Just popping in from the modern coins section to share this really cool chart of sorts. Via reddit. Expandable image link: https://i.imgur.com/VqaUnxV.png
That graphic looks like something @Deacon Ray would come up with! Nice. Can you provide a link? The picture you posted doesn't enlarge and it looks worth enlarging
Sorry about that, I was posting from my phone. Edited and added expandable link. Thank you for pointing that out
Hmm. The Roman section says "Early Republic" and shows a denarius of Marcus Aurelius and an as grave as the base coin. Not quite
Very nice visual representation...but has some problems. I wonder why they ordered it the way they did.
I saw that on reddit this morning. Saved the image for my future ancient research. I wasn't sure it was exactly right though. Some of the stuff I saw was a bit confusing.
And where's the Aureus? I agree that the layout is nice, but it is a mess like other's said... I'd love to take a crack at making a Roman Imperial pre-Antoninianus infographic!!! That'd actually be kinda fun!
Here's a very (very!) simple visual I used to get across the basic concept and terms of some of the Roman denominations for my son's 4th grade class.
Well, yes, of course... I didn't want 4th graders snickering at it (or misinterpreting what I said when I pronounced it). I'd seen it referred to as Ace before, so I made the swap.
4th graders will definitely snicker. Man, I'm 46 and I still make As jokes. Well, the poster is a good idea, but need some work though doesn't it? It would make a cool 3 page "centerfold" style fold out wouldn't it?
I know we are told it is 'cool' to be nice and I am not cool but that chart approaches being harmful to education. Several problems are pointed out above but the one that bothers me most is the relative sizes of the images. I could accept it if all the coins were shown at the same size but they are shown larger for greater values and not at all proportional to actual diameters. They are not random but show a complete misunderstanding of the values of metals. The (tiny) silver sestertius in Early Republic is 2.5 times the size of the (massive) Liberal Aes Grave and a bit larger than the Trajan dupondius. I'd guess the intent was to show that the 2 1/2 as sestertius should be a bit larger than the 2 as dupondius completely ignoring the currency reforms in the intervening centuries. Others are similarly strange. Deacon Ray might come up with something like this but his would be well done.
Here is what I came up with for the area that I know more about, Early Imperial Roman Denominations. Thoughts? What did I get wrong and need to change?
I was thinking the exact same thing, @dougsmit !! I tried to represent them proportional in my draft and have a measurement key at the bottom "for good measure".
Other than the Nerva which needs changing, I like this. I might question the use of so many Neros and only one of the others. The entire thing could be done in coins of one person or each coin could be selected to show a different ruler. Either strikes me as better than the mix. I like the small denomination indicators but see no reason to leave off minimal coin ID's like "Nero, c.64AD"
Yep, I was originally planning on having it be all Nero coinage, for consistency, but was having trouble finding good photos for some of them. I now like the idea of having multiple emperors to show diversity for an audience just learning the denominations, and in that case having a minimal coin ID like your example would go a long way towards additional knowledge. If anyone has nice replacement images that they'd recommend to replace others to get a strong, diverse set, please share