Coin Community Family of Web Sites Join Thousands of Coin, Bullion, & Money Collectors
Royal Estate Auctions - $1 Coin AuctionsCoin, Banknote and Medal Collectors's Online Mall 300,000 items to help build your collection! Join Thousands of Coin, Bullion, & Money Collectors Royal Canadian Mint products, Canadian, Polish, American, and world coins and banknotes. Vancouvers #1 Coin and Paper Money Dealer Specializing in Modern Numismatics








Username:
Password:
Save Password
Forgot your Password?


This page may contain links that result in small commissions to keep this free site up and running.

Welcome Guest! Registering and/or logging in will remove the anchor (bottom) ads. It's Free!

Question About Common Reverse Types On 4th Century Romans

To participate in the forum you must log in or register.
Author Previous TopicReplies: 3 / Views: 1,148Next Topic  
Pillar of the Community
Archraz's Avatar
United States
3499 Posts
 Posted 11/06/2011  1:24 pm Show Profile   Bookmark this topic Add Archraz to your friends list Get a Link to this Message Number of Subscribers
So I have noticed that certain reverse types are very common for 4th century Roman Bronzes. What causes certain reverse types to be much more common than others? Obviously, the length of an emperor's reign as well as the particular conditions which have allowed for certain types to be found in hoards are major factors. But, what I am also wondering is why it is that the "soldier stabbing fallen horseman" reverse type is so common in uncleaned lots? Is it just because so many coins were minted during Constantius II's long reign?
Thanks!
Edited by Archraz
11/06/2011 2:53 pm
Moderator
Learn More...
Sap's Avatar
Australia
16868 Posts
 Posted 11/06/2011  6:54 pm  Show Profile   Bookmark this reply Add Sap to your friends list Get a Link to this Reply
Let's ask a similar question. Imagine you're an archaeologist or coin collector 2000 years in the future. They might wonder, "Why is the design of the American quarter dollar with the eagle on it so much more commonly found than the other quarter designs?" Ultimately, the answer is the same as the answer to your question: "For whatever reason, the coin design remained unchanged for a long time."

Let's take three Roman emperors: Tiberius, Hadrian, and Constantius II. All ruled for quite a long time, by Roman imperial standards. The coins of Tiberius show every little variation - there are basically only two types of denarius. The coins of Hadrian show tremendous variation, with hundreds of different types featured on the denarius. The coins of Constantius II are once again only issued with a few different coin designs. SO length of reign is not the sole determinant of stable coin design.

Uniform, unchanging design of coinage is important if a government wishes to give the appearance of order and stability. The fractured state of the Empire at the time of Constantius II made central control and co-ordination of design important, giving the appearance of unity and co-operation, even if the reality was that the rulers of the various parts of the Empire hated each other's guts.

Countering this is the desire the government might have to use the coinage as "newspapers", telling the people the latest propaganda. Under Hadrian, there were all sorts of "good news" messages the government wished to convey. In the time of Constantius II, there was a general dearth of good news, so the generic "happy days are here again" message was as good as any.
Don't say "infinitely" when you mean "very"; otherwise, you'll have no word left when you want to talk about something really infinite. - C. S. Lewis
Pillar of the Community
Archraz's Avatar
United States
3499 Posts
 Posted 11/06/2011  7:36 pm  Show Profile   Bookmark this reply Add Archraz to your friends list Get a Link to this Reply
Sap- Thanks for the input. That does make sense. And so, ultimately, the fact that so many were minted, and with little variation, has caused them to not be common and not of great value. So, the lack of value is also why they are so common in uncleaned lots. I suppose that that all makes sense.
Pillar of the Community
United States
1549 Posts
 Posted 11/06/2011  8:01 pm  Show Profile   Bookmark this reply Add dougsmit to your friends list Get a Link to this Reply
One more thing: It happens that the horseman type came just as the economy was on the skids and weight standards changed frequently (always getting smaller). That meant people hoarded the good old coins in favor of spending the newer, lighter ones and the mints made more and more replacements which would be hoarded away, too. Had the weights not been changing so fast, each individual coin might have circulated longer and more would have been worn out rather than being saved. The coins that survived until today were not the ones that circulated in daily commerce but the ones that got put in a safe place for retrieval later. The original owners never planned for 'later' being 1700 years later.
  Previous TopicReplies: 3 / Views: 1,148Next Topic  

To participate in the forum you must log in or register.



    




Disclaimer: While a tremendous amount of effort goes into ensuring the accuracy of the information contained in this site, Coin Community assumes no liability for errors. Copyright 2005 - 2026 Coin Community Family- all rights reserved worldwide. Use of any images or content on this website without prior written permission of Coin Community or the original lender is strictly prohibited.
Contact Us  |  Advertise Here  |  Privacy Policy / Terms of Use

Coin Community Forum © 2005 - 2026 Coin Community Forums
It took 0.23 seconds to rattle this change. Forums