Message:

<p>[QUOTE=&quot;ambr0zie, post: 7813446, member: 80952&quot;]Really appreciate your effort, [USER=56859]@TIF[/USER]. Thank you. </p><p>Indeed, the coin is worn and the symbols on the reverse are very difficult to distinguish. This might be caused by the very dark toning but I don&#039;t intend to clean it as my previous attempts were big failures. </p><p><br /></p><p>The symbol on the right looks like a bud but then again this might be because of the wear. Looking at the example you found, it might be very similar. Thank you again.</p><p>I think I will buy the HGC 6 volume anyway (and the other volumes), even if it might not help in this particular case, it&#039;s still a helpful book. </p><p><br /></p><p>And yes, I didn&#039;t mention the auction house because I try to avoid negative feedback. Simply because I don&#039;t see them as a bad house - everything I won arrived correctly. But there were a number of errors in attribution, some of them pretty severe as I noticed them straight away (not being a specialist). And on Roman Imperial coins. I also missed one, posting it on CT as a Geta denarius but a member pointed out it&#039;s Caracalla (and this was correct). Usually I try to doublecheck every attribution from houses, but with Demos I&#039;m very circumspect.[/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