The abbreviation of the shilling is ß or ßl in many medieval and modern documents. The German silver schillings of modern times were comparable to the groschen and continued to mostly be worth 12 pfennigs. In northern Germany, from the High Middle Ages, the schilling was widely considered to be the sixteenth part of a Lübisch Mark and was divided into 12 pfennigs, as had been customary since the Carolingian coin reform. In the form of the groschen, there were again coins that (occasionally) had a value of 12 pfennigs. The schilling was no longer just a name for a quantity of 12 pfennigs. Depending on the local monetary situation, these multiple pfennigs had double, often 12 times and up to 20 times the value of the single, debased pfennig. From the Italian Grossino ( denarius grossus) came the name Groschen. From around 1150 onwards, in addition to the denar piccolo, which was greatly reduced in value, heavier multiple-denomination pfennigs denarii grossi were minted in northern Italy. The silver content of the pfennigs fell over the next few centuries. Thus the solidus was purely a coin of account as well as being a unit of weight and the gold equivalent of 12 silver pfennigs. Gold solidi (gold schillings) were a rare exception. In the Empire of Francia from about 800 AD, only pure silver currency was valid, the coin weight of which was based on the pound. However, the silver solidus or schilling was not minted in Carolingian times. The coin reform under Charlemagne in 794 established a new silver currency which specified that:ġ silver Carolingian pound (equal to about 406½ grammes) = 20 schillings ( solidi) = 240 pfennigs ( denarii). The coins are “made with a mold, not die-stamped as Roman coins usually are,” she adds, and they are also “nowhere near the metal standard of Roman coins of this period.The name schilling was originally given to the minted gold solidus, the late antique successor of the aureus. “here is still very powerful evidence that they are fakes,” writes Mary Beard, a classicist at the University of Cambridge, in the Times Literary Supplement. “They’re saying because of the coin there’s the person, and the person therefore must have made the coin.” “It’s circular evidence,” Richard Abdy, the curator of Roman and iron age coins at the British Museum, tells the Guardian’s Hannah Devlin. Some critics remain skeptical about the coins’ authenticity. “Not only do we hope that this encourages further debate about Sponsian as a historical figure, but also the investigation of coins relating to him held in other museums across Europe.” “This has been a really exciting project for the Hunterian,” Jesper Ericsson, a curator at the museum, says in a statement. In light of the Glasgow discoveries, researchers at the Brukenthal performed microscopic analysis on their coin, which “has revealed similar evidence of authenticity,” according to the Hunterian Museum. Another is kept in Romania’s Brukenthal National Museum. Only four coins featuring Sponsian are known to exist today, all of them from the 1713 discovery, per a statement from the Hunterian Museum, which houses one of them. The other coins in the University of Glasgow collection depict the recognized Roman emperors Gordian III and Philip I. “Our evidence suggests he ruled Roman Dacia, an isolated gold mining outpost, at a time when the empire was beset by civil wars and the borderlands were overrun by plundering invaders.” Pearson, an Earth scientist at University College London, in a statement. “Scientific analysis of these ultra-rare coins rescues the emperor Sponsian from obscurity,” says lead study author Paul N. OJCj0LfXhO- Paul Pearson September 16, 2021 The Roman "emperor" #sponsian - fake or real? tbc. However, the researchers now hypothesize that Sponsian was an army commander of a Roman province, and that coins depicting him were once in circulation.įascinating day of numismatic sleuthing at the wonderful museum collection today in Glasgow with Jesper Ericsson and Jacek Olender. These findings breathe life back into a man named Sponsian, whose image is depicted on some of the coins from the 1713 collection-and who is not a recognized historical figure. In a new paper published in PLOS One, the team found that the coins display “features indicative of authenticity,” including evidence of “extensive circulation-wear” and a “history of prolonged burial then exhumation.” The general consensus since then has been that they are forgeries.īut now, researchers have decided to re-examine four of the coins, which are kept at the University of Glasgow’s Hunterian Museum, using modern imaging technology. But by the mid-19th century, experts began to doubt the authenticity of the coins due to their odd, relatively sloppy design. In 1713, when a collection of Roman gold coins was unearthed in Transylvania, researchers thought they had struck gold.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |