Message:

<p>[QUOTE=&quot;lrbguy, post: 2829597, member: 88829&quot;]I agree that the style of the reverse type figures is very similar to that in use at Trier, based on the examples you showed and one in my own collection.&nbsp; The obverse effigy on the coins you showed are stylistically DISsimilar from the subject coin.&nbsp; My example, however, is closer. [On second look it is NOT closer.]&nbsp; So a Trier connection has much going for it that way.&nbsp; However, for that the use of the letter N we see on this piece is problematic, which is your essential puzzle.</p><p><br /></p><p>[ATTACH=full]666672[/ATTACH]</p><p><br /></p><p>In that regard something about the reverse caught my attention and tracking it is leading to a conundrum.&nbsp; The positioning of the letter &quot;N&quot; is not haphazard, but a well considered element of the reverse design.&nbsp; Specifically, the lettering of the reverse inscription has been shifted to the left almost to the point of crowding, leaving a huge gap for the letters T I O, with the letter N inserted between the last two letters.&nbsp; For Trier we see the lettering starting off mostly on the left side, with an AR-ATIO break for the last four letters together.&nbsp; No room in there for that &quot;N&quot;.&nbsp; This detail, I think, rules out the possibility that this is the composite result of some kind of overstrike on something.</p><p><br /></p><p>Moreover, I did a quick run through LRBC for everything, and RIC VIII for Rome, but came up dry for a right side field position (obverse or reverse) of an &quot;N&quot; from any mint for Fel Temps, including the reduced module AE2 type (e.g. hut).[/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