Message:

<p>[QUOTE=&quot;dougsmit, post: 2161362, member: 19463&quot;]It is a style and fashion thing in some cases but there is always the fact that dies were engraved by many workers including some that should have sought employment elsewhere.&nbsp; The same is true of US coins.&nbsp; Not every one is as well designed as others but we may differ in our opinions as to which are better and which are junk.&nbsp; Late Romans were produced by up to 15 mints in one reign.&nbsp; The made fewer coins in the early years so needed fewer cutters.&nbsp; A very few of us seek out coins struck from better dies rather than coins that are mint state.&nbsp; Today we recognize great artists that are very different than each other.&nbsp; Rome had no Jackson Pollock or Picasso --- well, maybe Magnentius has a Picasso ancestor on staff --- but there is definitely a variety in workmanship.</p><p><br /></p><p>Lets return to Gallienus.&nbsp; His early coins are pretty well done from some mints but the need for more and more millions of coins caused his later issues to look rushed from some mints.&nbsp; However, later coins from Antioch mint are regularly well made using dies cut in what I consider a boring style compared to some of the others that cut artistically and struck sloppily on ragged flans. Examples:</p><p><br /></p><p>Early period good portrait work - the reverses of these are often struck from worn dies</p><p>[ATTACH=full]416210[/ATTACH] </p><p>Middle period with flan prep getting sloppy</p><p>[ATTACH=full]416211[/ATTACH] </p><p>I really don&#039;t like the diecutting on this late portrait but the striking and flan preparation are excellent.</p><p>[ATTACH=full]416212[/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