At first glance, this Vespasian denarius with the common Vesta reverse doesn't seem all that special. Don't read the attribution info just yet if you want to try to guess the reason why it actually is so. Vespasian AR Denarius, 3.42g Antioch mint, 72-73 AD RIC 1556 (R3). BMC - . RSC - . RPC - . Obv: IMP CAES VESP AVG P M COS IIII; Head of Vespasian, laureate, r. Rev: VESTA; Vesta stg. l., with simpulum and sceptre Ex Numismatic Naumann 70, 7 October 2018, lot 411. This is a second known example of the Antioch RIC group 5 Vesta. It is also a double die match with the other published specimen, CNG 61, 25 September 2002, lot 1689, and an obverse die match with the extremely rare AVGVR TRI POT and VICTORIA AVGVSTI types from the same issue. All of these copy common contemporaneous reverse types from Rome. Here is the Rome Vesta. Vespasian AR Denarius, 3.32g Rome mint, 72-73 AD RIC 360 (C2). BMC 71. RSC 574. Obv: IMP CAES VESP AVG P M COS IIII; Head of Vespasian, laureate, r. Rev: VESTA; Vesta stg. l., with simpulum and sceptre Acquired from Beast Coins, October 2004. And here are the other two rare denarius types I have from the Antioch issue with the same obverse die - both were misattributed to Rome. Vespasian AR Denarius, 3.32g Antioch mint, 72-73 AD RIC 1553 (R3). BMC - . RSC - . RPC - . Obv: IMP CAES VESP AVG P M COS IIII; Head of Vespasian, laureate, r. Rev: AVGVR above TRI POT below; priestly implements Ex Ibercoin Auction 18.1, 3 December 2014, lot 5106. Vespasian AR Denarius, 3.11g Antioch mint, 72-73 AD RIC 1557 (R2). BMC 509, RSC 618. RPC 1929 (1 spec.). Obv: IMP CAES VESP AVG P M COS IIII; Head of Vespasian, laureate, r. Rev: VICTORIA AVGVSTI; Victory stg. r., crowning standard and holding palm Ex Pegasi 140, 2 August 2011, lot 319. Sometimes style is everything when trying to pin down a mint attribution, especially if different mints share the same types and legends. I would like to say I was the only one who noticed the auction house's misattribution of the Vesta as the common Rome type, but I think someone else knew it was something special - it was not quite the sleeper I was hoping for! The CNG example hammered close to $1000 in 2002, mine less than half that. Post your misattribtion coups or anything you feel is relevant.
What a score! I love going into depth, researching die-matches and comparing my scarce coins to other published examples. The specialist collector can often identify coins struck at a branch mint that the generalist -- even experienced dealers -- fail to recognize as special. I know from several of his posts that @dougsmit has picked up several eastern-mint Severans over the years that went unrecognized for what they were. My latest misattribution story is this dupondius of Faustina I which was listed as a sestertius by the auctioneer. This coin appears to be quite rare in the middle bronze denomination. RIC lists it, but cites Cohen. The British Museum does not have an example and it is not to be found at Wildwinds, OCRE, The Coin Project, coinscatalog.com, in the CNG archives or on a search at acsearchinfo. In fact, I am unable to find another example anywhere online. Faustina Senior, AD 138-141. Roman orichalcum dupondius, 16.19 g, 26.1 mm, 10 h. Rome, AD 140-141. Obv: DIVA AVGVSTA FAVSTINA, bare-headed and draped bust, right. Rev: CONSECRATIO S C, Funeral pyre in three stories, set on base, ornamented and garlanded, surmounted by Faustina in biga right. Refs: RIC 1189; BMCRE p. 236 *; Cohen 187; RCV --.
Very informative presentation and nice coins! So is it the case that the only way to identify the issues from Antioch is via matching the coins to published examples? There is no mintmark or distinct design element hidden somewhere? The orientation of the "AVGPMC" part of the legend of your Antioch coins, with "AVG" basically touching Vespasian's head and laurels, seems quite memorable, but that's just 1 obverse die. My hat's off to you specialists, the learned birds get the sleeper worms!
If you explore the other coinage of Antioch, I see a lot of similarity in the obverse bust style, like on this Antioch tet: https://www.acsearch.info/search.html?id=1487223 I notice a distinct difference in the style of the laureate ties at the back of the head of the Antioch busts and the one Rome Mint you shared... Do other Rome Mint's ties look like that? Is that an easy style highlight to look for?
It helps if you can find a die match - it certainly helped me with the Vesta since I already had two coins from Antioch with that obverse die. But even without the match I would have recognised it as an Antiochene denarius straight away. The portrait's 'Eastern' style and the 'connect the dots' legend all scream Antioch to me. Getting a handle on the style of each mint is the surest way to recognise the misattributed rare ones, die match or not.
With some issues the ties can help with attributing pieces to the correct mint, but to be honest, I haven't used this method for Flavian coins.
As a relative neophyte, this degree of familiarity where the idiosyncrasies of stylistic "personality" are as recognizable as the faces of different friends is both impressive and daunting. I've always approached life with a generalist, jack-of-all-trades (but ace of none) modus operandi, but few realms have been so rewardingly rich and inspiring either, and with you and other specialists and scholars here showing it is possible, I'm discovering a hunger for the sort of knowledge that will likewise unlock the doors to reveling in the rich and concrete implications of the superficially subtle details.
Great catch David. I love it. Here is an example of a misattributed coin. 2 auction houses attributed this as RIC 28 a rare pre-reform denarius of Nero. However, on the reverse RIC 28 reads TR P VII. My coin reads TR P VIII. It is therefore RIC 34, a rarer coin than RIC 28. In fact 2 of the examples of RIC 28 on Acsearch show my coin.
