Log in or Sign up
Coin Talk
Home
Forums
>
Coin Forums
>
Ancient Coins
>
Article in CoinWeek about Claudius I
>
Reply to Thread
Message:
<p>[QUOTE="Curtis, post: 8288921, member: 26430"]Here's a Provincial Claudius (though I see it sometimes listed as Imperial) that I'm very fond of. I posted it recently on the "Follow the Game" thread, where I noted that the reverse references Legio X and XII of Augustus, whose veterans settled at <i>Colonia Augusta Achaica Patrensis.</i> I'm not great with Legionary history, but <a href="http://www.romancoins.info/Legionary-Coins-2.html" target="_blank" class="externalLink ProxyLink" data-proxy-href="http://www.romancoins.info/Legionary-Coins-2.html" rel="nofollow">Andreas Pangerl claims the legions referenced</a> are most likely Legio X Fretensis and Legio XII Fulminata:</p><p><br /></p><p>[ATTACH=full]1464892[/ATTACH]</p><p><br /></p><blockquote><p><font face="Georgia"><b>Roman Provincial. Achaea, Patras [Patraea]. Claudius AE As or Assarion </b>(11.56g, 25mm, 1h). Legionary Issue.</font></p><p><font face="Georgia"><b>Obv</b>: TI CLAVDIVS CAESAR AVG GERM. Head of Claudius left.</font></p><p><font face="Georgia"><b>Rev</b>: COL A A PATR X XII. Aquila between two standards.</font></p><p><br /></p><p><font face="Georgia"><b> Ref</b>: BCD Peloponnesos II 2782 (<i>this coin</i>); RPC 1256, GERM (ex. 24 = possibly this coin, wrong photo and legend var?). </font></p><p><font face="Georgia"><b>Prov</b>: Ex-Peter J. Merani Collection, CNG EA 490 (21 April 2021), 70; </font></p><p><font face="Georgia">BCD Collection, CNG 81 (BCD Peloponnesos Part II, 20 May 2009), Lot 2782; </font></p><p><font face="Georgia">Frank Kovacs Collection (purchased from Kovacs, December 1996, “ex-Private Collection” per BCD's handwritten note).</font></p></blockquote><p><br /></p><p><br /></p><p>And an imitative Sestertius that was given the "NCAPR" countermark. Mattingly's BMCRE and Richard Baker (1984) were certainly exaggerating when they called it "the commonest of all countermarks" (Baker added a qualification, "commonest of all <b>early </b>countermarks," my emphasis). But it is certainly a very familiar one to anyone interested in countermarks. There is still disagreement about exactly what it means:</p><p><br /></p><p>[ATTACH=full]1464893[/ATTACH]</p><blockquote><p><font face="Georgia"><b>Roman Imperial</b>. Claudius (Augustus, 41-54 CE) AE Sestertius (35mm, 21.84g, 6h). Contemporary imitation or Western “Branch Mint” [NGC], c. 41/2 CE or later. Countermarked under Nero or Vespasian.</font></p><p><font face="Georgia"><br /></font></p><p><font face="Georgia"><b>Obv</b>: TI CLAVDIVS CAESAR AVG P M TR P IMP. Laureate head right.</font></p><p><font face="Georgia"><b>Rev</b>: SPES AVGVSTA S C. Spes, draped, advancing left, holding flower in right hand and raising skirt with left.</font></p><p><font face="Georgia"><br /></font></p><p><font face="Georgia"><b>Ref</b>: RIC (I) 99. Pangerl 60.</font></p><p><font face="Georgia"><b>Prov</b>: Ex-Richard Baker Countermark Collection, <a href="https://www.acsearch.info/search.html?id=5719088" target="_blank" class="externalLink ProxyLink" data-proxy-href="https://www.acsearch.info/search.html?id=5719088" rel="nofollow">CNG EA 439 (6 Mar 2019), Lot 224</a>;</font></p><p><font face="Georgia"><a href="https://www.acsearch.info/search.html?id=7710282" target="_blank" class="externalLink ProxyLink" data-proxy-href="https://www.acsearch.info/search.html?id=7710282" rel="nofollow">CNG