Log in or Sign up
Coin Talk
Home
Forums
>
Coin Forums
>
Ancient Coins
>
What is the point with fourrée?
>
Reply to Thread
Message:
<p>[QUOTE="EWC3, post: 3157684, member: 93416"]Thanks - it seems we both agree that Grierson was wrong - or perhaps misspoke on that occasion?</p><p><br /></p><p>I agree with your last. Will mention a couple of things I have seen which seem relevant</p><p><br /></p><p>Plated fakes of ancient Mauryan silver karshapanas are very common - I have seen scores of them. But they all seem to come from surface scatter - I never saw one in a hoard. Reason? My guess - they were almost all rapidly spotted and thrown away in disgust by diligent users. </p><p><br /></p><p>This ancient gold fourrée situation is maybe the same. Any throwing away in disgust may well lead to them being over represented in modern finds.</p><p><br /></p><p>Even stranger, I once plotted the weights of some medieval commercial lead weights in two groups - some that were in good condition and some that were worn. The result was weird. The worn weights seems more accurately adjusted than the minty ones! Reason? My guess again - a proportion of the minty ones got thrown away early on - either because the vendor saw the market inspector heading his way, or maybe even an irate customer threw it at a miller as he fled? Ha! be careful about quoting this as it is a fairly flimsy guess - but still - the basic facts seem to be there.</p><p><br /></p><p>Anyhow getting back to the main point I started with - which was really to do with the general idea that in the good old days a pound of silver weighed a pound, and that we ought to revert to something like that practice. That idea is perennially popular. It became very popular in England around the 1670's, and again in the 20th century in the USA, at least in say the influential fiction of Ayn Rand etc.</p><p><br /></p><p>In both cases it got backed by influential thinkers. In 17th/18th century England by John Locke. I judge that turned out to be a very serious mistake. So did Adam Smith.</p><p><br /></p><p>In the 20th century USA senior academics like Miskimin and Velde have aggressively pushed the idea that coin always circulated by weight. I judge that too to be a very serious mistake. So did John Munro - maybe have a look at the paper he gave at Utrecht on Velde - its somewhere on the web. Seems to me he got quite angry about what was being put - (perhaps in part because it was written by a Federal Reserve bank employee - although that was never said)</p><p><br /></p><p>I see I am getting no "likes" for my position here. Oh well. One of my favourite books is Bertrand Russell's "Unpopular Essays"</p><p><br /></p><p>Rob T[/QUOTE]</p><p><br /></p>
[QUOTE="EWC3, post: 3157684, member: 93416"]Thanks - it seems we both agree that Grierson was wrong - or perhaps misspoke on that occasion? I agree with your last. Will mention a couple of things I have seen which seem relevant Plated fakes of ancient Mauryan silver karshapanas are very common - I have seen scores of them. But they all seem to come from surface scatter - I never saw one in a hoard. Reason? My guess - they were almost all rapidly spotted and thrown away in disgust by diligent users. This ancient gold fourrée situation is maybe the same. Any throwing away in disgust may well lead to them being over represented in modern finds. Even stranger, I once plotted the weights of some medieval commercial lead weights in two groups - some that were in good condition and some that were worn. The result was weird. The worn weights seems more accurately adjusted than the minty ones! Reason? My guess again - a proportion of the minty ones got thrown away early on - either because the vendor saw the market inspector heading his way, or maybe even an irate customer threw it at a miller as he fled? Ha! be careful about quoting this as it is a fairly flimsy guess - but still - the basic facts seem to be there. Anyhow getting back to the main point I started with - which was really to do with the general idea that in the good old days a pound of silver weighed a pound, and that we ought to revert to something like that practice. That idea is perennially popular. It became very popular in England around the 1670's, and again in the 20th century in the USA, at least in say the influential fiction of Ayn Rand etc. In both cases it got backed by influential thinkers. In 17th/18th century England by John Locke. I judge that turned out to be a very serious mistake. So did Adam Smith. In the 20th century USA senior academics like Miskimin and Velde have aggressively pushed the idea that coin always circulated by weight. I judge that too to be a very serious mistake. So did John Munro - maybe have a look at the paper he gave at Utrecht on Velde - its somewhere on the web. Seems to me he got quite angry about what was being put - (perhaps in part because it was written by a Federal Reserve bank employee - although that was never said) I see I am getting no "likes" for my position here. Oh well. One of my favourite books is Bertrand Russell's "Unpopular Essays" Rob T[/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
>
What is the point with fourrée?
>
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...