How to properly grade & describe ancients? - My first question is

My first question-

I need you guys to teach me how to grade and discuss ancient coins properly. Is there a decent description of the grading system(s) on the Web someplace? I won't know what is proper & won't know the difference between statements like "near VF", "gVF", "VF+", "VF", and "aVF" etc unless I ask.

BTW, I have taken advanced grading at the ANA summer seminar twice. Time permitting, I'll take the class again & again. I'd certainly like to learn more about proper terminology & grading used with ancients. I appreciate any direction you guys can provide.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

The first thing to realize is that the DESCRIPTION is often much more important than the grade. I'll leave it to others here to discuss the finer points of grading, but I've been meaning to do a post on proper cataloging, so I'll try to work that up for you this weekend.

 

Doubt ANA schooling teaches ancient grading..

This is what you need to read: http://www.forumancientcoins.com/dougsmith/grade.html

 

I think everything you need to know could be found here....

http://www.forumancientcoins.com/dougsmith/grade.html

 

Absolutely correct. Description is the important factor when identifying Ancients. I'm not sure how grades can be applied.

 

Grades are extremely relative when it comes to ancients. Everything depends on what you compare it to. Take this Nabataean bronze of Malichus II for instance...



Most coin collectors would call this a sorry excuse for a coin, but it is in fact the highest grade specimen of the type that I've ever seen. Nabataean coins were poorly-minted and did not suffer the vagaries of time and weather very well.

So for a Nabataean it's fleur de coin. Put it next to a well-preserved Greek stater and it becomes an ugly little turd. Beauty, as always, is in the eye of the beholder.

 

"Grading" seems a bit iffy where ancients are concerned ...

Sure, if I compare two coins, I will be able to decide which coin looks better between the two ... but sadly, or maybe "interestingly", what one ancient collector thinks is cool, another may think is irrelevant ... know what I mean?

With US and/or Canadian coins (because I collect Canadian moderns as well as ancients) => there are obviously far more strict rules and standards!! (example => obverse1, obverse2, etc for Queen Victoria) ....... but sadly, or maybe "awesomely", ancient coins often have several varying dies and/or mints, etc, so it is extremely hard to compare and decide upon a rating system (in my eyes anyway) ...

=> I agree that an ancient's "type" is far more important than its grade ... and perhaps a "coin-versus-coin" pose-down against other known coin-sales is pretty much how most ancient collectors determine the coin's coolness-factor (its worth) of your ancient coin ...

NOTE => but that's just "me" ... and if you ask around, stevex6's word is probably only worth a handful of Semis!!

 

I disagree.

I agree 100%.

 

I use 3 grades with ancients. OK. Cruddy, Crap.

 

By posting a picture of your wife or girlfriend you will see just how good these guys can grade.
J/K There are great people here that know coins and will give you answers that will be correct.
Welcome to coin talk.

 

I disagree. To me grades are absolute. I utterly reject the notion of Vf for type or such. I grade every coin without excuses as to what others look like, age, or similar. The grade is the grade, and if the nicest coin for that type is a vg, or if coins left the mint as a vf at best, so be it.

Making excuses for the grade is the slippery slope US coins went down, and most of their grades are now meaningless. If a xf looks horrible because of "weak strike" then its a f, not an xf. End of story.

 

Sorry medman. I have to respectfully disagree. Grading Ancients is subjective at best. Of course this is my opinion, and we know opinions are like certain body parts. Everyone has one (or two).

 

All grading of every coin is a subjective act. However, i absolutely refuse to overgrade coins like nabatean and jewish coins commonly found poorly struck. Many coins left the mint grading vf, and have gone downhill from there. That is ok, its the naturd of our hobby.

However, any time someone grades a coin "xx" for type, i lose respect for that dealer. Maybe the best coin for that only exists in vg, that is ok. I accept that, and so should you.

