I don't know much about ancient coins as I have always primarily collected U.S. coins, but I recently had an urge to add one to my collection. I purchased this ancient Roman coin mainly because I think it looks cool and wanted to give my collection a little variety. As you can see, the coin is slabbed by NNC which is not a highly respected grading service. My question is, do you folks who collect these ancient coins agree with the grade NNC assigned to this coin or is it significantly over graded? Also, what does a Caligula coin in this condition typically sell for (fair market value)? Thanks.
I've seen XF examples of Caligula and this doesn't compare, though it's still better than many that come to market. Personally, I'd rank it a VF. Being one of the most famous monsters of antiquity, Caligula coins tend to fetch a high price. But those prices can be all over the place and depend more on the dealer than the coin. Anything from $100 to $1000 might be asked, but most seem to fall in the $250 to $500 range. You should do a search on vcoins.com and compare prices for yourself.
Here is the problem with grading ancient coins: Wear is just one factor of a grade. On modern coins, the assumption is made that wear is the factor on which grade is based until you get into MS when it is replaced by strike quality. On ancients, wear, strike and surface issues are all combined. Were your coin modern, it would be considered ungradable due to corrosion and improper cleaning. Almost no ancients legitimately earn the EF grade simple because it not only means next to no wear but that the coin was well struck and has a good looking, even surface. That means there are coins with more wear than yours that are better looking because of the other features. Most people assign grades according to eye appeal and many of us old conservative types believe that the proper grade is the lowest factor of the three I mentioned. I believe modern slabbers sometimes use this on early US coins that do not qualify for full fledged grading when they say a coin has 'VF details'. I'd say your coin has VF details but there is no way I would trade my onlt Fine example for it because of the corrosion and roughness I see. However, there are probably others out there that would rather have your coin with better hair details. To each his own. I sincerely believe that ancient coins should not be graded using modern terms simply because it causes more confusion than it is worth. I always believed it would be nice if we had a universally acceptable set of grading standards but am convinced that it is never going to happen. Grading coins is hard enough when you have to apply a single fine distinction but becomes terribly more a problem when you have to decide how much wear offsets how much surface roughness and how much of a less than perfect strike.
I would have it checked out for tooling. The details seem a little too crisp. THe slab already calls out smoothing, which is less offensive than tooling, but still loweres the value. Tooling is recutting features into the devices and lettering, and is considered a major no no and will serious diminish the value. I have one of these Vesta's and while the lettering is similar, I do not have nearly the detail on the bust as this one.
Gopher, I think you have a very nice Druses. As for the grade, it is in the ballpark in my opine. As for the slabber NNC, I think he gets a bad rap. He is always in the ballpark and seems to run things proffesionaly.
