CPK Posted January 7 · Supporter Share Posted January 7 (edited) Bought this Trajan denarius awhile back, and - like the Domitian denarius I posted about awhile back - I'm only now getting around to working on photos and attribution. I cannot find an exact match on OCRE. It seems to be an obverse legend variant of RIC II 331 - mine spells the emperor's full name in the dative case - 'TRAIANO' rather than the shortened or abbreviated 'TRAIAN' as described in RIC. A small difference, perhaps, but interesting nonetheless. Out of curiosity, at what point does a 'variant' justify its own RIC number? Anyway, the coin itself is not bad, with a good portrait and some really nice toning, especially on the obverse. Less appealing are the areas of delamination. TRAJAN, AD 98-117 AR Denarius (18.73mm, 3.30g, 7h) Struck AD 114. Rome mint Obverse: IMP CAES NER TRAIANO OPTIM AVG GERM DAC, laureate and draped bust of Trajan right Reverse: PARTHICO P M TR P COS VI P P SPQR, Mars, helmeted, advancing right, carrying spear in right hand and holding trophy over shoulder in left RIC II 331 var. (obv. leg.) Attractive gold and rainbow toning. Areas of delamination on obverse and reverse. A good portrait, struck in high relief. In my online searches, I was able to find only one coin that matched mine - literally (an obverse die match). This coin sold through Heritage Auction in 2022. Other than that I drew a blank. So, it would seem to be a very rare obverse legend variant. I'm curious, for those who have access to other reference catalogs, is this variant listed anywhere else? Such as Woytek? Thanks! Feel free to post your own rare coin variants, as well. Edited January 9 by CPK 19 1 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Conduitt Posted January 7 · Supporter Share Posted January 7 (edited) Perhaps the engraver had been working on the aureus beforehand…(assuming it isn’t an error in Ocre, which is pretty likely). Hopefully Woytek hurries up and publishes RIC II.2 soon, and hopefully all will be revealed. 55 minutes ago, CPK said: Out of curiosity, at what point does a 'variant' justify its own RIC number? I don’t think the authors even worked that out. One RIC number might cover coins with several legend variants and have the emperor looking left, right, draped and/or cuirassed, with a spear or shield or not, and wearing a helmet or not. Gallienus is typical for that. Others (see old RIC II) have different numbers for exactly the same coin, but where the author noticed an obverse die match with a coin with another reverse they’ve dated a year later. So to tell which RIC it is you need to die match it to the other coin. I think, though, that they tend to add a new number when they have a theory about a variation that dates it differently to the rest. Edited January 7 by John Conduitt 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ocatarinetabellatchitchix Posted January 7 · Member Share Posted January 7 It seems there are many « variant » obverse legends. By the way, this denarius belongs to the last issue of Trajan struck before his death on August 8, 117 at Selinus of Cilicia. 10 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Marcus Posted January 8 · Supporter Share Posted January 8 (edited) Woytek is listing this variant separately in his MIR volume on Trajan (so I suppose he will also do so in RIC). He knows one specimen with your bust type v (an obverse die match to yours, but the specimen is neither yours nor the Heritage one, so there are three in total up to now): Edited January 8 by Marcus 4 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CPK Posted January 8 · Supporter Author Share Posted January 8 2 hours ago, Marcus said: Woytek is listing this variant separately in his MIR volume on Trajan (so I suppose he will also do so in RIC). He knows one specimen with your bust type v (an obverse die match to yours, but the specimen is neither yours nor the Heritage one, so there are three in total up to now): Perfect! Thank you! 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Al Kowsky Posted January 8 · Member Share Posted January 8 There are many unlisted variants in the Roman provincial tetradrachm series & I have at least a half dozen in my collection. One that I acquired a couple of years ago is pictured below. The usual punctuation seen on the obverse of this issue is missing, & probably the reason it was in Michel Prieur's collection. The coin is also unlisted in Richard McAlee's book on Antioch coinage. 8 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Benefactor LONGINUS Posted January 27 · Benefactor Benefactor Share Posted January 27 On 1/7/2024 at 5:29 PM, CPK said: Trajan denarius - not in RIC CPK Collection Nice portrait @CPK and great link to your awesome CPK Collection ! 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Coinmaster Posted January 27 · Member Share Posted January 27 Between numismatics, there is no overall consensus, when a coin is a type, subtype or variant. I'd say your coin qualifies as a (text)variant. 👍🏻 3 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.