Log in or Sign up
Coin Talk
Home
Forums
>
Coin Forums
>
Ancient Coins
>
The Riddle of the Sphinx
>
Reply to Thread
Message:
<p>[QUOTE="DonnaML, post: 6473286, member: 110350"]I said I wouldn't respond directly to J.J. again, so I won't. But I do think "trolling" is an accurate characterization. Despite his or her (I say that even though I'd bet at least a nickel that J.J. is a guy, no offense to the guys here!) later claim that all he did was show you that you're "not right," "without any hint of insult" -- a slight retreat from his (again, a best guess) original claim that he was being "kind" to you!</p><p><br /></p><p>Of course he didn't prove you to be "not right." Which is one of the reasons I agree that he's been trolling you. You may have noticed that he never once responded to my point, made several times, based on common sense, that there is no logical reason whatsoever (and he has failed to give one) why a coin produced by a Roman Alexandrian mint, administered by Greeks and Romans, would ever conceivably have been issued showing any crouching man-headed Sphinx (i.e., any sphinx that looks like the Great Sphinx) other than the Great Sphinx itself. Which -- as I showed by quoting Pliny the Elder -- was the one famous in the ancient world, preceding all others literally and figuratively. To repeat [USER=26302]@medoraman[/USER]'s point, which summarizes things more succinctly than I was able to, "Why would an emperor wish to celebrate a non-Great Sphinx? He is the emperor, he only associates with the best and most famous."</p><p><br /></p><p>Sometimes, it's difficult to prove the obvious. But I think we accomplished that in this thread to as great a degree of certainty as is reasonably possible. Of course it's always possible to nibble around the edges of an argument without ever addressing the center, and that's exactly what J.J. has been doing. And he's never even conceded that it's more likely than not that the coin was intended to portray, and would have been seen as portraying, the Great Sphinx. All he is willing to admit is that "perhaps" it portrays the Great Sphinx. Hence, the appropriateness of the troll designation.</p><p><br /></p><p>You might also have noticed that in his first few comments, he said nothing whatsoever regarding symbolism, and argued vociferously that the crouching "Andro-Sphinx" (man-headed sphinx) is equally likely to represent some other, smaller statue like the one -- actually, a pair -- in Alexandria. It's only after we showed how absurd and illogical that claim was that he started arguing that the sphinx on the coin was intended as a symbolic representation, essentially abandoning the earlier argument. By the way, when I said the Great Sphinx was 50 times as large as the two in Alexandria or any other, it seems I was being hyperbolic. In fact, while the Great Sphinx is 73 m. long and 20 m. high, the ones at Alexandria are 4 meters long and 2.2 meters high. So, not quite 50 times! See this helpful comparison in the book (available in Google Books) <i>The Sphinx That Traveled to Philadelphia: The Story of the Colossal Sphinx in the Penn Museum</i>, by Josef Wegner & Jennifer Houser Wegner (2015):</p><p><br /></p><p>[ATTACH=full]1258470[/ATTACH]</p><p><br /></p><p>[ATTACH=full]1258471[/ATTACH]</p><p><br /></p><p>[ATTACH=full]1258472[/ATTACH]</p><p><br /></p><p>But sure, the Sphinx on the coin is just as likely to be one of the others!</p><p><br /></p><p>Regarding the lighthouse: did you notice that in arguing that "lighthouse doesn’t neccesary equals Pharos," he cited a Roman Provincial coin minted in Syria, not Egypt? In other words, he failed to show any Roman Egyptian coins depicting a lighthouse not called Pharos, or not portraying <u>the</u> Pharos.</p><p><br /></p><p>Finally, he turns to an <i>argumentum ad verecundiam -- </i>the "argument from authority" fallacy, relying on the coin descriptions in one particular authority (i.e., the fact that RPC's descriptions apparently say nothing more than "sphinx" as opposed to "Great Sphinx") as supposed proof that he's correct. The problem with this argument is that the RPC's descriptions are almost uniformly laconic, and rarely have more than the most cursory description of the objects on a coin. I could do the same, citing a number of CNG's descriptions, which tend to be far more expansive. See, for example, <a href="https://www.cngcoins.com/Coin.aspx?CoinID=103789" target="_blank" class="externalLink ProxyLink" data-proxy-href="https://www.cngcoins.com/Coin.aspx?CoinID=103789" rel="nofollow">https://www.cngcoins.com/Coin.aspx?CoinID=103789</a>, describing a coin of Antoninus Pius as follows:</p><p><br /></p><p><font size="6">"<b>The Famed Egyptian Sphinx</b></font></p><p><b>Sale: CNG 75, Lot: 881.