Catalog
See full images - free registration
Continue with Google - no registration!
or register with email
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!
Tetradrachm Apollokopf-Dickschrötling Type
| Issuer | Uncertain Dacian tribes |
|---|---|
| Year | 300 BC - 201 BC |
| Type | Log in to see details |
| Value | Tetradrachm (4) |
| 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 | Log in to see details |
|---|---|
| Obverse script | Log in to see details |
| Obverse lettering | Log in to see details |
| Reverse description | A highly stylised rider on horseback depicted in a prancing or rearing posture, moving to the left, executed in the degenerate Celto-Dacian tradition derived from Philip II of Macedon tetradrachm prototypes. The horse's body is rendered with bold, simplified modelling, with individual legs clearly articulated and a flowing tail to the right. The rider, shown in schematic form, appears seated atop the horse with a rounded head and vestigial body elements. The field is plain, with no legend, inscription, or exergual line, consistent with this uninscribed tribal issue. |
| 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 | ND (300 BC - 201 BC) |
| Additional information |
Dacian silver coinage of this period derived almost entirely from imitations of Macedonian tetradrachms, with Philip II's issues serving as the primary template. The so-called Dickschrötling — thick flan — variants represent a regional divergence from that model, where Dacian celators progressively abstracted the original types across generations of copying until the designs became schematic to the point of near-unrecognizability. Attribution to specific tribal groups remains genuinely contested; the Kostial and Göbl references reflect decades of scholarly disagreement rather than settled consensus.
The thick flan format itself suggests deliberate weight standardization outside Greek norms, possibly reflecting local exchange conventions among Carpathian communities not bound to Aegean monetary practice.