Log in or Sign up
Coin Talk
Home
Forums
>
Coin Forums
>
Ancient Coins
>
I, Claudius, bringing a project to completion and an identification to confusion, then; dies.
>
Reply to Thread
Message:
<p>[QUOTE="svessien, post: 4596079, member: 15481"]This is a rather long-winded article about buying a new coin. Hopefully it will be worth both writing and reading it. It is about:</p><p><br /></p><p>I, as in me, a coin collecting nuffsaid from Norway.</p><p><br /></p><p>Claudius, Emperor of Rome 41-54 AD.</p><p><br /></p><p>A collection of silver coins from the first 12 Caesars, which this coin from Claudius completes.</p><p><br /></p><p>Confusion over identifying the correct place where this coin was minted, and an examination of dies.</p><p><br /></p><p>This is the coin in question:</p><p><br /></p><p>[ATTACH=full]1138250[/ATTACH]</p><p><br /></p><p>The very reputable auction house described it as follows:</p><p><br /></p><p><font size="3"><i>Denarius 44, AR 19 mm, 3.74 g. [TI] CLAVD CAESAR AVG P M TR P [IIII] Laureate head r. Rev. PACI – [AVGVST]AE Pax-Nemesis, winged, advancing r., holding with l. hand winged caduceus pointing down at snake and holding out fold of drapery below chin with r. C 56. BMC 27. RIC 28. CBN 42.</i></font></p><p><font size="3"><i>Old cabinet tone, a small scratch on obverse field, otherwise very fine</i></font></p><p><i><font size="3"><br /></font></i></p><p><i><font size="3">Ex Künker 35, 1997, 296 and Hirsch Nachf. 197, 1997, 506 sales.</font></i></p><p><br /></p><p>Claudius is definitely my favorite emperor, and I have always loved this reverse. First of because as a man, you have to love the sight of a woman with a healthy musculus gluteus maximus. (You actually have to. It's genetic.)</p><p>A more intellectual approach to it would be to wonder why Pax Nemesis makes her first occurance on a Roman coin at this point in time?</p><p><br /></p><p><font size="3"><i>”After the assassination of Caligula on January 24, 41 AD, the Praetorian Guards needed an emperor to retain their jobs so they took Claudius to the Praetorian camp and put him under their protection. The goddess Pax-Nemesis represents subdued vengeance or the amnesty in prosecuting those who had participated in the assassination of his nephew. The Senate quickly met and began debating a change of government, yet it quickly devolved into an argument over which of them would be the new Princeps. When the Senate heard of the Praetorians’ claim, they demanded that Claudius be delivered to them for approval. Perhaps King Herod of Israel, Claudius’ boyhood friend, may have counseled Claudius.</i></font></p><p><font size="3"><br /></font></p><p><i><font size="3">Whatever the source of the counsel, be it Herod or the guards, Claudius rightly refused as he sensed the danger.</font></i></p><p><font size="3"><br /></font></p><p><font size="3"><i>Eventually, the Senate was forced to give in and accepted Claudius as the new emperor, and in return, he pardoned nearly all the assassins. Thus, this coin was issued depicting “Pax” meaning peace and “Nemesis” meaning the inescapable agent of someone’s or something’s downfall.”</i></font></p><p><br /></p><p>Source:</p><p><br /></p><p><a href="https://www.armstrongeconomics.com/history/ancient-economies/our-nemesis-sovereign-debt-crisis/" target="_blank" class="externalLink ProxyLink" data-proxy-href="https://www.armstrongeconomics.com/history/ancient-economies/our-nemesis-sovereign-debt-crisis/" rel="nofollow">https://www.armstrongeconomics.com/history/ancient-economies/our-nemesis-sovereign-debt-crisis/</a></p><p><br /></p><p>So, a coin with a good portrait, an attractive goddess and a good dose of history to boot, what’s not to like?</p><p><br /></p><p>The identification made by the auction house, I guess. That left something to be desired. In most cases I wouldn’t have noticed, because I have tended to trust the professionals, and at least this auction house. This time I started doing some research, because I wanted to see if I could identify die matches. (The denarii of Claudius are so scarce that this is quite possible.) I also questioned the dating; 44-45 AD. Looking at the obverse legend, I would have thought it was earlier.