Provenance for me is nothing of true value

[NewStyleKing]

I wonder if Mr Roosevelt cared about the provenance of his owl? And would he repatriate it if found to be wanting!  A lot of collecting is pure one-upmanship  but in a secret fashion!  The few coin sites that deal with ancients compared to the vast amount of ancients sold  shows that most owners ( and that is what they are) don't really give a fig about numismatics..surely you've wondered when you get beaten on a coin  where it gets to?  When will it appear again..why did they buy it...especially if its obviously not investment grade.

From a UK collector said Roma for my 2 Palms NewStyle, no example in coinArchives etc....

My research shows it was a new obverse and reverse, and is the only one in private hands.........I wonder if the UK collector knew that......unless it belonged to Dominique De Chambrier in reality  and like the Saltons, didn't really care anyway!  Yep most collectors don't care, so anything like having something like Roosevelt's ownership  is the only true bit of interest most collectors would have in the coin.

[CPK]

7 hours ago, El Cazador said:

This is absolutely not true and it is very very broad statement, far from reality 

Really? I confess I don't know @NewStyleKing personally, but this is the way he has been presenting himself on the forum.

Please explain.

[John Conduitt]

2 hours ago, NewStyleKing said:

The few coin sites that deal with ancients compared to the vast amount of ancients sold

I don't understand this bit. Do you mean there are few coin websites selling ancients (auctions, dealers, eBay etc) but many more coins sold some other way?

[DonnaML]

28 minutes ago, John Conduitt said:

I don't understand this bit. Do you mean there are few coin websites selling ancients (auctions, dealers, eBay etc) but many more coins sold some other way?

I think perhaps he means that there are few sites like this one and CT and Forvm on which ancient coins are discussed. But even apart from the various sites in other languages, just because many collectors don't spend time discussing their coins on the Internet doesn't mean they don't care about numismatics.

[NewStyleKing]

Thanks Donna. It might not mean they are not interested in numismatics but I doubt it, afterall what would be the purpose otherwise? Maybe possible for Roman coins but Greeks. If they got coins that mean something, then once sold  any knowledge is lost!  My example of 2 Palms and that CNG #3 newstyle coin recently says otherwise. Even the ex Salton Artemis & Demeter came with no official Salton pre-provenance!

The knowledge that a coin belonged to Mr Roosevelt essentially means nothing.  Just an exhibit about him and his relics, not the coin. Let me guess that he found the connection to ancient Greece and democracy interesting, if not romantic, a link to the past glories he wanted to emulate.

[Kaleun96]

On 5/9/2023 at 4:05 PM, NewStyleKing said:

On another platform, the great provenance search is active. Whilst our Sulla 80 says, "For me it is primarily: a coin is more interesting if it can be documented from a famous collection or an important journal articles/book.  (Cited from: https://www.cointalk.com/threads/finding-provenance.403741/)

For me it's the coins, maybe Dominique de Chambrier and/or Richard Beale will add piquancy to a coin...I doubt NewStyleKing/eBay would ever cut it!

 

Surely a coin is more interesting for what it might not or might say or imply. In NewStyles the period around the time of Mithradates Vl's shenanigans around Cappadocia, Bithynia etc start to show ...it is believed... symbols that might relate to pro-Mithradatic or Roman partisanship. Coupled with the names of the first magistrate , ( who influenced the symbol's type), can re-inforce this view! Eg Aristion, known to have been an Athenian magistrate coupled with basileus Mithradates names on a NewStyle with a clear Pontic symbol! Apellikon, a thief of Teos, Athenian diplomat of the Pontic court, symbol Griffin , (badge of Teos!) and failed Stregos who tried to take Delos (?) from the Romans.....etc....Kointos=Greek for the Roman name Quintus on a symboled coin seeming to show Roma being crowned by Nike, with the previous obverse die-liked Newstyle being Roma on her own.... So it's not provenance that's worth a damn it's what the coins can show or imply...Eid Mar anyone? Maybe modern provenance is a distraction from the fact that most coins have nothing really to say! Just a long line of anonymous names....Aesillas, Quaestor! 

