"100 Greatest Ancient Coins" HJB book discussion

In reading the recent thread "Your dream ancient/medieval coin(s)", I was a bit surprised to see how many were not on the list of the "100 Greatest Ancient Coins" published in the book by Harlan Berk. He assembled a panel of several expert collectors, dealers, and auction houses to create the list, but of course, it is extremely subjective.

Of those of you who have read the book, I'm wondering what your thoughts are on the rankings and if there are coins you feel should have been included/excluded?

Feel free to post images of coins that you have which are listed as well - let's see how many we can cover off as a collective forum.

If you haven't purchased this book, I highly recommend it. The production quality and content are fantastic, and it gives you a great overview of historic and aesthetic coin types.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

Overall I simply felt the book was written by a classicist. I would believe the book should have been titles "100 Greatest and Most Beautiful Classical Greek and Roman Coins". That would have been a more suiting description.

As to the ordering, things like that are interminably arguable. I think they approximately got the top ten about right for what the book was, but I would disagree with the order some.

I know I am somewhat an odd man out in ancient circles, but to me the Ban Liang or Wu Chu Chinese cash had much more of a real impact on world history than almost any coin in that book.

 

Ummm, I'm a bit afraid to comment ...



Oh, and I also figured that you "experts" would probably turn-up your noses at that book, so honestly, I didn't even think of purchasing it!!

However, maybe I'll give it a whirl if you are saying that it's a pleasant read ... thanks for the tip!!

Ummm, is the Seal and Octopus coin in the book?

 

I just ordered the book ... $28.34 delivered (hopefully that's a decent enough price?)

 

I own the book and liked many things about it although my definition of 100 Greatest would only include about half of the HJB selections. Major dealers will certainly place more emphasis on coins with high cash value than those of us whose collections are valued at less than most of those single coins. A quick count showed me 11 coins that I have at least a reasonable match in my collection. Some of the 100 are very specific while others are a bit general like 'Alexander the Great Tetradrachm' showing one of a thousand variations on that theme.

Some here will recall I posted a series of my 25 favorite coins. When I got my copy of the Berk book, I expanded that 25 to 100 (actually 99 1/2 since one of my selections was a half Augustus/Agrippa crocodile coin) and considered making a page for my site showing and explaining the whys of those specific selections. I decided not to bother with a page that size that would be of so little value to so few people. In the time since then I know I have added at least five more coins that would cut in line for the 100 and every time I think about it I would change some of the orders. Similarly, then I should not be too hard on Mr. Berk for making my favorite coins fall after some things he values more highly than I do. I wonder now if I even saved that list of 100 so I could start again without starting over.

It is a beautiful book with beautiful photos of spectacular coins. I trust you will enjoy it.

 

I see Amazon is now asking $25.35 US but it was $19.77 when I bought it in 2011. Perhaps it will be a good investment.

 

I got mine for about $10 when the guy in KY was having clearances on Ebay. I had about eight of them actually, i think all but one are gone now. Sorry Steve.

 

Thanks for suggesting the book Ancient Joe. It will be the next book in my still somewhat modest numismatic library.

 

Very thrifty, medoraman ... very thrifty (well played)

Sadly, ten bucks of the twenty-eight bucks was associated with shipping the book up to my northern hide-out ... so, the remaining $18 certainly seems like a reasonable price for the poor guy's efforts of gathering-up all of the info and making me a nice, useful book ... hey, I don't want to rip-off the dude, right?

NOTE => I am now very excited/curious to see if I own "any" of the coin-types shown in Mr. Berk's book (man, I am really hoping that Harlan is an animal-coin fan)

 

My favorite animal coin and the coin I know better than ever even to put on my want list is #8. Look it up. I admit to considering Mr. Berk a bit tasteless listing seven coins above it.

 

An Arkagas Decadrachm?


ie. http://www.britishmuseum.org/explore/highlights/highlight_objects/cm/s/silver_decadrachm.aspx

 

I agree completely. The one that sold last fall went for just under $3 million so even if the list was based solely on price, it's still underrated. I held that coin in my hand during lot viewing and all I can say is Wow.

 

Harlan gave me a copy so I think I win when thrifty is considered

 

I think this Eurocentric bias is seen a lot today with ancient coins. Personally, I haven't looked into anything outside of Greece and Rome at all, which is to my own loss.

 

While I hate to show my Eurocentric bias, I have to admit that I do not know a single coin of Asian origin that belongs in this group when applying the standards used in the book. I was even a bit surprised that as many Byzantine items made the 100 as did. I suspect too many items got their positions mostly out of being gold. Most of the really high positions were coins showing die work of the highest order (except the rather crude EID MAR which I believe is way overrated at #1). Certainly some, including EID MAR, got their positions out of something other than artistic merit but what Asian coin would you position even from interest? When I think of Chinese coins and the earliest of India, I think of coins issued by interesting people but the coins themselves are neither pretty or particularly well made in a technical sense. Rulers usually had a very few types and made no use whatsoever of propaganda. Coins were things for spending and that is about all. If this offends you (and it should) show us some examples of non-European cultural items that should have made the 100. Do note that the 100 and I include Eastern items like the Porus dekadrachm even though it may have been made in India but was made by Alexander who we most certainly claim as European. I have coins of many great leaders and great civilizations from India and east but most are just coins lacking anything that makes them really special from any standpoint beyond being spendable.
The challenge is dropped: Show coins that were not derivative of European issues that were wholly Eastern and interesting enough to make the list. I would allow the Cash as an entry, one entry, for inventing the concept of round, stringable and spendable and, perhaps a similar representative of the Punchmarked Indians. I might even allow a token representative Kushan gold but would have no idea which one to select as better than the rest. My list of 100 greatest ancient coins would show a Eurocentric bias ever bit as severe as Mr. Berk's.

