Numism > Reading For the Advanced Ancient Coin Collector

RIC VI Cyzicus 100

<< < (2/2)

Lech Stępniewski:
Thank you, Curtis and Barry, for your thorough investigations. I am convinced in 75% that there is a misprint in RIC.

PRO

1. Two or three specimens. One I have found earlier and the second I just found on the page http://www.arsantiqva.com/ (misattributed as RIC VII 2: see picture below - sorry for the poor quality because its a screen capture from the PDF file). Unfortunately the third specimen (from Wildwinds, misattributed as RIC 102)  has a striking weakness in very important part of the reverse legend (after AVGV) and we simply don’t know if there is only STI or STI CMH. I previously thought that space between letters suggests that there is no room for CMH but I found example of RIC 102 on the FORVM’s page https://www.forumancientcoins.com/pic3.asp?param=https://www.forumancientcoins.com/Coins/02515q00.jpg&id=4623&pak=937.09459&heavy=0
and now I am not so sure.

2. Parallel of the legends for Maximinus II and Constantine

CONTRA

1. Consensus between RIC, Maurice and Miss Robertson.

2. Inexplicable reason why in RIC VI Licinius has a separate number for this issue (i.e. 100) but Maximinus II and Constantine are listed as 101a and 101b

So the next task is to find that coin which was LISTED in RIC as Cyzicus 100.

curtislclay:
     According to a terse reply from the chief curator Dr. Dembski, the Vienna Cabinet contains coins of this type with BOTH of the obverse legends in question!

Lieber Herr Kollege!
Im Wiener MK liegen beide Typen mehrfach vertreten.
Beste Grüsse
Ihr G. Dembski

Curtis Clay at Harlan J. Berk, Ltd. schrieb:
> Dear Dr. Dembski,
>       Would you be able to check the obverse legend of this coin for me on
> the Ku Mu specimens?
>       RIC gives legend 1a,
>
> VAL LICINNIANVS LICINNIVS P F AVG.
>
>       However a Polish correspondent of mine has acquired a specimen with 1b
> instead,
>
> IMP C VAL LICIN LICINIVS P F AVG.
>
>       The question is, is this a new variant, or just a misprint in RIC
> which should have given legend 1b not 1a?
>       Unfortunately Voetter's Gerin catalogue omits this issue so doesn't
> provide the answer!
>       The important characteristics of RIC 100 are:
>
> rev. GENIO AVGVSTI, NOT followed by CMH
>
> ALTAR, not eagle, at feet of Genius
>
> Mintmark SMK, not MKV.
>
> So, does the obv. legend of the Ku Mu specimens of this coin begin VAL
> LICINNIANVS, or IMP C VAL LICIN?
>
> Best wishes,
>
> Yours,
>
> Curtis Clay
>

Lech Stępniewski:
Dear Curtis!

Thank you very much again for your help! If Dr Dembski is right, there are two variations of Licinus' legends in this issue. The old: VAL LICINNIANVS... and the new one: IMP C VAL LICIN... which was used by Licinius till his death. So unexpectedly the both opinions could be reconciled.

bpmurphy:
Sorry to bring up an old subject, but while working up a few new purchases for inventory, I came across an example of this variety, the existence of which has been questioned. Thought I'd post it here for all to see.

Barry Murphy

Lech Stępniewski:
Thank you, Barry, for this beautiful example of Cyzicus 100

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[*] Previous page