Classical Numismatics Discussion
  Welcome Guest. Please login or register. 10% Off Store-Wide Sale Until 2 April!!! Explore Our Website And Find Joy In The History, Numismatics, Art, Mythology, And Geography Of Coins!!! Expert Authentication - Accurate Descriptions - Reasonable Prices - Coins From Under $10 To Museum Quality Rarities Welcome Guest. Please login or register. 10% Off Store-Wide Sale Until 2 April!!! Explore Our Website And Find Joy In The History, Numismatics, Art, Mythology, And Geography Of Coins!!! Support Our Efforts To Serve The Classical Numismatics Community - Shop At Forum Ancient Coins

New & Reduced


Author Topic: Augustus AS RIC 431 with a "King Kong" Type of Countermark 'IM'?  (Read 933 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Pete B

  • Consul
  • ***
  • Posts: 139
Augustus AS RIC 431 with a "King Kong" Type of Countermark 'IM'?
« on: February 18, 2023, 11:49:14 am »
Hello Everyone! I hope your weekends are off to a great start! Here is an As of Augustus, RIC-431 as far as I can tell, with a monster of a countermark as seen on the obverse. I'm guessing it is IM from a very well-prepared punch. There is also a c/m on the reverse which seems to be undecipherable... does anyone recognize the IM punch? I looked in here-no dice; and other sites which should have a listing if there were one for it...

Offline Curtis JJ

  • Caesar
  • ****
  • Posts: 435
    • CONSERVATORI: Ancient Coins & Their Provenances
Re: Augustus AS RIC 431 with a "King Kong" Type of Countermark 'IM'?
« Reply #1 on: February 18, 2023, 01:42:47 pm »
I don't see it on a quick glance through Howgego.

(Kind of a funny looking countermark?? Assuming it's genuine, that's a really great looking specimen. I'd assume it's an abbreviation for Imperator? I find countermarks fascinating, even if I don't know as much about them as I'd like, so I'm looking forward to any answers that come of this.)


There are "IM" countermarks in Ulrich Werz's 2009 catalog/dissertation (this NOT the Konrad Bech countermark collection he also cataloged), specifically Type 107.4. He doesn't have images of this particular type (at least in the volumes I'm looking at), but looks like he gives references where you might find them (if they're not too obscure, which they sometimes are).

I don't really read German, so I haven't tried to work out what he says about the context. (This is from his 2009 dissertation, available for free legal download from Uni. Frankfurt at link below.)

The images inserted below are from Teil I and II (there are a bunch more parts/documents).

Ulrich Werz. 2009. Gegenstempel auf Aesprägungen der frühen römischen Kaiserzeit im Rheingebiet : Grundlagen, Systematik, Typologie. Winterthur.
http://publikationen.ub.uni-frankfurt.de/frontdoor/index/index/docId/6876

“Collect the collectors…” John W Adams’ advice to J Orosz (Asylum 38, 2: p51)

Galleries https://www.forumancientcoins.com/gallery/index.php?cat=27154

Offline Pete B

  • Consul
  • ***
  • Posts: 139
Re: Augustus AS RIC 431 with a "King Kong" Type of Countermark 'IM'?
« Reply #2 on: February 18, 2023, 02:11:35 pm »
Curtis JJ: Thank You! #107.4 for sure, probably. I trust the source, and there are no obvious signs that the countermark was applied recently... it's like a "statement" countermark, very well-executed with great margins. I would tend to think, seeing how the letters are spaced, that the "IM" is short for something else besides IMP...
I would like to think it was I(mperator) M(ilitvm), as the coin dates to 7 BCE, about the time of a suggested uprising by Tiberius?

Offline Curtis JJ

  • Caesar
  • ****
  • Posts: 435
    • CONSERVATORI: Ancient Coins & Their Provenances
Re: Augustus AS RIC 431 with a "King Kong" Type of Countermark 'IM'?
« Reply #3 on: February 18, 2023, 03:15:47 pm »
Interesting thought, Pete B! It may also be worth noting that it's struck right in the middle of Augustus's face.

