Message:

<p>[QUOTE=&quot;maridvnvm, post: 2015125, member: 31620&quot;]Doug,</p><p>I think that it is a bold statement to assume that the IIC, IVST AVS was struck before the first legend coin. The reverse die might have been used later. Your IVST AVS certainly seems fresher as you can see the legend alignment circle clearly on your example. It would certainly seem to link the two sets of coins to the same mint. I am tracking other reverse die links too to gather as much evidence on this output as possible. These odd legend (II C, II CO etc.) had been suggested as possibly coming from another mint but die linkage evidence would seem to defy this.</p><p><br /></p><p>JBGood</p><p>These coins come from eastern mints based on a variety of factors. Septimius Severus travelled to the east to battle Pesc. Niger during the early part of his reign. The style of these eastern coins is quite distinctive and can be differentiated from Rome mint coins purely on style.</p><p>Research has attempted to determine the chronology of these coin. The IVST AVG illustrated by Doug has an undated obverse legend and is placed at the start of production as it is at Rome and these coins are typically allocated to A.D. 193. There is a large issue that comes later dated COS II, which is typically dated A.D. 194-195. There are some issues that prove more problematic with dating. These II C, II CO and otherse are the most problematic as they are all rare and die linkage to other issues is limited. There is another issue ending COS I which is more closely linked with the COS II issue. These II C etc. have closer links to the first legend issue.</p><p><br /></p><p>Martin[/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