"NOT OFTEN SEEN" types

I developed over my years of collecting an allergic reaction to certain terms; one of them is the word RARE. It seems it doesn't mean anything since maybe 10% of all ancient coins are described with this qualificatif (over 48,000 roman coins' descriptions on acsearch contain the expression RARE). That's the explanation for this weird thread's title. Here's a little anecdote: quite recently, a member of this board presented his new acquisition. It was a RARE specimen, very few seen in auctions and even absent of the biggest collections. But I thought I've seen a similar coin before...but where ? While eating a bowl of Corn Flakes in the morning two days later, I suddenly had a flash of genius: it was at my coin's club. By the way, we met (before COVID) every two months and talk, exchange and show-off our little treasures. Only 3 of us are interested in ancients coins: one of the guy's name is Franz, he's in Canada for 25 years but started collecting 1st century roman coins in his youth in Belgium. I called him (we haven't met for almost 1 1/2 year) and asked him to check if my memories about the CT coin was accurate. He called me back 3 weeks later (those retired man living alone in pandemic times are so busy!) and told me: "You were right, it's my coin and I have a surprise for you." A surprise ? " I also found another one in my hold binder, it's pretty worn ("en piteux état") but it's easily identifiable ". Hum...we are talking about an extremely RARE example, and one guy maybe have two specimens in his personal collection... Looking forward to meet him in person and confirm the facts with my own eyes. I can't help but wonder how many private collections in the world have a similar example ?

When we talk about rarity, there are many different categories: rare Emperors, variants , obverse or reverse legends, types...

I'm now gonna present you my brand new Victorinus , two "NOT OFTEN SEEN" types. Those reverses are explicitly much more military. FORTuna REDVX is one of the many aspects of the Roman Goddess of luck, Fortuna, was in charge of bringing people home safely, primarily from wars—reduxmeans "coming back" or "returning". She may be one of the later aspects of Fortuna, as the earliest mention of Her is of an altar dedicated by the Senate in 19 BC for the safe return of the Emperor Augustus. Also called: Fortuna Reduci, "Fortune Returns"; She is depicted on coins with a wheel, sometimes the emblem of Nemesis, Greek Goddess of retribution, law and justice.


The De Witte illustration


The British Museum coin


My specimen

MARS VICTOR ; none on Normanby and only one in Cunetio. All coin recorded are from the same reverse die. Another type which suggests that Victorinus is returning from a military campaign. I believe 12 Emperors used this type of reverse of the victorious god of war on their coinage. Can you name them ?


The De Witte illustration


The British Museum coin


My specimen

Please show us your FORT REDVX, MARS VICTOR or any "NOT OFTEN SEEN" types !

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

While I agree that rarity/scarcity/not often seen, whatever you want to call it, doesn’t mean too much in the ancient collecting world, I am comfortable with using the R (rarity) scale. It’s just not something to go bonkers about. I still find it a bit exclusive to have coins that excist only in a small number. Here are three of mine:


Galerius Caesar, 293-305 AD

Argenteus, Nicomedia, likely 302/03 AD (same year as similar issue in Thessalonica).

Obverse: MAXIMIAN-VSCAESAR, head r., laur

Reverse: VICTORIAE-SARMATICAE, four-turreted camp-gate, open, with doors thrown back; small masonry, no star, no eagles on turrets. SMNΓ in exergue.

Reference: UNLISTED FOR RULER. RIC list this type only for Diocletian and Maximian Herculius (NICOMEDIA 22a and 22b, p. 556). Note that there are no eagles on turrets but this variant is also attested for NICOMEDIA 22a and NICOMEDIA 22b (see CORRIGENDA, VOL. VI, p. 556). Coin should be listed after NICOMEDIA 22b.

Weight 3.02g Diameter 17 mm

Possibly unique.



