Denarius; Crawford 443/1 var!
MINT MOVING WITH CAESAR in Northern Italy: 01, 49BCE. Elephant (right). NO SERPENT. From 833 obverse dies, there is only 1 obverse die like this and it was likely not made for distribution anyway (see the first “NOTE” below). “CAESAR” in exergue. 4 emblems on reverse (though some, including Crawford, say the elephant is the rev. side, and Crawford calls the serpent a dragon, but in our descriptions we will call it a serpent, and refer to the elephant side as the obverse). BMC (British Museum Catalog) Gaul 27. Kestner 3516 (all for the usual issue with the serpent). The first silver Caesar and the first to bear his name. This is the most common Caesar denarius in its usual state, but this variety of it is the rarest “recorded” variant among all the Caesar military issues (for the rarest “unrecorded” major variant see our number *[7var.] Cr.458 var. with Caesar’s name misspelled). Crawford never saw this type and it’s not mentioned in the British Museum catalog or anywhere else before 1990, verifying its rarity. It was also unknown to Sear until 1991, but in his updated and revised bibliography (The History and Coinage of the Roman Imperators 49–27 BC, 1998), he lists it on page 9 and pictures one on page 8 (from the same die as ours, easily identified by an abstract bird (?) flying near the rim at 12:30), that coin sold at Numismatic Fine Arts, Auction XXVII, Dec. 5, 1991, lot 602, and was the second example, after ours, known at the time. I don’t know who bought the Numismatic Fine Arts coin that Sear pictured (our brother in arms) or where it is located now, but the one we have is the original “discovery coin” sold first at Numismatica Ars Classica, Zurich, their auction number 2, lot 467, in 1990, where it was properly cataloged as a unique discovery. The condition they graded it was FDC (fleur de coin), the highest of all ancient coin grades. Numismatica Ars Classica got the coin back in 1999 (auction 15, lot 181), but by then they were not a small auction house with numismatists cataloging the coins, but an auction luminary with the numismatists on the Board of Directors and the cataloging left to graduate students. So it was miscataloged by them as the usual state with the serpent, and that’s why we missed it then (failed to notice it), though we should have been sharper. Nonetheless, here it is, the original, one of only 2 known in the world (so far). The obverse is 15% off center but it’s all there and extremely fine, about as struck with eye–catching orange/red toning. 18.3 mm. 3.79 grams. Item #353
A theory, flowing from the query, how did this coin happen? The lukewarm answer is, engraver’s error (the diemaker just forgot), and this has all the hallmarks of Occam’s Razor. But I put myself in the engraver’s shoes (sandals) and consider that to cut such an obverse die takes time, and this particular obverse is skillfully detailed with much artistry. To just assume that for the time (hours) it took to cut it, the diemaker never noticed that an aspect as prominent as the serpent (snake, dragon) was missing seems a leap beyond rational to me. Further, since the die is the intaglio of the coin’s obverse, it could have been incised in the die at any time its absence was noticed, even after some coins had been struck, but this exact obverse die is not recorded with the serpent added. So what is another explanation? Well, here’s one: Perhaps the elephant and Caesar’s name were the 2 given features on the obverse, and the 4 priestly elements were the given features of the reverse, as directed by Caesar. I mean, it would have been enough. The idea of the elephant trampling (or engaging) a serpent, might well have occurred as a possibility at the same time, but how would it look? Certainly the chosen (finished, or usual) design does not convey the message perfectly (frankly the 2 animals look as much like they are having a conversation as anything else). So in this conjecture, Caesar said, “make me 2 sample coins, with and without the serpent” and both designs were done intentionally and presented to him. And despite the “trampling” (a word that doesn’t trace to antiquity but rather to 18th or 19th century numismatics) not being clear in the image, Caesar liked it better (it may well be that in Caesar’s mind the elephant was “confronting” not “trampling” the serpent). So, in this scenario, our coin was a “trial” state, and thus one of the very first minted. One could imagine other explanations for our coin’s intentional existence, or its accidental existence, but you get my drift. As the first denarius struck by Julius Caesar, Crawford 443/1 will always be one of the most important coins from antiquity. Its arresting design, and “cross the Rubicon” significance, has made it the most popular ancient coin in the world beyond the numismatic community, and it is this popularity that has driven its price (in its usual state) to heights that skew rarity because other coins from the same vintage that are 20 times scarcer are half its average price. Beyond its average price (say $2,500 for an extremely fine one in 2017), one in the usual state, with the serpent, brought $11,000 hammer at Hess Divo, Switzerland, in 2015, but that’s a record price that makes my brain throw up. It is startling to think about the math. At say, $2,500 for the regular die state (what nice ones bring at auction regularly), this one is 832 times as rare (833 obverse dies). By multiplication ($2,500 X 832) this coin would be 2 million dollars. Of course, in the current ancient coin market, value is not estimated in this way, but it is gauged that way in other collectible disciplines, so it is not beyond reason to speculate that it might be calculated that way someday. I hope we live to see it. In any case, to have stumbled upon this famous abnormality is just dumb luck (accident, fluke, windfall) and yet, we have it and that is quite an accomplishment, and its position, as the sexiest variant, and maybe among the first struck, of the lead number in this catalog, is just a fantastic opening statement about the superiority of the collection (we have it, you don’t, we are great, you are not, na na na na).
Price:
$0.00