Numerical notations on Ptolemy I Soter’s gold staters

[FEDERICO D]

In the die-link diagram in the original paper there seem to be 4 links leading from O7, which go to R9, R10, R18 and (apparently) R19, although it is hard to be sure of this last link. Coins illustrating the first three links are shown, but I can't find an example of O7-R19.

Ross G.

Indeed in the diagram the obverse die 7 and the reverse die 19 are connected but I really think that it is a mistake because in the article an O7-R19 coin is never mentioned. The line ran away ... Excuse me

OK, dropping the supposed O7-R19 link means that we can now re-order the die-link diagram into a strictly linear order, with no crossed links.

There are several crossed links groups in the original die-link diagram. The first, starting with coin 2, can be re-ordered as coins 2, 6, 5 and 4, preceded by coin 1 and followed by coins 7 & 8. Coin 3, with no links, needs to move to somewhere else, although where it might fit (given its supposed numbers) is unclear.

The second crossed links group can be reordered as coins 20, 21, 22 , 23, 10, 11, 12, 13/14 (much as Mark Fox proposed), preceded by coin 19 as before and followed by 24.

Finally the third group can be reordered as coins 16, 17, 25/26, 27, 28 29.

This all seems quite neat in terms of the (known) die-links, but with certain coins (e.g. 3 and 18) the resolved numbers now no longer fit into the proposed overall number sequence scheme, and coins 10 through 14 now follow 19 through 23 when the numbers require the reverse of this.  In other words this revised linear die-link sequence doesn’t fully match the  number sequence.
 
So, if the linear die-link sequence is valid then the number theory isn’t, but alternatively it could mean that the actual die sequence wasn’t strictly linear, i.e, that there were periods when more than two obverse (and reverse?) dies were in use at the same time.  

Ross G.

[/quote]

What has come out in this discussion is that coins No. 19 and 20 now must be placed at the beginning of the reconstruction of the issue since the monograms shown on them must be interpreted as equal to 30,00(0) and no longer as 300,0(00).  This entails the need for a reordering of the numbering of the dies but their way of succession and the identified die links (and there are some) remain unchanged. In fact, all the other monograms interpreted as numbers remain confirmed in their position and interpretation and so the numerical explanation continues to work. Regarding the contemporary use of more dies, in my opinion it is something widely practiced. In the coinage of new Style in Athens, for example, there is evidence that the different monograms under the amphora (which in my opinion are always numbers) were used simultaneously by several employees.

[Altamura]

... I expected this objection from you. it is true that this letter was still used in Pamphylia ...

How do I have to understand this   .
You knew that the F was still used in Pamphylia in hellenistic times, told us the contrary but expected that I will find out? Strange kind of behavior that  .

(Could you please finally quote in a way that the reader can see immediately what is quoted (being in a light blue rectangle) and what is from you? And perhaps you didn't realize it yet: there is a button "Preview" to check before posting how a post will look like  .)

Regards

Altamura

[FEDERICO D]

(Could you please finally quote in a way that the reader can see immediately what is quoted (being in a light blue rectangle) and what is from you? And perhaps you didn't realize it yet: there is a button "Preview" to check before posting how a post will look like  .)

Regards

Altamura


[/quote]



I still don't understand how to do it ... Forgive me this limit ..By clicking on preview the box does not appear ...

[FEDERICO D]

... I expected this objection from you. it is true that this letter was still used in Pamphylia ...

How do I have to understand this   .
You knew that the F was still used in Pamphylia in hellenistic times, told us the contrary but expected that I will find out? Strange kind of behavior that  .

(Could you please finally quote in a way that the reader can see immediately what is quoted (being in a light blue rectangle) and what is from you? And perhaps you didn't realize it yet: there is a button "Preview" to check before posting how a post will look like  .)

Regards

Altamura

I was expecting this because I imagined that he would contest the numerical use of the F in Pamphylia, where this letter was still in use, which everyone knows. I did not hope that my interlocutor did not know that the letter F was still in use, but I imagined that he had used this circumstance to argue that the F was NOT ALSO a number, in a similar way to what he already did with the sampi.

[FEDERICO D]

Wow!! I managed to bring up the box !!!

[n.igma]

... Because this sign, similar to our F, is an ancient letter vau which has fallen into disuse and remained in use only to indicate the number 6 ...

Its hard to avert your eyes from a train wreck thread, so periodically I am drawn back to observe the continuing pile up.

In doing so I noticed the comment regarding the presence of archaic Greek letter F on Hellenistic coinage and the claim it must therefore represent a number.

To Altamura's observation on the Pamphylian usage of the letter F, I will also add the example of Elis and Olympia.

Olympia came under Elean control around 580 BC.

