Bonshaw

Resurrecting an old thread on Frank's humor, after his latest auction, I noticed this bio for him in a poetry anthology. Frank S. Robinson is a graduate of NYU Law School (1970), and served at the New York Public Service Commission as staff counsel and then administrative law judge (1977-97). He is the author of eight books including Albany’s O’Connell Machine(1973), Children of the Dragon (a novel), The Case for Rational Optimism (2009), and Love Poems. Robinson is a professional coin dealer. He is married to the poet Therese Broderick and has a daughter, Elizabeth. Robinson was appointed to the U.S. Assay Commission by President Nixon in 1972. In 1969, he was the first man to walk on the moon. Kind of an interesting bio, but also note the deadpan last line.

This is excellent context

I remember when my father, back in the 1970s, wanted to buy some modern forgeries of ancient coins. He was interested, and he wanted to get an idea of whether he could tell they were fake. (There was no Internet of course) He went to multiple coin shops, and every dealer he spoke to told him that they never got forgeries. He thought this very unlikely to be true, and concluded that 1) they thought it would be bad for business to even admit that it happens, or 2) they were worried about liability for accusing their source and not being able to prove their allegations. Perhaps 50 years later, some of the reasons may be the same.

Happy Sunday! Unfortunately, I'll have a week delay in posting coin #7/83 of my father's collection. I'm up against some deadlines. As I said at the beginning, I would post *less than* a coin a week (because of life). I'll be back at it next week.

Oh I like this - it made a fascinating frame for this electrum Lydia lion, rather than extending it: And another one, where it took the task more literally:

@rasiel, this is a remarkable contribution! I have been looking through Coryssa, and it will benefit my personal research (in archaic Lydian die studies) very much. Kudos. I will do my main post-2000 auction searching on acsearch to keep load off of your computer, but this is an outstanding benefit to the community.

Beautiful, have you ever used it with cream?

It depends on your perspective. I consider Oliver Cromwell as an interesting historical figure, and would be fascinated to own something he valued. But tell that to the Irish The venom in Terry Woods voice when he sings! A curse upon you Oliver Cromwell, you who raped our Motherland I hope you're rotting down in hell for the horrors that you sent To our misfortunate forefathers whom you robbed of their birthright "To hell or Connaught" may you burn in hell tonight This is one 17th century figure who is not yet a "normal" historical person.

I have one of these that isn't going into the smelter. Because mine is bronze. Bronze would have to go up in price a lot to smelt it! I love Kristín Þorkelsdóttir's art, and I love Iceland (although I've only spent one week there back in the 90s). For those interested, here is a link to Kristín Þorkelsdóttir's banknotes: Kristin Thorkelsdóttir – Numista It is interesting to compare the two identical medals, in bronze and silver. Some medals look a lot better in silver. Some look a lot better in bronze. I like the looks of this one better in bronze. Obviously, this is a purely subjective statement. I'm preparing a post comparing some of the Panticapaeum satyr coins, with very similar satyr representations in both bronze and gold. This is another opportunity for this comparison, in an ancient context with very skilled artisans in both metals.

Happy Sunday! It is time for the next coin from my father's collection, #6/83. An older coin, a denarius from the Roman republic, caught my attention. First, I'd like to thank everyone for the amazing information and details they provided about last week's follis, including @Jims,Coins, @theotokevoithi, and @quant.geek. And I very much enjoyed the tangential discussions that were spawned. Coin: 6/83 Ruler: Roman Republic, 89-88 BC Identification: S 217 (from the dealer's coin flip) I found this in my father's 1st edition Sear "Roman Coins and their values," 1964, with this info: "C. Vibius C.f. Pansa (89-88 BC) Laur. hd. of Apollo r., PANSA behind, symbol beow chin. R. Minerva in quadriga r., C. VIBIUS C.F. in ex. B.1" listed as value 50/- in VF (the dealer listed this coin as F) Type: AG Denarius Location: unlisted Weight: 3.415 g Width: 19.0 mm Height: 19.0 mm Thickness (flan): 1.57 mm Purchase date: July 29, 1971 Vendor: Alfred Szego, Box 427, Oakdale, N.Y. 11769 Purchase price: $8.50 (+ 0.30 p/h + 0.35 "special handling" - the latter for faster delivery, apparently) I googled Alfred Szego, he was a fascinating guy. He is widely published in botany and numismatics; in Botany, he was an expert on American chestnut blight, a topic that I find extremely interesting. But that is a rabbit trail... Here is the photo. It looks nice in hand, with some mellow luster, and some black encrustations: Here is the envelope that it came in: And here is the invoice: And finally, here is the notecard my father wrote to accompany the coin: I love that quadriga! Now I'll be researching chariot racing, and also figuring out what PANSA means... Thanks everyone for posting related coins, historical notes, numismatic details, everything that is making this journey rediscovering my father's collection so rewarding.

I love that you are posting your father's coins here too. This one also has a beautiful patina.

