Volledige afbeeldingen bekijken — gratis registratie
Doorgaan met Google — het is gratis of registreer met e-mail

Waarom registreren? Alleen om bots buiten ons catalogus te houden. Uw e-mail blijft privé — we delen het nooit en sturen u niets zonder uw toestemming. Dat garanderen wij u!

1 Sextans

Uitgever Umbrian uncertain city
Jaar 225 BC - 213 BC
Type Log in om details te zien
Waarde Log in om details te zien
Valuta As (circa 225-213 BC)
Samenstelling Log in om details te zien
Gewicht Log in om details te zien
Diameter Log in om details te zien
Dikte Log in om details te zien
Vorm Log in om details te zien
Techniek Log in om details te zien
Oriëntatie Log in om details te zien
Graveur(s) Log in om details te zien
In omloop tot Log in om details te zien
Referentie(s) Log in om details te zien
Beschrijving voorzijde A stylized plant or club motif rendered in relief at the center of the oval flan, depicted as a vertical stem with symmetrical lateral branches and a rounded terminal, characteristic of the crude aes grave casting tradition. The design is bold and schematic, occupying the majority of the flat field. No legend or inscription is present. The flan surface shows typical casting texture consistent with early Roman-period Italian bronze issues.
Schrift voorzijde Log in om details te zien
Opschrift voorzijde Log in om details te zien
Beschrijving keerzijde Log in om details te zien
Schrift keerzijde Log in om details te zien
Opschrift keerzijde Log in om details te zien
Rand Plain
Muntplaats Log in om details te zien
Oplage Log in om details te zien
Aanvullende informatie

The uncertain Umbrian attribution reflects a genuine scholarly impasse — several inland communities north of Rome were striking heavy cast bronze during this window, and die links alone have not resolved the question of which civic authority commissioned this series. What is clear is the timing: production falls squarely across the Second Punic War's opening years, when Rome's Italian allies were under enormous pressure to demonstrate loyalty through material support, including coinage that integrated with the Roman aes grave system.

Haeberlin's foundational analysis of cast bronze remains the primary framework for attribution, though subsequent scholarship by Thurlow and Vecchi refined the regional groupings without settling the issuer.

MISSCHIEN OOK INTERESSANT