Message:

<p>[QUOTE=&quot;Moe &quot;Wolfy&quot; Wilder, post: 24679002, member: 114824&quot;]None of the accusations and negative assumptions about my character or lack of knowledge are true. I started collecting ancients by cleaning uncleaned coins in 2001. I started buying and selling pounds of uncleaned in 2003 or 4, until my dealer (&quot;uncle&quot; Ernie) started undercutting the price points I needed to make a minimum profit. I am no fool. I am no scammer, nor troll. When I say I have something or had owned something in the past, I am nearly 100% positive, but I can be dissuaded if presented with counter evidence that it more closely matches another coin. Whether you believe me or not, I have been identifying very worn and corroded coins correctly for over 20 years, and I know when a coin is too far gone to be identified. I was taught how to do so mainly by the members of the Ancient Peddler&#039;s former mailing list and weekly private auctions. With just one notable exception, your responses have hurt me deeply and changed my opinion of you in particular and to a lesser degree, this forum in general.</p><p><br /></p><p>Regarding the Mankaphas, I posted to Zeno because I had no idea what it was. I only knew it was not a common Byzantine issue as people were saying. The expert seemed sure it was the ultra-rare 1204/5 Mankaphas issue. I did NOT have a fake account at Zeno.ru. AFAIK, the expert was who he claimed to be. I Had NOTHING to do with it. In Arnoldoe&#039;s post, the two coins pictured are different. Mine (top images) was &quot;supposed to be&quot; the 1204/5 issue and the other (bottom images) is the much more common 1188/9 issue. However, see next paragraph.</p><p><br /></p><p>To Quant.Geek, as I stated previously, I can be dissuaded by counter-evidence. I have no reference for Bulgarian Scyphates, so I honestly may have identified it as Bulgarian if I had a reference. I still know very little about medieval Bulgarian coins. I have, however, after a long search, seen images of the 1204 Mankaphas issue and there is a very close match. I didn&#039;t know how similar they appear to the Bulgarian issues. It is possible you are correct. I don&#039;t know why the expert was so sure, but he was.</p><p><br /></p><p>Finally, regarding the original subject, a Romulus Augustus bronze. I saw the letters ROMVLVSAV. I know for sure what I saw. To be honest, I didn&#039;t believe my eyes and had my wife (who didn&#039;t know the significance at all) tell me what she saw. The letters looked like they were covered with a light black crust. I dabbed a bit of oil on the letters, and they almost completely dissolved. i did not expect that at all (obviously). They are slowly coming back to focus and one day I might be able to prove it. I clearly see the VLVS and started this thread because I wondered if anyone else could. I understand the answer is &quot;No&quot;, and none of you can see it. I accept that. Since starting this ill-advised and ill-fated thread, I have come to the conclusion, that while it still could be an actual bronze coin of the last emperor, it is more likely to be a copper core of a contemporary forgery of a rather common gold tremissis from the final emperor. It is slightly smaller and lighter than the tremissis, but the design is the same. The mint would be a deciding factor but it was never extremely clear and I currently can&#039;t make it out at all.[/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