Message:

<p>[QUOTE=&quot;zumbly, post: 3213419, member: 57495&quot;]The last coin I showed a couple of days ago was an anepigraphic denarius with no reverse legend.&nbsp; So, obviously, I would be attracted to this one, which does away with the entire reverse, right?&nbsp; Or, maybe, I just really really like these <a href="https://www.cointalk.com/threads/what-quality-control.312319/#post-3014572" class="internalLink ProxyLink" data-proxy-href="https://www.cointalk.com/threads/what-quality-control.312319/#post-3014572">Kevin</a> specials. <img src="styles/default/xenforo/clear.png" class="mceSmilieSprite mceSmilie8" alt=":D" unselectable="on" unselectable="on" />&nbsp; </p><p><br /></p><p>[ATTACH=full]835096[/ATTACH] </p><p><b>ROMAN REPUBLIC</b></p><p>Uniface error strike AR Denarius. 3.96g, 19mm. Rome mint, 109-108 BC. L. Flaminius Chilo, moneyer. cf. Crawford 302/1. O: Helmeted head of Roma right; behind, ROMA and below chin, X. R: Blank.</p><p><br /></p><p>So what on earth happened here?&nbsp; It seems likely to me that two blanks got stuck to each other and were then struck together, one receiving the obverse design and the other the reverse.&nbsp; At some point they became uncoupled, and then either escaped quality control, or were just allowed to leave the mint as they were.&nbsp; Perhaps this one survived as a curiosity kept by some Roman lucky enough to find it tendered to him.&nbsp; Perhaps some day I&#039;ll be lucky enough to find its twin with the blank obverse.&nbsp; Unlikely, but one can hope!</p><p><br /></p><p>If anyone has any theories about how this RR oddity came about, I&#039;d be keen to hear them.&nbsp; And, of course, please feel free to share your own examples of ancient mint quality control fails.[/QUOTE]</p><p><br /></p>

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