C. H. V. Sutherland
- Archeology top 5%
- Anthropology top 10%
- History top 5%
- Classics top 10%
- Paleontology
- Topics
- Classical Antiquity Studies (12 papers)Historical, Religious, and Philosophical Studies (6 papers)Historical and Religious Studies of Rome (5 papers)
- Cited by
- ClassicsArcheologyAnthropology
- Partner nations
- United Kingdom
In The Last Decade
C. H. V. Sutherland
17 papers receiving 71 citations
Peers
Comparison fields: 5 of 31
- Archeology 76
- Anthropology 65
- History 34
- Classics 28
- Paleontology 14
Countries citing papers authored by C. H. V. Sutherland
This map shows the geographic impact of C. H. V. Sutherland's research. It shows the number of citations coming from papers published by authors working in each country. You can also color the map by specialization and compare the number of citations received by C. H. V. Sutherland with the expected number of citations based on a country's size and research output (numbers larger than one mean the country cites C. H. V. Sutherland more than expected).
Fields of papers citing papers by C. H. V. Sutherland
This network shows the impact of papers produced by C. H. V. Sutherland. Nodes represent research fields, and links connect fields that are likely to share authors. Colored nodes show fields that tend to cite the papers produced by C. H. V. Sutherland. The network helps show where C. H. V. Sutherland may publish in the future.
Co-authorship network of co-authors of C. H. V. Sutherland
This figure shows the co-authorship network connecting the top 25 collaborators of C. H. V. Sutherland. A scholar is included among the top collaborators of C. H. V. Sutherland based on the total number of citations received by their joint publications. Widths of edges represent the number of papers authors have co-authored together. Node borders signify the number of papers an author published with C. H. V. Sutherland. C. H. V. Sutherland is excluded from the visualization to improve readability, since they are connected to all nodes in the network.
All Works
| # | Work | Indexed citations |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | Roman Imperial Coinage | 26 |
| 2 | 0 | |
| 3 | Pertinax to Geta | 0 |
| 4 | Compliment or Complement? Dr Levick on imperial coin types | 3 |
| 5 | The concepts "Adsertor" and "Salus" as used by Vindex and Galba | 0 |
| 6 | 3 | |
| 7 | Scripta Nummaria Romana: Essays Presented to Humphrey Sutherland | 16 |
| 8 | The emperor and the coinage : Julio-Claudian studies | 7 |
| 9 | 0 | |
| 10 | From Diocletian's reform (A.D. 294) to the death of Maximinus (A.D. 313) | 2 |
| 11 | English coinage, 600-1900 | 4 |
| 12 | Gold: its beauty, power, and allure | 3 |
| 13 | 0 | |
| 14 | 1 | |
| 15 | 12 | |
| 16 | 9 | |
| 17 | 1 | |
| 18 | 31 | |
| 19 | 2 | |
| 20 | Coinage in Roman Imperial Policy, 31 B.C.-A.D. 68 | 4 |
About C. H. V. Sutherland
C. H. V. Sutherland is a scholar working on Anthropology, Archeology and Classics, having authored 24 papers that have together received 128 indexed citations. Recurring topics across this work include Classical Antiquity Studies (12 papers), Historical, Religious, and Philosophical Studies (6 papers) and Historical and Religious Studies of Rome (5 papers). The work is most often cited by research in Classics (28 citations), Archeology (76 citations) and Anthropology (65 citations). C. H. V. Sutherland has collaborated with scholars based in United Kingdom. Frequent co-authors include R. A. G. Carson, C. M. Kraay, Alfred R. Bellinger and Harold Mattingly. Their work appears in journals such as The American Historical Review, Archaeometry and The Classical World.
Rankless uses publication and citation data sourced from OpenAlex, an open and comprehensive bibliographic database. While OpenAlex provides broad and valuable coverage of the global research landscape, it—like all bibliographic datasets—has inherent limitations. These include incomplete records, variations in author disambiguation, differences in journal indexing, and delays in data updates. As a result, some metrics and network relationships displayed in Rankless may not fully capture the entirety of a scholar's output or impact.