Message:

<p>[QUOTE=&quot;curtislclay, post: 7943268, member: 89514&quot;]The Septimius is certainly rare, but there is another specimen in the Berlin collection, and a couple of others have turned up in recent years: </p><p>Schweizerische Kreditanstalt 3, lot 625</p><p>CNG E191, 9 July 2008, J.S. Wagner coll., lot 284</p><p>My coll., ex CGB, July 2017</p><p>&nbsp;</p><p>There should also be a specimen in Vienna, from the Tiepolo coll., reported by Cohen 733, but left unpriced as though doubtful, and therefore mentioned only in&nbsp; footnotes by RIC 818 and BMC 811. I&#039;ll check tonight at home whether or not I have a plaster cast of this Vienna example.</p><p><br /></p><p>This particular VICTORIAE BRITTANNICAE type on sestertii was strictly Caracalla&#039;s, because only for Caracalla did it appear in the year before with the dated legend PONTIF TR P XIII COS III, BMC pl. 58.6. Similarly the Two Victories holding shield on palm tree type was strictly Septimius&#039;, and the Victory seated on cuirass inscribing shield type was strictly Geta&#039;s, because only for them did dated versions of these types appear, with TR P XVIII or XIX for Septimius (BMC pl. 57.4) and VICT BRIT TR P III COS II for Geta (BMC pl. 62.5). When the same three types were undated, with rev. legend just VICTORIAE BRITTANNICAE, each of them could of course be used for all three emperors, but for each emperor his own reverse type tends to be commoner than the other two which were strictly the types of his colleagues. So this is partly the explanation of the rarity of your new Septimius sestertius: its rev. type was strictly Caracalla&#039;s.[/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