.
The Proculus coin found mid-November 2012 which the PAS identified as an extremely interesting "fifteenth century forgery" which was brought in for recording by its finder STILL is not in the PAS database. Talk about a "backlog"...
Obviously for anyone wanting to study the reception of antiquity in Renaissance Britain, Camden and all that, this object would be a prime piece of evidence. So why is it not in the database? What else of importance has been omitted from this "database" through prejudice against the object or finder? Indeed, what kind of "data" are these if subjective factors are at work on what goes in and what is kept quiet?
The Proculus coin found mid-November 2012 which the PAS identified as an extremely interesting "fifteenth century forgery" which was brought in for recording by its finder STILL is not in the PAS database. Talk about a "backlog"...
Obviously for anyone wanting to study the reception of antiquity in Renaissance Britain, Camden and all that, this object would be a prime piece of evidence. So why is it not in the database? What else of importance has been omitted from this "database" through prejudice against the object or finder? Indeed, what kind of "data" are these if subjective factors are at work on what goes in and what is kept quiet?
No comments:
Post a Comment