Message:

<p>[QUOTE=&quot;Parthicus, post: 4836848, member: 81887&quot;]I think I should clarify that I do not believe that the OP coin has any Punic (or other non-Latin) inscription.&nbsp; My mention of the Punic Provincial coinage is merely answering the general question of whether Roman-issued coins ever used non-Latin or Greek inscriptions.</p><p><br /></p><p>The last Punic-inscribed North African coins were issued during the reign of Tiberius; after that, the North African mints shut down permanently.&nbsp; There were still occasional issues from Phoenician mints that included a single Phoenician letter in the (reverse) design; the latest that I found in my (quick and non-exhaustive) search was from Trajan, though I may have missed a later issue.&nbsp; But (and I&#039;m quoting David R. Sear&#039;s Greek Imperial Coins, the introduction to the section on Claudius II Gothicus): &quot;In this chaotic political environment most of the Greek Imperial mints had ceased to operate, with the exception of Cyzicus and a small group of Pisidian cities.&nbsp; Alexandria, which remained in Roman hands, also continued its large output of debased tetradrachms, as in the later years of Gallienus.&quot;&nbsp; So,, no mints were operating in Punic-speaking areas during the reign of Claudius II.&nbsp; I couldn&#039;t tell much from our photos, but the obverse inscription seems to be within what I&#039;d expect for normal (Latin) coins of that degraded period, with any oddities likely explained by poor workmanship at the mint rather than use of a (for the time and area) very unusual language.[/QUOTE]</p><p><br /></p>

Your name or email address:

Do you already have an account?

• No, create an account now.
• Yes, my password is:
• Forgot your password?

Stay logged in