Electrum

On Sun, 12 Oct 2003 09:23:29 -0700, "Bob Flaminio"
wrote:

Huh? Aren't Saints and other U.S. gold coins 90% gold and 10% copper?
How would this qualify as "electrum" according to either yours or MEM's
definition?

Saints are alloyed with a small amount of silver along with copper, up
to 1 percent silver. Interestingly, American Gold Eagles are alloyed
with more silver, 3 percent, which is the reason for their paler
color, Saints typically having more of an orange hue.

--

Coin Collecting: Consumer Guide: http://rg.ancients.info/guide
Glomming: Coin Connoisseurship: http://rg.ancients.info/glom
Bogos: Counterfeit Coins: http://rg.ancients.info/bogos

On 12 Oct 2003 16:25:57 GMT, (Ankaaz) wrote:

And some experts in metallurgy.

We're not talking about metallurgy, or about "some" experts in
metallurgy. We're talking about numismatics and about usage in
numismatics.

Scholars that adhere to Pliny's definition, that is... Pliny also wrote that
porcupines shoot out their quills when provoked. His many observations should
be taken with a grain of salt.

We're also not talking about Pliny's observations. We're talking about
a definition that he made, which numismatists have followed for the
past two thousand years. Except Michael.

In my opinion, his use of the fraction 1/5 was
purely arbitrary.

Of course the 1/5th figure it was arbitrary. You have to set a limit
somewhere.

For
the sake of expediency, the term "electrum" has been applied generically to any
gold/silver alloy, no matter what the ratio.

This isn't true with numismatics. U.S. gold coins are not electrum
coins because they have a small amount of silver in them. Most
pre-Alexander III gold coins are not electrum coins because they have
a small amount of silver in them.

It simplifies things, don't you
think? You yourself have admitted on more than one occasion that language
changes.

If Michael's intention was to change the language, to change the
definition of "gold" and "electrum" as they apply to numismatics, he
should have said so.

What he did, once again, was fashion an article in response to a
little debate we had here. In that debate, I said that in most parts
of the Greek world, after Kroisos (Croesus) established the bimetallic
standard, minting authorities in the Greek world issued coins of
relatively pure gold and silver rather than electrum. This is true. To
argue against this, in his article, the only thing Michael could do
was redefine the meaning of electrum ... without explicitly saying he
was doing this.

I bring all this up now because I just finished reviewing the
literature about early electrum coins for an article I'm doing, which
I started well before Michael's appeared, after buying one of these
Lydian trites. Cool coins.

--

Coin Collecting: Consumer Guide: http://rg.ancients.info/guide
Glomming: Coin Connoisseurship: http://rg.ancients.info/glom
Bogos: Counterfeit Coins: http://rg.ancients.info/bogos

Reid Goldsborough wrote:
Huh? Aren't Saints and other U.S. gold coins 90% gold and 10% copper?
How would this qualify as "electrum" according to either yours or
MEM's definition?

Saints are alloyed with a small amount of silver along with copper, up
to 1 percent silver.

OK -- but I wouldn't consider 1% "appreciable", and therefore they're
still not electrum by MEM's definition.

--
Bob

Reid again exhibits his penchant for selective citing/paraphrasing when he
says:

"In the August issue of the Celator, in an
article titled 'Electrum,' Michael Marotta broke free from this long tradition
and defined it differently, as gold alloyed with any appreciable amount of
silver."


*Michael* defined "electrum"? Chapter and verse, please.



Anka Z
Co-president of the once thriving, but now defunct, Tommy John Fan Club.
Go, Lake County Captains!

Reid Goldsborough wrote:

If Michael's intention was to change the language, to change the
definition of "gold" and "electrum" as they apply to numismatics, he
should have said so.

What he did, once again, was fashion an article in response to a
little debate we had here. In that debate, I said that in most parts
of the Greek world, after Kroisos (Croesus) established the bimetallic
standard......

Aren't you changing the meaning of "bimetallic" as understood by numismatists?
Bimetallic has a meaning quite different from your use of the word to describe
an "alloy".

