Reply to Thread

Message:: [QUOTE="Ardatirion, post: 1646107, member: 9204"]I posted this on another forum some time ago, but I feel like there are enough ancient collectors on the board now that it could be useful: Many collectors of US coins proudly proclaim that they don't care who owned a piece before them, and are interested solely in the coin itself. I find this to be a rather foolish belief. The fact is, any pedigree information adds history to the coin and can often increase the value. Pedigrees are very important in ancient coin collecting. Not only do coins from famous collections bring more money at auction, but proof of previous ownership protects against increasingly common government seizures. The problem with this is that many collectors do not describe the pedigrees of their coins and, when they do, often do it in an unclear and confusing way. I present here the standard method that we use at work and that is common among the major ancient auction firms. The most common word you will see to describe a pedigree is "ex," a rather versatile Latin word most appropriately remembered as "out of." This is used for auction pedigrees and for most namedcollections. Abbreviations are used sparingly, so say Numismatica Ars Classica rather than merely NAC. First give the name of the auction company, the number of the auction (if they are numbered), the date of the auction in day, month, year format, then the lot number.Unless otherwise noted, sales are generally assumed to be mail bid or public auctions. Other formats include FPL (fixed price list), BBS(buy/bid sale), and Electronic Auction. Ex Classical Numismatic Group 85 (15 September 2010), lot 330c Ex Classical Numismatic Group Electronic Auction 238, lot 295 Ex is also used when a coin had previously been in a named collection. First provide the name, then cite the auction as usual, but in parentheses. Ex BCD Collection (Lanz 105, 26 November 2001), lot 529 Ex Ardatirion Collection When a dealer acquires a coin directly from a collection, with no intervening sales or auctions, he cites it using the word "from." From the Ardatirion Collection So, in the examples above, two different scenarios are presented. In the second, the coin being sold is offered directly from the private collection. In the first, it had passed through other hands in the meantime. Do remember that, when you acquire a coin listed as "from," it is now "ex!" In general, I only cite collections and public auctions. While I prefer to not publicly reference them, it is sometimes necessary to include other dealer interactions. I use either "purchased from" or"acquired from," depending on the circumstances. The main difference between the two is that "acquired" sounds fancier! I usually include the venue or month of purchase as well. Purchased from John Kraljevich, ANA Boston 2010 As records of eBay sales are private and almost never preserved, I cite them using "acquired." Acquired from John Doe via eBay, May 2012 Finally, one should also describe the circumstances of the coin's find, if applicable. This includes both hoards and often-unprovenanced ground finds. Hoards are generally described the same as a named collection despite that they can be published in various ways. For hoards first published in an auction catalog, describe them as if they were collections, using "ex" and including the sale info and date. For hoards published in an inventor, include the citation for the find. For completely published hoards, include the number of the coin. Ex Beauvais Hoard (Glendining, 4 November 1987), lot 14 Ex 1867 Auriol Hoard (IGCH 2352) Ex Vatican Hoard, 220 For ground fines with a certain provenance, use "found" and include the date (if known) and location. For finds with a less than certain source, include the word "purportedly." Found in Southern Spain Found by a metal detectorist in Norwich, 2009 Purportedly found in Syria Any questions?[/QUOTE]

Create my FREE Account!

Log in or Sign up

Reply to Thread

Useful Searches