Unpopular opinions- Ancient edition.

Sorry, Wildwinds. I've found them a good source for understanding peculiar bronzes.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

Obviously any citation using only ACSearch needs to be through consistent hits. If the results are inconclusive, then other resources are necessary.

In my case, the big issue I have with catalogs is I collect coins from disparate places. I often pick up coins for which there's really only one or two references - and those references specialize in that particular area. However, I only need one or two coins in those references. If I picked up every catalog for my coins, I would have spent nearly the same amount as on the coins themselves, and I'd have a small library of books I'd rarely consult.

Similarly, for those collecting one of every roman emperor - does it really make sense to pick up RIC? IMHO that's only necessary if one specializes to all the coins from a specific emperor or some other way in which a single book will inform you on which coins you need to target.

 

The descriptions and numbering in OCRE are taken directly from RIC. That's what I use it for, not for the illustrations, which not infrequently are mis-cataloged. As is also true of CRRO. RPC Online is better.

Unfortunately, OCRE apparently makes no effort to include anything not in RIC.

 

Exactly! Wildwinds is a great help if your goal is understanding but the problem comes when it is used to 'farm' catalog numbers rather than understanding. ANY resource that provides photographs and readings of legends is wonderful but anyone who accepts the ID's of even the best sources without critical reading is likely to make an error here and there. Wildwinds corrects errors when they can but using even the original references in hand requires some practice and problems increase whenever the numbers are copied and copied again.

Long ago I posted a page on using RIC:
https://www.forumancientcoins.com/dougsmith/idric.html
but it really only addressed using RIC VII and VIII. Using the other volumes would have required a different skill set. I do not expect the full set of RIC volumes ever to be revised and printed as books on paper. The future of some volumes really is better suited to the online form as used by Monnaies de l’Empire Romain / Roman Imperial Coinage AD 268-276 http://www.ric.mom.fr

 

My unpopular opinions:

-Non-pictorial series (e.g. Chinese, most Islamic) are just as cool, historically interesting, and often even just as beautiful, as Classical Greek/Roman types.

-Athenian owls are massively overrated. I've never owned one, and don't plan to.

-"Hawaiian" pizza topping (ham and pineapple) is delicious and perfectly acceptable. (Pineapple by itself as a pizza topping... not nearly as good, but if you like it I won't hate you for it.)

 

When I was a member of the ANA, I would take advantage of their library loan and borrow volumes of RIC if needed. Shipping wasn’t bad if you got a couple books at a time, and then made personal copies of the pages needed