https://www.cointalk.com/threads/she-is-such-a-diva.353526/ After closely examining the coin this evening I realised the reverse legend actually reads COS XVI not XV, making this a later rarer issue of the type! All previous auction houses and dealers had missed this small detail too, but as a specialist I should know better! Here is the correct attribution. Diva Julia Titi Æ Sestertius, 24.33g Rome mint, 92-94 AD (Domitian) Obv: DIVAE IVLIAE AVG DIVI TITI F above; S P Q R in exergue; Carpentum drawn r. by two mules Rev: IMP CAES DOMIT AVG GERM COS XVI CENS PER P P; S C, large, in centre RIC 760 (R). BMC 471. BNC 502. Acquired from Ken Dorney, January 2020. Ex Agora Auctions Sale 84, 4 September 2019, lot 187. Ex CNG E314, 6 November 2013, lot 364. I have two main rules I follow when attributing a coin: only cite reference books I have in hand (never copy and paste attributions!) and closely examine the coin in minute detail. At least I got around to the second one a day later! Following both rules turned a 'common' coin into something much rarer. Has something similar happened to you? I would like to know.