They look rounder and more consistent than the Roman coins of the same time, like the Aureus (check the link for pics), even if slightly bowl-shaped. I wonder how much this is because of different minting techniques, versus the Celts not adding random junk metals to their coins to debase the currency.
Roman coins in the first century AD were still pretty pure, especially the Aureus. Not sure why these are so fantastic - perhaps a bit of a vanity mint? Coinage in the ancient world was often used as a means of displaying power and prestige, while the Romans were always a bit... utilitarian, comparatively. There's a much broader range of precision in other Celtic coinage of the same time and period
I think prestige vs. utility might explain it; perhaps the Romans were aware of better techniques, but didn't use them because they were seen as a waste of time/effort? It's just the contrast surprises me, the Romans had some pretty good metalwork (the Swiss army knife you posted is a good example), and yet their coins were rather sloppy.
Love these coins, though. Beautiful pieces.
Ditto. And it's interesting how their bowl shapes helped to preserve features from one of the sides.
Plz you give me the coins so I can have the monies for spend.
You gibe
Dude, you're doing it wrong. Let me show you wisdom from Tibia times.
/me cleans throat
BR? BR? HEUHAEUHEUHAE PLZ GIB SELT COIN PLOS I REPOT U 2 ROME IMPEROR
("BR" in this case stands for "Breton", by the way.)