"100 Greatest Ancient Coins" HJB book discussion

Huh? ... it is actually an extremely interesting thread, eh?

However, I am a believer that we will not be able to determine an "exact/correct answer" ... what some people consider to be very important may merely be a side-benefit to another collector, right?

For example, if I was a religious fellow, then I'm sure that several Byzantine coins may find themselves atop my list ... but if I had no specific faith, then perhaps "seals and octopi" may find themselves on my top-100??

... or, I'm sure that there are many collectors out there that consider "rarity and/or $-worth" to be the most important factor, trumping all aesthetic qualities like strike and engraving detail ... however, this brand of collector would be challenged harshly by the more artistic collector who is only interested in the physical beauty of the coin ...

etc, etc

I myself (who is certainly not an expert in anybody's eyes, including my own) would take an analytical approach to the selection process ... note, I haven't given this any "real/constructive" thought whatsoever, so please don't judge me ...

Perhaps something like this:

a*(rarity) + b*(age) + c*(metal-type) + d*(historical-significance) + ....... + p*(number of animals) + ............. + x*(condition) + y*(strike) + z*('beauty') = da winna

=> yup, but sadly, I'm thinkin' that there are far too many varying "points o' view" associated with our obviously diverse and relatively small sampling of CoinTalk collectors ... and therefore, some people may start to take other people's opinions personally (and that would obviously be a poor thing and would create an ugly, emotional ball of twine)

=> man, I can't wait to get that new book that I just ordered ... I bet there will be a whole bunch of new coins to drool over!!

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

Great discussion so far! IdesOfMarch01 brought up some great points and I’m going to expand upon them a bit from my perspective. I'm using references of some coins from my own collection but am approaching it from as objective of a viewpoint as possible - I do have some bias as I've spent my own money on these coins, but I think the points I raise still stand and certainly apply to other issues.

"1. Quality of die engraving” I completely agree - "fine style" coins deserve a premium versus run of the mill coins. They seem to result in a considerable price jump in many cases, so there is some opportunity cost when considering the finest style specimens versus slightly worse. As a counterpoint to this, I've seen a good number of coins that are inexpensive considering their artistic merit. Take my avatar, my aureus of Antoninus Pius.



It was a fairly expensive coin but I suspect it would have been at least five times more expensive if it had been from an earlier emperor. Additionally, see this coin, my Agathokles Tetradrachm. Personally, I find it to be considerably more artistic than a great number of the coins in the "100 Greatest" book, not to mention that this is also a coin with a very interesting backstory, but it isn't on the list at all.




I'd also take this tetradrachm picturing Poseidon any day over the Naxos tetradrachms: (This thread needed some controversy )



Some coins like the Alexander the Great tetradrachms and Philip II tetradrachms come in a vast number of varieties. For these coins, artistic style most certainly produces a considerable premium - some eventually become indistinguishable because their designs degrade so much. Here are my examples:

Alexander the Great tetradrachm: #20


Philip II tetradrachm: #44


Arcania stater (in the same style as those from Corinth) #23


On top of just pure engraving skill, which differentiates between issues which were intended to look the same, differently styled coins from the same emperor result in a range of prices. Aurei of Domitian can generally be acquired without breaking the bank, but this coin quickly became one of my most expensive. The reverse is somewhat historical but not too varied from the other aurei of Domitian which depict the statue of Minerva rather than the bust, but this was considerably more expensive. There were two other aurei of Domitian in a higher grade than this directly adjacent to it in the sale, but they realized prices on the low side. Personal artistic preference definitely plays heavily here - I had zero interest in the other two aurei but loved this one:




"2. Historical significance" I think this is a major factor in defining what is great. I think a great coin should be able to stand on its own after a quick "elevator pitch" about it. During that process, the history of a coin is usually the first attribute to be mentioned. I spend a considerable amount of time looking through auction catalogs and tracking the provenance of coins and I can empirically say that when an auction house spends the time to tell the backstory of a coin, it most often realizes a higher price. Even with the exact same coin, being resold in a short window, I've seen considerable price jumps because of written story accompanying the lot. As for the Ides of March denarius, I think a large portion of its value is held within its historical significance, but I don't think it is unreasonably represented - the assassination of Julius Caesar is one of the best known stories about Ancient Rome (and indeed, I was just out to dinner a few nights ago and heard some school children talking about it; there is some hope for our future!) The aegina stater, Athenian tetradrachm, and a handful of other coins aren't even in the same hemisphere in terms of expense as some of their adjacent coins but their impact on history is significant so they must be valued somewhere on the continuum. I'd find it interesting to create a separate view of the rank by price and the rank by "100 Greatest" index to find the most over/underpriced coins for their perceived sequence (based on the ones which are the most expensive but lowest ranked).