Going back to NSK's original point, it seems the issue is not whether provenance is of interest or value but two separate issues:

1. Whether a given coin is interesting numismatically
2. Whether a given collector has a numismatic interest in the coins they collect

What then follows from this is the assumption that people interested in provenance aren't collecting numismatically interesting coins and aren't interested in coins they collect numismatically. As others have already pointed out earlier, being interested in provenance is not mutually exclusive to the coin being interesting or the collector being interested in the coin for numismatic reasons.

So I think the viewpoint at the heart of this thread ("provenance is nothing of value") is really just an excuse to provide NSK with another opportunity for expressing his views on these two other points, which many of us are already well-acquainted with. This thread is then merely an opportunity for him to more easily sort each of us into one of his categories of "collector" or "owner", because if you're interested in provenance it can only be because the coin is boring or because you have no numismatic interest in it.

In NSK's mind, provenance is meaningless and valueless to a "true collector". It's just a form of gatekeeping, I wouldn't put too much thought into arguing the point with him.

Edited May 16, 2023 by Kaleun96

[NewStyleKing]

I guess provenance (and the often associated  plastic tombs),have grown like a south sea bubble...it's a new talking point, trading point and essentially the coins themselves are left behind, no wonder RB could find a broker in provenance!

The big bad wolf..UNESCO 1970 essentially caused the market to evolve.

[John Conduitt]

2 hours ago, NewStyleKing said:

I guess provenance (and the often associated  plastic tombs),have grown like a south sea bubble...it's a new talking point, trading point and essentially the coins themselves are left behind, no wonder RB could find a broker in provenance!

The big bad wolf..UNESCO 1970 essentially caused the market to evolve.

It’s hard to see how slabs are associated with provenance. Does anybody else think that? They usually lose or drastically simplify it. The people who collect slabs are probably more likely to fall into the ‘one-upmanship’ category you dislike as it gives an independent view of ‘best’. But ancients don’t work like that at all, which is probably why collectors of ancients don’t like slabs and don’t go in for one-upmanship (except, perhaps, the very few buyers of coins like the gold Eid Mar). 

Provenance isn’t a new thing. I know it has taken on a greater meaning now you might have to prove ownership, but it has been recorded by numismatists and academics since the beginning. Not people who have no numismatic interest - it’s those people that ignore it.

I notice that in this discussion you don’t mention provenances that involve findspots and hoards, preferring to focus on ‘celebrity’ ownership. To my mind, it beggars belief that a numismatist or a collector with an interest in numismatics would not be interested in this. I assume, therefore, that you do accept this sort of provenance has value. Without context, most coins tell you nothing.

I do appreciate where you are coming from. If you collect Greek coins then provenance seems to mean having to hand everything over to the Greek government, who just sit on them. Any study or numismatic interest is severely hampered by their short-sighted policies and lots of coins end up being looted and smuggled because of them, not in spite of them. But that isn’t true everywhere. Or the fault of provenance.

It’s obviously true that people can be interested in numismatics, celebrity provenances and regular provenances all at the same time. Of course it is. I can be into music and like both Mozart and Kylie Minogue. High brow and low brow. And if Kylie covers Mozart, the price goes up. It’s not a bubble, it’s different interests intersecting. Any item that covers more than one interest will sell better.

Edited May 16, 2023 by John Conduitt

[jfp7375]

I'll admit I haven't read this whole thread, but here are my 2 thoughts on provenance:

1) The notion that provenance should be required legally or by norms in the collecting community, or that coins without provenance are substantially less desirable, is worrisome to me. There's no doubt that this trend is on the rise, and it has been the case for years now that in certain situations (transporting coins internationally, etc.) it is indeed legally required.

I understand all the reasons why, but the fact that this trend has bled onto coins that are legally "jailbroken" from MOUs, etc. is a problem. It is not reasonable or beneficial, in my view, to pursue a system where every coin in every collection globally has traceable provenance or is otherwise tainted. 

2) All that said, provenance can be extremely interesting and therefore valuable. I don't understand the comments here from people saying they don't care. Maybe they have in mind the above issue. But I don't see how you can be interested in history (which is really the genesis for any interest in numismatics) and NOT be fascinated to know specific ownership history of your coins, especially if they were owned by prominent collectors or historical figures.

