As I stated in a previous thread on a different topic, I received a big heavy package in the mail today. I was happy to open it and find the 2005 Spink and Son edition of the BMC.

The 2005 Spink edition is bound in red cloth with gold spine lettering and is limited to only 350 copies (plus an additional 5 copies bound in leather). In the original editions and reprintsvolumes IV and V were each divided into two books, but both volumes are now contained in a single book. They were printed by Cambridge University Press who devised a method of reproducing the platesthat they claim make them "as good as the originals).

PUBLICATION HISTORY:
Vol. I by Harold Mattingly
Originally Published 1923
British Museum Press reprint 1965
Spink & Son reprint 2005

Vol. II by Harold Mattingly
Originally Published 1930
British Museum Press reprint 1966
Spink & Son reprint 2005

Vol. III by Harold Mattingly
Originally Published 1936
British Museum Press reprint 1966
Spink & Son reprint 2005

Vol. IV by Harold Mattingly
Originally Published 1940
British Museum Press reprint 1968 and 1976
Spink & Son reprint 2005

Vol. V by Harold Mattingly with the Second Edition being prepared by R.A.G. Carson and Philip Hill
Originally Published 1950
British Museum Press Second Edition 1975
Spink & Son reprint 2005

Vol. VI by R.A.G. Carson
Originally Published 1962
British Museum Press reprint 1976
Spink & Son reprint 2005

Harold Mattingly died in 1964 and as a result work on the BMC came to an end and it is highly likely that this set will never be completed after the passage of so much time. There is no coverageof coins minted after AD 238, so if you collect later Roman coins this set will be of little interest to you.

COMPARISON OF THE REPRINTS:
About a week ago I started a discussion on the merits of the 1960s reprints vs. the 2005 reprints. In that thread no one stepped forward with experience using both sets, so I was not ableto decide which set was superior. I am going to offer my opinion here and to share a few photos from each set in the hopes that it might prove useful to someone considering one or more volumes of BMCin the future.

I am going to be using the 1965 and 2005 editions of Volume I to make my comparisons. The first thing you will notice from the photo above is that the earlier British Museum reprint is about ahalf inch thicker than the Spink reprint. The 2005 is bound in a cloth cover that feels superior in quality to the older book, but unlike the older ones the 2005 is issued without dustjakets. Botheditions have sewn bindings, but again the 2005 seems to be constructed better, which since it is printed and bound by Cambridge University Press is no suprise.

To read the complete article, see:
Coins of the Roman Empire in the British Museum (Comparison With Photos)(www.cointalk.com/threads/coins-of-the-roman-empire-in-the-british-museum-comparison-with-photos.290124/)