Message:

<p>[QUOTE=&quot;Roman Collector, post: 4349540, member: 75937&quot;]Your example, [USER=87200]@ancient coin hunter[/USER] , is pretty typical. The reigns of Valerian and Gallienus were characterized by generally shoddy workmanship at the mint and using dies long past their &quot;sell by&quot; date. It is representative of the period and highlights the economic stress of the times. To complain about the worn reverse die is akin to complaining about the zinc content of US cents rather than understanding what it says about the historical milieu in which they were produced.</p><p><br /></p><p>I -- like everyone else -- have the priestly implements reverse type. It has a pretty raggedy flan:</p><p><br /></p><p><img src="https://www.cointalk.com/attachments/saloninus-pietas-avg-jpg.884905/" class="bbCodeImage wysiwygImage" alt="" unselectable="on" /></p><p>Saloninus, Caesar AD 258-260.</p><p>Roman billon antoninianus, 2.39 g, 22.2 mm, 12 h.</p><p>Cologne, AD 258-260.</p><p>Obv: SALON VALERIANVS CAES, radiate and draped bust, right.</p><p>Rev: PIETAS AVG, lituus, jug, simpulum and sprinkler.</p><p>Refs: RIC 9; Göbl 914e; Cohen 41; RCV 10767; Cunetio 744; Hunter 8.[/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