Message:

<p>[QUOTE=&quot;Valentinian, post: 4179022, member: 44316&quot;]I agree. We cannot say the quality control was high and every difference was intentional. </p><p><br /></p><p>There is a &quot;Justin&quot; AE4, Hahn&#039;s MIBE 34, plate 7, that looks a great deal like an Anastasius AE4, missing only the V-like crossbar which would complete the &quot;A&quot;. Is it really Justin, or just a defective Anastasius?</p><p><br /></p><p>There are some other doubtful Byzantine-coin attributions. On my site about coins of Byzantine Cherson</p><p><a href="http://augustuscoins.com/ed/Cherson/" target="_blank" class="externalLink ProxyLink" data-proxy-href="http://augustuscoins.com/ed/Cherson/" rel="nofollow">http://augustuscoins.com/ed/Cherson/</a></p><p>I discuss some attributions that are still controversial.</p><p><br /></p><p>For example, many sellers and even books like MIBE have adopted attributions of the Cherson &quot;H&quot; denomination from Anokhin. But when you read Anokhin (in translation in the BAR series) you can see his arguments for attributing some to Justin II are extremely weak. I can say the same for his arguments about the dating of the city &quot;Eleutheria&quot; types. (See the site.)[/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