AncientOne Posted November 23, 2022 · Member Share Posted November 23, 2022 (edited) New study suggests Sponsian coins found in 18th century are not fakes. https://www.theguardian.com/science/2022/nov/23/coins-study-suggests-fake-emperor-sponsian-was-real-say-scientists Edited November 24, 2022 by AncientOne 4 1 1 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Prieure de Sion Posted November 23, 2022 · Member Share Posted November 23, 2022 Thanks first of all for the link - very interesting! Ah he was a usurper apparently at the time of Philippus Arabs. Phew I was still lucky. A little earlier at the time of Gordianus - and I would have had to actually collect his coin... 😂 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ricardo123 Posted November 23, 2022 · Member Share Posted November 23, 2022 Interesting story but also interesting it start and dicuss by members here in summer of 2020 ! https://www.cointalk.com/threads/the-legend-of-sponsianus.364019/ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AncientOne Posted November 23, 2022 · Member Author Share Posted November 23, 2022 8 minutes ago, Ricardo123 said: Interesting story but also interesting it start and dicuss by members here in summer of 2020 ! https://www.cointalk.com/threads/the-legend-of-sponsianus.364019/ Thanks for the link. Some of us get our information a little slower than the rest.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GregH Posted November 23, 2022 · Member Share Posted November 23, 2022 The original scientific article is here: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0274285 The case made in the article for the authenticity of the Sponsian coins seems spurious to me: - similar patterns of wear and tear to genuine coins, suggesting they had been in circulation for several years - minerals on the surface of the coins consistent with them having been buried for an extended period I am pretty sure i can simulate wear and tear on any coin, and then bury it for a while. The Guardian example cites that using gold worth $20,000 is a big outlay for a forger to start with. I would counter that gold forgeries of rare emperors could result in a massive return on investment, well above the value of the raw materials. The case against is clear: - a reverse design copied from a Republican issue that would have been over 370 years old at the apparent time of manufacture - style and workmanship not typical of 3rd century Roman issues - and found in Romania LOL Note the final paragraph of the Guardian article: "However, others were more sceptical. “They’ve gone full fantasy,” said Richard Abdy, the curator of Roman and iron age coins at the British Museum. “It’s circular evidence. They’re saying because of the coin there’s the person, and the person therefore must have made the coin.” I'd like to hear any other dissenting views from the science community, particularly around whether the methods used (electron microscopy, UV imaging, infra-red spectroscopy) and subsequent results, really do prove the authenticity of the coins. To me, these coins belong in the same category as Proculus, Bonosus etc - ie, uninvestible because there is too much doubt. 4 2 1 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GregH Posted November 23, 2022 · Member Share Posted November 23, 2022 45 minutes ago, AncientOne said: Thanks for the link. Some of us get our information a little slower than the rest.... Actually, you're ahead of the rest. The science article was only published a day ago. The cointalk discussion about Sponsian is older, and wasn't inspired by this very recent study. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.