Message:

<p>[QUOTE=&quot;Ken Dorney, post: 3186857, member: 76086&quot;]I think there is likely some confusion as to this thread.&nbsp; Let me see if I can make a few comments.&nbsp; Tom said:</p><p><br /></p><p><br /></p><p><br /></p><p>I suppose a better word could have been used other than &#039;spreading&#039;.&nbsp; Basically, with a more worn coin the characters will appear thicker or larger.&nbsp; Its because the high points have worn down.&nbsp; Its kind of hard to explain without really good images, but I will have to do with what I have at the moment:</p><p><br /></p><p>[ATTACH=full]822109[/ATTACH] </p><p><br /></p><p>I really despise grading coins, but the coin above is what I would call something right in the middle of wear, or maybe about Very Fine to Very Fine.&nbsp; </p><p><br /></p><p>[ATTACH=full]822110[/ATTACH] </p><p><br /></p><p>The above is what I would call somewhere in the bottom third of grading, subjectively Fine or Very Good.&nbsp; You can notice that the characters appear a bit thicker.&nbsp; That is what might be called &#039;spreading&#039;.&nbsp; </p><p><br /></p><p>Regarding rims, this can be confusing.&nbsp; Some coins are supposed to have rims, others not.&nbsp; But often it can be both.&nbsp; With the method of casting of Chinese coins, one can have both:</p><p><br /></p><p>[ATTACH=full]822111[/ATTACH] </p><p><br /></p><p>The example above has clear rims, both obverse and reverse.&nbsp; But often it can be confusing, considering the next coin.</p><p><br /></p><p>[ATTACH=full]822112[/ATTACH] </p><p><br /></p><p>The above coin is supposed to have both obverse and reverse rims.&nbsp; But clearly the reverse does not have rims.&nbsp; Did they wear down?&nbsp; No. This coin was simply cast without them, or was mis-cast (many various errors of casting exist with Chinese coins).&nbsp; Is this a new variety?&nbsp; For some specialists, yes.&nbsp; For others no.&nbsp; Does it add value?&nbsp; Perhaps, but little, even for specialists.&nbsp; </p><p><br /></p><p><br /></p><p><br /></p><p>I agree with Tom here.&nbsp; The &#039;before&#039; is infinitely better than the &#039;after&#039;.&nbsp; If you look closely there isnt any new detail that can be seen.&nbsp; The loss is the patina.&nbsp; Blue patina is very rare with ancient coins, a premium in which some would pay ten times for.&nbsp; To me, the coin is irrevocably damaged.&nbsp; I would have paid much more for it, but who could know what the before and after was if it was just in an average sales catalog?</p><p><br /></p><p><br /></p><p><br /></p><p>Yes.&nbsp; There are many coins, more commonly with Wang Mang &#039;cake&#039; and or &#039;biscuit&#039; coins, which were cast either without any characters or perhaps poorly cast with no details.&nbsp; Why clean them?&nbsp; It would not reveal any (or few) details.&nbsp; I have an example of this but buried deeply, I have no time to look.</p><p><br /></p><p><br /></p><p><br /></p><p>Sadly this is true.&nbsp; Western ethnocentrities demand that nothing or little exists outside ourselves.&nbsp; But when one looks at least superficially it becomes clear that the Chinese cultures developed much of what the west far before, and in some cases thousands of years before (this includes coinage). </p><p><br /></p><p><br /></p><p><br /></p><p>Primarily patina and personal preference.&nbsp; Basically the same (and if you can still get these for $1, let me know, I will buy all you can find).[/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