Skip to content
Do you have adblock enabled?
 
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Antigone Journal)   Media: We've discovered a new Roman emperor! Metallurgists and numismatolgists: Yeah, no   (antigonejournal.com) divider line
    More: Followup, Roman Empire, chance coin discoveries, Gold, Paul N. Pearson et al., coin finds, Numismatics, Aureus, identical coin  
•       •       •

5300 clicks; posted to Main » and STEM » on 27 Nov 2022 at 6:50 PM (9 weeks ago)   |   Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook



59 Comments     (+0 »)
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


Oldest | « | 1 | 2 | » | Newest | Show all

 
2022-11-27 1:16:54 PM  
Now I feel bad for raerae1980 getting all ready for last week's link about this guy,
/ assuming it's the same one.
 
2022-11-27 2:12:57 PM  
Sorry '84.
 
2022-11-27 2:47:54 PM  
YOU'RE A COIN COLLECTOR

QUIT MAKING UP NONSENSICAL WORDS

YEAH I'M SURE THERE'S A LATIN/GREEK ORIGIN BUT GO TO HELL ANYHOW
 
2022-11-27 2:59:27 PM  
Antinumismatologicaltarianism? On my FARK?
 
2022-11-27 3:43:03 PM  

born_yesterday: Antinumismatologicaltarianism? On my FARK?


Apparently it's more likely than you think!
 
2022-11-27 5:36:33 PM  
The further I read in that article, the more I was convinced that the guy was mostly pissed off that they weren't his coins, and he didn't find them.  Very upsetting.
 
2022-11-27 6:51:39 PM  
Was that supposed to make me want to buy a coin or something?
 
2022-11-27 6:52:10 PM  
Subby is an absolute bastard for 'numismatologist'
 
2022-11-27 6:53:12 PM  
Meet the new Emperor, same as the old Emperor: dead.
 
2022-11-27 6:57:46 PM  
All the "This isn't a real Roman official coin" aside, it really does rather sound like what you're get with a halfarse effort from some general in the ass end of nowhere setting up shop for himself, and having some local cast coins of their own to attempt to enhance their legitimacy.  That is in fact exactly what you tended to get with situations like that.  Some poor goldsmith/whoever that got roped in picked some random example he had lying about that was recognizably "Roman" but not locally familiar, and phoned in an approximation of a true Roman coin with the knowledge and facilities they had available to produce such.  Can't say it is or isn't with authority, but it would explain the actual wear patterns and age and such despite the poor form.  Wouldn't hardly be the first time similar shiat went down in similar circumstances - you need coinage to cement your rule if you're going to be more than a bandit lord.  You make something that looks good enough, keep the metal content good, people are fine with it
 
2022-11-27 7:00:12 PM  
It's heartwarming to get another confirmation that internet journalism is farking clueless, click-happy, and reactionary, and so near to the holidays. It's like the gift that keeps on giving.
 
2022-11-27 7:00:47 PM  
I started reading the article with interest.
Then I lost interest.
 
2022-11-27 7:02:07 PM  

King Something: born_yesterday: Antinumismatologicaltarianism? On my FARK?

Apparently it's more likely than you think!


I didn't even know I had a vagina!
 
2022-11-27 7:02:07 PM  
It seems that the "Crisis of the Third Century" was a time when just about anyone could claim he was an emperor and have coins made with his name and image on them, if he had the money. So what if the alloy he used was different. It was all he could get. So what if the coin was molded instead of stuck using a die. Maybe the proper way to do it wasn't available at that time. Not to say I believe any of it, one way or the other.

/Confidential to the writer of the article: "Alexander the Great (356-323) " should be "356-323 B.C.E."
 
2022-11-27 7:03:23 PM  

Some Junkie Cosmonaut: All the "This isn't a real Roman official coin" aside, it really does rather sound like what you're get with a halfarse effort from some general in the ass end of nowhere setting up shop for himself, and having some local cast coins of their own to attempt to enhance their legitimacy.  That is in fact exactly what you tended to get with situations like that.  Some poor goldsmith/whoever that got roped in picked some random example he had lying about that was recognizably "Roman" but not locally familiar, and phoned in an approximation of a true Roman coin with the knowledge and facilities they had available to produce such.  Can't say it is or isn't with authority, but it would explain the actual wear patterns and age and such despite the poor form.  Wouldn't hardly be the first time similar shiat went down in similar circumstances - you need coinage to cement your rule if you're going to be more than a bandit lord.  You make something that looks good enough, keep the metal content good, people are fine with it


Kind of like... John Galt?
 
