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 | Uncertain city of Central Italy |
|---|---|
| Year | 301 BC - 201 BC |
| Type | Log in to see details |
| Value | Semuncia (1⁄24) |
| Currency | Log in to see details |
| Composition | Log in to see details |
| Weight | Log in to see details |
| 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 | A scarab beetle depicted in high relief at center, rendered in a schematic yet naturalistic style characteristic of Central Italian aes grave coinage. The beetle's carapace is prominently domed, occupying the majority of the flan. The surface is unadorned by legend or inscription, with the field left plain. |
|---|---|
| Obverse script | Log in to see details |
| Obverse lettering | Log in to see details |
| Reverse description | A sunburst motif composed of four broad, tapering rays radiating diagonally from a raised central boss, forming an X-shaped or saltire pattern in high relief. The rays are boldly cast and fill much of the irregular flan. No legend or inscription is present, and the field between the rays is flat and unadorned. |
| 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 semuncia denomination — worth half an uncia, one twenty-fourth of the as — occupied the lowest functional tier of the pre-denarius bronze coinage system of central Italy. Issues attributed to uncertain central Italian mints during this century reflect the broader fragmentation of monetary authority before Rome consolidated regional coinage under the denarius system introduced around 211 BC. Without a secure city attribution, this piece falls into a contested group that scholars have shuffled between Umbrian, Samnite, and Latin candidates across successive catalogues, with Haeberlin, Thurlow-Vecchi, and Sydenham each proposing different organizational schemes for the series.