Message:

<p>[QUOTE=&quot;IdesOfMarch01, post: 1756386, member: 39084&quot;]I think it would be fascinating and enlightening for members to post the criteria by which they would judge a coin to be &quot;great.&quot;&nbsp; I&#039;ll start the discussion by proposing a few candidate criteria.&nbsp; (Disclaimer: I don&#039;t have the <i>100 Greatest Coins</i> book myself, nor have I read it, but I assume it contains a section describing their criteria for choosing the coins.&nbsp; Feel free to include whatever criteria you think is appropriate, whether or not the book itself used any of those.)&nbsp; Note that I&#039;m not saying the criteria on this list are either necessary or sufficient, just that they&#039;re candidates.</p><p>&nbsp;</p><p>1. Quality of die engraving.</p><p>&nbsp;</p><p>This criteria is sometimes loosely referred to as &quot;style&quot; but however you define it, clearly some coins show better quality than others.&nbsp; For example, there are large numbers of Galba sestertii by different engravers, some clearly better than others.&nbsp; 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.</p><p>&nbsp;</p><p>2. Historical significance.</p><p>&nbsp;</p><p>While the Ides of March denarius may not be particularly well-engraved or attractive, its historical significance cannot be ignored.&nbsp; Conversely, many other denarii are much better engraved and attractive, but cannot be considered great by any criteria.</p><p>&nbsp;</p><p>3. Significance of obverse/reverse subject matter.</p><p>&nbsp;</p><p>Certainly, a collector would rather have a Caligula sestertii with the Ad Locutio or Three sisters reverse, rather than a more common subject matter.&nbsp; How about a sestertius with the Colosseum?&nbsp; Is subject matter important in considering a coin to be great?&nbsp; </p><p>&nbsp;</p><p>4. Rarity.</p><p>&nbsp;</p><p>This might be a little more controversial, since rarity alone doesn&#039;t make an ancient coin &quot;great,&quot; but certainly it should be taken into consideration.</p><p>&nbsp;</p><p>5. Metal (gold, silver, bronze).</p><p>&nbsp;</p><p>Does this matter?&nbsp; Is a gold coin more of a candidate for greatness than a silver coin?</p><p>&nbsp;</p><p>6. Innovativeness.</p><p>&nbsp;</p><p>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?</p><p>&nbsp;</p><p>7. Quality of strike/condition.</p><p>&nbsp;</p><p>As opposed to the first six criteria, this applies to an individual coin rather than an issue.&nbsp; E.g., is a better quality Ides of March great, where a poor quality example of the same coin isn&#039;t?</p><p>&nbsp;</p><p>&nbsp;</p><p>Serious comments welcomed![/QUOTE]</p><p><br /></p>

Your name or email address:

Do you already have an account?

• No, create an account now.
• Yes, my password is:
• Forgot your password?

Stay logged in