Message:

<p>[QUOTE=&quot;The Trachy Enjoyer, post: 7627643, member: 118358&quot;]With some further digging, I found <i>an</i> answer...its hard to say if it carries any weight with 6th century examples I was hoping to better understand.</p><p><br /></p><p>The following excerpt is from Michael O&#039;Hara &#039;s <i>A find of Byzantine Silver from the Mint of Rome for the Period A.D. 641-752</i></p><p><br /></p><p>&quot;Dr. W. Hahn has been kind enough to communicate the results of microchemical analyses on three silver fractions, two of type 15 (Pope Constantine), one of type 19 (Gregory III).</p><p><br /></p><p><i>Constantine:</i></p><p><b>ANS</b>&nbsp;&nbsp; 69,2 % Ag.&nbsp; &nbsp; 30,8% cu. </p><p><b>BMC 66</b>&nbsp;&nbsp; 36,9% Ag.&nbsp; &nbsp; 63,1% cu. traces of Pb </p><p><br /></p><p><i>Gregory:</i></p><p><b>ANS</b>&nbsp; &nbsp; 68,6% Ag.&nbsp; &nbsp; 31,4% cu.</p><p><br /></p><p>From Hahn&#039;s figures, although without a more comprehensive analyses this can only be speculative, one explanation which suggests itself for the heavier coins of type 15 may be that they simply had a lower silver content, perhaps due to a particular shortage of silver at that time.&quot;</p><p><br /></p><p>How relevant siliqua purity is from the mint of Rome in the 700s for Byzantine siliquae minted in Carthage in the 500s, I don&#039;t know. It seems that 70% would be the standard for 8th century siliquae at the least[/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