A Roman Republican bronze lot

During the same auction I got my recent Ptolemaic purchase from, I also acquired this nice lot of Roman Republic bronzes (plus a single silver) for a rather modest price. 18 in total, some absolutely abhorrent quality-wise, but plenty of decent ones as well.



I am particularly fond of the early sextans (can anybody help me with the exact McCabe group this should belong to?), the Silanus As, the early ‘Romano’ litra, the Silanus As and the Sextus Pompey As for its historical connection (even though the quality isn’t the greatest). The Marc Anthony denarius was a rather pleasant surprise as well; it is a relatively rare type, struck shortly after Anthony reconciliated with Ahenobarbus in 40 BC. As someone who has a small-budget sub-collection of important imperatorial political figures, I thought this rather pricey admiral would remain forever out of reach, but luckily this popped up!





Posts your Republican bronzes below please!

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

Hiya

The big Sextans is my group AA. By far the most interesting coin in the group is the massive semis to the right of the large picture. It's either Crawford 41/6e (very rare, Michael Crawford only knew of a single example) or possibly a very large version of Crawford 106/5 staff and club. They have somewhat similar obverse, and the latter possibility is interesting because I have long suspected that the staff and club series had an early and large-dimension post-semilibral component. If it's a 41/6e then the relevant reference is Roberto Russo in Essays Hersh, 1998. That includes most of the dies. These types also equate to my group A1 and A2 both have semisses corresponding to 41/6e early and later issues. So if you could flip over the large semis, we can discuss more. I'm away from my books at the moment else I could definitively check the dies. The Pompey as is mercifully untooled. Mostly they have been chopped up to a point of unrecognisability. The Antony denarius is pretty rare of course. The SAX as is much scarcer than the C.SAX as. One can always tell the difference by the deck structure even if you cannot see if there's a C or not, because SAX has a raised rectangular deck structure but C.SAX has a line with dots. There's a VAL, an M.ATILI SARAN, a Luceria civic bronze, a Cybele/Horseman Cr.39 uncia, a common but apparently pretty semilibral semuncia, a relatively well preserved Minerva Horsehead bronze, a D SILANVS semuncial as, a wolf and twins as just to the left of the big semis, a corn-ear and KA sextans covering it, a late second century quadrans, possibility Trebanius but could be others, and three coins where I can only see parts of the obverses but am gonna guess that the as at far left is a mid second century issue (Cr.190 to Cr.219) from its pointy tufted bears, the as at left is early second century (Cr.110 to Cr. 170 or thereabouts), then there's a semis (?) mostly covered at left that I've no idea about. Fun group. It would probably interest you that there's a whole load of interesting bronzes including some wild overstrikes in a group I've recently consigned, and I wrote a long note about the overstrikes; I shouldn't post it here but if you follow the usual breadcrumbs you'll know where to find it. Very good chance your new corn ear and KA sextans is an overstrike!

Andrew

 

Wow, that is a big semis.

 

Really neat lot!

 

Wow, what a fun looking lot that is. I haven't delved too deeply into RR bronze, but since Andrew mentioned Crawford 106/5, here's my example for comparison (incidentally, formerly from his collection) :

ROMAN REPUBLIC
Anonymous, Staff & Club Series
AE Semis. 24.5g, 33mm. Etruria, 208 BC. Crawford 106/5. O: Laureate head of Saturn right, S behind. R: Prow right, S and staff above, ROMA below.
Ex Andrew McCabe Collection

 

those are great coins! What is the eight rayed star wheel in the lower left of the first photo? It looks like a Pontus or Judean coin. Never seen a RR like that? I have no RR bronzes but here is a Pontus bronze ex: Alex G. Malloy with an eight rayed star from the same time period:
Attribution: MacDonald 161
Date: 109-105 BC
Obverse: Tripod
Reverse: ΠANTIKAΠ, letters between the rays of a star
Size: 15.23mm
Weight: 3.27 grams
Description: VF. ex Alex Malloy with his un-named auction envelope. Pontic Kings of the Bosporus. Mithradates VI Eupator. Pantikapaion Æ Dichalkon / Star

 

That's the variant where the staff goes through the deck structure. The club is within the fighting platform - hence staff and club series - but on a number of variants it is completely separate, for example behind or under the head. That distinguishes this issue from many issues with club always in the fighting platform. On staff and club, the club often wanders off and can be found somewhere else on the coin.

 

I've recently (Sept-Oct) stumbled upon some reasonably priced RR AEs, though not previously having owned RR bronze nor had a specific interest in them, they were too good to pass up and have since sparked an interest.


Anonymous Roman Republic, Star (2nd) series, 169-158 BC
AE As, Rome mint
Obverse: Laureate head of bearded Janus; I (mark of value) above.
Reverse: Prow of galley right; star above, I (mark of value) to right, ROMA below.
References: Crawford 196/1
Size: 31mm, 21.9g


Anonymous Roman Republic, 217-215 BC
AE Uncia, Rome mint
Obverse: Helmeted head of Roma left, one pellet behind.
Reverse: ROMA above prow right, one pellet below.
References: Crawford 38/6
Size: 25mm, 14.53g


Anonymous Roman Republic, Victory and spearhead series, 189-180 BC
AE Semis, Rome mint
Obverse: Laureate head of Saturn right, S behind.
Reverse: Prow right; above, Victory with wreath and spearhead. Before, S and below, ROMA.
References: Crawford 145/2
Size: 25mm, 12.6g


Anonymous Roman Republic, After 211 BC
AE Semis, Rome mint
Obverse: Laureate head of Saturn right, S behind (slanted CCW).
Reverse: Prow right; S above (slanted CW), and ROMA below.
References: Crawford 56/3
Size: 26mm, 17.7g

 

ANONYMOUS ROMAN REPUBLIC
Æ Uncia
Obv.: Helmeted head of Roma left, pellet behind
Rev.: Galley prow right, ROMA above, pellet below
Rome mint, 217-215 BC
25mm, 8.8g, 3h
Reference: Crawford 38/6, Sydenham 86 , BMC 88
Ex JAZ Numismatics

 

WOW fantastic lot pickup congrats,
AE uncia, 217-215 BC. Helmeted head of Roma left, pellet behind. Reverse- ROMA, prow right, pellet below. Syd 86, Crawford 38/6, BMC 88. 24mm, 11.8g.

