Reply to Thread

Message:: [QUOTE="ErolGarip, post: 2820900, member: 88736"]"Sallent", yes, it was my first post and it was to learn first whether the ancient coins have numerals or not on them and thanks for your post. I've looked at many pictures (at google) of world ancient coins from east to west and with my novice eyes in this field, I've not seen any single ancient coin with any face value. Beside some earlier posts in this thread, your this post too verifies this. Ok, in so old days, as you said, their currency system, aparting/sorting out the coins, were based on their different materials and different sizes and maybe also some art/pictures differences as well, but, NO numerals at all even though they knew they were using numerals such as V(=5), X(=10), XX, etc, but, these were related to "vota/vows" of those so called legends/kings/royals. Aparting coins by their materials and sizes are still done even today. No need to mention blind people who use their fingers to sort out coins. In general, people in the world still do not look at the numerals on the coins, they just look at their colors which reflects materials, sizes, pictures on them. This approach can also be seen in naming 5cent by folks in USA as "nickel." So, about coins, today is not much different than those old days, people are not about the mathematics, but, more about materials, sizes, and so called legends on the coins. Ok, while we are at it again, let me write that ancient Roman currency coin system here that I found via google: Roman coins around 200BC (in the same era/years when the governmental authority was same): 1aureus(gold) = 2quinarii(gold, smaller size) = 25denarii(silver) = 50quinarii(silver, smaller size) =100sestertii(bronze) = 200dupondii(bronze, smaller size) = 400as(copper) = 800semisses(copper, smaller size) = 1600quadrans(copper, more smaller size.) If these numeral values which were not depicted on these coins were not a "speculation" by experts/numismatists of our days, then, they were "guessed" values based on some findings. Ok, I'll take these as true and I'll cointinue. In that era, c200BC, when there were all those coins above in the same region at the same time, what was their coin mathematics? First question to be asked related to this question is what was their "most important" coin? I can think of, any person even today can answer/say "their most important coin was 1auerus" as it was biggest value coin (at least, in this list above.) This answer maybe correct in economy, but, can be wrong in mathematics. In mathematics, "most important coin" is not about "biggest valued coin", it is about "unit value". So, in this old Roman currency system, I take "1quadran" as "unit value" and that 1quadran is the most important coin as it is in those all coins; quandrans, semis, as, dupondii, sestertii, quinarii, denarii and aureus and they didn't know either that their most important coin was 1quadran. Its equivalents of 1quadran of old Romans in our days are: 1 cent in USA/Europe, 1penny in England, 1yen in Japan, 1agora in Israel, 1kurus in Turkey, 1kopik in Russia, and so on. Now, it may be realized that I said: "most important money" is "unit value" of money and it is "1x" and it is usually a coin with 1x value today... (x=name of any coin, name is not important in the universe of mathematics that is equaivalent to universe of people in the world.) This (mathematical approach) DOES contradict with economical approach of people that doesn't care about "unit value" in money... Then, question arises: shall we keep doing mathematics in economy?[/QUOTE]

Log in or Sign up

Reply to Thread

Useful Searches