David Atherton Posted May 29, 2022 · Member Share Posted May 29, 2022 (edited) Flavian denarii will always hold a special place in my heart ... especially those rarities with intriguing mysteries! Vespasian AR Denarius, 2.80g Ephesus mint, 71 ADObv: IMP CAESAR VESPAS AVG COS III TR P P P; Head of Vespasian, laureate, r. Rev: AVG in oak wreath, no mintmark RIC 1426(5A)1 (R2). BMC -. RPC -. BNC -. Acquired from Kornblum, May 2022. Ex Gorny and Mosch 216, 10 October 2013, lot 2968. Ephesus struck a series of stylish denarii early in Vespasian's reign. Previously, it was thought all but the first issue were produced with mintmarks, that is until several specimens dated COS III recently surfaced that unquestionably lack any such control marks. The new RIC II.1 Addenda & Corrigenda records three COS III reverse types lacking mintmarks: AVG in oak wreath, confronting heads of Titus and Domitian, and Turreted female bust. All three types are known for Vespasian, just one specimen (turreted female bust) is recorded for Titus Caesar. All of these types are known from unique specimens, except for the AVG in oak wreath type with just two specimens cited by the A&C, the present coin being the second one listed. In all, only five no mintmark specimens for the entire issue are recorded in the A&C - with this latest addition four of them now reside in my collection. Ted Buttrey wrote in the RIC II Addenda the following concerning the no mintmark issue: 'I’m not terribly happy about this. It’s a convenient way to draw together several pieces which lack the mintmark, placing them after the completion of the ΘΙ and ΘΥ Groups 3-5 and the inception of Group 6 with ΕΡΗ —. But why should they have given up on a mintmark in mid-course, when all of Groups 2-9 are marked? The choices are – (i) mintmark on coins worn away; (ii) engraver forgot to add mintmark to the dies; (iii) issue deliberately produced without mintmark. Assuming (iii) for the moment, the new Group takes the place of fnn. 46-47, pp.162-3, and fits here nicely with V’s title for Groups 5-6, and T’s for Group 6, But I have no fixed opinion, and await the appearance of others of this variety.' I lean towards iii being the likeliest option - if accidental, why do we not see no mintmark specimens throughout the series? Why are they only dated COS III? IMHO, the likeliest explanation is that the no mintmark denarii were deliberately struck, albeit rather briefly (perhaps only for a few days), prior to or just after the COS III ΘΥ issue and before the much larger EPH issue was struck. At any rate, I was absolutely thrilled to acquire this fantastically rare denarius with its intriguing mystery! Please post your mysterious coins! Thanks for looking! Edited May 29, 2022 by David Atherton 17 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sulla80 Posted May 29, 2022 · Supporter Share Posted May 29, 2022 Congratulations, @David Atherton, an elegant coin and I can appreciate the great rarity and mystery of the mintmark thanks to your post! Very happy to see your move to this forum which I hope will be an enjoyable new home. Roman Imperial coins are not my collecting base, but these coins of Vespasian from Ephesus attracted me for the elegant style. Here's my favorite from Ephesus, which you have probably seen before. Vespasian, 69-79 AD, AR denarius, Ephesus mint, 71 AD Obv: IMP CAESAR VESPAS AVG COS III TR P P P< Laureate head right Rev: LIBERI IMP AVG VESPAS, Titus and Domitian, each veiled, togate and holding a patera, standing facing heads left, EPE in exergue Ref: RIC II 1430 (Group 6) For the portraits - this didrachm of Cappadocia again drew me away from base: Cappadocia, Caesaraea-Eusebia, Vespasian, with Titus, as Caesar, 69-79, AR Didrachm, 76-77 Obv: ΑΥΤΟΚΡΑ ΚΑΙCΑΡ ΟΥECΠΑCΙΑΝΟC CEΒΑCΤΟC, laureate head of Vespasian to right Rev: ΑΥΤΟ ΚΑΙ ΟΥECΠΑCΙΑΝΟC CEΒΑCΤΟΥ ΥΙΟC, laureate head of Titus to right Ref: RPC II 1650 9 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pantoffel Posted May 29, 2022 · Member Share Posted May 29, 2022 Those are some nice portraits! From the both of you. 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
maridvnvm Posted May 29, 2022 · Member Share Posted May 29, 2022 I dabbled with Flavians when I started collecting but they fell by the wayside as I found my collecting style and focus areas. I only bought one coin from Ephesus and that was driven by the confluence of ugliness and beauty. I looked at good examples of the type and was struck by their beauty but this coin was a massive contrast due to the extreme double strike. I parted with it almost a decade ago and hope it found a good home. Vespasian denarius Obv - IMP CAESAR VESPAS AVG COS V TR P P P; Head of Vespasian, laureate, right Rev - PACI AVGVSTAE; Victory adv. right, with wreath and palm; at lower right, star; annulet beneath Minted in Ephesus, A.D. 74 References:- RIC 1457. BMCRE 475. RSC 277. Dimensions:- 22.04 mm x 19.07 mm Severely double struck. 