Yes, due to age, strike issues, corrosion, cleaning, etc two f can look quite a bit different. My only point is if a coin would be graded a vg if it were a late roman bronze, you cannot grade it a vf just because its from a civilization that poorly struck coins.A vg is a vg is a vg. Period, in my mind.

Btw, i am not grading JA coin vg, just saying as a generality.

 

That approach requires an objective grading system, and if you've constructed one for yourself, that's all well and good, but go try and convince other collectors of it. At some point, at least in the extremes, it becomes an issue of apples and oranges. I've moved away from using grades like f or xf altogether - if a coin appeals to me on an intellectual or aesthetic level, than it grades higher than a coin that doesn't, plain and simple.

 

That is fine for purchase decisions. However, ancient collectors DO have a grading system, one that is stricter and older than anythng i use for US coins. I didn't make anything up, simply follow centuries of precedent.

How do you think this hobby ever lasted through the centuries of auctions and remote bidding with no grading system?

 

I don't think we're disagreeing. I wouldn't venture to call that Nabataean anything better than f, on a good day, if I was forced to grade it. But I've discovered in my short collecting experience, that "official" grades mean almost nothing to me when I'm acquiring a coin.

I recently bought a Julia Mamaea issued in Bostra that can't possible grade higher than f on account of being cast and suffering the desert weather. It's about as good as that coin gets, and I hunted down every example I could find - nonetheless, I'm thrilled to have one in such good condition. So whether it's an objective f or a relative xf makes little difference to me.

We no longer live in a century that seems to need a rigorous grading system for ancients. We can see with our own two eyes whether we like a coin or not.

 

If we were all together in a room, a brawl would have broken-out already!!!

"Let's get 'em, boys!!"

=> Kapoooowww!!


stevex6's bottom-line => I'm never gonna sell my coins, so I'm gonna continue to buy the "cool coins" ...

Ratings:

Whoa, Super-cool
Super-cool
cool
wow, nice
nice
interesting
really?
junk

 

We expect good photos of coins offered for sale so this is true to a degree. The main reason it is true, however, is that we failed so miserably to do it in any other way.

No! The guy that wrote that page (AKA me) has tried over and over again to find a way to transmit grading information in a simple way like EF50 but every grand scheme falls short in major ways. All those pages should do is point out that the subject is too big for my mind to grasp.

Steve can be so lucid when he wants to be. All I disagree with in the above is the demonstrated fact that I often fail to figure out which of two coins is the better. That is why I have half a dozen of some coins and still can't find one that makes the others unwanted.

I like this one,too. Unfortunately 'apples and oranges' makes it seem to simple. Perhaps its more a matter of apples and orangutans? My highest grade coin is one that I buy today and still will like at least as much tomorrow and on the day I die.

 

Yeah, I don't think we are disagreeing much either. Part of the problem is you may think I believe a VF is by definition a "better" coin. Heck no. I will pass on a VF for a gF lots of times. It depends on ME what is important to ME on the coin. Its a lot like the great demonstration Doug had of those Nemausus coins. I do believe every coin has an innate grade, most of us on here who have been around a while usually agree on the grade, but that has NOTHING to do with its desirability. With ancients, there is so much more going on than just a coin's grade, its not funny. I bought a RR coin once, passing over maybe 30 of them until I finally found one with a full camel neck and ARETAS on it. Those two things were important to me, but maybe not 99% of others looking at the same exact coin.

In short, I assert grade is but a small factor on an ancient coin, but every ancient DOES have a grade by definition. That's all.

No hard feelings. I would never take a swing at JA Steve, (he might be bigger than me). In the immortal words of Roy D. Mercer, "How big a boy are ya?"

 

Hey, I'm not brawling! I'll leave that up to the US collectors (of which I'm a part incidentally, except for caring about point differences.) You know, one of the best conversations I've had recently was with Bill, over lunch - concerning aspects of archeological numismatics. At one point I said, "just think if we were US collectors," and he said, "yeah...we'd be arguing over what constitutes a 66 as opposed to a 67."