Exercising bragging rights
Reid Goldsborough
beginnings.
The first is from the beginning of coinage, the first coin now
illustrated at this page:
http://rg.ancients.info/lion/article.html
I previously had later varieties, also illustrated on this page, but
this is the earliest.
The second is even earlier, from the beginning of civilization, not a
coin but an artifact, but one that has connections to much later (but
still very old!) Owls of Athens, the last piece now on this page:
--
Email: reid...@removethisnetaxs.com (delete "remove this")
Consumer: http://rg.ancients.info/guide
Connoisseur: http://rg.ancients.info/glom
Counterfeit: http://rg.ancients.info/bogos
Jeff R.
"Reid Goldsborough" <reidgold...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:plne53d3c7p1lba9j...@4ax.com...
> Two latest acquisitions, both immensely cool, awe-inspiring, from
> beginnings.
Very impressive acquisitions indeed.
How does one go about guaranteeing authenticity in such items - of such
antiquity - where there surely has been ample time for the most convincing
fakes to have been manufactured and slipped onto the market? Fakes which
may be thousands of years old themself, (no worries generating "authentic"
patina!) but which are fakes nonetheless.
Do they have any sort of provenance - more than just a few generations old,
that is?
Assuming they are genuine - congratulations. Surely the ultimate coin for a
collection of ancients. May one be tacky enough as to enquire of their
price?
--
Jeff R.
Reid Goldsborough
wrote:
>How does one go about guaranteeing authenticity in such items - of such
>antiquity...
One doesn't. There are no guarantees, no foolproof assurances, about
anything ancient. There are just degrees of confidence. Some
collectors flip out when they learn that there are fakes out there and
that they may even unwittingly have some in their own collections. You
can't collect ancient coins or artifacts in an informed way if you
can't tolerate some uncertainty. Better stick to collecting pocket
change or mint sets if you want certainty. But with that uncertainty
comes great interest, history, and beauty.
Minimizing the uncertainty can also be a good part of the fun,
approached from the right perspective. There are various ways of doing
this, from at one extreme delegating all authentication by buying only
from the most blue-chip, and expensive, dealers to gaining enough
knowledge yourself of how such items are typically faked and how
genuine items of the same type are supposed to look, feel, and sound
(when tapped, for instance), along with their weight and size and so
on. There are also more scientific tests you can have performed, but
though occasionally helpful they're generally not as reliable as
multilayered hands-on experience.
>Do they have any sort of provenance - more than just a few generations old,
>that is?
Because of the secrecy that exists in the world of ancient coins and
artifacts, it's difficult to impossible to trace the provenance of
most items. There's secrecy at the source because the vast majority of
finds are exported from source countries in violation of those
countries laws, necessarily so because of the irrationality of those
laws, legally treating dirt cheap late Roman bronze coins the same as
the Elgin Marbles, for instance. Illegality, of course, is far from
the ideal. The ideal would be to change these irrational laws in
Mediterranean countries, using the British treasure law as a model, so
that all the information -- about the items and the people who used
them -- that's currently destroyed by the secrecy would be preserved,
which would benefit all those seeking to learn more about our origins,
including those in source countries.
There's also secrecy in the distribution channels because dealers
don't want you knowing about their sources. One concern is that you'll
bypass them and go directly to such sources. Another is that those who
have sold or consigned to them want their privacy protected. Generally
the only way to discover the provenance of a piece is to find it in
old auction catalogs or attribution references. There are exceptions,
when sellers for instance pass on information, when they know it and
can disclose it, about provenance as an added value, which can help
them obtain a better price.
>Assuming they are genuine - congratulations.
I have a high degree of confidence that they're genuine. The sellers
in both cases have impeccable reputations, known for their expertise.
And there's nothing I can see about either that suggests they're fake,
no signs of modern manufacture, no divergence from similar items in
old collections and references.
>Surely the ultimate coin for a >collection of ancients.
I agree. I think the Lydian Lion is "the coin." The mother of all
coins. The primal coin. The first coin. No certainty here either, but
no other coin makes a better case for this.
And these eye idols are also primal. They're my first real foray into
non-coin antiquities. Given their age -- more than 5,000 years, going
back as they do to the very beginnings of civilization -- they're
amazingly affordable. That's because of their numbers, thousands, and
their small size, with the heads being only about an inch, or 26mm,
square, but this is about the size of a medium-large coin, a bit
bigger than a U.S. quarter.
