Reply to Thread

Message:: [QUOTE="Jochen1, post: 7648354, member: 103829"]Dear Friends of ancient coins! After a long break, it's time to post a new article. But in the last few months I have been botanically on the move. I am mapping the flowering plants in our region for the Natural History Museum in Stuttgart/Baden-Württemberg. Today I want to write something about corrected legend errors on coins. The ancient die cutters were only human and so they made mistakes just like the rest of us. Especially with Roman provincial coins there are many coins with legend errors, more than with imperial coins. It is particularly interesting when the die cutter noticed his mistake. Since it was more time-consuming and expensive to make a new die, it sometimes happened that he corrected the error. Coins with such corrections are an interesting field of collecting, as they give us an insight into the work in ancient mints. Here I would like to present a number of provincial coins on which a legend error has been corrected. I have found the following different procedures: (1) A forgotten letter was inserted afterwards.(2) A wrong letter was retouched afterwards.(3) A letter has taken on a double function. However, this may also have been an artificial device. I think you know that the image was engraved first and then the legend had to be added by another worker. In order to save space, I have only shown the side concerned. A forgotten letter was subsequently inserted [ATTACH=full]1315023[/ATTACH] (1) Moesia inferior, Markianopolis, Septimius Severus, AD 193-211 (Tyche).The ethnic on the rev. is MAPKI-A-NOΠOΛEI and across the field T-Ω-N. The first O is round with a dot in the middle. The second is just a thick dot. It has obviously been forgotten and inserted afterwards.Ref: AMNG I/1, 588var; Hristova/Jekov (2014) 6.14.38.29 (this coin).[ATTACH=full]1315024[/ATTACH] (2) Moesia inferior, Markianopolis, Septimius Severus, AD 193-211 (Dionysus).The legend on the rev. is V AV ΓAΛΛOV MAPKIAN-OΠOΛITΩN. This time the die cutter forgot the P of MAPKIANOΠOΛITΩN. He added it afterwards, but as there was no space left for a separate P, he simply added a small arc to the K. Thus we now have a ligated PK with a mirror-image P.Ref: AMNG I/1, 556 var.; Hristova/Jekov (2014) 6.14.8.8 (this coin).[ATTACH=full]1315025[/ATTACH] (3) Moesia inferior, Markianopolis, Macrinus, AD 217-218.The correct legend on the obv. is AVT K OΠEΛ CEV . MAKPEINOC. Of note here is the subscripting of I below the gap between E and N of MAKPEINOC. It will not be a subscribed I, but the die cutter will simply have forgotten the I and tried to correct this error. Pick has also noted this!Ref: AMNG I/1, 712; Hristova/Jekov (2014) 6.23.38.5 (this coin).[ATTACH=full]1315026[/ATTACH] (4) Moesia inferior, Nikopolis ad Istrum, Diadumenian, AD 217-218 (Homonoia).The correct legend would have been VΠ AΓPIΠΠA NIK-OΠOΛITΩN ΠPOC IC / TPΩ. Here the die cutter forgot the O of ΠPOC and only wrote ΠPC. But he knew how to help himself: He simply stuck the missing o (somewhat reduced in size) under the ΠPC!Ref.: AMNG I/1, 1813 var.; Hristova/Hoeft/Jekov (2020) 8.25.36.7 (this coin).[ATTACH=full]1315027[/ATTACH] (5) Moesia inferior, Nikopolis ad Istrum, Macrinus, AD 217-218.This reverse with the same error also exists for Macrinus.Ref: AMNG I/1, 1703; Hristova/Hoeft/Jekov (2020) 8.23.36.7 (this coin).[ATTACH=full]1315028[/ATTACH] (6) The coin just presented has another peculiarity on the obv. There is a conspicuous gap between the I and the N of MAKPINOC. And if you look closely, you can see the remains of a letter. It seems that the stamp cutter accidentally wrote MAKPIENOC and then removed the E.[ATTACH=full]1315029[/ATTACH] (7) Moesia inferior, Markianopolis, Macrinus & Diadumenian, AD 217-218.The legend is AVT K OΠEΛ CEV MAKPEINOC K M OΠE(sic!) ANTΩNEINOC. But the die cutter underestimated the length of the legend. There was no more room for the C at the end and so he had to write it in the field where it really does not belong.This coin usually exists without this error. The defective one is very rare and was not listed in AMNG, Varbanov or Hristova/Jekov.Ref: AMNG I/1, 726 var.; Hristova/Jekov (2014) 8.25.7.15 (this coin). A wrong letter was retouched afterwards  [ATTACH=full]1315030[/ATTACH] (1) Moesia inferior, Nikopolis ad Istrum, Elagabal, AD 218-222 (eagle with standards).The correct legend on the rev. would be VΠ NOBIOV - POVΦOVNIKOΠOΛITΩN ΠPOC ICT and in the left field below each other PO / N. One can clearly read POVΦO NIKOΠOΛITWN in the rev. legend. But the N of NIKO looks strongly like a V with its curved left line. My suspicion was that the die cutter had probably forgotten the last V of ROVΦOV and then made the N into a half-legible V. The unknown die cutter worked for Elagabal under the governor Novius Rufus.Ref: AMNG I/1, -; Hristova/Hoeft/Jekov (2012) 8.26. 47.2 corr. (ligature not noticed!); Hristova/Hoeft/Jekov (2020) 8.26.47.1 (this coin). At first I had given up on this idea because Doug Smith thought that a letter had simply been forgotten (probably the last V, because forgetting the N of NIKOΠOΛ is hard to imagine), and I bowed to his authority. But afterwards I found a second coin with the same error, this time on a coin struck for Caracalla under the governor Flavius Ulpianus, i.e. by a quite different die-cutter.[ATTACH=full]1315031[/ATTACH] (2) Moesia inferior, Nikopolis ad Istrum, Caracalla, AD 198-217 (Dionysos)Here the rev. legend is V ΦΛ OVΛΠIANO(VN) - I - KOΠOΛI ΠPOC I (VN ligated!).On this rev. the subsequent improvement is even more visible. You can really see how the die cutter has whittled away at the N! After this "correction" it was possible to read the N as V at the same time. It is interesting that both stamp cutters came up with the same idea after their mistake.Ref: AMNG I/1, -; Hristova/Hoeft/Jekov (2012) 8.18.8.5 corr. (legend error overlooked!); Hristova/Hoeft/Jekov (2020) 8.18.8.5 (this coin). (will be continued!)[/QUOTE]

Log in or Sign up

Reply to Thread

Useful Searches