NCAPR countermark on Roman coins

This comment continues the conversation started among @dougsmit (see CT Post 8289212), @Marsyas Mike (see CT Post 8289019), myself (@Curtis , see CT 8288921 / 2nd half about NCAPR) and others in the thread, “Article in CoinWeek about Claudius I” (CT 395046, 4 May 2022). It fits better here (same topics, even the same specimens, albeit under new ownership in my case).

I hope this helps to organize the discussion, instead of fragmenting or making it more confusing!

Starting…now:



MYSTERY VESPASIAN

Disclaimer: I'm a big appreciator of Richard Baker's work on countermarks, the cataloging at CNG, and Pangerl’s website. I use all those resources regularly to research my current coins and find inspiration for where to look next. So I'm not criticizing at all.


The big question: Where’s the mystery As/Dupondius, the NCAPR-Vespasian?

For a preview of the photos and issues below, can you find the Vespasian in this plate? (I'm not certain it's there, I'm really asking....)


For those just joining, NCAPR is traditionally thought the be a countermark applied under Nero. But there are reports of the NCAPR countermark having been stamped on a Dupondius or As of Vespasian (coins which didn't yet exist under Nero, so the countermark would have to be later). Consequently, some people date it to Vespasian's reign.

Let me put in a few smaller responses first, then turn to the big question.


FIRST THINGS…

Mike’s comment reminded me to re-read this current thread, including the comments from Mike and Doug and @Ardatirion , and including my Claudius under Al Kowsky’s stewardship.

I appreciate the mention of findspots. I’ll try to digest all that and see what else is known. That must be part of Baker’s claim that they were issued in three different places. (Findspot data is hard enough for Roman coins at all, much less something as specific as countermarks!)

I found the FORVM sale listing that you mentioned (I saved a pdf too, as they may have an expiration date or size limit on their “containers”): https://www.forumancientcoins.com/c...p?param=54866q00.jpg&vpar=1968&zpg=66888&fld=



That one happens to be a countermark-on-reverse. (See also below.) I noticed another with reverse placement: The important GALBA / NCAPR example from CNG 111, 486, which discusses "Refining the Chronology of NCAPR."

CNG’s GALBA-NCAPR countermarked coin – CNG 111 (29 May 2019), Lot 486, from the Richard Baker collection and, I believe, cataloged by Ardatirion – mentions the NCAPR-Vespasian, but it also brings new evidence of its own.



It has a "GALBA" countermarked obverse, and NCAPR on the reverse. The NCAPR looks much more heavily worn, suggesting it was applied before Galba’s reign, who was before Vespasian (unless, of course, it was just a much weaker strike). As the listing explains, it might support a date prior to Vespasian – even prior to the civil war – perhaps even Nero’s reign. (Someone say something if I misinterpret.)


FINDING THE "NCAPR-VESPASIAN":

Now that I see how widely the NCAPR-Vespasian has been reported, and how crucial it is to the debate about dating (Nero vs. Vespasian vs. Civil War vs. temp. Nero through Vespasian), it is very surprising that its image or reference to its source is nowhere to be found. (Or support for its existence at all!)

Until someone definitively answers the question, though, I do think I might’ve found an answer:

I believe the source of the “NCAPR Vespasian As-Dupondius” may be Andreas Pangerl’s collection (cataloged by Martini, possibly coin No. 60h, illustrated below), rather than Richard Baker’s.

Pangerl and Baker seem to have collaborated. Both collections are used to illustrate the Museum of Roman Countermarks. Pangerl is named as the site’s copyright holder, but it looks to me like Baker also wrote some parts of it, or at least was excerpted. (Including the “NCAPR” page.)

Of the two, only Pangerl’s collection has been published as a monograph (Baker’s only in CNG auctions or on the website):

Martini-Pangerl = Rudolfo Martini (2003) The Pangerl Collection - Catalog and Commentary on the Countermarked Roman Imperial Coins. (Nomismata 6.) Edizioni Ennerre.​

Photocopies of all the plates are available in a downloadable .pdf from Pangerl, but unfortunately not the text. The downloadable .pdf of Nomismata 6, Martini-Pangerl, begins only on page 231.

The same file is available on Pangerl’s academia.edu page (read-online or .pdf download: https://www.academia.edu/3821963/) and the “Museum” site (description with a link for .pdf download: http://www.romancoins.info/Countermarks.html#Pangerl).


Mentions of the Mystery Vespasian:

I don’t see the NCAPR-Vespasian mentioned in Baker’s 1984 SAN article. (It is, however, mentioned in some online HTML versions, which he’s updated.)

