Roerbakmix

In addition to @rvk's walk through, I just re-uploaded my 'how to clean silver coins' PDF again.

By popular demand I upload my guide on cleaning silver coins. This guide was made by me in 2022, partly using trial and error, and loosely based on a number of published studies. I was a bit more active in cleaning coins than I'm now, but regularly get messages asking for tips how to best clean a coin. To grab your attention, here is a 5 second GIF (note: not a still image), showing a timelapse of 10 minutes. I've uploaded print-screens; the PDF of the guide is enclosed as well. A number of coins / additions are not included in this PDF. Here are links to a couple of threads: Experimenting with different cleaning methods, some trial and a bit of error. A very thin (extremely rare) late medieval coin. A similar coin, but different types of encrustations A thread describing the removal of iron oxides (which are very difficult to remove) Another thread on dissolving iron oxides, now by HCl An example of the beneficial effects of Sodium Thiosulphate on the 'true toning' (silver sulphate) Cleaning low-silver content early medieval coins A number of different coin cleaning methods A detailed breakdown on the restoration of a 10-litra coin A failure; the effects of a cleaning method on a fourree. And a successfully cleaned fourree A fun experiment, with a timelapse Complete coin make over: a nerva denarius with both Iron oxides and horn silver The guide (note: the PDF can be downloaded below). Also, I'm in no way responsible for your coin cleaning adventures based on this thread 🙂 Horn silver.pdf

Thanks. Yours is nice; I like the chin. It’s not included in the die corpus (neither are mine): https://jaarboekvoormuntenpenningkunde.nl/jaarboek/2003/2003a.pdf Here’s a snapshot of my 2c sub-collection:

@Anaximander Besides the books you mention, the book by Tony Abramson (sceatta list, 3th edition) is an excellent introduction to the coin types. He groups the coins based on design, though he follows the series by Rigold. Most auction houses today refer to his book in auction descriptions ( e.g. SL 3-70). For a good understanding of the background, the books by Metcalf are still the standard work. The books on series D and E by Metcalf and Op den Velde are more recent and much more detailed than Metcalf. They can be found in this post: If you're interested, you can search @Nap's post history, or mine.

I also suffer from a similar disease, Hyperbolic Obsessive Sceatta Trauma Syndrome (HOSTS). Luckily, they're much smaller than attic tetradrachms.

Perhaps @AnYangMan.

I recently bought a small lot of sceattas from a UK coin dealer. He bought them from a metaldetectorist. Sadly, there was no provenance. The group lot contained 11 sceattas (4x series D BMC 2c, 4x series E, 1x series K, and 3x series C) - all from the late primary phase / early secondary phase. Two coins were an obverse and reverse die match, which suggest these coins might have been found together or at least in the same area. Instead of writing up a detailed post as I planned, I decided recently to post short threads instead of posting nothing at all. This week, I posted: An update to my nummular brooch The fun of being a specialist collector A Viking trade weight with a gilded silver inset Today's post will be on die-matches in my collection, and a brief introduction on the diverse series D BMC 2c sceattas, based on the publication by Metcalf and Op den Velde in 2003. The coins: The strike of coin 1 is slightly to the left, showing detail that is not visible on coin 2 (the large A). There is a large scratch over the bust, which is in the patina and (thus) must be old. Test cuts on sceattas are relatively uncommon, though three hoards (Cothen, Metz and Föhr) contained a high percentage of test cuts. Notably, one other coin in this group lot showed two small cuts (a series C, also on the bust), but to me these cuts looked more like scratches than deliberate cuts. Coin 2 is slightly more to the right, showing atypical runes for the issue (I's, with zig-zag lines between). This places these coins at the end of series D BMC 2c - see later. The reverse of both coins show a very atypical pelleted-annulet. Series D - a brief introduction The series D sceatta is usually attributed to the continent. Metcalf & Op den Velde (JMP 2003) note the stylistic similarities between the primary phase series A, and the later series C and R. The series is divided in three groups: BMC 2c: the largest group, with the obverse closely imitating series C the design of the bust, and the Runic legend AEPA (ᚫᛈᚪ). Yet, no die links between series C and BMC 2c have been identified. The reverse shows a central cross pommee, with four large pellets in each corner, surrounded by large pseudo-legends. This reverse design is not shared by any other series, however, it is not uncommon to encounter on Merovingian tremisses or deniers. BMC 8: the ‘reverse reverse mule’, a much smaller group of the series combining the reverse of BMC 2c with the reverse of series E. The presence of both BMC 2c and BMC 8 in the Aston Rowant and Remerden hoard indicate these coins were contemporary. No die-links between BMC 8 and BMC 2c have been identified. BMC 10: a rare, very small group (around 30 were known by Metcalf and Op den Velde in 2003). The bust is very similar to the Anglo-Saxon series A or (early) C, whereas the reverse shows a moon-faced ‘porcupine’ figure, though atypicial of series E. Three large, Latin letters spell “TILV” on the reverse, the meaning of which is unknown (an attribution to the Dutch trade port Tiel, or TILVS has been suggested).

