I was looking at the plates in Vecchi and Thurlow 1979 and realized the two illustrated specimens do no match the BM OR Copenhagen specimen. This does mean that Vecchi is associated with 3 out of the four specimens, but basically we have 1 specimen coming light in the 1948/49 and 3 appearing c. 1978/79. I cannot believe that a forgery would delay release of 3 specimens by 30 years and then ‘flood’ the market. Forgery just doesn’t make a lick of sense. No where oh were are these other two bars? I don’t think they made into a museum. I suspect the BM and two Vecchi bars are part of a cache or hoard recovered in the mid 70s. I’d give my eye teeth to know where the heck it was recovered from…
Copenhagen (see previous post for BM):
Other interesting points of Vecchi and Thurlow 1979 on Aes Signatum:
WHERE ARE THEY NOW?!
- an illustration of a whole RRC 6/1 where only fragments were published earlier, 1506g
- a weight range of 1746-1536g for RRC 9/1 implying a third specimen weighing 1536g known to the author, but BM specimen illustrated in plates. (1746 = BM, 1671.2g = Copenhagen)
- an illustration of a whole RRC 12/1 that is different from the BM specimen, the Paris, or the one known whole specimen in trade and a reported weight range of 1525-1222g. The 1222g specimen is not previously known and thus I assume likely to be the one illustrated.
I’ve just ordered Vecchi’s 2013 book from Charles Davis. I want it NOW.