'The catalogue is over 200 pages long, and every coin is carefully described in Latin, each page being divided into two columns, so that later additions could be added (as they were, presumably in 1737–44). It was arranged by period and metal, then module:
1–67 Numismata Consularia Arg.
69–71 Deorum et Dearum in denariis capita. [Alphabetical list by deity, referring to Republican coins]
73–9 Numismata Consularia Aerea
81–6 Numismata Aurea (‘apparent rari nantes in gurgite vasto’)
1–232 Numismata Imperialia [bronze and silver], with Notarum Explicatio (232)
233–6 Numismatum Imperialium valores prout ab Ezechiele Spanheimio aestimantur. [a copy of this section (with minor variants) exists in Oxford, Bodleian Library, MS Lat. Misc. f.17]
[237–8] Index Imperatorum
The catalogue reveals his expertise. The descriptions of the coins are very detailed and good, and he devoted special care to the Republican coins which were his favourites. He did not add many comments, even when one might have expected some (e.g. for Otho, or for the coins of Gordian I and II), although he made an observation on the authenticity of the coins of Elagabalus’s ‘women’, stating that he was including them until better specimens turned up. Beyond that, he might query whether the coins of Hosidius Geta depicted a boar or a goat, and state how to distinguish Jupiter Axur from Jupiter Capitolinus. He did not provide regular references to publications, but he did sometimes cite the Arschot catalogue, Mediobarbus, Morel (sometimes disagreeing with him), Vaillant, and Banduri (especially when a coin was not included in Banduri’s book).' (Burnett 2020b, pp. 396-7)