Message:

<p>[QUOTE=&quot;dougsmit, post: 3115105, member: 19463&quot;]Thanks to Mike for linking to my page on Aureolus.&nbsp; I conside his name attached to coins little more than a ploy of dealers to sell coins.&nbsp; They are the issues in the name of Postumus from the Milan mint.&nbsp; Aureolus was the main man of Postumus in that city at that time but most emperors with branch mints had someone in charge so we have to decide where to draw that line.&nbsp; IMO, Vetranio issued coins with his own name on them as well as coins in the name of Constantius II.&nbsp; That places him in a special status which dealers abuse by listing the Constantius inscribed coins as Vetranios as well as those that read Vetranio.&nbsp; I prefer we limit that term to coins with Vetranio&#039;s name.&nbsp; I believe it would be better to call the Aureolus coins &quot;Postumus, Milan mint&quot; or &quot;Postumus by Aureolus&quot; but neither of those terms would sell a coin to collectors who want only one coin of each ruler.&nbsp;&nbsp; The Milan coins use reverses honoring the cavalry most having EQVIT of something similar on the reverse.&nbsp; My page shows two examples.&nbsp; Rarely, we see full legend, well struck examples.&nbsp; Most look like a siege coinage (which they were) and are very collectible IMO without making up labels to boost sales.&nbsp; </p><p><br /></p><p>Question: When Septimius Severus was out of town dealing with civil wars in the East, Plautianus (father of Plautilla) spent time in Rome playing like an Emperor which eventually led to his downfall.&nbsp; Should we label the issues in the name of Septimius from this time coins of Plautianus so each of you needed to buy one for your ruler set?&nbsp; That seems silly.&nbsp; It differs from Aureolus in some ways but not others.&nbsp; Where do we draw that line?[/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