| Author |
 Replies: 26 / Views: 3,467 |
|
Pillar of the Community
3772 Posts |
Poll Question
There are threads in the main coin forum (run by 'jbuck') under the heading "How far can we go back?" and both current ones are stuck. He is going to start a new one (number three) soon. While waiting for the second to advance, I raised the point that a modification of the rules (enlarging the time frame), might let the thread progress further. Now he raised the point why not have one in this forum dealing with the time up to 1600 - see his post in https://goccf.com/t/161525&whichpage=211So there are a few questions, let's start with the key ones: 1. Who is interested and would contribute? 2. Should we start at AD1 and move towards AD1600 or walk back from AD1600? My idea would be to base it on decades and start with AD1-AD10 and move up decade by decade (could try the BC range separately). Coins would qualify for the decade they have been minted in either by being dated or other evidence (eg any coin from Delmatius would qualify for the AD331-AD340 decade). If no coin matching that criterium has been posted on the first day for the decade, coins can be based on the starting date of a reign (eg any Cripus coin would then qualify for the AD311-AD320 decade). Guess that with those rules we should be able to cover quite some ground. Since 'jbuck' is the adjudicator of the threads in the main forum, I would also like to propose 'echizento' as adjudicator/creator of the relevant thread in this forum. Results
| Yes interested - move up to 1600 |
 |
28% |
5 Votes |
| Yes interested - move down from 1600 |
|
17% |
3 Votes |
| Not interested |
|
39% |
7 Votes |
| Yes interested - either way |
|
17% |
3 Votes |
Poll Status:
Open
Total Votes: 18 Counted
Last Vote:
01/22/2015 10:52 am Edited by Medieval
01/17/2015 4:32 pm
|
|
|
|
Moderator
 United States
23731 Posts |
I would contribute some. But I would use a start date of when the use of some type of coinage first appeared. This would include Chinese coinage of the earliest times up through all ancient coinage in times before the Christian Era and than from the start of the Christian era to 1600.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
 3772 Posts |
Starting from the 5th century BC might be viable but until a period when coinage more commonly appeared a decade might be too short, from 200BC onwards it might work with decades.
Will contribute to whatever is agreed to. Just need to be sure that the rules don't get to complicated.
Would definitely be worth the effort to show those 'modern' collectors what was around in ancient times.
|
|
Bedrock of the Community
Australia
21788 Posts |
Relatively easy to date Byzantine coins within a fairly narrow period, but in some later periods, Byzantine coins are quite scarce.
That leaves Islamic coins, Indian, European and Chinese coins to fill the gap.
The coins of India can be almost impossible to date to any more accuracy than the dates of the rulers, provided that they can be identified on the coin. In many cases that is impossible also.
Islamic coins can be easier, PROVIDED THAT you can interpret them. Many of us cannot and that includes me, although I am beginning to learn. Mint identification is usually easier.
European coins up to about pre renaissance can be dated with a little more accuracy, but the collector usually has to be a specialist to do that. For some, the Lombardic lettering style can make things a little more difficult. From the renaissance forwards, the situation can become easier.
Chinese coins are probably easier than any of the above, because with reference to Schjoth and other writers, the date attached to the reign title makes things far easier.
Mitchener's books are a great help, but you have to be fortunate indeed to have ready reference to this writer.
The dating task is not impossible, but is nevertheless much harder to complete. It would certainly be a feather in the cap of the CCF if we achieved it!
Edited by sel_69l
01/16/2015 9:48 pm
|
|
Pillar of the Community
3772 Posts |
Don't forget that there are many Chinese coins which can be dated to a specific reign title of the emperor which helps to fill some gaps (not may are dated to a specific year though). But because there is sometimes difficulty to nail a coin into one decade, the escape hatch of the start of a reign is recommended - can't make it too easy though.
Just saw your updates. And while I agree that Schjoeth and Mitchiner are a good reference some of the dates would need to be confirmed - a lot of the Vietnamese coins from those references have been re-assigned. But lucky me, I have copies of both Schjoeth and Mitchiner's three volumes.
Edited by Medieval
01/16/2015 9:52 pm
|
|
Pillar of the Community
Russian Federation
5177 Posts |
Ironically, this is pretty much what I proposed in an unrelated thread  That said... if the poll had an option for "Yes interested - in either direction" or something similar, I would've voted for that; problem is, I don't really prefer one of the directions over the other, so I don't know where to vote as the poll exists now, unfortunately. Which, coincidentally, heavily reminds me of the infamous vote for the name of the town now called Thunder Bay. |
|
Pillar of the Community
3772 Posts |
You are perfectly right 'january1may', have added that option to the poll - glad you commented, especially since you can probably squeeze some odd dates in.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
4971 Posts |
i'll play, but not promising that there are 8 votes...and 2 are not interested..even though the thread has over 300 views. not to harsh the lurkers, I lurk in the world coin section myself. but may want to do something as broad as possible, like just by century or something like that, may get more participation.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
3772 Posts |
Methinks we need at least 10 yes before starting an adventure like that.
And once a decision has been made to go ahead would probably need another thread to sort out some details,
eg where to place coins with a known minting time frame of say 15 year (could put into the middle).
Also would need to advertise in the main coin section to motivate some people who rarely or never show up in thus forum.
One member who certainly could contribute would be 'manymore', the resident Chinese expert - bet he has quite a few coins which would fit into that challenge.
As 'sel_69l' said, it would be quite an achievement pulling it off.
Had a look during which periods coins might be linked to a decade or so, from around 400 BC (Macedonian kings) it should be possible.
Would like to see some comments from 'Ancientnoob', 'VisigothKing' and 'Bob_L - they certainly could provide quite some input.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
Russian Federation
5177 Posts |
Quote:
especially since you can probably squeeze some odd dates in I probably have more 16th-century coins than a typical member of this forum, but not particularly much of anything else, unfortunately. Sadly, I've been to the guy with the cheap late Roman coins just today, and the coins he has are no longer as good as they used to be (still a bit decent, but now they actually look like the $3 bargains they are, as opposed to being ridiculously good). Edited by january1may
01/18/2015 10:41 am
|
|
Pillar of the Community
3772 Posts |
No got 9 yes votes (all from members), waiting for a 10th.
And also still wait for comments from some regular ones.
Postscript:
Still 9 yes but now the no are up to 4.
Edited by Medieval
01/19/2015 06:05 am
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
1186 Posts |
I have Hungarian Denars from about 1100 to the late 1500's. I have the majority of the 1500's by year and mint mark (the earliest dated denar is 1503,which I have). I voted for 1600 down before the last option was added,but I could go either way.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
3772 Posts |
Nice to hear from someone, who comes seldom to this forum.  |
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
5155 Posts |
I would like to participate in what ever y'all come up with.
|
|
Moderator
United States
189340 Posts |
I would not be able to contribute, but I fully endorse this idea (of course). I think a countdown from 1600 would be better just to see how far back it can go, but I would support any decision.  |
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
7066 Posts |
Med,
I would participate, but likely could only do so sporadically. Been busy with a number of things in the non-cyber world, so haven't been online quite as much. I don't have a preference for which way the chronology goes. Thanks for attempting to pull this together. Sounds like fun.
Bob
|
| |
Replies: 26 / Views: 3,467 |
Posted 01/16/2015 9:28 pm