EA 483 (6 Jan 2021), Lot 408</a> (unnamed Al Kowsky consignment; <a href="https://www.cointalk.com/threads/claudius-sestertius-with-ncapr-counterstamp.334702/" class="internalLink ProxyLink" data-proxy-href="https://www.cointalk.com/threads/claudius-sestertius-with-ncapr-counterstamp.334702/">CT Thread 334702</a>); NGC Ancients, </font><a href="https://www.ngccoin.com/certlookup/2101304-007/NGCAncients/" target="_blank" class="externalLink ProxyLink" data-proxy-href="https://www.ngccoin.com/certlookup/2101304-007/NGCAncients/" rel="nofollow"><font face="Georgia">2101304-007</font></a><font face="Georgia">.</font></p></blockquote><p><br /></p><p>Many accept it as a "validating" countermark struck under Nero's reign (some presuming "N" to be for Nero). But the Richard Baker Countermark Collection contained examples that led him and CNG's cataloger to conclude that it was stamped around the reign of Vespasian, and at multiple locations (some, perhaps, during the civil war). (I forget who Cataloged it for CNG, if it was [USER=9204]@Ardatirion[/USER] or someone else, but I think they've commented here about it.) <i><b>EDIT:</b> Yes, it was Ardatirion, per <a href="https://www.cointalk.com/posts/4888886/" class="internalLink ProxyLink" data-proxy-href="https://www.cointalk.com/posts/4888886/">this comment</a> (CT Post 4888886, 25 Sep 2020), in a <a href="https://www.cointalk.com/threads/ncapr-countermark-on-roman-coins.354818/" class="internalLink ProxyLink" data-proxy-href="https://www.cointalk.com/threads/ncapr-countermark-on-roman-coins.354818/">very useful thread</a> on this topic (CT Thread 354818, 10 Feb 2020).</i></p><p><br /></p><p>Quoting CNG's text for this type from several coins of the Baker Coll.:</p><blockquote><p><font face="Georgia">"Previously believed to be applied during the reign of Nero, a specimen in the Pangerl collection appears on an as of Vespasian, necessitating a later date for the series. Three distinct production centers can be identified for this issue, in Spain, Gaul, and Italy. The Italian type is distinguished by the frequent joining of the letters NC at the base." (E.g., <a href="https://www.acsearch.info/search.html?id=5539151" target="_blank" class="externalLink ProxyLink" data-proxy-href="https://www.acsearch.info/search.html?id=5539151" rel="nofollow">EA 434, 189</a>. See also <a href="https://www.acsearch.info/search.html?id=5977766" target="_blank" class="externalLink ProxyLink" data-proxy-href="https://www.acsearch.info/search.html?id=5977766" rel="nofollow">CNG 111, 486</a> for a further refinement of dating.)</font></p></blockquote><p><br /></p><p>CNG preserved that attribution in their later sale from Al Kowsky.</p><p><br /></p><p>Baker must've changed his mind sometime after his 1984 article on “The Countermarks Found on Ancient Roman Coins: A Brief Introduction" (<i>Journal of the Society of Ancient Numismatics</i> [SAN] XV, 3: 52-58), since there he described in as applied under Nero's reign. (Available <a href="http://www.accla.org/actaaccla/baker2.html" target="_blank" class="externalLink ProxyLink" data-proxy-href="http://www.accla.org/actaaccla/baker2.html" rel="nofollow">in HTML on ACCLA website</a>, with a link to photocopy .pdf at the bottom of page.)