Ancient Fourees?

Discussion in 'Ancient Coins' started by Clavdivs, Mar 4, 2018.

  1. jamesicus

    jamesicus Well-Known Member

    What a great thread! I really enjoy these kinds of discussions - they highlite for me just how little I really know about Ancient coins.
     
  2. Avatar

    Guest User Guest



    to hide this ad.
  3. red_spork

    red_spork Triumvir monetalis

    I very much wish I knew. I remember reading an article in the Celator sometime back where Scott Rottinghaus and others whose names escape me had dies engraved and experimented with hot and cold striking of coins. I think an interesting experiment along the same vein would be to get some good silver replicas(i.e. those from Antiquanova) and attempt to make transfer dies with them and use them to strike new coins, but I don't know anywhere near enough about metalworking to even try such a thing.

    I've attached some photos I managed to dig up of 10 dies found in Tilisca, Romania in 1961. The second image is from Crawford plate LXV which illustrates the die in the first column of the third row along with an apparently solid example from the same obverse die and of good weight from the Maccarese Hoard. Unfortunately I am unable to find my scan of the original publication of the Tilisca find so I cannot find whether or not there were any of the products of this transfer die found along with it.

    TiliscaTransferDies.png

    Maccarese-382.1-CNAEBALB-WithTransferDie.jpg
     
  4. EWC3

    EWC3 (mood: stubborn)

    Thanks Doug. That seems accurate.

    Of course, Oxford Prof Howgego called Crawford's position "untenable" and cites Prof Lo Cascio and Dr Burnett as taking similar positions - so the "crackpot" jibe rebounds on those who make it.

    But how did the situation come about? Here in the UK I feel I was taught to think critically at school in the 1960's. Things were rather the opposite for my children by the 1990's.

    And look at the situation with Moses Finley. In the 1950's his views were considered so obnoxious in the USA that he was banned from teaching. Yet, much along the lines you say, later his positions were venerated, he was almost beatified in the late 20th century.

    Personally I find both positions wrong, both the banning and the beatification. Actually, since I personally think he was both wrong and not straightforward, I find the beatification even more troubling than the banning.

    It seems we must study the present to understand the past, but also, we must study the past to understand the present. So forever we try to pick ourselves up by our own bootstraps.

    Much easier to just believe the teacher of course :(

    Rob
     
    Last edited: Mar 11, 2018
Draft saved Draft deleted

Share This Page