CNG Keystone 3

Thus I conceded the 6 coins that Yale could prove were in their collection could reasonably be expected to be returned. For the rest there does not seem to be a good reason apparent why Yale should have claim.

Even though I can understand the return of the 6 I don’t completely agree with your line of reasoning. For example, I have given several coins from my collection away with no proof that I did so. I have photos of these coins and can prove they were once in my collection. If I see those gift coins up for sale what would stop me from claiming I never gave them away and demanding their return? I’m not suggesting dishonesty on the part of Yale per my example but the time involved and the lower quality of coins involved means these coins could easily have left the collection legitimately without a trace or a memory.

In such a case the new owner (CNG or the collector) could very reasonably expect proof that the coins were stolen and not legitimately acquired.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

It's not always quite that simple. I have a coin, reportedly deaccessioned from a major American museum, which I purchased in-person for cash from a well-known dealer some years ago whom I haven't spoken to since. These coins were sold in group lots at an auction in the 1990s which advised that prospective buyers should view the lots in-person and there are no pictures of the groups as far as I know. My coin is not specifically listed under any of these group lots, but came with the museum's ticket and I was able to trace it's accession.

When I reached out to the museum to ask about its deaccession and any other records they may have about the coin, the museum was less than helpful(in fact, they didn't return any of my emails at all). If tomorrow, they propose that my coin was stolen and it should be returned, should I return it to them? I can prove it was in their collection at one point, but I can't prove for certain it was ever sold, so really if it came down to it I'd have to either hope that the auction house had records, the dealer has records proving exactly which group lot the coin was from(at the time, he didn't), or that the museum has records. Personally, I'd be keeping my coin absent additional evidence such as a police report. I have every reason to believe it isn't stolen, but no real way to prove it, and the museum has a documented record of buying and selling lots of coins over the past century.

Yale's claims that the coins were stolen should not be taken at face value unless they have more proof than "these coins were previously in our collection". It would be entirely different if they didn't have a documented history of buying and selling many coins, including the Brashear Doubloon that was the centerpiece of the collection. Of course, we have very little information at this point, but hopefully more will come out.

 

I am still surprised the whole sale would be pulled. In the email I received from CNG, they only mentioned 6 coins were suspect. Although, CNG probably wants to avoid any incidents of coins sold and at a later late being discovered as misappropriated from Yale

 

Pulling the entire sale is the safest thing CNG can do. It would be a very bad experience for one of their buyers to win a coin only to have it seized or even brought into question down the road. As someone watching a couple of lots in this auction, I am very happy that CNG pulled the sale rather than potentially exposing myself and other bidders to any problems with stolen property.

By pulling the sale, CNG can figure out any issues with title and, assuming all other coins are good, relist them later, hopefully only excluding these 6 problematic coins.

 

Aah, the layers of an onion. The coins were returned to avoid tarnishing the reputation of the auction house and possible protracted litigation, IMO because we all know the integrity of the institution.

 

I don't understand what, if anything, you're implying by your last sentence. What exactly do we all supposedly know about Yale's integrity?

 

Nothing is the matter. No, my parents couldn't afford to get me into a college like that nor were my grades up to the level that they would have needed to get a scholarship to one of them.
Sorry to poke fun of your alma mater. I wouldn't have made the comment had I known I am glad to read that you were able to go to such prestigious institutions. You should be proud. It sounds like you had a lot of fun there with your friends. The only friend I have from my college days is the one I am married to.
Coming from limited means, I did go to the Salt Lake Community College. They don't have an ancient coin collection under nor above ground.

 

Good points. All joking about leaky basements aside, I'd be very curious to know what kind of records Yale kept over the years about the specific coins from Dura Europos, including any that were de-accessioned. It's clear that the expeditions themselves were extremely well-documented, with thousands of photographs. (See the links below.) The question is whether the subsequent history of all the objects, including coins, was equally well-documented. I tend to think -- or hope -- that coins and other artifacts that Yale excavated itself during its expeditions are kept track of more closely than those purchased on the secondary market.

http://media.artgallery.yale.edu/duraeuropos/Dura-Europos-resources.pdf (an extensive bibliography, including: Bellinger, Alfred R. The Coins. The Excavations at Dura-Europos Conducted by Yale University and the French Academy of Inscriptions and Letters, Final Report 6, ed. Michael I. Rostovtzeff et al. New Haven, Conn.: Yale University Press, 1949.

https://www.artstor.org/collection/dura-europos-and-gerasa-archives-yale-university/

http://media.artgallery.yale.edu/duraeuropos/

https://artgallery.yale.edu/online-feature/dura-europos-excavating-antiquity

https://artgallery.yale.edu/exhibitions/exhibition/dura-europos-crossroads-antiquity

 

It's perfectly OK to poke fun at Yale -- I was joking. And yes, I did have a lot of fun there -- albeit not the kind of fun most people associate with college days! -- despite being very studious for the most part. For me, spending entire days browsing through the library stacks and marveling at the wonders they contained was fun! Today, I probably would have been considered a nerd, although I don't remember that word being used at the time.

