Rand

Does this refer to Mike Gasvoda, or has anyone else been affected? Since joining the Forum in March 2023, I have not seen any posts from Mike Gasvoda or anyone else supporting any stealing. Or does your post refer to discussions of cultural property housed by museums? Otherwise, the post reads as an allegation.

There is a an interesting study about those coins by a forum member @Tejas

It is hard to predict how this case unfolds and what could have been part of the deal. The outpours of Athenian Owls, Tigranes's Tetradrachmes, etc., have also showered the American soil. The authorities might be tempted to use the deal for insights.

@Kaleun96 All good points. I only wanted to say that objective, if not perfect, grading may be helpful for me when reviewing a coin. I must have misread the comment about 'you might otherwise end up wondering how two AU 5/5 5/5 coins of the same type could sell for such different amounts' and felt appropriate to mention factors that are not part of NGC grading but influence the price. The importance of provenance was mentioned in several threads. Varieties are important for me personally. Apologies if my post read critical.

Grading of antients is far from perfect, and unlikely to be so in the future. However, it is important - buyers vote for this with their wallets. Two-dimensional photos may not present well three-dimensional objects. Photos can be of poor quality or edited. Quality videos are uncommon. Some bends are easily missed on photos. A few times I ended up with coins that did not look as appealing in hand as on photos. Most importantly, tooling may not be seen on photos. There is little doubt grading system and processes will develop further. Some grading attributes relevant to antient coin grading such as flan size and shape, and centring can have objective quantifiable metrics. - Provenances? - Varieties within the type? - Availability of a buyer? The exact same coin may sell for vastly different amounts on repeat sales.

The peaceful hobby turns increasingly toxic. The previously seen 'safe and ethical' approach of collecting coins through buying from reputable auctions falls apart if the sellers do not guarantee legitimate provenance or even the status of "good faith purchaser". Would the buyer be considered a "good faith purchaser" when dealing with an auction house with a history of selling a stolen item? Would the buyer be considered a "good faith purchaser" when dealing with an auction house being accused of selling a stolen item? This last is relevant to the Lue sale. Whether true or not, the accusation may lead to reputational damage and financial losses. Also, the legal differences in various countries may create a legal loophole that would make it very expensive or even impossible for a legitimate owner to recover stolen coins.

BM story has been the final straw in changing my perception about museums as undisputed public' goods'. We need museums, of course, but is it time for them to evolve? They cannot be bottomless storage places for everything found in the ground from the millennia past and what would be 'the present' for future generations… over millions of years ahead (I am an optimist). Public museums are relatively new from a historical perspective, and some evolution is expected. Letting the public be 'custodians' of some artefacts, such as coins, may not be unreasonable. Scientists do not need endless duplicates of the same coins. For most research purposes, academics need good images and a few high-quality metrics (weight, size, metal analysis). Would it be more helpful to obtain those, sell the coins to the public and use the money to keep a universal coin registry of the coins, learning from them and knowing who holds them when more analyses are needed? I am sure many collectors would not mind helping researchers.

I will not 🙂 The coin sold yesterday is of common PP type. The one I showed is of much rarer PERP type and one of the highest grade (if not highest) known. 🙂

True.

ANACS just inserted a wrong label. Human errors happen in every field. ANACS should reflect on QC. It would not stop me buying the coin, whether it is in a usual holder or in a slab with wrong label.

I doubt just slabbing any coin would bring profit. This would depend on the expertise of the collector/dealer. Slabbing may lead to a loss if the seller overgraded the coin and slabbed grades are low. I won a slabbed coin this morning. I am unsure why it was slabbed; this may be Heritage's policy. I bought it for a die study, irrespective of the grade, probably adding 20% to the sale price. Still, I doubt the slabbing paid off. I will unslab it to fit the collection. Another coin where slabbing probably paid off for the seller. I have not unslabbed it, in case I need to sell.

For those who genuinely want authentication only, the current system with TrueView should be fine. The offered standard slabs are cheap, add little cost to the overall grading process and may be considered packaging to be opened on delivery. The photos and IDs remain online, and ex-slab coins are not uncommon on offer. NGC does not offer a guarantee for authenticity - this does not mean they are not putting all their expertise into detecting fakes.

My perspective as a remote collector who handles a coin the first time when it arrives. Slabbing serves several purposes: - Authentication: certainly a bonus. Some fakes are made by die transfer, making them 'die-linked' with genuine coins. It is very hard to assess such coins from photos. - Grading: a bonus for evidence of tooling, rim state, bends and other attributes that are easy to miss on the photo. A few times, my coins were not described accurately by dealers. The grading scales for ancient coins and the consistency of grading need improvement. - Protection from damage/elements: Unlikely needed for the coins I collect. This may be helpful for more fragile coins and coins from some alloys. I have not seen evidence of how protective slabs are. - Presentation: I dislike the current slabs, which are designed with dealers rather than collectors in mind. The slabs I have, sit outside the main collection, breaking the flow of the collection presentation. Also - Secure slabs facilitate direct sales between collectors. I am not against slabs in my collection, in principle. To buy me in: 1. Make them much smaller; reflect the size of popular antique coins. Denarii, aurei, solidi, and many other coins are ≤20 mm and relatively thin. My preferable slab size would be ≤50x50 mm with slab thickness = coin thickness + 1-2 mm of the slab. 2. Remove labels at the top and keep the slab square. 99.99% of the time, I am the only person who sees my coins and know what they are. 3. Put slab ID on the rim to be scannable but ideally no-visible or minimally visible when the slab is viewed front or back. Keep the label information online. Label information may change with evolving attribution, die information, and changes in the grading system. Keeping the label separate from the slab would avoid the need for re-slabbing (the grading industry may feel different about this). 4. No cheap plastic. Use quality, highly transparent materials for smaller square slabs keeping rims visible. I want to see the coin, not the slab. Naturally, different collectors may have different preferences.

