Message:

<p>[QUOTE=&quot;Hrefn, post: 7948418, member: 115171&quot;]So far as dots on Theodosius II solidi, the only instance I am aware of is on the consular solidi above the senior emperor’s head on the reverse.&nbsp; The first has three, the second has two, and the third has no dots.&nbsp; &nbsp; I have never seen any learned comment on these.&nbsp;&nbsp; I did check to see if any comet came by during the relevant period.&nbsp; It would seem not, so that is not the explanation. </p><p><br /></p><p>So the Constantinople mint placed some unexplained dots on solidi circa 425 AD, but it does not seem to have been a common practice.&nbsp; And they are on the reverse. </p><p><br /></p><p>So I am not sure what to think.&nbsp; I would be nice to know on what basis the coin was originally condemned, because if it were entirely on style, I would regard that as insufficient.&nbsp; Although the style and epigraphy are not from Constantinople.&nbsp; Perhaps there was evidence of Beirut manufacture which did not make it into the record.&nbsp; That would be definitive.&nbsp; Someone with library access could check the original Bullletin.&nbsp; I only referenced the forgery network quote of same. </p><p><br /></p><p>They are all the same die pair.&nbsp; That troubles me a bit, but since they are not an official mint product it is quite possible only one die pair was made.&nbsp; </p><p><br /></p><p>Your find spot data could be definitive, also.&nbsp; </p><p><br /></p><p>[ATTACH=full]1376747[/ATTACH] [ATTACH=full]1376748[/ATTACH][/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