Here's an Athenian tetradrachm: #10


Another interesting historical tie in is the Olympics - here's a stater from the 93rd olympics in 408BC. This is relatively low-grade example but always produces an excited reaction when I show it because of its purpose: (#55, but a different variety)




"3. Significance of obverse/reverse subject matter" This is another major factor, and similar to historical significance. Colosseum sestertii are a perfect example: I'm intending to bid heavily on one coming up in a couple months (despite its noted smoothing) primarily because of the historical connection. The "100 Greatest" book puts a lot of value on this attribute. Similarly, here's my denarius of Julius Caesar. I've received a vast number of compliments on it but frankly, it's a fairly common coin. I chose this particular one because of its toning (another factor, probably folded into your #7) but people gravitate toward the accurate depiction of Julius Caesar and the fact that it was minted mere months before his death: (#14)




Another example from my collection is this sestertius of Philip I, minted for the 1000th anniversary of Rome. It is well preserved and a good example of a sestertius (it was hard to find one that the dealers I work with agreed was not tampered with) but I'm sure the story of its purpose gives it the ranking of #88 on the "100 Greatest" list. Otherwise, it isn't particularly exciting by itself:





"4. Rarity" This is a tough one and obviously constantly changing. The Ides of March denarius is an example of a coin with a dangerous rarity in my eyes. With 28+ different dies, there should have been tens of thousands of them minted, yet we only know of less than one hundred. This is a direct cause of some of the trepidation I've had when pursuing them. On the opposite side of the spectrum, I've seen that some coins are inadvertently hurt by their rarity: if it is too rare, there won't be enough demand as no one will know about it. Take this coin of mine, the finest of only four known, with beautiful toning and highly reflective surfaces.



I've asked several people (collectors and non-collectors) to sequence my coins by what they think are the "best" and this coin consistently ends up in the top three, yet it was more than ten times less expensive than the coins around it. I think this is extremely interesting and shows that there is a considerable amount of subjectivity.

 

"5. Metal (gold, silver, bronze)" I admit that I've fallen into the trap of preference by metal type. It wasn't until IdesOfMarch01 posted his set of Twelve Caesar denarii that I even considered building a similar set as I prefer(red) gold so significantly, but I'm more than coming around to the idea now. There are many coins which are excessively rare in gold, which makes me wonder if they were ever meant to be struck in gold, or if they were created later. The "Circus Maximus" coinage of Septimius Severus is a great example - an aureus of the scene sold for more than 30x what I bought my denarius for. Granted, the aureus was in better condition, but considering that every other factor is identical except for metal, I find this bias somewhat surprising. (#87)




I felt as a whole that Greek gold was underrepresented in the "100 Greatest" book and was quite shocked at the lack of an Alexander the Great stater, considering the exciting historical connections and the fact that there are a great deal of them available. Here's an example of the much rarer denomination, the distater, which weighs twice as much as a normal stater but has the same design:




"6. Innovativeness" I think this is a very interesting attribute and definitely adds to the historical significance. Lydian electrum is probably the best example of this and it is completely understandable why so many people want the first coins ever made. This hekte is from Mytilene and is later than Lydian electrum (ca. 500BC) but shows how designs started to get progressively more intricate:



Some innovations like 3/4ths facing portraits on Greek coinage end up having the earlier issues priced many, many times more than somewhat later issues. Here's an example of a coin of this type that I'm completely satisfied with - it's a solidly Mint State coin and cost 1/100th of what a larger and slightly earlier example would have cost:




"7. Quality of strike/condition" I was a bit surprised to see what Ides of March denarius Harlan chose for the "100 Greatest" book's cover. There are several, much nicer examples which, in my eyes, truly deserve the title of #1. Perhaps a single type should appear multiple times throughout, occupying lower spaces with lesser examples. If we try to assemble this list, I suggest expanding it to the "1000 Greatest" and canceling any appointments for the next decade or so! I bought the coin below specifically because of its grade (FDC) and color. It's not particularly expensive or rare but I think it represents a great coin (although probably not one of the greatest) simply because it is exactly what they intended. Its quality means I feel sufficiently covered for this type of later-era denarius.