</p><p><br /></p><p>Let’s start there, with the dating. The legend on my coin is</p><p><br /></p><p>TI CLAVD CAESAR AVG P M TR P. According to Seaby, that’s 41-42 AD.</p><p><br /></p><p> If it was RIC 28, minted 44 AD, it would have been TI CLAVD CAESAR AVG P M TR P IIII</p><p><br /></p><p>The seller has concluded that the ”IIII” has landed outside the flan, like other parts of the legend. That can be defended, but you would expect to see small parts of the numerals along the rim, right?</p><p><br /></p><p>My suspicion that the dating was wrong was confirmed when I found a die match that was dated 41-42 AD:</p><p><br /></p><p>[ATTACH=full]1138249[/ATTACH]</p><p><br /></p><p>However, the coin on the right has a different reverse, adding to the confusion:</p><p><br /></p><p>[ATTACH=full]1138248[/ATTACH]</p><p><br /></p><p>Solidus Numismatik described it as:</p><p><br /></p><p><font size="3"><i>"CLAUDIUS (41 - 54 n. Chr.). Denar. 41 - 42 n. Chr. Lugdunum.</i></font></p><p><font size="3"><i>Vs: TI CLAVD CAESAR AVG P M TR P. Kopf mit Eichenkranz rechts.</i></font></p><p><font size="3"><i>Rs: [PRAETOR] - RECEPT. Claudius in Toga und Prätorianer mit Adlerstandarte stehen einander gegenüber und reichen sich die Hände.</i></font></p><p><font size="3"><i>RIC 12. C. 78. BMC 9.</i></font></p><p><font size="3"><i>Schlagspuren und Kratzer, sehr schön.</i></font></p><p><font size="3"><i>Sehr selten.</i></font></p><p><font size="3"><i>3,61 g 19 mm"</i></font></p><p><font size="3"><br /></font></p><p><font size="4">So, Lugdunum, eh? At least we seem closer to knowing the date, but the price was that the mint now is in question. I guess it’s not very likely that the obverse dies were sent back and forth between Rome and Lyons for different reverses, so who is wrong?</font></p><p><font size="4"><br /></font></p><p><font size="4">First task: Find the correct RIC number on the coin with Pax/Nemesis from 41/42 AD. That’s RIC 10. Great. What does RIC online say about the mint, I wonder?</font></p><p><font size="4"><br /></font></p><p><a href="http://numismatics.org/ocre/id/ric.1(2).cl.10" target="_blank" class="externalLink ProxyLink" data-proxy-href="http://numismatics.org/ocre/id/ric.1(2).cl.10" rel="nofollow"><font size="4">http://numismatics.org/ocre/id/ric.1(2).cl.10</font></a></p><p><font size="4"><br /></font></p><p><font size="4">As you can see, not very much. According to RIC online, all the denarii from Claudius are minted in Rome.</font></p><p><br /></p><p><font size="4">According to all acsearch results, RIC 12 was minted in Lugdunum.</font></p><p><br /></p><p><font size="4">According to me (I told you this thread was about me too), RIC 10 and RIC 12 have to have the same mint, and this is why:</font></p><p><font size="4"><br /></font></p><p>[ATTACH=full]1138247[/ATTACH]</p><p><br /></p><p>Almost all the examples I was able to find have die matches across 10 and 12.</p><p><br /></p><p>It is possible, based on style, that the coins to the left have another mint: That RIC 10 and 12 were minted at the same time with the same obverse dies both in Rome and Lyons.</p><p><br /></p><p>However, I find it more likely that one mint operated with two different engravers.</p><p><br /></p><p>It must be quite clear by now that I’m far into speculation about this, but I think this thread illustrates that I’m not the only one guilty of that. Look at the different auction descriptions here:</p><p><br /></p><p><a href="https://www.acsearch.info/search.html?term=Claudius+denarius+RIC+10+Pax&category=1-2&en=1&de=1&fr=1&it=1&es=1&ot=1&images=1&thesaurus=1&order=0&currency=usd&company=" target="_blank" class="externalLink ProxyLink" data-proxy-href="https://www.acsearch.info/search.html?term=Claudius+denarius+RIC+10+Pax&category=1-2&en=1&de=1&fr=1&it=1&es=1&ot=1&images=1&thesaurus=1&order=0&currency=usd&company=" rel="nofollow">https://www.acsearch.info/search.html?term=Claudius+denarius+RIC+10+Pax&category=1-2&en=1&de=1&fr=1&it=1&es=1&ot=1&images=1&thesaurus=1&order=0&currency=usd&company=</a></p><p><br /></p><p>I find it difficult to see a pattern here. One thing is for sure: RIC 10 is a rare coin. I have put the samples I have found together here:</p><p><br /></p><p>[ATTACH=full]1138246[/ATTACH]</p><p><br /></p><p>I’m sure there are more, but not many, many more. It’s a coin that is at least R6, perhaps R7. I have ended up describing it as a coin from the Lyons mint, as most of the examples from acsearch puts it at Lyons, and that most if not all RIC 12 samples are described as from Lyons. Looking at the style of these two types, I find them different than other Claudius silver coins from the same time.