Katalog
Warum registrieren? Nur um Bots aus unserem Katalog fernzuhalten. Ihre E-Mail bleibt privat — wir geben sie nie weiter und senden Ihnen nichts Unerwünschtes. Das garantieren wir Ihnen!
| Emittent | Uncertain Etruscan mint |
|---|---|
| Jahr | 240 BC - 225 BC |
| Typ | Anmelden um Details zu sehen |
| Nennwert | 1 Semis = 1/2 As |
| Währung | Anmelden um Details zu sehen |
| Material | Anmelden um Details zu sehen |
| Gewicht | Anmelden um Details zu sehen |
| Durchmesser | Anmelden um Details zu sehen |
| Dicke | Anmelden um Details zu sehen |
| Form | Anmelden um Details zu sehen |
| Prägetechnik | Anmelden um Details zu sehen |
| Ausrichtung | Anmelden um Details zu sehen |
| Stempelschneider | Anmelden um Details zu sehen |
| Im Umlauf bis | Anmelden um Details zu sehen |
| Referenz(en) | Anmelden um Details zu sehen |
| Aversbeschreibung | A large six-spoked wheel depicted in full face, centrally positioned within the field of this heavy cast bronze semis. The spokes radiate symmetrically from a prominent central boss or hub, and the wheel's rim is defined by a raised circular border. The overall style is archaic and schematic, characteristic of early Etruscan aes grave coinage. The surface is heavily patinated with natural bronze encrustation consistent with great antiquity. No legend or inscription is present. |
|---|---|
| Aversschrift | Anmelden um Details zu sehen |
| Averslegende | Anmelden um Details zu sehen |
| Reversbeschreibung | Anmelden um Details zu sehen |
| Reversschrift | Anmelden um Details zu sehen |
| Reverslegende | Anmelden um Details zu sehen |
| Rand | Anmelden um Details zu sehen |
| Prägestätte | Anmelden um Details zu sehen |
| Auflage | ND (240 BC - 225 BC) - With V to left - ND (240 BC - 225 BC) - Without V to left - |
| Zusätzliche Informationen |
Etruscan bronze coinage of this weight class belongs to a minting tradition that operated largely outside Roman monetary authority, though by the mid-third century BC the pressure of Roman expansion was forcing northern Etruscan communities into increasingly dependent relationships with Rome. Pieces of this size and type were cast rather than struck — the technology of the Roman aes grave tradition — and the specific mint attribution remains disputed among specialists, with Haeberlin's groupings still serving as the foundational reference despite more than a century of subsequent scholarship.
The ICC#168 classification places this among a narrow group of semis issues whose production window likely closed as Roman monetary standardization absorbed or displaced local Etruscan casting operations entirely.