Message:

<p>[QUOTE=&quot;red_spork, post: 24643979, member: 74282&quot;]<a href="https://www.academia.edu/330846/Roman_victoriati_in_perspective_from_the_other_side_of_the_Adriatic" target="_blank" class="externalLink ProxyLink" data-proxy-href="https://www.academia.edu/330846/Roman_victoriati_in_perspective_from_the_other_side_of_the_Adriatic" rel="nofollow">This paper</a> comes to mind where the author argues for this interpretation. As for me I&#039;m not sure whether the victoriati or the Capuan coins come first. The design was not something brand new and among others was featured on the <a href="https://www.acsearch.info/search.html?id=100305" target="_blank" class="externalLink ProxyLink" data-proxy-href="https://www.acsearch.info/search.html?id=100305" rel="nofollow">tetradrachms of Agathokles</a> well before either coin came about. We know both the denarii and victoriati have their origin in a relatively small window during the first half of the Second Punic War: sometime circa 217 to about 211 BC but exactly which year each of them came about and the exact sequence of early issues is quite mysterious and as far as I know no one is any more certain about the exact chronology of this Capuan type so it is hard to be sure one way or another at least for me.</p><p><br /></p><p>Some of the researchers of this era are more certain about the chronology than I am and might give more certain answers but I, personally, am still trying to reconcile everything.[/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