Featured Bearded and beardless Marcus Aurelius portraits under single catalog number

Usually, in my limited experience, although the cataloguing of tiny variations isn't nearly as prevalent or obsessive as it is for U.S. coins -- and I think that would be impossible, given the large numbers of different dies for each coin and the fact that no two are ever exactly alike in terms of what the portraits on the coin look like -- any significant variation in the obverse portraits on a particular type of Roman coin results in a separate catalogue number (or at least a sub-number, like (a), (b), (c), etc.) in RIC, RSC, and other catalogues. Thus, there are separate catalogue numbers assigned for left-facing vs. right-facing, head vs. bust, bareheaded vs. laureate, draped vs. cuirassed vs. draped and cuirassed, "seen from front [or back]" vs. "seen from right [or left]" vs. " vs. "seen half from [front or back]," etc., and even for more minor variations like "draped on far shoulder" and so on.

So one would think that a bearded vs. a clean-shaven portrait on a coin that's otherwise the same would also be considered a sufficiently significant variation to warrant a separate catalogue number. And sometimes the catalogues do note that specific type of distinction. See, for example, Volume III of RSC at pp. 62-63 (noting the presence of a beard in 10 of 16 different obverse types for Caracalla), and at p. 109 (noting the presence of a beard in two of nine different obverse types for Elagabalus -- who, I think, is the only emperor for whom the presence of a horn on his forehead is also noted, for two of those nine types!).

But for one of my coins, a Marcus Aurelius Caesar denarius, none of the catalogues, as far as I can tell, notes the fact that in some examples (like mine), Marcus -- who was 24 or 25 years old when the coin was issued -- is entirely clean-shaven, whereas in others he has a (usually sparse) beard and/or mustache and/or long sideburns. And I don't really understand why none of the catalogues -- not RIC (I have the relevant volume downloaded), not RSC, not ERIC II, and not the old edition of Sear (the Millenium edition doesn't include this coin) -- takes note of that distinction.

My catalogue description of the coin is as follows: Marcus Aurelius Caesar AR Denarius. AD 145-146. Rome. Obv: AVRELIVS CAE-SAR AVG PII F, bare head right, clean-shaven/ Rev: COS II, Honos standing left, holding branch and cornucopia. RIC III 429(a), RSC II 110, BMCRE 594, ERIC II 301, Sear RCV (1981 ed.) 1279. 18.2 mm, 3.3 g. [I added the "clean-shaven" to the description after seeing other examples of the same catalogue number for which that isn't the case.]

Here are the seller's photo of the coin, plus my own photo of the obverse:





Wildwinds has two examples of this coin; see http://www.wildwinds.com/coins/ric/marcus_aurelius/RIC_0429a[pius].jpg and http://www.wildwinds.com/coins/ric/marcus_aurelius/RIC_0429a_2[pius].jpg. The first one has a beardless portrait (although it's possible that the line descending from his upper lip is intended to represent a slight mustache), whereas in the second, although the image is quite poor, you can still see that Marcus has a mustache, beard, and long sideburns.

Here's an image of a sold coin from Pegasi Numismatics on V-coins on which the portrait has a short beard, slight mustache, and long sideburns connecting to the beard:



In the examples on the OCRE database at numismatics.org (see http://numismatics.org/ocre/id/ric.3.ant.429A?lang=en), most are beardless, like my example, but a few do show facial hair, like this one from Valencia showing Marcus with the sparse beginnings of a beard and mustache:


So it seems to me that even though the clean-shaven version appears to comprise the majority of examples of this coin, the catalogues should at least recognize the bearded versions (at different stages of growth) as a separate variety. (In RIC III, at p. 80, the coin is catalogued as 429(a) not because of any "beard issue," but because there's a version of the coin with a left-facing head catalogued as 429(b).)

Interestingly, the German-language articles at the back of the 2017 second edition of Andreas Pangerl's "500 Years of Roman Coin Portraits" include one by Herr Pangerl entitled "Vier Jahrzente Portraits des Marcus Aurelius auf römischen Reichsmünzen" (see pp. 318-333), rendered in the English abstract at p. 439 as "Four Decades of Coin Portraits of Marcus Aurelius," from youth to late middle age. As stated in the abstract, "Marcus' portrait on coins begins presenting him as a little boy with curly hair, then follows him throughout his adolescence with increasing development of a beard, ending as mature adult man with a long, dense and finally forked beard (see Fig. 3, showing dated coins with portraits across different nominals over four decades)." The article divides Marcus's coin portraits into seven general types reflecting the changes in his portraiture.

