Log in or Sign up
Coin Talk
Home
Forums
>
Coin Forums
>
Ancient Coins
>
Whence "brass"? About "first brass," "second brass," AE-3, AE-4, etc.
>
Reply to Thread
Message:
<p>[QUOTE="Roman Collector, post: 3771872, member: 75937"]For bronze coins of the dominate (post AD 296), also known as late Roman bronze coins, the terms Æ I-Æ IV are still in use. Our own [USER=19463]@dougsmit[/USER] , in his <a href="http://www.forumancientcoins.com/dougsmith/denom.html" target="_blank" class="externalLink ProxyLink" data-proxy-href="http://www.forumancientcoins.com/dougsmith/denom.html" rel="nofollow">web page about denominations</a>, explains how these terms are used to refer to coins of various sizes:</p><p><br /></p><blockquote><p>"The system uses the abbreviation for bronze followed by a number 1 through 4: AE1 = over 25mm (Valentinian I); AE2 = 21-25mm (Honorius); AE3 = 17-21mm (Arcadius); AE4 = under 17mm (Theodosius I). Of course, there are still coin issues that straddle the lines with various specimens being, for example, slightly over or under 17mm. In this case you see a split listing 'AE3/4'."</p></blockquote><p><br /></p><p>Doug provides this helpful illustration of each coin size:</p><p><br /></p><p>[ATTACH=full]1008808[/ATTACH] </p><p><br /></p><p>The reason these coins are described in this way is that we truly don't know what the various denominations were called when they were in circulation. Nonetheless, there has been a movement in recent years to assign names to the coins, such as follis, maiorina, centenionalis, and such. David Vagi[4] and David Sear[5] are among the leading proponents of this movement. </p><p><br /></p><p>Of course, we would expect numismatists such as Banduri and Wiczay to use such terminology, and this is indeed the case. Banduri, for example, uses the term Æ III to describe the most commonly encountered bronze coins of Crispus:</p><p><br /></p><p>[ATTACH=full]1008825[/ATTACH] </p><p><br /></p><p>Wiczay uses Æ III and Æ IV to describe coins of Constantius II:</p><p><br /></p><p>[ATTACH=full]1008827[/ATTACH]</p><p><br /></p><p>Note his catalog describes coins of various sizes on this page. Nos. 4194-4198 refer to Æ II-sized coins. No. 4193 is an Æ III. Nos. 4204-4206 are Æ IV-sized. This terminology is still in use today for bronze coins of the late Roman period. </p><p><br /></p><p><i>Post anything you feel is relevant! </i></p><p><i><br /></i></p><p><i>~~~</i></p><p><i><br /></i></p><p>4. Vagi, David L. <i>Coinage and History of the Roman Empire, c. 82 B.C.- A.D. 480</i>. <i>Vol. 1</i>, Coin World, 1999, pp. 94-97.</p><p><br /></p><p>5. Sear, David R. <i>Roman Coins and Their Values II: The accession of Nerva to the overthrow of the Severan dynasty AD 96 - AD 235</i>, London, Spink, 2002, p. 24-26.[/QUOTE]</p><p><br /></p>
[QUOTE="Roman Collector, post: 3771872, member: 75937"]For bronze coins of the dominate (post AD 296), also known as late Roman bronze coins, the terms Æ I-Æ IV are still in use. Our own [USER=19463]@dougsmit[/USER] , in his [URL='http://www.forumancientcoins.com/dougsmith/denom.html']web page about denominations[/URL], explains how these terms are used to refer to coins of various sizes: [INDENT]"The system uses the abbreviation for bronze followed by a number 1 through 4: AE1 = over 25mm (Valentinian I); AE2 = 21-25mm (Honorius); AE3 = 17-21mm (Arcadius); AE4 = under 17mm (Theodosius I). Of course, there are still coin issues that straddle the lines with various specimens being, for example, slightly over or under 17mm. In this case you see a split listing 'AE3/4'."[/INDENT] Doug provides this helpful illustration of each coin size: [ATTACH=full]1008808[/ATTACH] The reason these coins are described in this way is that we truly don't know what the various denominations were called when they were in circulation. Nonetheless, there has been a movement in recent years to assign names to the coins, such as follis, maiorina, centenionalis, and such. David Vagi[4] and David Sear[5] are among the leading proponents of this movement. Of course, we would expect numismatists such as Banduri and Wiczay to use such terminology, and this is indeed the case. Banduri, for example, uses the term Æ III to describe the most commonly encountered bronze coins of Crispus: [ATTACH=full]1008825[/ATTACH] Wiczay uses Æ III and Æ IV to describe coins of Constantius II: [ATTACH=full]1008827[/ATTACH] Note his catalog describes coins of various sizes on this page. Nos. 4194-4198 refer to Æ II-sized coins. No. 4193 is an Æ III. Nos. 4204-4206 are Æ IV-sized. This terminology is still in use today for bronze coins of the late Roman period. [I]Post anything you feel is relevant! ~~~ [/I] 4. Vagi, David L. [I]Coinage and History of the Roman Empire, c. 82 B.C.- A.D. 480[/I]. [I]Vol. 1[/I], Coin World, 1999, pp. 94-97. 5. Sear, David R. [I]Roman Coins and Their Values II: The accession of Nerva to the overthrow of the Severan dynasty AD 96 - AD 235[/I], London, Spink, 2002, p. 24-26.[/QUOTE]
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
Coin Talk
Home
Forums
>
Coin Forums
>
Ancient Coins
>
Whence "brass"? About "first brass," "second brass," AE-3, AE-4, etc.
>
Home
Home
Quick Links
Search Forums
Recent Activity
Recent Posts
Forums
Forums
Quick Links
Search Forums
Recent Posts
Competitions
Competitions
Quick Links
Competition Index
Rules, Terms & Conditions
Gallery
Gallery
Quick Links
Search Media
New Media
Showcase
Showcase
Quick Links
Search Items
Most Active Members
New Items
Directory
Directory
Quick Links
Directory Home
New Listings
Members
Members
Quick Links
Notable Members
Current Visitors
Recent Activity
New Profile Posts
Sponsors
Menu
Search
Search titles only
Posted by Member:
Separate names with a comma.
Newer Than:
Search this thread only
Search this forum only
Display results as threads
Useful Searches
Recent Posts
More...