Message:

<p>[QUOTE=&quot;SeptimusT, post: 2948232, member: 91240&quot;]This is a coin I purchased a few days, identified as Crawford 44/5, which I don&#039;t have in hand yet. Upon further research I&#039;m not sure if it was identified correctly.&nbsp; I believe that it may be Crawford 167/1, or possibly 53/2. I was wondering if anyone more familiar with these might be able to chime in...</p><p><br /></p><p>I&#039;ve been using <a href="http://www.stevebrinkman.ancients.info/anonymous/" target="_blank" class="externalLink ProxyLink" data-proxy-href="http://www.stevebrinkman.ancients.info/anonymous/" rel="nofollow">this site</a> to compare the coins. The main difference that I can see between 44/5 and 53/2 and 167/1 is that the later two have the peaked helmet style, exhibited in my coin. The main difference between 53/2 and 167/1 is that the ROMA on the reverse has a crossed A, as opposed to the more stylized form on the other coins, and that there is no line at the bottom of the inscription. From what I can see, my coin has no line beneath ROMA, and it has a crossed A.</p><p><br /></p><p>I was looking for a Punic War denarius, so an identification of 167/1 doesn&#039;t quite fit my bill (it&#039;s dated to the 170s BC), but I suppose it&#039;s still a nice coin. I think I would probably keep it anyway if my ID is correct.</p><p><br /></p><p>[ATTACH=full]719593[/ATTACH][/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