Volume: IV.2 №: 362 (temporary)

Reign: Marcus Aurelius Persons: Lucius Verus (Augustus)Magistrate:Pherekydes (strategos)
City: Aegae Region: Aeolis Province: Asia (conventus of Smyrna)
Denomination: Æ (33 mm) Average weight: 24.13 g. Issue: Marcus and Verus, co-emperors (c. 161-163)
Obverse: ΑV ΚΑΙ Λ ΑVΡΗ ΟVΗΡΟϹ; bare-headed bust of Lucius Verus wearing cuirass and paludamentum, r., seen from front
Reverse: ΕΠΙ ϹΤΡ ΦΕΡΕΚΥΔΟΥ ΤΙΤΝΑΙΟϹ ΑΙΓΑΕΩΝ; river-god Titnaios reclining, l., holding reed and cornucopia, resting on water-urn
Reference: BMC 23–4 Specimens: 3



Constantius II, as Caesar AD 324-337.
BI Centenionalis, Thessaloniki 328 AD

Obverse: FL IVL CONSTANTIVS NOB C, Laureate, draped and cuirassed bust right.

Reverse: Two-turreted gateway of military camp. Star above, B in right field. Mintmark: SM TS

Reference: RIC VII 527/172, RCV 17640

Size: 18 mm Weight: 3,21g Conservation: nearly extremely fine

Sear notes that only 2 samples of the variety with officinae B have been found. This is likely not one of them, so I suppose there are at least 3.

 

Important acquisitions for your Numophylacium Victorini, @Ocatarinetabellatchitchix! I don't think it's an exaggeration to say they are rare.

I only have two Fortuna Redux coins, but FORTVNA is not abbreviated. Plenty of Mars, but no Mars Victor, sad to say.


Gallienus, AD 253-268.
Roman billon antoninianus, 3.39 g, 20.1 mm, 11 h.
Antioch, AD 266-267.
Obv: GALLIENVS AVG, radiated and cuirassed bust, right.
Rev: FORTVNA REDVX, Fortuna standing left, holding short caduceus and cornucopiae; VII C in exergue.
Refs: RIC 613 F; Göbl 1640b; Cohen 277; RCV 10220.
Notes: VII C probably refers to Gallienus' 7th (and final) consulate, AD 266-68.


Aurelian, AD 279-275.
Roman billon antoninianus, 3.61 gm, 20.6 mm, 12 h.
Obv: IMP AVRELIANVS AVG, radiate, cuirassed bust, right.
Rev: FORTVNA REDVX, Fortuna seated left, holding rudder and cornucopiae, wheel under seat; S in exergue.
Refs: RIC 128; MER/RIC 1466; CBN 452; Sear 11539; MIR 16, Hunter p. cx.

 

2x Fortuna Reduci:

 

I agree that just calling an ancient coin "rare" is meaningless. Every ancient coin is unique. Unique seems pretty rare to me. It's much more useful to say "rare reverse type" or "rare city-state" or "rare obverse with two-headed Vespasian."

Or for that matter, "rare obverse with Constantine wearing Spock ears!:

 

I'd say "NOT OFTEN SEEN" obverse with Constantine wearing Spock ears !

 

Well, I used to hold that coin at stare at it a lot when I owned it, so "NOT OFTEN SEEN" would not apply in my case.

 

rarity increases exponentially with ownership

 

Both FORT REDVX and MARS VICTOR were used by Septimius Severus from Eastern mints. Mars is a bit "NOT OFTEN SEEN". This MAREI VICT with the COS obverse is "NOT AT ALL OFTEN SEEN"


FORTVNA REDUX was a common type but exists in a number of variations that are "NOT OFTEN SEEN". Combined with the "NOT OFTEN SEEN" left facing bust this Fortuna as Pietas standing is "NOT EVER SEEN" or at least, I have not seen another. Note the reverse is spelled out rather than abbreviated.

More "OFTEN SEEN" is Fortuna posing as Hilaritas with long palm. These are a bit "NOT OFTEN SEEN" but actually as common as dirt compared to the others shown here.


The common FORTVNA REDVCI for these is standing with rudder. This one is "NOT OFTEN SEEN" because of the spelling FOTVNAE REDVCI. It uses the CO obverse die spelling "NOT OFTEN SEEN".


