Here is a coin of Constantine, minted in his name by his frenemy Licinius: The obverse legend is IMP C CONSTANTINVS PF AVG. The reverse is IOVI CONSERVATORI AVGG NN and has Jupiter holding victory and an eagle with a wreath. The RIC reference is RIC Thessalonica 61b. My question is this: Van Meter (2000) lists this reverse with obverse legend 21, IMP CONSTANTINVS PF AVG, as number 48. Also listed is obverse legend 23, IMP C VAL CONSTANTINVS PF AVG, as number 49. It is not listed with obverse legend 22, which is the one I have. However, I get the impression that Van Meter meant for the obverse legend listings to be the most common obverses for the reverse type, rather than an exhaustive list. Would it be more correct to say the coin is not listed in Van Meter, or to give a reference to this reverse type and note that the legend is a little different? I should say that the purpose of this citation is for my records and that I'm not trying to sell the coin or anything. Thanks for your insight.
It is not possible to find any book that covers every minor variation of every coin type. Some come closer than others and many of our number make an effort to report new variations but even the most complete work will be outdated before the ink is dry. VanMeter is a fine work for what it set out to be - a beginners' guide. It was nowhere close to an exhaustive list. I completely agree with the gsimonel suggestion We might be better off if we were more careful to use 'VAR' for most works unless our coin is a die duplicate of the published specimen.
