Message:

<p>[QUOTE=&quot;lrbguy, post: 2888952, member: 88829&quot;]I must confess to having been surprised to see the OP coin, since I retrieved it from the Post Office just today having purchased it this past week.&nbsp; The OP pic is from the seller.&nbsp; Here is my own photo (I like the writeup Roman Collector gave it):</p><p>[ATTACH=full]693809[/ATTACH]</p><p><br /></p><p>I bought it to go along with this one which has the same reverse inscription, but a different reverse type.</p><p>[ATTACH=full]693813[/ATTACH]</p><p>Rome, after AD 217</p><p>Obv: IVLIA PIA FELIX AVG, bare-headed and draped bust, right</p><p>Rev: MAT AVGG MAT SEN M PATR, Julia wearing stephane, standing facing left, extending olive branch in right hand; holding scepter in left.</p><p>This coin is referenced in BMCRE V as #11, while the coin above is #12.</p><p><br /></p><p>Mattingly places these two coins in the section for the sole reign of Caracalla (212-218), but lists them along with all the late issues (PIA FELIX) for Domna after the death of Septimius, from 211- 217.&nbsp; I am sure that is what confused the seller into thinking they are from the period when Geta was out of the picture.&nbsp; As Doug has pointed out, the use of the plural AVGG must date them to the one year that Geta survived his father, i.e. 211 A.D., which does not have a separate catalog section.</p><p><br /></p><p>RIC references the second coin as C380 (for coins from the mint at Rome after the death of Septimius).</p><p>RSC/Cohen calls it 114</p><p>I do not have access to Hill and am not familiar with the last reference RC gave above.&nbsp; Can we get him to give up those numbers for the second coin and some info on the T&amp;M reference itself?[/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