Message:

<p>[QUOTE=&quot;kaparthy, post: 259, member: 57463&quot;]<b>The Devil is in the Details.</b></p><p><br /></p><p>I agree with you agreeing with me that quibbling over details must not detract from the enjoyment of the hobby.&nbsp; At some arbitrary point, however, the facts become factors, and you have to ask yourself just WHAT you are collecting.&nbsp; </p><p><br /></p><p>I agree that from our perpective, the Owl is a long and honored series.&nbsp; I only pointed out that it was not struck continuously for 500 years.&nbsp; Some of the hiatuses and lacunas lasted a generation and most of the gaps ran for decades.&nbsp; Image having no new coins from 1960-2000.&nbsp; Yes, from 4000 AD, that gap might not be so plain, but think about what happened in Athens while no Owls were struck.</p><p><br /></p><p>You misunderstand me when you say that I &quot;equated Owls with Athenian bronze coinage when the nickname &quot;Owl&quot; means Athenian Owl tetradrachms...&quot; I was refering to the &quot;Copper Owls&quot; the debased, perhaps silverplated, emergency coinage of 413-404.&nbsp; You said the Owl was always pure silver.&nbsp; That is not quite true.&nbsp; Again, imagine the very real situation where no silver Five Francs were struck in France from 1919 to 1960.&nbsp; You could not say that the 5F was a time honored coin of .900 fine silver from the days of Napoleon to the Present.&nbsp; So, too, with the Owl.&nbsp; It was debased.&nbsp; It was replaced with copper coins of the same stamp, which may have been dressed up in silver plating.&nbsp; Owning one of those Copper Owls is not the same thing as owning a silver Tetradrachma.</p><p><br /></p><p>I agree -- and in fact, checking Sear, I was surprised pleasantly: the had they same weight (and same metal purity, of course) for most of their 500 year run.&nbsp; Except for the emergency, and except for changes in style, it was pretty much the same coin, just as the $5 Gold US Half Eagle was pretty much the same coin from 1796 to 1908.</p><p><br /></p><p>You said: &quot;The Buffalo nickel, by its mere inclusion of a Latin motto, doesn&#039;t become classical. Its design motifs, very American, as in native American, are anything but classical.&quot; </p><p><br /></p><p>The STYLE of a coin is not determined by the Title of its Subject.&nbsp; In other words, if you think the Buffalo Nickel is &quot;native American&quot; style then I invite you to come to Albuquerque -- stop in Oklahoma on the way and listen to Native American radio while you are there.&nbsp; The Gallery Mint Museum, in fact, has a Buffalo Pattern that is in the &quot;Roman&quot; style.&nbsp; It is the same coin, believe me.&nbsp; That was his point in making the coin, to demonstrate that the Buffalo Nickel is a truly CLASSICAL design.&nbsp; Struck in Silver the Buffnick would pass on the streets of Rome by weight. Just about all coins would.&nbsp; </p><p><br /></p><p>HOWEVER, if you want to see some coins that would not, consider the 1999 DUTCH coins designed under the aegis of Her Majesty the Queen.&nbsp; Their modernism would have been a barrier even if they were GOLD.&nbsp; They are too unclassical to have been recognized as coins in Rome.&nbsp; Even farther from coindom are the modern &quot;medals&quot; that are really circuloidal sculptures, totally uncoinlike.[/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