| Conteúdo do artigo |
- From johnmenc@optonline.net Wed Aug 29 04:07:27 2012
Return-Path: <johnmenc@optonline.net>
X-Sender: johnmenc@optonline.net
X-Apparently-To: colonial-coins@yahoogroups.com
X-Received: (qmail 54393 invoked from network); 29 Aug 2012 11:07:27 -0000
X-Received: from unknown (98.137.34.45)
by m8.grp.sp2.yahoo.com with QMQP; 29 Aug 2012 11:07:27 -0000
X-Received: from unknown (HELO ng15-vm5.bullet.mail.gq1.yahoo.com) (98.136.219.187)
by mta2.grp.sp2.yahoo.com with SMTP; 29 Aug 2012 11:07:26 -0000
X-Received: from [98.137.0.80] by ng15.bullet.mail.gq1.yahoo.com with NNFMP; 29 Aug 2012 11:07:26 -0000
X-Received: from [98.137.34.119] by tg1.bullet.mail.gq1.yahoo.com with NNFMP; 29 Aug 2012 11:07:26 -0000
Date: Wed, 29 Aug 2012 11:07:25 -0000
To: colonial-coins@yahoogroups.com
Message-ID: <k1kt5d+iath@eGroups.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAC7kd3SUv+RvTjGJxGa6ubuK5Ht0jrzWJydB7fAyEMyjX2C0VQ@mail.gmail.com>
User-Agent: eGroups-EW/0.82
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
X-Mailer: Yahoo Groups Message Poster
X-Yahoo-Newman-Property: groups-compose
X-Originating-IP: 69.123.181.16
X-eGroups-Msg-Info: 1:12:0:0:0
X-Yahoo-Post-IP: 69.123.181.16
From: "colonialjohn" <johnmenc@optonline.net>
Subject: A Texas Copper Mint and the 1717 Jolla
X-Yahoo-Group-Post: member; u=111282553; y=vd9UQkdIEJRtUNofgOV_oL5FJusS41ZTFxX6pa70x0NbDmrNwfiy4Zvdbg
X-Yahoo-Profile: colonial_john_c4
Your tough Jeff - some geologist in Texas can analyze (11) Jollas and then =
the owner can sell one for $50,000 + and this party can then say they are a=
ll linked to one copper mine with high copper purity and rainbow colors on =
the surface ... all I want is for some people to take a "closr" and "new" =
look at the Ryder 40 and "possibly" consider it a variety based on the fact=
s today <BG>. What's the phone number for PCGS? <BG>. Show me the numbers i=
n the data ...
I agree 1696 =3D 1796 =3D Bi <0.1% for most if not all the pieces. Some mix=
ing occured - but small in number.
We are almost done with the section on Ryder 40. Actually Marc Mayhugh the =
1754 GII CAST you sold me is being cut up now for the final test specimen i=
n this cross-comparison study. All I can do is try ...=20
--- In colonial-coins@yahoogroups.com, Jeff Rock <rosaamltd@...> wrote:
>
> John, the ones dated 1696 were struck nowhere near that year -- if you re=
ad
> my CNL article on the counterfeit Irish you will see that the same revers=
e
> is paired with a George III amongst other things. Cobwright thinks that
> all were made 1796 or later because that is the latest date found, and
> coincides with the Conder token issues which pair into the evasion series=
.
> Some, perhaps many, clearly WERE made at that date. Others I suspect wer=
e
> made in the 1770's into the 1780's when some of the nonregal coinage was
> being produced. There are many dies that don't pair with anything else,
> or, pair in just a limited number of marriage and don't connect with the
> Conders at all. Those will most likely be the earlier strikings, though =
we
> are a long ways from being able to state anything as proven. Remember, t=
he
> series is just now starting to get attention -- Morris' estimate of 2024 =
is
> probably closer than any of us want to admit!