This coin is in beautiful condition, and the blue-green patina is gorgeous

It is fun seeing how your father organized his collection

@DonnaML, I find your exonumia fascinating, as well as many of the others posted here. Could you please say something about what the boundaries are on your exonumia? Is there a particular date range in scope? Is Essaie money relevant here? Example - this is one of mine, a model crown from 1848 that I like a lot - it has bicolor gilt. I'm wondering if this is in scope of this Exonumia forum?

@Restitutor, I think it would be very useful if there were a forum where useful general information for ancient coin collectors could be captured from some of these discussions. This thread is an example. It is bringing together, through the input of many forum participants, the current state of guarantees of authenticity for slabbed ancient coins provided by the TPG slab companies (NGC and ANACS), and auction houses / dealers (CNG, Heritage, Stacks-Bowers, Great Collections, Davissons...), and how those guarantees of the slab companies and the auction houses / dealers interact. This is important stuff, some of the information is confusing to even some experts here, and it would be great to have it "pinned" somewhere for reference. The "Forum Rules and FAQs" folder seems to be more administrative. Is there anywhere we could put a summary post of all the information in this thread that would be more accessible in the future?

GreatCollections is another auction house that only sells slabbed coins. They mostly do moderns but do have a decent number of ancients. They are absolutely clear: ALL ITEMS ARE SOLD "AS IS" AND WITH ALL FAULTS. PURCHASER HEREBY ASSUMES ALL RISKS CONCERNING AND RELATED TO THE GRADING, QUALITY, DESCRIPTION, CONDITION, AUTHENTICITY, AND PROVENANCE OF AN ITEM. But they reassure you that the third-party grading services will: "Since the 1980s (and even before), there have been third-party grading companies which will independently assign grades to coins. As part of their service, they will encapsulate the coin in a tamper-evident holder and also guarantee the authenticity of the coin." So my count right now for auction house terms & conditions on slabbed coins is: CNG: Unconditional guarantee, but they (mostly) sell unslabbed coins. Heritage: T&Cs are confusing and self-contradictory. It is safest to assume that they don't guarantee authenticity of slabbed coins without written clarification. Stacks Bowers: Seems to refer all liability for encapsulated coins to the grading service, and not allow any return for any reason whatsoever by any buyer. GreatCollections: Only sells encapsulated, guarantees nothing about the coin condition, authenticity, or provenance.

This is complex and confusing, I see. I went back and edited my original post to make sure that it doesn't cause confusion, including the explanation for the edit ("I edited this post to soften the statement that auction houses don't guarantee the authenticity of slabbed coins. Apparently some do. Check terms & conditions."). The rest of this discussion is fascinating. I agree with @John Conduitt and @idesofmarch01 above that the only specific statement Heritage makes about encapsulated coins says that they "may not be returned for any reason," whereas "coins sold referencing a third-party grading service" have a "guarantee by the Auctioneer that they are genuine", but don't mention slabbed coins specifically. And having now reviewed the Heritage Auction T&Cs, I have to act under the presumption that they don't guarantee authenticity of slabbed coins, unless clarified further. I definitely would want this clarified in writing before buying a $100k slabbed coin from heritage. That will never happen, of course, but the principle stands.

@idesofmarch01 These are good points, but I have never seen CNG sell a slabbed coin. Do they? But you have now made me question my impression that other auction houses like Heritage do not guarantee authenticity of slabbed coins. I know that they don't grade condition, or allow returns, of slabbed coins, but I'm going to go read a bunch of Terms & Conditions now and see if I understood this correctly. Let me say that I *really* love this forum. There is so much expertise here. If I learn that Heritage, for instance, actually does guarantee the authenticity of slabbed coins, that will be great information, and will change my behavior.

This guarantee issue may be worth exploring a little more. I have done an extensive Lydian Weidauer XV electrum trite die study, which is why I have strong opinions in this area. I have carefully tracked the provenance of the suspicious slabbed coin I mentioned in my previous post. This coin was previously auctioned by CNG back in 2006, so presumably back then it had a guarantee of authenticity, but I don't have access to the CNG terms and conditions from 2006. The coin was then slabbed, and auctioned by Heritage in 2017, but was left unsold. Then it was put up for auction on heritage again on Jan. 7, 2018, and sold for $6,600 here: https://coins.ha.com/itm/ancients/greek/ancients-lydian-kingdom-alyattes-or-walwet-ca-610-561-bc-el-third-stater-or-trite-13mm-475-gm-ngc-au-5-5-4-5/a/3061-29208.s Here is a closeup of this (slabbed) coin directly from NGC: I can say that, from a die-matching perspective, this coin makes no sense at all. The front is at least an attempt at a Weidauer XV Type C obverse (but suspicious in several ways in comparison to other Obverse dies). Every single Weidauer XV trite was stamped with the same two reverse punches (at different stages of wear), but these two packpunches are different, much more like those used in other trite series. This is either a historically important coin, or a forgery, and the other iffy aspects of the obverse die push me towards forgery. Now here is the question: this coin was sold by CNG back in 2006, so presumably back then, it carried the CNG guarantee. The owner, or at least the owner in 2017 (presumably completely unaware of these questions), had it slabbed by NGC, who inspected and gave it their seal of authenticity, but no guarantee. Did that void the original CNG guarantee, especially since we are selling away from the original buyer? The coin failed to sell in 2017 (perhaps some folks thought it looked suspicious), but then sold in 2018 for $6,600, which is a princely sum for a Weidauer XV trite back then! The luster of this coin really stands out strongly, this isn't the sort of luster you see on one of these trites, so this presumably appealed to the buyer. So NGC doesn't stand by this coin. Does Heritage? Could the present owner go back to CNG? Surely not if they didn't even possess the invoice. So in this case, the slab distanced the owner from a previous guarantee. Do you think that Heritage would offer a refund, or wash their hands of this since they didn't look in the slab?

