1/5/2024 0 Comments Sc on roman coins"what would it buy" is also a good question and not an easy one to answer specifically for Antioch or your coin. With multiple ancient systems that changed and differed over time and between ancient locations/governments. Aureus, Denarius, Quinarius, Sestertius, Dupondius, As, Semis Anyone have info about K & A?Ĭlick to expand.Both good questions - there were different denominations:Į.g. I haven't searched about this reverse type, as I don't have one. The other, proposed by Butcher in Coinage of Roman Syria, is that it stands for Δ EΠAPXEIΩN, "of the four eparchies," and is related to the imperial cult at Antioch (and later at Laodicea).Īdditionally, Elagabalus issued an AE type from Antioch with K and A above and below SC on reverse instead of Δ and Є (not my coin): Obverse: IMP C MAVONINVS AVG, laureate bust right, three dots at top of laurel.Ī while back I was doing some searching about the Delta and Epsilon and came across two opinions.įorvm's "moonmoth" contributor suggests that it stands for something like Demosia Exousia or ΔHMAPXIKHΣ EXOYΣIAΣ, Greek for Public or Tribunician Power. Reverse: ΔЄ across field, star below, all within wreath of 10 elements fastened at top with garland. Obverse: IMP C MAVR ANTONINVS, laureate bust right, three dots at top of laurel. Post-Caracalla Antiochene bronze and billion coins added Δ and Є in their fields:īut these examples below take them up a notch making them the prominent element on the reverse where an SC would appear, and the SC doesn't make any appearance on this coin type. With all this talk about SC meaning, and much of it relating to Antioch AE coinage, I'll toss these two coins out there. Are all SC's the same? Because someone writes a theory are we all to accept it without question? Did the people who made or used these coins know or care about the meaning of the SC? IDK.ĭo those reading this far see any significance in the SC being in Latin letters while the rest of the legend is in Greek? Can you ID the coin below? I regret no one commented, confirmed or denied my ID of the coin. Collectors need to discriminate between things from which they can learn and things better left to the scientists. Those destroyed coins will live on as historical documents even though they no longer exist as physical pieces of metal. Coins like this (or better most likely) were sacrificed by the scholars that determined the orichalcum used in them matched that used in Rome rather than in the East showing the coins were made in Rome and shipped East for use. There is no need to follow the fad believing that only Mint State coins are collectible but there is a lower limit under which the benefit gained is not worth the trouble for the beginner. I do suggest spending $10-20 on one 'book' rather than 2-20 piles of 'ashes'. I hate to see beginners spending hundreds of dollars on many things they will not learn from and passing them on to other beginners (often at a profit) who believe anything that old has some mystical value. When terribly corroded, they are like the ashes you get when you burn a book. I can not imagine why anyone would pay $5 for a coin with no details unless it were so rare that its existence was history. Coins with historical value need to retain enough design that they are identifiable with some certainty and show enough legends that you can read at least a bit of the history.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |