Vespasian denarii with the priestly implement reverse are not rare and I've had examples of each RIC number for quite a while. Recently I came across an unusual variant of RIC 43. Vespasian AR Denarius, 3.14g Rome mint, 71 AD RIC 43 (C2). BMC 50. RSC 43. Obv: IMP CAES VESP AVG P M; Head of Vespasian, laureate, r. Rev: Above AVGVR, below, TRI POT; Simpulum, sprinkler, jug, and lituus The vast majority of denarii from this issue with the shortened obverse legend have the break above the portrait, normally seen between VE-SP or VES-P. This is a rare variant without the break above the portrait. I suppose it was a whim of the engraver whether the legend was continuous or not. The reverse commemorates Vespasian being voted pontifex maximus by the Senate in November of 70, shortly after his arrival in Rome. It copies a type struck for Julius Caesar. My criteria for acquiring duplicates are: 1. Variant of type or legend. 2. A stylistic variant. 3. Upgrade in condition or strike. I believe the above coin meets at least two of these criteria. Plus, I love the coin's golden toning! Here is my other specimen acquired in 2007. Vespasian AR Denarius, 3.39g Rome mint, 71 AD RIC 43 (C2). BMC 50. RSC 43. Obv: IMP CAES VES-P AVG P M; Head of Vespasian, laureate, r. Rev: Above AVGVR, below, TRI POT; Simpulum, sprinkler, jug, and lituus Feel free to post your duplicates!
Nice one David great detail and toning, I only have one type as a duplicate A/Pius Sestertius column. The second one bought for two reasons first really cheap and second it has better detail of his statue on top of column.
I will add another critera that I use. Separated by time. Coins that can be allocated to different issues by style that could otherwise be described identically (and in some cases given the same RIC Id.) Probus Obv:– IMP C PROBVS P • F • AVG, Radiate, cuirassed bust right Rev:– TEMPOR FELICI, Felicitas standing right, holding caduceus and cornucopiae Mint – Lugdunum (//I). Coin 1:- Emission 4 Officina 1. Mid to Late A.D.277 Reference:– Cohen 713. Bastien 188. RIC 104 Bust type F 3.80 gms Coin 2:- Emission 6 Officina 1. A.D. 278 - 279 Reference:– Cohen 713. Bastien 269. RIC 104 Bust type F (C) 4.60 gms
I've come to appreciate beautiful toning on silver coins since I've been hanging out with ancients collectors here on the Forum and your denarius has beautiful toning! Here's my one and only coin featuring priestly implements. I just this morning noticed the stressed lettering at the bottom on the reverse side. Is this the result of a worn out die?
How about variation in the position of the Officina mark? Probus Obv:– IMP C PROBVS • P • F • AVG, Radiate, cuirassed bust right Rev:– TEMPOR FELICIT, Felicitas standing right, holding caduceus and cornucopiae Minted in Lugdunum, Emission 9, Officina 2. January to August A.D. 282 Reference:– Cohen 727. RIC 129 Bust type F B in left field. Bastien 386. (B in right field). Bastien 397. B in exe. Bastien 439.
Or the orientation of the officinal mark? Probus Obv:– IMP C PROBVS • P • F • AVG, Radiate, cuirassed bust right Rev:– SPES AVG, Spes standing left, holding flower and raising robe Minted in Lugdunum. Emission 9, Officina 3. January to August A.D. 282 Reference:– Cohen 700. RIC 128 Bust type F C in left field. Bastien 404. Retrograde C in left field. Bastien 407.
Ah! If only I had the luxury (or curse?) of dealing with officina marks! Flavian silver can only come close with the Ephesian mint marks. Here is a minor variant of one. RIC 1433. Mint mark below bust. RIC 1434. Mint mark behind bust.
Nice job capturing that Vespasian Dup! Gorgeous Denarius @David Atherton - love that reverse toning. Hmmm... DUPLICATES: Roman Republic AR Denarius Q. Fabius Labeo 124 BCE 18mm 3.7g Rome - Roma X below - LABEO Jupiter in quad Prow LABI Cr 273-1 Syd 532 Sear 148 RR Fabius Labeo 124 BCE AR Den Quadriga last X or XVI Sear 148 Cr 273-1 But, wait... TRIPLICATE as a MULE FOUREE: Roman Republic fourée mule anon Q Fabius Labeo denarius 18mm 2.9g after 124 BC Roma X Jupiter Quadriga tbolt scepter Cr 159 obv Cr 273-1 rev Sear 148 rev
We tend to accept duplicates in our specialties where we might not in a general collection. I collect both ways. My only example of this coin shows a small break P-A not too much larger than that on the OP coin which has a larger spacing over at CA-ES. My tendancy from the outside would be to accept the "whim of the engraver" idea but I have not studied the question at all let alone enough to have an opinion on such a specialist matter. My coin came in 1989 as part of a six coin lot described as fourrees by the then well respected auction house Numismatics Fine Arts. The other five were fourrees but in 1989 fourrees were a specialty interest of mine and it was obvious to me that this one was solid but encrusted with deposits. Soaking in lemon juice removed the deposits. Duplicates? I have a hundred of them by most standards but I consider very few of them to be duplicates. A good example is the Venus from the rear denarius type of Julia Domna. These are about equal in scarcity showing extra drapery falling to the left and to the right of the figure: Left Right (look for drapery but ignore the palm which goes down on that side) More scarce by far are Rome mint denarii with drapery dangling on both sides. There is a lot of variation here on the length and boldness of this drapery. Denarii of the Eastern mint we call 'Emesa' are regularly draped on both sides. These four have both drapes and have legend variations ......who cares about that? I do. As with the Vespasian example, we may all differ on the question whether I have shown seven duplicates or seven interesting and different coins. High on my want list is an Alexandria mint denarius with this reverse. I do not have it for Julia but do have the Septimius variety which shows the double drapery. All these have been denarii. You can research yourself to find out if the differences also come in bronze or gold. If you can see yourself caring about a question like that, you may want to specialize in something like David does Vespasian or I do Septimius Severus. If this strikes you as ridiculous, perhaps your collecting will take a different track. That's OK, I collect generally too.
An interesting example of the same type from the following COS IIII issue. In contrast to the IMP CAES VESP AVG P M issue, these normally have the legend break like so VESP AVG or VESP A-VG. Mine is the same as Doug's. Vespasian AR Denarius, 3.50g Rome mint, 72-73 AD RIC 356 (C3). BMC 64. RSC 45. Obv: IMP CAES VESP AVG P M COS IIII; Head of Vespasian, laureate, r. Rev: AVGVR (above) TRI POT (below); Priestly implements
Nice variant David. I have not added any interesting coins of Vespasian lately. Time for that to change.
No duplicates in my collection as I tend to sell the one I've upgraded from but here is my rare Vespasian priestly instruments RIC 42 Vespasian Denarius IMP CAES VESP AVG PM laureate head of Vespasian right AVGVR PON MAX simpulum, sprinkler, jug and lituus (emblems of the augurate and pontificate) Rome 70-71 AD Sear 2281; RIC II, part 1, 42 (R) 3.55g Only one specimen in the Reka Devnia hoard, compared to 36 with TRI POT
Mine is a @Bing duplicate: But here RR duplicates Lentulus Spinther: Unveiled Libertas Veiled Libertas:
