I love error coins, especially 'official' ones. This Judaean bronze from Domitian's reign has a very interesting error, one that is difficult to explain. Domitian Æ24, 12.92g Caesarea Maritima mint, 92-93 AD Obv: IMP CAES DOMIT AVG GERM PM TR P XII; Head of Domitian, laureate, bearded, r. Rev: IMP XXIII (sic) COS XVI CENS P P P; Victory holding wreath and trophy, l. RPC 2308 (10 spec.). Hendin 1459. Ex Forvm Ancient Coins, March 2021. Struck for Domitian at the Roman colony of Caeserea Maritima in either 92 or 93, this Latin inscribed bronze provincial mistakenly on the reverse records Domitian receiving a twenty third imperial acclamation. Domitian was assassinated a few years later in 96 still having only received twenty two imperial acclamations, so it is very surprising that this error at the Caeserea mint occurred. Remarkably, it shows up on all the known dies for the type. Did news briefly, but falsely, reach the colony of a twenty third acclamation and the die engraver(s) followed suite? Or did one die engraver repeatedly make the same honest mistake over and over? It's a numismatic mystery likely never to be answered. Please show your error coins.
Interesting hypothesis by Jim Hazelton : "Was this a simple mint error? An extra I, randomly placed? No it was not. No it certainly was not! A coin is a government record. It is an official document. The target audience for this document included both active-duty military and military veterans, so such a mistake would not have been tolerated for long. This inscription spans the entire issue of the coin, including innumerable die switches. The wording was purposeful. But what happened, and why? In my opinion, Legio X Fretensis took it upon themselves to acclaim Domitianimperator for the XXIIIrd time. Since the emperor's physical presence wasn't required, as we have already deduced from IMP II, all that was required was for the legion to proclaim the necessary formula. Apparently they did that. The coin is the evidence. Why? I have no idea. Perhaps it was a spontaneous outburst of patriotic fervor. Perhaps it was thanks for a special favor or in aid of a future favor. Perhaps they fought a battle nobody knows about. I asked Prof Aldrete what he thought of the matter, and he offered another plausible explanation. He suggested a difference in the way the acclamations were counted might explain it. "Sometimes the Imperator titles are counted for individual battles and sometimes awarded collectively for entire campaigns, so off the top of my head," he wrote by email, "I'm guessing that Caesarea did their math differently from the other mints and counted two battles separately that the other mints folded into one campaign." That seems to me a reasonable explanation as well. Maybe there pas a difference of opinion among the legions. Maybe this was an attempt by the army stationed in Caesarea and the veterans settled there to set the record straight, with their version anyway. "What is really interesting," Prof Aldrete added, "is that they persisted with the XXIII even after it presumably would have become apparent that other coin runs had a different number." I agree with this statement 100%, and I wonder what Domitian had to say about this coin. Was it ever brought to his attention? If so, what was the emperor's final word? Did he, for whatever reason, ignore this acclamation, or did he learn of it too late, and only his assassination prevented its being recorded on the Roman coinage? RPC 2308 is the perfect Coin of the Week in that it asks more questions than it answers. It leaves you wondering." Also this article by Stephan Witetschek: 23-mal Imperator? Die Weiheinschrift IvE 413 und die Zahl der imperatorischen Akklamationen für Kaiser Domitian.
Interesting indeed, but I have to respectfully disagree with Mr. Hazelton's theory ... there are far too many 'perhaps' and 'maybes' for my liking. Occam's Razor tells me it's a mint error.
