1. Thank you to forum members for your comments about whether my Aelius Homonoia hemidrachm was really part of the Dattari collection as listed in the original catalogue. (I remain doubtful.) 2. In the correspondence one member questioned the size and weight of my coin. When I checked I found I was mistaken. After making the correction I wanted to check to see how my coin fit into the series. Since I found the results interesting, I thought I’d share them with forum members. 3. I used the acsearch.info database, where I searched for “Aelius Homonoia.” Since there were differences among dealers in describing the denomination, I extracted all of the Homonoia enthroned pieces. It wasn’t that hard; there are under 30 unique entries. My coin is at the end of the table. Here’s the list Wouldn’t it be great if every dealer included the size and axis of coins in their catalogues? 4. My next step was to create a chart showing the distribution by weight. Although the sample size is small and there is one outlier, it does show two weight groupings 5. Finally I created a table correlating size (horizontal axis) and weight (vertical axis). Interestingly the data seems to show that the hemidrachm has less variance than the drachm. But again, it’s a small sample. Again, many thanks to those who assisted with my original question; I hope you find this information interesting. D
It might be best to combine this thread with the one in which you showed your Aelius so that we don't have to flip back and forth between the threads for the ongoing discussion. You can ask a moderator to do that (just click the report button and type your request, or send one of the moderators a private message). Where is the correction? I don't see it edited in the other thread nor did you post again in that thread. In that thread you listed your coin as being 33 mm and 11.77 gm. What was in error-- the diameter, the weight, or both? What are the actual measurements? [Edited: Oh, is your coin #28 on your table, 28 mm and 11.77 gm? If so, that is squarely within the expected range of a "hemidrachm".] Here is the entirety of Dattari's original section for Aelius: Dattari-Savio plate 103 shows all six coins listed in the original Dattari and none match your coin, so your coin is definitely not part of the Dattari collection as listed in the original catalog. It could still be an ex-Dattari coin though, as discussed in the other thread, but unless you can track the sale of the coin back to Dattari, you'll be taking that on faith. Could you add another column to that table to show what denomination the coin was called in the ACsearch listing? That might be interesting. Die axis doesn't seem important in for coins of Roman Egypt. It was usually 12:00 or close to that. I'm not sure there is any significant meaning to be drawn from minor variations. ... I might as well use this opportunity to show my Aelius coins again First, an incredibly generous Secret Saturn gift received last year: EGYPT, Alexandria. Aelius 137 CE Billon tetradrachm; 23 mm, 13.16 gm Obv: ΛAIΛIOCKAICAP; bare head right Rev: ΔHM EΞOVC VΠAT B; Homonoia standing left, holding cornucopiae and patera over garlanded altar Ref: Köln 1271; Milne 1539; Emmett 1350.2 Ex John A. Seeger Collection Gift from my CoinTalk Secret Saturn, 2018 Here's a diobol I picked up ~five years ago. EGYPT, Alexandria. Aelius year 2, CE 137 diobol, 24.5 mm, 11.5 gm Obv: ΛA IΛ IOCKAICAP, bare head right Rev: ΔHMEΞOVC VΠAT B, Homonoia standing left, holding patera and corn Ref: Emmett 1353.2
Hello TIF! 1. Thank you very much for looking up my coin in the Savio plates of the Dattari collection. Really appreciated your help. D