I can see how it slightly mismatches with the design of the hallway, but why not go all the way and find the other 1150!

Instead of starting a comprehensive write-up and running out of spare time to finish it, I've decided to write short threads on a series of additions. I explained and illustrated the fun of being a specialist collector, and posted about a Viking trade weight with gilded silver inlay. Today, I'll give you an update on my nummular brooch, and ask for help of Medieval specialists such as @Tejas, @JeandAcre, @John Conduitt, @AnYangMan and @Nap. The nummular brooch, or pseudo-coin fibula, was discussed here when I bought it back in 2022, freshly dug from Zeeland, a coastal province in the Netherlands. The obverse shows a figure to the right, with a legend that has so far defied interpretation: it's either a garbled pseudo-legend, or names a local chieftain from the period (who knows!) Fouth letter = C : EVOCNCVS, EVOCHCVS, EVOCACVS Fouth letter = G : EVOGNCVS, EVOGHCVS, EVOGACVS Fouth letter = N : EVONNCVS, EVONHCVS, EVONACVS or, with the CVS >> DVS: Fouth letter = C : EVOCNDVS, EVOCHDVS, EVOCADVS Fouth letter = G : EVOGNDVS, EVOGHDVS, EVOGADVS Fouth letter = N : EVONNDVS, EVONHDVS, EVONADVS I shared photos of the brooch with Frisian linguists, hoping for an interpretation, and though it sparkled interest and discussion, no sensible interpretation followed. I also discussed it with Simon Coupland, the foremost authority on Carolingian coinage couldn't make sense of it either. In the end, with help from @AnYangMan who found photo's of similar examples, we tentatively dated is as Carolingian. In the past two years, I've searched for examples online, both in databases such as PAS (and the Dutch equivalent PAN), the Dutch NUMIS database, but also on fora of metal detectorists. I found a number of poor examples, all die-match (or 'mold match', more correctly). The update ... The update regards the reverse. On my brooch, this is just the incuse of the obverse. On a metal detectorist forum, I found a thread that provides new information on my example. I edited the photo's and tweaked a bit with the contrast to make it more legible: The brooch is 26 mm (mine is 34) and it weighs 4.95g (mine 10.53). No find location was given, and so far, the finder hasn't reacted to my request for more information. I was immediately interested by the reverse which on this example wasn't incuse, but showed a legend between two circles, with a small central cross, much like Carolingian and Ottonian coins. The obverse was very similar to mine - in fact: it was a die-match. Here, I show both obverses together, true to size: Having thus concluded that the obverses were die-matched ('mold matched'), both brooch had to be made in the same workshop. The reverse of the new find is thus relevant to my example. Again, I tweaked a bit with brightness and contrast: But here I'm stuck again: what is the reading of the legend? The letters I'm quite certain about: +bYB.T..N... perhaps: +bYBUT..N..A But really - though it feels I'm close to a more precise dating of my brooch, I'm stuck again! Feel free to speculate on the reading 🙂