Of course the FORT REDVX family also has seated types including some way too common for this thread. The "NOT OFTEN SEEN" one below has been seen here more than once since both Maridvnvm and I have one and neither of us are shy when it comes to posting Eastern SS coins. In addition to using the less common IIC obverse the rereverse is spelled FORTVNAE REREDVC.


As a footnote, the standing and sitting Fortuna types were also used on Eastern denarii of Julia Domna (all "NOT OFTEN SEEN") but the one shown here is more (or is it less?) "NOT OFTEN SEEN" with the LORTVN REDVC spelling with the long palm option. I believe that all permutations for this type once existed for both rulers but we may not have found all of them yet. When I find a coin I think is 'different' I tend to find that Maridvnvm has one, too. His postings may have suggested that you might find some varieties with a great deal more ease than is the case. I am unaware of a resource with a better showing of Eastern Severus than back posts on Coin Talk (mostly by Maridvnvm). My coin below came from the Barry Murphy collection when it was dispersed. He did not see fit to mention the L. His online resource is still very valuable (even if Martin has a number he lacked).
https://bpmurphy.ancients.info/severan/jdemesa1.htm

 

Language is used to communicate. Words are part of language. Along the way we learn to expect what certain words, like "rare," mean. Then, as a thinking adult, you realize that some speakers and writers use words to trigger a reaction in you, but the writer is not using the word in a way that corresponds to reality. (Political commentary is often that way, but I won't go into that here.)

It is not the word "rare" that is wrong. If we didn't use it, sellers would be equally happy to misuse "seldom seen." Pay attention to what people say around you and you will notice that words and the reality they purport to describe often do not correspond closely. We collect coins, so words like "rare" are important to us.

In 2001 I wrote about "Rarity and the value of ancient Roman coins"
http://augustuscoins.com/ed/numis/rarity.html

That page shows how easy it is to misrepresent and mislead even when speaking the literal truth. If one is willing to deviate from the truth (and many are), then words like "rare" are used to provoke a reaction (maybe, willingness to pay a higher price). It might not communicate a fact.

We are not going to be able to get people to stop lying. We can protect ourselves by learning how they provoke us. We need to learn trigger words and when they appear, slow down, think, and seek the real truth. That's well-known to be hard to do. That's why so many sellers call coins "rare"-- it works.

 

Well stated.

Thank you.

 

Many times dealers use the "rare" moniker. I recently posted a coin of Gallienus that was sold at rare 3 when in fact several subsequent posters in the thread I started had similar versions of the coin, some with slight variations.

 

I like to use "Hard to Find", as I know "RARE" can be "misused" exactly as @Valentinian explained.

However, I often POST "Rare" as it was in the original attributions that I cut-and-pasted. I try to edit it, as appropriate. And, yes, I DO have several truly "RARE" coins (under 10 known) in my collection.

Most of my "Hard to Find" coins are NOT-Roman Empire (CE era), rather they are from Roman Republic or many of those States, Cities, etc. that interacted with the Roman Republic (generally BCE era).

Here is one I enjoy:



Etruria, Populonia
2 ½ asses 3rd century BC, AR 0.85 g. Radiate female head r.; behind, CII. Rev. Blank. EC 104 (misdescribed, Female head with an Attic helmet). Historia Numorum Italy 179.
Of the highest rarity, apparently only the second specimen known.
Dark patina and about very fine
From the collection of E.E. Clain-Stefanelli



This one may not be "RARE", but everyone lists it as "VERY RARE". Seven are listed on ACSearch. I will say, these are "HARD TO FIND"


Roman Republic
Anon
Ca 240 BCE
AR Heavy Quinarius / Drachm
16mm 3.0g
Rome mint
Helmeted Head of Mars r -
Horse’s head sickle
Cr 25-2 Syd 25 RSC 34a Rare
Ex: CNG; From the RJM Collection. Ex Coin Galleries (17 July 1996)

 

An interesting aspect of collecting Kyrenaika coins are “unpublished" coin types which still show up about once or twice a year. Here are a few examples:


