Juno Moneta- Die, Anvil, Tongs, Hammer

Or maybe the description of a garlanded reverse die is a fanciful cataloguer description seized by generations of dealers to boost sales. Other examples that are hard to prove/disprove: the Tribute Penny denarius; Vercingetorix portrait denarius.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

Reluctantly, I think I may have to agree with you on the identity of the object. Also weighing against the die theory: if it is a die, it is ginormous in relation to the flans visible on some of these coins' reverses. Example below, from CNG's archives:

 

I updated the description. thanks.

 

That's a fabulous example! Congratulations!

 

Overly dramatic/romantic coin description by dealers and collectors is a real phenomenon of course, but in the case at hand Crawford--not known as a shill for the market!--is among those describing it as a punch die, complete with footnote defending his description. Despite that, on consideration I do think Carausius has it right.

Phil Davis

 

I thought I had a bargain on a Vcoins buy of the above coin, after having paid for coin, Aegean store noticed and to their credit withdrew it from sale and refunded my money, before sending. It looks very similar to your example Doug.

 

Thanks. Sorry if I was a bit feisty about it (having a bad day). As you've seen, many dealers and researchers are coming around to this way of thinking. It's an interpretation that could go either way, with the Moneta obverse and other tools. I do think the cap "fits" better, because of shape, relative size, as you noted, and other examples of garlanded caps in the Republican coinage. It's still a very cool type either way.

 

Yes, I was overstating that a bit. Certainly the Moneta obverse with other, obvious tools provides contextual justification to identify it as a die. The description is certainly not negligent and "fanciful" wasn't really fair.

 

You weren't at all rude about it, so there is no need to apologize

I appreciate your insight and think this whole exchange has been very interesting!

 

You should have heard me while I was typing.....KIDDING!!

 

a very nice coin... and what a way to enter the game! (plus very interesting posts and dialogue peeps)

 

...did sumein say Vulcan?!?

 

I missed your mention of visible flans earlier. Is that really a flan or just a compass hole? Many Roman coins have visible dots in the center of the flan caused by the engraver anchoring the compass to etch the border of the die/inscription. Not to be confused with centrition dimples on Provincial coins, which were part of flan production and show as a divot. These were part of die production and show as a raised dot. Usually these dots get covered by devices. On rare designs with empty centers, the dots are sometimes visible. Notable examples are Antony legionaries, where the dots are generally incorporated into the galley design, but sometimes get exposed in the field.

 

Vulcan


Roman coin die shaped like a cap and like the cap/wreath on the coin

 

I managed to find a pic of the fake. Would have been good if genuine for $70.

 

Oh. Hmm, yeah, I guess you're right again . I only see this on a few coins in archives and position-wise, it is more or less in the center of the design.

Let's see if I can make a third mistake on this coin... Moneta's earring is shaped like a hammer and reiterates the coin-making theme. (kidding... or am I? )

 

The plot thickens. Interesting discussion everyone.

 

To be fair, the coins of this period are commonly struck very sloppily and most exhibit flat striking or are off center. Maybe these dies were hard to strike?

FWIW, I'm in the "cap" camp as well, but it's fun to think about.

 

those who hammered these coins should have had a..

 

I'm curious about that die. Do you know whether that's a genuine Roman die? It was my understanding that forger's dies have survived to modern times, but that no official dies are known. I've seen forger dies that are cylindrical.