Why arent Nero coins more valuable?>

Very interesting thread. I never gave much attention to Nero because there were two of his coins in the collection I started with, that of my father-in-law. This as was found in the churchyard of his village and sold to him by a local historian.



Lugdunum, ca. 65 AD. 31 mm, 10.38 gr. RIC I 464; BMCRE 367; WCN 562.

But I recently bought this hemidrachm of Caesarea-Eusebia in Cappadocia. Laureate head t.r. Rev. Victory standing right with her right foot set on globe, inscribing shield set on her left knee. 13.5 mm, 1.68 gr. RIC 618. RPC I 3646.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

Its a wonderful Nero denarius you got there! I am sure it would be harder bidding on a coin like that today!

Just wanted to revive this 3 year old thread to hear people's opinion on the the current market for Nero coinage - and especially his denarii. Like we all have experienced the last 1-2 years, the general market for ancient coins has increased rapidly with high price growth.

I recently added this Nero denarius to my collection - with the same IUPPITER CVSTOS reverse as @IdesOfMarch01 and I must say I have had a hard time finding a good specimen in a quality I wanted without totally blowing the budget, although I regret not jumping on auction-opportunities the last 1-2 on similar to better coins at lower prices. Anyways, hard to know when its the right time. Its not a perfect coin, but it like it and its patina is actually wonderful in hand.

Ex. Spink Auction 1012 lot 1307, 01.12.2010
Ex. Tkalec Munzauktion Zurich 25.oct 1996 lot 134

Any other thoughts on the posted coin, or comments on the current market for Nero denarii? @TIF

 

I noticed over the past year or two that a large number of Nero tetradrachms from Antioch have appeared on the market, probably from one or more hoards discovered in the Middle East. Most appear quite worn or poorly struck (or both), but every now and then a really nice example comes up.

 

Whether Nero or any other ruler, we need to remember that there were times when the mint stopped issuing coins for one reason or another but often because the needs of daily commerce were met by things left over from previous rulers. This continues today. The demand in the US for half dollars has been so low that most made ended up in a collector group. Spend one at a fast food place and you may confuse the clerk. Nero's first coins with young portraits were good silver like those of Caligula and Claudius but when Nero debased the silver (post reform) all the good things got hoarded or melted. Those who read CT may have noted Blake Davis and Curtis Clay mentioning the scarcity of bronze coins of Septimius Severus in the middle part of his reign. Too many had been made ever since Antoninus Pius to require more. It is easier to find a Pertinax sestertius from 193 than it is to find a Geta as Caesar. Fewer were made.

I suggest you don't challenge Martin (alone or with the help of a few others here) to a Domitian vs. Septimius coin post war. Remember September? More than one of us could post one a day for two years or more. Gordian III was once hot on CT but his main proponent quit the hobby. Remember the cockroach posts? I agree it would be 'interesting' to see the count for CT since Ancients became a thing here. I doubt Domitian would be #1 and would not even bet on him being in the top 5 BUT I am not going to do the count to prove it. You? I also would be interested in a count of which individual coins have been posted here to the most threads. Several of us have favorite coins we post whenever we get a chance. I wish CT had a feature that would display the number of times an image had been used before and give us a message, "Really? You have posted that thing 113 times in the past, most recently yesterday. Consider giving the poor thing a rest."

 

The problem with published numbers from sources listed in this admittedly older thread is they suffer from the same issue as books. Most common coins simply are not listed as often, but the rarities get resold and listed always. Nero, by viewing tons and tons of auction catalogs and sales over the years, is simply the most common 1st century emperor. It makes sense, coins before him had higher silver content, so when he devalued it made him money to recall older coins and lower the silver and make money. Neros are WAY more common than listed in scholarly articles or websites simply because most are so common as to not warrant individual attention. Same with 2nd century emperors versus the 1st century emperors. Many/most simply do not get individually listed unless very rare variety or exceptional condition.

The only 1st century emperors I have ever bought from group lots have been Augustus, Nero, Vespasian, Domitian and Nerva. Of those, maybe 80% are Nero. Not scientific, but gives you a scale of differences. However, compared to 2nd century emperors, ALL of them I have more from group lots than Nero's. Like I said, not scientific, but what I see in the marketplace for the last 20 years. 2nd century a dime a dozen, (relatively), but 1st century always rarer, and if you get one most likely a Nero.

 

Denarius of Nero 60-61 AD Lugdunum ObvnHead right bare Rv.Roma standing right inscribing shield. RIC 28 3.67 grms 18 mm Photo by W. Hansen

 

I got this provincial issue from Gadara couple of weeks ago. Love the style! Dated to last year of his rule.