>=20
> And Ray, you are right. Most scientists will hypothesize, experiment, as=
k
> other researchers to re-test the results and then, after looking at a wid=
e
> range of other possibilities will publish a paper -- on a THEORY, not
> calling something a fact, especially when the sample size was ridiculousl=
y
> small.
>=20
> On Tue, Aug 28, 2012 at 7:35 PM, Ray Williams <njraywms@...>wrote:
>=20
> > **
> >
> >
> > Morris,
> > I'm just deleting all the metallurgical posts for now. I'll wait for
> > the final publication and see if the test results allow John's conclusi=
ons
> > to have merit. For now, the XRF/SEM posts are just way too much
> > speculation. Usually scientists analyze all the data from all their
> > experiments and make public the results at the end.
> > Ray
> >
> > --------------------------------------------------
> > From: "Morris Hankins" <joshalso2000@...>
> > Sent: Tuesday, August 28, 2012 6:43 PM
> > To: <colonial-coins@yahoogroups.com>
> > Subject: Re: [Colonial Numismatics] Re: Morris - Evasions and their
> > Inherent
> > Bismuth V...
> >
> > > John, sorry. This is a little too much assumption for my taste and I
> > deal
> > > and study 'EVASIONS'. Not enough fact to justify basically anything i=
n
> > > this tome....or is it tomb. Might be something there in 2024.
> > >
> > > Morris
> > > Evasion Coppers -
> > >
> > > --- On Tue, 8/28/12, colonialjohn <johnmenc@...> wrote:
> > >
> > >> From: colonialjohn <johnmenc@...>
> > >> Subject: [Colonial Numismatics] Re: Morris - Evasions and their
> > Inherent
> > >> Bismuth V...
> > >> To: colonial-coins@yahoogroups.com
> > >> Date: Tuesday, August 28, 2012, 3:23 PM
> > >> The pattern from my analysis
> > >> basically has been if the copper CC is pre-1750/1760 we
> > >> generally see Bi > 0.1% and after 1770 generally <
> > >> 0.1%. This confirms the Cornish Mines Reports as they became
> > >> virtually non-existant or insignificant when compared to the
> > >> Pary's Mines after 1770 so the GII/GIII pieces bear this
> > >> point out with Bi values.
> > >>
> > >> On a seperate note there was an interesting cataloguing of
> > >> (2) 1717 Texas Jollas by Heritage. Part of the descroption
> > >> talks about Mass Spectroscopy using Isotopic Analysis to
> > >> confirm all the copper came from one ore source. See here:
> > >>
> > >> http://coins.ha.com/c/item.zx?saleNo=3D1173&lotNo=3D5010
> > >>
> > >> Personally - talikng to our in-house MS specialist the
> > >> technology may not be there yet to do this for copper alloys
> > >> but as you can see from the Heritage jargon this sounds more
> > >> like a combined XRF analysis/ MS Isotopic Analysis? I am
> > >> currently trying to do a MS Isotopic Analysis with the
> > >> silver Klippe 8R's 1733/1734 issues. Silver is easier to
> > >> perform MS than copper in terms of aging/sourcing - we shall
> > >> see. This may be a simple ancient type triangulation
> > >> scenario for this San Antonia River hoard with a Texas
> > >> Copper Ore Mine/Texas Minting Location/Single Output
> > >> location with no outside mixing sources? Mo seems to come
> > >> from Ag but to use it as a MS signature profile element
> > >> based on my CC8R studies is really stretching it ... and its
> > >> interesting there is no zinc or tin in these issues. Fe is a
> > >> common surface contaminant and saying all these are related
> > >> with just trace Pb, Ni & Ag impurities? With Ag we
> > >> expect trace In/Ir but no mention but possibly there
> > >> instrument IDL's were not set that low or simply did not
> > >> consider these two important trace elements normally seen
> > >> with the presence of Ag & Au. Looking at some of these
> > >> 1717/1718 pieces and their oxidation colors Phil I am not to
> > >> sure of their high copper purity. Nice study write-up ... I
> > >> am a bit uneasy about these conclusions ... no one is that
> > >> good in 2012. No one ...