In other words, if you think a piece of ancient Greek or Roman history is cool, how do you not find a piece of Greek/Roman history owned by former US President John Quincy Adams 2x as cool?? (Just a random example)

[Väinämöinen]

29 minutes ago, jfp7375 said:

But I don't see how you can be interested in history (which is really the genesis for any interest in numismatics) and NOT be fascinated to know specific ownership history of your coins, especially if they were owned by prominent collectors or historical figures.

As I see it, you need to try and place yourself in a different mindstate. There is interest in the history these coins represent, but no interest in the journey the coins went through. This means that pedigree is irrelevant unless it provides a direct benefit. Some people here have even described that they don't even care about the original find provenance, meaning that the specific event or events that led to the loss or the hiding of the objects is irrelevant to them. 

I'm not one to tell others how to collect, but I personally view things differently. I also care about the journey.

[John Conduitt]

8 minutes ago, Väinämöinen said:

Some people here have even described that they don't even care about the original find provenance, meaning that the specific event or events that led to the loss or the hiding of the objects is irrelevant to them. 

That may be, but it is incongruous with claiming to be interested in numismatics and the coins themselves. You wouldn't know, for example, the dating of many coins or the sequence of dies without studying hoards and finds. So many aspects of numismatics rely on the study of context and other finds (i.e. not the individual coin by itself) that they are integral to it.

[David Atherton]

NSK is winding us up ... I wouldn't take it too seriously. It's the equivalent of saying "lick it" in a stamp forum.

[DonnaML]

15 minutes ago, David Atherton said:

NSK is winding us up ... I wouldn't take it too seriously. It's the equivalent of saying "lick it" in a stamp forum.

I'm not sure. I think he may be serious. Even though his logic doesn't seem to hang together entirely. And even though he never even tried to address that hypothetical I posed earlier in the thread 

[kapphnwn]

 In response to @NewStyleKing. I do not believe that it is the 1970 UNESCO accord that is creating all the angist but the various MOUs between the United States and various countries around the Mediterranean basin. On top of that, there are those restrictions that are coming out of Europe. I am afraid I do not know much about these, but I am sure when I find out I am very certain that I  will not like them. I live in Canada, and while it is a great place to live the ancient coin market is very small, and as a result my coins will have to cross borders. I have done so already many times. Some 15 of my coins are currently in CNG auctions. I do not think there is a problem now or even for the foreseeable future but....... 

 In regard to provenance, yes it would be nice if every ancient coin had one. But that will never be the case for all of them. This issue is new and upto even a few years ago, not considered to be of any importance. On January 14 2022 at the NYINC I bought this coin.   

Antonianus of Carausius  London Mint 286-293 AD Ae antoninianus. Obv Bust right radiate draped and cuirassed. Rv Pax standing left. RIC 101 3.48 grms 23mm Photo by W. Hansen

When I purchased the coin all I knew was that the vendor had acquired it the previous year from another dealer. However, I liked the coin and thinking 'UK must be safe' bought the coin. So all I had was a vague idea that it showed up in 2021.  I have since discovered that coin was in a NAC Auction E Lot 3204 April 4 1995

 

It is clear than neither the guy I bought the coin from or the one who sold it to him knew anything about this 1995 provenance. There are a lot of coins out there like that. To illustrate the point this is a page of coins listed in the Trau collection auctioned of by Adolf Hess in Luzern Switzerland May 22 1935 The coins being listed are all of the Emperor Gallienus;

 Note only a few of the antoninianii are illustrated about one in ten. Further there are over 400 coins sold in a series a bulk lots each except for the last lot 100 coins each. How many coins sitting in current collections came from those bulk lots I have no idea. 

I agree that every one of us has the right to enjoy his collection the way he see fit. If one does not care about provenance all the power to you. However I wouldn't disparage those who find it interesting.

 

 

Edited May 17, 2023 by kapphnwn

[DLTcoins]

27 minutes ago, kapphnwn said:

 In response to @NewStyleKing. I do not believe that it is the 1970 UNESCO accord that is creating all the angst but the various MOUs between the United States and various countries around the Mediterranean basin.

