Message:

<p>[QUOTE=&quot;dougsmit, post: 2873094, member: 19463&quot;]Thanks for the Roll-Velez paper.&nbsp; It will require a turn for the worse in local weather to make me ready to digest the details!</p><p><br /></p><p>I have a page on the matter of MAX confusion and offer it to confused beginners for helping clarify the matter an experts on the matter to suggest where what I have said might lead beginners astray. </p><p><a href="http://www.forumancientcoins.com/dougsmith/max.html" target="_blank" class="externalLink ProxyLink" data-proxy-href="http://www.forumancientcoins.com/dougsmith/max.html" rel="nofollow">http://www.forumancientcoins.com/dougsmith/max.html</a></p><p><br /></p><p><br /></p><p>I look forward to seeing the ones you consider deceptive.&nbsp; Worst IMHO are the small fractions of Galerius with simple legend MAXIMIANVSAVG.&nbsp; The lack of space caused the omission of helpful additional letters like GAL. </p><p>[ATTACH=full]687095[/ATTACH]</p><p><br /></p><p>The Roll-Velez paper mentions using the word &#039;dot&#039; rather than just using a dot (.) in his tables.&nbsp; I applaud his sensibility.&nbsp; Moreover I appreciate the mint workers in the time of Maximianus who went out of their way to make sure we saw the dot they placed on this obverse.</p><p>[ATTACH=full]687098[/ATTACH]</p><p><br /></p><p>Maximianus must have been a good looking fellow. We have quite a variety of portrait styles from his various mints and periods but most make him look at least to some degree regal.[/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