Location varied by specific countermark, but many types had deliberate and strict placement (e.g., some Legionary c-marks were always on the neck, "NCAPR" was almost always in the field behind the head, etc.). It would be interesting to see if other examples of "IM" were also struck right on the face. Are there other types of countermark that appeared on the face of the (previous?) emperor, and what did that mean? (Maybe to proclaim "there's a new sheriff [Emperor] in town"?)
“Collect the collectors…” John W Adams’ advice to J Orosz (Asylum 38, 2: p51)

Galleries https://www.forumancientcoins.com/gallery/index.php?cat=27154

Offline Meepzorp

  • IMPERATOR
  • Caesar
  • *****
  • Posts: 5127
    • Meepzorp's Ancient Coins
Re: Augustus AS RIC 431 with a "King Kong" Type of Countermark 'IM'?
« Reply #4 on: February 18, 2023, 09:45:53 pm »
Hi folks,

I have an AE As of Augustus with a countermark on the reverse. It is similar to the countermark on the reverse of PB's coin, which may not be fully struck up.

Here is my example (last coin):

https://www.forumancientcoins.com/meepzorp/ri_aug_ae_pt04.htm

Meepzorp

Offline Pete B

  • Consul
  • ***
  • Posts: 139
Re: Augustus AS RIC 431 with a "King Kong" Type of Countermark 'IM'?
« Reply #5 on: February 18, 2023, 10:38:18 pm »
Hi Meepzorp; if I had to guess I would guess that it's an "M" on mine, "M(ilitum)"? Plus, there is that cigar-like stamp on the obverse, maybe an "I" for One? As Curtis JJ pointed out, the placement of the large obv. countermark spited Augustus, at a time when just about everyone wanted to be his friend.

Offline Meepzorp

  • IMPERATOR
  • Caesar
  • *****
  • Posts: 5127
    • Meepzorp's Ancient Coins
Re: Augustus AS RIC 431 with a "King Kong" Type of Countermark 'IM'?
« Reply #6 on: February 19, 2023, 03:44:02 am »
Hi PB,

I agree.

I think that the reverse countermarks on both of our coins is the same countermark. The style of the countermark looks the same.

When I first bought my coin, I thought that the countermark was an N. However, when I was building my website, I shot photos of my coin. Under magnification, it looks more like an M.

Also, you commented above about how the IM countermark on the obverse of your coin was applied on the face of Augustus, and it was applied very hard, with tremendous pressure. The M countermark on the reverse of my coin was also applied with great pressure. In fact, it was applied so hard that it caused a huge and long flan crack. The flan crack on my coin extends about 75% of the way through the entire flan. It literally almost split the coin into 2 pieces.

Meepzorp

Offline Pete B

  • Consul
  • ***
  • Posts: 139
Re: Augustus AS RIC 431 with a "King Kong" Type of Countermark 'IM'?
« Reply #7 on: February 19, 2023, 10:03:10 am »
Meepzorp: yeah, I saw that... As Curtis JJ pointed out, countermarking was a deliberate process. I wonder what the 'deliberations' were for pounding on Augustus?

Offline Curtis JJ

  • Caesar
  • ****
  • Posts: 435
    • CONSERVATORI: Ancient Coins & Their Provenances
Re: Augustus AS RIC 431 with a "King Kong" Type of Countermark 'IM'?
« Reply #8 on: February 19, 2023, 10:33:04 am »
Quote from: Meepzorp on February 19, 2023, 03:44:02 am
... applied very hard, with tremendous pressure. The M countermark on the reverse of my coin was also applied with great pressure. ... so hard that it caused a huge and long flan crack ... almost split the coin into 2 pieces.

This won't add to our discussion of the IM c-marks' source or interpretation, but I really like countermark examples that show something interesting about the actual mechanics and practical details of doing the counter-stamping.

Below: Faustina II from Hierapolis-Castabala from my collection. The flan crack on this one isn't quite as long as Meepzorp's, but close! Not in my Forum gallery yet, but here's the ACSearch link with CNG's photo: https://www.acsearch.info/search.html?id=8930729 (It's also on RPC Online 4976 as # 6, but w/ an old b&w SNG photo I think: https://rpc.ashmus.ox.ac.uk/coins/4/4976)

Expandable (click):


Most people would consider the crack to detract heavily -- I'd prefer one without, I suppose, but nonetheless, it's one of the things I find really interesting about the coin. The flan ended up somewhat cupped and, as you can see, Faustina's hairstyle got flattened out pretty well. (Thankfully her funny little crescent hat remained unscathed! Was that a real headdress?)

