Why not collect medals?

Not that I want to compete with you folks, but why not? They often have far more ambitious designs, and specific historical content.. is it just the lack of an associated face value?


Early commems seem to fit right between the qualities of business strikes and medallic art, and seem to fall in between for collector interest as well.. false correlation?

:hammer::computer::hammer::computer:
Felt like playing with a hammer.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

I do collect medals LOL here are a couple of my French medals :hail:

 

True pieces of history, very nice!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

Back in '76 (if memory serves) I subscribed to a series of pewter medals from the US Mint entitled "Americas First Medals". Still have them...lovely medals as I think the originals were done in gold and silver. A few years ago the US Mint did a series of medals dedicated to the National Parks done up in 90% silver....got those too. If a medal stikes my fancy I buy it but it's generally from the US Mint.....probably limiting myself but there is sooo much out there to collect. I have trouble keeping up with coins. Oh, forgot to mention. Tuskegee airmen (great admiration for those guys) and Navaho code talkers (ditto)...got those too.

 

I don't see "face value" as obviously equating to "value."

 

I had to find one, it took over a year, but I found one and at an great price:

​

One of the most beautiful medals ever minted by the US Mint in the XXth century.

 

The thing that I like most about medals is the ultra high relief and special attention to detail. Because they don't circulate they retain that high quality as years go by.

 

Forgot.....that's a looker Scott. Real beauty.

 

Rhode Island Ship Medal

This is the medal I aspire to own one day (probably will have to wait until my ship comes in :whistle




For more info about this medal, read the fascinating history:
http://www.coins.nd.edu/ColCoin/ColCoinIntros/RIShip.intro.html

 

I believe one should collect to collect and enjoy, not to speculate on what something is going to be worth years hence. I like medals such as the one I posted above because of the incredible symbolism in them, coupled with high relief designs. In this sense they deviate a bit from mainstream numismatics and enter the grey area of artwork.

I treat coins similarly, which is why I am so bad about selling stuff, I should sell lots of stuff, but I don't.

 

scottish:
Beautiful medal.

Nice original box & papers also.

Please tell us, what did it go for?
Especially from an expo! Nice piece.

 

Far less than the retail for these, I purchased it from England, where these have no interests. In the USA there are specialised collectors that collect just materiel from World's Fairs, and they drive up the prices on these.

 

I collect medals, I love them, they are more often than not far more stunning works of art...

I have notice that on the whole they are not as expensive but then again...many are very expensive so its much like coins...those that are more rare and interesting are more expensive, more common means less expensive.

here is one of my favorites from my collection:





City of Strasbourg Silver (gilt) Medal with City Coat of Arms and Ten Arms of the Cities of the Dekapolis

No. 559 in Numismatique de l'Alsace by A. Engel and E. Lehr
Obv. (top): 'Thue recht scheu niemand" Do right fear nobody
Rev. (bottom):"forchte gott ehret den konig" Fear God Honor the King

Minted some time between 1655 and 1678, this medal depicts the city of Strasbourg with an angel flying above holding palms in one hand and an olive branch in the other.

On the reverse, two lions hold the behelmte stadtwappen (the city's coat of arms with a helmet). The coat of arms is encircled by the arms of the 10 cities of the Dekapolis, an alliance of ten cities in the Alsace region of the Holy Roman Empire with the city of Haguenau as its capital.

The Dekapolis included the cities cities of Münster, Kaysersberg, Türkheim, Colmar, Schlettstadt, Landau, Weissenburg, Rosheim, Hagenau and Oberehnheim

 

If I collected coins purely based on artistic merits, quite a few pieces in my collection would have to leave. What I find interesting about coins is that they are (or were, or could be) used as means of payment. That may also apply to medals from the days when the intrinsic value determined what a metal disk was worth, but not to modern pieces. Even a coin that I do not find particularly attractive may be one that I want or keep because it is part of a historically interesting series for example.

Sure, there are lots of "borderline" cases, like proof-only issues or coins made solely for collectors. Some of those I may buy, others I don't care about. And while I do not expect to make a profit from collecting coins, I like the idea that, at least with modern pieces, you can fairly easily get an overview of what is there and what would be a reasonable price.

Christian

 

And when you collect medals from the 16th-17th centuries, you are more often getting a better creation of the minters art than coins. They tended to be minted with screw presses as opposed to hammered, and had higher relief etc.



This is a Scottish medal commemorating the Scottish coronation of Charles I(1625-1649), he waited eight years to be crowned in Scotland. And perhaps because of that, everything went wrong for him afterwards.

 

Which is indeed the reason that some, like the Rhode Island medal above are listed in coin references such as the Redbook.

 

What a rewarding thread, there are some really nice designs here that I'd not seen before. The one right above does look familiar.

I wonder what the best reference book on medals would be.. I'll have to poke around.