Log in or Sign up
Coin Talk
Home
Forums
>
Coin Forums
>
Ancient Coins
>
Roman Error and Not in Sear or RIC
>
Reply to Thread
Message:
<p>[QUOTE="lehmansterms, post: 2892402, member: 80804"]Bear in mind that at the rate at which antoniniani were being struck at that time (some estimate up to a million a <b><i>day</i></b> at a major mint like Rome) dies were "burnt up" at a furious rate. I suspect that if, in the process of addition of lettering to a nearly complete die, an apprentice engraver sneezed or just straight-up slipped with the burin and made a small inappropriate scratch, there was no way they were going to scrap that die and start over.</p><p>Also, when you're talking about the House of Valerian, you must understand that it wasn't until relatively recently that anyone made a really serious effort to wade through the astoundingly enormous body of surviving coins and make - if it's even possible - a truly exhaustive survey of types. RIC V, i, in particular is an example of how even the finest minds in numismatics at that time (late 1950's, early '60's) were overwhelmed in their attempt to produce a catalog of all the varieties the frantic action at the mints produced in the 250's-260's. "Not in RIC" really doesn't mean a great deal when you get into this body of material. To be able to say, for example, "Not in Göble" carries a much greater impact - but even that is not all that unusual and specialists are adding "newly discovered" variants all the time.[/QUOTE]</p><p><br /></p>
[QUOTE="lehmansterms, post: 2892402, member: 80804"]Bear in mind that at the rate at which antoniniani were being struck at that time (some estimate up to a million a [B][I]day[/I][/B] at a major mint like Rome) dies were "burnt up" at a furious rate. I suspect that if, in the process of addition of lettering to a nearly complete die, an apprentice engraver sneezed or just straight-up slipped with the burin and made a small inappropriate scratch, there was no way they were going to scrap that die and start over. Also, when you're talking about the House of Valerian, you must understand that it wasn't until relatively recently that anyone made a really serious effort to wade through the astoundingly enormous body of surviving coins and make - if it's even possible - a truly exhaustive survey of types. RIC V, i, in particular is an example of how even the finest minds in numismatics at that time (late 1950's, early '60's) were overwhelmed in their attempt to produce a catalog of all the varieties the frantic action at the mints produced in the 250's-260's. "Not in RIC" really doesn't mean a great deal when you get into this body of material. To be able to say, for example, "Not in Göble" carries a much greater impact - but even that is not all that unusual and specialists are adding "newly discovered" variants all the time.[/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
>
Roman Error and Not in Sear or RIC
>
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...