preference: decrepit great rarity or EF common coin?

Generally speaking, if you were confronted with an opportunity cost situation, would you go for a great rarity (something like an EID MAR Denarius, a Priscus Attalus AE, etc) in decrepit shape; wear, porosity, or the like (but no breakage or bronze disease (if applicable) or a spectacular common coin, like a Hadrian Sestertius, in EF?

Both certainly have merits. With me, it'd be the decrepit rarity. It's all conjectural; I have no buy in mind.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

Both is a good answer, but assuming one only had the budget for one or the other, and both were going to sell soon...

 

It depends on the coin for me, and whether better grade examples are easily obtainable or not.

Some of my decrepit rarities

Postumus as Hercules, ORIENS AVG reverse. Unpublished, but almost certainly barbarous


Carausius - VIRTVS CARAVSI AVG

My Balbinus is also pretty beat-up. This may or may not be genuine



Some decent condition common coins

Gallienus - ABVNDANTIA AVG [Rome]


Gallienus - PROVIDENTIA AVG [Rome]. The obverse is nice, but the reverse is a little weakly struck


Claudius II Gothicus - VICTORIAE GOTHIC. The only downside with this one is that the deposits are too hard for me to risk removing lol

 

Rarity most likely. I can even tolerate holed coins. But broken and put back together, nope. Same with tooled, not a fan either.

 

Tough to say, because a decrepit Eid Mar could easily be worth 100x an EF Trajan denarius. But I get your point. Given my current focus on buying coins that I won’t feel a great desire to upgrade, I would say the spectacular common coin.

 

Hard to tell. Depends on how decrepit and how spectacular are the respective coins.
But what I suggest for people who need to choose - choose carefully and make a final decision if they are in an auction....

Sometimes in an auction when I have 2 major targets and I can afford just one, I end up losing both. I usually try to get the first coin but I don't bid aggressively saying that if this one gets too expensive, there is the next interesting one where I can allocate my budget. And of course that one goes over the roof and I lose it too.

 

Myself I would rather go for condition. I have a "minimum standard" which is somewhat flexible because with every ancient coin one has to accept a few compromises. As a case in point
Carausius Ae Antoninianus London Mint 286-293 AD Obv. Bust right radiate draped and cuirassed. Rv Pax standing left. RIC 101 3.48 grms 24 mm Photo by W. Hansen I thought that the portrait on this coin was needle sharp though I was less happy with the flan which is more ragged than I normally would have liked. I bought the coin, so the portrait won out. One of my purchases at the NYINC January 2022.

 

And I would be happy with that coin. But I'm also a fan of raggy flans, don't know why. Great coin though!

 

I say that my preference is a spectacular common coin, although my purchase history tends toward decrepit rarities. I would probably say:

Decrepit rare hole filler > Spectacular common coin > Decrepit rarity of a common emperor/empress

Some of my favorite decrepit rarities:

Quinctilius Varus AE portrait "As" of Achulla


Manila Scantilla


Diva Julia Maesa


Gordian I


Basiliscus


Versus coins that are common, but arguably easier on the eyes

Trajan, ARAB ADQ denarius


Divus Lucius Verus


Trebonianus Gallus


Quintillus


Crispus

 

I have some coins that are pretty mediocre on at least one side, but the other side is decent. (For example, my new Severus Alexander Provincial with Asklepios examining the paw of a bovid on the reverse -- which I think is in very nice condition, and is much more important to me than the mediocre obverse.)

But I definitely put more emphasis on condition than rarity, although I certainly don't demand perfection. I do have minimum standards (which vary; for example they're considerably stricter for Roman Imperials than for Roman Provincials). I generally would have no interest in spending a lot of money on a completely decrepit -- but identifiable -- coin, no matter how rare. (Especially given how common rare ancient coins are!) Sure, I'd buy a completely decrepit Eid Mar for $50.00. But that's not realistic. I wouldn't spend $100,000 on one, even if I were wealthy.

 

One can always get an EF common coin -- any day of the week. I have coins in my specialty collection that are among fewer than half a dozen known examples in the world. When I see them, I buy them, because I'll never have another opportunity.

 

This is my mindset as well.

- If a type is regularly available in high grade, you shouldn't be in a hurry to buy it unless a particular example has superb style, pedigree, or some other attribute.

- If a coin is extremely rare as a type and you might not have another chance for many years, buy it. Perhaps you can eventually upgrade but it's better to not regret passing on a potentially unique opportunity.

- If a coin is semi-rare but rarely in particularly nice condition, it's probably worth buying the next truly exceptional one that comes up if you want the type.

Regarding Eid Mar denarii, they would fall in my third category here. There are enough in existence that they aren't rare. But, for me, finding one that didn't look out of place required some patience, although far less patience than other types where I've been waiting for 10 years for another chance (and might very well end up waiting another 10).

 

If i hade to choose i would go for a common coin. But i would prefer a beautiful coin.

This coin is not perfect, and it’s rather common. But i love the style and impression.

