I was going through a lot of coins that I'd recently won in a CNG auction, and I came across this Diocletian antoninianus: AE antoninianus Ticinum mint, A.D. 294 Obv: IMP C VAL DIOCLETIANVS AVG Rev: IOVI C-O-NSERVAT - Jupiter, standing, head facing right, holding scepter in right hand and thunderbolt in left. XXIT in exergue. 23 mm, 3.8 g. This coin belongs after RIC (Vol. V,ii) 232. There is no officina in the field. Pre-reform coins of Diocletian from Ticinum had XXIT in the exergue, originally preceded by Latin letters denoting officina, then, beginning around 292 A.D. with Greek officina letters in the field. In 294 the officina letters were dropped briefly before the monetary reform. RIC lists this last issue without officinas for several reverse types, but not for this one particular reverse. Is there someplace I should report this? I know about the excellent "Not in RIC" web site, but that begins with RIC vol. VI, after the coinage reform. Is there anyone keeping track of these additions that I should notify?
There is a very interesting thread where you can read about Diocletian here: https://www.cointalk.com/threads/di...utm_campaign=Feed:+cointalk+(CoinTalk+Update))
Nice find. I like that it is both unlisted and an attractive specimen as well. Sorry, but I have no idea who to report such things to.
A very nice looking coin. Sorry, I don't know who keeps track of coins not in RIC except that website.
If itwas Lugdunum then you could submit it for the next Supplement to the Basten series but I am not aware of anything else I am afraid. I did exactly this for the following coin:- Maximianus Antoninianus Obv:– IMP MAXIMIANVS P F AVG, Radiate, draped and cuirassed bust right (seen from front) Rev:– IOVI AVGG, Jupiter standing right holding thunderbolt and spear,eagle at feet. Minted in Lugdunum (//A). Emission 7. Officina 1. Spring A.D. 290 – A.D. 291 Reference(s) – Cohen -. Bastien - (0). RIC V Pt. 2 Lugdunum - Bust Type C. This reverse type not noted in RIC or Bastien for Maximianus Herculius. It is noted in RIC and Bastien for Diocletian (RIC quotes as common, Bastien 300 (1), 301 (1) and 302 (3) would appear to counter this rating)
