Roman Republican Coin # 85: M. Servilius C.f. (Crawford 327/1, 100 BC)

[DonnaML]

This is only the fourth Roman Republican coin I've bought this year. I'm definitely slowing down, not because of any loss of interest but because it's getting more and more difficult to find interesting/unusual reverses I don't already have that aren't exorbitantly expensive. This one may not be in the best condition, but I'm happy with it anyway.

Roman Republic, M. Servilius C.f. [son of C. Servilius Vatia], AR Denarius, 100 BCE, Rome Mint. Obv. Head of Roma right wearing winged helmet, earring, and necklace; control-symbol T [Tau in Greek alphabet*] behind / Rev. Two soldiers armed with swords fighting on foot (one on left with round shield and conical helmet, and one on right with oval shield and round helmet**), each with his horse behind him; in exergue, M•SERVEILI•C•F; below, control-symbol F [F in Latin alphabet*]. 19 mm., 3.9 g. Crawford 327/1; RSC [Babelon] I Servilia 13 (ill. p. 88); BMCRR I 1660; Sear RCV I 206; RBW Collection 1183 (ill. p. 245). Purchased from Aeternitas Numismatics, Madrid, Spain, 14 May 2023.***

 

*Crawford explains the control-symbols for this issue at Vol. I p. 329: “The control-marks are the letters of the Latin alphabet on the reverse and the letters of the Greek alphabet on the obverse, either rarely accompanied by a dot; the Latin letters start from the beginning of the alphabet, the Greek letters from the end; thus A is paired with Ω, B with Ψ, C with X and so on as far as X with ∆. Each pair of control-letters may have several pairs of dies.” 

Thus, on this coin, the “F” on the reverse (the sixth letter of the Latin alphabet) is paired with “T” on the obverse (Tau, the sixth letter from the end of the Greek alphabet). The Schaefer Roman Republican Die Project at CRRO shows four examples of Crawford 327/1 with the F-Tau combination (see http://numismatics.org/archives/ark:/53695/schaefer.rrdp.processed_300-399#schaefer_clippings_output_327_DEFGHIKLMNO_sd); only the first has an obverse die matching my specimen, labeled as die “T1”:

 

 

And, out of the 132 examples of Crawford 327/1 listed on ACSearch, four have the F-Tau combination; none of those four has the “T1” obverse die matching mine.

**Several sources describe the reverse scene not simply as two soldiers fighting, but as a Roman fighting a barbarian. However, I have seen none purporting to identify which is which.

***According to Crawford -- see Vol. I p. 329 and the stemma (family tree) for the Servilia gens at id. p. 270 -- the moneyer for Crawford 327/1, M. Servilius C.f., was the brother of a P. Servilius C.f. M.n. Vatia Isauricus (Cos. 79), and, more significantly for numismatic purposes, a son of C. Servilius Vatia, moneyer ca. 127 BC and issuer of Crawford 264/1, which also has a battle scene on the reverse. My example:

Crawford explains (Vol. I p. 289, see also id. p. 329) that both types “probably refer[] to the propensity for single combat of the moneyer[s’] ancestor, M. Servilius Pulex Geminus, Cos. 202 [citations to Livy and Plutarch omitted].” As RSC I elaborates at p. 88, based on a footnote in BMCRR I (p. 179 n. 2), “The horseman represented [on Crawford 264/1 ] is M. Servilius Pulex Geminus, who was elected Augur in B.C. 211 and who filled that office for about 40 years and who was consul in B.C. 202. He is said to have received wounds in twenty-three single combats and to have been victorious in all.” Crawford 327/1 also “commemorates the heroic deeds of M. Servilius Pulex Geminus” (id.) – the grandfather of C. Servilius Vatia (the moneyer for Crawford 264/1), and great-grandfather of M. Servilius C.f. (the moneyer for Crawford 327/1), according to the stemma at Crawford I p. 270. See also Yarrow pp. 100-101 (ill. Fig. 2.52) [Liv Mariah Yarrow, The Roman Republic to 49 BCE: Using Coins as Sources (2021)], for further details regarding the career of Pulex Geminus, including an excerpt from Livy’s rendition of his famous speech in 167 B.C regarding the wounds he suffered in his 23 victorious single combats.