 

We differ greatly on the definition of 'rarity'. We know from sales records that there are about 100 known examples of the EID MAR. A few of them are plated and the average one is 'average' but in high demand from people who would not even think of owning a common coin in that grade. Prices go up when there are 100 coins and 10,000 people who want one. On the other hand, there are quite a number of coins known from a very few surviving specimens. Some are even one of a kind 'unique' but many sell for less than a good lunch because the demand for that item is less than the census count. My answer to the question has to depend on the coin. If it is a great rarity that fits my specialty collection, I want it. If it is equally rare but was issued by a ruler that means nothing special to me, I would pay no extra. Maridvnvm and I have posted on Coin Talk I'd suspect 50 coins of Septimius Severus that do not exist in half as many examples as the EID MAR but there are only a handful of people who would take some of them as a gift let alone pay for their rarity. I don't know the census of each of my coins with any accuracy but I'll tack on here ten coins I believe exist in fewer than 100 examples total for the group. Besides that, what they have in common is that most of you would not want them even though you would have a lot of trouble finding any one of them any better. Before someone asks: I hope no one was planning on asking me to trade one of these for one of those common EID MAR coins. In a couple of these cases, I'd have trouble making that decision.

To get ten here, I had to cheat and include a couple I know are barbarous and a couple I know exist in at least ten examples. I would be interested in hearing from anyone who can demonstrate I am wrong about there being under 100 total. Would I trade them for a mint state common? Not a chance.

 

Generally, I tend to prefer higher grade common coins over coins of exceptional rarity in a lower grade...however, if the opportunity arises, I'm more than happy to acquire decent examples of scarcer types. Without the right amount of patience, I think that a balance between scarcity and grade is achievable. The coin below is an example.

I wanted a coin of Gordian III as Caesar for a while. At NYINC, I was originally going for a denarius; there was one in Triton and one in the New York auction. However, when I went to examine the coins I liked neither of them. Although I saw this coin on Biddr, I never considered it until I saw it in person. When I decided that I liked this coin, I checked the Triton lots again as they also had the same type of sestertius. However, I did not like the Triton example and I decided to go for this coin.

Gordian III (AD 238-244)


AE Sestertius (31mm, 22.42 g). Rome mint. 1st emission of Pupienus and Balbinus. AD 238, as Caesar. M ANT GORDIANVS CAES, bare-headed and draped bust right / PIETAS AVGG around, SC in exergue, priestly implements: lituus, knife, patera, jug, simpulum and aspergillum. RIC IVc 3.

Ex Peter Corcoran Collection
Ex New York Sale (11 January 2021), lot 380.
Ex Classical Numismatic Group Auction 87 (18 May 2011), lot 1060.

 

For many of us, the question posed in this thread is inextricably linked to the historical significance of the coin, a factor that cannot be dismissed.

As Doug observes:

Typically, greater historical significance = greater demand, and...
Typically, greater demand = higher price.

So it's completely understandable that uncommon coins with just a few known examples but no intrinsic historical significance will rarely, if ever, command a premium based solely on their condition (although TPGs may try to convince you otherwise) while historically significant coins with limited or even plentiful quantities (e.g., Tiberius denarius "tribute penny") will command premium prices.

As long as one of your criteria for collecting ancient coins is the coin's historical significance, you're probably likely to accept a lesser condition coin than your usual criteria would allow if it fits with your collection's focus.

 

As stated above, it's a general collection vs. specialized field situation.

In my specialized field some types are highly unlikely to be encountered in a lifetime. Not buying the one that pops up, regardless of condition would be somewhat giving up on completing the series
The general collection is another animal. I collect ancient that appeal to me. I'm not bothered with rarity when I consider buying a coin with good style, good metal, good preservation. I just need to fall in love (well sort of ) with the said coin.

Of course the pristine rarity would be the cherry on the cake

Q

 

If that is the exchange rate, I prefer 100 common denari in EF over a decrepit Eid Mar denarius any time.


At the end of the day it comes down to personal preference. I derive more pleasure from a common, but aethetically pleasing coin than from a badly worn or crumbling unicum, regardless of the historical significance of the ruler or the event that the coin refers to. Others see this differently. It is entirely subjective.

More objectively, however, I do believe that common high grade coins have monetary advantages over rare low grade coins: I think high grade coins tend to hold their value better than rarities in poor condition. In addition, high grade coins tend to be more marketable, i.e. they are easier to resell than rarities in poor condition. But, I'm sure to the speciality collector this doesn't matter a bit.

 

For me, rarity doesn't matter much, and EF doesn't matter much. I collect coins, which are old, and historically interesting to me. However, I try to buy, the nicest looking examples, that I can afford.
Here's one of my coins, which is not rare, and not EF. But, it's historically interesting to me, and a pretty nice looking example, for the type, according to my standards of beauty.

Roman Republic. Anonymous AE As. 211 BC To 206 BC. Rome Mint. Sear 627. 32.0 mm. 36.69 grams. Obverse Janus With "I" Above. Reverse Ship's Prow With "I" Above.