Title: unimpressive scholarship and way-out-on-a-limb reasoning
Product review: I see I'm clearly in the minority here, having a negative opinion of this work, but "that's what makes a ball game," as they would've said in the '30s. Our humble prof has culled scant evidence from a few scratchy glyphs on a Roman coin that's more aerugo than coin and subsequently woven a richly detailed tapestry of arguments and counter-arguments. Were the author as knowledgeable in ancient numismatics (not to mention, ancient astrology) as one is led to believe, he would require a whole lot more than a ram with a vague star over one shoulder to construct so detailed an argument. What we have here is truly a silk purse woven from a sow's ear. Now, pray tell, what will the Dr. Molnar make from Mme. Hog's other ear?
Would you say this review depicts the product in a flattering or unflattering light?