Please post any coins you have, Roman Republican or otherwise, depicting scenes of combat. And, if anyone is willing to speculate on whether the reverse scene on my new coin really does show a Roman vs. a barbarian -- and, if so, which is which -- I'd love to hear your thoughts.

Edited May 26, 2023 by DonnaML

[expat]

Great pick up @DonnaML I had that in my shopping basket till it disappeared. Now I know who bought it. 😁

[jdmKY]

Numonius Vaala, 41 BC, denarius

The reverse shows one warrior armed with a shield and sword attacking a vallum (rampart) with 2 soldiers defending. The first Roman soldier to breach a defense was awarded the corona vallaris or “wall crown”. 

 

[AETHER]

4 hours ago, jdmKY said:

Numonius Vaala, 41 BC, denarius

The reverse shows one warrior armed with a shield and sword attacking a vallum (rampart) with 2 soldiers defending. The first Roman soldier to breach a defense was awarded the corona vallaris or “wall crown”. 

 

I see where Nerva's nose was inspired from, amazing portrait on this coin btw

 

[DonnaML]

Perhaps this coin, issued only three years earlier than my new M. Servilius M.f. posted above, may give some clue as to which is the Roman and which the barbarian on the M. Servilius:

Roman Republic, Q. Thermus M.f., AR Denarius 103 BCE. Obv. Head of Mars left with crested, plumed helmet/ Rev. Roman soldier advancing right, fighting with uplifted sword a barbarian soldier before him, while protecting with shield a fallen comrade at his feet, Q THERM.MF. in exergue (THE and MF in monograms). RSC I Minucia [Q. Minucius Rufus] 19 (ill.), Crawford 319/1, Sear RCV I 198 (ill.), BMCRR Italy 653. 19.4 mm., 3.97 g.

On the Q. Thermus, the Roman has the oval shield and the barbarian has the round shield. On the other hand, the two combatants on the Q. Thermus appear to be infantry, whereas the combatants on the M. Servilius are dismounted horsemen. And the Roman cavalryman on the coin issued by M. Servilius's father, C. Servilius Vatia, clearly has a round shield. Does anyone know anything about what the shields used by Roman infantry and cavalry around the turn of the first century BC actually looked like?

[Ryro]

9 hours ago, DonnaML said:

Please post any coins you have, Roman Republican or otherwise, depicting scenes of combat. And, if anyone is willing to speculate on whether the reverse scene on my new coin really does show a Roman vs. a barbarian -- and, if so, which is which -- I'd love to hear your thoughts.

Another amazing coin!

They sure aren't fighting other Romans. Very interesting designs on the shields of the latter coin though.

And WONDERFUL question asking which witch is which. Going off shield design one might think the rider with sword in air to the left has a more barbaric/Greek design. Is the other rider with the monogram boss on his shield spearing the rider with sword in air? Or being attacked by him??

Here's the Roma monogram above Philip V and then Romans bragging about beating up other Greeks and Celts:

L. MARCIUS PHILIPPUS. Denarius (112 or 113 BC). Rome.

Obv: Head of Philip V of Macedon right, wearing diademed royal Macedonian helmet with goat horns; Roma monogram to upper left, Φ to lower right.

Rev: L PHILIPPVS .

Equestrian statue right; mark of value in exergue. Crawford 293/1. VF 3.99 g. 19 mm

The faces of the vanquished 

 

[antwerpen2306]

nice coins. Here my coin Crawford 319/1

 

[Roman Collector]

Lovely coin, @DonnaML, with an action-packed reverse!!

[DonnaML]

21 hours ago, Ryro said:

Going off shield design one might think the rider with sword in air to the left has a more barbaric/Greek design. Is the other rider with the monogram boss on his shield spearing the rider with sword in air? Or being attacked by him??

Assuming that you're talking about the C. Servilius Vatia denarius -- the second coin I posted above, issued by the father of M. Servilius C.f. -- there's no ambiguity about who's the Roman and who's the barbarian on that coin. According to all the authorities, you're correct that the guy on the left with his sword in the air is the barbarian, and the rider on the right with the "M" on his big round shield, trying to spear the first guy, is the Roman: the "M" stands for the moneyer's ancestor, M. Servilius Pulex Geminus. 

