2 new Republicans

The mail today produced two very different mid grade Republican denarii. I like Republicans that show something just a little different from most. These fit that requirement.

The first is c.140 BC at the time that Rome revalued the denarius from 10 to 16 asses. A few issues spelled out this change replacing the X denomination mark with XVI. Soon afterward it became more common to use a * monogram combining the elements of XVI rather than spelling it out. This is one of the full XVI issues.


C. Valerius Flaccus AR denarius 19mm 3.94g Crawford 228/1
Roma head / Victory in biga
I usually avoid getting just another Roma/chariot type but the XVI made this a keeper.

Second is much later at 55 BC after types became more original. The head is Mars but the reverse is a battle scene described by the experts as a horseman spearing a combatant who protects himself with a shield while attacking a second, but unarmed, figure. Honestly I can't say I see how they decided that the one was attacking the other rather than just being two enemies. Perhaps better specimens are more clear. Under the shield held by the small figure there is something I am reading as a helmet that fell off someone's head. The coin has a good, old tone.

P. FONTEIVS PF CAPITO IIIVIR / MN FONT TR MIL
P. Fonteius Capito Crawford 429/1 55 BC 17mm 3.85g.

What do you see in the scene? This is a crop from the full size image which was reduced above.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

It does look like the one is skewering the other with a sword.

Both are excellent coins, Doug. I need to get back into the game pretty soon. I'm keeping busy with computer issues and such, but I miss buying a RR every now and then. These two would fit nicely in my collection. Great finds.

 

I love the Republican coins . And really like both , very nice pick ups .

 

this is a sword. So it does looked like the guy with shield was stabbing the other little guy

 

Great stuff, Doug. Love the second especially.

 

Both are nice!

This example shows the battle scene a little clearer, and it seems apparent that the ('Gallic') enemy is about the skewer the other combatant, as Bing said:
http://www.acsearch.info/search.html?id=1099

More info on what the reverse may depict is in the link.

 

those are awesome...i always dig a biga and that little battle scene is neat as can be.

i see left little guy as wounded and falling, his helmet has come off and is to the right. he still holds his shield (has a little dot on the to the left like the do on the raised shield). the little guy on the right is his comrade (same helmets and shields), and still defending against the horseman.

 

I think I've seen the first one before at a show, but with "X", not "XVI".
I want to try to find that one again...

 

The RR coins with an "X" are fairly common, but all RR coins are really neat in my estimation.

 

So 1 denarius was worth 10 asses from establishment of currency? Then they switched it to 16 asses from 140 to 100bc, then switched it back to 10?

the star was a moneyer mark before it was used to represent 16

 

and what about that, on Doug's coin exergue ?



OK, you'll find me outside !
Nice republican coin BTW guys (and gals)

Q

 

Great new additions, Doug ... ummm, I'm still not a super-fan of the chariot types (even with the XVI), but I am a super-fan of hearing why you liked it and why you scooped it up!!

=> oh, and I love the battle-scene example (super toning) and an interesting fight-scene (after seeing the close-up with the special-effects, I tend to agree with the seller's description .... however, I could also be talked into seeing two defenders => the first with his helmet knocked-off and a sword through his body and the second protecting himself with his shield) ... either way

=> congrats on your new additions

 

Here is my one and only chariot example (I bought my example because I just couldn't resist the cool obverse showing Vejovis tossin' a thunderbolt)

C. Licinius Lf Macer
84-83 BC
Vejovis & Minerva in Quadriga



https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vejovis

 

Where did you get the idea they switched back? After a period of honestly in labeling they stopped marking 16 and used the X to mean denarius whatever the exchange in asses. I always thought it interesting that they continued to use 'sestertius' or 2 1/2 to mean the coin worth twice the dupondius which means 2 pounder. Of course we continue to call our months September (7th), October (8th), November (9th) and December (10th) long after adding two months (July and August) pushed them up two positions. Names of familiar objects last longer than the meanings that caused them to be what they were in the beginning.

 

Descriptions of scenes on these coins often date back quite a way and people are slow to change ideas that were pontificated by the first level scholars. There have been a few people reattribute things like lions into big dogs but getting a new idea accepted generally is a difficult process.

 

Fantastic additions Doug, really like the battle scene on the second piece.

 

Are we sure the scene is not the very first depiction of a pizza delivery? The little guy is giving the bigger guy a couple dupondii for that giant pizza loaded with so many toppings it looks like a shield.

Awesome additions Doug. I really enjoy the various helmets of Mars on the Roman coins.

 

If it's not a pizza delivery then perhaps the horseman is dealing a death blow to the right figure (spearing straight down into the right figure's thorasic cavity) as that figure is fighting/sticking the horseman's comrade to the left. Thank goodness the cavalry arrived.

 

Very cool coins Doug!

 

My main question is how the attributor decided that the whole was to be taken as one scene rather than a split with rider above and combat below. This format is used on other Republicans like the one below where no one suggests that the chariot is jumping over the guy fighting the beast. This one does have some dispute on what is being shown in the lower section as I recall but I do not have the details at hand. Most say it is a lion but there is a case for wild dog based on a historical event. The one below admits uncertainty.
http://www.acsearch.info/search.html?id=200302