red_spork Posted January 23 · Member Share Posted January 23 Yesterday I added a variety to my collection that I have wanted to find an example of for several years now, ever since reading Pierluigi Debernardi's die study of Crawford 46. For those less familiar with these coins, Crawford 46 is a relatively rare series of anonymous denarii from an uncertain mint known in about 40 examples. The coins confusingly come from a relatively small number of dies but in 3 markedly different obverse styles which have reverse die links between them and as such seem to be a single emission from one small short lived Second Punic War field mint. This coin is from the main or most common obverse style but its reverse die has a feature that is, to my knowledge, unique across the entire Roma/Dioscuri denarius series: the dioscuri are missing the lances on the reverse, usually depicted as a pair of parallel horizontal lines. Every single denarius, quinarius or sestertius I've ever seen have had those lances except the handful known from this single reverse die which I find a really cool and interesting feature. If you check the die study link above you'll also notice this coin is actually cited in it as De Nicola FPL September 1970 so that provenance was a nice unexpected bonus as well. Roman Republic AR Denarius(4.06g, 12h). Anonymous. After 211 B.C. Uncertain mint. Helmeted head of Roma right; behind, X. Border of dots / Dioscuri galloping right(without usual lances); in linear frame, ROMA. Line border. Crawford 46/1; Pierluigi Debernardi "Studio Deo Conii di RRC 46/1 e 60/1c", Panorama Numismatico 11/2014, p. 16 number 12(this coin) & dies 4/4 Ex Niels Bro Rasmussen collection, Bruun Rasmussen Online Auction 2403, 21 January 2024, lot 5019, ex Jens Hermann collection, Museumsbygningen Kunstauktioner Auktion 35, 30 Oktober 2004, lot 272, ex Høeg Albrethsen collection, Kunsthallen Kunstauktioner 376, 15 March 1989, lot 2, ex Luigi De Nicola FPL September 1970 lot 256 As always feel free to post anything related 14 1 2 4 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
red_spork Posted January 23 · Member Author Share Posted January 23 As an illustration of the lances here is a different anonymous denarius from my collection with lances, the two horizontal lines in the middle of the reverse: Roman Republic AR Denarius(19mm, 4.47 g, 1h), anonymous(related to C AL series), 209-208 B.C., Sicilian mint. Helmeted head of Roma right with loop beneath visor; behind, X / The Dioscuri galloping right; below, ROMA in linear frame. Crawford 75/1c; Sydenham 191a; Russo RBW 321 11 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Benefactor DonnaML Posted January 23 · Benefactor Benefactor Share Posted January 23 44 minutes ago, red_spork said: Yesterday I added a variety to my collection that I have wanted to find an example of for several years now, ever since reading Pierluigi Debernardi's die study of Crawford 46. For those less familiar with these coins, Crawford 46 is a relatively rare series of anonymous denarii from an uncertain mint known in about 40 examples. The coins confusingly come from a relatively small number of dies but in 3 markedly different obverse styles which have reverse die links between them and as such seem to be a single emission from one small short lived Second Punic War field mint. This coin is from the main or most common obverse style but its reverse die has a feature that is, to my knowledge, unique across the entire Roma/Dioscuri denarius series: the dioscuri are missing the lances on the reverse, usually depicted as a pair of parallel horizontal lines. Every single denarius, quinarius or sestertius I've ever seen have had those lances except the handful known from this single reverse die which I find a really cool and interesting feature. If you check the die study link above you'll also notice this coin is actually cited in it as De Nicola FPL September 1970 so that provenance was a nice unexpected bonus as well. Roman Republic AR Denarius(4.06g, 12h). Anonymous. After 211 B.C. Uncertain mint. Helmeted head of Roma right; behind, X. Border of dots / Dioscuri galloping right(without usual lances); in linear frame, ROMA. Line border. Crawford 46/1; Pierluigi Debernardi "Studio Deo Conii di RRC 46/1 e 60/1c", Panorama Numismatico 11/2014, p. 16 number 12(this coin) & dies 4/4 Ex Niels Bro Rasmussen collection, Bruun Rasmussen Online Auction 2403, 21 January 2024, lot 5019, ex Jens Hermann collection, Museumsbygningen Kunstauktioner Auktion 35, 30 Oktober 2004, lot 272, ex Høeg Albrethsen collection, Kunsthallen Kunstauktioner 376, 15 March 1989, lot 2, ex Luigi De Nicola FPL September 1970 lot 256 As always feel free to post anything related The nearer of the Dioscuri is certainly depicted with his hand in position to hold a lance, as on the other dies. But there's nothing there. Other than "the engraver simply forgot to put in the lances," can you think of any possible reason for the omission on this one die? 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Curtis JJ Posted January 23 · Supporter Share Posted January 23 Oh, wow, haha! I recognize this one on my watchlist. I wasn't planning to bid (its subtleties would've been lost on me). But I was curious about it and, looking at those beautiful surfaces, figured that someone with a good library for Republican coins could find a pre-1970 provenance for it! It's always nice to see where a coin like that has gone (clearly to the right place!) but especially nice in this case to actually learn what makes this coin special after wondering about it! 5 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
