Message:

<p>[QUOTE=&quot;dougsmit, post: 2011159, member: 19463&quot;]this study was early in the realization that studies based on surface readings were flawed. As a result they drilled a small hole in the edge of tested coins and used the material removed for the tests.&nbsp; The holes were then filled. The plates in this article show one example of a drill hole.&nbsp; At the time, I declined the opportunity to have my coins participate in this study.&nbsp; I believed then and now that the meaningfulness of such a study would require a much more careful separation of the subject coins than their separation by mint.&nbsp; I believe that Emesa mint coins of the earlier period (first legend examples) should not be averaged in with the later COS II legend coins.&nbsp; Doing so makes the assumption that these coins all came from the same metal source and, for that matter, that the traditional mint assignments were correct (i.e. that Laodicea old and new styles were both from the same place).&nbsp; Most of all I did not trust the repair of the coins to&nbsp; be such I could not tell it had been done.&nbsp; To this date, I have not seen a coin known to ave been sampled by this team so I do not know just how perfect their repairs were.&nbsp; Had I felt their study was structured better to answer the questions I had regarding some&nbsp; of the early Emesa issues, I would feel worse about not participating but I still do not see myself allowing my coins to be drilled.</p><p><img src="https://html2-f.scribdassets.com/8s195vz5a8q6e1q/images/17-3c90e9c966.jpg" class="bbCodeImage wysiwygImage" alt="" 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