General discussion > General Discussion

New collector

<< < (3/3)

Victor:
RIC VI makes a distinction on the head size of RIC 14 and 20. RIC 14 has a small head on a long neck, while 20 has a large head with a shorter neck. This is a confusing and sometimes arbitrary way to classify. The new book on the London mint by Cloke & Toone group these coins together, merely noting that there are bust variations. I would list this coin as RIC VI London 14a/20, but of course you could also list it as 14a, since it has the small head/long neck.

For comparison, below is a Maximianus that I just sold. It has the large head and short neck; but I listed it as RIC VI London 6b/17.


the second coin, with S-A in the fields, is from Siscia, struck circa A.D. 294.
RIC VI Siscia 81a, RIC lists three workshops- A, B or Γ

Adriaan78:
I bought this coin in an auction yesterday. The description is saying it is RIC vi 171 for London. However, when i checked my newly aquired Cloke and Toone book (Which I love..!) I do not think it is 171. It must be one of the coins close by 171. I cannot figure out which one though...

Victor:
I am out of town now and can't check my references, but hopefully someone else will look at this.

Genio popvli romani:
Yes in deed, your coin is not #171 but #177 with obverse legend 1e and bust (BB).
Here is another example:

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[*] Previous page