Fantastically Rare Domitian 'PONT' Denarius

[David Atherton]

For a specialist there is no better feeling than acquiring a 'second known' specimen (unless it's acquiring the only one known!). My latest addition is just such coin. I never thought I'd own one! Bonus points that it's a much coveted 'PONT' denarius.

 

Domitian

AR Denarius, 2.94g
Rome mint, 81 AD
Obv: IMP CAES DOMITIANVS AVG PONT; Head of Domitian, laureate, bearded, r.
Rev: P P COS VII DES VIII; Altar, garlanded and lighted
RIC 7 (R3). BMC p. 299 † note. RSC 370. BNC 9.
Ex Private Collection, February 2023.

Domitian seems to have been in somewhat of a hurry to strike coins as Augustus after Titus's death in mid September 81 AD, presumably for a legionary donative. This denarius was struck before Domitian had been awarded the power of the tribunate (TR P) and Pontifex Maximus (PM). Here his only titles are Augustus (AVG), Imperator (IMP), Consul for the 7th time (COS VII), and Pater Patriae, father of the country (P P). Perhaps it may have taken a few days for the Senate to award the power of the tribunate to Domitian because they had assembled at the small town of Reate where Titus had died and needed to be in Rome in order to vote him the right. The religious ceremonies required for Domitian to assume the title Pontifex Maximus had not yet finished by this time either, here he is simply PONT, or in other words a member of the College of Pontiffs. Some have argued that PONT is the same as PM, I disagree. Titus as Caesar early on had also used the title PONT on his denarii and he was never Pontifex Maximus under Vespasian - only the emperor can be Pontifex Maximus or greatest priest. Although this Group 2 denarius is not part of Domitian's first RIC issue, it is very likely to have been struck within the first few days of him assuming the purple. RIC notes the chronology is not precise with these issues from 81 and they are grouped only for 'convenience'. Judging by the rarity of the Group 2 denarii they could not have been struck for any great length of time. This reverse features a pulvinar altar type carried-over from Domitian's last denarius issue struck under Titus in celebration of the Colosseum's dedication. When the new RIC II.1 was published in 2007 just one specimen was known for this altar variety (BNC 9). This coin is now the second specimen. All the above references cite the previously unique Paris specimen.

 

In hand.

 

 

Have you a 'second known' example? I would love to see it!

As always, thanks for looking/watching!

Edited March 26, 2023 by David Atherton

[Roman Collector]

Coingratulations, @David Atherton! What a find! It's always a pleasure to obtain something so rare. I too have had the joy.

There are only two known examples of this coin with a veiled bust type. Orielensis at CT owns the other one.


Faustina I, 138-140 CE.
Roman Æ as or dupondius, 9.03 g, 24.4 mm, 5 h.
Rome, 145-147 CE.
Obv: DIVA FAVSTINA, veiled and draped bust, right.
Rev: AVGVSTA S C, Vesta veiled, standing left, holding palladium and scepter.
Refs: Unlisted with veiled bust; compare: RIC 1179; BMCRE 1582; Cohen 111; Strack 1294; RCV --.

[Qcumbor]

Fantastic find.

When it comes to "second known" one has to compose with preservation or miss the opportunity ! 🙂 

As a Dombes coinage collector I've sometimes enountered this situation : The series of demi ecu for Anne-Marie Louise d'Orleans is only known (so far) for 5 years of mintage, i.e. 1665, 1669, 1672, 1673, 1674.

1673 is rather common, with at least two or three examples popping up at auction every year. 1669 and 1672 are exceedingly rare, with a handful known. In the reference book for those (Jean-Paul DIVO -Numismatique de Dombes) only two examples of 1665 (one at the BnF, one in private hands) and one of 1674 (at the BnF) are referenced.

In 2008, a friend dealer located a 1674 specimen on which I jumped immediately. In 2017, on the other forum, I wrote a thread about the toughness of completing such a set and how pessimistic I was to achieving it anytime soon. In 2021 however, CGB auctioned the only 1665 example in private hands. I put a bid accordingly to my hopes and finally got it just above starting price because little is known about them (advantage of specialization).

I am now the proud owner of a complete series only the BnF has completed before me, including two "second known" coins 🙂 

 

And the complete set :

Q

 

Edited March 26, 2023 by Qcumbor

[rvk]

Great find @David Atherton!

Second known Titus mule that I picked up earlier this year. Thought to have been a brief issue of an engraver error of a reverse type for Titus with a reverse legend intended for Domitian. A short-lived issue occurring some time around 69 AD, when Titus' name changed from Titus Flavius Vespasianus to Titus Caesar Vespasianus and Domitian became PRINCEPS IVVENTVTIS.

Titus. 69-79 AD. AR Denarius. (17mm, 3.27g). T CAESAR IMP VESPASIANVS: Laureate head right / PRINCEPS IVVENTVTIS: Venus standing right, leaning on cippus holding helmet and spear.

 

[David Atherton]

11 hours ago, rvk said:

Great find @David Atherton!

Second known Titus mule that I picked up earlier this year. Thought to have been a brief issue of an engraver error of a reverse type for Titus with a reverse legend intended for Domitian. A short-lived issue occurring some time around 69 AD, when Titus' name changed from Titus Flavius Vespasianus to Titus Caesar Vespasianus and Domitian became PRINCEPS IVVENTVTIS.

Titus. 69-79 AD. AR Denarius. (17mm, 3.27g). T CAESAR IMP VESPASIANVS: Laureate head right / PRINCEPS IVVENTVTIS: Venus standing right, leaning on cippus holding helmet and spear.

 

What a splendid coin! When we discussed this earlier I called it an error 'mule'. Upon second thought, I believe it's more accurate to call this an 'engraver's error' because the reverse type was indeed intended for Titus but the legend certainly was not!