8 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alegandron Posted May 29, 2022 · Supporter Share Posted May 29, 2022 I really like that Denarius @David Atherton. Has such a clean look, and I appreciate the mystery of why all of a sudden, no mint marks. Apprentice boo-boo? “Couldn’t find the tools, but let’s keep going.”? I enjoy Tetartemorions, and by nature these denominations have several mysteries, including WHERE they came from... UNCERTAIN ASIAASIA MINOR Uncertain mint AR Tetartemorion Lion - Incuse 5mm 0.13g However, creating these incredibly tiny, detailed pieces of history are amazing. 5 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Roman Collector Posted May 29, 2022 · Patron Share Posted May 29, 2022 Wow! Only the second known example of that one! Coingratulations, @David Atherton! 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sulla80 Posted September 17, 2022 · Supporter Share Posted September 17, 2022 (edited) On 5/29/2022 at 4:43 AM, David Atherton said: Flavian denarii will always hold a special place in my heart ... especially those rarities with intriguing mysteries! Vespasian AR Denarius, 2.80g Ephesus mint, 71 ADObv: IMP CAESAR VESPAS AVG COS III TR P P P; Head of Vespasian, laureate, r. Rev: AVG in oak wreath, no mintmark RIC 1426(5A)1 (R2). BMC -. RPC -. BNC -. Acquired from Kornblum, May 2022. Ex Gorny and Mosch 216, 10 October 2013, lot 2968. Ephesus struck a series of stylish denarii early in Vespasian's reign. Previously, it was thought all but the first issue were produced with mintmarks, that is until several specimens dated COS III recently surfaced that unquestionably lack any such control marks. The new RIC II.1 Addenda & Corrigenda records three COS III reverse types lacking mintmarks: AVG in oak wreath, confronting heads of Titus and Domitian, and Turreted female bust. All three types are known for Vespasian, just one specimen (turreted female bust) is recorded for Titus Caesar. All of these types are known from unique specimens, except for the AVG in oak wreath type with just two specimens cited by the A&C, the present coin being the second one listed. In all, only five no mintmark specimens for the entire issue are recorded in the A&C - with this latest addition four of them now reside in my collection. Ted Buttrey wrote in the RIC II Addenda the following concerning the no mintmark issue: 'I’m not terribly happy about this. It’s a convenient way to draw together several pieces which lack the mintmark, placing them after the completion of the ΘΙ and ΘΥ Groups 3-5 and the inception of Group 6 with ΕΡΗ —. But why should they have given up on a mintmark in mid-course, when all of Groups 2-9 are marked? The choices are – (i) mintmark on coins worn away; (ii) engraver forgot to add mintmark to the dies; (iii) issue deliberately produced without mintmark. Assuming (iii) for the moment, the new Group takes the place of fnn. 46-47, pp.162-3, and fits here nicely with V’s title for Groups 5-6, and T’s for Group 6, But I have no fixed opinion, and await the appearance of others of this variety.' I lean towards iii being the likeliest option - if accidental, why do we not see no mintmark specimens throughout the series? Why are they only dated COS III? IMHO, the likeliest explanation is that the no mintmark denarii were deliberately struck, albeit rather briefly (perhaps only for a few days), prior to or just after the COS III ΘΥ issue and before the much larger EPH issue was struck. At any rate, I was absolutely thrilled to acquire this fantastically rare denarius with its intriguing mystery! Please post your mysterious coins! Thanks for looking! Hi David - I found myself revisiting your post as I added a COS II (with mintmark) today. I am a fan of these portraits from Ephesus, circa AD 70. The strike weakness on the reverse shows the mint mark seen here from another coin: Edited September 17, 2022 by Sulla80 5 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CPK Posted September 18, 2022 · Supporter Share Posted September 18, 2022 Congratulations on that incredible acquisition @David Atherton! That is a really intriguing coin, in superb condition. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David Atherton Posted September 18, 2022 · Member Author Share Posted September 18, 2022 3 hours ago, Sulla80 said: Hi David - I found myself revisiting your post as I added a COS II (with mintmark) today. I am a fan of these portraits from Ephesus, circa AD 70. The strike weakness on the reverse shows the mint mark seen here from another coin: Congratulations on your new acquisition! A very handsome example! Certainly it's tough to beat the Ephesian style in silver. The veristic beauty of these pieces is quite exceptional. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.