I really took this coin to the cleaners

Discussion in 'Ancient Coins' started by red_spork, Dec 2, 2016.

  1. red_spork

    red_spork Triumvir monetalis

    As most will recall from my previous posts, I've been focusing entirely on the Roman Republic, but I've been focusing on two areas a little more than the others: the silver victoriati and the "staff and club" series struck at a Second Punic War-era military mint thought to have been in Etruria. The intersection of these two interests is the victoriatus of the staff series, an extremely rare type known from only 3 die pairs and a type that, until very recently I had resigned myself to not being able to acquire for a very long time as the two examples on ACSearch at the time both sold for over $1,000 USD after fees, and even a third example that recently came up for auction went well above what my modest budget currently allows me to spend on a single coin. As you might imagine, when an example of the type showed up on eBay at a price I could afford, unidentified and mostly uncleaned nonetheless, I was both shocked and extremely apprehensive. After comparison with other examples in my photo file and my library, it was obvious that the style was right and the coin was a die match to another I knew of that I believed to be authentic, so I went ahead and bought it and anxiously waited for it to arrive.

    A week or so later I had the coin in-hand and there was no question, the coin was absolutely authentic and struck and looked to have excellent detail below the patina, but I'd never successfully cleaned a coin before, much less one so important to my collection that I couldn't risk destroying it. I wrestled with whether or not to clean it for a short time and sought out advice from a few more experienced collectors and a good friend who is a professional coin cleaner. I got some really good advice from each of these people, but the best advice I got was that there was probably a reason that some previous owner had started cleaning it and given up(see near the center of the obverse on the "before" pic) and I decided to suck it up and pay to have a professional clean it, so less than 24 hours after receiving the coin I was back at the post office sending it on its way to be cleaned.

    After a few days I got a message saying the cleaner had received the coin and would start on it and let me know how it's going shortly. A week or so later, I was told that whatever the encrustation was, it wasn't coming off easily and to preserve the underlying metal it would require a very slow process with a lot of physical cleaning. I received a few more progress updates over the next couple of months mentioning that it was going well but that still more time was needed to carefully clean this coin. Finally, a few days ago, I finally got the message I had been waiting for: the coin was done and would be on its way back to me shortly. Today I opened up the package and was greeted by the coin in the second picture. The coin has some underlying metal issues and porosity, as I expected because every example in my file has similar issues(maybe due to the specific alloy used?) but the important detail is all there and I'm extremely pleased with the result, which is in many ways better than I expected, and probably miles ahead of what would've been produced had I cleaned it myself. More than anything, I'm just excited to finally have the coin back and to have been able to add a type to my collection that I wasn't sure if I'd ever be able to add.

    The coin as I purchased it, with much of the reverse still completely gunked up:
    cr106.1.beforecleaning.JPG

    The coin I received in the mail today:
    Cr106.1Alt-1200.JPG
    Roman Republic AR Victoriatus(3.13g, 18mm). Anonymous("Staff and club" series), 209-208 B.C., Etrurian mint. Laureate head of Jupiter right. Border of dots / Victory standing right, crowning trophy with wreath; Staff between. ROMA in exergue. Line border. Crawford 106/1; Sydenham 209; RSC 24n.

    Please share anything relevant and let me know if you think I made the right decision.
     
    Last edited: Dec 4, 2016
  2. Avatar

    Guest User Guest



    to hide this ad.
  3. Kentucky

    Kentucky Supporter! Supporter

  4. Mat

    Mat Ancient Coincoholic

    Im indifferent. I actually like the brown adhesions on the obverse but the reverse with the attempted cleaning in the past would have bothered me. So to the cleaner, good job, at least there isn't the distractions, but part of me really likes the old brown.

    But if you're happy that's all that matters. Nice coin either way.
     
    Pishpash and Smojo like this.
  5. red_spork

    red_spork Triumvir monetalis

    If the whole thing had the fairly even patina on the obverse I might have left it but I agree, the partial cleaning of the reverse was fairly distracting. That's probably the biggest factor that lead to me having it cleaned.
     
    Paul M. likes this.
  6. John Anthony

    John Anthony Ultracrepidarian

    Since the cleaning revealed attractive, smooth surfaces, it was worth the money and effort! It's one of those things you can only know in hindsight. The cleaner did an outstanding job - kudos to him for his skill and patience, and congratulations to you on a tremendous score!
     
    Mikey Zee and Paul M. like this.
  7. Bing

    Bing Illegitimi non carborundum Supporter

    I have several coins I would like to clean. But, like you, I don't trust myself to do the job right.
    IMHO, you did the right thing. The "cleaned" coin is a real beauty and is now probably worth at least what the other coins you mentioned.

    On a side note, just how much does a professional cleaner charge for this type of service? If this is an inappropriate question, just ignore it.
     
    Paul M. likes this.
  8. Orfew

    Orfew Draco dormiens nunquam titillandus

    The partial cleaning would have bothered me as well. I also certainly would not have attempted it myself. It is now a truly lovely coin.
     
  9. Ajax

    Ajax Well-Known Member

    That's just an awesome coin.
     
  10. Theodosius

    Theodosius Fine Style Seeker

    I like the cleaned version much better. It did not come from the mint with all those deposits on it. Half the details were obscured on the reverse.

    Good call.
     