</b> Estimate $1500.</p><p>Closing Date: Wednesday, 23 May 2007.</p><p>Sold For $1500. This amount does not include the buyer’s fee.</p><p><br /></p><p><b>EGYPT, Alexandria. <i>Antoninus Pius. </i></b>AD 138-161. Æ Hemidrachm (13.78 g, 12h). Dated RY 2 (AD 138/9). Radiate head right / Sphinx couched right; star above, date in field. Cf. Köln 1310 for similar type; Dattari 3084; Milne 1613; Emmett 1731. VF, brown and green surfaces, the usual edge splits. Rare.</p><p><br /></p><p><br /></p><p>This wonderful reverse type depicts the famous Egyptian Sphinx."</p><p><br /></p><p>Or even this one, at <a href="https://www.cngcoins.com/Coin.aspx?CoinID=65847" target="_blank" class="externalLink ProxyLink" data-proxy-href="https://www.cngcoins.com/Coin.aspx?CoinID=65847" rel="nofollow">https://www.cngcoins.com/Coin.aspx?CoinID=65847</a>, describing an example of the Domitian Sphinx:</p><p><br /></p><p><br /></p><p><b>Sale: CNG 69, Lot: 1281.</b> Estimate $500.</p><p>Closing Date: Wednesday, 8 June 2005.</p><p>Sold For $2000. This amount does not include the buyer’s fee.</p><p><br /></p><p><b>EGYPT, Alexandria. <i>Domitian. </i></b>81-96 AD. Æ Obol (3.48 gm, 12h). Dated RY 11 (91/2 AD). Laureate head left / Egyptian sphinx reclining right; date above. RPC II 2646; Köln 396; Dattari 571; Milne 510; Emmett 327. VF, brown surfaces, pit on Domitian's forehead. ($500)</p><p><br /></p><p><i>From the Garth R. Drewry Collection.</i></p><p><br /></p><p>A rare numismatic representation of an Egyptian sphinx in the pose of the famous Giza monumental statue."</p><p><br /></p><p>But I won't cite them as proof, because that would be inappropriate. (I do love paraleipsis!)</p><p><br /></p><p>TLDR He's wrong and he's been trolling.</p><p><br /></p><p>PS: I'm lucky he wasn't around for my thread at <a href="https://www.cointalk.com/threads/new-hadrian-alexandrian-coin-with-traditional-egyptian-theme.373239/#post-5395208" class="internalLink ProxyLink" data-proxy-href="https://www.cointalk.com/threads/new-hadrian-alexandrian-coin-with-traditional-egyptian-theme.373239/#post-5395208">https://www.cointalk.com/threads/new-hadrian-alexandrian-coin-with-traditional-egyptian-theme.373239/#post-5395208</a>, discussing my Hadrian Nomes Obol from the Arsinoite Nome, portraying an image of a Pharaoh's head on the reverse, and presenting the evidence supporting the theory that it was intended to represent Amenemhat III. I'm sure J.J. would have been arguing that it could just as well have represented any other pharaoh, or the symbolic power of pharaohs![/QUOTE]</p><p><br /></p>
[QUOTE="DonnaML, post: 6473286, member: 110350"]I said I wouldn't respond directly to J.J. again, so I won't. But I do think "trolling" is an accurate characterization. Despite his or her (I say that even though I'd bet at least a nickel that J.J. is a guy, no offense to the guys here!) later claim that all he did was show you that you're "not right," "without any hint of insult" -- a slight retreat from his (again, a best guess) original claim that he was being "kind" to you! Of course he didn't prove you to be "not right." Which is one of the reasons I agree that he's been trolling you. You may have noticed that he never once responded to my point, made several times, based on common sense, that there is no logical reason whatsoever (and he has failed to give one) why a coin produced by a Roman Alexandrian mint, administered by Greeks and Romans, would ever conceivably have been issued showing any crouching man-headed Sphinx (i.e., any sphinx that looks like the Great Sphinx) other than the Great Sphinx itself. Which -- as I showed by quoting Pliny the Elder -- was the one famous in the ancient world, preceding all others literally and figuratively. To repeat [USER=26302]@medoraman[/USER]'s point, which summarizes things more succinctly than I was able to, "Why would an emperor wish to celebrate a non-Great Sphinx? He is the emperor, he only associates with the best and most famous." Sometimes, it's difficult to prove the obvious. But I think we accomplished that in this thread to as great a degree of certainty as is reasonably possible. Of course it's always possible to nibble around the edges of an argument without ever addressing the center, and that's exactly what J.J. has been doing. And