Message:

<p>[QUOTE=&quot;David Atherton, post: 2892047, member: 82616&quot;]Oh yes, that is indeed a &#039;strange&#039; one! What really is odd is Buttrey&#039;s dismissal of your coin as &#039;barbarous&#039; and readily accepting mine as &#039;official&#039; (which appears more &#039;barbarous&#039; than official to my eyes). This goes to [USER=19463]@dougsmit[/USER]&#039;s question about how do we determine what is &#039;official&#039; and what isn&#039;t when you come across coins that are outside the norm?</p><p><br /></p><p>Consider this denarius: The legend, type, and weight are correct for Ephesus but the style is very crude. Buttrey and Carradice discuss this specimen in the RIC II.1 introduction and are not certain if it is the work of a less skilled &#039;official&#039; die engraver or &#039;barbarous&#039;.</p><p><br /></p><p>[ATTACH=full]695368[/ATTACH]<b>Vespasian</b></p><p>AR Denarius, 3.29g</p><p>Rome mint, 69-70 AD</p><p>RIC 1397 (R), BMC p. 89†, RSC 291, RPC 807 (5 spec.)</p><p>Obv: IMP CAES VESPAS AVG; Head of Vespasian, laureate, r.</p><p>Rev: PACI ORB TERR AVG; Turreted and draped female bust, r.</p><p>Acquired from NB Numismatics, March 2017. Ex VAuctions 292 (Imperial Coins), 6 December 2012, lot 130.</p><p><br /></p><p><br /></p><p>I fear we shall never have any kind certainty about where these &#039;strange&#039; coins fit in.[/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