red_spork Posted January 23 · Member Author Share Posted January 23 2 hours ago, DonnaML said: The nearer of the Dioscuri is certainly depicted with his hand in position to hold a lance, as on the other dies. But there's nothing there. Other than "the engraver simply forgot to put in the lances," can you think of any possible reason for the omission on this one die? I can't think of any reason other than a simple mistake. There are other dies very similar and seemingly from the same hand that depict the lances so it seems like the engraver simply forgot. 3 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Benefactor Phil Davis Posted January 23 · Benefactor Benefactor Share Posted January 23 8 hours ago, red_spork said: I can't think of any reason other than a simple mistake. There are other dies very similar and seemingly from the same hand that depict the lances so it seems like the engraver simply forgot. I picture the correctly-engraved die currently in use shattering unexpectedly and the mint supervisor, looking around in a panic at his engravers, seeing this die and saying "Close enough! Gimme that!" 4 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
red_spork Posted January 23 · Member Author Share Posted January 23 13 hours ago, Curtis JJ said: Oh, wow, haha! I recognize this one on my watchlist. I wasn't planning to bid (its subtleties would've been lost on me). But I was curious about it and, looking at those beautiful surfaces, figured that someone with a good library for Republican coins could find a pre-1970 provenance for it! It's always nice to see where a coin like that has gone (clearly to the right place!) but especially nice in this case to actually learn what makes this coin special after wondering about it! I almost let this coin go myself to be honest. I kinda waffled over it because while it was special, the auction house had identified it correctly enough that I suspected it would get very expensive, as seems to be my luck, and after completely striking out even with aggressive bids in Triton I was not hopeful. After a week of not being able to stop thinking about the coin I finally just decided I had to buy it whatever the cost and I'd bid an absolutely stupid amount and hope the coin gods would smile upon me. Thankfully the price, while not "cheap", was a lot more reasonable than I'd planned for. I really expected there would be other bidders bidding me up in the last few minutes but no one showed up. 3 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dafydd Posted January 23 · Supporter Share Posted January 23 A beautiful coin @red_spork and as well as the unique reverse , great toning too! Maybe the Dioscuri were in training and weren't allowed sharp pointed objects as they were teaching them to ride horses first ! 😆 3 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
idesofmarch01 Posted January 23 · Member Share Posted January 23 1 hour ago, red_spork said: Thankfully the price, while not "cheap", was a lot more reasonable than I'd planned for. I really expected there would be other bidders bidding me up in the last few minutes but no one showed up. Just a peripheral observation about Roman coins in auctions during the past year or more: it's my impression that prices for Roman coins have not been nearly as strong as prices for Greek coins, from which I'd infer that it's a good time to aggressively pursue those Roman coins on your bucket list. I don't know what might be driving Greek coin prices into the stratosphere, but one only has to take a look at CNG's current fixed price list of Greek coins (anyone here stepping up for https://www.cngcoins.com/Coin.aspx?CoinID=396449?) to see how strong these prices currently are. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
red_spork Posted February 1 · Member Author Share Posted February 1 (edited) This coin arrived safe and sound at my house yesterday. I was happy to see the toning was as beautiful in hand as expected from the pictures. Here it is beside my rather bright and untoned(despite almost 23 years of provenance) "46A" denarius which I shared back in the Cointalk days. Both of these varieties are very rare and in the 10 years I've been collecting I only recall seeing these two isolated examples of these varieties(46A and 46/1 with no lances) ever come up for sale so I am very to have been able to acquire both of them Edited February 1 by red_spork 6 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SteveJBrinkman Posted February 4 · Member Share Posted February 4 Many congratulations Jordan on the acquisition of this rare early type. I haven't been in Numis Forums for a while so I was glad to see this posting. The 46/1 issue was at the top of my want list for many years. These earliest of the Roman Republican anonymous denarii have fascinated me and the unique style of this issue is immediately recognizable as being separate from the more common 44/5 group for which the 46/1 specimens are often mistaken for. A couple of years ago, I won my example and I'm happy with it. Here is my example (with spears). 6 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
red_spork Posted February 4 · Member Author Share Posted February 4 2 hours ago, SteveJBrinkman said: Many congratulations Jordan on the acquisition of this rare early type. I haven't been in Numis Forums for a while so I was glad to see this posting. The 46/1 issue was at the top of my want list for many years. These earliest of the Roman Republican anonymous denarii have fascinated me and the unique style of this issue is immediately recognizable as being separate from the more common 44/5 group for which the 46/1 specimens are often mistaken for. A couple of years ago, I won my example and I'm happy with it. Here is my example (with spears). Thanks for the kind words! Yours is a really wonderful example of 46/1 that I've been impressed by ever since you emailed letting me know you'd won it a few years ago. Yours is a better example than mine in several ways and I really hope I can find one as nice as yours but with the spears one of these days. Your website and Pierluigi's papers on this issue have made me want to try and collect all the varieties of 46 though I suspect it will take a long time to fill the remaining slots. 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.