Classical Numismatics Discussion
  Welcome Guest. Please login or register. All Items Purchased From Forum Ancient Coins Are Guaranteed Authentic For Eternity!!! 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. Internet challenged? We Are Happy To Take Your Order Over The Phone 252-646-1958 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: Deified Victorinus mule orthographic error  (Read 756 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline mauseus

  • Procurator Caesaris
  • Caesar
  • ****
  • Posts: 3088
  • Ah Allectus, my trusted friend.......
    • Later Roman Coinage
Deified Victorinus mule orthographic error
« on: August 19, 2014, 03:53:17 pm »
Hi,

I acquired this coin in June but only now when I've taken a photograph have I noticed the orthographic error.

On the face of it this is an example of the deified coinage of Victorinus that "mules" with one of his last lifetime reverses. When I looked at the photo about to type a description for my Victorinus gallery did I notice that the reverse read PROVIENTIA AVG instead of PROVIDENTIA AVG. A curiosity that I've not seen reported for the type before, RIC 88 var, AGK 2a var.

Regards,

Mauseus

Offline curtislclay

  • Tribunus Plebis Perpetuus
  • Procurator Monetae
  • Caesar
  • *****
  • Posts: 11155
Re: Deified Victorinus mule orthographic error
« Reply #1 on: August 19, 2014, 05:26:00 pm »
Nice combination of rare coin, muled rev. type, legend error, and fine condition!

Now if the flan had only been a little larger and rounder...!
Curtis Clay

Offline SC

  • Tribunus Plebis Perpetuus
  • Procurator Monetae
  • Caesar
  • *****
  • Posts: 6068
    • A Handbook of Late Roman Bronze Coin Types 324-395.
Re: Deified Victorinus mule orthographic error
« Reply #2 on: August 22, 2014, 12:48:23 pm »
Not just that.  Isn't the reverse overstruck on an incuse.

I swear I can see the outline of his profile, including beard and tip of first radiate, facing left under Providentia (or in this case Provientia).

Shawn
SC
(Shawn Caza, Ottawa)

Offline curtislclay

  • Tribunus Plebis Perpetuus
  • Procurator Monetae
  • Caesar
  • *****
  • Posts: 11155
Re: Deified Victorinus mule orthographic error
« Reply #3 on: August 22, 2014, 12:59:43 pm »
Right, from die-clashing, a common phenomenon!
Curtis Clay

Offline SC

  • Tribunus Plebis Perpetuus
  • Procurator Monetae
  • Caesar
  • *****
  • Posts: 6068
    • A Handbook of Late Roman Bronze Coin Types 324-395.
Re: Deified Victorinus mule orthographic error
« Reply #4 on: August 23, 2014, 07:17:36 am »
So rare coin, muled reverse type, die clash, legend error and fine condition.

You could use this coin alone to do a great lecture on ancient coinage.

Great piece.

Shawn
SC
(Shawn Caza, Ottawa)

Offline Tibsi

  • Caesar
  • ****
  • Posts: 567
    • http://www.forumancientcoins.com/gallery/index.php?cat=11846
Re: Deified Victorinus mule orthographic error
« Reply #5 on: August 25, 2014, 02:58:39 am »
Great stuff! Please report it to my topic too:
https://www.forumancientcoins.com/board/index.php?topic=64853.225

Offline dougsmit

  • Tribunus Plebis Perpetuus
  • Procurator Monetae
  • Caesar
  • *****
  • Posts: 2126
    • Ancient Greek & Roman Coins
Re: Deified Victorinus mule orthographic error
« Reply #6 on: August 25, 2014, 07:19:43 am »
If you pay attention to enough less than perfect coins, it becomes obvious that there are more die clashes from certain rulers or periods than others.  Probably the leader in this category is Claudius II but Victorinus has his share.  I assume (a dangerous thing to do) that clashes would be a sign of mint workers pressured to turn out more coins than reasonable with given resources.  There are die clashes on rare coins but we see more on those issued by the millions.  Is there another explanation for some having more clashes?  Possibly, clashes happened equally frequently in other periods but the mint officials retired clashed dies while Claudius II did not see the need to exert any quality control.  Might clashes be more likely to happen with some change in the striking routine (e.g. alternating reverse dies on one obverse) or type of die (e.g. hinged)?

We are told that clashes are the result of dies struck together with no flan between them.  I wonder if the use of hinged dies and thin flans might transfer enough stress on overused dies to show die damage ghosting without an actual clash.  If there is a difference, clashed dies are more likely to be seen on older, worn dies since the clash can occur after the die has been in use for a while.  We have coins that show the same die before and after the clash.  I went out on a limb and wrote a page saying that I did not believe in coins overstruck on an incuse (brockage) but had to eat those words when I saw one.  We should never fall into the trap of saying 'always' and 'never' but it is certainly true that overstriking probably accounts for less than one in a million of the coins showing this ghosting.  I would love to see someone do a  study of the clash situation on a large hoard of Claudius II coins just to see if a pattern turns up but finding two coins from the same dies is hard enough without asking for a series of die states that would allow ruling out progressive rather than one time damage. 

Does anyone know of a coin which shows reverse clash damage from two separate clash incidents?  I have a coin with double clash incuses but that is from the coin being double struck rather than the die having double clashes. 

Those new to the subject of clashed dies are invited to visit my page where coins mentioned above (and others) are shown. 
https://www.forumancientcoins.com/dougsmith/brock.html

 

All coins are guaranteed for eternity