</p><p><br /></p><p>I’m still speculating, though. Please help me if you can. Or share a Claudius coin of your own, that would be nice too.</p><p><br /></p><p><i>And, by the way: The set is not complete. It won’t be in a million years. I will keep on honing the 12 Caesars. But it has reached a new level, and I’m really, really happy with the coin.</i> <img src="styles/default/xenforo/clear.png" class="mceSmilieSprite mceSmilie1" alt=":)" unselectable="on" unselectable="on" /></p><p><br /></p><p><br /></p><p>Svein[/QUOTE]</p><p><br /></p>
[QUOTE="svessien, post: 4596079, member: 15481"]This is a rather long-winded article about buying a new coin. Hopefully it will be worth both writing and reading it. It is about: I, as in me, a coin collecting nuffsaid from Norway. Claudius, Emperor of Rome 41-54 AD. A collection of silver coins from the first 12 Caesars, which this coin from Claudius completes. Confusion over identifying the correct place where this coin was minted, and an examination of dies. This is the coin in question: [ATTACH=full]1138250[/ATTACH] The very reputable auction house described it as follows: [SIZE=3][I]Denarius 44, AR 19 mm, 3.74 g. [TI] CLAVD CAESAR AVG P M TR P [IIII] Laureate head r. Rev. PACI – [AVGVST]AE Pax-Nemesis, winged, advancing r., holding with l. hand winged caduceus pointing down at snake and holding out fold of drapery below chin with r. C 56. BMC 27. RIC 28. CBN 42.[/I] [I]Old cabinet tone, a small scratch on obverse field, otherwise very fine[/I][/SIZE] [I][SIZE=3] Ex Künker 35, 1997, 296 and Hirsch Nachf. 197, 1997, 506 sales.[/SIZE][/I] Claudius is definitely my favorite emperor, and I have always loved this reverse. First of because as a man, you have to love the sight of a woman with a healthy musculus gluteus maximus. (You actually have to. It's genetic.) A more intellectual approach to it would be to wonder why Pax Nemesis makes her first occurance on a Roman coin at this point in time? [SIZE=3][I]”After the assassination of Caligula on January 24, 41 AD, the Praetorian Guards needed an emperor to retain their jobs so they took Claudius to the Praetorian camp and put him under their protection. The goddess Pax-Nemesis represents subdued vengeance or the amnesty in prosecuting those who had participated in the assassination of his nephew. The Senate quickly met and began debating a change of government, yet it quickly devolved into an argument over which of them would be the new Princeps. When the Senate heard of the Praetorians’ claim, they demanded that Claudius be delivered to them for approval. Perhaps King Herod of Israel, Claudius’ boyhood friend, may have counseled Claudius.[/I] [/SIZE] [I][SIZE=3]Whatever the source of the counsel, be it Herod or the guards, Claudius rightly refused as he sensed the danger.[/SIZE][/I] [SIZE=3] [I]Eventually, the Senate was forced to give in and accepted Claudius as the new emperor, and in return, he pardoned nearly all the assassins. Thus, this coin was issued depicting “Pax” meaning peace and “Nemesis” meaning the inescapable agent of someone’s or something’s downfall.”