Agrippina Sestertius Help

Discussion in 'Ancient Coins' started by kolyan760, Dec 4, 2020.

  1. kolyan760

    kolyan760 Well-Known Member

    what do you guys think about C/M and coin itself ? Genuine ?? Fake ? or not sure s-l1600 (1).jpg s-l1600 (2).jpg s-l1600 (3).jpg
     
  2. Avatar

    Guest User Guest



    to hide this ad.
  3. SensibleSal66

    SensibleSal66 Casual Collector / error expert "in Training "

  4. Pishpash

    Pishpash Supporter! Supporter

    Idk. It's very round.
     
    Magnus Maximus and ZoidMeister like this.
  5. gsimonel

    gsimonel Supporter! Supporter

    I wouldn't worry about how round it is. There seemed to be a lot more care put into preparing flans in the 1st century A.D. than in, say, the 3rd century.

    I don't know enough about countermarks to have an opinion.

    In case it's helpful--I have my doubts, considering its condition--here's a similar coin from my collection for comparison:
    [​IMG]
    Agrippina Senior
    Wife of Germanicus
    Bronze Sestertius
    Rome mint, A.D. 50-54
    Obv: AGRIPPINA M F GERMANICI CAESARIS
    Rev: TI CLAVDIVS CAESAR AVG GERM P M TR P IMP, encircling SC
    RIC (Claudius) 102
    34mm, 26.1g.
     
  6. Roman Collector

    Roman Collector Supporter! Supporter

    I agree. In contrast to the squarish flans on sestertii of the Antonine period and beyond, Julio-Claudian sestertii are typically round.

    Here's my example, purchased at Forvm in 2003:

    Agrippina Sr Sestertius.jpg Agrippina Sr Sestertius Sulzer listing.JPG
     
  7. Julius Germanicus

    Julius Germanicus Well-Known Member

    I find the flanof the OP coin a little too thick (could it have been hammered?), there is unusually little wear on the letters, and the centring is almost too perfect for me.
     
    kolyan760 likes this.
  8. kolyan760

    kolyan760 Well-Known Member

    Don’t you think C/M letters are way too sharp ?
     
  9. Roman Collector

    Roman Collector Supporter! Supporter

    They are deeply recessed and wouldn't be subject to much wear.
     
    jamesicus likes this.
  10. kolyan760

    kolyan760 Well-Known Member

    I think they are too big and way too sharp, doesn’t look natural
     
  11. kolyan760

    kolyan760 Well-Known Member

    90D3CD5E-960D-4163-A525-F3EFB1C5FF1B.jpeg
     
  12. Roman Collector

    Roman Collector Supporter! Supporter

    Ryro likes this.
  13. kolyan760

    kolyan760 Well-Known Member

    The letters inside are also too wide and big , look carefully
     
  14. Roerbakmix

    Roerbakmix Well-Known Member

    Are you looking for opinions or an echo of your opinion?
     
    Alegandron, jamesicus and Ryro like this.
  15. kolyan760

    kolyan760 Well-Known Member

     
  16. kolyan760

    kolyan760 Well-Known Member

    I’m not talking about corrosion, The style size and shape
     
  17. Marsyas Mike

    Marsyas Mike Well-Known Member

    It is a very good looking coin. This is not to say it is genuine - there are some scary fakes coming out of eastern Europe and some of them have convincing (to me) green patina. Others look spray-painted. If this is fake, it was prepared with some care.

    I recently got an example of this countermark on a Claudius sestertius - it came from Serbia, so I suppose it could be a fake, but it is a lot uglier than the fakes I'm seeing all over eBay.

    As RC notes, the countermarks are generally in much better condition than the host - countermarks are often deeply recessed, and, of course, more recent than the host.

    When I was researching this countermark, I found some references to the NC being joined in the countermark - which seems to be the case with the OP. See my attribution notes below.

