Message:

<p>[QUOTE=&quot;LukeGob, post: 8151849, member: 73885&quot;]I recently got a pretty cool little lot of 5th &amp; 6th C AE coins from an auction. Mostly, I was after some Thrasamund Vict.s &amp; nice monograms, but there was a &quot;Cross in wreath&quot; in with them that I had my fingers crossed about. Couldn&#039;t quite make out the legend from the listing pic, but I just couldn&#039;t make it be &quot;DNTHEODOSIUS...&quot; Anyway, I lucked out &amp; it&#039;s one of the enigmatic DOMINO NOSTRO AE4s; an anepigraph potent cross in wreath Re. Now, my trusty copy of RIC X tentatively assigns the series to Boniface and gives an admittedly brief but convincing argument for doing so. Even if that bet gets hedged a little. But other places I look say that that attribution is no longer accepted, assigning the series to the Vandals under Gaiseric or maybe Huneric &amp; cite G. Bijovsky. She comes recommended, so I&#039;ve read what I can find with a lean towards accepting her dating. However, there doesn&#039;t seem to be much written about the D.N. series (Anywhere. At least that I can find. If anyone knows anything good, clue me in, please &amp; thanks) &amp; what there is, isn&#039;t backed-up by much. Not by the fault of any of the authors, but simply because there aren&#039;t very many of these coins.</p><p>&nbsp;&nbsp; &nbsp; So, with my cool new coin stuck hanging in attribution-limbo, I&#039;m hoping for some help from better numismatic minds than mine. What is the thinking with these coins as to who issued them &amp; when? And why? Am I missing something to the argument to assign these to Gaiseric? I know there&#039;s no answers or consensus, but I can&#039;t find anything about why they&#039;re now thought to be Vandal. </p><p>&nbsp;&nbsp; &nbsp; Personally, Boniface seems a more likely contender. Everything from the style of the Ob bust &amp; the Camp-Gate/Victory/Cross/etc. on the Re to the lettering screams very late-4th/early-5th c. The basic fabric of the flans on which the D.N series coins are stuck also, to me, seems Imperial. Vandal Nummi of King Gaiseric or Huneric; &amp; I&#039;m going with the imitative Vict. Adv. L. W/wr &amp; Palm in the name of Honorius types here; are usually struck on thinner, less-regular flans. In my limited experience, at least. And I&#039;ve never seen a small Vandal AE with relief as bold &amp; as high as the D.N. coins. Even the nicer larger denomination &quot;municipal&quot; bronze struck at Carthage under Gaiseric &amp; Huneric are still rather different, stylistically, from the D.N. coins. It&#039;s a pretty thin argument, I know, &amp; I&#039;m not too attached to it, but they just don&#039;t look like Vandal coins to me and I&#039;m wondering what others think. </p><p>&nbsp;&nbsp; &nbsp; So, what does everyone think? Who issued this series? What do you think of the arguments laid out by Kent in RIC or by Bijovsky or others? Anyone have any other ideas? And please, if you have an example, could you post a pic? Thank you.</p><p>&nbsp;&nbsp; &nbsp; Oh, and probably a good bit of what I&#039;ve written is riddled with errors, despite my best efforts, so feel free to correct away as needed &amp; don&#039;t rely on any of it without first verifying.&nbsp; </p><p>1.4 g</p><p>11 mm</p><p><br /></p><p>[ATTACH=full]1421988[/ATTACH] [ATTACH=full]1421989[/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