Message:

<p>[QUOTE=&quot;akeady, post: 8329153, member: 83175&quot;]From the examples on CNG sold coins, I think I see the difference and it&#039;s nearly as Custis says (or exactly, maybe):</p><p><br /></p><p>RIC 479:</p><p><img src="https://www.cngcoins.com/photos/enlarged/10100480.jpg" class="bbCodeImage wysiwygImage" alt="" unselectable="on" /></p><p><a href="https://www.cngcoins.com/Coin.aspx?CoinID=300655" target="_blank" class="externalLink ProxyLink" data-proxy-href="https://www.cngcoins.com/Coin.aspx?CoinID=300655" rel="nofollow">https://www.cngcoins.com/Coin.aspx?CoinID=300655</a></p><p><br /></p><p>RIC 482:</p><p><img src="https://www.cngcoins.com/Photos.AM/4-7MO79/4-7NZX3.jpg" class="bbCodeImage wysiwygImage" alt="" unselectable="on" /></p><p><a href="https://www.cngcoins.com/Lot.aspx?LOT_ID=1334" target="_blank" class="externalLink ProxyLink" data-proxy-href="https://www.cngcoins.com/Lot.aspx?LOT_ID=1334" rel="nofollow">https://www.cngcoins.com/Lot.aspx?LOT_ID=1334</a></p><p><br /></p><p>The IMP.CAE is unbroken in 479, while it&#039;s divided by the neck in 482.</p><p><br /></p><p>At least, CNG seem consistent.</p><p><br /></p><p>OCRE lists nothing under 482, but under 479 there are examples of both types - this is a failing of OCRE - it&#039;s only as accurate as the collections it cites.</p><p><br /></p><p><a href="http://numismatics.org/ocre/id/ric.1(2).aug.479" target="_blank" class="externalLink ProxyLink" data-proxy-href="http://numismatics.org/ocre/id/ric.1(2).aug.479" rel="nofollow">http://numismatics.org/ocre/id/ric.1(2).aug.479</a></p><p><br /></p><p>ATB,</p><p>Aidan.[/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