My coin show Friday turned up two Republican denarii that really appealed to me. One I bought; the other was left for someone else. I left a really perfect EF fine style Roma/chariot coin with a moneyer I do not have. I bought a coin that could be better in terms of condition but had designs best described as NOT the standard Roma/chariot. View attachment 328752 L. Caesius used a left facing bust of Veijovis hurling a thunderbolt. Behind his head is a monogram that has been interpreted in two different ways by different scholars. Unfortunately my specimen is a bit crowded at that side so you might want to look up a perfect example before deciding which theory you prefer. At the top is a P. Below is an A of the style where the crossbar is v shaped rather than straight. Some say this is AP for Argentum Publicum (Public Silver) denoting the metal for the issue was from the state treasury rather than provided by the moneyer. We have no records that state whether or not this issue was from public silver. The same monogram can be read as ROMA with every line of the monogram being part of at least two letters. I prefer the Roma theory. The reverse shows two men in an odd semi-seated posture with a dog between them. They are identified as Lares (household gods) by ligate letters on either side: LA at the left and retrograde RE at the right. The standard reading for the right side is PRE making the whole Lares Praestites or Lares that guard the city. I am unclear how the monogram here is better read that way than simple completing the word Lares. In either case we see guardian gods and a guard dog. Most simple is the exergue LCAESI naming the moneyer of 112-111 BC. My example has a terrible rendition of the bust of Vulcan at reverse top with faint tongs behind him. This coin sure looked a lot better at the show before I started comparing it to others shown online and in books. At the show I saw the different obverse and reverse figures; at home I became more aware of the weak minor details which add interest to the type. TIF posted a better example of this coin a while back: http://www.cointalk.com/threads/ancients-l-caesius-roman-republic-some-questions.236766/
Some of the details may be just abit weak, but at least they're all there. One of these caught my eye in the last CNG e-auction but I didn't win it. I have to admit what I'm curious to know is what fraction of the following coin's $368 hammer+fee price you paid given that yours is still a nice example of an interesting issue : http://cngcoins.com/Coin.aspx?CoinID=257823 CNG goes with the ROMA theory. I wouldn't be able to hazard a guess without knowing if either has precedence in other RR coinage.
Note that CNG estimated their coin at $100 plus fees. Their coin is much nicer than mine. Even with that scratch on theirs, I would pay $100 +18% +postage for their coin but $368 is out of the question. That would be +$66 + postage (they don't send anything cheapest way) so the final bill would have been over $450 and you would, like me, still have a coin you might want to upgrade. The other denarius I mentioned in the OP as liking was substantially perfect but was a legend variation of my current best grade Republican (below) but just a bit nicer. I'm now thinking I should have bought it and consigned it to CNG. I don't do that sort of thing but if someone is willing to pay $450 for common scratched Republicans, it has to make you wonder. Which do we buy with our $450? Three or four junkers or one nice coin with a scratch? It turns out that the same sale had the type I left behind (but not as nice) that sold much closer to estimate. http://cngcoins.com/Coin.aspx?CoinID=257824 This just shows that there is no telling what will happen at an auction.
Great new addition ... man, I love the good ol' AR RR's ... => congrats on a bunch of great new pick-ups!!
Hey Doug ... ummm, I think you have two identical threads associated with this topic? (or maybe it's just me?)