The first unambiguous, explicit mention of the NCAPR-Vespasian, as far as I can find anywhere, is a CNG auction listing: CNG EA 484 (12 December 2018), Lot 189 (Baker Collection), a Livia Dupondius:



Notice, though, that the NCAPR-Vespasian specimen is described there as “an As of Vespasian,” not a Dupondius:

Previously believed to be applied during the reign of Nero, a specimen in the Pangerl collection appears on an as of Vespasian, necessitating a later date for the series.​

Thereafter, CNG dates their NCAPR countermarks to Vespasian, giving the same reason in later listings.

The NCAPR-Vespasian is mentioned at least once on the Pangerl site (with Baker, in some capacity), Museum of Roman Countermarks. Here, on the “NCAPR” and “NERCPP” page (below, maroon bold is my emphasis):

7. "NCAPR" and "NERCPP" Countermarks on Julio-Claudian Coins, commonly attributed to Nero (or maybe later ?)

.... "Nero Caesar Augustus Probavit" or "Nero Caesar Augustus Populo Romano"....

Another possibility would be to read NCAPR as "Nerva Caesar Augustus Probavit". This hypothesis is supported by a Vespasian dupondius with the "NCAPR" countermark, making an attribution to Nero very unlikely.

The much less common "NERCPP" on the other hand clearly refers to Nero Caesar Pater Patriae… [http://www.romancoins.info/CMK-Nero&later.html]​

I find two earlier auction records that hint at the existence of the NCAPR-Vespasian, most importantly Gorny and Mosch in 2009 (Auktion 176, Lot 2150). (And Auctiones GmbH EA 53, 138 in 2016.)

G&M specifically cites the Pangerl Collection (Martini-Pangerl) to justify dating the NCAPR series to Vespasian rather than Nero:

Translated: “For the NCAPR countermark struck in Italy under Vespasian (perhaps for NVMMVS CAESAR AVGVSTO PROBATVS) see R. Martini, Collezione Pangerl contromarche imperiali romane (2003) p. 121 no. 60e.”​

[Original: "Zu dem in Italien unter Vespasian geschlagenen Gegenstempel NCAPR (vielleicht für NVMMVS CAESAR AVGVSTO PROBATVS) s. R. Martini, Collezione Pangerl contromarche imperiali romane (2003) S. 121 Nr. 60e."]​

The NCAPR is Martini-Pangerl Type 60. Sadly, we don’t have the text from page 121 (and the key to the plates provides no additional information).

But we do have the plates, which thankfully illustrate eight examples (“60a” through “60h”). Typical of countermark studies, they only show the side with the countermark.

I suspect the NCAPR-Vespasian may be example “60h” (FORTVNA REDVX; the others look like reverses of Claudius/his family types). Gorny & Mosch cited “60e” because it’s the same host coin and placement (Claudius Sestertius stamped behind Spes):




Other interesting things to note about the sample of coins shown on the Martini-Pangerl plate (I’ve uploaded an image that may expand more: https://imgur.com/a/2bijnkC ):

- denominations vary, they’re not all Sestertii (I expected they would be), though I don’t know enough about early RIC AE to say whether those include Asses and Dupondii or just one or the other (see also the Livia Dupondius above);

- stamped on both sides; surprisingly, most of the stamps shown are on the reverse; this is definitely not a random sample, but instead an attempt to illustrate the full range of variation, so reverse NCAPR stamps could still be very rare; it just demonstrates that rev.-stamping of NCAPR was practiced;

- placement of NCAPR vis-à-vis the designs is very deliberate: obverse or reverse, the stamp is always placed behind the figures, whether standing (60e & 60h) or a bust/head (60c, 60d, 60f); with text reverses, it appears to be placed at the top (60a, 60b, 60g);

- I can’t tell if there is a Vespasian; could specimen “h,” bottom right, be the Vespasian? Looks like FORTVNA REDVX. I don't think Claudius had those (Vespasian did). I would guess that the text / catalog explains what the host coins are, but I don’t have access to it.


FINAL THOUGHTS:

Can anyone tell, is 60h actually a Vespasian? FORTVNA REDVX reverse type? Presumably As or Dupondius, making it the NCAPR-Vespasian.

If that’s the coin, and it’s Vespasian, how do we evaluate the dating of the countermarks? Do we wait for more to appear before "believing"?

Personally, if that’s all the evidence there is, I think it may be too much weight to balance against just that one AE As/Dupondius. I would certainly like to know as much as possible about that coin and see better pictures. Perhaps there’s more support for the hypothesis that just hasn’t been published.

In any case, I appreciate that a great deal of data has been put out there by the collectors and by CNG and Martini, among others. That’s what makes it possible to consider and debate the evidence.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.