Most examples have that same countermark (incuse "T") in the exact same spot (just left of Helios' hips). I'm surprised more of them aren't cracked: When you flip the coin face-down as if preparing to strike it with a counterstamp, the portrait is in high enough relief to tilt the coin at a substantial angle (not even close to lying flat). Usually you can actually see where Faustina's hair took the brunt of the force and it ruined her coiffure. (On RPC 4976 [LINK], specimens 5, 6, 13, 15.)

EDIT: Forgot to mention, I think of it as a nice illustration of one big drawback to countermarking the reverse (thus striking opposite the high relief portrait side): You would bend/crack the coin more frequently. (Note that Meepzorp's cracked Augustus was also c-marked on the rev.) So it was probably a better practice to countermark the obverse/high relief side, thus striking against a much more stable & "spread-out" target (there are other reasons too, of course, especially that users probably paid more attention to the portrait; or, perhaps, as a way to deliberately deface the portrait in certain cases).

... countermarking was a deliberate process. I wonder what the 'deliberations' were for pounding on Augustus?

This will be very interesting to answer. I'd imagine the only way to know is to search out as many other comparison examples as possible (either same countermark, or others that focused on Augustus' portrait, or on other Emperors' portraits, such as certain countermarks suggestive of Damnatio Memoriae after Caracalla, Nero [de facto], probably others). Eventually, a larger "sample" and more context could help a lot.
“Collect the collectors…” John W Adams’ advice to J Orosz (Asylum 38, 2: p51)

Galleries https://www.forumancientcoins.com/gallery/index.php?cat=27154

Offline Pete B

  • Consul
  • ***
  • Posts: 139
Re: Augustus AS RIC 431 with a "King Kong" Type of Countermark 'IM'?
« Reply #9 on: February 19, 2023, 12:35:37 pm »
"Along with his adoption, Tiberius received tribunician power as well as a share of Augustus' Maius Imperium, something that even Marcus Agrippa may never have had..." Borrowed from Wiki. I wonder if the "IM" punches are of transposed letters?

Offline Curtis JJ

  • Caesar
  • ****
  • Posts: 435
    • CONSERVATORI: Ancient Coins & Their Provenances
Re: Augustus AS RIC 431 with a "King Kong" Type of Countermark 'IM'?
« Reply #10 on: February 19, 2023, 02:32:58 pm »
I wonder if the "IM" punches are of transposed letters?

Interesting possibility. I noticed Werz categorized "MI" and "IM" as the same type, 107.4 (but he has IM as the primary). At least for Werz's 107.4 type, though, he clearly sees the IM as continuous with other abbreviations of Imperatoris -- IMP and various IMP-ligate / monogram types.

Yours may be completely unrelated to the IM's & MI's documented by Werz, I can't tell. Below are a couple more lines from the same pages (the top line of plates, 107.8, was included in the first snippet I showed)

I made a small error in my first comment -- he did include a couple images of IM, 107.4 in that plate (107.4/1 S1 & S4).

The main difference I see with yours is the size of the incuse rectangle. That's what originally looked so unusual to me. There are long/wide rectangular countermarks, but aren't they usually filled with letters, not empty space? To me, it seems like the lettering is similar to some of the ones illustrated by Werz (not that I know anything about epigraphy), especially some examples of his 107.8 type. (But still they are in smaller incuses.)
“Collect the collectors…” John W Adams’ advice to J Orosz (Asylum 38, 2: p51)

Galleries https://www.forumancientcoins.com/gallery/index.php?cat=27154

Offline Pete B

  • Consul
  • ***
  • Posts: 139
Re: Augustus AS RIC 431 with a "King Kong" Type of Countermark 'IM'?
« Reply #11 on: February 19, 2023, 05:19:41 pm »
Curtis JJ: curiously, I had an example of your Faustina II, with a complete countermark-the top of the "T" (similar to a Cross) broke off during later punching it seems... the IM punch used on my Augustus As was obviously carefully prepared. My search for other examples comes up woefully lacking for results.
 