I don't have any comment on why the slab should be shown in preference to the coin, obviously the coin should be more important from the buyer's perspective. But there is one possible reason that some dealers and auction houses may prefer to sell slabs: the guarantee. Most reputable dealers and auction houses guarantee unslabbed coins against being modern forgeries. The terms of that guarantee vary widely, but it is still a guarantee, and carries with it some cost. Some reputable dealers and auction house do not guarantee slabbed coins against being modern forgeries. They make the (valid) point that it is hard to do the inspection that would be necessary to make that guarantee once the coin is slabbed, but it is a significant cost savings for them to not be liable for such a guarantee. There may be an auction house that guarantees even slabbed coins for authenticity, but if so, I don't know which one. In the case of moderns, NGC or PCGS will provide their own guarantee that coins are genuine, so this is just moving the liability from the dealer/auction house to the slabbing company. In the case of NGC Ancients, however, they do *not* guarantee the authenticity of ancient coins. They do, however, promise to do a careful job in an expert evaluation of authenticity, and they probably catch the most egregious forgeries at least. So if you buy a slabbed ancient from an auction house or dealer, you might not be getting any authenticity guarantee at all (check terms & conditions), but are swapping that for the confidence of at least having had an NGC expert look at it, which is worth something. I can see why some dealers and auction houses would prefer to sell slabbed coins, since it releases them from this liability. I know of at least one slabbed ancient that I am pretty sure is a forgery, and that sold (for a pretty sum) at auction. I assume that there are lots more. Caveat emptor in buying slabbed ancients.

A gimmick is exactly what it is, and it is a gimmick that worked on me. I do use high-purity materials in my work, and for some reason I love the stuff. It doesn't come cheap in general. I have a bottle of ultra-high-purity helium-3 in my office. This stuff is hard to come by.

It is often said that the British Guiana 1 cent magenta stap is the most valuable man-made object by weight. That is ruling out antimatter, perhaps, which can't be produced or stored at the macroscopic scale anyway. I believe it (the stamp) is around 40 mg, and sold for $9,480,000 in 2014, so that is $237 million USD per gram. As usual, philatelists have numismatists beaten all to heck in terms of excess. Doesn't this look like something worth $237 million per gram? But now let me go in the opposite direction of this thread. I have idiosyncratic taste in coins. One of my favorites is a modern gold commemorative. It isn't even that attractive. Here is a photo of my coin which is - horror of horrors - entombed in plastic! (Look! A PF69 Ultra Cameo!!! 🙂) Just to be extra triggering, I'm using the photo from the NGC website. This coin is a funny duck for sure, weighing in at 1.22 ounces of gold, with a face value of 350 Canadian dollars. Showcasing the flowers of Canada's coat of arms (and honoring the 90th anniversary of the Royal Canadian Mint, not a favorite of those here), it represents everything that many people hate about modern commemoratives. So why do I care? I'm strange. I think that this is the first coin of any material ever minted with 5N (99.999%) purity. No one has told me that, I haven't found it listed anywhere, but I have looked and have failed to find anything this pure minted before 1998. And you can probably pick one up for pretty close to its scrap bullion value. Why should you care? Well, you probably shouldn't. But I do! Now back to the main discussion of what ancient gold you bought after selling modern bullion coins.

Did he collect any Lydian electrum? That is my personal focus (not my father's, and my father's collection is really growing on me).

What kind of coins were in his collection? Were they mostly Byzantines and ancients from Asia Minor, found locally in Turkey?

@Jims,Coins, great, thanks for all of the details, and for posting your coin! The difference in coloration between your photo and the seller's photo is remarkable. You call it a "AE Follis - Silverdenar". Now I'm confused. Bronze and silver? [EDIT: @Jims,Coins explains below that "Silverdenar" is the name of the seller, the coin is AE Follis.] My camera setup takes much nicer photographs than my cell phone, but the coloration is always off (relative to my cell phone camera, which gets colors more faithfully but isn't good on details). I always spend some time color-correcting the fixed photos to try to match what the coin looks like in hand, and sometimes I can't get it quite right. But your coin - changing the quite attractive greens to a desert patina in the photograph - borders on color fraud. Thanks also for posting the price and date of your purchase. Your follis is in better shape, but if I inflation adjust $2.50 in 1978 to 2019 here: Inflation Calculator | Find US Dollar's Value From 1913-2024 (usinflationcalculator.com) I get $9.80. So your $11.50 for a somewhat nicer coin (lacking some of the corrosion on my father's coin) seems quite comparable.