This mysterious Domitian dupondius came up for sale on Vcoins recently advertised as a 'mule'. Being a specialist I couldn't resist! Domitian Mule(?) Æ Dupondius, 9.10g Rome mint, 85 AD Obv: IMP CAES DOMIT AVG GERM COS XI CENS PER P P; Head of Domitian, radiate, r., with aegis Rev: MONETA AVGVST; S C in field; Moneta stg. l., with scales and cornucopiae RIC -. BMC -. BNC -. Acquired from Ken Dorney, January 2022. An oddity for sure. Here we have a dupondius obverse paired with a Moneta reverse type which was an exclusive reverse to the As issues. I wrote to Ian Carradice co-author of RIC II.1 for his opinion. He writes - "I'm not sure about this coin. An official mint mule is certainly not out of the question, though it's a pity the end of the reverse inscription ..POT.. or ..PER.. is unclear, so I'm not sure which issue it would belong to? But also, I'm not sure if it really is official. The obverse has a good enough style, but the missing portion of the inscription suggests a large cut in that part of the die. Meanwhile, the reverse has a rather clumsily executed Moneta, with bizarre drapery (contrasting with the usually excellent style of AD 85). The reverse legend is also incomplete, so would render it difficult to catalogue (and that would be futile if it is 'barbarous'). The coin is certainly a curiosity, but that is about all I can say for it." Now with the piece in hand I can confirm the obverse reading as 'PER', putting the reverse reading as AVGVST and placing this coin in the third issue of 85. Both the obverse and reverse styles look official to my eyes. However, the low weight does give me pause. The metal appears to be orichalcum. Until another specimen surfaces with clearer legends I'll catalogue this as a possible mule. A curiosity indeed. Did my gamble to acquire a unique official mint mule pay off?
Yes, I think it did pay off. You can never really lose with coins like this. At the least you have acquired a very interesting coin. I have had a few Flavian mules over the last few years. I think your coin is an interesting piece of history that could potentially provide information relating to the minting processes during the Flavian era. In any case you have acquired a great coin. Congrats!
David, That is an interesting coin with a lot of questions . I didn't vote because I'm leaning towards a barbarous copy. I did a quick search in the CNG archives & copied 5 examples of this coin type, all auctioned fairly recently. Apparently these coins are common. CNG 465, lot 381 CNG 478, lot 397 CNG 478, lot 399 CNG 481, lot 560 CNG 489, lot 359
I know nothing but it seems like a good place to post my less than official Domitian dupondius. ex. P. Minns (UK 70's?), ex. Grant Edwards 1989
I'm in the barbarous camp as well. I was on the fence but looking at the examples posted by Al ... Though, still voted yes as I love barbarous coins and am not qualified to assuredly say its barbarian vs mule. Here's a barbarous Caligula of mine:
Yes, extremely so! Because these were struck in such massive numbers their style is quite variable, even within issues. As mentioned above, I don't have any problems with the coin's style, it's the low weight that gives me second thoughts.
As I wrote on Forvm: "I am inclined to think it's official. "It would be interesting if another coin could be located struck from the same obv. and/or rev. die." The weight is not impossible. Cf. BM 311 (8.85g, worn), BM 363A (8.84g), BM 366A (9.39g), BM 402 (8.50g).
I don't have much to add really but I have to say, seeing your threads in the forum always makes me click. You have an uncanny ability to turn seemingly uninteresting coins (to me) into somthing extremely fascinating. Keep it up!!
Thank you Curtis for your thoughts and alleviating some of my doubts concerning the low weight. I feel more confident now labeling the piece as an official mule.
