Message:

<p>[QUOTE=&quot;BenSi, post: 3557474, member: 95174&quot;]The line drawings are great, they have a couple of small mistakes in their renderings, since I collect and specialize in tetartera I can mention on what I have found.</p><p><br /></p><p>He disputes the silver content on Constantinople tetartera issues but without reason, Meltcalf was the first to prove it in the 1960;s and Hendy reproved it with new tests in the 90&#039;s, he does not acknowledge this at all and tells the reader this was for ceremonial use only. he dismisses what was scientifically proven. They were in fact a different denomination than the Thessalonica issues.</p><p><br /></p><p>Die sizes, he makes the claim that 1000&#039;s of coins were tested, for dies sizes, I loved the theory but again if he had tested 1000;s of coins he would have noted that some of the coins had listed had three die sizes and not two. Perfect example of this is the Andronicus half tetartera he has at 15mm die size , I have several and the they have die sizes of 12mm, their is a 15mm but he missed their were actually three sizes 18mm, 15mm and 12mm. this is also true for coins of Manuel and Isaac II. His theory was very interesting and I would not have realized the three die sizes if not for his catalog but he truly did not test enough coins to prove this otherwise he would have been first to catch this. I also remember him emailing me for the die sizes on coins in my collection , if I replied to late he would say he already had it.&nbsp; ( Other collectors I respect say the die sizes for trachea in the book are not much help.)</p><p><br /></p><p>The rarity values are very off on the tetartera, the really rare ones were correct ( Basically a 5 was only one known.)but certain coins I had only seen 2 or 3 of in my collecting and he would give it as a rarity of 2 when in fact they proved to be much rarer. I think the rarity level was an interesting idea to add but I am certain they are misleading and not researched.</p><p><br /></p><p>His sizes and weights are interesting but he gives no source on where he found these. I think coin archives.</p><p><br /></p><p>Michael Hendy basically wrote the blueprints for post reform coinage of Alexius , Val is very critical in the text about some of his findings. That&#039;s okay but don&#039;t just say it, prove it.</p><p><br /></p><p>I knew Val, he at once asked me to participate in his project but I could not because of a new job, I also think he rushed the publication because of his illness, he passed from cancer a few years back. He had a good knowledge of the coins but could be very stubborn if you disagreed with him regardless of the proof you had to dispute them. </p><p><br /></p><p>I still think this is a great book for all of the visuals he included. I in fact have two copies, one I bought from his son that I have never opened , I am keeping it as a backup in case my original copy gets destroyed from overuse. </p><p><br /></p><p>I recommend it for anyone interested in the time period but now DOC series is free online, CLBC should be used as a supplement simply for the excellent&nbsp; drawings.[/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