Generally when I see something as from Museo Kircheriano (cf. Marchi catalogue), I assume it ended up in the Museo Nazionale in Rome but we also know some stuff was dispersed. New to me today is that much of the material I find so fascinating from this collection seems to have sold in 1914 in the Hirsch Sale.

Secondina Lorenza Cesano in AMIIN 2, Roma 1915 pp. 49-180

G. is an abbreviation for Garrucci.

link to plate

Notice how the damage at the top of the reverse is very similar. The same specimen was also known to Marchi in 1839.

I should have realized it when I’d blogged about this same auction here. At least I leave myself footprints to follow back. Here’s where I was first reading Garrucci I didn’t notice it was the same specimen as he only had a terrible drawing. So file this post under bull prow Praeneste,

All Dies Exemplar will need to be cross checked with Garrucci, but even some where it does not say this or give other provenience hint Kirchner may be the original source:

This look like the bad drawing in Marchi. Notice the flattened top and bottom. Interestingly this type was apparently unknown in 1767 to Passeri.

Earlier posts on Ariminum aes grave.

BUT

For the record this might be nonsense or it might be old news, but to me today it was an interesting distraction.

I got here because I’m thinking about RRC 25/1, so I was worrying about the origins of this specimen

sold in 2001

Here’s Garrucci:

Notice in the drawing (however simple) that the flaws near the bottom sprue and void above Janus head are still obvious. The drawing appears better than one might expect.

This is Marchi’s illustration of the same coin from 1839. It marks the tell tale void above Mercury’s head and the unique shape of the wing on the helmet. Also on the Janus side the nick at the top and then the cut on the right side of inner rim also match. Although Marchi’s catalogue is officially of specimens from the Kircher collection, we know that some of the specimens he illustrates were later found in other museums, cf. the Ariminum coin discussed above and also from that same series the whole unit, known to Garrucci to be in Pesaro and also found there and documented by cast and photography by Haeberlin, and already known in 1767 in the collection of Passerii.

The coin was ostensibly still in Rome when Haeberlin says he saw it, BUT his cast doesn’t look anything like Garrucci’s plate, it is clearly a different specimen. He says the one he saw was from Sabina like Garrucci’s. What happened?!!

Update 4.7.26 (thanks to Jeremy Haag):

I have an article on uncia in the late republic in the works but this led to my interest in the semuncia. There are blog posts on this from back in 2021 (but updated more recently with new material). And, then again more recently from my dive into the Vicarello material for a Lucerian specimen where I independently came to the same conclusions about a Crawford type as McCabe (his work is also forthcoming).

As I was thinking about putting the final touches on that article, I was checking for potential new material and the above Lucerian specimen came up in my searches (HNItaly 683). There is one in Paris, none in the BM or ANS, 7 have appeared since 2006 in trade).

The type is closely derived from the earlier cast semunciae for the same mint (HNItaly 675 and 677f):

The crescent provides continuity in the shift from cast to struck during the course of the second punic war. Moreover, the crescent helps to explain the selection of Diana for the obverse of struck materials.

Does it also explain why Diana appears on some struck semuncia of the Roman republic? We have two specimens of RRC 160/5 which are our earliest Roman Diana on the semuncia thus far. In fact the first Diana on any Roman coin known to date.

Crawford dates this issue to c. 179-170 BCE.

Diana is then ‘revived’ on some of the semuncia of the last decade of the 2nd century BCE (see earlier post).

I thought I’d written about this Durmius type, but apparently I haven’t. I was thinking about a possible butterfly on the Fabatus control marks and say this coin again.

Compare this control mark on RRC 408/1:

Instead of a crab we have a scorpion holding the butterfly. Both the Crab and Scorpion are zodiac signs (Cancer, Scorpio) and butterfly represents the soul. This strikes me as key to understanding the symbolism.

---

17 March 2026: As I think in future more about crabs and scorpions, I wanted to keep a note of the 3rd Century BCE Scarab intaglio from Italy:

This is a screenshot of some coins from Velia in the Oppido Lucano hoard (most famous for having a specimen of RRC 13/1 in it).

My eye stuck on those incuse squares behind the head of Athena. They look so much like counter marks, but they are not! Here’s the catalogue entry. This is HN 1318.

This space behind the neck of Athena but inside the curve of the plume of the helmet is just where Velia places secondary symbols. Presumably correlated to the issuer or issuing of the coins.

