Reply to Thread

Message:: [QUOTE="LukeGob, post: 8155906, member: 73885"]I found what I was looking for with a reasoning for assigning these to the time of Vandal's rule of Carthage instead of Imperial. It seems I'm rocking a lot of outdated & incorrect assumptions about the dating of Vandal AE & that's coloring my confusion. Less sure then ever, but at least I know what to read now. That is what I love about all of these terrible little coins though, how little is really known about them. Especially the little imitative pieces that probably aren't even Vandal (can we go back to calling them "barbarous"? or something?). They're still 1,500 yr old coins with just as much to tell us about their time as any other ancient coin; more, even, since they're so poorly understood. Makes the, uh, ...creative ways they're often described when sold extra annoying. Horrible as they are, I love the things for what they are. I honestly think that eventually we'll have them organized, to a degree. Stylistic similarities run through a lot of them. Maybe/probably we'll never know who, specifically, struck which ones. But organizing them into sets that were at least each likely struck by the same tribe, whoever it was, by stylistic details &/or the types being imitated &/or etc I think is doable.[/QUOTE]