Some of you have seen this before. For those who haven't - here was, and now is again the centerpiece of my collection. I owned this coin once before, then sold it off to a dealer when I decided to go for broke with music. Luckily he still had it and sold it to me at the same price he paid me for it . A cool dealer if you ask me, lol. Here it is: Mn. Cordius Rufus, 46 B.C. AR denarius Brockage error Corinthian helmet with crest upon which owl stands RVFVS Incuse of obverse Crawford 463/2; CRI 64; Sydenham 978; Cordia 4 Link if picture don't work: http://www.forumancientcoins.com/gallery/displayimage.php?pos=-66952 This is a brockage error of one of my favorite coin designs. Brockages aren't hard to find unless your set out to find a certain design, then they are nearly unique. This one is just one of two I've seen for sale in researching archives up to 2002 (the other example surpassed $1,000). It's good to have her back , in my collection she stays for now on. stainless
Just in case you don't really know how lucky you are: I sold my collection in the early 1970's and have never recognized a single coin from it again. I have photos of a few and aluminum foil rubbings of most so I could check them but they just dropped out of sight. Be glad the dealer was slow to sell your coin.
True. People do not appreciate how thinly traded coins are. They go for sale and may never be sold again in your lifetime. This is especially true of collector coins, like a brokage, than those ultra expensive, high grade coins which some people treat as commodities. I for one have not sold a coin in two decades at least, though I have given some away to YN.
Has anyone ever heard why there seems to be higher levels of brockages in Republican coins than most other series? I just see a whole bunch on brockages on these, and rarely in others.
I know that one problem would be the weight issue. With heavy bronzes you rarely see any because of this. I also see a lot from the Tetricus family and from the Indo-Sakas. They were supposed to destroy all errors back then, it would also have to do with how careful they were. stainless
Brockages: I have not been convinced that the same people issued each of the Republican issues rather than the moneyers contracted the teams individually making a variation in what was acceptable and what not. Another answer might be a technical discovery that made it less likely that a coin would stick in the die so brockages were actually produced less often after they discovered the trick. I don't know. What is considered an error by one culture might just be a variation to another so it makes sense that some issues might not have seen anything wrong with brockages worth correcting. Weights: More issuers of coins were concerned with a certain number coins being produced from a certain amount of metal than that each coin weighed exactly the average. To what extent the man on the street cared whether he had a 3.7g denarius rather than a 3.1g one, I am not sure.
