Hello all,
Please forgive what is likely to be a fairly lengthy post.
The most heavily used comprehensive reference (in English anyway) is of course
RIC. However many of the volumes are well out of date, and contain a significant number of errors regarding dating and assignment of mints etc.
If I outline my impressions of reliability volume by volume:
I: Seems to be pretty reliable, apart from Claudian-era bronze where it seems a little scratchy?
II: Relatively reliable, as so many of the coins can be easily dated from the titles, but not particularly ambitious for the undated coins of
Trajan and
Hadrian which it only gives to quite wide ranges.
III: Pretty much the same as II.
IV: Seems to make a number of serious errors in
mint attributions and dating, and again is not particularly ambitious in trying to date coins that are not explicitly dated.
V: Forgive me if this sound harsh, but I find both parts of Volume V to be almost useless. It doesn't seem to have been much of an advance on
Cohen at all, for example for Valerian &
Gallienus it only separates the listing by
mint (often inaccurate) and doesn't even arrange the coinage by the dates it offers, when it provides them. Even if correct it wouldn't seem to offer much of an advance to
Cohen in understanding the patterns of the coinage. Many
coins of Probus and
Aurelian, for example, seem to be misattributed for
mint and entire issues appear to have been completely omitted.
VI-X As far as I know these volumes are superior to most of the others, and I'm not aware of any bad mistakes, (although there are obviously several omissions and I presume there must be mistakes when dealing with issues this complex). Volume IX doesn't seem to venture much beyond the self-evident and the coinage of this era perhaps could be arranged more precisely?
In most of these regards
BMC doesn't seem to be much better, although it is preferable to have many more examples illustrated.
Any views on how
fair these assessments are?
Naturally then one might look for more accurate references and arrangements. I wonder if anyone might have formed a list of what could be considered the "definitive" arrangements as the current knowledge stands, even if this is articles/monographs on a reign-by-reign basis? (I am certainly NOT asking for anyone to produce one for me from scratch here, by the way)
Finally, I have access to a few references that go behind
RIC, and it would be nice to get an impression on how reliable they are in turn. (I haven't been able to find any specific reviews on the internet anyway)
1. Philip
Hill, The Dating and Arrangement of the Undated Coinage of
Rome AD 98-148.
I have trouble following some of the arguments presented, and I question whether this coinage can be arranged as precisely as it is in this book. David
Sear seems to have accepted it's conclusions
wholesale in the latest volume of
Roman Coins and Their Values, (sometimes dangerously as some of the
types he lists can be related to several listings in Hill's book, but he provides only the date of one). In particular I wonder about the remarkable conclusion that coins struck in the name of
Hadrian with lifetime titles were stuck under
Antoninus Pius? (
Sear 4537-4543).
2. Philip
Hill, The coinage of
Septimius Severus and
his family of the
mint of
Rome AD 193-217
Unfortunately little of the basis the arrangement is based on seems to have been published, and again I find it hard to credit that the coinage can be arranged as precisely as it has been here.
Both of Hill's books seem to be based on the "cycle theory of
mint production" that I understand is also the basis of
BMC vol VI? I have been told by
Curtis Clay that
BMC VI is unreliable for
Severus Alexander, so does that mean the basis of these two books is also on shaky ground?
3. Edward Besly & Roger
Bland, The
Cunetio Treasure.
I've only just come across this very interesting book. Although most of the arrangements are second-hand, the way they are presented seems convincing as far as I can tell (and it is great to have so many specimens illustrated, a major flaw in most
RIC volumes!).
Thanks if you've managed to read through this rambling post ... my thanks to anyone who is prepared to
help my understanding with any of these matters.
Best regards,
Steve