Message:

<p>[QUOTE=&quot;Justin Lee, post: 3961691, member: 87404&quot;]Thank you all for the kind words and support! It&#039;s nice to see the variety of coins and eras/empires you all enjoy!</p><p><br /></p><p><br /></p><p><br /></p><p>In <i><a href="https://archive.org/details/in.ernet.dli.2015.279434/page/n55" target="_blank" class="externalLink ProxyLink" data-proxy-href="https://archive.org/details/in.ernet.dli.2015.279434/page/n55" rel="nofollow">A Study in the Coinage of the Mamertines</a></i> (<a href="https://www.cointalk.com/threads/the-mamertinoi-sons-of-mars-or-mamertines.324371/#post-3391255" class="internalLink ProxyLink" data-proxy-href="https://www.cointalk.com/threads/the-mamertinoi-sons-of-mars-or-mamertines.324371/#post-3391255">shared with me earlier this year</a> by [USER=87809]@cmezner[/USER]), Särström sets this type of Quadruple unit (Series I Group A [Plate I, p 203], discussed in the text, pp 56-65) between 288-278, and maybe even a tighter date of 288-285 BC...</p><p><br /></p><p>&quot;Assuming that the Mamertines began to strike these coins shortly after their arrival at Messana, we are probably not far wrong if we fix the approximate date of the issue of the coins in Series I between about 288 and 285 B. C.&quot;</p><p><br /></p><p>That&#039;s the research I&#039;m using for my dating. Is there more explanation from CNG on their dating?[/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