 

I think it would be fascinating and enlightening for members to post the criteria by which they would judge a coin to be "great." I'll start the discussion by proposing a few candidate criteria. (Disclaimer: I don't have the 100 Greatest Coins book myself, nor have I read it, but I assume it contains a section describing their criteria for choosing the coins. Feel free to include whatever criteria you think is appropriate, whether or not the book itself used any of those.) Note that I'm not saying the criteria on this list are either necessary or sufficient, just that they're candidates.

1. Quality of die engraving.

This criteria is sometimes loosely referred to as "style" but however you define it, clearly some coins show better quality than others. For example, there are large numbers of Galba sestertii by different engravers, some clearly better than others. Some Greek coins in particular (such as Doug cites, above) are stunningly beautiful especially relative to the quality of the engraving tools available at the time.

2. Historical significance.

While the Ides of March denarius may not be particularly well-engraved or attractive, its historical significance cannot be ignored. Conversely, many other denarii are much better engraved and attractive, but cannot be considered great by any criteria.

3. Significance of obverse/reverse subject matter.

Certainly, a collector would rather have a Caligula sestertii with the Ad Locutio or Three sisters reverse, rather than a more common subject matter. How about a sestertius with the Colosseum? Is subject matter important in considering a coin to be great?

4. Rarity.

This might be a little more controversial, since rarity alone doesn't make an ancient coin "great," but certainly it should be taken into consideration.

5. Metal (gold, silver, bronze).

Does this matter? Is a gold coin more of a candidate for greatness than a silver coin?

6. Innovativeness.

Does a physical design that introduces a hole, or a square rather than round coin, or the first issue of a more valuable metal designed to replace larger, more cumbersome metals, warrant greatness?

7. Quality of strike/condition.

As opposed to the first six criteria, this applies to an individual coin rather than an issue. E.g., is a better quality Ides of March great, where a poor quality example of the same coin isn't?


Serious comments welcomed!

 

Wow Joe => yes, that definitely earns you the title of Mr. Thrifty!! ... plus, it also gains you several style-points (man, you are certainly a coin-force to be reckoned with!!)

Gorgeous coin => I can hardly wait for my book to arrive!!

 

In response to Joe and Doug's posts, (which btw I meant no offense to Joe and appreciated him bringing this up as a subject), any coins to be brought up would be have to be done based upon your criteria of "greatest".

Artistically? I would bring up early Parthian and especially Sassanid issues, as well as some Kushan and Hunnic coins. I believe the quality of die work on these large silver coins compares well to anything Romans did, and even fairly well to most Greeks.

Historical importance? I have Sogdian coins depicting a camel, a coin struck on the silk road about the silk road. Considering Eastern Rome and Byzantium basically lived on this trade, as well as most Persian empires, I believe this is very historically important. I have mentioned Ban Liang cash, a coin that basically was the perfect ideal of "money" for half the world for 2000 years. I cannot think of any European coin that fits that criteria except maybe the first Lydian issues.

I was simply saying I thought it was a pretty strong reflection of the dealer who wrote the book and a subset of this hobby. Yes, its a very large subset, but in my eyes not the entire "ancient coin collecting" world.

Like I said, if the book was entitled "100 most beautiful ancient coins", then save for some Hunnic and Persian coins, I have no issues with it. "Greatest" is where I think the definition gets iffy.

 

I agree we each have to define 'greatest' before we can start picking coins but we also need to decide what we consider to be important or even what we consider to be a coin. Should we allow Chinese spades, Roman medallions or even things like the Porus dekadrachm (how many of them do you think were spent in commerce?) or should we define 'greatest' as things that supported commerce in some special way (Ban Liang, Athenian owls and Janus asses might get extra points here)?

I know in my top 100 favorites there were some Eastern coins highest being my Sasanian family coin of Vahran II which I have shown here before. The Berk book was largely on types of coins but he usually selected the best known example of the coin for the book even if it was not one he had handled. My 100 included specific examples including some that were unique because of the way they were overstruck or countermarked. Given enough money, you could duplicate his 100 more easily than mine but it would be easier to upgrade my list than it would his. I'm going away for a couple weeks so I may have time with no computer access when I could give thought to my 100 (or 50? --- 25 was way too restrictive!). I'd be interested in seeing other's opinions of what coin was missing from Berk that you would have added or your whole 100 if you are into that big of a project.

 

I will review Berk's book again Doug with this objective.

Btw, I completely agree about some of the masterpieces of Greek coinage. Many of these were ceremonial pieces, and while beautiful, I do not really consider them circulating coinage. They are more like Roman medallions in my eye.