Ok, I know the photograph isn't great, but it's the best I could do and I'm working on it. It's progressed from Simon Cowell level horrendous to simply mediocre. The mintmark is Trier, but I posted for ID because of the style and flan, especially the obverse style. The flan is VERY thin. I don't have a coin scale, one of the things I've skimped on. Can someone recommend one? Do you think it's an imitative and does anyone have an RIC number? Purchased at the local coin shop, c. 1995. I suspected Jon Kern was the supplier, but I could be wrong.
RIC number is 106c tier mint...it is an official issue, not an imitation and it is identifiable by the spelling error in the obverse legend (ARCAPIVS vs. ARCADIVS).
Thanks! Wow, that was fast! . I had always wondered, mainly because of what's going on in front of the nose/chin, etc.
Lovely siliqua. As @Romancollector notes, your coin is genuine. Siliqua generally have varying standards of quality that really start to go downhill around the late 390's and early 400's. So your coin is perfectly normal for the time period.
Thanks! Is there any indication of what part of Arcadius' reign this issue came from? Once I become less inept at coin photography, I'd like to retake the photo. My attempts at photographing my Magnus Maximus siliqua were less successful. (yesterday's thread)
Oh, and although RIC I is the only RIC I have, I have all the Roman Sears except Volume 4, which seems to be scarce. However, 4's the period which I collect the least. I don't really collect the family of Constantine, save for Julian.
Likely 392 to 395 AD, which means it was potentially minted by the usurper Eugenius(392-394), to curry favor with Theodosius I in a bid for recognition.
