Web page check please (Title change)

I changed the thread title.

I think you are right .......... time is very precious to me now.

Thank you -- nice of you to say that.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

Thank you Deacon Ray. Your reply was, as always, most gracious.

 

Another suggestion, @jamesicus...

I understand about your sense of urgency regarding time. If you haven't done so already, I encourage you to repeat these posts on Forum Ancient Coins (often abbreviated here as "FAC"). The high quality content (and your webpages, such as the new Tetrarchs page) would likely be incorporated into their permanent "Numiswiki". FAC and its Numiswiki is a heavily used resource for ancient coin collectors of all levels. It would be nice to incorporate your knowledge and work into such a site, ensuring that it will be available for future collectors.

 

Yes, I am with you on that.

 

Thank you for that suggestion TIF -- I used to post on Forum Ancient Coins frequently many years ago -- before I became a crusty curmudgeon!

And thank you for your kind comments -- much appreciated!

 

@jamesicus this may or not be the place to post this, but a while back when I was researching storage methods I came across this post of yours from 2006 on the old ancients.info forum:

"When I first started collecting Roman Imperial coins (in 1939) the fashion was to keep them in those small acid free white paper envelopes, writing the coin description and attribution data on the outside in fine black ink. The envelopes were arranged and stored in those ubiquitous long and narrow cardboard storage boxes. I don't recall anyone taking particular care or exercising special precautions when sliding the coins in and out of the envelopes and handling them. The prevailing wisdom seemed to be that the patinated surfaces of Aes coins would not be harmed by normal handling. Likewise, I seem to remember that just about all silver coins were darkly toned from handling and storage -- as a general rule collectors didn't seem to polish or clean them at that time. Of course, gold coins retained their natural lustre in normal handling."

That was one of things I read that swayed me to paper envelopes. Ever since coming across that post I have paid keen attention to your postings here. I normally don't comment on them because they are out of my collecting niche, but I do read them. I just wanted you to know that your contributions are indeed valued, commented upon or not!

 

How very nice of you to remember that David. Thank you so much for your post -- and your much appreciated comments.

 

I'm sorry I haven't commented until this AM, but the usual issues of time and other intervening activities---not to mention access to this PC---limit my free time. I barely can keep up with the newest threads let alone those 'resurrected' ...

I have already 'bookmarked' the link. I'm highly impressed with how professionally the web page has been arranged and more than a bit in awe of all the effort it took to set up; the information within will be referred to many times in the future. Thanks so much!!!

 

Than you very much for that very nice reply, Mikey Zee -- most certainly no need to be sorry.

 

James: Thank you for the comprehensive posting in your other thread. Very nice detail. Although I do not collect the Roman Empire coinage, I have a representative from many of the Rulers. My focus is on The Roman Republic, and those entities that interacted with them during Rome's ascendancy to Empire. Although I understand most of Roman Empire History, I enjoy reading of their struggles as a Republic from 753 BCE up until Octavian.

That being said, I do not have the luxury of time to really delve into many of my passions. I own a business that usually pulls me into the maelstrom from 6:30AM to 7 or 8 at night. VERY similar to @TIF , posting and reading these threads are a quick welcome respite from the tensions of the day. It enables me to quickly interact, comment, learn in small snippets, and fuels my love for the Hobby. Ergo, many times I am remiss following comprehensive postings or segues to other sites. However, I in fact, really enjoy chasing those threads of info! I did see your site and felt that it was well laid out and simple for me to understand the info. Thanks! However, please forgive me at my stage in life: I am swamped, but I DO enjoy coming to the Ancients Forum as a means to "get away" for few-minute-breaks throughout my day.

Your posts are invaluable, and I do enjoy reading them. Unfortunately, I do not have the stretches of time that I wish I had to really "enjoy" them as I would like.

Thanks for your contributions @jamesicus ! I look forward to reading your future input!

OH! And I always like to keep my postings "honest". I like to post coins!

RANDOM:


Carthage Third Punic War Serrate Double Shekel 149-146 BCE 12.8g 26mm Wreathed Tanit - Horse r pellet below raised l leg SNG COP 403 scratches
(Last coinage of the Punic Carthage Empire before Rome rendered them Extinct...)

 

Many times members post excellent, but much enlarged, pics of their coins which sometimes leads to wonderment as to their actual size. At one time I included actual size of the coins I depicted on my web pages after careful pixel measurement, cropping and resizing (I normally depict my web page coins at 300x300 pixels). The results were not very satisfactory due to varying user computer screen resolutions and sizes etc. although they provided somewhat useful "ball park" scaling comparisons. I am considering re-introducing that feature on my current web pages.

Here is a link to an extraction from one of my archived web pages illustrating that feature:

Actual coin size depiction page extraction

 

Thank you for that insightful post, Alegandron. I understand your situation well -- I have walked in your mocassins. Actually, I have walked in all your mocassins.

 

That looks (and sounds) like a lot of effort. I understand the mechanics of what you want to do, but I don't see the rationale. You already know that "actual size" is going to vary with viewer screen size. So unless you further specify - "Those of you with 17 inch monitors are seeing this image actual size, the rest of you can get a sense of scale... maybe." - I can't tell what the viewer is going to gain by it. Personally, I feel a greater sense of "presence" with a coin image when I can easily pore over its detail. Is the effort going to produce something needed?

 

James: Agreed. However, a larger sized pic enables me to see details as described. Also, I try to ensure I add specs including diameter/width or dimensions if irregular, as well as weight.

 

Very nice website James. I just noticed this thread. You've packed a lot of excellent information about the tetrarchy in there and I think it's a very useful resource for collectors looking for an in-depth background study of the period and its coinage.

 

Using a different style sheet gives a different -- lighter -- rendition of the page.

Please click on this link to view it

 

Hi @jamesicus! Thanks for the link to your website.

I love the chronology of it. I am still trying to get my head around the time line and scope of the Roman Empire and all the rulers. I am making progress! I came across a time line on YouTube recently. I want to sit with it and your website and my coins and actually see where all of my coins fit.

You and everyone here already knows all of this, but in case you would like to see the time line presentation I am talking about, here it is:



Thanks again.

 

Oh! So that's where my moccasins went! Would you mind giving them back?!?

 

Thank you for that very informative reply @LaCointessa (love that name) and thank you for the link. As you can probably discern, my main collecting interest is the historical association of (London Mint) Tetrarchic coins and therefor Chronologies/Timelines are of great interest to me.