Message:

<p>[QUOTE=&quot;dougsmit, post: 7955897, member: 19463&quot;]In the earlier Empire, the reverse was almost always the hammer die and that was what defined it as the reverse.&nbsp; In those days, brockages all showed an incuse of the obverse.&nbsp; We start seeing reverse brockages around the time of the Gallic Empire.&nbsp; </p><p><a href="https://www.forumancientcoins.com/dougsmith/feac72bro.html" target="_blank" class="externalLink ProxyLink" data-proxy-href="https://www.forumancientcoins.com/dougsmith/feac72bro.html" rel="nofollow">https://www.forumancientcoins.com/dougsmith/feac72bro.html</a></p><p>I suspect some of these coins were struck with hinged pincher dies. </p><p><a href="http://www.grunalmoneta.co.uk/history.html" target="_blank" class="externalLink ProxyLink" data-proxy-href="http://www.grunalmoneta.co.uk/history.html" rel="nofollow">http://www.grunalmoneta.co.uk/history.html</a></p><p><img src="http://www.grunalmoneta.co.uk/hinged_die.jpg" class="bbCodeImage wysiwygImage" alt="" unselectable="on" /></p><p>I do not know the origin of the above photo but there is a dark rectangle on the die face that could support Sev&#039;s theory (which seems quite reasonable to me).&nbsp; I have never seen a coin with this &#039;mechanism&#039;.</p><p><a href="http://muzeydeneg.ru/eng/?p=665" target="_blank" class="externalLink ProxyLink" data-proxy-href="http://muzeydeneg.ru/eng/?p=665" rel="nofollow">http://muzeydeneg.ru/eng/?p=665</a></p><p><img src="http://muzeydeneg.ru/wp-content/uploads/2012/07/008-210x300.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