Offline Joe Sermarini

  • Owner, President
  • FORVM STAFF
  • Caesar
  • *****
  • Posts: 12103
  • All Coins Guaranteed for Eternity.
    • FORVM ANCIENT COINS
Re: Augustus AS RIC 431 with a "King Kong" Type of Countermark 'IM'?
« Reply #12 on: February 19, 2023, 06:13:24 pm »
Quote from: Curtis JJ on February 18, 2023, 01:42:47 pm

Click the images to expand to full-size (I used inline so it doesn't waste server space, but can upload too, sometimes I'm not sure where to draw the line):


Always upload. If they are too large to upload with the board, send them to me and I will upload them.
Joseph Sermarini
Owner, President
FORVM ANCIENT COINS

Offline Curtis JJ

  • Caesar
  • ****
  • Posts: 435
    • CONSERVATORI: Ancient Coins & Their Provenances
Re: Augustus AS RIC 431 with a "King Kong" Type of Countermark 'IM'?
« Reply #13 on: February 19, 2023, 08:38:38 pm »
Always upload. If they are too large to upload with the board, send them to me and I will upload them.

Thanks, Joe, will do!

Curtis JJ: curiously, I had an example of your Faustina II, with a complete countermark-the top of the "T" (similar to a Cross) broke off during later punching it seems...

Pete B, if you mean it was originally shaped like a "+" not a "T" shape, I think something else must be going on. Every example I've seen (quite a few, using more than one die/stamp, across multiple references, Howgego, RPC, etc.), the T is always in the same shape, but not a cross. For quick reference, there are about 5 examples on the RPC 4976 page (https://rpc.ashmus.ox.ac.uk/coins/4/4976) and a few others on RPC's page for Howgego 686 (https://rpc.ashmus.ox.ac.uk/countermark/807) -- all of them have that same "T" shape, even using more than one punch.

Here's a closer zoom on mine, but you can see more large images on the links above. (Another specimen on the 4976 page also cracked the flan similarly -- No. 14 from CGT's collection.)
“Collect the collectors…” John W Adams’ advice to J Orosz (Asylum 38, 2: p51)

Galleries https://www.forumancientcoins.com/gallery/index.php?cat=27154

Offline Pete B

  • Consul
  • ***
  • Posts: 139
Re: Augustus AS RIC 431 with a "King Kong" Type of Countermark 'IM'?
« Reply #14 on: February 19, 2023, 10:19:54 pm »
Maybe this is a little bit clearer... in hand, you can see the break separating the top of the punch from the body of it

Offline Pete B

  • Consul
  • ***
  • Posts: 139
Re: Augustus AS RIC 431 with a "King Kong" Type of Countermark 'IM'?
« Reply #15 on: March 10, 2023, 05:44:45 pm »
I just received the "IM" Augustus coin in the mail; the countermark was punched in with such force that the reverse hills at 3mm. It's a lot fresher than the coin, and the countermark on the reverse is an "M".
Curtis JJ: your Faustina II "T" countermark shows that on the punch something was definitely broken-off at the top, as mine would eventually be

Offline Curtis JJ

  • Caesar
  • ****
  • Posts: 435
    • CONSERVATORI: Ancient Coins & Their Provenances
Re: Augustus AS RIC 431 with a "King Kong" Type of Countermark 'IM'?
« Reply #16 on: March 10, 2023, 11:13:29 pm »
Curtis JJ: your Faustina II "T" countermark shows that on the punch something was definitely broken-off at the top, as mine would eventually be

Pete B: Here's why I find that hard to accept:

There are many known examples of the Howgego 686 countermark (from at least a couple dies). All of them are in the same shape. "T" in incuse. Attached are just the first 6 images I could grab from the RPC (see, e.g., my link above). It's easy enough to find a few dozen more examples in auction archives; they're all the same. It's been published multiple times, always as "T."