Here’s an image of a Paris specimen to let you see the incuse better:

Velia did in the early days of its coin issue strike series with incuse punch reverses, but that doesn’t seem to be the inspiration for this unusual secondary symbol.

The shear complexity of the Velia issues and their symbols have kept numismatists happily and busily obsessed over the years. Rutter in Historia Numorum Italy is usually v v terse, but he lets Velia stretch to 6 pages resorting to a chart at one point.

One more just for fun. This is HN 1308.

Some where in the basement of Palazzo Massimo lurks this coin seen by Bahrfeldt and illustrated by Garrucci. It comes from Vicarello hence my present interest.

The under type is said to be HN Italy 680, Luceria:

The problem is that right now this Lucerian coin is dated to c. 217-211 BCE way too late to be an undertype for RRC 16.

So what is going on?!

1. Lucerian coin is earlier that previously thought (RRC 16 is firmly dated)
2. Identification of under type is wrong.
3. Some other scenario?!

If I ever get into see coins in this collection this is now top of my list for personal inspection….

Bahrfeldt

From the catalogue at the end of:

Ercolani Cocchi, Emanuela, Anna Lina Morelli, and Diana Neri. Romanizzazione E Moneta: La Testimonianza Dei Rinvenimenti Dall’Emilia Romagna. Firenze: All’insegna del giglio, 2004.

I’m struck not only by these two coins appearing in the same excavation. Were they found together?! But also by their similarity in size.

Ariminum is a Roman foundation of 268 BCE. According to another publication (below), there is also said to have been found in Rimini an RRC 18/1 and also in their collection RRC 18/4 and 18/5, suggesting they were also found in the area.

I’d be very inclined to invoke this as evidence to down date RRC 18 to after 268 BCE. I’d do that any way but this helps solidify my thinking.

in the 2007 publication

While looking for more near contemporary accounts of the Vicarello findings I learned about Lago degli Idoli located in the shadow of Mount Falterona, east of Florence and west of Rimini. The wikipedia page is fairly decent as things go so I won’t re iterate the content there.

The focus of this testimony is the presence in the votive deposit of aes rude. The 1838 reports says aes rude ranged from 2 ounces to 2 pounds in size and amounted to 300 pounds in total!

The type of other votive bronzes are all described in the report. Many figurines but also many anatomical pieces, esp. limbs. Zero mention of coins.

The 1842 report is more tantilizing with its reference to rectangular monetary pieces described as aes grave among the aes rude.

Still in 2005 aes rude was appearing in excavations as the site:

Fedeli, Luca. “Stia (AR): lago degli Idoli: campagna di scavo 2005.” Stia (AR): lago degli Idoli: campagna di scavo 2005 (2005): 164-167.

But more interesting is the three pieces of what is called aes signatum and the 20 coins:

I can’t find any other details and that frustrates me…

Chiarantini, Laura, Marco Benvenuti, M. Tognelli, F. Lurci, and Pilario Costagliola. “Indagine archeometrica di manufatti metallici provenienti dal Lago degli Idoli (AR).” In Atti della Giornata di studio” Gli scavi e le indagini ambientali nel sito archeologico del Lago degli Idoli”, pp. 97-103. Comunità Montana del Casentino, 2007. [ILL ordered]

Benvenuti, Marco, Laura Chiarantini, Pilario Costagliola, A. Dini, I. Giunti, Lorenzo Giuntini, and Mirko Massi. “An investigation of unworked lumps of Cu-based materials (“Aes Rude”?) from two Etruscan sites.” In Proceedings of the 2nd International Conference” Archaeometallurgy in Europe”, vol. 2, pp. 0-0. Associazione Italiana di Metallurgia, 2007. [ILL ordered ; abstract]

---

BM holdings of artifacts from this votive deposit

Louvre holdings

Nuceria Alfaterna HN Italy 608.

Sometimes identified as the river god Sarnus or Apollo Carneius. The legend is just the city name in Oscan.

From Berlin 1888 catalogue

The horns briefly called to mind RRC 39/1, but I don’t think there is any real parallel.

Luceria HN Italy 668

From the Sambon 1925 sales catalogue:

Why were the workmen dividing? A case of the judgement of Solomon? And how were they dividing that the cut is even on both sides? Some sort of chopper? Or is the story all a fantasy to give the ugly coin a origin story and thus make it more ‘collectable’?

