How Best to Arrange a Collection

Discussion in 'Ancient Coins' started by David Atherton, Jan 25, 2020.

?

Best method for arranging a collection?

  1. Strictly chronological by catalogue number.

    13 vote(s)
    44.8%
  2. Chronological by metal.

    3 vote(s)
    10.3%
  3. Other.

    13 vote(s)
    44.8%
  1. rrdenarius

    rrdenarius non omnibus dormio Supporter

    Excellent question. I do not have an excellent answer. My collection is Roman Republic (by Crawford #), Italian cast bronze (by Vecchi, ICC #) and Roman weights (by Bendall).
    I keep one XL spreadsheet for coins and cast bronze. I enter data by purchase date and then have a second page sorted by estimated mint date. I use Crawford for mint date, even when more recent studies tweak mint dates. Cast bronze pieces do not fit this model well due to wide ranges for mint date. I am considering a separate page for cast bronze.
    I store the coins in trays that fit in my lock box, and that has led to random ordering of most of my collection.
     
    panzerman likes this.
  2. Avatar

    Guest User Guest



    to hide this ad.
  3. Nap

    Nap Well-Known Member

    My medieval British coins are arranged by number in the Spink catalog

    http://www.forumancientcoins.com/gallery/index.php?cat=38961

    My collection is much more haphazardly stored. Like coins are placed with like in bags or AirTite tubes in the safe deposit box. As my collection is a mix of coins that are small, large, and in slabs, and because I keep my coins in a SDB, I have not come across any one storage solution that fits my needs. Most of my coins are in Air Tite holders. For display and transport I will put them in a binder or in Abafil trays. Coin tags are stored separately
     
    Orfew likes this.
  4. TypeCoin971793

    TypeCoin971793 Just a random guy on the internet

    I generally sort by:

    1. Chronology
    2. Then catalogue number
    3. Then weight/diameter
    4. Date of acqusition
     
  5. Suarez

    Suarez Well-Known Member

    The problem with anchoring your numbering scheme to a catalog is that if/when it's updated all your work goes out the window. I realize that for many a collector that would be a welcome job since it ends up re-engaging you with your collection but in many cases I think it's like needlessly baking in an expiration date.

    When the OCRE database was launched I tried to reason with its lead developer why it was such a boneheaded idea to marry itself to RIC but it didn't register. Now they painted themselves into a corner since new variants must be either awkwardly interspersed or tacked on as a supplement (which is even more awkward). And if RIC gets a reprint then that part of the database has to be redone and creates all sorts of problems for the userbase.

    Basically, in designing a cataloguing system you should try avoiding inefficient schemes that could cripple you later on. Or at least think of a system to work around them as they come up. Again, in the case of the average collection the number of items is small enough that this is never really a major issue.

    Rasiel
     
    Broucheion and Mat like this.
Draft saved Draft deleted

Share This Page