Log in or Sign up
Coin Talk
Home
Forums
>
Coin Forums
>
Ancient Coins
>
"100 Greatest Ancient Coins" HJB book discussion
>
Reply to Thread
Message:
<p>[QUOTE="AncientJoe, post: 1756777, member: 44357"]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.</p><p> </p><p>"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.</p><p> </p><p><img src="http://imageshack.us/a/img819/5551/fgdo.jpg" class="bbCodeImage wysiwygImage" alt="" unselectable="on" /></p><p> </p><p>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.</p><p> </p><p><img src="http://imageshack.us/a/img12/8071/pzqh.jpg" class="bbCodeImage wysiwygImage" alt="" unselectable="on" /></p><p> </p><p> </p><p>I'd also take this tetradrachm picturing Poseidon any day over the Naxos tetradrachms: (This thread needed some controversy <img src="styles/default/xenforo/clear.png" class="mceSmilieSprite mceSmilie1" alt=":)" unselectable="on" unselectable="on" />)</p><p><img src="http://img211.imageshack.us/img211/1395/crxk.jpg" class="bbCodeImage wysiwygImage" alt="" unselectable="on" /></p><p> </p><p> </p><p>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:</p><p> </p><p>Alexander the Great tetradrachm: #20</p><p><img src="http://imageshack.us/a/img706/6952/e4t0.jpg" class="bbCodeImage wysiwygImage" alt="" unselectable="on" /></p><p> </p><p>Philip II tetradrachm: #44</p><p><img src="http://imageshack.us/a/img248/527/2660.jpg" class="bbCodeImage wysiwygImage" alt="" unselectable="on" /></p><p> </p><p>Arcania stater (in the same style as those from Corinth) #23</p><p><img src="http://imageshack.us/a/img197/6827/5av6.jpg" class="bbCodeImage wysiwygImage" alt="" unselectable="on" /></p><p> </p><p>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:</p><p> </p><p><img src="http://imageshack.us/a/img29/2827/dl9q.jpg" class="bbCodeImage wysiwygImage" alt="" unselectable="on" /></p><p> </p><p> </p><p>"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).</p><p> </p><p>Here's an Athenian tetradrachm: #10</p><p><img src="http://imageshack.us/a/img14/7038/xtea.jpg" class="bbCodeImage wysiwygImage" alt="" unselectable="on" /></p><p> </p><p>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)</p><p> </p><p><img src="http://imageshack.us/a/img824/1687/x3kz.jpg" class="bbCodeImage wysiwygImage" alt="" unselectable="on" /></p><p> </p><p> </p><p>"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)</p><p> </p><p><img src="http://imageshack.us/a/img832/8062/frli.jpg" class="bbCodeImage wysiwygImage" alt="" unselectable="on" /></p><p> </p><p> </p><p>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:</p><p> </p><p><img src="http://imageshack.us/a/img46/56/egee.jpg" class="bbCodeImage wysiwygImage" alt="" unselectable="on" /></p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p>"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.</p><p> </p><p><img src="http://imageshack.us/a/img5/708/vehq.jpg" class="bbCodeImage wysiwygImage" alt="" unselectable="on" /></p><p> </p><p>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.[/QUOTE]</p><p><br /></p>
[QUOTE="AncientJoe, post: 1756777, member: 44357"]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. [IMG]http://imageshack.us/a/img819/5551/fgdo.jpg[/IMG] 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. [IMG]http://imageshack.us/a/img12/8071/pzqh.jpg[/IMG] I'd also take this tetradrachm picturing Poseidon any day over the Naxos tetradrachms: (This thread needed some controversy :)) [IMG]http://img211.imageshack.us/img211/1395/crxk.jpg[/IMG] 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 [IMG]http://imageshack.us/a/img706/6952/e4t0.jpg[/IMG] Philip II tetradrachm: #44 [IMG]http://imageshack.us/a/img248/527/2660.jpg[/IMG] Arcania stater (in the same style as those from Corinth) #23 [IMG]http://imageshack.us/a/img197/6827/5av6.jpg[/IMG] 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: [IMG]http://imageshack.us/a/img29/2827/dl9q.jpg[/IMG] "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 [IMG]http://imageshack.us/a/img14/7038/xtea.jpg[/IMG] 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) [IMG]http://imageshack.us/a/img824/1687/x3kz.jpg[/IMG] "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) [IMG]http://imageshack.us/a/img832/8062/frli.jpg[/IMG] 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: [IMG]http://imageshack.us/a/img46/56/egee.jpg[/IMG] "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. [IMG]http://imageshack.us/a/img5/708/vehq.jpg[/IMG] 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.[/QUOTE]
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
Coin Talk
Home
Forums
>
Coin Forums
>
Ancient Coins
>
"100 Greatest Ancient Coins" HJB book discussion
>
Home
Home
Quick Links
Search Forums
Recent Activity
Recent Posts
Forums
Forums
Quick Links
Search Forums
Recent Posts
Competitions
Competitions
Quick Links
Competition Index
Rules, Terms & Conditions
Gallery
Gallery
Quick Links
Search Media
New Media
Showcase
Showcase
Quick Links
Search Items
Most Active Members
New Items
Directory
Directory
Quick Links
Directory Home
New Listings
Members
Members
Quick Links
Notable Members
Current Visitors
Recent Activity
New Profile Posts
Sponsors
Menu
Search
Search titles only
Posted by Member:
Separate names with a comma.
Newer Than:
Search this thread only
Search this forum only
Display results as threads
Useful Searches
Recent Posts
More...
