I too have no investment in whether its cast or pressed. Tell you guys one thing,,,if proven they're cast,,they're not going to worth a dime,,but first things first:
what needs to be done is a little experimentation. But first:
1. The flaw on the sig rune is big. Not even a magnifying glass is needed. You can see it while its being worn! SO, if cast and so easy to fix why wasn't it? The thinking is because its on the die and once there it stays there.
Already answered to this: you can remove it even from a die used on die struck process, with small chisels. It doesn't matter the process, in both processes you can work on the die, those flaws were in relief on the die! They didn't, who cares now?
Originally Posted by Gaspare
3. for those that say there are other ways of manufacture the question has been asked a couple times,,what are the other ways?
The question is not what are the other ways, is to show proofs they weren't cast. Worst of all no one is answering to my questions, but only with: "the way they were made was dies struck", even if evidences totally led us in another direction. Can't really understand why people doesn't want to watch at the pictures I posted. Why should they be die struck? If you look at the same recessed area in all the rings you want, the same area will be different for each ring. Did they made more than 5000 dies with micro differences?!? No of course, simply the colding process generated different compactions of the silver.
Can someone show here, one single proof of why we should think these rings were die struck? We believe they are die struck but we don't know why and we don't have any proof. No words, proofs.
There are 5 points: dismiss them one by one, showing evidences, since no one of them is compatible with a die struck process. Then we will be sure these rings are not cast.