Following my post yesterday on a Viking trade weight with gilded silver inlay (>>link<<), today I'll post a little write up on a very recent addition which illustrates a fun aspect of a specialist collection: identifying rare varieties. The deeper down the rabbit hole, the easier it becomes to spot them. First, the coin. Series A - imitative. Obv: Bust with curved diadem to the left. Large letter A before. Reverse: Beaded square around radiating Ts and Is around central pellet. Weight and diameter: still have to measure it 🙂 Tony Abramson places this coin under series A in Sceatta List, under #3-70 (photo SPINK, AUCTION 21060, LOT 600), edited by me to give the correct orientation of the reverse. This specimen from the Abramson collection is the only other example I could find, which makes my coin the second known. It's clearly a die-match, both obv. and rev. Series A is the earliest series of sceattas following the gold Thrymsa's. They are dated ~ 680 AD and are usually attributed to East Anglia. The series typically show a bust to the right with Latin "TIC" before. After 680, the series evolved to series C and, later, series R. So what makes this coin stand out? First: it's left facing. As in other fields, left facing sceattas are very rare. In series E, the most diverse, unstandardized and imitated series, only a very small fraction (my estimation is 1:100 coins) are left facing - in the other series, this is even less common. Second, the orientation of the TT II on the reverse is very uncommon. Even in the later and less standardized series R, the letters on the reverse almost invariably show "TT o II" with the TT's vertical. Though admittedly this is a very minor deviation, it's uncommon. Finally, the large A before the bust (clearly visible on my coin) is odd and must have some meaning. My coin adds this design, as it's off flan of the coin from the Abramson collection (which is an obv/rev die match). The same A is closely copied by Series A, C, and R. Series A was quickly imitated on the continent, leading to series D, with (in contrast to series A) has Runic legends (usually reading EPA). On many coins from series D, also behind the bust, there is the same large A. See for example this coin from my collection: (which, by the way, is also a recent addition). So the A must have had some meaning, as it was so closely copied in series A, C, D, and R - even on the more imitative / unstandardized specimens. Perhaps the answer lies in the more off-center examples: on my coin, there's also part of a letter visible below the A, perhaps a V? Unfortunately, the dies of sceattas were usually much larger than the coins, so we'll have to wait for an example that is off-center to the lower-left. Finally, should we place this sceatta in series A? Or in the more unstandardized series R? I'm unsure. This coin from my collection was attributed by @Tony Abramsonand Chris Timms (expert on series R) to series R for example: I'm interested to hear some opinions. Perhaps @Nap, @Tejas or @John Conduitt or others?

Life has been rather busy for me, wrapping up my Ph.D (public defense scheduled at 10 October 2024!), but I've been lurking the forum. My night shifts in the hospital are usually the moments I've time to write down some of my new additions, but even those have been extremely busy. I have been adding some really nice early medieval coins and artifacts. So I decided to write a short thread on those, instead of a long write-up as I had planned. This super cool weight was offered as part of a group-lot of early medieval and Roman metal detecting finds. It included a broken Saxon disk head pin (see below) and some random scrap pieces. As I eyeballed a Viking coin weight with a gilded sceatta-inset shortly before, I immediately noted and recognized this weight as a Viking weight. Gilded Viking trade weights are rather rare and sought after. Not much is known about the trade economy of Vikings (at least, not by me). A master thesis on the subject by Rebekah Hiett, kindly brought to my attention by Gary Jonhson, a collector of these weights, tried to answer the questions (1) why did the Vikings inset their lead weights, and (2) why did they choose the items that they did. Hiett suggests the weights are related to the Great Army conquest in East Anglia in 865, after which the Anglo Saxons paid their 'piece money', i.e. large sums of silver and gold to maintain peace. As far as I understand, the Viking trade economy was mostly bullion-orientated, meaning that silver and gold objects were cut in pieces which had to be weighed. The trader probably had an abundance of cut brooches, fibulae, jewelry, and other valuable objects readily at hand to choose from. This still doesn't answer the question why the Viking traders inset their weights. Hiett suggests that the objects were both symbolic and valuable. The persons responsible for weighing - likely a smith or perhaps the leader of a small band of Vikings - probably were involved in acquiring these objects in a raid as well. Using symbolic objects, as in my weight, probably showed a certain authority. This weight was found in the 1990s by a metal detectorist in Norfolk. It's heavy at 121.33g - one of the heaviest weights in the corpus of Hiett. My interpretation of the gilded silver inset, which is probably cut from a brooch or fibula, is two birds with open wings looking towards each other. The large pellet-within-annulet perhaps shows the sun. The weight is very chocolate brown and pleasantly heavy in hand. ARTEFACT, Viking. Mostly lead, with gilded silver inset Find location: Presumably Norfolk Published: emailed to British Museum, no response Chocolate brown heavy round lead weight with a gilded silver inlet. The inlet shows two birds facing each other. A central pellet-within-annulet between. Various sratches under the patina, but no markings. The object is slightly oval, and measures 33x31x16mm (inset: 15.7x9.5mm). It weighs 121.33g. As a bonus, this is the broken Saxon disk head pin that was included in the group lot as well. Kindly share your interpretation of the gilded silver inset, or anything else you find relevant!

A Roman Scalpellus (scalpel) This part of what once was a Roman scalpel was gifted to me by a metal detectorist living in Limburg, the most Southern province of the Netherlands with a rich Roman history. I'm a moderator on a metal detectoring forum (www.bodemvondstenwereld.nl), where I moderate the section on sceattas. I bought a large number of Celtic coins from him, and somewhere, I must have told him that I'm a medical doctor, because he sent me this cool find of him. Roman scalpel (scalpellus). Bronze, with silver inlays. Iron remains of the blade, clasped in the bronze handle. Weight 21.94g, dimensions 45.6 x 11.4 x 8.2 mm. It's very similar to this Roman Scalpel, found in Ficarolo (Italy), showing similar silver inlays: Intact, the scalpel might have looked like this (second one): A fresco in Pompeii, showing the use of the scalpel (this scalpel? Who knows!)