</p><p><br /></p><p>Colin Kraay, who is usually cited, believed the N was for Nero, and could claim a tradition to at least Borghesi in the 19th century, and including Mattingly's BMCRE vol 1. His (1956/1979) “The Behavior of Early Imperial Countermarks” (pp. 113-136 in <i>Essays in Roman Coinage Presented to Harold Mattingly</i>) is usually cited for this. (<i>Essays Mattingly</i> is a highly worthwhile volume if you can get a copy; I've got the 1979 reprint and love it.) He also discusses NCAPR in his brief German paper (1956), “<a href="https://www.e-periodica.ch/cntmng?pid=smb-001:1953:4::552" target="_blank" class="externalLink ProxyLink" data-proxy-href="https://www.e-periodica.ch/cntmng?pid=smb-001:1953:4::552" rel="nofollow">Gegenstempel auf Überprägten Römischen Münzen</a>,” in <i>Schweizer Münzblatter [SMB]</i> (6): 4-7.[/QUOTE]</p><p><br /></p>
[QUOTE="Curtis, post: 8288921, member: 26430"]Here's a Provincial Claudius (though I see it sometimes listed as Imperial) that I'm very fond of. I posted it recently on the "Follow the Game" thread, where I noted that the reverse references Legio X and XII of Augustus, whose veterans settled at [I]Colonia Augusta Achaica Patrensis.[/I] I'm not great with Legionary history, but [URL='http://www.romancoins.info/Legionary-Coins-2.html']Andreas Pangerl claims the legions referenced[/URL] are most likely Legio X Fretensis and Legio XII Fulminata: [ATTACH=full]1464892[/ATTACH] [INDENT][FONT=Georgia][B]Roman Provincial. Achaea, Patras [Patraea]. Claudius AE As or Assarion [/B](11.56g, 25mm, 1h). Legionary Issue. [B]Obv[/B]: TI CLAVDIVS CAESAR AVG GERM. Head of Claudius left. [B]Rev[/B]: COL A A PATR X XII. Aquila between two standards.[/FONT] [FONT=Georgia][B] Ref[/B]: BCD Peloponnesos II 2782 ([I]this coin[/I]); RPC 1256, GERM (ex. 24 = possibly this coin, wrong photo and legend var?). [B]Prov[/B]: Ex-Peter J. Merani Collection, CNG EA 490 (21 April 2021), 70; BCD Collection, CNG 81 (BCD Peloponnesos Part II, 20 May 2009), Lot 2782; Frank Kovacs Collection (purchased from Kovacs, December 1996, “ex-Private Collection” per BCD's handwritten note).[/FONT][/INDENT] And an imitative Sestertius that was given the "NCAPR" countermark. Mattingly's BMCRE and Richard Baker (1984) were certainly exaggerating when they called it "the commonest of all countermarks" (Baker added a qualification, "commonest of all [B]early [/B]countermarks," my emphasis). But it is certainly a very familiar one to anyone interested in countermarks. There is still disagreement about exactly what it means: [ATTACH=full]1464893[/ATTACH] [INDENT][FONT=Georgia][B]Roman Imperial[/B]. Claudius (Augustus, 41-54 CE) AE Sestertius (35mm, 21.84g, 6h). Contemporary imitation or Western “Branch Mint” [NGC], c. 41/2 CE or later. Countermarked under Nero or Vespasian. [B]Obv[/B]: TI CLAVDIVS CAESAR AVG P M TR P IMP. Laureate head right. [B]Rev[/B]: SPES AVGVSTA S C. Spes, draped, advancing left, holding flower in right hand and raising skirt with left. [B]Ref[/B]: RIC (I) 99. Pangerl 60. [B]Prov[/B]: Ex-Richard Baker Countermark Collection, [URL='https://www.acsearch.info/search.html?id=5719088']CNG EA 439 (6 Mar 2019), Lot 224[/URL]; [URL='https://www.acsearch.info/search.html?id=7710282']CNG EA 483 (6 Jan 2021), Lot 408[/URL] (unnamed Al Kowsky consignment; [URL='https://www.cointalk.com/threads/claudius-sestertius-with-ncapr-counterstamp.334702/']CT Thread 334702[/URL]); NGC Ancients, [/FONT][URL='https://www.ngccoin.com/certlookup/2101304-007/NGCAncients/'][FONT=Georgia]2101304-007[/FONT][/URL][FONT=Georgia].