Grading survey: from Poor to FDC

Grading is so subjective. Here are two coins that I would grade extra fine for details but have other issues. So, would they be graded very fine, good very fine, very fine +, extra fine-? Talk about subjective grading.



Antoninus Pius (Augustus)
Coin: Brass Sestertius
ANTONINVS AVG PIVS P P TR P - Laureate head right
COS IIII - Antoninus Pius standing left, wearing radiate nimbus and military attire, holding olive branch and spear.
Exergue:


Mint: Rome (145-161 AD)
Wt./Size/Axis: 22.49g / 30mm / 360
References:
RIC 765
Banti 116
Cohen 318
Provenances:
Numismatic Sale #73 Agora Auctions Numismatic Sale #73
Acquisition/Sale: Numismatic Sale #73 Agora Auctions Numismatic Sale #73 $0.00 03/18
Notes: Jun 13, 18 - The Gary R. Wilson Collection



Domitian (Augustus)
Coin: Brass Dupondius
IMP CAES DOMIT AVG GERM COS XV CENS PER P P - Radiate head of Domitian right.
FORTVNAE AVGVSTI - Fortuna standing left, hand on rudder and holding cornucopia S C in fields
Exergue:


Mint: Rome (90-91 AD)
Wt./Size/Axis: 11.21g / 29mm / 6h
References:
RIC II 705
RIC [1962] 392
Sear 2786
Cohen 132
BMC 444
Acquisition/Sale: fvrivs.rvfvs eBay $0.00 12/19
Notes: Dec 15, 19 - The Gary R. Wilson Collection

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

Not to distract from the subject of this thread but the NFA coin you're referring to is a different type despite being very visually similar (possibly even the same dies). These Diocletian aurei have two distinct types: yours, which is 5.46 grams and the very rare type which is 6.56 grams. The heavier examples sell for 4-5x+ a normal weight coin.

 

Yes, exactly. Well said. I would add that, properly speaking, FDC isn't a grade at all. How could it be, when a large majority of ancient coins were never FDC, not even five minutes after they were struck? The only quibble I might have with your comment is the mention of "ho-hum reverse style." IMO, it's not a given that "best style" or something like that is a necessary component of a correct FDC designation. I think it needs discussion. I would argue that style isn't a requisite element of FDC, although I suspect I'm in a minority here.

Phil Davis

 

(Yikes, how did that happen??? )

Uh, oh!!!...not just "hole" (or "holed"), but "gnarly" hole? What are we grading types of holes now?

 

Does that really matter? If you enjoy the coins as they are, it doesn't matter if they are VF, gVF or something else. It only matters the moment you sell them and than it is someone else how is doing the grading.

 

Grades are used for more than bragging rights and prices.

I use grades to filter catalogs. When I look at an online auction catalog I look at all of the Greek coins but only look at the Roman coins that are AU/MS or have a star or "fine style" designation.

If I was coding a tool such as OCRE or CoinProject the software should use the grade to pick candidates for the exemplar coin to appear for a particular catalog number.

If I was doing scientific analysis of hoards to estimate ancient weight standards I would expect the low grade coins to be a few percent lighter than the high grade ones.

 

I had an antoninianus of Phillip I in my original collection (sold) graded out as FDC by Frank L. Kovacs. It was a FORTVNA REDVX type. I have a couple of between EF-and FDC but they have minor imperfections which keep them from being listed as FDC. I find that good F is often upgraded to VF by some dealers. Suffice it to say it is quite difficult to grade ancients....

 

And then there are the MA-Shops sellers -- all seemingly located in France, for whatever reason -- who apply the grade "AU" to just about every ancient Roman coin they have, including coins that I would call Fine. At the very best.

 

I agree. My point was that the grading scales are somewhat broad. The price, based on grading will always be of the opinion not only of the seller but the buyer as well.