But I'm not entirely sure that means that the dismounted cavalryman with the round shield on the first coin is necessarily the Roman as well.  Maybe I'm doing the wrong Google searches, but I haven't found anything stating that Roman cavalry during the Republic always used round shields, as opposed to oval shields or some other shape.

[robinjojo]

I don't have any Roman Republic denarii depicting a battle scene.  Actually I have scant Roman denarii!

The battle scene on your denarius is very well done for such a small coin, really dynamism is conveyed through the figures and horses.  Nice coin!

The subject of warriors going at it toe to toe is a longstanding favorite theme in the ancient world, such as with this Archaic black figure Greek vase 

 

[Octavius]

 several scenes of violence...

RR denarius of A. Lininius Nerva with reverse of one-armed Roman cavalryman dragging a barbarian by his hair.

c. 46 BCE.

RR denarius  - Regulus with reverse scene of bestiarii fighting in the arena....

RR denarius  -Titus Dedius -  with reverse of two combatants -  probably early gladiatorial match...

[Octavius]

 Yet more violence depicted on Roman Republican coins.

here are two denarii of Sabinus...

first depicting Tarpeia being crushed to death by Sabine shields. She betrayed Rome to the Sabines for "what they carried on their arms". Thinking that she would be rewarded for her treachery with gold bracelets, the Sabines instead paid her off by crushing her to death with the shields which they carried on their arms. Ah, Karma.

Second, another RR denarius of Sabinus depicting the rape of the Sabine women by the Romans....

 

Edited June 7, 2023 by Octavius

[Topcat7]

Quote

only the first has an obverse die matching my specimen, labeled as die “T1”:

@DonnaML Comparing the wear on coin 150 would it be safe to say that yours was earlier in the piece?

Nice coins. I am partial to Roman Republican coins, (but as others get into them it forces the prices up and me further out, I am afraid).

BTW: Just noticed your left facing coins. All 40 of my R.R. coins face right. (Interesting)

Edited June 8, 2023 by Topcat7

[Dafydd]

Here are my two "violent" Sabinus  coins

L. Titurius L.f. Sabinus 89 BC. Rome
Denarius AR

18 mm., 4,01 g.

Head of the Sabine king Tatius right, [palm frond below chin?], SABIN downward to left, A # PV downward to right / Tarpeia facing, buried to her waist in shields, with raised hands she tries to thrust off two soldiers who are about to cast their shields at her, star in crescent above, L # TITVRI in exergue.

good very fine

Crawford 344/2c; Sydenham 699a; Tituria 5.  Ex Savoca 2019.

PERIODNAME	REPUBLICAN
TITLE	L.TITIUS SABINUS DENARIUS
DENOMINATION	DENARIUS
MATERIAL	SILVER
RULER	L.TITURIUS SABINUS
REGION	ROME
DATE	89 BC
MINT
CATALOG	RCV 249. RRC 344/1a-b CRR 698
CONDITION	G.F
OBVERSE	BARE HEAD OF KING TATIUS r.
REVERSE	TWO ROMAN SOLDIERS RUNNING EACH BEARING A SABINE WOMAN "RAPE OF THE SABINE WOMEN". L.TITVRI IN EX/
WEIGHT	3.90
DIAMETER	19.30

 

[DonnaML]

 

17 hours ago, Topcat7 said:

BTW: Just noticed your left facing coins. All 40 of my R.R. coins face right. (Interesting)

FYI, out of my 85 Roman Republican coins, only six (including the M. Servilius C.f. that's the subject of this post) have an obverse portrait facing left. Plus there are another two that face both ways (Janus and Janiform heads of the Dioscuri). So that's only about 7% facing left. Perhaps an even smaller percentage than what one finds on Imperial coins, especially if one includes Imperials up through emperors like Probus.

Edited June 8, 2023 by DonnaML

[Edessa]

Same here. Only eight left-facing busts out of 90-odd types. Here is Bellerophon hurling his spear.