The collection of antiquities of @DonnaML and others inspired me to photograph my very modest collection. A very local find: a 'Lakenlood' from Leiden, found in Leiden The first one is a so called 'lakenlood', literally translated as cloth lead, made and found in the Dutch city Leiden. In the 16th and 17th century, Leiden was famous for its textile industry. Thousands of textile workers from the Southern Netherlands, England, Germany and France, who had had to leave their countries on political or religious grounds, found employment in Leiden and contributed to its success. In the seventeenth century, Leiden cloth found its way onto the world market through Amsterdam. In the same way, raw materials such as wool, cotton, silk and colorants arrived in Leiden from South Europe, Asia and North and South America. Thousands of men, women and children manufactured the famous Leiden cloth in a home industry system. In order to guarantee the quality, the city's administration founded seven inspection halls for various types of fabric. The Laecken-Halle (Cloth Hall) that was founded in 1641, was the most significant hall. To guarantee the quality, the exported cloth was tested in the Laecken-Halle, a richly decorated building, showcasing the success of the textile industry in Leiden. The building has been converted to the city museum (Leiden, the city with one of the oldest universities of Europe, by the way, has a relatively large number of museums: the 'rijksmuseum van oudheden' (national museum of antiquities), with an impressive Egyptian collection, 'Naturalis' (natural history), 'Boerhave museum' (a museum on the history of science, named after Hermanus Boerhave, the founding father of modern medicine), the 'Siebold huis' (a museum on the relations between the Netherlands and Japan), the 'volkenkundig museum' (National Museum of Ethnology), and the 'anatomisch museum', a local collection of the Faculty of Medicine, which is not open to public (but, as an alumnus on that faculty, I had the privilege to visit it multiple times). Earlier, Leiden also housed the national coin collection, but unfortunately, that collection is now stored safely away in a vault somewhere. The 'Museum de Lakenhal' houses an impressive collection of Dutch Masters, including Rembrandt, Lucas van Leyden, Gerrit Dou, Jan Steen, and others. It has recently been renovated and expanded. It's well worth a visit. The quality of the textile, ready for export, was guaranteed with the Lakenlood, usually giving some information on where the cloth was produced (other Dutch cities followed the success of Leiden), the quality, and sometimes the year or date. It was also in Leiden where I found this lakenlood: Lead 'lakenlood' ('cloth lead'), one side showing a decorated shield with the text "DOUBLE STAEL GEBLAUT". Near the "L" of "STAEL", there is a small numeric 10. The other side blank. Diameter: 60 mm, weight: 58.74g. Registration in the Dutch PAN system pending. Found in 2014, in Leiden, near the banks of the river 'de Mare'. On the reverse, you can actually see the imprint of the texture in the lead: Interestingly, when I visited the Museum back in 2015/16, I found the actual stamp that had been used to make this cloth lead. It has been photographed recently: As for the text, I'm still unsure what "DOUBEL STAEL GEBLAUT" means. It has also been used on leads from other cities, and probably has to do with the quality of the textile. Perhaps someone here knows enough about the cloth industry to make an educated guess. Meanwhile, even though I've moved away from Leiden (though not very far away), I'm very happy with this 'Leideny' piece of history!

Very nice! I would like a Viking or Anglo-Saxon artifact, but am wary about the many fakes that are around (as @DonnaMLpointed out). I do have one artifact that is somewhat relevant I think, even though it's not Viking. It's a pseud-coin fibula, likely from a local craftsman from the coastal region of the North Sea in the Netherlands. EARLY MEDIEVAL, Anonymous. Denomination: Pewter Pseudo-coin fibula (Pseudo-coin fibula), minted: Frisian / Carolingian; 9th-10th century Obv: EVO[??]DVS, bust to right Rev: Incuse of obverse Weight: 10.53g; Ø:34 mm. Catalogue: NA. Provenance: From Hollandia Numismatics, who bought it from finder. ; acq.: 07-2022 Find location: Zeeland, the Netherlands Published: Numis: 1167868 Derived from a Carolingian Solidus of the MVNVS DIVINVM type, placing the dating to the 9th or 10th century. The artifact was discussed in depth, and compared with mould-identical examples here:

Where is the ‘o’?