Understated rarities are my favorite coins, perhaps because discovering uncommon issues in otherwise mundane series is such a great reward for my compulsive attraction towards late romans. This coin at first glance is as common as 320s Ticinum votives get. But at a closer look: CRISPUS AE3 19mm 2.93g Follis/Nummus (VF, fully silvered) AV: CRISPVS NOB CAES; laureate, cuirassed, spear pointing forwards, shield on left arm bust l. REV: DOMINOR·NOSTROR·CAESS; VOT / · / X / crescent inside wreath. EXE: ST, Ticinum mint. REF: RIC VII Ticinum 171, rated R4 (rare) 322-325AD. The bust type is, I think, very rare for this series, besides this one, I have only seen 2 others. Also of interest here is the nice, uniform silvering which has toned almost like a silver rather than silvered coin.
Nice. I have a sister coin from Thessalonica w/o silvering, but I don't know the rarity of the issue: CRISPUS AE3 OBVERSE: FL IVL CRISPVS NOB CAES, laureate, draped & cuirassed bust left REVERSE: CAESARVM NOSTRORVM around VOT X within wreath, TS-Delta-VI in ex. Struck at Thessalonica 324 AD 2.5g, 17mm RIC 125
Cool examples guys!! My sole example is of the more common type and mint---photographed in hand due to the stormy weather and light issues at the moment.. actually, it's a 'monsoon' outside LOL
If not for that particular bust type - Crispus holding shield and spear pointing forward, which is rather common for VIRTVS EXERCIT type but very rare for VOT inside wreath type - the R4 rarity would've been close to meaningless considering the availability of the type. This is one of those rare cases in RIC VI - IX when stated rarity is close to real-life 2015 rarity
Nice Crispus! A friend of mine wrote an article (in spanish, english abstract only) reporting a Crispus with a reverse usually atributed to Constantine I: http://revista-hecate.org/files/7014/1805/7108/Blanco1.pdf I found it very interesting and intriguing at the same time.
I must say it was an interesting read and a very thorough analysis. Although inconclusive (not really a surprise since these hybrid types are notoriously difficult to categorize being either irregular but from official dies or really well-done barbaric imitations) it sets a high standard for numismatic articles. Congratulations! The OP coin though is clearly an official issue and has been known to Sutherland when editing RIC VII, considered a distinct type and assigned its own number.
This one was struck in Arles and is rated R4 as well. It has Mars on the reverse. Listed Ric VII- 163. Hope it's still R4.
Rarity can be defined as in RIC where minor details combined irregularly produce rare numbers but fancy busts are not rare for Crispus overall. When I think of rare coins I think of things that are recognizably different without relying on mistaken combinations of dies. This style may be rare for Ticinum but not for Crispus. Specialists love such things but I have discovered that my Severan rarities bore people here (general collectors for the most part) severely.
What makes the OP coin rare is not just the bust type - as I said that bust type is very common with VIRTVS EXERCIT reverse, but rather the pairing of that bust with the VOT in wreath type. Even if the pairing was a mistake that might have happened by accident - although apparently it was a repeated mistake - there are now 5 instead of 3 as I last counted in early in 2014: http://www.forumancientcoins.com/gallery/displayimage.php?album=search&cat=0&pos=10 http://www.forumancientcoins.com/gallery/displayimage.php?album=search&cat=0&pos=14 http://www.forumancientcoins.com/gallery/displayimage.php?album=search&cat=0&pos=20 http://www.vcoins.com/en/stores/lon...6_ad__follis_ticinum_mint/441275/Default.aspx
A relevant article about rarity was posted today on NGC's website, authored by David Vagi. http://www.ngccoin.com/news/viewarticle.aspx?IDArticle=4773&ancient-coins It's a pleasant and concise article but nothing that hasn't been said here and on other forums, repeatedly.
Great find, Seth. I share your love of cherry-picking LRB's. Here is one of my recent finds, a rare type for Constantine II, more common for Crispus. Although the coin is a regular issue, the reverse legend break is not recorded in RIC... Constantine II AE Reduced follis, 18mm, 3.1g, London mint: 318 AD. Obv.: FL CL CONSTANTINVS IVN NC; Bust laureate, draped cuirassed, seen from back. Rev.: PRINCIPIA I-VVENTVTIS; Prince in military dress, standing right, cloak spread, leaning on reversed vertical spear, hand resting on shield; crescent // PLN. Reference: cf. RIC VII London 136. R4. (The RIC coin has legend break PRINCIPIA IV-VENTVTIS.)
No, rarity does not necessarily mean a higher price, what it objectively means is less specs known. While price is subjective, rarity (or at least recorded and published rarity) is objective: we objectively know that at a particular time, in known public and private collections there are X coins of a particular feature of a particular issue. And beyond those known from published sources, there are the ones collectors note from public sales or small private collections that were not recorded by the regular references. That's what I actually mean with understated rarity - the fact that despite it's obvious rarity to a specialist, a coin like the one in OP could easily fly beneath the radar for the equivalent of a Happy Meal
Precisely. I won't pay a premium for such "minor rarities" if you will. Dealers who bother looking up their coins see R4 and translate it as at least $100. The coin I posted was mixed in with a group of otherwise common types, all for $20 apiece - a little more than a Happy Meal, but nothing onerous.
Dealers approach coin-collecting as a business rather than as means to gain knowledge and fun/excitement. Also as a dealer you really don't have that much time to compulsively search for varieties of otherwise common LRB types, although some varieties might bring a - mostly small - premium. For instance there's a difference between RIC-recorded rarity based on officina and based on bust type. Statistically speaking a bust type that's uncommon for a particular issue will command more of a premium than an otherwise rare officina of an otherwise mundane issue for the type.
Great new Crispus addition, seth ... oh, and thanks for the coin-link info as well I only have one crisp Crispus to add to your thread ... Crispus AE3 Date: 320 AD Siscia mint Diameter: 19.4 mm Weight: 3.2 grams Obverse: IVL CRISPVS NOB C - Laureate and cuirassed bust of Crispus, holding spear and shield Reverse: VIRTVS EXERCIT - Two captives at base of Vexillum inscribed VOT X; S / F / HL at sides. ASIS* in exergue
Before I clean this coin and soak it in distilled water, I've decided to post it on this thread hoping it would fit. It's a follis of Crispus struck in Rome, with VOT X on reverse. RIC VII - 240
Wow! I would be interested in your post of the "AFTER" shot so that it can be compared - Before-After!
