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 Liegendem Achter Type
| Issuer | Uncertain Eastern European Celts |
|---|---|
| Year | 300 BC - 201 BC |
| Type | Log in to see details |
| Value | Log in to see details |
| 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 | Hammered |
| 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 | Heavily stylised 'Baumreiter' (tree-rider) figure mounted on horseback, moving to the left, in the highly abstracted Celtic artistic idiom derived from the Macedonian horseman prototype. The horse's body is rendered in a schematic, almost disjointed manner typical of Eastern Celtic coinage, with limbs reduced to linear strokes. Four pellets are arranged before the horse, with an additional pellet below, serving as decorative or symbolic field elements. The rider is similarly abstracted, merging with the horse's form in the characteristic late Celtic artistic style. No legend or inscription is present on the reverse field. |
| 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 |
The "Liegender Achter" — literally "recumbent figure-eight" — type belongs to a cluster of imitative coinages derived from the Macedonian tetradrachms of Philip II, filtered through successive generations of Celtic reinterpretation until the original prototype became barely recognizable. Attribution to a specific tribe remains unresolved; the broad "eastern European" assignment reflects genuine scholarly uncertainty rather than carelessness, as the distribution of finds spans a wide arc from the middle Danube into the Carpathian basin.
Kostial 433 and Castelin 1274 place this among the more abstract derivatives of the Philip II tradition.