My recent auction win with a cool pedigree

So I have been wanting to upgrade my Dang Jin spade for awhile now under the suspicions that mine is not genuine (though no experts have been able to say one way or another). About a month ago, Stack’s Bowers released an auction that contained the Q. David Bowers’ collection of Chinese coins. I saw many tempting targets, but I decided to limit myself to one (a really rare “eared” spade) plus several lots that I was going to buy for resale. On the first time around, I passed on the Bowers’ Dang Jin spade because I was holding out for the later lots. Fortunately, no one else bid. All of my bids got murdered, and since I really wanted a coin with the Bowers pedigree, I contacted Stack’s and was able to secure the Dang Jin spade for the opening bid.

I was surprised it did not sell for its (really low) opening bid. It has an attractive (to me) crusty patina as opposed to the normal boring brown patina that is often seen with this type (was a major hoard found in a river? @AnYangMan @Ken Dorney ). I have only seen a couple others with a crusty patina. Bob Reis has one for sale right now, and I think the other was sold by Heritage years ago.

Seeing how just the Chinese portion of his collection probably netted him a few million dollars, I wonder how much the rest of Bowers’ collection willl bring...

(Feel free to post your coin that you got because of its pedigree.)

Without further ado, here is the coin I got:

Warring States Period, State of Chu (350-250 BC)
Obverse: “Pei Bi Dang Jin”
Reverse: “Shi Huo”
24.38g



Here is my original specimen. I just have no idea if it is real or not. The patina is weird and the style does not match any other example I have seen. But it is damaged and appears to be made of old metal. If I decide to sell it, I will back it with a lifetime guarantee that I will buy it back if it is ever found to be bad.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

I don't really collect Chinese coins but find it fascinating just how different specialists in these and specialists in 'Classical' (Greek and Roman) coins see things. A major factor in the authentication of a Chinese coin seems to be 'patina' which is usually beyond what Western collectors would call by that name. Crust and damage are almost expected/preferred which a perfectly preserved specimen would be hard to accept as genuine. There are many more coins that fall in the category of possibly fake even to the eyes of experts. People sell coins that are described as uncertainly genuine with less stigma as if there were three acceptable levels of merchandise (real,fake and 'who knows?'). Is a Chinese coin fake until proven real or real until proven fake. How is such a coin going to be 'proven' when the flags so obviously conflict? These things happen in Greek/Roman also but I don't note it with the same frequency. Relatively few Greek/Roman collectors prefer coins maintained with the completely crusted look. Cleaning down to the minimal, smooth patina is much more acceptable and coins with surfaces like the ones shown here would sell poorly as damaged goods. This is not a matter of one view being right and the other wrong but it is something a collector of either group might have trouble accepting if trying to collect coins from the other. I suspect some of this explains why people of my background can not get into collecting Chinese coins. I wonder if it is also why people who love spades and knives have no interest in tetradrachms.

Am I missing something here?

 

Cool! Always nice to have a pedigree/provenance.

Here's one I bought in large part because of the pedigree:


Julia Domna, AD 193-217
Roman orichalcum dupondius; 10.61 gm, 24.2 mm
Rome, issue 6, AD 195
Obv: IVLIA DOMNA AVG, bare-headed and draped bust, right.
Rev: FECVNDITAS, Fecunditas enthroned right, nursing one child, second child stands before her.
Refs: RIC 844; BMCRE 494; Cohen 43; Hill 126; RCV 6639
Notes: Ex Ars Classica VIII, 1924, Bement Collection, lot 1184. Die-match to BMCRE-494, pl. 21.4.

Here's the listing from the 1924 auction:




And here's the example in the British Museum collection:

 

Love seeing those old coins and wondering who handled them. Sorry to say i'll have to stick with U.S.A. coins, I'm a newbie and really have to stay on the U.S. stuff

 

No. Or, if there was, none of them made it to the west (which would not be surprising at all). You got a nice catch. I really wanted to bid in this auction but as a dealer I wanted the group lots and in typical Stacks fashion they didn't photograph any of those lots. In some ways they are still 30 years behind the times. Thus I did not bid in the auction.

Doug. You aren't missing anything. With regards to Chinese coins there is a huge 'Chicken Little' or 'Boy who Cried Wolf' syndrome. Its true that the Chinese are experts at reproducing these coins and artificially patinating them, but like anything else with time and some learned skills its usually pretty easy to spot the fakes.

As for crusty coins, it just depends. Many like them cleaned, others partially, again some down to smooth surfaces. And of course those encrustations can be an indication of authenticity. Many Chinese coins look uber crusty on the surface, but sometimes its just that. Surface. Encrustations should be very hard and not easily removed, certainly not with ones fingernail. I kept this one below kind of for this reason, but also (doesn't show in the photo) for the really attractive crystals and colors the original patina exhibits:




Since river hoards were mentioned I might comment on those. China is unique archaeologically and geologically. There are certain properties there in which sometimes items come out of the ground nearly disintegrating but much more often nearly looking like they did when first deposited. About 20 years ago there was a big river hoard of Tang Dynasty coins in about mint state or so and with nice tan colored patinas. Very nice indeed. I am sure many now would look at them and think they are fake, but older collectors could glance at them and know where and when they came from.

