Where do YOU draw the line? Syracuse Deka Repair

I noticed this supremely beautiful Syracuse Dekadrachm for sale on vcoins today:



It is for sale here:

https://www.vcoins.com/en/stores/ar...acuse__400_bc_ex_allatini/817447/Default.aspx

Don't all shoot off and order it before I can, it is listed for $85,000 which seems reasonable given its beauty and Roberto Allatini (1856 - 1927) pedigree.

They also note "Minor mark to cheek of Arethusa restored."

I found this earlier sale photo in acsearch:



The ding in her cheek is very visible in this photo.

So I was wondering if this type of repair, where metal was added back to the coin is really ok with me and with the rest of you?

My basic feeling is removing obscuring and ugly corrosion, dirt, shoe polish, lacquer, paint, etc. that was not part of the coin when it left the mint is ok. Removing attractive patina that was not part of the coin originally but protects and enhances the coin is not ok.

For this thread, lets focus on how people feel about adding metal back to a coin and then presumably doing some smoothing and polishing.

I don't like the idea much, but at least Art Ancient let you know in black and white what was done. (I am not bashing Art Ancient either, they may not have commissioned this work to start with and are generally a very fine dealer. I would buy anything from them without question.)

I would still treasure this coin being in my collection in case anyone wants to send it to me.

John

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

Man, that coin is gorgeous! I'm not a fan of restorations like this, but I do appreciate that it was clearly stated.

I wonder, and this is just speculating, but it would seem like restoration experts should put some sort of chemical in the compound they use which would be immediately distinguishable in analysis (either something that would show up with XRF, or something that glows in the ultraviolet). That way, even if it isn't disclosed, it would be really easy to detect (even if it isn't obvious in the visible spectrum).

 

PERSONALLY, and I am NOT a Numismatist... I do not care if it were an $85 coin or an $1,085,000 coin; that kind of "repair" is plain wrong. I would refuse to buy it. In fact I LIKE the prior ding, as it shows character as well as realistic wear / tear on the coin. I WOULD buy the prior coin WITH the ding. I agree, Art Ancient is a great dealer and possibly did not commission this. But, whomever, leave the coin ALONE.

 

Not OK in my opinion.

 

I would not be disappointed at all if a silver plug of exactly the right size was constructed and held in place with Ren wax. If hobo nickel techniques are used I would be irritated and ask for my money back.

 

I think it should have been left as is. I think most would feel this way, but it is done in other collecting fields such as with paintings. Perhaps this hobby is becoming more commercialized as is with art work where collectors look at coins more of art than a numismatic piece?

 

If you knew the car you were interested in buying, which looks great to you, was previously listed as "Totaled", would you still buy the car? You can argue the difference between restored, rebuilt, refurbished, etc. but the bottom line is it was damaged and now it's been altered and looks great. Personally, I would not. Neither would I buy a restored coin, regardless of it's beauty, rarity and/or price.

 

I'm 100% in agreement with this sentiment.

It's reasonable to include "adding metal to a coin's surface" in the definition of "tooling," and this, in my mind, is clearly tooling.

 

I don't like it for the simple fact that there is no way to insure that the next buyer (after whoever buys it from ArtAncient) will be told about the alterations and may buy a coin they otherwise would not have. Alter historical artifacts as little as possible I say.

 

The restoration looks great and is professionally done. How is this different than the Louvre restoring great works of art from antiquity, such as the Winged Nike of Samothrace or the Venus de Milo?

As long as the repair is disclosed--and I concur with physics-fan3.14 that it should be done in a manner that the repair could be detected easily so as not to defraud anyone--I approve of the restoration.

 

Not a fan of that type of restoring. So Brian's comments are spot on for my reply.

 

The bottom line here is how much the coin would sell for had the repair not been made. If the answer is more than $85k, the market is saying to owners of such a coin to keep hands off. If the answer is less than $85 allowing for the cost of having the work done, the market is saying we want bondo added to every dent and scratch. Today's condition snob market does not care what you think but only the opinion of the two high bidders who do not understand why we are concerned. We lose.

While we are at it, why not bold up that EYAINE signature? Or did we? Someone does not care. We lose again.

 

i think a lady with some scar makes her sexy

 

I think this says it well for me. Oil painting restorations are done in a way that can be reversed later. I don't see how this kind of change to a coin can be reversed. It also opens the door, as Curt says, to defrauding people. Again, not bashing Art Ancient, I have bought several coins from them and will do so again.

 

The damage on her cheek is part of the history of this coin. Ancients are supposed to have dings and scratches. Covering them up crosses the threshold of deception. Did they repair the cheek so they could sell it for more money?

 

IMHO it is not even a good repair and you can still see traces of the indentation from the original ding around the periphery of the plug. Made an $85K coin worth about $15K to me.

 

I think the repair, if anything, lowers the value I would pay for that coin (if only I had the money, LOL).

From now on, it will always be an altered coin. Yes, the original ding was a little distracting at first, but at least you could still appreciate the beauty that was there, and it was original! Now it's just a tooled coin, and the fact that you can see the repair mark makes it worse.

 

That is true, but if it wasn't pointed out that the repair was made, how many of us would notice "that area" and do the usual "ooh...ahhh" as many do here for such types.

Our opinions change when anything like that is done.

 

I'm not a huge fan of the repair honestly, but at least the dealer did the right thing and put it in the listing. To me anything that adds or removes metal is too much.

 

I'm in the wouldn't buy the altered coin. Good on the dealer to announce it as such.

Why is a coin different from a painting? I suppose it's not just that the types of preservation done to a coin is different than a painting.

I'm the same.