Whelp. I now feel I have something to say about the Vicarello find that probably should be PRed, so we’ll have to have some stuff for the bibliography of that article. Not to mention reading it all to make sure I’m not intending on saying something in print that is too foolish. I’ll add to this post as I find more.

On the coins

Marchi 1852, …Acque Apollinari… (fully transcribed also on wikisource)

Haberlin’s notes are invaluable as he reports where some vicarello coins ended up, where Garucci and Marchi conflict in their testimony.

Taylor, Rabun. “Wheels, Keels, and Coins: Aquae Apollinares (Vicarello, Lazio) and Patterns of Pilgrimage in 3rd-Century Italy.” Ancient Waterlands, 2019, 225–44. doi:10.4000/BOOKS.PUP.40645. (academia) VERY USEFUL. VERY WELL ILLUSTRATED.

Falkenstein-Wirth Vera von. 2011. Das Quellheiligtum Von Vicarello (Aquae Apollinares) : Ein Kultort Von Der Bronzezeit Bis Zum Ende Des Kaiserreichs. Darmstadt: Verlag Philipp von Zabern. [coin chapter requested via ILL]

Colini, A. M. “La stipe delle acque salutari di Vicarello.” Rendiconti della Pontifica Accademia Romana dr’Arcbeo1ogia 60 (1968): 35-56. [Discussed in past blog post; on file.]

Tocci, L. M. 1967-1968. “Monete della stipe di Vicarello nel Medagliere Vaticano.”Atti della Pontificia Accademia Romana di archeologia40: 75-81.(PDF on file)

Francesco Panvini Rosati (on file in collected works)

Important for details of signed issues! Also of Italic coins, esp. Etruscan. give not only reported count but also number actually in collection. Here’s taste. V interesting that Marchi failed to record Semuncia and Quartuncia of Prow series.

There is a fanciful reconstruction on display in Palazzo Massimo (or was, gallery has been closed for a long time) to give a sense of scale and possible stratigraphy (the actual stratigraphy summarized but not actually documented).

More general bibliography

I’m not listing the cup/itinerary bibliography it is just too long and too unrelated.

Hodges, Richard. “The archaeology of the Vicarello Estate, Lake Bracciano.” Papers of the British School at Rome 63 (1995): 245-249. (Jstor). Survey of previous work and holistic approach to the site, but short.

Falkenstein-Wirth 2011 above

---

The BM has 4 coins from this votive deposit and one vase; the purchases were made through Rollin & Feuardent, Sambon

Historia Nummorum Italy 363, second specimen (YET! The Herzen catalogue says only one was found at Vicarello) –

Historia Nummorum Italy 357 (Yet another is listed in Sambon sale 1870 also from Vicarello. But only one is listed by Marchi as found and the BM specimen was sold to them by Sambon in 1870 — I hope no duplication occurred)

RRC 37/1c (Haeberlin illustrates other RRC 37 specimens found at Vicarello)

Again we must ask the question how many Roma/Bull (RRC 37s) were really found at Vicarello. Here is Sambon selling two more with that attribution in 1870. Even after he sold one with this attribution to the BM in 1867. Marchi says 5: 3 cadeuceus, 2 Ls.

BERLIN has 24 pieces of aes rude!

Vecchi 309 = HN Italy 387 (not in Marchi’s find list?!?!)

Most tantalizing:

“uncertain object evenly thick, rounded at the ends, crescent-shaped; roughly like a kidney or bean.”

Here is Garrucci‘s illustration

I wonder if this might be Vecchi 350 = HN Italy 677f?

---

Noe 1925 says that the best of the Vicarello finds were acquired by the Pontificium Collegium Germanicum et Hungaricum de Urbe. I wonder if they still hold them or deposited them with the Vatican? The college has its own library so it is not beyond possibility that they have them still.

Balbi di Caro 1993: 31

---

Barhfeldt asked the Italian Numismatics community a series of questions in RIN 1888. one of which was WHAT happened to the Vicarello coins?!

Pigorini director of the Kircher Museum answered in the same publication:

In short he says the Jesuits left not a clue about the what they might have done with the coins either what they chose to keep or what the disposed of in some other way. No papers let alone a catalogue or inventory.