Roman Republican Denarii Nos. 48 & 49

Now that the Marius Capito coin from Nomos, and the Macedonian shield/elephant head coin from Forvm have arrived, I've decided to follow my own self-created tradition and post both of them "officially," together with the descriptions I wrote. Even though I recognize that I already posted the dealers' photos when I bought them, thereby tempting fate. Sometimes, defying superstition works out OK. Not that I plan to make a habit of it!

48. Roman Republic, M. Caecilius Q.f. Metelllus, AR Denarius, 127 BC (Crawford, RSC, Sear), ca. 126 BCE (Mattingly 2004 at p. 258 Table 3 [see infra]), Rome Mint. Obv. Head of Roma right in winged helmet, star on helmet flap, ROMA upwards behind, * (XVI ligature, mark of value = 16 asses) below chin / Rev. Macedonian shield, decorated with elephant head in center wearing bell, M METELLVS Q F around beginning at 6:00, all within laurel wreath. Crawford 263/1(a), Sydenham 480, RSC I Caecilia 29, Russo RBW 1064, Sear RCV I 139 (ill.). 19.5 mm., 3.80 g., 9 hr.*



*The coin is classified as Crawford 263/1a because the obverse "ROMA" legend goes upwards; the ROMA on 263/1b goes downwards. The moneyer was Consul in 115 BCE. The reverse design of a Macedonian shield encircled by a laurel wreath honors the moneyer's father, Q. Caecilius Metellus Macedonicus, who defeated the Macedonian pretender Andriscus in 148 BCE. See Crawford p. 288, Sear p. 99. Sear calls the coin “an early example of a moneyer commemorating his family history” (id.), and Mattingly states that the moneyer “broke new ground by honoring a living father.” (See Harold B. Mattingly, “Roman Republican Coinage ca. 150-90 B.C.,” in From Coins to History (2004), pp. 199-226 at p. 220 [emphasis in original].)

The elephant head in the center of the shield, as with other coins of the Caecilii Metelli, recalls the victory of L. Caecilius Metellus, Cos. 251, over Hasdrubal at the Battle of Panormus in 250 BCE, and the capture of 100 of Hasdrubal’s elephants, which were paraded at Metullus’s triumph. See Crawford p. 288 (referencing the discussion on p. 287 of the symbolism of the elephant head on the reverse of Crawford 262); Mattingly p. 219 & n. 75.

49. Roman Republic, C. [Gaius] Marius C.f. Capito, AR Serrate Denarius 81 BCE [Harlan: 81/80 BCE], Rome Mint. Obv. Draped bust of Ceres right, wearing earring, head bound with corn wreath, hair falling down neck; CAPIT• upwards behind, with legend followed by control number CI; control symbol (knife [Crawford, Table XXXIII at p. 395 ] or distaff [BMCRR p. 355]) to right of chin* / Rev. Husbandman/plowman left holding goad in right hand and plow in left, with yoke of two oxen plowing left with heads turned to face forward; horizontal test cut and control-number CI above; C•MARI•C•F / S•C [Senatus consulto] on two lines in exergue. Crawford 378/1c; RSC I Maria 9; Sear RCV I 300 (ill.); Sydenham 744b; BMCRR Vol. I 2855-2890 [Control-number CI is no. 2873]; Harlan, Michael, Roman Republican Moneyers and their Coins, 81 BCE-64 BCE (2012) [“RRM I”], Ch. 2 at pp. 8-13. 19 mm., 3.97 g., 10 hr. Purchased Feb. 21, 2021 from Nomos AG, Obolos Auction 18, Lot 468.**




*Crawford’s three sub-types of this issue (378/1a-1c) differ in the existence and placement of the control-symbols found on some of the coins in addition to the control-numerals found on all of them (with the obverse and reverse of a coin always bearing the same numeral except in the case of hybrids, which are almost uniformly fourrees). All three sub-types are numbered continuously: 1a bears the control-numerals from I to XXIII (with no control-symbols); 1b the numerals from XXVI to XXXII (with control-symbols in the exergue on the reverse) [examples of XXIV and XXV are not known]; and 1c the numerals from XXXIII to CLI (with control-symbols on the obverse beneath & to the right of Ceres’s chin). (See Crawford Vol. I p. 392; see also Table XXXIII, listing the known control-symbols at pp. 392-395.) Examples with 125 of the 151 control-numerals were known to Crawford, on 125 different obverse and reverse dies. Thus, no pair of control-numerals, or combination of control-numeral and control-symbol, has more than one pair of dies, and the six other examples of Crawford 378/1c with the control-numeral CI found on acsearch are all double-die matches to my example. Since Crawford was published in 1974, at least one coin with a previously unknown control-numeral (LXXXII) has been found, in the Mesagne hoard, bearing a tripod as its control-symbol.

