Chances are I won't be so good looking when I'm 104 but I hope that if I am still around that I will know better than to pay ten times what a coin is worth either before or after it was butchered. Certainly many collectors will agree that this coin was cleaned wonderfully and it will probably sell to someone with more cash than sense. Is this coin better than my example of the type. 99% of all collectors would agree it is but I would not make an even trade because I (not European) prefer smoothed green to ravenged raw even if that means a worn coin. $213 in 2001 from a dealer known to be overpriced. Fine However, for the record, the coin I like best on this page is the first one of bcuda. Yes I would prefer a smooth coin with green patina but a smooth coin with the more scarce legend is on my list. I have one and it is the higher traditional grade of my two (less wear, more hair detail) but it has surfaces NGC should grade -1/5 at best. I have had it for years and found it so repulsive I never catalogued it so I do not know how I came to have it. When I discovered it was the scarcer legend I decided I should keep it until I got a decent one. To some of us, surfaces are more important than wear. Buying coins only by letter grade is folly, IMHO. VF? I hope, in 30 years, ffjun will have a better one. His father has an excuse for not knowing a lot about coins but Junior has time to be whatever he wants to be.
This result looks like what I get when I do my extreme coin makeovers. I wouldn’t really wanna risk it with such a valuable coin though, I tend to stick with those that I buy for less than $10 and are worth no more than $50
I'm in the minority & will say I actually prefer it uncleaned. True the details are better with it cleaned but the reverse difference of color would drive me crazy and I would quickly dump that coin if it was a result of my cleaning. And the price...forget it. I wouldn't pay $100 for that cleaned coin cause of the look of the reverse. My bronze Caligula could maybe be cleaned, but no way would I attempt it plus I like its scruffy look. I could have easily parted with this coin since I bought the AR Drachm, but I am really partial to it. Caligula (37 - 41 A.D.) AE30 AS SEGOBRIGA, SPAIN O: C CAESAR AVG GERMANICVS IMP, laureate head left. R: SEGO BRIGA in wreath. Segobriga Mint 30.5mm 10.1g Burgos 1724
I too prefer your coin to that of the OP's(before or after). There's something about a hardened even green-patina that I like; in comparison to greenish encrustation encapsulating a coin. The former, I believe to be part of the original coin's metal metamorphized into a shell. Whereas, the latter appear to me to be more of an earthen encrustation. An organic concreted layer that has perhaps been stained by the coin's oxidized metal, or other minerals in the substrate that it was discovered. If one were to remove the patina on your coin it would look stripped, and much of the (potentially fragile) sharp details (being part of the patina) would likely be lost. The removal of encrustation on the OP's coin was able to expose the sturdy details underneath.
My worry here is that people see this and think if they strip their coins it will reveal more detail. It won't. 99% of the time it just reveals pitting. Plus, how much of this coins "make over" is smoothing and tooling? I'm not good at spotting that stuff, but @Barry Murphy is.
I learned this with the uncleaned coins that I bought when I first started out with ancients. I would've rather had some of them with a bit more "crust" than what I ended up with: pitted junk.
I've bought several coins from this dealer (all very reasonable in price, so I find what he's charging for this one to be quite surprising), and nothing in our dealings, or in the other coins of his I've looked at, suggests to me that he would engage in that kind of practice. The only problem I've had is lengthy shipping delays from Spain, which really aren't his fault.
That's really good to read. Again, being one of the countless who started by and large in cleaning crusty LRBs is simply amazing that he got those results on the obverse. But I've cleaned a few with electrolysis, which I assume was used and museums use but I don't recommend, that turned out better than the mass majority: But even these, best of hundreds, don't resemble the OP coins level of smoothness and lack if pitting
I think what everyone paid who's posted their Caligula Vestas in this thread is about what one should cost. And they're all very nice, I think. No need to pay > $2,000. I wonder if the dealer will sell his coin at that price. I believe he's being a little over-optimistic, even though I do like the new and improved obverse.
Yes, the coin should have been left alone, based on the photos of the reverse. It is, after all, an ancient coin and not a US penny. Still, if left alone the color will darken, but it will never achieve the original patina. I'll need to dig through the boxes tonight to unearth my example.
I suppose I ought to show my hastily photographed version in this thread. As one can see, I can't be too picky when it comes to staying within a reasonable budget for coins. This one cost me less than $30. Sure, I could attempt to clean a little of the residual crust around the obverse legend, but would it really improve the coin that much to do so? I think the contrast makes it more legible. As a starter coin, I'm happy with it. I see its condition as environmental damnatio memoriae. When I develop more of a disposable income, I may upgrade it down the line.
I love a good patina as much as anyone but is revealing the pitting on a coin really such a bad thing? Reasonable cleaning doesn’t create the pitting. The coin is what it is and I like my pot marked misfits well enough either way. In some ways they are more honest.
Found it. I thought I would need to hire a search party, but I found it without too much trouble. This coin came from my local coin dealer in June 1991, at a cost of $180. I think it was a fairly reasonable price for a coin in Fine-VF condition. This coin was likely cleaned at some point. It has been in a paper envelope since 1991 and its appearance really hasn't changed at all - I've changed a lot (none for the better) - but not it. 13.0 grams
Very interesting opinions here from it's ruined to an improvement. I did exactly the same as the op almost 20 years ago. It had a green patina very similar to Doug's but much thicker. It has been darkening ever since. Prior to cleaning no one wanted to buy it, but after I recieved several offers. Soon after I decided to keep it and glad I did. The op has remarkably smooth surfaces and a red color I wouldn't expect to see. Hopefully it hasn't been artificially colored. As for the price it isn't out of line for what he normally asks for some choice pieces. I suspect it will sell for close to what he is asking eventually.
The wonderful thing about ancients is that they made enough we can each have them 'our way'. I hate coins like these stripped down to reveal their roughness preferring those pits be filled with something, preferable something natural. I guess it is people like me that drive some sellers to add artificial 'Maybelline' patina.