There are also different hoards. Those in which are not 'domestic'. The Chinese exported coins all over their part of the world in trade and many are found just about anywhere. I kept the coins below, from a river hoard in Indonesia. They are pretty cool, you can still see bits of sand:



One last photo. Some earlier coins as found, obviously originally deposited on their string and fused together that way. Nowadays with all the 'Chicken Littles' coins are not cleaned much but like this, just separated into individual coins:

 

NICE!

 

That's fascinating.

 

You bring up a lot of interesting points, Doug.

This “patina” is incredibly hard to fake correctly, which is why it is a method of authentication. Crusty painas like that on the Bowers spade usually mean the coin is authentic because it is less attractive than smooth, monocolor patinas. Ugly/random/crusty patina usually means authentic in Chinese numismatics, so I have grown fond of that look because it almost always bodes well. I love greed/red/pink combinations, while @AnYangMan falls in love with any patina with blue in it.

There are few details to see with early Chinese coins, so there are much fewer times that cleaning is needed to see what is on the coin. The calligraphy is often fine and beautiful, but the way it is written lends itself to be seen through thick patina. Roman/Greek coins are appreciated for their artistry and attention to fine detail, which is why heavy patina/encrustations are frowned upon.

Exactly. I pass on almost every “perfect” specimen I see. But there is also a stylistic aspect to authenticating coins, and much of the time the counterfiters do not get the style right. Put just like with modern coins, originality is preferred, and coins stripped down to the bare surface sell for less on the market than those with their patina intact.

Yeah, this is a grey area. Usually, the provenance will help determine the authenticity of a coin, but many Chinese coins come without a solid provenance. The strength of the seller’s guarantee also helps. In the case of Bob Reis and Scott Semans (for example), they will guarantee the authenticity of their coins for as long as they live.

The way I go about authenticating Chinese coins is to start with my gut feeling. If I get a good vibe from the coin, I will try to find aspects that will prove it to be fake. If I get a bad vibe, I see if there is enough evidence to prove it is genuine (but usually I just pass so I do not have to worry).

Metallurgical analysis. That is really the only way.

That is perfectly understandable. Collecting Chinese coins involves a completely different mindset.

I appreciate tetradrachms just as much as I would a nice knife, but for different reasons. But both have a history, beauty, and a mystique about them, which is the reason why we collect these ancients in the first place.

 

This is very true but its also important to understand that the style can be completely wrong but a coin still old and genuine. But coin is the wrong word. Charm. The Chinese have a long history of 'pocket pieces' and the use of tokens for games. More often than not coin inscriptions are used as a part of or a major portion of the design. The majority of these charms are from the Song Dynasty to Qing, but some are older.

 

Again, I know nothing about Chinese but my #1 way of authenticating Greek and Roman coins is that same "gut feeling". It is really hard to explain to new folks and many of them thing we are being difficult when we have trouble putting into words just why we know their fakes are fakes. It reminds me of the old saying, "If it swims like a duck and quacks like a duck....". Dealers and authentication pros can spot fakes based on their more experienced 'guts' trained by experience with 10,000 (by Chinese count) coins.

Compared to most Western collectors I find more attraction to 'ugly' coins. I have a web page on Wabi-Sabi ancients:
https://www.forumancientcoins.com/dougsmith/wabisabi.html

If I had included a Chinese coin on that page I might have offered this cash with a patina-lump giraffe on the reverse. Believe me, I could care less that this is only a 4 stroke Zheng and would not trade my giraffe for a 5 stroker.

Yes, as a matter of fact, I do like to look for animal shapes in clouds.

 

I have nothing from China/ ancient or recent But, Ifind the ancient material really neat.

 

I've seen people post those "spades" here in the forum before. The first time, I thought someone was showing off their ancient Chinese shovel collection .

So these were coinage? Are they coin-sized? Do you have a picture with a secondary object for scale?

 

All KINDS of cool stuff from China. Doesn't need to be square-holed Bronzes!

SPADE:


CHINA - ZHOU Dynasty, 1122-255 BC square foot spade 350-250 BC AN YANG - 3 lines rev bronze 31x52mm 7.45g H3.184 S13+

FISH:

China Zhou Dynasty 1046-256 BCE AE Fish Money 67mm 9.5g AB Coole Enc Chinese Coins 6920ff
ex: @Ken Dorney

SHELL:

China Zhou -Chou- 1000-200 BCE Dynasty Bronze cowrie - some gold plate - VF - Rare

ANT-NOSE:


China Shang Dyn 1766-1154 BC Ant Nose Ge Liu Zhu 2-6g 19-5x11 very scarce H 1.10

 

Now I have to get one of these!

One of my other collections is antique fishing lures. If a fish coin only had a hook attached, it'd easily be the earliest artificial bait. It already has a line tie!! haha

 

Amazing. Different but how do you put them in a coin book

 

I don’t

 

Yep! Some may disagree, but they still fit their stringent definition of a coin.

Depends on your definition of “coin-sized.”

Yep!

 

I am aware of charms, but I do not collect them. When I see one in an inventory or auction lot, I just say it is not a real coin and move on.

 

Thanks! That really puts things in perspective. Ancient Chinese must have had huge pockets!!

 

There is no time like now to get some!

I am really not sure how they carried their coins before they started putting holes in them. After the holes, it is quite easy to imane the Chinese carrying all of their coins on a string.