** Regarding the general symbolism of a husbandman plowing with oxen, as depicted on the reverse of this coin, see Jones, John Melville, A Dictionary of Ancient Roman Coins (Seaby 1990) at pp. 121-122 (entry for “Founder”), explaining that the Romans “inherited a custom from the Etruscans of defining the boundaries of a new city by marking them with a plough,” so that certain coins showing plowing can be interpreted as a reference to the founding of colonies.

Regarding this coin-type in particular, Grueber states at p. 353 n. 2 of BMCRR Vol. I that “[t]he type of the head of Ceres [the goddess of agriculture] and the husbandman refers to the foundation of a colony” by Sulla’s veterans. Crawford disagrees, stating at Vol. I p. 392 that “I do not believe that there is any reference to Sulla’s colonies” on these coins, and that the obverse and reverse images simply complement each other. Harlan (see RRM I Ch. 2 at pp. 10-12) disagrees with Crawford and prefers Grueber’s interpretation, stating at p. 12 that this type “not only depicts the expectations of the veterans who were to receive land, but also expounds the benefits to be found in the return to peace, masking in bucolic tranquility the terrible exactions that procured the soldiers’ rewards. Besides the land given to the veterans in those new colonies established among the Italians, Sulla also had to pay his troops their back wages and maintain them until they were discharged. This special S•C issue may well represent some of that money distributed to the soldiers and the design on the coin also may be heralding the expected grants of land.” See also Sear RCV I at p. 128 regarding the S•C in the exergue on the reverse of Crawford 378/1c: “It would seem that during his term of office this moneyer was authorized by the Senate to effect a substantial increase in the originally-produced volume of his coinage.” (The first series of this type [Crawford 378/1a] does not bear the S•C, the only case in the Roman Republican coinage of the S•C being added to a type in the course of production during a given year.)

A couple of other thoughts on the Marius Capito: in hand, the test cut on the reverse of the Marius Capito denarius is hardly noticeable.

As noted, the control symbol on the obverse is characterized as a knife by Crawford and a "distaff" by Grueber in BMCRR. To me, it looks like a knife, although I admit that I've never been near a spinning wheel outside of a museum or historic house, and wouldn't know a distaff if it bit me. Perhaps someone more familiar with such implements could weigh in.

The statement in Crawford that "no pair of control-numerals, or combination of control-numeral and control-symbol, has more than one pair of dies" appears to be accurate. Here are some examples I found on Acsearch of other Marius Capito denarii with the control-number CI (one from Heritage, one from Roma, one from Inumis, two from CNG and one from CGB.fr in that order) All appear to me to be double die matches. (Let me know if you disagree.) Some of them are really wonderful, but I do like mine, despite the test cut!















Please post any Roman Republican coins you feel like posting, and/or any coins (Republican or not) with oxen or other bovids, or with Macedonian shields.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

Thanks for the write up Donna , 2 more interesting beautifull denarii added to your collection, congrats.

relevant but kind of ugly bronze:

 

To focus on the one question I actually asked amidst my sea of words: does the control-symbol in front of Ceres's chin on the obverse of my Marius Capito denarius (and the other examples I posted with control-number CI) actually look like a knife to anyone? That's how Crawford characterizes it, but I really don't see it. Where's the blade? Where's the point? On the other hand, the pictures of distaffs I looked at (Grueber's identification) look much thinner. Any other suggestions?

 

Absolutely love your new additions. Very nice! And awesome write up to boot.

I don't have any bovine yet. I do have a goat I can contribute. Its my profile pic but I have not posted it before.