 

That it is deemed above reproach.

 

Yeah, in my last comment I may have implied that the collector did something wrong, when we don't know that for sure, the collector could have been duped by someone at the institution, or it could be a case of poor record keeping. Regardless, both CNG and Yale seem convinced that many of the coins that would have been auctioned properly belong to Yale.

 

I believe the institution's (and, more specifically, the Art Gallery's) intentions are good regarding the integrity of their practices, but they are, after all, composed of human beings, and I have no doubt that there have been curators and other employees over the years whose individual honesty has been less than stellar. Like any other institution. Would it surprise me if some employee stole the coins and sold them? No. Would it surprise me if Yale actually sold the coins and knows they sold the coins and is now pretending they didn't? Yes.

 

However, it would surprise me if we ever are made aware of the real facts of this issue.

 

I agree that institutions intentions are good, until it comes to athletics and then the gloves are off.

 

I thank you for your reply. Peace.

 

The institutions intentions were generally purist in nature in times past, but not anymore. I see and hear the results of new doctrines introduced in the universities when speaking with the younger generation.

 

I would feel pretty confident there must be a lot more evidence than given in the email. (At least enough that CNG felt like conceding quickly without a fight, since this must've come up after the sale opened.) If you read the prior paragraph, it sounds like Yale knows exactly what the coins are and where they came from: "six coins in Keystone 3 came from an excavation sponsored by Yale University at Dura-Europos between 1928 and 1937."

Perhaps not photographed, but they seem to recognize them. Sure sounds like these were coins they have known went missing and have been keeping an eye out for (in the sense of being specifically recorded as missing, not continuously investigating for 85-90 years!). But not just that they saw the pedigree at CNG and couldn't find their own records of de-accession.

Could've happened in any number of ways. Someone working on the excavation took some coins home & lost them, then died and they were sold at an estate sale. Or stolen by a grad student working on an archaeology article. I imagine many of us will be learning more details from CNG staff in the upcoming days, as some of us may be pestering friends & contacts there for details!

Lastly, I happen to have a much more positive view of institutional collections, in principle, than a lot of ancient coin collectors. Fairly frequently I use both qualitative and quantitative research and reference catalogs based on these collections, all of which would be much harder to produce without such collections, in addition to reviewing their online exhibits. (Though admittedly, the advance of information technology is now making it possible to perform much of that research based on commercial records.) So, even though I was planning to bid on as many of those coins as possible, I feel no bitterness toward Yale for wanting to re-claim what they considered their property.

This is partly why I think it's important to incentivize (i.e., "pay more for") pedigree/provenance on the private market. Having the most complete record possible can turn out to be quite beneficial. (Though of course there are circumstances like @red_spork 's where the record will be broken, despite valiant efforts to restore it.)

 

@DonnaML, thanks for sticking up for your Alma Mater! My dad and both his male siblings (yep, this was the 1950's) went there. (...Then he moved the family to a remote part of the western United States, and things started going downhill....)
The link is Fantastic. Didn't just bookmark it; have it tabbed for immediate reference.
...And what about what this says for the level of integrity at CNG? If they erred on the side of caution, that would strike me as a favorable alternative to the opposite end of the available spectrum.
...And, Yes, camping out in the stacks was something I did Lots of at the crappy (please read, mostly nominal) university where I started an MA program (before giving up in despair and disgust). Memorably (as most of the experience wasn't), that's where I first got into medieval genealogy.

 

I wonder if the book I cited above about the coins from the Dura-Europos expeditions, published by Yale in 1949, has details on all the individual coins. I doubt that any book published then would have had photos of all of them.

 

Interesting thought! It depends how many coins were there, it wouldn't necessarily be a surprise if it was a small number. My understanding is that most major archaeological sites yield only stray finds, not large hoards, so for only a handful or a few dozen, I don't think it would be at all out of the ordinary. One of my collecting interests is "coins cited or illustrated in scholarly research" so I tend to look at lots of old articles on JSTOR, including from that period and I don't think it'd be unusual, depending on circumstances.