2022-11-27 7:06:06 PM  

SBinRR: I started reading the article with interest.
Then I lost interest.


I can't believe I actually looked it up, but it looks like yes, the Romans had laws against compound interest.
 
2022-11-27 7:11:35 PM  
I'm sure someone should've realized it when the emperor's name was Maximus Genitalia.
 
2022-11-27 7:12:38 PM  
i0.wp.comView Full Size



Reminds me of this:


i2.wp.comView Full Size
 
2022-11-27 7:16:48 PM  

Insult Comic Bishounen: I'm sure someone should've realized it when the emperor's name was Maximus Genitalia.


Wait until Biggus Dickus hears of this!
 
2022-11-27 7:22:22 PM  

englaja: Insult Comic Bishounen: I'm sure someone should've realized it when the emperor's name was Maximus Genitalia.

Wait until Biggus Dickus hears of this!


He'll go nvts.
 
2022-11-27 7:25:20 PM  

Mock26: [i0.wp.com image 700x339]


Reminds me of this:


[i2.wp.com image 636x487]


Fark user imageView Full Size
Fark user imageView Full Size
 
2022-11-27 7:28:29 PM  
There are literally dozens, if not hundreds, of these short-lived usurpers, pretenders, and generally unrecognized emperors, many of whom are known just from their coins. These include guys like Pacatianus, Jotapianus, and Uranius Antoninus. Some of them lasted mere weeks, heck, the emperor Florian is believed to have reigned a month, yet base metal antoniniani struck in his name are not as rare as you would think. This coin is of dubious style for the Gordian III/Philip the Arab period and gold, while not unprecedented, would be highly unusual for a usurper.

I once diagrammed out a chart of all the emperors from Augustus to Constantine XI Dragazes, to include the secessionist states and usurpers in Excel just to see what that timeline would look like. It's big. It's real big.

\Numismatologist was considered ok...in the 19th century
\\This is kinda my thing
\\\Hey, RaeRae1980, if you'd like a copy of that chart of emperors, let me know
 
2022-11-27 7:31:11 PM  

dionysusaur: Now I feel bad for raerae1980 getting all ready for last week's link about this guy,
/ assuming it's the same one.


I am dying to hear her reaction to the "Rome didn't exist" lunatic
 
2022-11-27 7:31:27 PM  
fark yeah a new numisma
 
2022-11-27 7:34:25 PM  
Devil's Advocate: the author of TFA still doesn't address the observation of those mineral crystal deposits indicating burial for a substantial period of time... I can't remember what they were called specifically.

My guess would be that the observance of those deposits could either result from any relatively short period of time the coin in question was tucked away from oxygen, or have been entirely made up.
 
2022-11-27 7:34:32 PM  

gameshowhost: YOU'RE A COIN COLLECTOR

QUIT MAKING UP NONSENSICAL WORDS

YEAH I'M SURE THERE'S A LATIN/GREEK ORIGIN BUT GO TO HELL ANYHOW


I thought the word was just "numismatist" anyway.

/Me? I used to collect stamps.
//But then I realised, philately gets you nowhere.
 
2022-11-27 7:36:07 PM  

Insult Comic Bishounen: I'm sure someone should've realized it when the emperor's name was Maximus Genitalia.


Biggus dickus?
 
2022-11-27 7:42:44 PM  

Insult Comic Bishounen: I'm sure someone should've realized it when the emperor's name was Maximus Genitalia.


Biggus Dickus - Monty Python's Life Of Brian. Remastered [HD]
Youtube clYE6NNOIoU


Obligatory
 
2022-11-27 7:43:34 PM  
I admit I did a double take when I finished the article and the author's picture showed up.
I don't know what I was expecting, but it wasn't that.
 
2022-11-27 7:50:00 PM  

Insult Comic Bishounen: I'm sure someone should've realized it when the emperor's name was Maximus Genitalia.


Oh, DUDE! It's "Maximus Genitalius". Romanes eunt domus? The fark.
 
2022-11-27 7:53:57 PM  

Insult Comic Bishounen: I'm sure someone should've realized it when the emperor's name was Maximus Genitalia.


It's not that unbelievable.  After all, there is an Emperor Poopy Anus.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pupienus
 
2022-11-27 7:59:36 PM  

ieerto: It's heartwarming to get another confirmation that internet journalism is farking clueless, click-happy, and reactionary, and so near to the holidays. It's like the gift that keeps on giving.


If you think print reporting is better at academic reporting, it's not.

A researcher will publish something like "daily consumption of bread correlates with 5% lower chance of cancer in our latest study" and the newspaper headline will be "toast cures cancer".
 