Roman Republican, Mn. Fonteius C. f., AR Denarius, 85 BC, Rome
M . FONTEI behind, C . F . before
Laureate head of Vejovis right, thunderbolt below
(No legend)
Infant winged Genius on goat right, Dioscuri caps in left and right fields, thyrsus in exergue, all within laurel wreath
20.9mm 3.72g
Fonteia 11; Crawford 353; Sydenham 724b

 

Totally, its one of the first things I noticed.
I really like the control marks on the republic denarius. One of the first things I look for.

 

Don't know if it's authentic, but noted Judea ancient with a bull for sale on e-bay recently.

https://www.ebay.com/itm/JUDEA-1st-...250149?hash=item5497560625:g:qIIAAOSwg0FgRk3I

 

A great type -- one of my favorites. I actually added up how many Roman Republican coins I have with different kinds of animals (animal coins in general are my favorite!), out of my 49:

9 with no animals at all (I don't count the two with satyrs/Pan!), 8 with horses as the only kind of animal (all with one, two, or three horses, with riders or pulling bigas or trigas, but no quadrigas and no horses by themselves), 4 with sows, pigs, or boars, 3 with goats, 3 with elephants or elephant heads, 3 with bovids (oxen, bulls, or heifers), 3 with snakes, 2 with snakes and horses, 2 with she-wolves, 2 with dogs or hounds, 2 with eagles, 1 with a pegasus, 1 with a griffin, 1 with a panther/leopard, 1 with a dolphin, 1 with a camel, 1 with a sphinx, 1 with a lion, and 1 with stags and a grasshopper

 

The toning on the Metellus denarius gives it great eye appeal .

 

The control mark does kind of look like a knife, with the handle at the top and the rather large blade pointed downwards. The blade doesn't look very sharp though

 

Lovely coins, @DonnaML! I like the plowman types.

I'm an imperial collector, myself. But I do have some republican issues, too. Here's the first I ever acquired and it's still my favorite.


L. Mussidius Longus, Moneyer 42 BC.
Roman Republican AR denarius, 3.48 gm, 16.4 mm, 4 h.
Rome, 42 BC.
Obv: Bust of Marc Antony's 3rd wife, Fulvia, as Victory right, draped.
Rev: L·MVSSIDIVS LONGVS, Victory in biga right, holding reins in both hands.
Refs: RRC 494/40; BMCRR 4229; RCV 1517; Sydenham 1095; RSC Mussidia 4; Banti Mussidia 613.

 

The elephant on your MSC is ADORABLE!!!
And very nice Marius. I seem to recall you having reservations about the tiny, well placed test cut.
I think it's great! And it shows that the Ancients even knew this type was often fouree.

 

Nice coins, @DonnaML, the knife does looks like a perfume bottle or a flask as much as it might look like a knife. I guess I like this coin from the time of Sulla's dictatorship as I have all three varieties 1a, 1b, and 1c...the third one falls somewhere close to the top of my list of favorite coins. Crawford lists 19 dies for this variety:

C. Marius C.f. Capito, 81 BC, AR Serrate Denarius, Rome mint
Obv: Draped bust of Ceres right, wearing wreath of grain ears; XI at end of legend
Rev: Husbandman with yoke of oxen plowing left; XI above
Ref: Crawford 378/1a; Sydenham 744; Maria 7

Here's my example of 378/1b which is the most unusual of the three variants variant with only 6/125 dies described in Crawford. I liked the grasshopper/cricket in exergue, even though it falls off the flan.
C. Marius C.f. Capito, 81 BC, AR Serrate Denarius, Rome mint
Obv: C•MARI•C•F•CAPIT•XXVIII, draped bust of Ceres, wearing wreath of grain ears; XXVIII before
Rev: Ploughman with yoke of oxen left; XXVIII above, S • C and cricket in exergue. Crawford 378/1b; Sydenham 744a; Maria 8

C. Marius C.f. Capito, 81 BC, AR Serrate Denarius, Rome mint
Obv: Bust of Ceres right; behind, CAPIT·T(upside down)XXXXVIII, Below chin, unidentified symbol
Rev:Ploughman with a yoke of oxen left; above, T(upside down)XXXXVIII. In exergue, C·MARI·C·F / S·C
Ref: Babelon Maria 9; Sydenham 744b; Crawford 378/1c

 

These are great, @Sulla80. It's wonderful that you have examples of all three subtypes; I've never seen an example of 378/1b before. Odd that they changed that format after using it for so few dies/control-numbers, only XXVI through XXXII (which adds up to seven rather than six, I think). I wonder if the reason for the change could have been something as simple as the placement of the control-symbol in the exergue on the reverse, beneath the S·C, resulting in the symbol being wholly or partially off the flan much of the time, as on yours.

