Eid Mar on Pawn Stars

So you guys liked my appearance on Pawn Stars? How did you like my Eid Mar?

That's right, that was me!

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

Double Post

 

Everyone seems to get very dramatic every time a clip from Pawn Stars is posted. Through this show, and the others like it, the History channel has found an avenue to display historical items to a wider audience. While the premise is far fetched that these items would walk into a pawn shop, and I believe the majority of viewers recognize that, how many people, outside of the collecting world, would know what an EID MAR denarius or a Shekel of Tyre are had they not watched the show? Maybe that person pulls up google and starts looking at ancient coins, maybe they find a website such as Cointalk and want to learn more, and become a new collector. This isn't a bad thing to me.

You read reviews lamenting the fact that the History channel doesn't show history anymore. Usually the reviewer means those tedious documentaries that a grand total of 8 people watch. I expect the majority of the reviewers don't even bother to watch the documentaries which is why the History channel had to determine other ways of bringing History to the masses. Through shows like Pawn Stars and American Pickers I have learned about numerous objects that I would never have known existed.

We can keep complaining about the ridiculousness of the premise or we can choose to look at the potential benefits of having a show that brings to light the sheer awesomeness of so many of these historical items that otherwise would sit forgotten.

Why would David Vagi not promote slabs and grading? He is the head of NGC Ancients. It is his job to promote slabbing and grading.

 

I preferred it when the History Channel used to do real documentaries that actually taught proper history, instead of dumb reality shows with little historical value and geared to an audience with the attention level of a 4th grader.

Not to mention all the pseudo-scientific conspiracy shows that they are now also running. Not only have they dumbed down the format to appeal to the lowest common denominator, but now they're also pushing myths and outright fiction while pretending it has some basis in reality. You know which programs I'm talking about.

I give it 5 years before the History Channel is doing ground-breaking programs such as "The history of Lady Gaga" or a reality show about ghost hunters. With the precipitous decline of quality programming all over the place (not just the History Channel), one can almost be forgiven for thinking this was all done by design by the powers that be.

 

Zero interest in scripted reality shows of any kind. The whole premise is a lie. Yawn.

Check out "forged in fire" for something a little closer to real.

 

Pawn Stars has some interesting stuff on there sometimes even if it is scripted to make it more mainstream. However, I greatly prefer being one of the 8 people watching the documentaries

To @Sallent 's point there are some shows on there that are REALLY, REALLY hard to defend even if you're a fan of History Channel (which I am).

 

What a travesty...

 

Yes, I agree many preferred History Channel when they did real documentaries. They just didn't watch it. Some shows are hard to defend because, as you say, they are 'pseudo-scientific conspiracy shows' but it does seem their more recent program has been doing a better job melding the popular format with more history. It is hard to convince someone to sit and listen to a stuffy academic. Why do you think they have those poorly acted fight scenes in many of these documentaries?

There have already been plenty of shows about ghost hunters so I feel that is a poor example but what would be wrong with a show about Lady Gaga in the future? She has done a lot of good work and it would not be the first time a celebrity has had a historical biographical show about them. I also don't see a problem with a ghost hunter show. The possibility of ghosts and the supernatural have influenced some of the greatest writers in history.

You also write of the decline of quality programming across networks. Others would argue we are potentially entering into the heyday of speculative fiction TV.

It all comes down to different perspectives. I see shows like Pawn Stars, American Pickers, and American Restoration as potentially beneficial as each have made me consider my own collecting interests and realize I do not have nearly enough money for everything I want. Additionally, I do agree that some shows, such as Ancient Aliens, Swamp People and Ice Road Truckers, are not a particularly good fit.

 

I understand what you are trying to say but isn't the original premise of the history channel supposed to be to cater to that niche market that prefers the documentaries? It was never conceptualized as a mainstream content provider and to some extent they have lost touch of that original niche by trying to shoehorn in shows that don't fit their premise. At some point when does the "history" moniker become something of a gimmick?

What's wrong with letting the mainstream channels deliver that content to the masses? That being said I do like some of the shows that you mention and think HC is better than a lot of others but I would prefer more traditional historical content.