Another factor to add into the mix is denomination. This affects Greek coinage more than Roman but often a dekadrachm will cost many times more than a tetradrachm. Rarity does play into this as well but I think the size of the coin psychologically makes a good portion of the difference. I don't have a similar tetradrachm but here's my dekadrachm from Euianetos. I love this coin but almost the exact same design can be owned for 1/10th of the price in a coin of half the weight: (#3)




medoraman also brought up an interesting observation in that circulating coinage is handled differently from ceremonial pieces. Roman medallions and the pentekaidekadrachm (a mouthful!) are two clear examples of this type and I also consider them in a different category, more along the lines of a medallion or sculpture, especially when they're known to be unique. I'd prefer to see them along a list of the "100 Greatest Works of Ancient Art" rather than alongside coins specifically.

Sorry for the lengthy post but let me know your thoughts on any of this!

 

... ummm, ya got a couple of keepers in your collection, eh?

 

Great write up with amazing coins!

Two of which have been added to my 'dream' coin list

 

Curious => did the good ol' Syracuse Heiron I Tet make the list?

Yah, it may not be Ancient Joe's quality, but it is probably numero-uno in my collection ...




what qualities does this coin possess? => ummm? ... well, I think that it's gorgeous (aesthetic points), it's beefy (lotsa silver, metal points) and it has several animals on it (owner's specific preference/alure)!!

=> again ... curious, did this baby make the list?

Ummm, or is this merely a raunchier version of Joe's last entry? (*sigh*)

 

The closest coin stylistically is the Demareteion dekadrachm, ranked at #5. Here's a $250K example (not mine):



Here's a tetradrachm by the same "Damareteion Master": ($35K, sold a handful of years ago, also not mine)



I know these coins are loved by many but I think this type is a perfect example of how relatively minimal stylistic differences and a smaller size results in a massive swing in price.

 

Great choices, and very quick research on your part finding the auction records

 

Thanks Joe ... coin-on!! (fantastic thread)


Wow, it's "kinda" like my coin, but way nicer, plus they tossed-in a "Lion" in exergue ... geesh, well played!! (so far, that's number #1 in my books!!)

Ooops ... well, other than your #3 coin!! (your #3 coin is my #1 favourite)

 

I would too.

I love the god Poseidon and the historical significance of this type.

How far will you go for Rome?

This is the tag-line of a game called Rome Total War 2 [major release, of an awesome and very popular series known as Total War], which is going to start more people around my age [14-18] into studying the Ancients..

And may start some new coin collectors... [I have heard of someone who became a coin collector due to the first Rome Total War]

 

I was particularly thinking of the early electrum coins when I added this criteria to my list above. The whole idea of struck coinage, using precious metals, is incredibly innovative although it seems so obvious to us now. Just like the wheel.

Since I don't have the book, I was wondering how many of the coins listed in Berk's top 100 are in your collection?

 

This will be only an approximation for most of us since some of his choices are super specific (Kimon dekadrachm, Euainatos dekadrachm) while some are much more general (Alexander tetradrachm). His write up talks about the Philip millennium series like it is all included in the number but he shows only one sample (the only one I lack to rub it in!). On the other hand he shows every imaginable variation and denomination of the Croesid bull/lion coins. I have only one one so do I count that or bemoan lacking the other 50?

By my way of counting, I claim 11 matches.

 

BTW, that incuse rooster is a top notch coin for any top list!

 

When you get the book count how many coins came from Greek Italy and Sicily. I'm not saying that is wrong.

 

As dougsmit said, it's a bit difficult to count precisely as some are inexact matches due to overly specific types being listed. In my collection I have 10 (9 pictured above and an Arsinoe gold octadrachm which I don't have an image of at the moment).

 

Thanks!

 

Your Philip sestertius is a great example but am I wrong that Berk's coin was a silver? I preferred the animals of the series and never found a column so did not get to count this number. If any Saeculares type coins will count I'll get a +1. I know Steve will agree with me that any animal is better than a column.

 

Berk's pictured coin is indeed silver, but the title is: "Philip I Millennial Games Coinage" and he doesn't specifically say it must be a denarius to count, so I think you get a +1 if you have one of the 10th Secular games.

My "Ship in Circus" denarius is the silver complement to the aureus listed as #87 but I still count that as well as it matches the rest of the attributes.

 

Thanx Doug => yah, and I'm pretty sure that everybody else is also on-board

=> animals, ships and weapons .... say no more!!


... that's an absolutely gorgeous selection of zoo-animals!! (*thanks*)

 

Just finished reading Berk's book a couple days ago. It was a really fun and easy read. I don't know if I got the full scope of the book since I read it on my phone on the bus going to and from work. All around though I can't weigh an opinion on whether or not I agree or disagree with the selection. I have only really been collecting for around 8 months! I would love to own all of those coins however but probably never will. Maybe if I win the lottery.