Message:

<p>[QUOTE=&quot;Roman Collector, post: 7743925, member: 75937&quot;]That&#039;s just a bizarre coin in many ways. I agree the obverse inscription is that of the branch mint (formerly attributed to Milan). But neither RIC nor the <a href="http://sonic.net/~marius1/mysite/Gallus%20Branch.htm" target="_blank" class="externalLink ProxyLink" data-proxy-href="http://sonic.net/~marius1/mysite/Gallus%20Branch.htm" rel="nofollow">Four Bad Years</a> site list any coins of this mint with an Annona reverse. Moreover, the style is very different from branch mint portraits. Here are my branch mint coins:</p><p><br /></p><p>[ATTACH=full]1325804[/ATTACH] </p><p>[ATTACH=full]1325805[/ATTACH] </p><p>[ATTACH=full]1325806[/ATTACH] </p><p>[ATTACH=full]1325807[/ATTACH] </p><p>[ATTACH=full]1325808[/ATTACH]</p><p><br /></p><p>Now, there is a coin of Trebonianus with the Philip I Annona reverse (corn ears over modius and cornucopiae), RIC 62, but a search for this coin at acsearchinfo turns up no examples sold at auction and a similar search at OCRE comes up empty, too. So, the coin must be very rare. Moreover, this coin supposedly has the Rome mint obverse inscription, unlike the OP coin. </p><p><br /></p><p>It&#039;s very strange, indeed.[/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