I bought this interesting Pius denarius with bare head bust that was struck when Caesar was. Post your Pius denarii or whatever you consider relevant. Thanks. Antoninus Pius, as Caesar, AR Denarius. Rome, AD 138. IMP T AEL CAES ANTONINVS, bare head right / AVG PIVS P M TR P COS DES II, Fides standing right holding corn-ears and basket of fruits. RIC 12.
Why do you consider your coin as Caesar when the reverse legend includes AVG? Without AVG = just TRIB POT COS AVG on reverse - PM TRP COS DES II AVG on obverse - TRP COS II
Thanks for sharing these very interesting variants of bare head Pius denarii. I copied the attribution from the seller, which was obviously wrong.
I like those bare-headed Antoninus Pius examples. Interesting to know why is shown that way when he was Augustus - the early Caesar issues and the posthumous issues make sense, but not sure about the Augustus era. I don't think Hadrian shared Augustan titles with him, but I'm not sure. I have a couple: Antoninus Pius Denarius (140-143 A.D.) Rome Mint ANTONINVS AVG PIVS P P TR P COS III, bare head right / GENIVS POP ROMANI, Genius of the Roman people standing front, holding scepter and cornucopiae. RIC 70a. (2.90 grams / 17 mm) This is a sestertius with the Column of Antoninus Pius (barely).
I do like the bare head portraits better than the laureate ones. Here's another COS DES II, but with an engraving error on the reverse. ANTONINUS PIUS AR Denarius. 3.2g, 19.5mm. Rome mint, AD 138. RIC 9 var. (rev legend). O: IMP T AEL CAES HADRI ANTONINVS, bare head right. R: AVG PIVS P M TR P COS DE (sic!) II, Minerva standing left, holding Victory in her right hand and shield with her left; spear leaning on her left arm. And one as Caesar. ANTONINUS PIUS, as Caesar AR Denarius. 2.91g, 20.8mm. Rome mint, AD 138. RIC 447a (Hadrian). O: IMP T AEL CAES ANTONINVS, bare head right. R: TRIB POT COS, Diana standing right, holding bow and arrow. Ex Archer M. Huntington Collection, previously held by the American Numismatic Society (1001.57.4904)
As I recall the story (someone look it up to check as you should anything you read): When Hadrian died, the Senate resisted deifying him but Antoninus Pius refused to adopt the title Augustus until they did. Depending on how you look at it, he was Emperor and did take the major title TRP. There was no question who was Emperor and the Senate wanted the stability of an Augustus. I see this something like if a US President were elected in November but refused to take the oath of office unless Congress gave him something (a wall, universal health care, term limits for Congress...something). Senators' power and wealth were based on the system as it was remaining strong so they had a lot to lose if the system were weakened. Proposing another man to be Emperor would have led to big trouble they could not afford so Antoninus got his wish and the name Pius in the package. Beginner Trivia: Any coin that reads "Antoninus Pius" is not from this Antoninus. His later coins read "Antoninus Augustus (AVG) Pius". The early issues that read Pius have it on the reverse. Coins with the two words adjacent belong to later Emperors we know better from nicknames (Caracalla and Elagabalus).
When you have a rare coin, it is likely that another example is die-identical. Though there are differences due to the wear of the dies, it is clear that Zumbly's error denarius is a die-match to mine. Most of the early issues are bare-headed, though laureate ones exist and the same goes for later issues, though bare heads are much rarer. Thanks Doug for your wise remarks. Frans
Interesting portrait, @gogili1977 ! The Numophylacium Sulzerianum, the catalog of the collection of Jacob Sulzer published in 1777, (incorrectly) considered Annona to be the figure on the reverse: The description of the reverse is translated "Annona standing type, holding corn ears in the right hand and basket of fruits in the left hand." I don't have a denarius with a bare-headed Pius. Here's an Antoninus Pius denarius with an actual Annona reverse, though: RIC 175; BMCRE 657-59.
Very rare is an aegis on the breast; I only have a handful of denarii with the head of medusa with snakes. Frans
This is a very good point that new collectors might learn. The word 'rare' is much abused. If there are a hundred examples and a thousand people want them, a coin might be termed rare but what do we call a coin known by two or three examples? Maridvnvm and I each have some rare coins of Septimius Severus with matching dies. Many of the dies we see are immediately recognizable to us because we have seen a good percentage of all the dies used in the period of our interest. Several reverses are only known to us from one die so all examples that turn up are die matched. There never were many of these coins and fewer survive. On the other hand there are coins where it is a red letter day when you find a die match. The same type was made in huge numbers using enough dies that the issue could be called common if only a few examples of each die survived. There is a rare exception in the coinage of Pescennius Niger. A random sample of a thousand of his coins will show many more dies than a thousand Eastern mint Septimius from the first period when the two were fighting would show. We find fewer die matches in those coins. I take this as evidence that there once were many more coins of Pescennius than there are now. This supports the theory that Septimius outlawed the possession of the coins of his defeated enemy. Sometimes exceptions to rules prove interesting since we have to ask why.
Nice example. I've been on the hunt for a Pius as Caesar denarius. Mine is an IMPERATOR II type, minted for that proclamation following the completion of the Antonine Wall in Britain