Jorg Lueke
wrote:
> On Sat, 26 May 2007 11:35:10 +1000, "Jeff R." <contact...@this.ng>
> wrote:
>
>
> >Do they have any sort of provenance - more than just a few generations old,
> >that is?
>
> Because of the secrecy that exists in the world of ancient coins and
> artifacts, it's difficult to impossible to trace the provenance of
> most items. There's secrecy at the source because the vast majority of
> finds are exported from source countries in violation of those
> countries laws, necessarily so because of the irrationality of those
> laws, legally treating dirt cheap late Roman bronze coins the same as
> the Elgin Marbles, for instance. Illegality, of course, is far from
> the ideal. The ideal would be to change these irrational laws in
> Mediterranean countries, using the British treasure law as a model, so
> that all the information -- about the items and the people who used
> them -- that's currently destroyed by the secrecy would be preserved,
> which would benefit all those seeking to learn more about our origins,
> including those in source countries.
>
Do you really think people would trace the provenence of most coins
even if the legal climate were conducive to unrestricted world trade?
Isn't it also largely an economic and temporal consideration? If you
cleaned up 1000 lot coin would you write tags especially for $2 or $20
pieces? I think it is unrasonable to expect that for common items.
Does it happen for the legal finds of Britain and Germany now? I
don't see it to a great etent for anything that is not really rare or
from a prominent collection.
> There's also secrecy in the distribution channels because dealers
> don't want you knowing about their sources. One concern is that you'll
> bypass them and go directly to such sources. Another is that those who
> have sold or consigned to them want their privacy protected. Generally
> the only way to discover the provenance of a piece is to find it in
> old auction catalogs or attribution references. There are exceptions,
> when sellers for instance pass on information, when they know it and
> can disclose it, about provenance as an added value, which can help
> them obtain a better price.
If collectors did go to the soyrces directly wouldn't that lead to
more fakes, badly tooled, an horribly cleaned ancients on the
market?
>
Reid Goldsborough
wrote:
>Do you really think people would trace the provenence of most coins
>even if the legal climate were conducive to unrestricted world trade?
Who do you mean by people -- dealers or collectors? As a collector I
find it very interesting and rewarding to find out about a coin I have
obtained. To me, it's not just, Gee whiz, look at how old this is. I
learn what I can about it, including its travels through time. Tracing
it when possible to a hoard, and then the hoard to the year and
circumstances it was buried and found, is all a part of this. I'm not
alone in this. Problem is, again, that in the vast majority of cases
this knowledge isn't preserved for the reasons I said, and much other
knowledge as well about the coins and the people who used them.
>If collectors did go to the soyrces directly wouldn't that lead to
>more fakes, badly tooled, an horribly cleaned ancients on the
>market?
Depends on the collector. If you know nothing or little and buy from
Eastern European or Middle Eastern sources directly, or for that
matter from fellow collectors, of course you're going to get taken
more than if you buy from experienced dealers.
Jorg Lueke
wrote:
> On 27 May 2007 09:12:37 -0700, Jorg Lueke <jlueke_2...@yahoo.com>
> wrote:
>
> >Do you really think people would trace the provenence of most coins
> >even if the legal climate were conducive to unrestricted world trade?
>
> Who do you mean by people -- dealers or collectors? As a collector I
> find it very interesting and rewarding to find out about a coin I have
> obtained. To me, it's not just, Gee whiz, look at how old this is. I
> learn what I can about it, including its travels through time. Tracing
> it when possible to a hoard, and then the hoard to the year and
> circumstances it was buried and found, is all a part of this. I'm not
> alone in this. Problem is, again, that in the vast majority of cases
> this knowledge isn't preserved for the reasons I said, and much other
> knowledge as well about the coins and the people who used them.
I agree it's fun and interesting to know as much abound a coin as
possible including where it was found. I just don't know that it
would be practical for that information to survive in the majority of
cases simply because ,ost coins are fairly common and found in
relatively uninteresting spots. Just like many collectors don't keep
track of what sale they got a coin, I think most would not bother
preserving which whear field in Romania they folles came from.