Kyrenaika, Kyrene AR tetradrachm
480-435 BC 17.03 gm 30 mm 12h
O: type I silphium plant with root; grain kernel lower right
R: head Zeus Ammon right; corded circle border; [Κ]VΡΑΝΑΙΟΝ around
"unpublished" cf BMC pl. XXXIV, 4–6 (Barke)
Triton XX:394 01/09/2017; F&S MB 14:294 06/21/2007

I was shown the coin when it first came to the US to see if I knew anything about the type. There may be other examples in existence, but not that I am aware of. There are no other published Attic weight tetradrachms using the legend "ΚVΡΑΝΑΙΟΝ" but some from the same period using "BARKΑΙΟΝ" This lead Robinson in BMC Cyrenaica to think that Barke was dominant during this period, but it may just be that fewer from Kyrene survived.


Kyrenaika, Kyrene AR didrachm
525-500 BC 7.45 gm
O: head ram right above two silphium fruits
R: crude rectangular punch
cf. Buttrey 61-64 (drachms)
HJ Berk buy-bid 171:196 05/24/2012

A rough specimen of an unpublished denomination, but what can you do when you have never seen any others?


Kyrenaika, Barke (?) AE17
258-250 BC? 17 mm 5.12 gm 12h
O: diademed head Ptolemy I right
R: ram standing left; star to left; inscription above and below?
unpublished
CNG e351:418 05/20/2015 ex-Alexandre Carathéodory Pasha

Another rough but unpublished example. Probably from the time when Magas had reconciled with Ptolemy II.

I prefer not to label these "unique" even though I am not aware of any other examples because some may exist in private collections (like the AE above), be found in the next hoard (like the ΚVΡΑΝΑΙΟΝ tet) or even gathering dust in some museum basement. "Unpublished" also seems to be an appropriate term when purchased but that will no longer apply when a much needed new reference is available. (Dr. Fischer-Bossert?) Personally, I think they certainly qualify as "rare" but "not often seen" applies too.

 

Struck at Rome under Faustina II, the following As has Diana on the reverse. Rated R4, with only one example at the British museum, the coin is listed RIC 1183.

 

Wow! That's Faustina I, btw, and it's RIC 1182, not 1183.

RIC 1182 features Aeternitas with crescent on head, advancing l., r. hand holding starry mantle over head. Strack (1284) notes examples in Berlin, Paris, and the Vatican. I have been able to find only one example online, this one sold by Dr. Busso Peus, Nachfolger, E-auction 10, lot 359, 18 January, 2020.



RIC 1183 features Aeternitas with crescent on head, advancing l., r. hand holding starry mantle over head, and lighted torch in l. hand. Strack (also 1284) notes examples in London, Vienna, the Vatican, and at the National Museum in Naples. Here's the version in London, BMCRE 1587.



I don't think yours has the torch in her left hand. It's almost certainly 1182.

Now, while both Cohen and Strack identify the reverse figure as Diana, Mattingly identifies her as Aeternitas. I do too because of the starry mantle. See my thoughts about this here. Here's a sestertius in my collection whose reverse figure is identified as Aeternitas by Cohen, Strack, and Mattingly. Compare her starry mantle to your coin.


Faustina I, AD 138-141.
Roman orichalcum sestertius, 26.54 g, 33 mm.
Rome, AD 150-161.
Obv: DIVA FAVSTINA, bare-headed and draped bust, right.
Rev: AETERNITAS, Aeternitas standing left, holding globe and raising above head a starry mantle.
Refs: RIC 1106; BMCRE 1495-97; Cohen 30; Sear 4610; Strack 1262; Dinsdale 020810.

 

@Roman Collector . Thank you for this detailed clarification. Mine weighs only 10.13 g. whereas the example shown on the link weighs almost double of this. Would my coin remain RIC 1182 ?

 

1182 is a middle bronze and should weigh 9 to 13 g. There is no sestertius with this reverse design with which it might be confused. I think the Peus listing is in error.

 

I suggest that we post a comment about this on the appropriate link at acsearch.

 

Worth mentioning the rarity reference used by them - the availability of coins for purchase:
https://db.stevealbum.com/php/rarity.php