Subsequently and to the last of their mintage in the late 1st century BC the the coins of Olympia bore the mint marks, FAΛEIΩN, or FA, or  F - A, the latter two being the abbreviation of Faleion, signifying of the Eleans.

The presence of the letter F, like many other archaic Greek letters (e.g. sampi) on Hellenistic coinage does not constitute proof of the need for a numeric interpretation.

Refer: Seltman C. 1921. The Temple Coins of Olympia.

[n.igma]

And another, from the Classical era, demonstrating the existence of the letter F in the Boeotian Greek dialect ...

FAST money ... I love it!  But seriously, it is an abbreviation of the magistrates name of which about 70 are attested to in this series.

Curiously, it prompts me to consider the the first law of holes, "When you find yourself in one, stop digging."

Philological study and arguments in support of a proposition should be all encompassing, rather than cherry picked to support a point a view.

[FEDERICO D]

... Because this sign, similar to our F, is an ancient letter vau which has fallen into disuse and remained in use only to indicate the number 6 ...

Its hard to avert your eyes from a train wreck thread, so periodically I am drawn back to observe the continuing pile up.

even!!!

[FEDERICO D]

... Because this sign, similar to our F, is an ancient letter vau which has fallen into disuse and remained in use only to indicate the number 6 ...

Its hard to avert your eyes from a train wreck thread, so periodically I am drawn back to observe the continuing pile up.

In doing so I noticed the comment regarding the presence of archaic Greek letter F on Hellenistic coinage and the claim it must therefore represent a number.

To Altamura's observation on the Pamphylian usage of the letter F, I will also add the example of Elis and Olympia.

Olympia came under Elean control around 580 BC.

Subsequently and to the last of their mintage in the late 1st century BC the the coins of Olympia bore the mint marks, FAΛEIΩN, or FA, or  F - A, the latter two being the abbreviation of Faleion, signifying of the Eleans.

The presence of the letter F, like many other archaic Greek letters (e.g. sampi) on Hellenistic coinage does not constitute proof of the need for a numeric interpretation.

Refer: Seltman C. 1921. The Temple Coins of Olympia.

I never denied that the F was still in use as a letter in some places in the Greek world, I only said that in the remaining places it was used ONLY as a number and that it was ALSO used as a number EVEN in the places where it continued to be used as a letter.

[FEDERICO D]

Curiously, it prompts me to consider the the first law of holes, "When you find yourself in one, stop digging."

In fact, why just look at the holes? we also look at the "full ones", that is to say we objectively analyze the numerous data proposed and we do not wait for the interlocutor to contradict only one point in order to be able to say that EVERYTHING he said is wrong.

[Altamura]

... I never denied that the F was still in use as a letter in some places in the Greek world, I only said that in the remaining places it was used ONLY as a number and that it was ALSO used as a number EVEN in the places where it continued to be used as a letter. ...

What you wrote here sounded different to me:

... Because this sign, similar to our F, is an ancient letter vau which has fallen into disuse and remained in use only to indicate the number 6 ...

And this is, as we have seen above, is simply not true. Not for Aspendos and not for other places.

Regards

Altamura

[FEDERICO D]

it is true that in some geographical areas the F has remained in use as a letter but it is equally true that it has been used throughout the Greek world to express the number 6. Then I have already said that the F should be interpreted as a number because in the context in which is reported there are elements that lead to a numerical interpretation, that is, the diacritical dots that indicate numbers

[FEDERICO D]

but then why not also contest the use of letters as numbers in case it is ascertained that they are actually numbers such as this one?

[FEDERICO D]

And this is, as we have seen above, is simply not true. Not for Aspendos and not for other places.

Regards

Altamura
[/quote]




Digamma, waw, or wau (uppercase: Ϝ, lowercase: ϝ, numeral: ϛ) is an archaic letter of the Greek alphabet. It originally stood for the sound /w/ but it has remained in use principally as a Greek numeral for 6.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Digamma

[FEDERICO D]

Just to give you some other elements of reflection (or to add another wagon to the train wreck if you like more) I add this passage that clarifies us why in some cases the numbers imply tens, hundreds and thousands. The passage is taken from an article on Aspendos coins but concerns Greek numbers in general.

Source:
https://www.academia.edu/39997497/F_De_Luca_Monograms_on_staters_minted_in_Aspendos_during_the_IV_III_Century_BC_numerical_notes_linked_to_the_size_of_the_issue_Revue_Numismatique_OMNI_no_13_07_2019_pp_40_71

[FEDERICO D]

The "Compendium of Roman antiquities, or rather laws, customs, habits and Romans ceremonies written for young people's education", book of 1817 written in Italian, quoted in the previous post can be consulted here see pages 199-200):

https://books.google.it/books?id=bdGLDI0M0ukC&printsec=frontcover&hl=it&source=gbs_ge_summary_r&cad=0#v=onepage&q&f=false

[FEDERICO D]

... I expected this objection from you. it is true that this letter was still used in Pamphylia ...

