, die axis 180o, 42 A.D.; obverse TI CLAVDIVS CAESAR AVG P M TR P IMP P P, laureate head right; reverse SPES AVGVSTA, Spes standing left, flower in right, lifting skirt with left, SC below; countermark: NCAPR within
rectangular incuse; SOLD"

This quote is from a FORVM listing - for reasons known only to the computer gods, my pdf links do not work on FORVM (in other words, I save these files to pdf, which preserve the web address; most of the time I can click on this address and it pulls up the site; not for FORVM).
Useless link: https://www.forumancientcoins.com/catalog/roman-and-greek-coins.asp?param=54866q00.j...

And I could find no primary source for these excavations at the Meta Sudans; I know Mussolini did a lot of digging around there (and leveled the Meta Sudans in the process! Why?).

I have one of these, a poor specimen that also demonstrates the heartbreak of bronze disease.

Here it is when I first got it:



A year or so later I became suspicious of some green areas. After a lot of digging and soaking, I managed to get out most (all?) of the BD, which seems to be dwelling underneath the hard green patina. Fortunately the countermarked area was spared (so far). I'm keeping an eye on it:


Claudius Æ Sestertius
CM for Nero or Nerva
(c. 41-54 A.D. host)
[TI CLAVDIVS CAES]AR A[VG PM TR P IMP (P P?)], laureate head right / [SPES AVGVSTA], SC in exergue, Spes walking left, holding flower and lifting hem of skirt.
RIC 99 (no PP) or RIC 115 (PP)
(24.36 grams / 32 mm)
eBay Sep. 2020
Countermark: NCAPR (11 mm x 3 mm rectangle). NC is joined (Italy) Pangerl 60.
"Nero Caesar Aug. Populo Romano"
"Nummus Caesare Augusto Probatus"
"Nero Caesar Augustus Probavit"
“Nerva Caesar Augustus Probavit”
“Three distinct production centers can be identified for this issue, in Spain, Gaul, and Italy. The Italian type is distinguished by...joining of the letters NC at the base."
CNG's Dec 2018 Elec. Auction 434

Note the NC linked at the base:

 

A feature of the NCAPR mark that I find interesting is that the mark almost always appears in the same place on the host coin of that same type but varies in location for different types. The Claudius sestertii tend to have it behind the right facing head making my coin 'strange'.



The Nero Claudius Drusus is also behind the head but the head is left facing.

There are other types which regularly show the c/m on the reverse. I have not seen this addressed to include any reason for the variations or lack thereof.

It would be good to hear an explanation of the opinion that the mark dates to Vespasian.

 

This question of "genuine and official" would seem to be most significant. Is there an image?

 

@Marsyas Mike and @dougsmit -- Thanks for the comments:

This conversation has (to my enjoyment) gotten a bit technical and moved away from the original topic of the thread, so I hope it’s okay to redirect it back to a thread that was specifically about NCAPR countermarks.

I’ve added my (lengthy) reply to “NCAPR countermark on Roman coins” (CT 354818, 10 Feb 2020), in which we were already on the same topics, even discussing all of our same examples.

My reply / new comment is here:
https://www.cointalk.com/posts/8289519

For reference, here are three other NCAPR-Countermark threads I’d recommend reading:

(1) @dougsmit 's “NCAPR” (CT 311048, 12 Feb 2018) about his specimen stamped in front of the face;

(2) @Al Kowsky 's “Claudius Sestertius with NCAPR Counterstamp” (CT 334702, 9 Mar 2019) about my specimen;

(3) @jamesicus “Claudius countermarked coinage (updated)” (CT 364299, 10 Aug 2020) also has much of the same material and includes some additional references and mention of Britain.