Log in or Sign up
Coin Talk
Home
Forums
>
Coin Forums
>
Ancient Coins
>
Mt First Sestersius
>
Reply to Thread
Message:
<p>[QUOTE="dougsmit, post: 2429834, member: 19463"]I'm with Carausius on this one. The coins scooped were not always just the heaviest ones but randomly grabbed coins scooped and returned to the batch until the magic number was achieved. There are heavy coins of the types that suffered the practice that were not scooped and underweight ones that would have not have been selected had they been selecting heavies. There are even (rare and I want one) coins that were scooped on both sides when the blank was grabbed twice and they failed to notice that the other side was already done. Were the consideration al pezzo, we would not have overweight unscooped coins or 3.2g (my lightest one, below) scooped ones. Of course some of its weight loss may be porosity. The acsearch one linked below at 4.17g would have been better scooped than my coin.</p><p><a href="https://www.acsearch.info/search.html?id=1537724" target="_blank" class="externalLink ProxyLink" data-proxy-href="https://www.acsearch.info/search.html?id=1537724" rel="nofollow">https://www.acsearch.info/search.html?id=1537724</a> </p><p>This is another study for someone to do. I don't know how many coins have been studied with this in mind. </p><p>[ATTACH=full]504751[/ATTACH] </p><p><br /></p><p>As far as bronzes are concerned, certainly it would be less important. At the peak of the sloppy standards period is this coins of Trajan Decius weighing 11.2g and looks to have used larger dies as appropriate for the normal 18g sestertii. I once thought it might have been made on a flan intended for dupondii but my actual dupondius of Decius weighs only 7.5g.</p><p>[ATTACH=full]504741[/ATTACH] [ATTACH=full]504742[/ATTACH] </p><p><br /></p><p>A highlight related to this matter is the less common Falling Horsemen of Constantius II and (as here) Constantius Gallus which are openly marked 72 for the weight of 72 to the (Roman) pound (328.9g). </p><p>[ATTACH=full]504744[/ATTACH] </p><p>Mine weighs 4.61g which means it is very slightly heavy (4.57g aim). You can never say anything about how the 'ancients' did something. In this case, I'd say Decius did not care as much as Constantius that year in that mint.[/QUOTE]</p><p><br /></p>
[QUOTE="dougsmit, post: 2429834, member: 19463"]I'm with Carausius on this one. The coins scooped were not always just the heaviest ones but randomly grabbed coins scooped and returned to the batch until the magic number was achieved. There are heavy coins of the types that suffered the practice that were not scooped and underweight ones that would have not have been selected had they been selecting heavies. There are even (rare and I want one) coins that were scooped on both sides when the blank was grabbed twice and they failed to notice that the other side was already done. Were the consideration al pezzo, we would not have overweight unscooped coins or 3.2g (my lightest one, below) scooped ones. Of course some of its weight loss may be porosity. The acsearch one linked below at 4.17g would have been better scooped than my coin. [url]https://www.acsearch.info/search.html?id=1537724[/url] This is another study for someone to do. I don't know how many coins have been studied with this in mind. [ATTACH=full]504751[/ATTACH] As far as bronzes are concerned, certainly it would be less important. At the peak of the sloppy standards period is this coins of Trajan Decius weighing 11.2g and looks to have used larger dies as appropriate for the normal 18g sestertii. I once thought it might have been made on a flan intended for dupondii but my actual dupondius of Decius weighs only 7.5g. [ATTACH=full]504741[/ATTACH] [ATTACH=full]504742[/ATTACH] A highlight related to this matter is the less common Falling Horsemen of Constantius II and (as here) Constantius Gallus which are openly marked 72 for the weight of 72 to the (Roman) pound (328.9g). [ATTACH=full]504744[/ATTACH] Mine weighs 4.61g which means it is very slightly heavy (4.57g aim). You can never say anything about how the 'ancients' did something. In this case, I'd say Decius did not care as much as Constantius that year in that mint.[/QUOTE]
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
Coin Talk
Home
Forums
>
Coin Forums
>
Ancient Coins
>
Mt First Sestersius
>
Home
Home
Quick Links
Search Forums
Recent Activity
Recent Posts
Forums
Forums
Quick Links
Search Forums
Recent Posts
Competitions
Competitions
Quick Links
Competition Index
Rules, Terms & Conditions
Gallery
Gallery
Quick Links
Search Media
New Media
Showcase
Showcase
Quick Links
Search Items
Most Active Members
New Items
Directory
Directory
Quick Links
Directory Home
New Listings
Members
Members
Quick Links
Notable Members
Current Visitors
Recent Activity
New Profile Posts
Sponsors
Menu
Search
Search titles only
Posted by Member:
Separate names with a comma.
Newer Than:
Search this thread only
Search this forum only
Display results as threads
Useful Searches
Recent Posts
More...