Notes on coins in the collection of William Fawkener - London, British Library - Add MS 22911, ff.261-8

Manuscripts of Unpublished Works

William Fawkener

Notes on coins in the collection of William Fawkener - London, British Library - Add MS 22911, ff.261-8

FINA IDUnique ID of the page ᵖ	15854
TitleTitel of the book.	Notes on coins in the collection of William Fawkener
InstitutionName of Institution.	London, British Library
InventoryInventory number.	Add MS 22911, ff.261-8
AuthorAuthor of the document.	William Fawkener
Publication dateDate when the publication was issued: day - month - year .
PlacePlace of publication of the book, composition of the document or institution.
Associated personsNames of Persons who are mentioned in the annotation.	George Wheler
KeywordNumismatic Keywords ᵖ	Roman , Byzantine , Greek , Roman Provincial , Otho , Antioch , Sinope , Tripolis , Metropolis
LiteratureReference to literature.	Wheler 1682Wheler 1682, Burnett 2020b, pp. 579-80Burnett 2020b
LanguageLanguage of the correspondence	English, Latin
External LinkLink to external information, e.g. Wikpedia ᵖ

Export: CSV  RDF

Grand documentOriginal passage from the "Grand document".

'We probably have notes made on [Fawkener's] collection preserved among the papers of John Covel. BL, Add. MS 22911, ff.261–268, consist of several pages, numbered 1 to 7, which describe many coins, sometimes in detail and even with sketches and sometimes with less detail. There is a very considerable overlap with the coins illustrated in George Wheler’s book, which prompted the first thought that the pages must represent notes made on Wheler’s collection when he visited Covel in Constantinople during his journey with Spon. But on four occasions, we learn that the relevant coins were in Fawkener’s collection, and this suggests that the papers are a set of notes made on Fawkener’s collection.
...
The coins are numbered on some of the pages, a feature which helps us arrive at a total of about 145 pieces, and sometimes the size is given, either descriptively or with a sketch of the diameter. Although we start with a small bronze of Otho from Antioch, the coins are nearly all from western Asia Minor, with a few Roman or Byzantine pieces included. They are well described, in English and Latin, and the author was careful to indicate spaces where he could not make out the reading. Although he makes the occasional mistakes, as when he gives a coin of Sinope the erroneous inscription ΗΝΩΠΗΣ (f.263v), his descriptions seem very accurate, and, in one case, he correctly reads and identifies the coin from Tripolis which Wheler described and mistakenly attributed to Metropolis (Wheler no. 49–50, on f. 261).'