he's never even conceded that it's more likely than not that the coin was intended to portray, and would have been seen as portraying, the Great Sphinx. All he is willing to admit is that "perhaps" it portrays the Great Sphinx. Hence, the appropriateness of the troll designation. You might also have noticed that in his first few comments, he said nothing whatsoever regarding symbolism, and argued vociferously that the crouching "Andro-Sphinx" (man-headed sphinx) is equally likely to represent some other, smaller statue like the one -- actually, a pair -- in Alexandria. It's only after we showed how absurd and illogical that claim was that he started arguing that the sphinx on the coin was intended as a symbolic representation, essentially abandoning the earlier argument. By the way, when I said the Great Sphinx was 50 times as large as the two in Alexandria or any other, it seems I was being hyperbolic. In fact, while the Great Sphinx is 73 m. long and 20 m. high, the ones at Alexandria are 4 meters long and 2.2 meters high. So, not quite 50 times! See this helpful comparison in the book (available in Google Books) [I]The Sphinx That Traveled to Philadelphia: The Story of the Colossal Sphinx in the Penn Museum[/I], by Josef Wegner & Jennifer Houser Wegner (2015): [ATTACH=full]1258470[/ATTACH] [ATTACH=full]1258471[/ATTACH] [ATTACH=full]1258472[/ATTACH] But sure, the Sphinx on the coin is just as likely to be one of the others! Regarding the lighthouse: did you notice that in arguing that "lighthouse doesn’t neccesary equals Pharos," he cited a Roman Provincial coin minted in Syria, not Egypt? In other words, he failed to show any Roman Egyptian coins depicting a lighthouse not called Pharos, or not portraying [U]the[/U] Pharos. Finally, he turns to an [I]argumentum ad verecundiam -- [/I]the "argument from authority" fallacy, relying on the coin descriptions in one particular authority (i.e., the fact that RPC's descriptions apparently say nothing more than "sphinx" as opposed to "Great Sphinx") as supposed proof that he's correct. The problem with this argument is that the RPC's descriptions are almost uniformly laconic, and rarely have more than the most cursory description of the objects on a coin. I could do the same, citing a number of CNG's descriptions, which tend to be far more expansive. See, for example, [URL]https://www.cngcoins.com/Coin.aspx?CoinID=103789[/URL], describing a coin of Antoninus Pius as follows: [SIZE=6]"[B]The Famed Egyptian Sphinx[/B][/SIZE] [B]Sale: CNG 75, Lot: 881.[/B] Estimate $1500. Closing Date: Wednesday, 23 May 2007. Sold For $1500. This amount does not include the buyer’s fee. [B]EGYPT, Alexandria. [I]Antoninus Pius. [/I][/B]AD 138-161. Æ Hemidrachm (13.78 g, 12h). Dated RY 2 (AD 138/9). Radiate head right / Sphinx couched right; star above, date in field. Cf. Köln 1310 for similar type; Dattari 3084; Milne 1613; Emmett 1731. VF, brown and green surfaces, the usual edge splits. Rare. This wonderful reverse type depicts the famous Egyptian Sphinx." Or even this one, at [URL]https://www.cngcoins.com/Coin.aspx?CoinID=65847[/URL], describing an example of the Domitian Sphinx: [B]Sale: CNG 69, Lot: 1281.[/B] Estimate $500. Closing Date: Wednesday, 8 June 2005. Sold For $2000. This amount does not include the buyer’s fee. [B]EGYPT, Alexandria. [I]Domitian. [/I][/B]81-96 AD. Æ Obol (3.48 gm, 12h). Dated RY 11 (91/2 AD). Laureate head left / Egyptian sphinx reclining right; date above. RPC II 2646; Köln 396; Dattari 571; Milne 510; Emmett 327. VF, brown surfaces, pit on Domitian's forehead. ($500) [I]From the Garth R. Drewry Collection.[/I] A rare numismatic representation of an Egyptian sphinx in the pose of the famous Giza monumental statue." But I won't cite them as proof, because that would be inappropriate. (I do love paraleipsis!) TLDR He's wrong and he's been trolling. PS: I'm lucky he wasn't around for my thread at [URL]https://www.cointalk.com/threads/new-hadrian-alexandrian-coin-with-traditional-egyptian-theme.373239/#post-5395208[/URL], discussing my Hadrian Nomes Obol from the Arsinoite Nome, portraying an image of a Pharaoh's head on the reverse, and presenting the evidence supporting the theory that it was intended to represent Amenemhat III. I'm sure J.J. would have been arguing that it could just as well have represented any other pharaoh, or the symbolic power of pharaohs![/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
>
The Riddle of the Sphinx
>
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...