Message:

<p>[QUOTE=&quot;Valentinian, post: 3627104, member: 44316&quot;]There are quotes from good books above. Do not think that they are necessarily the correct answers. Harl wrote a book I recommend (but, with some caveats). Many of his assertions are stated as if they are known facts, when actually there is still much scholarly dispute he has not represented.&nbsp; I spent many weeks in major numismatic libraries reading and copying articles on topics like this Republican mystery and the denomination of the tetrarchal follis, etc. If anyone says the answers are known for sure, they have not read widely. &quot;A little knowledge is a dangerous thing.&quot;</p><p><br /></p><p>Last year I studied how Republican coins are dated (the methods, not just the results). There are two relevant pages on my site. Begin here:</p><p><br /></p><p><a href="http://augustuscoins.com/ed/Repub/TimelineTable.html" target="_blank" class="externalLink ProxyLink" data-proxy-href="http://augustuscoins.com/ed/Repub/TimelineTable.html" rel="nofollow">http://augustuscoins.com/ed/Repub/TimelineTable.html</a></p><p><br /></p><p>At the place on that page (141 BC and the following coins) where the changing denomination marks are discussed&nbsp; (X to XVI to a horizontally crossed X back to X) I discuss the uncertainty scholars have about what really happened and when. You can bet that in the next few years another scholarly article will come out with a somewhat different interpretation of events. Unfortunately, there are no relevant ancient documents other than the coins themselves. There are few easy answers. That&#039;s part of the fun of ancient numismatics.[/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