  11. chrsmat71

    chrsmat71 I LIKE TURTLES!

    well, they certainly did a fantastic job....and it's a lovely coin RS.

    i would be scared of what you would find under the thick deposits, i would think a corroded surface as likely as a nice surface.
     
  12. zumbly

    zumbly Ha'ina 'ia mai ana ka puana

    The cleaner did a careful and thorough job. Lots more detail revealed, and with any luck in time the coin will tone down nicely. Congrats, right decision, IMHO.
     
  13. rrdenarius

    rrdenarius non omnibus dormio Supporter

    You can't beat that coin with a stick. Great pick-up of a rare issue! Crawford has several numbers assigned to club, staff, staff & club, staff & feather, ... I have a few. Three are in my display at the Money Show of the SW on ancient coin grading.
    Victoriatus - Club
    P1010035.JPG P1010036.JPG
    Struck As - club, this was one of my first European purchases
    P1010037.JPG
    P1010039.JPG
    Denarius - Staff & Feather
    Cr 130.1 staff feather ACR E12 L96 11.10.13.jpg
    Denarius - club
    Club denarius NAC 84 Pt II lot 1630 5.21.15.jpg

    Cast uncia, Astralaga with club symbol
    Astragalus club Cr27.10 Artemide Asta 12.15.14 rev.jpg Astragalus club Cr27.10 Artemide Asta 12.15.14.jpg
     
  14. red_spork

    red_spork Triumvir monetalis

    Nice! i really like your club denarius and victoriatus but all are great. I don't have any from any of those series, but I do have the following 3 coins from the "staff and club" etrurian series, though only 1 actually has the "club" symbol on it. I think the "club" on these represented a slightly later issue personally, maybe they had a different striking team or something and thus marked it differently. Who knows.

    1066atriens.jpg
    Roman Republic Æ Triens(27mm, 11.61g, 9h), Anonymous("Staff and club" series), 209-208 BC. Helmeted head of Minerva right; above, •••• / Prow right; above, ROMA and staff; below, ••••. Crawford 106/6a; Sydenham -; Russo RBW 483.
    Ex RBW collection, ex Crédit Suisse List 52(January 1988), lot 422.

    cr106.6b.JPG
    Roman Republic Æ Triens(26mm, 14.27g, 4h), Anonymous("Staff and club" series), 209-208 BC. Helmeted head of Minerva right; behind, club and above, •••• / Prow right; above, ROMA and staff; below, ••••. Crawford 106/6b; Sydenham -; Russo RBW 484
    Ex Andrew McCabe collection, privately purchased from Sondermann in 2010

    Cr106.8a.JPG
    Roman Republic Æ Sextans(21mm, 4.99g, 3h), Anonymous("Staff and club" series), 209-208 BC, Etrurian mint. Head of Mercury right; above, •• / Prow right; above, ROMA and staff; below, ••. Crawford 106/8a; Sydenham -; Russo RBW 487.
    Ex Andrew McCabe collection, ex JD Collection, NAC 78(5/26/2014) lot 1637
     
  15. randygeki

    randygeki Coin Collector

    I like it either way too :D
     
  16. Eduard

    Eduard Supporter**

    Like you, I would have had difficulty making the decision to clean it. It is an important and historic coin, and its relation to the Second Punic War, Scipio and Hasdrubal makes it a very interesting and significant numismatic item.

    Concerning the cleaning: yes, the uneven appearance of the reverse would have bothered me as well, but all in all I think I would have left it alone. I like the original appearance of the obverse and tend to prefer that over bright surfaces on ancient coins. As the cleaning turned out well (obviously done very carefully), all is well.

    If the coin were mine, I would now place it on a window-sill to tone it down to a more natural, subdued shade of silver. I have had some good results with that simple conservative approach on some of my (as-bought) brightly cleaned ancients.

    All in all a very nice coin and congratulations to you for acquiring it!
     
    Mikey Zee likes this.
  17. Mikey Zee

    Mikey Zee Delenda Est Carthago

    The more I gaze at the before and after, the more I like the results!! If it could be naturally toned a bit, I'd absolutely LOVE it!! Congrats @red_spork !!!
     
  18. Pishpash

    Pishpash Well-Known Member

    Excellent results.
     
  19. Ed23

    Ed23 Active Member

    Bad results. I don't like it. I wouldn't have it. Cleaning ruined the coin. That's my opinion on the results.
     
  20. IdesOfMarch01

    IdesOfMarch01 Well-Known Member

    Personally, I very, very much prefer the cleaned version. The details are much improved on the cleaned coin, and the surface encrustations that were removed don't seem to qualify as patina but rather as, well, surface crud.

    But maybe that's just a personal preference.
     
    rrdenarius and red_spork like this.
  21. TIF

    TIF Always learning.

    Ed23, I see from your introductory post that you primarily collect modern US coins. All ancient coins are cleaned, so cleaning doesn't have the same value-lowering impact as it would for modern coins-- often, a good cleaning/conservation will increase the value of an ancient coin. There really is no comparison at all to cleaning as it relates to modern coins versus cleaning of ancient coins.

    @red_spork, I think the conservator did a fine job. If you don't like the brightness just store it in a toning-conducive environment.

    I agree with @IdesOfMarch01 regarding the material which was removed: it was surface encrustation, not "patina".
     
    Paul M., rrdenarius and Bing like this.
Draft saved Draft deleted

Share This Page