    CM - NCAPR on Claudius Sest. Sep 2020 (0).jpg

    CM - NCAPR on Claudius Sest. Sep 2020 (0c).jpg


    Claudius Æ Sestertius
    CM for Nero or Nerva
    (c. 41-54 A.D. host)

    [TI CLAVDIVS CAES]AR A[VG PM TR P IMP (P P?)], laureate head right / [SPES
    AVGVSTA], SC in exergue, Spes walking left, holding flower and lifting hem of skirt.
    RIC 99 (no PP) or RIC 115 (PP)
    (24.36 grams / 32 mm)


    Countermark: NCAPR (11 mm x 3 mm rectangle). NC is joined (Italy) Pangerl 60.

    "Nero Caesar Aug. Populo Romano"
    "Nummus Caesare Augusto Probatus"
    "Nero Caesar Augustus Probavit"
    “Nerva Caesar Augustus Probavit”

    “Three distinct production centers can be identified for this issue, in Spain, Gaul, and Italy. The Italian type is distinguished by...joining of the letters NC at the base." CNG's Dec 2018 Elec. Auction 434

     
    Bing and jamesicus like this.
  18. jamesicus

    jamesicus Supporter! Supporter


    I try to avoid offering opinions on coins based on photographs - there are so many opportunities for “enhancement” of them these days - but this coin is so interesting that I cannot resist. The NCAPR countermarked issue is described as “very hard to come by” in many sales catalogs, etc.

    The strike appears to be correct, but the flan thickness appears to be unusually thick in the photograph you included. One of the answers regarding genuineness lies in the weight of the coin. Mattingly lists this coin in BMCRE, vol I, Claudius, No. 222 with a weight of 27.34 gm. What is the weight of the coin you depict?

    The lettering appears to be correct to me on your coin and the patina also looks appropriate.The countermark also looks correct - they usually are much sharper than the lettering on the “as minted” coins.

    Here is the example of this coin in my collection:

    8E58D707-0185-441A-B8F8-0C43C84FC39B.jpeg

    Agrippina the Elder, Sestertius, BMCRE vol. 1 (Claudius), No. 222, AD 42-54, 25.2 gm. (Countermarked NCAPR and with partial legend obliteration).
    ……… RIC I (Claudius) No. 102, AD 42-54, 25.2 gm.

    Obverse depiction: Agrippina the Elder, draped bust facing right, hair in long plait down back
    Inscription: [AGRIPPINA] M F GERMANICI CAES[ARIS]

    Reverse depiction: [Large SC centered]
    Inscription: [TI CLAVDIVS] CAESAR AVG [GERM P M TR P IMP P P]

    NCAPR countermark in incuse rectangle above SC

    Agrippina the elder was the daughter of Agrippa and Julia (the daughter of Augustus). She married Germanicus, the brother of Claudius, and was the mother of Caligula.

    Please do reply with the weight of your coin - it is if great interest to me.
     
    Last edited: Dec 4, 2020
    Bing and Marsyas Mike like this.
  19. Herodotus

    Herodotus Well-Known Member

    34.5 mm, 27.71 gm

    It looks legit to me. Some more pics
    [​IMG]
    [​IMG]
    [​IMG]
    [​IMG]
     
    Marsyas Mike and Bing like this.
  20. jamesicus

    jamesicus Supporter! Supporter

    Is (or was) that your coin @Herodotus? The weight the
    owner lists (?) is within the correct range for this issue. If that is the case, I would say this coin could be genuine. (Edited).
     
    Last edited: Dec 4, 2020
  21. Herodotus

    Herodotus Well-Known Member

    No, it is not my coin.

    It is currently on auction offer on eBay. It also caught my eye, before this thread having been posted.

    For those interested, here is a thread discussion from earlier this year on this board concerning the NCAPR countermark.

    https://www.cointalk.com/threads/ncapr-countermark-on-roman-coins.354818/#post-4103739
     
  22. Herodotus

    Herodotus Well-Known Member

Draft saved Draft deleted

Share This Page