You write that the control-symbol on your third example is unidentified, but Crawford identifies it as a finger-ring (see Table XXXIII at p. 395): for those who aren't aware, the upside-town T is simply a somewhat archaic way of writing an L, for 50, so the control-number for your coin is actually LXXXXVIII, or 98 (XCVIII as it would now be written). If that's a ring, it certainly has a gigantic stone in it!

 

You really have an amazing collection of Roman Republican denarii. Impressive!

Don't know much about RR denarii, but since you are asking for suggestions, and numismatists see a knife blade, which I don't see, and certainly not a distaff, I come up with what the control mark reminds me of: grains of wheat, like the one shown by Albert in his catalogue of Roman Republic coins.

 

Good suggestion. The "flask" idea makes some sense too. More than a knife, anyway!

 

@DonnaML - two more interesting coins for your collection.

I have 378.1a. Some of the celators employed on this issue seem
much more skilful than others. Ceres is quite crude on some examples, more refined on others.Likewise the oxen.


Crawford 263.1.

 

Thanks for that - I have always looked at it as a "padlock" although I don't think these were invented yet.

It looks like the reason the Crawford only lists 6 dies for 1b is that he was missing XXX - which may have showed up earlier than the first one I can find: 2017 in a NAC auction with tongs

 

Your Caecilius Metellus denarius a really cool piece of ancient history!

Not only does it allude to a Roman's personal ancestry and history, it offers numismatic evidence to the melding of Greek and Roman cultures, as well as North Africa and Roman cultures.

I'm really into descriptions, for several reasons. Your descriptions are detailed, especially the XVI ligature note. May I offer a few more words to your detailed descriptions? Just subtle suggestions in parentheses below.

With the advent of computers and word processing, I feel the old 19th-20th century abbreviated descriptions should go away. In fact, I think a description should stand alone and not assume one's looking at the coin or one is already very familiar with the piece. Here we go:

Obverse: Head of Roma (facing) right with (hair arranged in three symmetrical locks) and (wearing) a winged, (peaked) helmet with a (three piece visor); also (wearing drop earring) and (pearl necklace); star on helmet flap, ROMA upwards behind, * (XVI ligature, mark of value = 16 asses) (in field) below chin, (all within a beaded border.)

Reverse: (Greek) Macedonian shield, decorated (with a single pellet in five double crescents, many pellets around) and (tusked) elephant head in center wearing bell, M METELLVS Q F around beginning at 6:00, all within laurel wreath.

Writing detailed "stand along" descriptions helps me obverse to actual coin design details, but also everyone else, including the non-collector and next generation ancient coin collectors, gets to better understand the amazing symbolism.

For me, detailed descriptions are a learning opportunity. Over time, each ancient coin collected seems to require periodic review and updating as I learn more and see more.

 

That was my first thought as well -- an upside-down padlock. Or maybe a ladies' handbag. But a ring it is, with a very gaudy rock!

 

Thank you. I very much like your idea of adding more detail. Although, despite what one may think from my lengthy footnotes for Republican coins, which I add simply because there's so much to write about their historical background and symbolism, I'm probably too lazy to add quite that much for all the coins I own. Like descriptions of beading and borders and decorations and the like. I might follow your suggestion and start adding more to my descriptions, though, especially in the future. For example, a description of the jewelry worn by the obverse figure, whether Roma or another goddess, is something I do already try to include when I remember. I admit that I'm not that great at identifying helmet parts! However, my primary audience for the descriptions I write is myself (in the personal catalog I keep) and the highly knowledgeable membership here, so I don't think it's necessary to spell out basic shorthand conventions like "right" meaning "facing right."

As for the elephant head on the reverse, I guess it does have a tusk -- it's a bit hard to see. As I pointed out elsewhere, the bell it's wearing is placed so that it looks more like a bottle it's drinking from than a bell hanging from its neck.