As it happens, one of the coins chosen in the article to illustrate the development of Marcus's portraiture is this very coin, i.e., RIC 429(a):



(See p. 326.)

This example seems to lie between clean-shaven and bearded; it shows a definite mustache, and hair dotted along his jaw. In the identifying table accompanying the illustrations, the article specifically points out for this coin the same omission I've noticed, namely that "RIC gibt keinen Barttyp an." [RIC does not specify a beard type.] According to the English-language abstract, this coin falls within "Type 3," described as "long head shape of adolescent boy, beginning moustache, increasing but discrete sideburns." However, some of the examples of this coin shown above would appear more to resemble Spangerl's Type 4, namely "a more square adult type of head, sort beard, with moustache beginnning to touch the beard."

In any event, it seems clear to me that this coin portrait is a transitional type, and that the different varieties of it -- all included under the same catalog number -- reflect different stages of that transition. If the new editions of RIC ever get up to Marcus Aurelius, or if there's ever another catalogue including his coins, I hope that these different varieties are acknowledged. I think that they should be, judging by the standards generally used for assigning different catalogue numbers to varieties of Roman coin portraiture.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

I believe you touched for the reason for this seeming inconsistency when you pointed out that many/most of these differences are gradual changes as a young man grew a beard. It seems too much to list a dozen stages of beard growth but portraits were updated every time the die cutter wished rather than a few times in a long reign like we see on UK coins of Queens Victoria and Elizabeth II. There is also a matter of worn coins effectively shave slight beards so it will be possible to find die duplicates that appear to be bearded or beardless depending on wear or strike. At first thought I agreed with your desire for a separate catalog number but I changed my mind when I remembered how I dislike very minor cataloged differences like 'slight drapery on far shoulder'. I can deal with head versus bust gracefully when the difference is a chest and shoulders rather than a neck but am tired of arguments over things like draped versus draped and cuirassed, etc. I can live with a footnote stating, "Coins of this type show a variety of beard lengths over the period of issue."

There is one exception I make here. IF the beard difference is considered important in some way (perhaps separating the portraits of father and son), they need to be mentioned. Therefore, we need not point out that Carus was bald but we should mention that for Gordian II. Unfortunately there are many Eastern mint coins of either Philip I or Philip II that seem to combine old features with a lack of facial hair making the distinction less than absolute. Ancient coins are analog; not digital. Catalogs are easier when differences are yes and no rather than maybe.

 

Interesting post - I have a denarius from that era. As Doug notes, wear can give these a shave and a haircut - I think this one has a slight tuft on his chin. Hard to tell with the wear.



Marcus Aurelius (as Caesar)
Denarius
(145-147 A.D.)
Rome Mint
AVRELIVS CAESAR AVG PII F, bare head right / COS II, Spes walking left, holding flower and raising hem of robe.
RIC 431 [pius]; Cohen 102.
(2.93 grams / 17 mm)

 

Thanks for your very well-reasoned response, dougsmit. I have some additional thoughts and questions, which I will try to post tomorrow. I will say now, though, that I like your idea of a footnote (which could say something to the effect that the portraits of this type show a wide range of facial hair from clean-shaven through various degrees of mustache, sideburn, and beard growth), as much or more than the idea of separate catalogue numbers. Because just from the few photos I posted, one can see that it isn't simply a binary difference, like bareheaded vs. laureate, or draped vs. cuirassed. Instead, it's a continuum. There's everything from a few hairs on the chin and upper lip, or on the jaw, all the way to a mustache and sideburns joining up with a visible beard. Unless there were one catalogue number for completely clean-shaven portraits and a second for all degrees of facial hair -- and why draw the line there? -- it could be argued that to be completely accurate, one should have a separate catalogue number for each degree of facial hair. Which would be highly impractical. A footnote could serve just as well, and would resolve Pangerl's complaint that RIC says nothing whatsoever about beard type or facial hair for this coin -- an important factor in the development of Marcus Aurelius's image over time, and one that I would think was directed intentionally by the imperial government to show Marcus's increasing maturity. Perhaps it's no coincidence that this coin dates to 145-146 AD, and that Marcus married Faustina II in 145. (See RSC III at p. 199.)