Message:

<p>[QUOTE=&quot;GDJMSP, post: 3003620, member: 112&quot;]I was so busy yesterday trying to take care of other forum issues that I simply didn&#039;t have to even think about responding in this thread. Today, I have been bit more lucky.</p><p><br /></p><p>So, Rob, what most others here are already aware of is that I know nothing, less than nothing even, about ancient coins. But every once in a while a post/thread comes along in this section of the forum where I might have something to say that might, stress might, be worth saying. But that of course depends whom you&#039;d ask <img src="styles/default/xenforo/clear.png" class="mceSmilieSprite mceSmilie8" alt=":D" unselectable="on" unselectable="on" />&nbsp; As it happened this thread was one of those cases which is how my comments ended up here.</p><p><br /></p><p>An example of what I am trying to get across to you Rob would be this. In your comments above, post #11, you mentioned the Muwahhid dinar. Well, I didn&#039;t have any idea what a Muwahhid dinar even was, so I had to go look it up. As I said, I know nothing about ancients. The medieval time period, about that I know a little. That said when I did look up what a Muwahhid dinar was I found something that, overall, seems to be a whole lot like what I have always found about the weights and standards of the medieval period. That being that things are rarely static when it comes to weights and standards for coins.</p><p><br /></p><p>For example, I&#039;ll quote a portion of a paragraph that I found here -</p><p><br /></p><p><a href="http://www.forumancientcoins.com/numiswiki/view.asp?key=Balog%20Weights" target="_blank" class="externalLink ProxyLink" data-proxy-href="http://www.forumancientcoins.com/numiswiki/view.asp?key=Balog%20Weights" rel="nofollow">http://www.forumancientcoins.com/numiswiki/view.asp?key=Balog Weights</a></p><p><br /></p><p><i>&quot;Dirhams varied quite a bit more in weight standard, and there are few reliable studies.The earliest dirham of Egypt was two-thirds the weight of the mithqal, or 2.82 grams, but in the course of the eighth century, Egypt had successively five different dirham weight standards.&quot;</i></p><p><br /></p><p>Now based on that alone it tells me that what I said above - nothing is static when it comes to weights and standards for coins. In the centuries past things were always changing. And as far as I&#039;ve ever been able to determine this continued until the modern age when the world as a whole began to adopt universal standards. So that&#039;s a beginning.</p><p><br /></p><p><br /></p><p><br /></p><p>What you&#039;re saying here, I get it, or think I do anyway. And I wouldn&#039;t say that I disagree with it based upon what I do know. For example, I am aware that as far back as lets say 100 BC it was common place for there to be moneychangers found in every marketplace and at every port. And these folks would set up their tables and as shoppers and or merchants, and or those coming off the ships as the case may be would exchange whatever currency the people happened to have for currency of the local area so that they could buy and sell more readily. These moneychanges even back then would use touch stones and karat needles to test the coins people wanted to exchange. And as a general rule these coins could come from just anyplace and be of widely different weights and widely different fineness. But their testing of them allowed them to make fair exchange. And typically, everything was different ! Even coins from the same country would be of different weight and fineness. This was because the minting entity, whoever it was, chose or decided what he/they wanted the weight and fineness to be at any particular time. If a ruler decided he needed more money in the treasury then he lowered the weights and fineness at his whim - and that&#039;s just the way it was. And if he decide he had enough money in the treasury but wanted to increase his standing, his reputation if you will in his world community (which usually means among his neighboring countries) then he would increase the wight and fineness of his coins and in effect say to his neighbors - There, let&#039;s see ya top that !</p><p><br /></p><p>This is the kind of thing I was talking about above when I talked about ego and or greed. And it is my belief that it was these simple concepts, these simple ideas that drove everything when it came to the weights and standards of coins throughout most of history. Now did trade enter into it ? Of course, but it couldn&#039;t have entered into too much, in other words it couldn&#039;t have had too much influence over determining the weights and fineness of coins for other wise we would not have the great diversity in standards that we do have. But there were exceptions. Venice for example, it was their creation of the Ventian ducat, and its static weight and fineness, in the late 13th century that allowed them to become the center of trade in the world at the time - and for centuries afterwards. And it was not until the Netherlands came along with their gold ducat, also having the same static weight and fineness as the Venetian gold ducat, that allowed them to supplant Venice and thus become the center of trade in the world.</p><p><br /></p><p>And of course between the influence of the two super trade powers over a period of 700 years give or take, the rest of the world also issued gold ducats ! Though they did vary in small amounts from time to time from the consistency that Venice and the Netherlands were known for. There has never been a coin, a single denomination, issued by as many different countries as the ducat. This coin literally changed the world, and change it into what we have today. Without it, it never would have happened. And it did this with its consistency, with its putting and end, to a large degree anyway, over the constant changing of standards. But over the years the value, the buying power, of the ducat changed greatly - the standards however remained the same, and still do even today.</p><p><br /></p><p>As for your comments about standards being linked to and yet diverging over time from previous and simpler standards - I&#039;d say it&#039;s almost a certainty that is exactly what happened. But I also understand it and think I know why it happened. For the very same reasons I noted above - ego and greed.</p><p><br /></p><p>I kind of see it like this. Depending upon the time period in question we had empires in early history. And it was those empires who decided what the standards were at the time they were in power - over their entire empire. But as those empires broke up and individual countries began to emerge the new powers that be had to also have standards. So what would be the natural thing for them to do ? Copy their predecessors, at the least to limited degree, and at the most to a very similar degree. But over time, as the same driving forces of ego and greed took effect, those standards changed.</p><p><br /></p><p>I think we see the same kind of thing happening with language. The romance languages for example, they are all based on Latin, the Roman language. And it&#039;s no coincidence, the Romans ruled all those countries. So it only makes sense that their languages were and are based on Latin. Even English is based on Latin, and of course Rome ruled Great Britain as well. So even language, like the standards, were based on, linked to, what came before.</p><p><br /></p><p>For me, the explanation of it all is very simple and it goes to basic human nature - man being man.</p><p><br /></p><p><br /></p><p><br /></p><p>This - I don&#039;t know. I understand what binary fractions are but I think the reasons behind it all are much simpler than that. Who knows, you could be right. But me, I don&#039;t wanna think that hard <img src="styles/default/xenforo/clear.png" class="mceSmilieSprite mceSmilie2" alt=";)" unselectable="on" unselectable="on" />[/QUOTE]</p><p><br /></p>

Your name or email address:

Do you already have an account?

• No, create an account now.
• Yes, my password is:
• Forgot your password?

Stay logged in