Message:

<p>[QUOTE=&quot;dougsmit, post: 7551533, member: 19463&quot;]I found it interesting that the placement of the emperor on the right required the legend to start on that side as well to avoid his name being next to her portrait.&nbsp; It also strikes me as odd that the standard position of favor is listed &#039;on the right hand of God&#039; but that is on the left side since we are looking at the scene from the front so God&#039;s right hand would be shown on the left side.&nbsp; This is not the place for this discussion but we might also look at the pre-Christian coins (including Provincials) and see who is on which side. </p><p><br /></p><p>My coin of the type adds nothing to the discussion.&nbsp; Legends are nice but I would have preferred one with faces.</p><p>[ATTACH=full]1302757[/ATTACH] </p><p><br /></p><p>It might be acceptable here to show a coin from this period that I find particularly confusing.&nbsp; Many sellers are as confused as I am but not all realize or admit that point.&nbsp; Sear did us no favor when he renumbered some coins between his editions.&nbsp; This is Sear Byzantine, 1974 edition, number 1865 and that is the only edition of that book that I own.&nbsp; His later edition made the coin SB 1866.&nbsp; The way Sear presented Anonymous folles separated from the same ruler&#039;s named coins insures confusion.&nbsp; I have seen more than one translation of the four letters on the reverse of this coin CR/PΔ which seems to include Greek and Latin letters (fashionable in the day) but assigning certain words to the letters.&nbsp; I would be interested in hearing how our Byzantine specialists translate this coin.&nbsp; Which R/P stands for Romanus?&nbsp; Both?&nbsp; Is the delta Diogenes or Despotes? Is C Caesar?&nbsp;&nbsp; Whitting (page 198) gives &quot;May the Cross help Romanus&quot;.&nbsp; Most experts dodge the question.&nbsp; Sear offered no translation in 1974; did he in the second edition that I have not seen?&nbsp; Berk omitted the type from his 1986 book showing only the Anonymous type G as SB1866 using the then current 1974 Sear catalog number.&nbsp; I have my opinions on this matter but my opinions mean nothing.&nbsp; I accept the Latin Caesar as parallel to the Greek Despot making the reverse bilingual (top Latin / bottom Greek) but it bothers me that people write books and don&#039;t see the need to comment.&nbsp; Is leaving it out better than the Whitting guess (which I have had trouble accepting for years)?&nbsp; This strikes me as, well, very <i>Byzantine</i>. </p><p>[ATTACH=full]1302758[/ATTACH] </p><p><br /></p><p><a href="http://augustuscoins.com/ed/Byz/late.html" target="_blank" class="externalLink ProxyLink" data-proxy-href="http://augustuscoins.com/ed/Byz/late.html" rel="nofollow">http://augustuscoins.com/ed/Byz/late.html</a></p><p>Valentinian clarifies the Whitting theory quite effectively explaining the CR as a variant of SB which is quite reasonable.&nbsp; I prefer to leave the matter in the massive pile of things I don&#039;t know.&nbsp; When I want to know something about Byzantine coins, I consider Valentinian&#039;s site a good place to start. I would like to know if, for example, there are non-coin inscriptions of Romanus that show his appeal to the cross that would cause the man on the street to know the meaning of these letters.[/QUOTE]</p><p><br /></p>

Your name or email address:

Do you already have an account?

• No, create an account now.
• Yes, my password is:
• Forgot your password?

Stay logged in