Catalog
Why register? Just to keep bots out of our catalog. Your email stays private - we will never share it or send you anything uninvited. We guarantee you that!
| Issuer | Carnutes |
|---|---|
| Year | 40 BC - 30 BC |
| Type | Log in to see details |
| Value | Log in to see details |
| Currency | Log in to see details |
| Composition | Log in to see details |
| Weight | 3.29 g |
| Diameter | Log in to see details |
| Thickness | Log in to see details |
| Shape | Log in to see details |
| Technique | Log in to see details |
| Orientation | Log in to see details |
| Engraver(s) | Log in to see details |
| In circulation to | Log in to see details |
| Reference(s) | Log in to see details |
| Obverse description | Log in to see details |
|---|---|
| Obverse script | Log in to see details |
| Obverse lettering | PIXTILOS |
| Reverse description | A draped figure, identified as a seated goddess, positioned facing left upon a throne or seat, with the left arm resting upon the backrest in a relaxed posture. The right hand holds an ornamental object interpreted as three intertwined serpents, a motif associated with Gaulish religious iconography. Before the figure, a volute in the form of an S-curve or esse occupies the central field, while an indeterminate object appears below the exergue line. The overall composition reflects the distinctive stylized conventions of the Carnutes bronze coinage series classified as the Seated Goddess type. |
| Reverse script | Log in to see details |
| Reverse lettering | Log in to see details |
| Edge | Log in to see details |
| Mint | Log in to see details |
| Mintage | Log in to see details |
| Additional information |
The Carnutes occupied the territory around modern Chartres and Orléans, and held particular religious significance among the Gallic tribes — Caesar noted that their territory served as the annual gathering point for the pan-Gallic druidic assembly. This coin belongs to a period immediately following the Roman conquest, when Carnutes political authority had been effectively dismantled but local bronze production continued, likely under Roman administrative tolerance rather than genuine autonomy.
Class V distinctions within this series are established by die typology documented in Delestrée-Tache, separating it from the earlier, heavier Class I issues struck before the Gallic collapse.