How do I have to understand this  .

Altamura

Auf gar keinen Fall darf man aber die revolutionären Theorien von Federico de Luca vergessen :wink: , nach denen die Buchstaben auf diesen Stateren (wie eigentlich alle Buchstaben auf griechischen Münzen) als Zahlen zu interpretieren sind, selbst das ΜΕΝΕΤΥΣ ΕΛVΦΑ:
https://www.academia.edu/39997497/F_De_ ... 9_pp_40_71
Ich selbst halte das, zumindest in der vertretenen Rigorosität, für ziemlichen Stuss, es ist aber interessant zu sehen, wie weit man sich verrennen kann (und wird gerade im amerikanischen Forum intensiv diskutiert: https://www.forumancientcoins.com/board ... c=123077.0 )


FROM the German site Numismatikforum
https://www.numismatikforum.de/viewtopic.php?p=522953

Altamura,
if you have to make some simplifications, do them well: for me not all letters on Greek coins are numbers but only those of some issues or certain coinages.
Wait a little longer to "wie weit man sich verrennen kann"

[PtolemAE]

but then why not also contest the use of letters as numbers in case it is ascertained that they are actually numbers such as this one?

Because the 2nd C. - 1st C. Ptolemaic tetradrachm dating scheme (using the symbol for 'L' ~ 'year') is simple, internally consistent, and also consistent with usage on other coin types (including some bronzes) of the time period. Iow, it's not a convoluted previously-unheard-of arithmetic combining letters and complex compound monograms in multiple representational systems. Those scholars who understand the simple dating system sensibly refrain from fanciful numerical interpretations of the Pi-A (at right) and the Theta (below).  Sometimes a letter is just a letter (apologies to Freud).

In short, the simple dating system has a big advantage: it is believable.

PtolemAE

[FEDERICO D]

but then why not also contest the use of letters as numbers in case it is ascertained that they are actually numbers such as this one?

Because the 2nd C. - 1st C. Ptolemaic tetradrachm dating scheme (using the symbol for 'L' ~ 'year') is simple, internally consistent, and also consistent with usage on other coin types (including some bronzes) of the time period. Iow, it's not a convoluted previously-unheard-of arithmetic combining letters and complex compound monograms in multiple representational systems. Those scholars who understand the simple dating system sensibly refrain from fanciful numerical interpretations of the Pi-A (at right) and the Theta (below).  Sometimes a letter is just a letter (apologies to Freud).

In short, the simple dating system has a big advantage: it is believable.

PtolemAE

I think that by now those who have looked at this topic are tired of reading these constant diatribes and in fact I do not want to feed them at all. I had the opportunity to expose one of my ideas, to many it was overwhelming but that's okay. Those who want to deepen it can read the previous post and there is no need for me to add more. I do not pretend to convince you, it is enough for me to have had the opportunity to have been able to express my ideas and I thank you for that. I am sincerely disappointed with the extraordinary stubbornness with which ALL THE THINGS I have exposed have been looked at with irony, despite having cited ancient sources, posted coins and given numerous feedbacks. Including, not least, this epigram of Alcaeus of Mitylene (Anthologia Palatina, VII, 429) in which there is a trace of this convoluted arithmetic of which I speak to you but which you insist on not seeing.

[FEDERICO D]

but then why not also contest the use of letters as numbers in case it is ascertained that they are actually numbers such as this one?

 Sometimes a letter is just a letter (apologies to Freud).

PtolemAE

Maybe I will have to apologize to Freud but I will have shown myself free from the force of habit that leads this horse to always feel a prisoner even when it is tied only to a plastic chair that could only fly away with a blow of its paw.

[djmacdo]

Obviously, Federico is convinced of his position and just as obviously he has not convinced many of us that his position is correct.  Let us let it rest there!  Right now, there is nothing else useful to say.  Let Federico reexamine his position and see if he can provide an explanation that seems more convincing to most of us, but as matters stand right now, this conversation is degenerating into non-productive posts and is doing no good.  Let it end--as we were promised a while ago.

[Molinari]

Obviously, Federico is convinced of his position and just as obviously he has not convinced many of us that his position is correct.  Let us let it rest there!  Right now, there is nothing else useful to say.  Let Federico reexamine his position and see if he can provide an explanation that seems more convincing to most of us, but as matters stand right now, this conversation is degenerating into non-productive posts and is doing no good.  Let it end--as we were promised a while ago.