 

Cool RR AE lot @AnYangMan !

I love RR Bronzes... here are a few of mine:


RR Anon AE Quartuncia 217-215 BC Saturn Prow BRN Cr 38-8 S 624



RR Anon AE Semuncia 217-215 Mercury Prow Sear 620 Craw 38-7



RR Anon AE Uncia 217-215 BC Roma Attic Prow Cr 38-6 Sear 615




RR Anon AE Sextans 217-215 BCE She-Wolf Twins Eagle Syd 95 Cr 39-3 Sear 609




RR AE Quadrans 18mm 3.6g Rome 206-195 BC Hercules R wearing lions skin pellet behind - ROMA Prow of galley right 3 pellets Cr339-4a; Syd679c



RR Anon AE Triens 157-156 BC Minerva Prow Cr 198B-3 Sear 989




RR Anon AE 23 Quincunx 6.96g Apollo P behind Dioscuri Luceria 5 pellets Cr 99-4 Syd 309 Sear 910


RR Anon AE Semis Rome after 211 BCE Laureate hd Saturn r S - Prow r S ROMA 19.3g 26mm Craw 56-3



RR AE As P.CORNELIUS P.F. BLASIO BC 169-158 35mm 42.5g S 703 Syd 370 Cr 189-1

 

Wow, a reply from the great @Andrew McCabe himself! Massive thanks for the crash course on the practicalities of collecting republican bronzes. I must admit to having made several rookie mistakes in attributing them (I originally had the SAX as attributed as a C.SAX! ), so massive thanks for the insights and attributions, as well as the heads up on the Semis! I had now idea it would be this rare!




The additional pictures, as requested. The reverse sadly shows a fair bit of pitting, but I think it shows enough detail to be attributable as a 41/6e. It seems to be a reverse die-match to the 41/6e sold in NAC sale 61, lot 128 (placement of ‘ROMA’), but that could also just be wishful thinking. Do you agree? The hidden coin was indeed a semis, with ligate MAT, Crawford 162/4. Not that common of a semis, am I right?




And a couple of additional pictures for sake the completeness. The quadrans is from L. Minucius in 133 BC, Crawford 248/4. The as to the left is anonymous, probably belongs to group K3 (unkempt beard, bulbous prowstem and peaked deck structure), am I right? The semuncia has a pleasant reverse, but sadly shows a lot of pitting and snowfall patina on the obverse.

As for the Corn-ear and KA sextans, I have been looking at it from various angles till different parts of my face turned blue, but I can’t seem to make up my mind. There is some minor chatter in the field to the right of Mercury’s face, but sadly not enough for a clear undertype to be established (if it even is overstruck), Ah well, guess I’ll have to bid on one of yours in that upcoming auction . Some really interesting coins (and write-ups) in that group!

Also; everyone, thanks for the magnificent stream of roman bronzes. Some real beauties here!

 

That definitely looks like a 41/6e semis. Congrats! I'm quite envious. It's much better than my mediocre example:

 

As Andrew said, it's a quincunx from Luceria. The obverse looks an awful lot like that of a republican triens, which is why it was probably in this lot. Sadly, mine shows absolutely no sign of Minerva’s bust

 

Here's a favorite example of a republican bronze:

211-208 BC Æ Sextans (20mm, 5.27g, 12h)
Obv: Head of Mercury right wearing winged petasus (a Greek-style hat).
Rev: Prow of galley right ; monogram to right; ROMA below

2 pellets on obverse indicate 2 unciae or 1/6th of an Æ As (~34g in 200 BC)

 

Unfortunately this coin has been heavily, heavily tooled, probably from a Crawford 69/6b corn-ear and IC semis

 

I do not think the sextans is heavily tooled. I know the design and style of dies pretty well. I don't see alterations to the design. Essentially every detail is more or less as it should be and the IC before prow is where and how it should be as are the design features and style of prow etc. Nor do I see the steps at the edge of devices or caverns around letters that would indicate tooling.

what has happened is the coin has been cleaned way to much, with the surfaces essentially polished smooth. This however is generally called smoothing. I'd prefer a less-cleaned coin that hasn't been smoothed but don't think it's tooled.

 

Thanks Andrew McCabe and red_spork for the comments - I can see the smoothing, and perhaps lightly tooled on the reverse - some of the effect may also be my bad photography and lighting - especially the obverse overexposure which can be seen on obverse photo in the tray. I'd love to see other examples to compare.

 

Here's a picture of the earlier coin - not as smooth or uniform as it looks above - lighting makes all the difference :



Along with another favorite - a heavy 38.8 gram lump with some nice detail :

 

this really looks much better and more natural than the tray photo. If I saw this photo I'd think not tooled, and cleaned only to the correct extent necessary. Consider deleting that in tray photo as it does give a negative impression of a coin that has had stuff done to it. this looks very nice. The type does come nice (uncirculated) because of second punic war upheavals.