Or see here: https://rpc.ashmus.ox.ac.uk/countermark/807

If I understand what you're saying, as far as I can tell, there are no clear examples with a "+" shape, and the clearer the example, the more it looks like a "T."
“Collect the collectors…” John W Adams’ advice to J Orosz (Asylum 38, 2: p51)

Galleries https://www.forumancientcoins.com/gallery/index.php?cat=27154

Offline Pete B

  • Consul
  • ***
  • Posts: 139
Re: Augustus AS RIC 431 with a "King Kong" Type of Countermark 'IM'?
« Reply #17 on: March 11, 2023, 08:53:21 am »
Curtis JJ: That may be... there could be a hundred different punches. It is undeniable, though, that something broke from the top of the punch on your coin, and the top of the punch on mine was in the process of breaking off, at the same place as your example shows

Offline Curtis JJ

  • Caesar
  • ****
  • Posts: 435
    • CONSERVATORI: Ancient Coins & Their Provenances
Re: Augustus AS RIC 431 with a "King Kong" Type of Countermark 'IM'?
« Reply #18 on: March 11, 2023, 02:24:44 pm »
Curtis JJ: That may be... there could be a hundred different punches. It is undeniable, though, that something broke from the top of the punch on your coin

I was trying to be diplomatic. Overall, it’s not an important topic, but if I sound annoyed, it’s because you’re claiming with absolute certainty to be right and that I and others are wrong. And – more importantly – you’re not taking anyone else’s opinion (or the mountain of evidence) at all seriously. Not nearly as seriously as I’ve taken your hypothesis.

It does sometimes happen that all the published sources overlook or get something wrong. So, I took your theory seriously in good faith. But you’re not doing the same – at all. Using emphatic words like “definitely” and “undeniable” doesn’t substitute for evidence. It’s slightly insulting. (And, factually speaking, “undeniable” is wrong.)

Even if we try to be as favorable to your theory as possible, and ignore all the other specimens and context, photos of the two coins you’ve mentioned (i.e., yours & mine) do not convincingly show what you say they show.

My coin’s photo(s): I guess you’re referring to the encrustations in the upper part of the incuse? At best, you might tentatively hypothesize that those aren’t actually encrustations but instead evidence of a broken stamp. But even if you entertain that theory, it doesn't make sense to call it undeniable without having handled the coin (or considering anything else about the context, including all the other specimens struck from the same stamp).

That exact specimen has been photographed and/or published many times over the past 60 years (illustrated in SNG Levante, SNG von Aulock, and Robert Hiérapolis Castabala, reproduced in RPC and elsewhere). It was one of the specimens cited by Howgego (p. 242, type 686). (He used a different coin for the “plate coin,” the BMC specimen & RPC’s “plate coin. Beyond all those authors/references who were writing about this exact coin, many others have said the same thing about other examples of the same type, some from the same stamp/countermark "die".)
https://rpc.ashmus.ox.ac.uk/coins/4/4976
https://rpc.ashmus.ox.ac.uk/countermark/807

Your photos (being as generous as possible): I can’t tell if you’re correct and it’s a crack in the countermark as you say, or a cleaning scratch or excavation ding, a flan defect, or any number of other possibilities. Some of those are more plausible than others, but none definite/undeniable (as long as we’re still ignoring all the context, including other photos of coins struck from that stamp).

If you’ve noticed something new that everyone else missed, I genuinely would like to know. But so far, it just sounds like you “want to believe” so much that you are unwilling to consider what anyone else has said or the evidence that would confirm or disconfirm your belief.
“Collect the collectors…” John W Adams’ advice to J Orosz (Asylum 38, 2: p51)

Galleries https://www.forumancientcoins.com/gallery/index.php?cat=27154

Offline Pete B

  • Consul
  • ***
  • Posts: 139
Re: Augustus AS RIC 431 with a "King Kong" Type of Countermark 'IM'?
« Reply #19 on: March 11, 2023, 06:35:16 pm »
I'm claiming no such thing, and I had mine in my hands. I've had lots of EAC experience with counterstamps and diebreaks. If it walks and quacks like a duck, it's usually a duck that you're looking at. Anyway, mine's sold and the buyer didn't disagree, so Thank You Curtis for your postings on the subject. Very Interesting...

 

All coins are guaranteed for eternity