[/I][/SIZE] Source: [URL]https://www.armstrongeconomics.com/history/ancient-economies/our-nemesis-sovereign-debt-crisis/[/URL] So, a coin with a good portrait, an attractive goddess and a good dose of history to boot, what’s not to like? The identification made by the auction house, I guess. That left something to be desired. In most cases I wouldn’t have noticed, because I have tended to trust the professionals, and at least this auction house. This time I started doing some research, because I wanted to see if I could identify die matches. (The denarii of Claudius are so scarce that this is quite possible.) I also questioned the dating; 44-45 AD. Looking at the obverse legend, I would have thought it was earlier. Let’s start there, with the dating. The legend on my coin is TI CLAVD CAESAR AVG P M TR P. According to Seaby, that’s 41-42 AD. If it was RIC 28, minted 44 AD, it would have been TI CLAVD CAESAR AVG P M TR P IIII The seller has concluded that the ”IIII” has landed outside the flan, like other parts of the legend. That can be defended, but you would expect to see small parts of the numerals along the rim, right? My suspicion that the dating was wrong was confirmed when I found a die match that was dated 41-42 AD: [ATTACH=full]1138249[/ATTACH] However, the coin on the right has a different reverse, adding to the confusion: [ATTACH=full]1138248[/ATTACH] Solidus Numismatik described it as: [SIZE=3][I]"CLAUDIUS (41 - 54 n. Chr.). Denar. 41 - 42 n. Chr. Lugdunum.[/I] [I]Vs: TI CLAVD CAESAR AVG P M TR P. Kopf mit Eichenkranz rechts.[/I] [I]Rs: [PRAETOR] - RECEPT. Claudius in Toga und Prätorianer mit Adlerstandarte stehen einander gegenüber und reichen sich die Hände.[/I] [I]RIC 12. C. 78. BMC 9.[/I] [I]Schlagspuren und Kratzer, sehr schön.[/I] [I]Sehr selten.[/I] [I]3,61 g 19 mm"[/I] [/SIZE] [SIZE=4]So, Lugdunum, eh? At least we seem closer to knowing the date, but the price was that the mint now is in question. I guess it’s not very likely that the obverse dies were sent back and forth between Rome and Lyons for different reverses, so who is wrong? First task: Find the correct RIC number on the coin with Pax/Nemesis from 41/42 AD. That’s RIC 10. Great. What does RIC online say about the mint, I wonder? [/SIZE] [URL='http://numismatics.org/ocre/id/ric.1(2).cl.10'][SIZE=4]http://numismatics.org/ocre/id/ric.1(2).cl.10[/SIZE][/URL] [SIZE=4] As you can see, not very much. According to RIC online, all the denarii from Claudius are minted in Rome.[/SIZE] [SIZE=4]According to all acsearch results, RIC 12 was minted in Lugdunum.[/SIZE] [SIZE=4]According to me (I told you this thread was about me too), RIC 10 and RIC 12 have to have the same mint, and this is why: [/SIZE] [ATTACH=full]1138247[/ATTACH] Almost all the examples I was able to find have die matches across 10 and 12. It is possible, based on style, that the coins to the left have another mint: That RIC 10 and 12 were minted at the same time with the same obverse dies both in Rome and Lyons. However, I find it more likely that one mint operated with two different engravers. It must be quite clear by now that I’m far into speculation about this, but I think this thread illustrates that I’m not the only one guilty of that. Look at the different auction descriptions here: [URL]https://www.acsearch.info/search.html?term=Claudius+denarius+RIC+10+Pax&category=1-2&en=1&de=1&fr=1&it=1&es=1&ot=1&images=1&thesaurus=1&order=0¤cy=usd&company=[/URL] I find it difficult to see a pattern here. One thing is for sure: RIC 10 is a rare coin. I have put the samples I have found together here: [ATTACH=full]1138246[/ATTACH] I’m sure there are more, but not many, many more. It’s a coin that is at least R6, perhaps R7. I have ended up describing it as a coin from the Lyons mint, as most of the examples from acsearch puts it at Lyons, and that most if not all RIC 12 samples are described as from Lyons. Looking at the style of these two types, I find them different than other Claudius silver coins from the same time. I’m still speculating, though. Please help me if you can. Or share a Claudius coin of your own, that would be nice too. [I]And, by the way: The set is not complete. It won’t be in a million years. I will keep on honing the 12 Caesars. But it has reached a new level, and I’m really, really happy with the coin.[/I] :) Svein[/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
>
I, Claudius, bringing a project to completion and an identification to confusion, then; dies.
>
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...