My comment to Wayne Sayles' blog (23rd June 2015, 5:38 AM):
From this, and addressing just the issues about "ancient coins themselves" (Feb 9th 2015), it would appear that the main conclusion one can draw is that those who buy and sell ancient coins without passing on information about findspots (thus preventing maps like this from being drawn) are thus participating in the destruction of knowledge about the past - such as about ancient coin circulation patterns (http://paul-barford.blogspot.com/2015/06/coineys-destroy-knowledge.html). Did any of the coins the findspots of which are shown on these maps pass through your hands as a dealer Mr Sayles? What about many which are not shown on these maps?"Comment moderation has been enabled. All comments must be approved by the blog author". Let us see if the veteran dealer "approves" a frank discussion of findspots and dealers filling their stockrooms largely with items which have 'somehow lost' any documentation of licit origins as they pass through the no-questions-asked, and ooops-I-lost-the-papers market.
UPDATE 28th June 2015
Well, of course not. I mean actual HONEST discussion of the issues surrounding the current mode of doing business by the antiquity trade is not at all in the interests of those engaged in it, is it? The coins that pass through dealers' hands, both freshly-surfaced and 'orphaned' older material, represent a huge loss of archaeological information about the past and the coin trade is not a bit concerned to even make a pretence of wanting to do anything about it. Mr Sayles may block comments on his blog raising these issues, but that does not mean that the issues go away, or that one day the coin trade will not be held accountable for the cynical and utter destruction of so much information. They will be accountable, but by blithely ignoring this issue since the 1970s when it was first raised, have already well-and-truly alienated themselves from being part of the solution. Selfish bastards.