Message:

<p>[QUOTE=&quot;medoraman, post: 1101314, member: 26302&quot;]I agree with you Doug that they chose their fineness. But, there is a discrepancy between that and saying they had the ability to do .999 fine. Say the Venetians had a source of gold .989 or .993 fine, then it is easy to blend down to a standard. This is something even the first electrum coins in Lydia did. However, this is different than saying they had a source of 1.000 pure or effectively .999 pure and blended down. Taking away these last few impurities like others have said become progressively more cost and technology prohibitive. Without proof of consistent .999 pure ingots or coins from antiquity, (which I have never seen proof of), one cannot prove they have the ability to make this fine a product. If you have a good metallurgical source to cite .999 pure gold being consistently made in antiquity I would love to read it.</p><p><br /></p><p>Another way to say it would be if the Venetians COULD make .999 gold consistently, why did they settle on .986? Wouldn&#039;t it make more sense they settled on .986 since that was the highest fineness they could consistently produce on an ongoing basis? I doubt that .014 of impurities really made their gold coins stand up better in commerce, which is why US coins were never struck .999.</p><p><br /></p><p>Doug, yes I also know you have a book listing medieval gold coins as 1.000 fineness. I would like to hear what metallurgy tests they have to back that claim up.[/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