On Sun, 12 Oct 2003 12:30:06 -0700, "Bob Flaminio"
wrote:

OK -- but I wouldn't consider 1% "appreciable", and therefore they're
still not electrum by MEM's definition.

Michael didn't explicitly offer his own definition of electrum, just
based his entire argument on an assumed definition that was very
broad. He talked about how some geologists define electrum and in
another place how some metallurgists define electrum. In still another
place he mentioned the Pliny standard but for some reason didn't
mention that this has become the way that numismatists define it.

Your point, though, about silver in U.S. coinage is a good one. It
typically has very little, and even under a wildly broad definition of
electrum, most U.S. gold coins could not be considered electrum.

--

Coin Collecting: Consumer Guide: http://rg.ancients.info/guide
Glomming: Coin Connoisseurship: http://rg.ancients.info/glom
Bogos: Counterfeit Coins: http://rg.ancients.info/bogos

On 12 Oct 2003 20:02:16 GMT, (Ankaaz) wrote:

*Michael* defined "electrum"? Chapter and verse, please.

I said in a previous message that Michael didn't explicitly offer his
own definition of electrum, but he did base his argument on an assumed
definition, one that's much broader than is used in numismatics, the
Pliny standard.

The subject of early electrum coinage is fascinating. What's most
interesting isn't redefining established terms just for the sake of
argument but the various theories of why these coins, the first coins,
came into existence and why they were minted in electrum when all
indications are that the ancient Lydians and Ionian Greeks possessed
the technology to refine pure gold and silver. Don't you think?

--

Coin Collecting: Consumer Guide: http://rg.ancients.info/guide
Glomming: Coin Connoisseurship: http://rg.ancients.info/glom
Bogos: Counterfeit Coins: http://rg.ancients.info/bogos

On 12 Oct 2003 21:15:56 GMT, used (nit-picker)
wrote:

Aren't you changing the meaning of "bimetallic" as understood by numismatists?

I don't believe I am.

Bimetallic has a meaning quite different from your use of the word to describe
an "alloy".

How so?

--

Coin Collecting: Consumer Guide: http://rg.ancients.info/guide
Glomming: Coin Connoisseurship: http://rg.ancients.info/glom
Bogos: Counterfeit Coins: http://rg.ancients.info/bogos

Reid Goldsborough spoke thusly...
On 12 Oct 2003 21:15:56 GMT, used (nit-picker)
wrote:

Aren't you changing the meaning of "bimetallic" as understood by numismatists?

I don't believe I am.

Bimetallic has a meaning quite different from your use of the word to describe
an "alloy".

How so?

When I think 'bimetallic' and 'coins', I think of coins like this:

http://www.wbcc-online.com/italy/italy1.html

not of coins made up of alloys.


--
Stu Miller
Visit the Virtual Coin Museum (over 100 displays):
http://www.thestujoecollection.com/museum.htm
Contact Me (Newsgroup email addy is invalid):
http://www.thestujoecollection.com/contact.htm

Stujoe wrote:

Reid Goldsborough spoke thusly...
On 12 Oct 2003 21:15:56 GMT, used (nit-picker)
wrote:

Aren't you changing the meaning of "bimetallic" as understood by numismatists?

I don't believe I am.

Bimetallic has a meaning quite different from your use of the word to describe
an "alloy".

How so?

When I think 'bimetallic' and 'coins', I think of coins like this:

http://www.wbcc-online.com/italy/italy1.html

not of coins made up of alloys.

I don't think that someone unable to differentiate between 'alloy' and
'bimetallic' should be criticizing, much less authoring, an article for
publication about electrum.

Ever have someone explain to you how the valve in your car's radiator
works? Or the thermostat on a mercury contact furnace switch? If you
had, then you understand why an alloy is not 'bimetallic'.

I'd explain in detail, but odds are good that once again Reid is trying
to use the newsgroup to write his article for him. If he'd do his own
research he'd understand why, at one time, pure silver was more valuable
than pure gold.

Alan
'Alloyed Metals is not a Rock Tour'