Why is this Augustus As "Altar Series" being labeled RIC I 230

[Robert K]

I bought this Augustus As yesterday, see photo below.
24.7 mm - 10.9 gms.
obv.: I can read CAESAR and then just make out MAX with a large amount of space in between.
rev.: I can read ROM ET ... in exergue.

With that information I assumed CAESAR PONT MAX obverse and ROM ET AUG in exergue. The reverse image is called the Altar of Lugdunum.

I located this in two places on Wildwinds:

http://www.wildwinds.com/coins/sear5/s1690.html - Ref Augustus AE As, RIC 230, Cohen 240, BMC 550
Augustus Æ As. Lugdunum Mint, CAESAR PONT MAX, laureate head right / Altar of Lugdunum, Victory on each pedestal, ROM ET AVG below. C240, BMC550.


http://www.wildwinds.com/coins/ric/augustus/i.html - search down for: RIC 230
sear5 1690   Augustus AE As. Lyons Mint, CAESAR PONT MAX, laureate head right / Altar of Lyons, Victory on each pedestal, ROM ET AVG below. C240, BMC550.


I am assuming they refer to RIC I - 230. My RIC I is the 1972 reprint.
RIC 230 is on page 82. 230 is a Denarius with obverse: IMP CAESAR AVGVST(VS)

But on page 91 RIC describes the Altar Series
Rev. ROM ET AVG (in ex.)
Then by obverses:
RIC I 360 is an "As" CAESAR PONT MAX

*** QUESTIONS ***
Are they referring to a different edition of the printed RIC - I then my 1972 reprint?

Are they referring to a different RIC such as an online RIC I have seen some people use?

Can anyone confirm or agree this coin is RIC I - 360?

Thank you very much.

[curtislclay]

RIC 230 in the new edition of RIC I published in 1984. Your edition of 1974 is no longer current.

[Robert K]

Is that the one edited by C H V Sutherland and Dr A G Carson with a more modern cover showing the colosseum and a coin?

Thanks.

[curtislclay]

It is by Sutherland. My copy doesn't have a dust jacket.

Colosseum unlikely, since the famous Colosseum sestertii of Titus are not covered by RIC I, they are in RIC II (which also has a new edition, publ. in 2007).

[Meepzorp]

Hi RK,

Nice coin!

Here is my example (first coin):

https://www.forumancientcoins.com/meepzorp/ri_aug_ae_pt07.htm

Meepzorp

[Meepzorp]

Hi RK,

Curtis is correct.

The RIC Augustus volume does not depict a colosseum on the cover.

If memory serves me correctly, the cover depicts an As of Augustus.

Meepzorp

[shanxi]

The RIC Augustus volume does not depict a colosseum on the cover.

Meepzorp

If you look on the homepage of the publishing house, you will see, that there is a 2018 reprint of RIC I which shows a picture (not a coin) of the colosseum. This edition was presumably meant by Robert K..

[Robert K]

The RIC Augustus volume does not depict a colosseum on the cover.

Meepzorp

If you look on the homepage of the publishing house, you will see, that there is a 2018 reprint of RIC I which shows a picture (not a coin) of the colosseum. This edition was presumably meant by Robert K..

Yes, that is the one I am referring to shanxi. Anyway, I ordered that, which is a 2018 reprint of the 1984 edition. I hope it is the correct one because It is about $178.

Thanks everyone.

[Robert K]

Hi RK,

Nice coin!

Here is my example (first coin):

https://www.forumancientcoins.com/meepzorp/ri_aug_ae_pt07.htm

Meepzorp

Of course I like your coin because all of the legends are clearly readable and the reverse strike is nicely centered. I really like the reverse of this coin which shows the Altar of Lugdunum. Apparently there was some occult happenings,  worship of who knows what and possibly sacrifices.

I kind of wish I had waited to find one with the reverse centered better like yours Meepzorp. But when I was talking with the dealer he said that would have increased the price by $XXX and I thought I will go with the one I bought.