Log in or Sign up
Coin Talk
Home
Forums
>
Coin Forums
>
Ancient Coins
>
Do the Research on Your Ancient Coins
>
Reply to Thread
Message:
<p>[QUOTE="akeady, post: 8265407, member: 83175"]Wildwinds got the main reference right - RIC 684. The rest isn't right, though.</p><p><br /></p><p>This is Sear 2306 - it still references the old RIC II, so RIC 84 = BMC 146 = RSC 390 - but this is the PONTIF MAXIM reverse (as per previous post):</p><p><img src="https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/-r8ize7c8_jaPmOnzlrW4AIcBHULslAuLjoh6ixGEsMCuBPRi4Q0aXwbbNRXQK78cLA9nSizQ4tNTnGbkUPjP-o8Em2J_bYXzfsEcHnvxkLEYdzRPc5yD1nvqGXWiwVMleVFKxoWw0MnEgg8g-ZF-Z7x_dpsNn-7RWZ5lGioedHJVa7D66CWw_FF9i5IzuDvMEZwW2Zr1Tb82Zv1LlITKiNM-On3XnOZBqta1hU4stB_cdbTZNTG_Xb7j1j_juqtrSU-1ZmdSFnToC-pjW74w3PNOUphanmOcGawnv7QTZWFeWZsuNkREt56Brv_BcWUqluYKiecRKc8CqOjGTP-JUKk-14bdq19n-n_L9U3EUPy1Zor6xkYw8kpoB-crvrDNPgrByQiCQfg2wP8gFzsueT9jLPzSqw5swe219ZeYv8_DaIBobjyiDqcDAOAHS6lVwj9Ihnb7Pu1iLU5bn92ynTVfTXZSAlPtiXlv9h5gE2K4O8nqHPfBxN-Bx_GeohrGGoEu1MBBwfcrLFacIEYwjlhjncocdEnPXH7a1c0Rnt82BsDEfDYChTN4oladASjSTHvmy2ktL64fvfEPWZXvWlBiTwmzrcev_2hZXdvkKSm2JmOib2G7ujnnG-c06nNtB9IllpgG7GfS3D4y0ClYdr6whfm1Q7m8VEqSY4DynPFceyyddrEePhFR8qsyCDUczJUUwiSrSi1bp24XjCpnyBzKDOiZ5h1I-s6CNETpBcIkOcOvsOQDSLurzfxhbM=w1350-h1830-no?authuser=0" class="bbCodeImage wysiwygImage" alt="" unselectable="on" /></p><p><br /></p><p>Sear doesn't list your coin (he does list the COS V reverse, but with a longer version of the obverse legend).</p><p><br /></p><p>Wildwinds has a lot of errors. But hey, any time I look through my own coins, I find mis-attributions and typos too!</p><p><br /></p><p>Anyway, RIC (and BMC to a lesser extent as it's older) is the primary reference and they got that right!</p><p><br /></p><p>OCRE <a href="http://numismatics.org/ocre/results" target="_blank" class="externalLink ProxyLink" data-proxy-href="http://numismatics.org/ocre/results" rel="nofollow">http://numismatics.org/ocre/results</a> for Imperial coins</p><p>& CRRO <a href="http://numismatics.org/crro/results" target="_blank" class="externalLink ProxyLink" data-proxy-href="http://numismatics.org/crro/results" rel="nofollow">http://numismatics.org/crro/results</a> for Republican coins</p><p><br /></p><p>are very useful as online versions of RIC and Crawford respectively and have good search options.</p><p><br /></p><p>They use examples from museums and there are sometimes mistakes there too, but the descriptions are taken from the references, so should be correct.</p><p><br /></p><p>ATB,</p><p>Aidan.[/QUOTE]</p><p><br /></p>
[QUOTE="akeady, post: 8265407, member: 83175"]Wildwinds got the main reference right - RIC 684. The rest isn't right, though. This is Sear 2306 - it still references the old RIC II, so RIC 84 = BMC 146 = RSC 390 - but this is the PONTIF MAXIM reverse (as per previous post): [IMG]https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/-r8ize7c8_jaPmOnzlrW4AIcBHULslAuLjoh6ixGEsMCuBPRi4Q0aXwbbNRXQK78cLA9nSizQ4tNTnGbkUPjP-o8Em2J_bYXzfsEcHnvxkLEYdzRPc5yD1nvqGXWiwVMleVFKxoWw0MnEgg8g-ZF-Z7x_dpsNn-7RWZ5lGioedHJVa7D66CWw_FF9i5IzuDvMEZwW2Zr1Tb82Zv1LlITKiNM-On3XnOZBqta1hU4stB_cdbTZNTG_Xb7j1j_juqtrSU-1ZmdSFnToC-pjW74w3PNOUphanmOcGawnv7QTZWFeWZsuNkREt56Brv_BcWUqluYKiecRKc8CqOjGTP-JUKk-14bdq19n-n_L9U3EUPy1Zor6xkYw8kpoB-crvrDNPgrByQiCQfg2wP8gFzsueT9jLPzSqw5swe219ZeYv8_DaIBobjyiDqcDAOAHS6lVwj9Ihnb7Pu1iLU5bn92ynTVfTXZSAlPtiXlv9h5gE2K4O8nqHPfBxN-Bx_GeohrGGoEu1MBBwfcrLFacIEYwjlhjncocdEnPXH7a1c0Rnt82BsDEfDYChTN4oladASjSTHvmy2ktL64fvfEPWZXvWlBiTwmzrcev_2hZXdvkKSm2JmOib2G7ujnnG-c06nNtB9IllpgG7GfS3D4y0ClYdr6whfm1Q7m8VEqSY4DynPFceyyddrEePhFR8qsyCDUczJUUwiSrSi1bp24XjCpnyBzKDOiZ5h1I-s6CNETpBcIkOcOvsOQDSLurzfxhbM=w1350-h1830-no?authuser=0[/IMG] Sear doesn't list your coin (he does list the COS V reverse, but with a longer version of the obverse legend). Wildwinds has a lot of errors. But hey, any time I look through my own coins, I find mis-attributions and typos too! Anyway, RIC (and BMC to a lesser extent as it's older) is the primary reference and they got that right! OCRE [URL]http://numismatics.org/ocre/results[/URL] for Imperial coins & CRRO [URL]http://numismatics.org/crro/results[/URL] for Republican coins are very useful as online versions of RIC and Crawford respectively and have good search options. They use examples from museums and there are sometimes mistakes there too, but the descriptions are taken from the references, so should be correct. ATB, Aidan.[/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
>
Do the Research on Your Ancient Coins
>
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...