Julius Cesar Denarius, Moneyer S. Macer: Weakly Struck or Just Worn?

I have been looking at this J.C denarius for some time now, and the more I examine the more it affirms my belief that the coin saw relatively little actual wear (for sure circulated some), but most of the weakness seen is just a (really) poor strike. The obverse in particular is weak.

Not only was the strike way off-center, but also dramatically weak in parts. I have seen a few other J.C denarii like this.

What do you guys think, poor strike rather than circulation wear?

Julius Caesar. February-March 44 BC. AR Denarius. Rome mint. P. Sepullius Macer, moneyer.
Obv: Laureate and veiled head right
Rev: Venus standing left, holding Victory and scepter; shield set on ground to right. Crawford 480/13; Sydenham 1074.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

I agree-- it's an uneven strike. The areas with few details didn't have enough metal to fill the dies recesses. I'd be happy to have this coin since the centering isn't too bad and much of the legends are visible

 

I agree - a bit of wear, but mostly a weak strike. Considering the haste with which most of JC's denarii were produced (out of military imperative), it's surprising that we have as many well-struck coins as we do. It is not the least bit surprising that most are weak.

 

You lucky )%&, still want a portrait.

But like the others, looks like a poor strike. Still a great coin though, congrats.

 

I have one of these, and in almost every case the denarius shows evidence of (1) a weak strike, especially in the obverse wreath area of the portrait, and (2) an uneven, off-center strike.

On your coin, the obverse legends are decently strong, and on the reverse Victory is pretty well struck. As Julius Caesar denarii go, it's in relatively good condition.

Here's mine:



JULIUS CAESAR 100 - 44 B.C.
AR Denarius (4.05 gm) Rome Feb. - Mar. 44 B.C.
Sydenham 1072, Crawford 480/11
CAESAR DICT PERPETVO Wreathed head of Caesar Rev. P SEPVLLIVS MACER Venus stg. L. holding Victory & scepter resting on star.

My portrait is not veiled, so a slightly different attribution from yours.

 

I agree. And I'd certainly take it into my collection.

 

I also agree about the strike versus wear of the OP coin...and I'd love to have it!!

Of course, it goes without saying that I wish I could afford one nearly as nice as I-O-M's example

 

It seems sad but the OP coin, for all its weak spots, is still above average and very fortunate to have the important parts strong and the lesser parts weak. Imagine the opposite coin with a strong back of the head and no face. The same goes for the reverse. I also would love the coin. Ides' coin is just a tiny bit (reverse centering) short of spectacular/perfection. I suppose the wreath could have a bit more detail but it hardly deserves mention when you consider what the other 99.9% of these look like. We all have to ask what to say about an issue when the best known not perfect. There are ancients that do not exist above "Fine Details". You can love them as they are or pretend they don't exist.

 

I don't know what I like more about IOM's post: the coin or the photo. Both superb!

Thank you very much for your opinions. Seems you guys concur with my view.
I forgot to mention that the planchet is not only oblong, but also not of uniform thickness throughout. Thicker on one side than the other.

This non-uniform thickness may explain part of the uneven strike and supports what TIF and J.A say.

I was lucky when this lot came up for auction some years ago: most people, including the auctioneer thought it was weak from wear. The off-center strike did not help either I guess. As a result it attracted relatively little attention and I was able to get it for a good price.

 

Datsuh niceuh! Giulio Cesare.

 

That is an addition I would warmly welcome into my collection.

 

I like it. Enough of the coin's details were struck to give it good eye appeal. Plus, it's my favourite JC portrait style.

 

That's a really nice one, Eduard. You have to be glad that that incredible wrinkled Adam's apple was not lost!

I have to say that I believe yours is Crawford 480/14 (without the shield) rather than 480/13. I think I see the scepter on your coin terminating at ground level with 480/14's star rather than a shield.

Poor centering and uneven strikes are practically a hallmark of these particular JC portrait issues...

 

Eduard, congrats on that sweet OP-addition ...

Oh, and that's always a total winner, Z-Bro (I love the Mick Jagger)

 

Congrats Eduard, attractive example! Does look like more week strike than wear. Wish I had one to share but this type is likely to stay on my want list for a while.
Yeah I'm a little jealous

 

Thank you everybody.

I was looking further in ACsearch into Caesar's denarii of this type (moneyer Macer), and noticed that the two major types: Capite Velato (veiled head), and wreathed head are both about evenly distributed in terms of occurrence.
I always thought the wreathed head was actually scarcer.

Zumbly, than you very much for posting your L.Aemilius Buca moneyer example.
That is a very nice coin! (and much scarcer than the Macer type, it seems). Nicely centered and with full legends. Thank you also for setting me straight on the attribution. I think you are correct.