Reid Goldsborough
wrote:
>I agree it's fun and interesting to know as much abound a coin as
>possible including where it was found. I just don't know that it
>would be practical for that information to survive in the majority of
>cases simply because ,ost coins are fairly common and found in
>relatively uninteresting spots. Just like many collectors don't keep
>track of what sale they got a coin, I think most would not bother
>preserving which whear field in Romania they folles came from.
I disagree. I think the vast majority of collectors would welcome
knowledge that a coin they bought was found in a hoard, or as a more
isolated find, in Romania or anywhere else, and I think that with
rational laws it would be very practical, not burdensome at all, to
preserve this most basic of information.
No, nobody is talking about knowing about the field in Romania where
the coin was found. I wasn't, and I haven't heard or read anybody else
wanting to know what particular field a coin was found. Did you hear
or read this? Or were you just exaggerating to try to make some kind
of point?
Knowing that a particular ancient Greek or Roman coin was found in
Romania rather than Syria or Lebanon or Israel Saudi Arabia or Iraq or
Iran or Pakistan or Turkey or Bulgaria or Greece or Italy or France or
Spain or Portugal or Britain or the Netherlands or Belgium or Germany
IS interesting, and it can be very *useful*, when applied in the
aggregate, in adding to the knowledge base about the particular coin
type and the people who minted and spent and traded with it.
Hoard and findspot knowledge is one of the cornerstones of ancient
numismatic scholarship, which can be an important adjunct to
historical research in general. I'm very surprised you choose to
downplay this.
Jorg Lueke
wrote:
>
> Knowing that a particular ancient Greek or Roman coin was found in
> Romania rather than Syria or Lebanon or Israel Saudi Arabia or Iraq or
> Iran or Pakistan or Turkey or Bulgaria or Greece or Italy or France or
> Spain or Portugal or Britain or the Netherlands or Belgium or Germany
> IS interesting, and it can be very *useful*, when applied in the
> aggregate, in adding to the knowledge base about the particular coin
> type and the people who minted and spent and traded with it.
>
> Hoard and findspot knowledge is one of the cornerstones of ancient
> numismatic scholarship, which can be an important adjunct to
> historical research in general. I'm very surprised you choose to
> downplay this.
>
indeed both interesting and vital in general. However, I disagree
that it is interesting and valuable for every or even most coins.
Personally, I'd keep track of every piece, but it seems a bit of an
onerous burden to place on every collector. If a coi Constantinople
is found in Istanbul like 1000 others before it, that information adds
no new knowledge and is not that interesting. If a coin of
Constantinople is found in Norway it is much more interesting. I just
don't think most collectors care as much about this information as you
or I would and generally this infomation is not the most valuable
aspect of the coin.
Reid Goldsborough
wrote:
>I am certain not trying to downplay this type of knowledge. It is
>indeed both interesting and vital in general. However, I disagree
>that it is interesting and valuable for every or even most coins.
>Personally, I'd keep track of every piece, but it seems a bit of an
>onerous burden to place on every collector. If a coi Constantinople
>is found in Istanbul like 1000 others before it, that information adds
>no new knowledge and is not that interesting. If a coin of
>Constantinople is found in Norway it is much more interesting. I just
>don't think most collectors care as much about this information as you
>or I would and generally this infomation is not the most valuable
>aspect of the coin.
You're ignoring the big picture. Where coins are found and what other
coins they're found with and what circumstances can be deduced from
where they're found is how knowledge is created. It's a key way that
numismatists date and otherwise attribute coins -- learn about who and
where and when coins were minted. It's not just about you learning
that your little Byzantine coin was found in Byzantium.
note.boy
Due to the laws regarding ancient coins varying from country to country the
stated find country may be wrong if the actual find country had very strict
ancient coin laws, the find country may be changed to avoid those strict
laws. Billy
Jorg Lueke
wrote:
>
> You're ignoring the big picture. Where coins are found and what other
> coins they're found with and what circumstances can be deduced from
> where they're found is how knowledge is created. It's a key way that
> numismatists date and otherwise attribute coins -- learn about who and
> where and when coins were minted. It's not just about you learning
> that your little Byzantine coin was found in Byzantium.
>
with you I am ignoring the big picture. It's always the other guy
isn't it? Have it your way.
