Message:

<p>[QUOTE=&quot;Cherd, post: 8646162, member: 24754&quot;]I kind of thought this to be the case as well. However, when comparing to other instances where this kind of thing happened, as with when Aureolus tried to garner Postumus&#039; support by minting coins in his likeness, NGC uses this type of scheme:</p><p><br /></p><p>[ATTACH=full]1517840[/ATTACH]</p><p><br /></p><p>Where the (?) is missing after the name and &quot;In the name of&quot; is used in place of &quot;For&quot;.</p><p><br /></p><p>Although, there is a (?) after the date in this example, so I&#039;m guessing that it just means &quot;We aren&#039;t certain&quot;. So, the (?) after Poemenius is probably just saying, &quot;We think the person that minted this coin was Poemenius, but we&#039;re not certain.</p><p><br /></p><p>I&#039;m betting that you are correct, and that this is probably the intended interpretation. I&#039;m settling on the bust being Constantius II, and that Poemenius shouldn&#039;t be included on the list of &quot;People on Roman bust coins&quot;.[/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