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >> --- In colonial-coins@yahoogroups.com,
> > >> PLMossman@ wrote:
> > >> >
> > >> > Hi John:
> > >> > Bismuth was never found in any concentration or maybe
> > >> was never even
> > >> > looked for.
> > >> > Phil
> > >> >
> > >> >
> > >> > In a message dated 8/28/2012 9:24:40 A.M. Eastern
> > >> Daylight Time,
> > >> > johnmenc@ writes:
> > >> >
> > >> >
> > >> >
> > >> >
> > >> > Phil - In all your analyses with Skip and those GII
> > >> casts studies did you
> > >> > ever have a GII cast 1/2d with a bismuth value less
> > >> than 0.1%? Never?
> > >> > <VVBG>.
> > >> >
> > >> > JPL
> > >> >
> > >> > --- In _colonial-coins@yahoogroups.com_
> > >>
> > >> > (mailto:colonial-coins@yahoogroups.com)
> > >> , "colonialjohn" <johnmenc@> wrote:
> > >> > >
> > >> > > Since your book is basically done I am sure
> > >> in certain parts you talk
> > >> > about the date spread going as far back as 1696
> > >> to v.late 1700's (maybe into
> > >> > 1800's?). Not sure of the latest dated Evasion.
> > >> See this piece here
> > >> > recently acquired:
> > >> > >
> > >> > >
> > >> > _
> > http://www.ebay.com/itm/261082797140?ssPageName=3DSTRK:MEWNX:IT&_trksid=
=3Dp3984.m1497.l2649_
> > >>
> > >> > (
> > http://www.ebay.com/itm/261082797140?ssPageName=3DSTRK:MEWNX:IT&_trksid=
=3Dp3984.m1497.l2649
> > )
> > >>
> > >> > >
> > >> > > Its analysis with surface XRF analysis is: Copper
> > >> (97.9%), Zinc (1.09%),
> > >> > Arsenic (0.57%), Silver (0.09%), Lead (0.12%), Indium
> > >> (0.05%), Tin
> > >> > (0.07%), Bismuth (0.03%) and Gallium (0.006%).
> > >> > > As I begin to analyze more 18thC Copper from
> > >> America and Britain I am
> > >> > confirming P.T. Craddocks assumption that Cornish
> > >> Copper was prevalent in the
> > >> > first half of the 18thC and after 1770 or so its
> > >> use was severely
> > >> > diminshed due to lower ore outputs. Have papers
> > >> to confirm this FACT. It can be
> > >> > GOOGLE'd. Had several conversations with
> > >> Cobwright and and as in these
> > >> > discussions he believes most Evasions were
> > >> produced 'VERY LATE' and possibly the
> > >> > earlier one's like 1696 as many of the figures
> > >> and sayings do not link to
> > >> > these events but much later as post 1790 or so.
> > >> Most evasions with bismuth
> > >> > values follow this trend being less than 0.1%
> > >> which is suggestive of Pary's
> > >> > Mine Copper and NOT Cornish copper which is
> > >> predominant prior to 1750. Just
> > >> > curious what the analysis of say (12) 1696 pieces
> > >> would bring? Something to
> > >> > think about moving forward. Thia ananalysis would
> > >> be FREE - would make a
> > >> > good CNL write-up after sending you the XRF
> > >> results. Think about it ... are
> > >> > all Evasions post 1775 or made in the last
> > >> quarter of the 18thC???
> > >> > >
> > >> > > JPL
> > >> > >
> > >> >
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >> ------------------------------------
> > >>
> > >> Yahoo! Groups Links
> > >>
> > >>
> > >> colonial-coins-fullfeatured@yahoogroups.com
> > >>
> > >>
> > >
> > >
> > > ------------------------------------
> > >
> > > Yahoo! Groups Links
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> >=20=20
> >
>
|
|---|
| URL da fonte |
|
|---|
| Data de publicação |
|
|---|
| Volume |
|
|---|
