The coin should probably be attributed to Augusta, although little can be read of the reverse legend, and the restoration must remain tentative. No coinage was previously known for Claudius, and, if the attribution is correct, then this large denomination (not previously known for Augusta at this period) would parallel the large denominations struck for Claudius at Anazarbus (RPC I, 4059).See now W. Weiser, ‘Neues zu kilikischen Münzen der frühen Kaiserzeit’, MÖNG 39.2, 1999, pp. 26-7. Cf. Giessener 101, 2000, lot 623 (AUGUSTANWN ETOYS with possible reading of the date as AI), 4.18.