I agree. The NGC slabbing is mounting. Sometimes there are concerns about the rim adjustment to fit the mount. If the result is only some scratches, they are just scratches, possibly from removing from the mount.

PS. Another reason why I collect what I collect. I love the coins I collect - I am never bored with them. However, I would probably collect other coins depending on how much I would be prepared to spend each year: $50K - Roman Republic $100K - Aurei and Constantine I solidi $1000K - Greeks in Sicily I would hate collecting one coin a year or letting the best examples go to others every time. ‘First in a village rather than second in Rome.’ The price is 'staying in a village'.

Thank you. This is a beautiful coin!

There is no surprise collectors praise Greek Sicilian coins - their artistry is astonishing. How widely did they circulate, and are they often found outside Sicily? With Italy restricting their export, there is little hope of new legitimate coins coming from Italy itself.

Nice coin! The first photo does not show the beauty of the coin well. The video does a much better job. Within the Berk dynasty, Shanna Schmidt makes the best and really stunning photos (and charges accordingly) https://www.shannaschmidt.com/roman-empire/vespasian-69-79-ad-rome

This coins does not win beauty prizes. I struggled to find a nice one 10 years ago. Nicephorus III Botaniates, Constantinople, Histamenon nomisma. Jean Elsen & ses Fils S.A. Auction 117. 15/06/2013.

It was my long-term impression that DO was 'the Harvard collection' until Harvard Art Museums put online coins from their collection. Many provenances indicate bequests and gifts accepted over decades rather than purchases (https://hvrd.art/o/196513). I hoped to visit the museum last year during our daughter's graduation. However, the campus was very busy, and I did not have enough time. From the link provided by @Deinomenid, it reads that Harvard Art Museums intends to actively expand the collection. We may now have two 'collectors' from one University to bid against.

I thought that DO never stopped buying, for example: https://www.doaks.org/resources/coins/catalogue/BZC.2013.027/view Purchased Numismatica Ars Classica NAC AG, Auction 75. 18/11/2013. Ex 1973 Jericho hoard, Jordan https://www.doaks.org/resources/coins/catalogue/BZC.2002.3/view Purchased from Baldwin’s, 23/03/2002 The possibility of American collections buying does add pressure for bidding. With a private buyer, there is hope for another chance later. With universities/museums, when there are gone, they are gone (with few exceptions). Regarding DO, my impression has been they buy very sensibly, selecting nice coins and not pursuing very high. Now Harvard joining does add pressure.

Really enjoyed the thread. I have two coins for this period as well. Romanus III Argyrus, Constantinople, Histamenon nomisma. From Numismatica Ars Classica, Auction 56. 08/10/2010 Constantinus IX Monomachos, Constantinople, Histamenon nomisma. Auktionen Meister & Sonntag, Auction 8. 13/10/2009

Thank you @Hrefn. I appreciate and keep your coins in my records - I particularly like the Merovingian one. A beautiful coin - I only have the reverse die link for it (not as nice as yours). Solidus Numismatik. Auction 13. 25/03/2017

I collect Anastasian gold coins, as I might have mentioned before. Many collectors would find the period boring and coins monotonous… I do not complain. Focusing on gold coins is not because of snobbishness - bronze and silver often bring higher prices than average Anastasian gold. Gold coins of the period are far more suitable for die studies, though. I like the historical mysteries of the period with few historical records, vast gaps of knowledge, and many people who produced gold coins with the Anastasian name. In fact, there were hardly any other gold coins in the world produced during the Anastasian period. Parisian and Axumite Emprires were not producing gold coins at scale; those few we know could be outside the Anastasia reign. I came across some coins from an Indian state that may be called electrum but appear more like silver. Anastasius solidus may be seen as a truly global currency found all over Eurasia, including India and China plus Africa. So if I wanted to see myself as more of a generalist, I could say I collect all gold coins produced from 491 to 518 (and some later coins that used the Anastasian name). I would still collect the same coins. It may be hard to prepare an accurate write-up about an Anastasian coin because of the scarcity of reference literature. The history books and numismatic publications on the topic are few, and academics disagree on important matters. So what I cannot find in publications and I try to puzzle out myself… the best I can. Following the coins, it is sometimes tempting to disagree with what the literature says. I do like these coins themselves, beyond the collector’s hunt. I do not intend to produce a book of my own collection. I can do this within minutes with the software I used for the database, but it would be a miserable story with many ‘blank pages’ of coins I do not have. I hope to prepare a book of Anastasian coins if I can in the future, featuring my coins but not necessarily identifying them as such. To make such a book, I need to master photography, travel museums, commissioning photography when needed, get permissions to publish other coins… I am on the way to applying some analytical methods to my coins. Scores of coins can be considered unique or only in private hands, but I am more excited about finding duplicates and die links. Classical Numismatic Group, Inc. Triton XX. 10/01/2017

Third party grading for higher value (e.g., $5K+) ancient coins is likely to become as essential as PMG grading is for banknotes. The current NGC slabs have a long way to go towards what a good 'ancients' slab should be for people who may prefer to keep their coins in slabs after purchase. Reducing the slab's size for the numerous denarii, aurei, and solidi is long overdue. The grading scales need to be refined as well. I hope PCGS moves to the ancient coin segment.