Roman Republic. L. Cossutius C.f. Sabula. 72 BC. AR Denarius (19mm, 3.37g, 7h). Rome mint. Obv: Winged head of Medusa left, serpents in her hair; SABVLA upwards behind. Rev: Bellerophon riding Pegasus right, hurling spear; XX [control numeral] behind; L• COSSVTI• C• F below. Ref: Crawford 395/1; Sydenham 790; Cossutia 1; RBW 1436 var. (control number). Iridescently toned about Extra Fine. Ex Pegasi, Jan 2001.

[akeady]

A quick search for "left" in "Obverse description" showed 31 left-facing obverses on RR coins for me out of 952 coins, so < 3.3% for me.

Here's a double lefty:

Moneyer:	C. Sulpicius C.f. Galba
Coin:	Silver Denarius D.P.P. - Jugate, laureate heads of the Dei Penates left P - Two soldiers standing facing each other, holding spears and pointing at sow which lies between them
Exergue:	C. SVLPICI C.F.
Mint:	Rome (106 BC)
Wt./Size/Axis:	3.86g / 19mm / 0h
References:	RSC 1 (Sulpicia) Sydenham 572 Crawford 312/1
Acquisition:	Auctiones Online Auction eAuction 66 #175 15-Dec-2019

ATB,
Aidan.

[DonnaML]

15 hours ago, akeady said:

A quick search for "left" in "Obverse description" showed 31 left-facing obverses on RR coins for me out of 952 coins, so < 3.3% for me.

Here's a double lefty:

Moneyer:	C. Sulpicius C.f. Galba
Coin:	Silver Denarius D.P.P. - Jugate, laureate heads of the Dei Penates left P - Two soldiers standing facing each other, holding spears and pointing at sow which lies between them
Exergue:	C. SVLPICI C.F.
Mint:	Rome (106 BC)
Wt./Size/Axis:	3.86g / 19mm / 0h
References:	RSC 1 (Sulpicia) Sydenham 572 Crawford 312/1
Acquisition:	Auctiones Online Auction eAuction 66 #175 15-Dec-2019

ATB,
Aidan.

Somehow I missed my specimen of this type when I was doing my count, so in fact I have 7 left-facing obverses out of 85, or 8.2%. Still a tiny percentage!

I am flabbergasted, by the way, at learning that you have 952 different Roman Republican coins. That must be close to all of them!

[akeady]

4 minutes ago, DonnaML said:

Somehow I missed my specimen of this type when I was doing my count, so in fact I have 7 left-facing obverses out of 85, or 8.2%. Still a tiny percentage!

I am flabbergasted, by the way, at learning that you have 952 different Roman Republican coins. That must be close to all of them!

Sorry, they're not all different types - some are different control marks, etc. - e.g., 14 of Cr. 340/1 - one is a brockage of a type I already had and a few are just duplicates where I have no excuse.   I have about 820 different types.

Most are here - http://coins.uggool.net/TopPageRRCoins.html - though I've fallen behind with updates - the 952 number comes from Tantalus, there are not quite so many here - and have some more to photograph and add to Tantalus, so it's 960+ in total.

I've most of the common coins, but there are many more I don't have which turn up regularly enough.   I got 6 bronzes in the last Roma sale, which arrived this week and I believe two from Naville have arrived today.   I had over twenty bids in the Roma auction, all on fairly unexciting-looking bronzes, but ones I didn't have.   I didn't pursue them too hard, as my budget is long gone and there are many other interesting examples in the upcoming Elsen auction.

Listing types from Crawford, CRRO has 1747 basic types, but that's excluding varieties (e.g., /1a, /1b, /1c would just count as /1).   CRRO used to list these varieties separately from the top page and I believe there were over 2500 types then.

I made a spreadsheet of Crawford with all the types along with the number of dies estimated by him (for silver) and the number in the BnF collection (for bronze) - I'll check how many he lists when I get home and report back.   Of course, that's only an approximation, but near enough!

Compared to your coins, @DonnaML, I've got less of the quality and more of the quantity!   I intend to offload some duplicates and upgrade some 😄

ATB,
Aidan.

