The New York Sale
Auction LI 12 Jan 2021
View prices realized
► Sale information
Find similar lots
Augustus. Silver Denarius (3.72 g), 27 BC-AD 14. Uncertain mint, ca. 17 BC. CA-ES-AR, bare head of Gaius Caesar (or Augustus?) right within oak wreath. Reverse: AVG-VST across field, candelabrum ornamented with rams' heads; all within a floral wreath entwined with two bucrania and three paterae. RIC 540; BN 1013-6; BMC 684-5; RSC 2. Struck in high relief. Untoned. Nearly Extremely Fine. Estimated Value $1,500
This coin represents one of the more enigmatic issues of Augustus' long reign as emperor. Sutherland in RIC I attributes the issue to an uncertain mint and dates it to 17 BC, noting that it was in celebration of the ludes Saeculares held that year. The youthful portrait on the obverse is uncertain and could be either a "rejuvenated" portrait of Augustus (Mattingly, RIC I, 1st ed.) or a portrait of the young heir, Gaius Caesar, the eldest son of Augustus' lieutenant M. Vipsanius Agrippa and Julia the Elder, whom Augustus adopted that year along with his younger brother, Lucius. The first interpretation rests on the oak-wreath surrounding the portrait, identifying it as the corona civica aurea which in 28 BC was awarded by a grateful Roman Senate to Augustus for having ended the long period of civil wars, and accordingly positively identifies the portrait as being that of Augustus. However, no convincing argument explains why his portrait would be rejuvenated. R. Prideaux recently put forth the idea that the issue was struck at a special military mint operating in Pannonia in 12 BC to appease Agrippa's troops after his untimely death while on campaign in Pannonia in that year, and that the portrait was engraved by someone unfamiliar with the emperor's likeness (see the commentary to Triton XI, 829). This argument fails on two counts: firstly, an engraver with the legions in Pannonia would most certainly be familiar with the portrait of Augustus as the troops were paid in denarii transported from the main imperial mints, and secondly, legions would not simply begin striking coins on their own initiative because to do so would be a treasonous usurpation of an imperial prerogative.Although not addressed in the Triton commentary, Prideaux also mentions the funereal importance of the candelabrum on the reverse. Rams' heads are fairly common adornments on Julio-Claudian funerary altars (see, e.g., P. Zanker, The Power of Images in the Age of Augustus p. 280 for a Roman funerary altar of the Claudian period that features the garland, candelabra and rams' heads), and an aromatic garland was a staple of Roman funerary rites for obvious reasons. Otherwise the association of the candelabrum with the ludes Saeculares (which is the traditional interpretation of the type) is not readily apparent. Seemingly only a death of significance to the succession would manifest itself on coinage, and the death of Agrippa in 12 BC was one such death as he was not only Augustus' closest friend and confidant but his chosen successor. It is recorded that the emperor mourned his passing for a full month and even had Agrippa's remains interred in his own mausoleum despite Agrippa having constructed a mausoleum of his own. In light of the funerary nature of the reverse of this coin, and also the fact that nothing specifically ties it to the ludes Saeculares of 17 BC other than the tenuous link of the candelabrum reverse, could it be that the portrait in the obverse is in fact young Gaius Caesar and that it was struck in 12 BC to commemorate both Agrippa's death and Gaius' newfound role as Augustus' direct heir? The framing corona civica would quite nicely associate the youth with the imperium of the principate in this instance and should not necessarily be interpreted as a prerogative solely of the emperor. It also serves as an artistic function as a balance to the floral border enclosing the candelabrum on the reverse. Furthermore, as David Sear notes in the millennial edition of Roman Coins and Their Values, the combination of the youthful portrait along with the title CAESAR simply and clearly suggests the young heir, while its placement in the place of precedence on the obverse further serves to highlight his status.
Ex Goldberg 55 (29 October 2009), 129.
This coin represents one of the more enigmatic issues of Augustus' long reign as emperor. Sutherland in RIC I attributes the issue to an uncertain mint and dates it to 17 BC, noting that it was in celebration of the ludes Saeculares held that year. The youthful portrait on the obverse is uncertain and could be either a "rejuvenated" portrait of Augustus (Mattingly, RIC I, 1st ed.) or a portrait of the young heir, Gaius Caesar, the eldest son of Augustus' lieutenant M. Vipsanius Agrippa and Julia the Elder, whom Augustus adopted that year along with his younger brother, Lucius. The first interpretation rests on the oak-wreath surrounding the portrait, identifying it as the corona civica aurea which in 28 BC was awarded by a grateful Roman Senate to Augustus for having ended the long period of civil wars, and accordingly positively identifies the portrait as being that of Augustus. However, no convincing argument explains why his portrait would be rejuvenated. R. Prideaux recently put forth the idea that the issue was struck at a special military mint operating in Pannonia in 12 BC to appease Agrippa's troops after his untimely death while on campaign in Pannonia in that year, and that the portrait was engraved by someone unfamiliar with the emperor's likeness (see the commentary to Triton XI, 829). This argument fails on two counts: firstly, an engraver with the legions in Pannonia would most certainly be familiar with the portrait of Augustus as the troops were paid in denarii transported from the main imperial mints, and secondly, legions would not simply begin striking coins on their own initiative because to do so would be a treasonous usurpation of an imperial prerogative.Although not addressed in the Triton commentary, Prideaux also mentions the funereal importance of the candelabrum on the reverse. Rams' heads are fairly common adornments on Julio-Claudian funerary altars (see, e.g., P. Zanker, The Power of Images in the Age of Augustus p. 280 for a Roman funerary altar of the Claudian period that features the garland, candelabra and rams' heads), and an aromatic garland was a staple of Roman funerary rites for obvious reasons. Otherwise the association of the candelabrum with the ludes Saeculares (which is the traditional interpretation of the type) is not readily apparent. Seemingly only a death of significance to the succession would manifest itself on coinage, and the death of Agrippa in 12 BC was one such death as he was not only Augustus' closest friend and confidant but his chosen successor. It is recorded that the emperor mourned his passing for a full month and even had Agrippa's remains interred in his own mausoleum despite Agrippa having constructed a mausoleum of his own. In light of the funerary nature of the reverse of this coin, and also the fact that nothing specifically ties it to the ludes Saeculares of 17 BC other than the tenuous link of the candelabrum reverse, could it be that the portrait in the obverse is in fact young Gaius Caesar and that it was struck in 12 BC to commemorate both Agrippa's death and Gaius' newfound role as Augustus' direct heir? The framing corona civica would quite nicely associate the youth with the imperium of the principate in this instance and should not necessarily be interpreted as a prerogative solely of the emperor. It also serves as an artistic function as a balance to the floral border enclosing the candelabrum on the reverse. Furthermore, as David Sear notes in the millennial edition of Roman Coins and Their Values, the combination of the youthful portrait along with the title CAESAR simply and clearly suggests the young heir, while its placement in the place of precedence on the obverse further serves to highlight his status.
Ex Goldberg 55 (29 October 2009), 129.