Message:

<p>[QUOTE=&quot;Mike Margolis, post: 3177450, member: 88401&quot;]OK Roman collecting friends. How often did they get their Roman numerals wrong? Was this to better fit the flan or were they indulging a little too much in the rites of Bacchus? My students would get a poor grade for this when we study other ways of numbering such as Base 2 and Roman numerals:[ATTACH=full]817984[/ATTACH]</p><p>Tiberius AE As</p><p>Rome Mint 35-36 AD</p><p>Obverse: TI CAESAR DIVI AVG F AVGVST IMP VIII, laureate head left</p><p>Reverse:&nbsp; PONTIF MAXIM TRIBVN POTEST XXXVII, S - C, vertical rudder in front of large banded globe, small globe lower right</p><p>References: RIC 58 Scarce</p><p>Size: 28mm, 9.93g</p><p><br /></p><p>The attribution notes a different number so I am not sure of this. I know someone could fill me in on what is happening here? Someone probably posted this issue before and I just missed the story. (Or maybe this is an example of buying an authentic pre-columbian Aztec carving and getting home and noticing the tiny words- &quot;Hecho En Mexico&quot;) Also it doesn&#039;t match RIC 58 or RIC 52 in Wildwinds, haven&#039;t checked CNG or acsearch yet.</p><p>Found it on CNG- as RIC I-&nbsp; 64</p><p><br /></p><p>Reverse says XXXIIX instead of XXXVIII?</p><p><span style="color: #ff0000">POST YOUR EXAMPLES OF BAD MATH!</span>[/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