Message:

<p>[QUOTE=&quot;Ardatirion, post: 645648, member: 9204&quot;]Estimating circulation from amount of wear is an inaccurate business at best.&nbsp; But judging from the wear on that, it did not circulate much. This does not necessarily mean that it was deposited in 210 BC or anywhere near that. If I recall the record of debasements clearly, that coin could have been in circulation as late as the reign of Nero, several years AFTER the invasion of Britain. Its not at all infeasible for a denarius (or hoard thereof) to be lost, found, and subsequently placed back into circulation. </p><p><br /></p><p>With regards to North American finds of Roman coins: they mean absolutely nothing. For a coin find to prove Roman contact with the Americas it would have to be a full hoard of many coins, found in a stratified context in an archaeological site. Stray finds or anything pulled from context mean absolutely nothing in this case. </p><p><br /></p><p>Any evidence of ancient contact with North America before the Vikings is always sketchy at best and always easier to explain through other methods. Do I think that ancient ships and traders stumbled across this continent? Yes. I honestly do. Do I think that coins or anything else serves as evidence for this? No.[/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