Reid Goldsborough
<note...@naespamntlworld.com> wrote:
>Due to the laws regarding ancient coins varying from country to country the
>stated find country may be wrong if the actual find country had very strict
>ancient coin laws, the find country may be changed to avoid those strict
>laws. Billy
Exactly. This is one of the many problems resulting from the schizoid
system that exists today. When a famous coin or hoard is found, such
as the Athenian dekadrachms that recently came to market, you hear all
kinds of stories about where it came from. A great deal of knowledge
about the past has been lost because of these irrational laws, all
overreactions to the wholesale movement in past centuries of ancient
artifacts from source countries to museums in other countries.
Reid Goldsborough
wrote:
>Once again you refuse to listen at all. Since I only partially agree
>with you I am ignoring the big picture. It's always the other guy
>isn't it? Have it your way.
I'm listening, but you're not making any sense. Why would you argue at
all about the benefit to knowledge of where coins came from? Of course
not every coin is going to change what we know. But with the current
situation, a great deal of knowledge is lost. My point all along is if
you change the current situation, new knowledge will arise.
Sibirskmoneta
> On Tue, 29 May 2007 10:18:56 GMT, "note.boy"
> <note...@naespamntlworld.com> wrote:
>
>>Due to the laws regarding ancient coins varying from country to country
>>the
>>stated find country may be wrong if the actual find country had very
>>strict
>>ancient coin laws, the find country may be changed to avoid those strict
>>laws. Billy
>
> Exactly. This is one of the many problems resulting from the schizoid
> system that exists today. When a famous coin or hoard is found, such
> as the Athenian dekadrachms that recently came to market, you hear all
> kinds of stories about where it came from. A great deal of knowledge
> about the past has been lost because of these irrational laws, all
> overreactions to the wholesale movement in past centuries of ancient
> artifacts from source countries to museums in other countries.
>
> --
like this:
http://www.ukdfd.co.uk/ukdfddata/index.php
Which I have bookmarked and frequently visit when researching particularly
17th century tokens.
But with inane and anal laws like those of Cyprus all this is lost and taken
underground.
Knowledge should be shared, not legislated out of legality.
kathy1945
congratulations on both - they're gorgeous!
Kathy
Reid Goldsborough
wrote:
>I would die for your Athenian Owl tetradrachm!!!!! Major
>congratulations on both - they're gorgeous!
Don't die! If it's a matter of life and death, I'll give it to you.
Eric Faust
> On 29 May 2007 14:44:03 -0700, kathy1945 <hiimbl...@netscape.net>
> wrote:
>
>>I would die for your Athenian Owl tetradrachm!!!!! Major
>>congratulations on both - they're gorgeous!
>
> Don't die! If it's a matter of life and death, I'll give it to you.
In that case, I'm dying for that lion and any other electrum you've been
holding out on us.
Reid Goldsborough
<erNODAMS...@comcast.net> wrote:
>In that case, I'm dying for that lion and any other electrum you've been
>holding out on us.
Buy one yourself, cheapskate. I was just offering to help a fellow
collector in dire need. What do I look like, a chump?
kathy1945
wrote:
> On 29 May 2007 14:44:03 -0700, kathy1945 <hiimblack...@netscape.net>
> wrote:
>
> >I would die for your Athenian Owl tetradrachm!!!!! Major
> >congratulations on both - they're gorgeous!
>
> Don't die! If it's a matter of life and death, I'll give it to you.
Just a turn of phrase - but it's nice to know you're there when a
person needs you! That bug-eyed owl captivated me during the first
week of my coin collecting career ( which started 10 months ago), and
I resolved to have one before my time on this earth is over. It'll
happen.
Kathy
Reid Goldsborough
wrote:
>Just a turn of phrase - but it's nice to know you're there when a
>person needs you! That bug-eyed owl captivated me during the first
>week of my coin collecting career ( which started 10 months ago), and
>I resolved to have one before my time on this earth is over. It'll
>happen.
A large recently discovered hoard of Owls is currently on the market,
being dispersed. Now might be a good time to buy one of these. The
Owls in this hoard, reportedly more than 3,000 pieces, are typically
on the more affordable side, not in great condition and frequently
test cut. I bought two beat-up coins from the hoard, both costing only
$150, the fourth and sixth coins on my main Owl page. But nicer
specimens are out there too from this hoard and elsewhere.
