Log in or Sign up
Coin Talk
Home
Forums
>
Coin Forums
>
Ancient Coins
>
Ever buy duplicates on purpose?
>
Reply to Thread
Message:
<p>[QUOTE="benhur767, post: 2845001, member: 36818"]I buy duplicates on purpose, but as others have pointed out, in ancient coins there are no true duplicates (except maybe modern counterfeits). There is always some difference of style, strike, or condition that is worth studying. In the case of the elephant denarius of Caracalla, there are several interesting die variations that warrant comparison. On the examples below, the die was cut at the end of 211 with the tribunicia potestas number XIIII, but had to be changed to XV because the coins weren't struck until early 212 (presumably). Different engravers had different solutions to the problem. For the coin on the left, the X and V were simply spaced out to fill the gap taken up by the longer XIIII. For the coin on the right, the engraver combined extra spacing with a dash (–) to "strike through" the remaining Is. While this has been read as an H, as in XVH, that would not have been the intent. The elephants on these two coins are also different; the one on the left thrusts its trunk into the gap between the two Ps in the legend, whereas the one on the right does not.</p><p><br /></p><p>[ATTACH=full]674028[/ATTACH]</p><p><br /></p><p><b>Coin on the Left: </b>RIC 199, RSC 208</p><p>Caracalla. AR denarius, Rome mint, struck 212 CE; 18mm, 3.40g. BMCRE 47, Hill 1312 (R4), RIC 199, RSC 208. Obv: ANTONINVS PIVS AVG BRIT; head laureate right. Rx: P M TR P XV COS III P – P; Elephant walking right. Somewhat porous; EF.</p><p><br /></p><p><i>References:</i></p><ul> <li>K. Elks, “Coins of Caracalla with Altered Dies,” <i>NC</i> 1973, pp. 222–3 and pl. 15.4 (die duplicate).</li> </ul><p> <ul> <li>Spink & Son, Ltd., <i>The Michael Kelly Collection of Roman Silver Coins </i>(London, 18 November 1997), Auction 123, p. 47, lot 1230 (die duplicate).</li> </ul><p><b>Coin on the Right: </b>RIC 199, RSC 208</p><p>Caracalla. AR denarius, Rome mint, struck 212 CE; 2.81g. BMCRE 47, Hill 1312 (R4), RIC 199, RSC 208. Obv: ANTONINVS PIVS – AVG BRIT; head laureate right. Rx: P M TR P XV H [sic] COS III P P; Elephant walking right. EF.</p><p><br /></p><p>ex The Old Sable Collection</p><p><br /></p><p><i>References:</i></p><ul> <li>K. Elks, “Coins of Caracalla with Altered Dies,” <i>NC</i> 1973, pp. 222–3 and pl. 15.1 (reverse die link).</li> </ul><p> <ul> <li>B.A. Seaby, Ltd., <i>The G.R. Arnold Collection of Silver Coins of the Severan Dynasty</i> (London, 21 November 1984), pl. VI, no. 152 (reverse die link).</li> </ul><p>[/QUOTE]</p><p><br /></p>
[QUOTE="benhur767, post: 2845001, member: 36818"]I buy duplicates on purpose, but as others have pointed out, in ancient coins there are no true duplicates (except maybe modern counterfeits). There is always some difference of style, strike, or condition that is worth studying. In the case of the elephant denarius of Caracalla, there are several interesting die variations that warrant comparison. On the examples below, the die was cut at the end of 211 with the tribunicia potestas number XIIII, but had to be changed to XV because the coins weren't struck until early 212 (presumably). Different engravers had different solutions to the problem. For the coin on the left, the X and V were simply spaced out to fill the gap taken up by the longer XIIII. For the coin on the right, the engraver combined extra spacing with a dash (–) to "strike through" the remaining Is. While this has been read as an H, as in XVH, that would not have been the intent. The elephants on these two coins are also different; the one on the left thrusts its trunk into the gap between the two Ps in the legend, whereas the one on the right does not. [ATTACH=full]674028[/ATTACH] [B]Coin on the Left: [/B]RIC 199, RSC 208 Caracalla. AR denarius, Rome mint, struck 212 CE; 18mm, 3.40g. BMCRE 47, Hill 1312 (R4), RIC 199, RSC 208. Obv: ANTONINVS PIVS AVG BRIT; head laureate right. Rx: P M TR P XV COS III P – P; Elephant walking right. Somewhat porous; EF. [I]References:[/I] [LIST] [*]K. Elks, “Coins of Caracalla with Altered Dies,” [I]NC[/I] 1973, pp. 222–3 and pl. 15.4 (die duplicate). [/LIST] [LIST] [*]Spink & Son, Ltd., [I]The Michael Kelly Collection of Roman Silver Coins [/I](London, 18 November 1997), Auction 123, p. 47, lot 1230 (die duplicate). [/LIST] [B]Coin on the Right: [/B]RIC 199, RSC 208 Caracalla. AR denarius, Rome mint, struck 212 CE; 2.81g. BMCRE 47, Hill 1312 (R4), RIC 199, RSC 208. Obv: ANTONINVS PIVS – AVG BRIT; head laureate right. Rx: P M TR P XV H [sic] COS III P P; Elephant walking right. EF. ex The Old Sable Collection [I]References:[/I] [LIST] [*]K. Elks, “Coins of Caracalla with Altered Dies,” [I]NC[/I] 1973, pp. 222–3 and pl. 15.1 (reverse die link). [/LIST] [LIST] [*]B.A. Seaby, Ltd., [I]The G.R. Arnold Collection of Silver Coins of the Severan Dynasty[/I] (London, 21 November 1984), pl. VI, no. 152 (reverse die link). [/LIST][/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
>
Ever buy duplicates on purpose?
>
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...