2022-11-27 7:59:40 PM  
Here's a good example of an Imperial sestertius of Philip the Arab and a provincial one from Viminacium in Moesia Superior (now Serbia), so not far from ancient Dacia. You can see the style is quite different from the supposed Sponsianus coin. There were provincial mints throughout the Balkans so experienced die cutters were not that unusual...

First the imperial sestertius from the mint at Rome...


Fark user imageView Full Size


...and this is the provincial one from Viminacium...

Fark user imageView Full Size
 
2022-11-27 8:00:16 PM  

WastrelWay: It seems that the "Crisis of the Third Century" was a time when just about anyone could claim he was an emperor and have coins made with his name and image on them, if he had the money. So what if the alloy he used was different. It was all he could get. So what if the coin was molded instead of stuck using a die. Maybe the proper way to do it wasn't available at that time. Not to say I believe any of it, one way or the other.

/Confidential to the writer of the article: "Alexander the Great (356-323) " should be "356-323 B.C.E."


The point was that it wasn't a 3rd century fake, it was probably a much later fake, likely a 17th century one.

The forger was not a Roman pretender to the Empire, but an Enlightenment pretender to having discovered another Diocletian.

That's why things like mold-casting and improper alloys matter: casting in molds lets a later forger make large quantities of a fake all at once so he can conveniently find them in a grave or hoard.

As to why the alloy being different matters, it does if it was less pure or the wrong percentage for coinage struck in the 3rd century, as this seems to have been.
 
2022-11-27 8:03:07 PM  

King Something: born_yesterday: Antinumismatologicaltarianism? On my FARK?

Apparently it's more likely than you think!


Say, what denomination is your coin, King?
 
2022-11-27 8:16:32 PM  

swahnhennessy: I admit I did a double take when I finished the article and the author's picture showed up.
I don't know what I was expecting, but it wasn't that.


What, this? It's exactly what I was expecting.

Fark user imageView Full Size
 
2022-11-27 8:24:37 PM  

Ktonos: Here's a good example of an Imperial sestertius of Philip the Arab and a provincial one from Viminacium in Moesia Superior (now Serbia), so not far from ancient Dacia. You can see the style is quite different from the supposed Sponsianus coin. There were provincial mints throughout the Balkans so experienced die cutters were not that unusual...

First the imperial sestertius from the mint at Rome...


[Fark user image 763x387]

...and this is the provincial one from Viminacium...

[Fark user image 764x397]


TIL there was a Philip the Arab.

/ History is a trip, dude.
 
2022-11-27 8:25:00 PM  

WastrelWay: Some Junkie Cosmonaut: All the "This isn't a real Roman official coin" aside, it really does rather sound like what you're get with a halfarse effort from some general in the ass end of nowhere setting up shop for himself, and having some local cast coins of their own to attempt to enhance their legitimacy.  That is in fact exactly what you tended to get with situations like that.  Some poor goldsmith/whoever that got roped in picked some random example he had lying about that was recognizably "Roman" but not locally familiar, and phoned in an approximation of a true Roman coin with the knowledge and facilities they had available to produce such.  Can't say it is or isn't with authority, but it would explain the actual wear patterns and age and such despite the poor form.  Wouldn't hardly be the first time similar shiat went down in similar circumstances - you need coinage to cement your rule if you're going to be more than a bandit lord.  You make something that looks good enough, keep the metal content good, people are fine with it

Kind of like... John Galt?


Very much like that, but Roman generals were smart enough to obtain a large military following rather than relying on their inherent coolness.  It works better, for certain repressive values of better
 
2022-11-27 8:27:26 PM  

Insult Comic Bishounen: I'm sure someone should've realized it when the emperor's name was Maximus Genitalia.


Oh, come on, it was right there and you whiffed it.
 
2022-11-27 8:30:17 PM  

To Wish Impossible Things: ieerto: It's heartwarming to get another confirmation that internet journalism is farking clueless, click-happy, and reactionary, and so near to the holidays. It's like the gift that keeps on giving.

If you think print reporting is better at academic reporting, it's not.

A researcher will publish something like "daily consumption of bread correlates with 5% lower chance of cancer in our latest study" and the newspaper headline will be "toast cures cancer".


Fark user imageView Full Size
 
2022-11-27 8:33:43 PM  
Was it because the coin said "44BC" on it?
 
2022-11-27 8:36:12 PM  

Ktonos: Here's a good example of an Imperial sestertius of Philip the Arab and a provincial one from Viminacium in Moesia Superior (now Serbia), so not far from ancient Dacia. You can see the style is quite different from the supposed Sponsianus coin. There were provincial mints throughout the Balkans so experienced die cutters were not that unusual...

