Do you care where your coins have spent the time since they last were spent as money? I, personally, have no interest in 'coins' that never were used as coins (collectibles, non circulating legal tender etc.) but I do enjoy the thought of what hands have touched my coins. As far as I know there is no ancient coin that carries a provenance back to antiquity but there are a few that have been in collections for quite a while. My example below was sold at auction in 1971 when the Massachusetts Historical Society decided they had no use for a collection of non US coins that belonged to President John Quincy Adams. I believe that was an ill advised move but I sure am glad they did it. All of us have the opportunity to own a coin from the collection as a result. The collection was sold by Stacks at auction but most coins were not illustrated in the catalog and many were grouped together in lots of varying sizes. Many of the coins were not terribly high grade. Unfortunately, except for the few illustrated coins, we can not prove that a coin was in the sale. Buyers were provided with tickets saying a coin was in the sale but there is no guarantee that there was not a switch since that time. We know that this lot contained a coin of this description but there is no proof that this is that coin other than the ticket. That fact prevents coins from the collection from selling for a premium unless they were among the few that were illustrated. I have run across rather few coin from the sale over the years. acsearch.com provides six if you search 'Quincy' of which one mentions being accompanied by the ticket. Keep an eye open for examples. I do recommend buying the Stacks sale catalog if you find one. It may be worth more than the coins. Galerius Caesar / Genius / Aquilea mint
A good provenance also acts to confirm your own good taste. Purchased from Spink as well, but in 1895 by Mr Boyd. Severus Alexander Alexandria, Egypt BI Tetradrachm Laureate, draped bust r. A KAI MAP AVP CEV AΛEΞANΔO CEV Diakosyne standing l., holding scales and cornucopia, LE Emmett 3096(5) Ex Spink (January 1895); Ex W.C. Boyd Collection; Ex Baldwin 26, lot 207
In my opinion, provenance does add some appeal to a particular coin, specially if the provenance if from someone like John Q. Adams. I do in fact own some german state minor coins which were part of his collection. I also own some roman coins from the Vermeule collection, and a few U.S coins from the Norweb collection. However, provenance is only an added appeal factor to a coin - If I do not like the coin on its own merits, be they its beauty, or historical relevance, then its provenance is of no relevance to me. As an added note, what I do find very appealing are coins found whilst detecting: regardless of their condition, it is an incredible feeling to retrieve a coin from the ground which was last touched by a human hand 2000 years ago.
1st Class 4 sure! Provenance is one of the best form of showing value!than for the photos of the Adam's piece :kewl:
I have a difference of opinion within myself on this whole topic. I oft say that history is my passion, and it's why I collect coins. Yet I also don't particularly care who owned the coin before I did. I even prefer circulated examples over uncirculated! (Because they actually made the history that I love) They should go hand in hand but yet for me, they don't. A large part of that may be in the fact that I don't care what anyone says about the coins...including grading services or former owners...I judge each coin based on it's own indivigual merit. Both the coins in this thread are spectacular, and had I the means/or was there then, both or either could have found their way into my collection. But not because of the previous owner, because they are quality coins that I would enjoy studying for years to come. I don't even know who that Boyd person is, though I do know of Adams. Perhaps one day my collection will carry the pedigree...I wouldn't know though as I don't plan to be on this plane of existance when/if that should happen.
