Message:

<p>[QUOTE=&quot;lrbguy, post: 2887154, member: 88829&quot;][USER=87990]@greekandromancoins[/USER] : Peter, could you give us a blowup of the mintmark as you originally had it but with a bit more coverage (wider view)?&nbsp; Like these:</p><p>[ATTACH=full]693189[/ATTACH]</p><p><br /></p><p>I&#039;m not convinced I am seeing the mark type correctly and want to check it out.&nbsp; Everything I have said about the mark so far is based on the reading that it is a series 4 (double dot) mark, like the first example here (which is from a coin of Constantine II). </p><p>However, if there are no dots at the ends, then it is from series 2 which changes everything.&nbsp; RIC lists coins of Constantine II in series 2 from officinae Alpha and Epsilon, to which I can add clear examples for gamma and delta.&nbsp; The lower example here is for Constantine II and shows an epsilon that has something in common with the mark on your coin, though to a lesser degree.&nbsp; I will rephoto that and put up a cleaner pic if your blowup shows there are no dots at the ends of the mark.</p><p><br /></p><p>As for the shape of a digamma, the shape is occasionally something like that, but it is highly dubious that such a thing would have been intended, since there is no evidence of a sixth officina in use at Heraclea at this time.&nbsp; When&nbsp; (and where) there is a sixth, it is usually represented by an S or a Z, not digamma.&nbsp; But the similarity of form cannot be denied, I think.[/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