Message:

<p>[QUOTE=&quot;red_spork, post: 3412446, member: 74282&quot;]That&#039;s a very nice victoriatus, better than my example of this type but the attribution is off very slightly. Yours is a scarce Crawford 67/1, also a Sicilian mint type but likely from a different Sicilian mint than the more common 70/1. Here are my examples of 67/1 and 70/1, respectively:</p><p>[ATTACH=full]905835[/ATTACH] </p><p>[ATTACH=full]905836[/ATTACH] </p><p><br /></p><p>A good link for identifying these fully-anonymous victoriati <a href="http://www.stevebrinkman.ancients.info/anonymous/AnonymousVictoriatii.html" target="_blank" class="externalLink ProxyLink" data-proxy-href="http://www.stevebrinkman.ancients.info/anonymous/AnonymousVictoriatii.html" rel="nofollow">is this </a>guide written by Kenneth Friedman and Richard Schaefer. I found it extremely helpful and I still refer to it from time to time when verifying attributions for scarcer types as some like 89/1b and 92/1b are seemingly impossible to find good pictures of elsewhere.[/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