Message:

<p>[QUOTE=&quot;Roman Collector, post: 4580659, member: 75937&quot;]It wasn&#039;t unusual for Roman die engravers to put dots between elements in inscriptions. See <a href="https://www.cointalk.com/threads/dots-dots-and-more-dots.318978/" class="internalLink ProxyLink" data-proxy-href="https://www.cointalk.com/threads/dots-dots-and-more-dots.318978/">this thread</a>, for example.</p><p><br /></p><p>I am <a href="https://www.cointalk.com/threads/new-obverse-die-great-lets-use-the-oldest-reverse-die-in-the-mint.338560/" class="internalLink ProxyLink" data-proxy-href="https://www.cointalk.com/threads/new-obverse-die-great-lets-use-the-oldest-reverse-die-in-the-mint.338560/">always disappointed</a> when an obverse is struck with a nice, fresh die and the reverse is struck with a very worn one. This Tetricus I, for example, would be a very nice coin indeed if the reverse die weren&#039;t ready to be melted down!</p><p><br /></p><p><img src="https://www.cointalk.com/attachments/tetricus-i-laetitia-antoninianus-jpg.932642/" class="bbCodeImage wysiwygImage" alt="" unselectable="on" /></p><p>Tetricus I, AD 271-274.</p><p>Roman billon antoninianus, 2.55 g, 18.4 mm.</p><p>Mainz, Trier, or Cologne, depending on who you read, AD 273-274.</p><p>Obv: IMP TETRICVS PF AVG, radiate and cuirassed bust, right.</p><p>Rev: LAETITIA AVGG, Laetitia standing left, holding wreath and anchor.</p><p>Refs: RIC 88; Cohen 62; Hunter 18; RCV 11239; Elmer 787.[/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