New Republican denarius, looks undergraded

Discussion in 'Ancient Coins' started by svessien, Aug 3, 2020.

  1. akeady

    akeady Well-Known Member

    That's a coincidence! - my pedestrian pig victoriatus arrved today from the last Naville auction - a bad 'phone shot:

    [​IMG]
    [​IMG]

    ATB,
    Aidan.
     
    Carthago, Volodya, Sulla80 and 3 others like this.
  2. Avatar

    Guest User Guest



    to hide this ad.
  3. Alegandron

    Alegandron "ΤΩΙ ΚΡΑΤΙΣΤΩΙ..." ΜΕΓΑΣ ΑΛΕΞΑΝΔΡΟΣ, June 323 BCE

    Oh, WOW! Congrats on that! I thought those little gems were pretty cool.
     
    akeady likes this.
  4. Sulla80

    Sulla80 Well-Known Member

    Another "pedestrian victoriatus" that I am pleased with - whatever the formal grade might be - on this one the pig had not yet arrived... Victoriatus 53-1.jpg
    Roman Republican, Anonymous, 211-208 BC, AR Victoriatus, Mint in Sicily
    Obv: Laureate head of Jupiter right
    Rev: Victory standing right, placing wreath on trophy; ROMA in exergue
    Ref: Crawford 67/1
     
    Bing, DonnaML and akeady like this.
  5. svessien

    svessien Senior Member

    Is that why Jupiter is looking kinda detached?
     
    Sulla80 likes this.
  6. Al Kowsky

    Al Kowsky Well-Known Member

    I agree with IdesOfMarch01 that good quality photos are essential in buying coins over the internet, not only raw coins but slabbed coins too. We mustn't forget condition grading of ancient coins are only opinions & nothing more, this applies to slabbed coins too. Anyone who buys a slabbed coin strictly for the information on the slab insert is making a foolish decision. I buy coins that have aesthetic value, are in excellent condition, & importantly have eye appeal. To illustrate my point see the photos below of two slabbed coins of Trebonianus Gallus. The top coin is being auctioned today by Heritage, & the bottom coin is in my collection. By looking at the info on the slab inserts alone you might think the top coin is the better of the two, however, the bottom coin is much more attractive to my eyes than the top coin. Despite having a smaller diameter flan & porosity on the reverse of the coin, I believe my coin has a more artistic portrait along with a more handsome eagle, & more attractive toning. I could never be happy with the top coin in my collection, & I'm certain the top coin will sell for more than what I paid for my coin.

    T.G. 114, obv (2).jpg Comparison, Treb. Gallus Tets.jpg Treb. Gallus Tet.jpg
     
    Valentinian, DonnaML, Bing and 2 others like this.
  7. Sulla80

    Sulla80 Well-Known Member

    Al, I'm sorry to say, as nice as your coin is, given the 4/5, I will be happy to take it off of your hands for <1/2 of what I think it is worth :)
     
    DonnaML and svessien like this.
  8. svessien

    svessien Senior Member

    Only a 4/5, Al?
    Don’t you have STANDARDS??

    :)

    Great coin, and thanks for sharing your opinion.
     
    DonnaML likes this.
  9. dougsmit

    dougsmit Member

    I commend NGC for their attempt to give people a feeling that it is not only about wear by adding their two /5 ratings. Al's two Trebonianus tets make a point. One is 5/5 for strike while the other is 4/5. The difference I see is weak letters obverse left and reverse right. Where I differ with many of us is that I would rather have the 5/5 coin with enough wear to make it 'only' VF. For the most part, I could be talked into coins graded F (or better) 5/5 5/5 simply because what happened to coins during their period of use does not bother me anything like the things that downgrade the surface numbers. Both of these coins have a porosity common on billon. NGC is very hard on fine scratches which I assume neither of these have. Scratches are harder to see in plastic so I consider it a good choice to warn people.

    http://www.forumancientcoins.com/dougsmith/grade.html
    In 1997, when I was writing my grading pages, I seriously considered trying to quantify the problems I saw using a 0-10/10 scale reserving 0/10 for coins that required a paragraph to describe fairly. I decided against it because any 'new' system would just add confusion to the already messy situation. A big company can do things that I could not. I also considered an even more complicated system that did not try to equate an amount of porosity to an amount of scratches to a patina state by ranking more different categories. I recall years ago seeing a discussion on that idea (was it by Paul Rynerson?) but at the time the difference between EF and MS had not entered the ancient game at least to the degree we see today and the problem did not seem as important since many dealers I patronized simply did not handle coins that they were ashamed to sell. Over time we stopped seeing many coins that were less than VF on the label while there were coins that were attractive (to me) at VG previously.
    For those who have not visited my pages, I copy below a small section from 'Conditions of Preservation'. I apologize for the way formatting was lost with this cut and paste but this shows 10 of the 42 coin examples for things that happened to coins after they left the mint. There were also 42 images in the 'Conditions of Manufacture' section showing things that happened before they left the mint. NGC looked at it differently with Strike and Surface but that did accomplish the same goal of making people aware that there is more to grading than wear.
    [​IMG] VF Earthen/Sand Patina
    Maximianus post reform radiate
    Patina can be combined with hard soil deposits that produce an attractive contrast. This is preferred to patina worn away from the high points.



    aVF Contrasting surfaces
    Commodus sestertius
    This contrasting tone is from wear on high spots through the patina to the metal below. This example also shows scratches on the portrait.

    [​IMG]
    [​IMG] aVF Thick Patina
    Carausius antoninianus
    Felicitas rx.
    Too much of a good thing can cause detail to be lost under an overly thick surface coating.


    F Chippy Patina
    Julia Domna sestertius
    A hard even patina can be ruined by chipping or wear around the edges. Collectors prefer patinas that are solid and stable.

    [​IMG]
    [​IMG] VF Uneven, patchy patina
    Decentius centenionalis
    Partial, uneven patina can look worse than no patina at all!


    EF Patchy silver wash
    Probus antoninianus
    Horseman spearing rx.
    Coins that were originally covered with a thin silver wash can lose part of the coating leaving a very uneven and unattractive mix of colors.

    [​IMG]
    [​IMG] VF Fingerprint
    Septimius Severus denarius
    Mars rx.
    Ridges at the upper right of this coin could be the result of etching by an ancient fingerprint over the centuries or handing by a modern coin cleaner with strong chemicals on his hands.
    VF Porous
    Trajan as
    Coins without patina on the surface can show a fine texture or porosity. This is common on coins found in rivers but can also be the result of cleaning with harsh chemicals.

    [​IMG]
    [​IMG] F Surface pitting
    Clodius Albinus sestertius
    Minor pitting or heavily porous surfaces obscure detail on many bronze coins.


    G Patchy, rough surfaces
    Septimius Severus as
    Minerva rx.
    Uneven, patchy and ugly surfaces ruin the appearance of many coins.

    [​IMG]
     
    cmezner, DonnaML, svessien and 2 others like this.
  10. Al Kowsky

    Al Kowsky Well-Known Member

    I have no problem with NGC's grading on either coin (you can click the image for an enlarged view). I see no scratches on either coin & no visible porosity on the top coin, however, I think the top coin was over-cleaned, hence the 4/5 for the surface. My choice for favoring the bottom coin is strictly personal as outlined in the post :).
     
Draft saved Draft deleted

Share This Page