 

It may very well have started to cater to the niche market and there is nothing wrong with letting the mainstream channels deliver that content to the masses. Where does the money come from to maintain a niche channel though? It isn't a publicly funded channel so someone has to pay for it. The problem with a niche channel it seems is exactly that. If your niche market isn't putting enough money into sustaining the business and making a reasonable profit in the eyes of the parent company something is going to have to change or it is going to get cut. Would you prefer a History channel that plays documentaries occasionally (which I believe they still do) with a bunch of other stuff mixed in or no History channel at all? The unfortunate reality is that when there is money involved the push seems to be to make more of it and to make more of it they have to appeal to more people. I am not saying this is a good thing just that it is what it is.

 

That is very interesting. How do you find info like that? I have coins in my collection that I'd like to trace back.

 

The discussion was not about the economics of HC content it was about the legitimacy of lamenting the change in it. I think it's perfectly reasonable for those who enjoyed the old format to miss the way it was.

Does the HC make more money now than they did? I'm sure they do but for a niche content provider to decide to play at the mainstream is a two edge sword. The mainstream is fickle and if you "alienate" (see what I did there ) your base once you reach an inflection point you've made a bad long term play. Every product is better in the long term if it stays true to the spirit of its original vision. Of course nothing said on a coin forum is going to change the direction of the decision makers until they start losing viewers.

I do like many of HC programs. The Hatfields and Mccoys miniseries a few years ago was really good and the kind of stuff that would make HC appealing without selling out with aliens and ghosts and what not.

 

Sorry, I thought I had noted it in my second post when I mentioned no one watching the material (Might have said it in my head but it didn't get to the keyboard). I was always taking it from an economic perspective in the sense that no one watching means no money for the company which requires a change to get people to watch. I wasn't defending the legitimacy of lamenting the change. It is perfectly reasonable to complain about the loss of the old format, I prefer to look at the potential benefit of the new.

To me it seems like HC went to the extreme with shows like Pawn Stars, Aliens, Swamp People, to draw people in and have now dialed it back.

I now also realize that we are talking about two different history channels since I am in Canada and while they share some overlapping programming they are not exactly the same. Edit: For example I don't think you would have received the recent Vimy Ridge material that has aired recently.

 

That's interesting I didn't know that the US and Canada had different programming on HC. I read somewhere that most channels lose money and that ESPN and a few others prop the whole thing ip which is why you HAVE to pay for so many channels. But as you say if offering flashy shows is what they feel they need to do then I'll continue to watch the few good things so long as they continue making them.

My favorite documentaries come from the BBC. They are government funded I think but they are good usually and have some neat documentaries on classic antiquity every now and then.

 

Interesting post @hoth2

A quick look at the coin made me wonder about authenticity also. I assume Vagi is enough of an expert to know, but the 20 second look he gave the coin was too quick in my mind (but fit the tv show time). I do not like the surfaces of the coin. That does say it is not real, but they look bad to me. The coin looks to be an obverse (but not reverse) die match for the one Kuenker sold in 2007. Some obverse issues (die corrosion or wear) give Brutus a front hair wave and a dot at his forehead on both coins, but the flow lines look different on the Kuenker coin.

nice research Rich!



phone pics of video here

pic from acsearch, Kuenker 2007

The coin looks better than the "ancient" fake EID MAR I bought this year. Mine does not match any of the dies I have seen on acsearch, wildwinds, CNG or Cahn. FYI - I had mine tested for metal content and it looks like it could be ancient (or produced on an ancient coin), the gold content is too high for a modern coin.

 

If you get a chance I highly recommend seeing if you can track down some of the Vimy Ridge stuff. Here are some pictures of some of the carvings Canadian soldiers made underground before the battle: http://nationalpost.com/news/canada...ranean-carvings-by-canadian-soldiers-a-wonder

 

The reboot of Cosmos a couple years ago did a good job of bringing "brainy" content to the masses and making it enjoyable (ratings were pretty darn good). Of your you had the almost rock star Neal DeGrasse Tyson and Seth Mcfarland teaming to producing a high quality show with great visuals as well as content. Does history have a Neal deGrasse Tyson? Maybe someone could borrow the ship of the imagination to travel in time and check out awesome stuff?

 

That is incredibly interesting. Thanks for sharing Whiz.

 

It is sad that the only show that talks about archaeology is ancient aliens.

 

110,000 is a good price