[jdmKY]

Out of 95 Imperatorial coins, I only have 3 1/2 facing left

Sicinius and Coponius, 49 BC, denarius 

Julius Caesar, 46-45 BC, denarius

Octavian, 32-29 BC

And the 1/2:

Sextus Pompey, 43-35 BC, As

[DonnaML]

42 minutes ago, akeady said:

Sorry, they're not all different types - some are different control marks, etc. - e.g., 14 of Cr. 340/1 - one is a brockage of a type I already had and a few are just duplicates where I have no excuse.   I have about 820 different types.

Most are here - http://coins.uggool.net/TopPageRRCoins.html - though I've fallen behind with updates - the 952 number comes from Tantalus, there are not quite so many here - and have some more to photograph and add to Tantalus, so it's 960+ in total.

I've most of the common coins, but there are many more I don't have which turn up regularly enough.   I got 6 bronzes in the last Roma sale, which arrived this week and I believe two from Naville have arrived today.   I had over twenty bids in the Roma auction, all on fairly unexciting-looking bronzes, but ones I didn't have.   I didn't pursue them too hard, as my budget is long gone and there are many other interesting examples in the upcoming Elsen auction.

Listing types from Crawford, CRRO has 1747 basic types, but that's excluding varieties (e.g., /1a, /1b, /1c would just count as /1).   CRRO used to list these varieties separately from the top page and I believe there were over 2500 types then.

I made a spreadsheet of Crawford with all the types along with the number of dies estimated by him (for silver) and the number in the BnF collection (for bronze) - I'll check how many he lists when I get home and report back.   Of course, that's only an approximation, but near enough!

Compared to your coins, @DonnaML, I've got less of the quality and more of the quantity!   I intend to offload some duplicates and upgrade some 😄

ATB,
Aidan.

Even if the total number of different Republican types is really 2,500 -- not counting each separate control mark or other die variety as a separate type, in which case it would be thousands more! -- you still have more than one-third of them, which is incredibly impressive. And it's at least theoretically possible that one person could collect every different type. Something that would never be possible with Roman Imperials, considering that the recent RIC II.3 lists more than 3,200 different types for Hadrian alone. Never mind all the Provincials. So the total number of different Imperial types for all the emperors must be what, something well above 100,000? 200,000?

 

Edited June 9, 2023 by DonnaML

[Dafydd]

2 hours ago, jdmKY said:

Out of 95 Imperatorial coins, I only have 3 1/2 facing left

Sicinius and Coponius, 49 BC, denarius 

Julius Caesar, 46-45 BC, denarius

Octavian, 32-29 BC

And the 1/2:

Sextus Pompey, 43-35 BC, As

I have to compliment you on the images!  Perhaps it is my perception but I think they are great!

[akeady]

4 hours ago, DonnaML said:

Even if the total number of different Republican types is really 2,500 -- not counting each separate control mark or other die variety as a separate type, in which case it would be thousands more! -- you still have more than one-third of them, which is incredibly impressive. And it's at least theoretically possible that one person could collect every different type. Something that would never be possible with Roman Imperials, considering that the recent RIC II.3 lists more than 3,200 different types for Hadrian alone. Never mind all the Provincials. So the total number of different Imperial types for all the emperors must be what, something well above 100,000? 200,000?

 

I see 41703 types in OCRE, but I suppose there are quite a few more - some RIC numbers cover more than one variety and there are many "Not in RIC" coins.

I read recently (in "When Money Talks") that by the end of the nineteenth century, more than 200,000 varieties of Greek and Roman coins had been identified, but it didn't cite a source for that, IIRC.

ATB,
Aidan.

[DonnaML]

1 hour ago, akeady said:

I see 41703 types in OCRE

If accurate, that would mean that Hadrian alone issued almost 8% of all Roman Imperial coin types. Which seems very unlikely, given that his reign encompassed only about 4% of the length of the Western Empire.

Whatever the actual number, I think I'm right that no one person could ever hope to collect anything close to all of them. Whereas doing so for the Republic is at least theoretically possible.

 

Edited June 10, 2023 by DonnaML

[jdmKY]

@Dafydd - Wish I could take credit for the photos but they were taken by a professional - Tom Mulvaney of Lexington, KY. Super talented and a great guy!