I'm hoping folks can
help me with this one, as I'm torn whether it's
Rome or
Laodicea.
This coin is either
RIC IVa 135a (
Rome,
Rare) or 510a (
Laodicea, Common). to me the
portrait looks
Rome, but the hooked nose on
Moneta on the
reverse leans a
bit toward
Laodicea to my eye.
It gets a little more confusing from here.
Cohen lists 342 and 345 with the same
reverse and
obverse legends and does not differentiate between mints. Maybe someone smarter than me can divine what the difference between
Cohen 342 and
Cohen 345 is??
RIC links the
Laodicea coin (510a) to
Cohen 342 and
RIC makes no mention of
Cohen 345 anywhere, but
Mouchmov lumps this whole
type generically under
Cohen 345, and makes no mention of the (supposedly more common)
Cohen 342 in the
RD hoard records.
BMCREV lists no
catalogue number for the
Rome Mint variety, but references its existence on page 177, referring the reader to the identical coin from another "eastern"
mint as BMCREV 669. Usually
BMCRE equates "eastern
mint" with "
Emesa", while
RIC doesn't link this
type to
Emesa at all, and stylistically I've not seen an example of this
type yet with and obvious
Emesa obverse portrait.
So what does the group think here? Any
help to nail the
attribution would be much appreciated and feed my OCD for the perfect
attribution - lol.
My leanings as follows:
RIC IVa 510a based solely on the styling of
Moneta on the
reverse.
Cohen 342, in line with
Mattingly who authored most of
RIC and
BMCRE, and that
Mouchmov failed to differentiate between
Cohen 342 and 345, and simply elected to cite
Cohen 345 alone.
Coin here:
https://www.forumancientcoins.com/gallery/displayimage.php?pid=172586