First the imperial sestertius from the mint at Rome...


[Fark user image image 763x387]

...and this is the provincial one from Viminacium...

[Fark user image image 764x397]


So, if I wanted to make a coin of myself as emperor to be found by lazy journalists in a thousand years, you suggest the Roman mint. Got it.
 
2022-11-27 8:40:08 PM  
I apologize for my earlier outburst.
 
2022-11-27 8:47:41 PM  
I find this conversation deeply intriguing philosophically. Imagine, hundreds of years from now, historians fiercely arguing whether or not Trump actually existed, or if he was fictional.
 
2022-11-27 9:36:54 PM  
The 3rd century was a wild era which saw numerous usurper 'emperors' claim political power throughout the

*BOING*

SIGN UP FOR OUR FREE NEWSLETTER

Ok. My email address is get-this-damn-popup [at] outta-my-face dot com.

/How to make your web site suck, method #93,723,122,936
 
2022-11-27 9:45:58 PM  

UNC_Samurai: dionysusaur: Now I feel bad for raerae1980 getting all ready for last week's link about this guy,
/ assuming it's the same one.

I am dying to hear her reaction to the "Rome didn't exist" lunatic


I'm trying to figure out the conspiracy theory on that one. The whole of Roman history was drafted in the 17th century to make sense of the remains of a much older civilization that the Catholic Church was trying to cover up, which was built by the lizard people who really run the world.
 
2022-11-27 9:55:52 PM  
I'll leave this gem here.....


Fark user imageView Full Size


Maximus Doofus Dingus Cheatum
 
2022-11-27 10:14:53 PM  

Marcus Aurelius: The further I read in that article, the more I was convinced that the guy was mostly pissed off that they weren't his coins, and he didn't find them.  Very upsetting.


Numismatist here: the coin isn't a fake in the normal sense of the word. The paper's author is (most likely) correct in determining that it's not a product of the 18th century meant to deceive the coin collectors of the day. It is instead a contemporary imitation; a one-off meant to supplement the currency along the Roman frontiers as Rome's coins were insufficiently abundant.

I have addressed the issues with the conclusions of the author and he has written a preliminary response acknowledging "Our paper was mostly aligned at testing the notion that these coins are 1713 forgeries which has been the numismatic consensus since Cohen. The possibility of contemporaneous 'barbarous' imitations of Roman was one that we of course considered ... But our hypothesis for the historical Sponsian is labelled as that (notwithstanding the recent media hype), and we are open to alternative interpretations. So your suggestion is an important one and we would not reject out of hand the notion that they could have been ancient coins minted somewhere else."

Rasiel Suarez,
Author "The Encyclopedia of Roman Imperial Coins"
 
2022-11-27 11:19:57 PM  

The Reverend Sam Hill: The 3rd century was a wild era which saw numerous usurper 'emperors' claim political power throughout the

*BOING*

SIGN UP FOR OUR FREE NEWSLETTER

Ok. My email address is get-this-damn-popup [at] outta-my-face dot com.

/How to make your web site suck, method #93,723,122,936


I have to wonder if the asshats who came up with this are using the same mentality as email scammers. If they can con just 1 in 10000 people and they don't think it costs them anything...

Do you think it works? They must think it's enough to cover costs... and the website aren't all dying off like I expected. How many people hit a paywall and bust out the credit card? It is clearly more than none. But, I have hard time understanding who is paying. Is it the same whales as those paying for F2P games? And paying for porn?
 
2022-11-27 11:29:40 PM  

wildcardjack: UNC_Samurai: dionysusaur: Now I feel bad for raerae1980 getting all ready for last week's link about this guy,
/ assuming it's the same one.

I am dying to hear her reaction to the "Rome didn't exist" lunatic

I'm trying to figure out the conspiracy theory on that one. The whole of Roman history was drafted in the 17th century to make sense of the remains of a much older civilization that the Catholic Church was trying to cover up, which was built by the lizard people who really run the world.


China has been pushing this idea that Western history was fabricated by monks after Europe successfully broke away from China and that all those old structures were built by the only ancient civilization, the Chinese, who spread their culture around the world. Some bigwig was talking about their progress on linguistics trying to prove that Indo-European languages were dialects of Mandarin. Hence they had an ancient, historical claim to all of Eurasia and those places colonized by European people. I think it was an address by someone in charge of education over there. She also mentioned using the Confucius Institute in US universities to help normalize these ideas among young Americans.
 
Displayed 50 of 59 comments


Oldest | « | 1 | 2 | » | Newest | Show all


View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking




On Twitter


  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.