[/FONT][/INDENT] Many accept it as a "validating" countermark struck under Nero's reign (some presuming "N" to be for Nero). But the Richard Baker Countermark Collection contained examples that led him and CNG's cataloger to conclude that it was stamped around the reign of Vespasian, and at multiple locations (some, perhaps, during the civil war). (I forget who Cataloged it for CNG, if it was [USER=9204]@Ardatirion[/USER] or someone else, but I think they've commented here about it.) [I][B]EDIT:[/B] Yes, it was Ardatirion, per [URL='https://www.cointalk.com/posts/4888886/']this comment[/URL] (CT Post 4888886, 25 Sep 2020), in a [URL='https://www.cointalk.com/threads/ncapr-countermark-on-roman-coins.354818/']very useful thread[/URL] on this topic (CT Thread 354818, 10 Feb 2020).[/I] Quoting CNG's text for this type from several coins of the Baker Coll.: [INDENT][FONT=Georgia]"Previously believed to be applied during the reign of Nero, a specimen in the Pangerl collection appears on an as of Vespasian, necessitating a later date for the series. Three distinct production centers can be identified for this issue, in Spain, Gaul, and Italy. The Italian type is distinguished by the frequent joining of the letters NC at the base." (E.g., [URL='https://www.acsearch.info/search.html?id=5539151']EA 434, 189[/URL]. See also [URL='https://www.acsearch.info/search.html?id=5977766']CNG 111, 486[/URL] for a further refinement of dating.)[/FONT][/INDENT] CNG preserved that attribution in their later sale from Al Kowsky. Baker must've changed his mind sometime after his 1984 article on “The Countermarks Found on Ancient Roman Coins: A Brief Introduction" ([I]Journal of the Society of Ancient Numismatics[/I] [SAN] XV, 3: 52-58), since there he described in as applied under Nero's reign. (Available [URL='http://www.accla.org/actaaccla/baker2.html']in HTML on ACCLA website[/URL], with a link to photocopy .pdf at the bottom of page.) Colin Kraay, who is usually cited, believed the N was for Nero, and could claim a tradition to at least Borghesi in the 19th century, and including Mattingly's BMCRE vol 1. His (1956/1979) “The Behavior of Early Imperial Countermarks” (pp. 113-136 in [I]Essays in Roman Coinage Presented to Harold Mattingly[/I]) is usually cited for this. ([I]Essays Mattingly[/I] is a highly worthwhile volume if you can get a copy; I've got the 1979 reprint and love it.) He also discusses NCAPR in his brief German paper (1956), “[URL='https://www.e-periodica.ch/cntmng?pid=smb-001:1953:4::552']Gegenstempel auf Überprägten Römischen Münzen[/URL],” in [I]Schweizer Münzblatter [SMB][/I] (6): 4-7.[/QUOTE]
Your name or email address:
Do you already have an account?
No, create an account now.
Yes, my password is:
Forgot your password?
Stay logged in
Coin Talk
Home
Forums
>
Coin Forums
>
Ancient Coins
>
Article in CoinWeek about Claudius I
>
Home
Home
Quick Links
Search Forums
Recent Activity
Recent Posts
Forums
Forums
Quick Links
Search Forums
Recent Posts
Competitions
Competitions
Quick Links
Competition Index
Rules, Terms & Conditions
Gallery
Gallery
Quick Links
Search Media
New Media
Showcase
Showcase
Quick Links
Search Items
Most Active Members
New Items
Directory
Directory
Quick Links
Directory Home
New Listings
Members
Members
Quick Links
Notable Members
Current Visitors
Recent Activity
New Profile Posts
Sponsors
Menu
Search
Search titles only
Posted by Member:
Separate names with a comma.
Newer Than:
Search this thread only
Search this forum only
Display results as threads
Useful Searches
Recent Posts
More...
