Log in or Sign up
Coin Talk
Home
Forums
>
Coin Forums
>
Ancient Coins
>
Attribution Quiz #5 - Victor Clark's Coin
>
Reply to Thread
Message:
<p>[QUOTE="TIF, post: 2759736, member: 56859"]What a fantastic gift! Great-looking coin <img src="styles/default/xenforo/clear.png" class="mceSmilieSprite mceSmilie1" alt=":)" unselectable="on" unselectable="on" /></p><p><br /></p><p>I'd start with the emperor and denomination: clearly Philip I, as you identified, and your coin is a silver alloy with radiate bust, so it is an <b>antoninianus</b>.</p><p><br /></p><p>(I see that Victor chimed in with the answer as I was composing this post, but I will continue, focusing instead on how to arrive at that conclusion)</p><p><br /></p><p>Wildwinds (if that is the source you are using for attributions) does not have every possible coin of every emperor so there will be gaps in numbers. Different volumes of RIC also have different numbering schemes, so what you think might be a pattern for one era is not the same for another.</p><p><br /></p><p>Philip I's coins are in <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roman_Imperial_Coinage" target="_blank" class="externalLink ProxyLink" data-proxy-href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roman_Imperial_Coinage" rel="nofollow">RIC volume 4c</a>. I don't know if there is a free online version of that volume (probably not).</p><p><br /></p><p>If I had this coin and wanted to know its RIC number, I'd check Wildwinds, CNG's archives, and ACsearch.</p><p><br /></p><p>Checking Wildwinds (the page for Philip I, with thumbnail images), I used my browser's "find on page" to make it easier; search word "Aequitas", which narrowed the candidates from a gazillion to just eleven. Of those eleven, one was provincial, one was a sestertius, one was an as (the denomination is called an "as"), and one was an aureus so I didn't have to look carefully at those.</p><p><br /></p><p>Of the remaining seven candidates, one had a left-facing bust and so it didn't have to be carefully examined.</p><p><br /></p><p>The six remaining candidates which need a closer look (of the coins shown on Wildwinds' Philip I page, realizing it isn't complete) are RIC</p><p><br /></p><p>27b</p><p>27 variant</p><p>57</p><p>82 variant</p><p>82 variant</p><p>82 variant</p><p><br /></p><p>Look closely at all six of those and you'll find the tiny differences which in this RIC volume led to assignment of a different number.</p><p><br /></p><p>If you are hunting for a coin's attribution and don't see it in Wildwinds, try CNG or ACsearch. I usually start with CNG's archives because it is easier to search, but I'm not usually searching for Roman Imperials which might be easier in Wildwinds.</p><p><br /></p><p>There's more than one way to find a coin's attribution/reference but this is generally how I go about it if I don't own an appropriate reference book.[/QUOTE]</p><p><br /></p>
[QUOTE="TIF, post: 2759736, member: 56859"]What a fantastic gift! Great-looking coin :) I'd start with the emperor and denomination: clearly Philip I, as you identified, and your coin is a silver alloy with radiate bust, so it is an [B]antoninianus[/B]. (I see that Victor chimed in with the answer as I was composing this post, but I will continue, focusing instead on how to arrive at that conclusion) Wildwinds (if that is the source you are using for attributions) does not have every possible coin of every emperor so there will be gaps in numbers. Different volumes of RIC also have different numbering schemes, so what you think might be a pattern for one era is not the same for another. Philip I's coins are in [URL='https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roman_Imperial_Coinage']RIC volume 4c[/URL]. I don't know if there is a free online version of that volume (probably not). If I had this coin and wanted to know its RIC number, I'd check Wildwinds, CNG's archives, and ACsearch. Checking Wildwinds (the page for Philip I, with thumbnail images), I used my browser's "find on page" to make it easier; search word "Aequitas", which narrowed the candidates from a gazillion to just eleven. Of those eleven, one was provincial, one was a sestertius, one was an as (the denomination is called an "as"), and one was an aureus so I didn't have to look carefully at those. Of the remaining seven candidates, one had a left-facing bust and so it didn't have to be carefully examined. The six remaining candidates which need a closer look (of the coins shown on Wildwinds' Philip I page, realizing it isn't complete) are RIC 27b 27 variant 57 82 variant 82 variant 82 variant Look closely at all six of those and you'll find the tiny differences which in this RIC volume led to assignment of a different number. If you are hunting for a coin's attribution and don't see it in Wildwinds, try CNG or ACsearch. I usually start with CNG's archives because it is easier to search, but I'm not usually searching for Roman Imperials which might be easier in Wildwinds. There's more than one way to find a coin's attribution/reference but this is generally how I go about it if I don't own an appropriate reference book.[/QUOTE]
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
Coin Talk
Home
Forums
>
Coin Forums
>
Ancient Coins
>
Attribution Quiz #5 - Victor Clark's Coin
>
Home
Home
Quick Links
Search Forums
Recent Activity
Recent Posts
Forums
Forums
Quick Links
Search Forums
Recent Posts
Competitions
Competitions
Quick Links
Competition Index
Rules, Terms & Conditions
Gallery
Gallery
Quick Links
Search Media
New Media
Showcase
Showcase
Quick Links
Search Items
Most Active Members
New Items
Directory
Directory
Quick Links
Directory Home
New Listings
Members
Members
Quick Links
Notable Members
Current Visitors
Recent Activity
New Profile Posts
Sponsors
Menu
Search
Search titles only
Posted by Member:
Separate names with a comma.
Newer Than:
Search this thread only
Search this forum only
Display results as threads
Useful Searches
Recent Posts
More...