'The manuscript is undated. Cole calls himself Ortelianus, the adoptive name he used from 1589, so it was probably composed after 1588, the year in which Cole originally compiled his Fasti and the year before he wrote his unpublished Numismata Graeca. The way he signs himself with his father’s and grandfather’s name looks like an early feature, and so I would think it is likely that the list dates to the 1590s, probably indeed to 1597, the year which Cole gave for his summary, and when he was preparing his Fasti for a publication which never happened. Ortelius’s death in 1598 must be the terminus ante quem, since Cole mentions that Ortelius is looking for better specimens of some coins.
This manuscript consists of six paper leaves only. Its description is as follows:
f.1r: Catalogus numismatum coss D’ni Abrahami Ortelij [Catalogue of the consular coins of Mr Abraham Ortelius]
f.1v: blank
f.2r: Omnium Abr. Ort’ij nummorum consularium et similium inscriptiones, eo ordine quo a Fulvio Orsino in familiis Romanis exhibentur [The inscriptions of all the consular and similar coins of Abraham Ortelius, in the order in which they are set out by Fulvio Orsini in the Roman Families]
The list of moneyers and inscriptions then occupies the rest of f.2r, and continues on ff.2v, 3rv, 4rv, 5rv and the upper half of 6r; followed by the word ‘Finis’.
The lower half of f.6v has an explanation of the conventions adopted in the list:
'LECTORI.
Qui nummi una linea descripti sunt, uno tantum latere habent inscriptionem, qui duabus, utroque. Quae (his) literis italicis scripta sunt, denotant ea in Ortelii nummo trita esse, et ex F. Ursini libro descripta. Ubi in F. Ursino varios nummos ejusdem omnino inscriptionis descriptos vidi, eos quos habet A. Ortelius aliqua sigilli descriptione denotavi [3 dots in inverted triangle] Hi puncti denotant similes nitidos Ortelium desiderare. I. COLIVS, I.F.G.N. ORTELIANVS.'
[TO THE READER
The coins which are described in one line have an inscription on only one side; those with two, on both. What is written in (these) italic letters denote things which are worn on Ortelius’s coin, and are described from Orsini’s book. Where I have seen in Orsini several coins described with exactly the same inscription, I have indicated those which Ortelius has with some description of the type. [3 dots in inverted triangle] These dots indicate that Ortelius wishes for similar ones in good condition. Iacobus Colius, son of I[acobus], grandson of G., Ortelianus]
The list of coins is arranged alphabetically by family, and follows the abbreviations and conventions set out by Cole at the end, on f.6v, with the addition of some elaborate borders between each letter of the alphabet. He lists the families alphabetically, usually adding the inscription found on the coin. Where this is missing, then it probably indicates that Ortelius did not have such a coin. On that basis the list records 240 coins (with 47 families not represented in the collection). On five occasions, he refers to the work of Occo: ff.2r, 3v, 4v: ‘Vide Occonem’, in all three cases followed by a word that has been deleted; f.5r ‘Vide Otthonem in Occone’ (for Salvia); f.6v: ‘Vide Occonem in Agrippa’ (for Vipsania). The reference is to A. Occo, Impp Romanorum numismata (Augsgburg, 1579), the first edition of the standard reference book for Roman imperial coins, so here relevant only to very late Republican coins. Cole did not specify the metal, and most of the coins are clearly denarii, but there are also some bronze coins of Augustus, namely six quadrantes minted in his reign with revived moneyers’ names. There are also eight Augustan silver coins with moneyers names, and one coin of Galba, included because it had no portrait (as BMC Galba 211: TRES GALLIAE). Two of the coins had the Flavian countermark VES. One of the coins listed is a Brutus/EID MAR coin, a famous rarity. Cole also recorded the control marks on several of the coins. A few of the coins—such as the coins of Pompey or the Eid Mar of Brutus—are also marked as being in Ortelius’s collection in Cole’s copy of Occo (see Burnett 2020b, Chapter 8), since Occo’s book began with Pompey. The coin of Galba does not, however, suggest that the catalogue of Republican coins may have been made later than Cole’s annotations in Occo.' (Burnett 2020b, pp. 1389-90)
