>> Perhaps if you actually looked at some Gaulish coins then you would see
>> that they did use the Roman alphabet.
>This is faulty logic. Here's your syllogism::
>The coins are Gaulish.
>They have Latin inscriptions.
>Therefore Gaulish coins may have Latin inscriptions.
>But the question is 'are the coins Gaulish or Romano-Celtic or Roman?' So
>your basic premise is unproved.
>And it becomes circular when you use this false 'proof' as evidence that
>Gauls used the Roman alphabet on coins.
None of this makes any sense. Define "Gaulish", "Romano-Celtic", and
"Roman" in a numismatic context for me and I might better understand what
you are trying to say.
>> Also, the gold stater of Vercingertorix is in Latin letters, and (in case
>> you will claim this is a Roman coin!) the metal alloy is Gaulish and
>> absolutely not Roman who used very fine gold.The predecessor of
>> Vercingetorix also used coins of the same type with the name in Latin
>> letters. These are just a couple of hundreds of other examples.
>This is educated conjecture and needs to be carefully considered before it's
>taken on board. It just isn't fact.
Explain why you think this is not fact. Again, you are not making any
sense, and I can't argue such fuzzy thinking -- it has no substance.
>> Greek letters are seen on Celtic coins but they are rarer, and Allen notes
>> that psi, phi and omega do not occur at all. Sometimes, a mixture of Latin
>> and Greek letters is used (especially where there is a theta). Allen
>> out that about one in fifteen Gaulish coins contains some Greek element. I
>> don't think he included the use of the theta in this, but he is not
>> explicit. Theta shows up where other Greek letters do not (in Belgic Gaul
>> and Britain).
>That's interesting. INteresting interface, the Celto-Greek. Or is it
You have to understand that the prototypes of the earliest Celtic coins are
Greek, and that Celts were involved with Greeks through trade and served
with and against them in war. I use the term Graeco-Celtic when explaining
the artistic fusion that is characteristic of the evolution of Celtic coin
designs as they assert their Celtic style while maintaining the general
subject (such as Apollo head/chariot) of their Greek prototypes. Some later
Celtic coins followed Roman prototypes such as the boar design on Iceni and
Corieltauvian coins following the Republican denarius of C. Hosidius c.f.
Geta of 60 B.C. that depicts the Calydonian boar (Ovid).
>> example that I dealt with (handling the actual coins at the Ashmolean
>> Museum as my check) showed a twenty percent error rate in the published
>> data sample (not an Ashmolean publication I should hasten to add).
>By 'error' do you just mean disagreement with you? Or with the the
>particular peer-group concensus you subscribe to? Because where there's
>still guesswork happening, however cautious and however well-informed, it
>can't be used to determine the rightness of wrongness of another opinion.
LOL, You are way off on both, and rather rudely so. I mean data-entry
errors e.g. writing up one coin and giving it the catalogue number of
another, writing 5.72 g instead of 5.27 g, getting coins and their data
mixed up. that sort of thing -- sloppy work. Nothing at all to do with
opinions, theories or the like. How else would double entry and second
party proof reading help to alleviate the problem?
Hooker & Perron, Total Project Coordination
Database-Web...Graphics...Custom Maps...Colour Suites...Expert Systems
Building the Celtic Coin Index on the Web:
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.310 / Virus Database: 171 - Release Date: 12/19/01