Need Help Iding This Gallienus Bronze

http://www.beastcoins.com/RomanImpe...allienus.htm

Compare your coin to 499 about 2/3 of the way down this page.

In many cases we have this problem. Students of the series can divide coins into groups that obviously go together but deciding whether those groups belong to different cities or to which cities is not always easy. Sometimes we get lucky as with the Alexandria mint denarii of Septimius Severus where the same mint made their Provincial tetradrachms and the style link is clear. Sometimes the traditional placement is based on a wild guess like 'Antioch was the most important city in th e East so we'll call that mint Antioch.' Sometimes there will be a clue like a grave inscription that suggests that a man worked at a mint for years so we figure there may have been one nearby. Later they started putting mintmarks on the coins that make it easy but in the time of Gallenus we are mostly reliant on style and how they indicated workshops. If coins can be chained together as likely products of one mint and one coin can be linked to a city, experts make something between an assumption and an exucated guess. If the metal in a coin can be linked by trace elements to mines in a certain region, they might asume that those coins are from that region. If finds of certain coins in mint condition are all from a region, they might assign the coins to that region. No one factor is by itself conclusive and new studies sometimes reassign what was once given to one city to somewhere else. I'm no expert in Gallienus so I don't know the basis for thinking that your coin was from Mediolanum but you can lay it out with coins of other proposed mints and see that it is different from Rome or 'Asia' (probably Turkey, Syria or the like - no claim being made to where exactly). It will be interesting to see what the next RIC edition does with these.