It's fun hearing from someone who also appreciates Owls. They're
deservedly the most famous of all ancient coins, the most well-known
among noncollectors, and among the most famous of all coins. Big,
thick silver coins with interesting iconography (Athena, goddess of
wisdom and warfare, and her owl, a symbol of wisdom to this day) from
the birthplace of democracy when democracy was first emerging 25
centuries ago.
Eric Faust
> On Wed, 30 May 2007 07:48:19 -0600, "Eric Faust"
> <erNODAMS...@comcast.net> wrote:
>
>>In that case, I'm dying for that lion and any other electrum you've been
>>holding out on us.
>
> Buy one yourself, cheapskate. I was just offering to help a fellow
> collector in dire need. What do I look like, a chump?
I ask not because you look like a chump, but rather that my collection is
worth chump change in comparison.
Reid Goldsborough
<erNODAMS...@comcast.net> wrote:
>I ask not because you look like a chump, but rather that my collection is
>worth chump change in comparison.
I've gotten to the point in my life where self-acknowledgement has
reached parity with self-delusion. I am a chump, always have been, and
always will be. My wife, my kids, and especially my dog can attest to
that. Silliness.
Actually, your referring to the value of a collection is worth
pursuing. I'd maintain that the actual value of a collection has some
relation to, but relatively little, its market value. There are all
kinds of ways to place a value on any given collection of coins or
anything else. To me the value of any given coin has most to do with
how well it motivates me to learn more about it, the people who used
it, the time and place where they lived, and so on. It also has a lot
to do with its subjective eye appeal -- its glom value to me -- which
doesn't necessary correlate with conventional ideas about beauty.
Other factors too. But at the bottom of the list, of little appeal to
me, is rarity. I'd rather actually have a common coin -- a
representational coin, one that many bought and sold with -- than a
coin that only few people today can possess.
Eric Faust
> On Wed, 30 May 2007 15:20:01 -0600, "Eric Faust"
> <erNODAMS...@comcast.net> wrote:
>
>>I ask not because you look like a chump, but rather that my collection is
>>worth chump change in comparison.
>
> I've gotten to the point in my life where self-acknowledgement has
> reached parity with self-delusion. I am a chump, always have been, and
> always will be. My wife, my kids, and especially my dog can attest to
> that. Silliness.
>
> Actually, your referring to the value of a collection is worth
> pursuing. I'd maintain that the actual value of a collection has some
> relation to, but relatively little, its market value. There are all
> kinds of ways to place a value on any given collection of coins or
> anything else. To me the value of any given coin has most to do with
> how well it motivates me to learn more about it, the people who used
> it, the time and place where they lived, and so on. It also has a lot
> to do with its subjective eye appeal -- its glom value to me -- which
> doesn't necessary correlate with conventional ideas about beauty.
> Other factors too. But at the bottom of the list, of little appeal to
> me, is rarity. I'd rather actually have a common coin -- a
> representational coin, one that many bought and sold with -- than a
> coin that only few people today can possess.
I agree with what you say, I just couldn't resist a play on words. Rarity
doesn't do it for me either. When it comes to the coin budget, it's all
about supply and demand though. I'm not tempted by a lack of supply, but my
preferences frequently collide with everyone else's on the demand side of
the equation, so I do desire some of the big ticket items. Owls and
Alexander tets are among my favorites, and nice ones will put a good dent in
your wallet despite being relatively common.
I'm happy to buy an interesting coin in a sad state of preservation when I
can't afford or track down a better example. I'm drawn to coins by a love of
history first, and an appreciation of art second. Here's an example
currently in transit, destination: my greedy hands. Not expensive, rare, or
high grade (damaged, in fact), but a coin from an interesting place and
time, and pleasing to my eye.
http://www.vcoins.com/ancient/calgarycoin/store/viewItem.asp?idProduct=2719
Reid Goldsborough
Pretty ladies on obverse and reverse. I agree. Very nice coin. And a
good deal too. You can often get good deals on ancient fractions like
this, which collectors don't value as much as larger pieces, but this
piece is far from tiny. And the state of preservation is marvelous,
better than gVF if you don't factor in the spade cuts on the edge and
center of the reverse, but they're not very distracting, taking away
very little from the intended beauty of the design. Robert Kokotailo
is a great dealer too, an expert who generously shares his knowledge.
You fully deserve to exercise bragging rights about this coin. <g>