Message:

<p>[QUOTE=&quot;Orielensis, post: 3277819, member: 96898&quot;]Thank you for the kind words! I feel similar, and am always glad when you or others show coins with visible traces of historical use and wear. There are some coins in my collection which I cherish exactly because they have fascinating imperfections, and it&#039;s good to be able to discuss those with like-minded collectors here on CT. Here is an example:</p><p><br /></p><p>[ATTACH=full]865867[/ATTACH] </p><p><br /></p><p>This coin won&#039;t appeal to grade collectors: just a common Antoninus Pius denarius with a heavily damaged portrait. Yet, the damage looks intentional and the wear around it as well as the surface of the coin suggest that it happened in antiquity. Someone scratched out the emperor’s face. </p><p><br /></p><p>Last year, I’ve been to an exhibition at the British Museum titled “Defacing the Past”. It focused on the Roman politics of erasing faces and titles, especially after a <i>damnatio memoriae </i>(which never happened to Antoninus Pius). On exhibit were, among other items, Roman coins which had been altered or damaged as a means of political protest, and, speculating a bit, maybe this is what happened here? What might have motivated a person some 1800 years ago to deface this denarius? Was it a legionary&#039;s overdue pay, a grain-shortage, or a provincial&#039;s indignation against Roman rule? Or are we just looking at the random result of someone being bored and playing around with a knife and a coin? </p><p><br /></p><p>We&#039;ll probably never know, but the fact that it raises such questions makes this damaged denarius, at least in my eyes, more interesting than a perfectly preserved specimen.[/QUOTE]</p><p><br /></p>

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