Marcus Aurelius Sestertius RIC 1034 - sort of Weight: 28.78 grams, Size 32 mm Obverse Inscription: M ANTONINUS AVG TRP XXVI Reverse Inscription: IMP VI COS III "VIC GER" on Shield Roma seated left on shield inscribed "VIC GER" and holding Victory As I had mentioned in one of my recent articles on this site, "unlisted" means that the coin type, in all its particulars, is not included in relevant catalog of the volume of Roman Imperial Coins. And, as noted, there are varying degrees of "unlistedness" from a type that is completely absent in the catalog, all the way to minor differences from that described, even those that the authors of RIC may not have bothered to include. As an example of minor unlisted - a sestertius of Marcus Aurelius, from his final year, with Virtus seated on the reverse, RIC 1249, foot on ground. My example shows Virtus's foot on a helmet. (I will have to post the coin at a later date). Unlisted? yes, since it is not mentioned in RIC as such. But, it seems to be a minor oversight. The coin above was struck between Dec. 171 to Dec 172. This type (lacking the inscription on the shield) is among the most common of Marcus Aurelius sestertii. Although I do not have the time to go into the history in detail - plus the historical sources are severely lacking for this period - the coin was struck during a dark time for Rome - a plague brought back from Lucius Verus' earlier expedition against Parthia had killed thousands upon thousands, the Germanic tribes had taken advantage of the situation by invading Gaul and northern Italy. The situation was dire, although by the time the coin was struck Marcus was in the process of beating back the Germans and the coins reflected the situation - although I am not certain but I believe the celebrated "rain miracle" took place about a year after this coin was struck. It was a dire time indeed. Many types in all metals deal with the military situation, this being one of them. In short, the year 171-172 is a perfect example of how coins can match current events. The inscription "VIC GER" on the shield is not a listed type for this coin. However, that might be due to the ease with which the inscription is rubbed off - in fact, to my dismay, the inscription is far less clear than it was when I originally purchased the coin, which means it cannot be stored in a holder, and certainly cannot be handled. Although I have had this coin for close to 20 years up until a month ago and despite diligent searches I was not able to find another example. I did see one other, perhaps on French ebay? although I did not note where - perhaps someone else came across it? Also if you have this type with a blank shield it might be worth taking closer look to see if there are any traces of VIC GER. Sort of reminds me of the date on the 1917 US Liberty quarter! Is the inscription significant? Perhaps not - "VIC GER" is noted on RIC 1029 where standing Victory is place a shield on a palm tree with the same inscription. But, it is quite interesting and I thought worth posting. P.S. What is the difference between a thread and a conversation?
A very attractive and interesting coin, Blake. When I saw the title, I said to myself - "I just got a VIC GER sestertius of Aurelius too!" But mine is the common standing Victory type. It was issued around the same time (a year earlier) as the OP and for the same reason, I'd guess: Marcus Aurelius Æ Sestertius (170-171 A.D.) Rome Mint M ANTONINVS AVG TR P XXV, laureate head right / IMP VI [COS III] S C, Victory, naked to waist, standing front, setting on palm-tree right, shield inscribed VIC GER RIC 1001; Cohen 269. (22.19 grams / 28 mm)
Threads are the public thingees you are reading now. Conversations are private messages between coin talk members. To start one you click on the member's name and hit "start a conversation". This can only be read by the participants which can be more than two members if you wish. John
My first thought here would question if you know a particularly strongly struck example of the type without VIC GER that certainly proves that all of the type did not have those elusive letters in the die but that they might only transfer of a fraction of coins and worn away quickly. That leaves a question as to whether we must have two listings in a catalog for coins that 'become' a different type from what their die was. In some catalogs, we see a statement to the effect, "Some dies show an inscription on the shield." Experts will never agree on how to handle such matters. Assuming what is not seen can be dangerous.
I wonder if this is another example - this is not mine, but an auction on eBay. I think I see the "C" in VIC - the rest of it is quite worn:
Agreed - since there doesn't appear to be any evidence of coins where this was worn away (but see next post). I just did another quick search on ACSEARCH.com - nearly every coin of this type had a shield with a dot in the middle and a design around that. There were not that many with nothing at all, and those that did were in various states of preservation. I didn't have time to study the coins more closely, which I will get to later this weekend. But I could find no other coin of this type with the VIC GER inscription or where it appeared to be worn off. I have noticed that there were some pretty awful and inartistic portraits of Marcus around and subsequent to the period in which the coin was struck - was that due to the need to get out the coins as fast as possible to pay the soldiers or was it just an unskilled celator(s) - or both? And if it was the need for speed, why did it continue into the reign of Commodus when presumably that need was no longer there? Assumptions can be misleading since there is almost always no way to prove an assertion one way or another.
Blake, Until I can see a clearer example, I would postulate that the VIC GER on shield probably doesn't derive from the ancient rev. die, but was added by a modern tooler. If a better specimen should prove that the VIC GER is original, then I would suspect it was a die cutter's error, since most other examples show other devices on the shield, such as Medusa head, Star (BM 1416-9, none very clear in their online photos), or Wolf and Twins (Schmidt-Dick, Typenatlas, pl. 44, third coin from top).
