Message:

<p>[QUOTE=&quot;John Anthony, post: 1631837, member: 42773&quot;]Well, I am a collector of moderns, and from my perspective, it would seem that you need to acquire a representative sample of ancient coins in order to claim that you&#039;ve collected a particular type.</p><p><br /></p><p>Modern coins lack one dimension that ancients possess: the interpretation of a particular design by a particular die cutter. We have an abundance of minutia to hold our interest to be sure: strength of strike, luster, die variety, rarity, toning, etc. But comparing the actual execution of a design between different die cutters is not a part of our equation. (It certainly is an element of earlier US coinage - all the large cent varieties come to mind.)</p><p><br /></p><p>It seems to me that in ancient collecting, &quot;type&quot; refers to a general blueprint - a blueprint that gets executed by artists of various degrees of talent and skill. It&#039;s exactly analogous to a piece of music. I have at least four different interpretations of the Beethoven Symphonies by four different conductors - they are all radically different, despite the fact that they are taken from the same blueprint. They all have their merits and their debatable quirks. Is it really incumbent upon me to choose my favorite and discard the rest? That would seem amateurish at the least - a nuanced discussion of the differences seems more in order.</p><p><br /></p><p>That&#039;s my long-winded way of saying that if I had to pick only one of those coins, I would be greatly disappointed, and I would do it only with an eye for eventually acquiring the other three. <img src="styles/default/xenforo/clear.png" class="mceSmilieSprite mceSmilie1" alt=":)" unselectable="on" unselectable="on" />[/QUOTE]</p><p><br /></p>

Your name or email address:

Do you already have an account?

• No, create an account now.
• Yes, my password is:
• Forgot your password?

Stay logged in