 

 

The memoranda of understanding are the implementation in practice of the 1970 UNESCO Convention, which requires each party to address trafficking complaints raised by other parties. The Convention and the memoranda are two sides of the same coin.

Edited May 17, 2023 by DLTcoins

[Phil Davis]

On 5/16/2023 at 5:27 AM, NewStyleKing said:

...The few coin sites that deal with ancients compared to the vast amount of ancients sold  shows that most owners ( and that is what they are) don't really give a fig about numismatics...

So true numismatics is a product of the Internet, nonexistent before the Digital Age, since it can only take place on "coin sites?"

That's quite a... statement.

[John Conduitt]

12 hours ago, DLTcoins said:

The memoranda of understanding are the implementation in practice of the 1970 UNESCO Convention, which requires each party to address trafficking complaints raised by other parties. The Convention and the memoranda are two sides of the same coin.

That convention only applies to existing collections, requires an inventory to check against and requires the payment of compensation by the state to the person who bought the looted item (if in good faith).

The relevant supplement covering looted excavations is The Convention on Stolen or Illegally Exported Cultural Objects (1995). This puts the emphasis on the law of the state in question, which can obviously vary. The only influence on this is that the 1970 Convention says there should be export controls and countries should develop memorandas of understanding. It doesn't say what the terms of those should be.

It also states that "cultural objects are those which, on religious or secular grounds, are of importance for archaeology, prehistory, history, literature, art or science." The definition of 'important' is hugely subjective and so will also vary from state to state.

This also requires the buyer to be compensated, but by the person who sold it to them if possible, or by the state.

It doesn't seem to be more prescriptive than that.

Edited May 17, 2023 by John Conduitt

[DLTcoins]

59 minutes ago, John Conduitt said:

That convention only applies to existing collections, requires an inventory to check against and requires the payment of compensation by the state to the person who bought the looted item (if in good faith).

The relavant supplement covering looted excavations is The Convention on Stolen or Illegally Exported Cultural Objects (1995). This puts the emphasis on the law of the state in question, which can obviously vary. The only influence on this is that the 1970 Convention says there should be export controls and countries should develop memorandas of understanding. It doesn't say what the terms of those should be.

It also states that "cultural objects are those which, on religious or secular grounds, are of importance for archaeology, prehistory, history, literature, art or science." The definition of 'important' is hugely subjective and so will also vary from state to state.

This also requires the buyer to be compensated, but by the person who sold it to them if possible, or by the state.

It doesn't seem to be more prescriptive than that.

Yes, the 1970 Convention lays the groundwork for resolving (primarily international) trafficking concerns while leaving the states parties free to regulate internally. Rather than parse details of the Convention and it's implementation, here is the actual text for those interested:

https://www.unesco.org/en/legal-affairs/convention-means-prohibiting-and-preventing-illicit-import-export-and-transfer-ownership-cultural

Edited May 17, 2023 by DLTcoins

[Olek1984]

On 5/10/2023 at 4:37 AM, Severus Alexander said:

If a significant proportion of the market audience values an aspect of a thing, that aspect adds value to the thing.  Clearly a significant proportion (even if it's a minority) of ancient coin collectors value the provenance of a coin, so provenance adds value.  (Note: I'm not necessarily saying that's the only way for something to add value.)

I take it that the OP isn't questioning this obvious fact!  Rather he's saying he's part of the sub-group of collectors who don't value provenance.  Well, OK... de gustibus non est disputandum!

Yep, I'm sure almost all of us would agree with that. But that doesn't imply anything about whether provenance also adds value, just to a lesser extent.  (As has been pointed out above.)

This strikes me as the most objectionable claim in the OP (i.e. the alleged fact that most coins have nothing really to say).  Almost every ancient coin carries some historical interest, if you dig into it.  This became especially clear to me when I had to write auction descriptions of coins that I had previously found not very interesting.  I ended up wanting to keep/buy most of the coins in the auction! 😆

Back to provenance: personally I think it's pretty cool, in a nerdy kinda way, that the following coin was previously owned by Nobel Prize winning physicist Murray Gell-Mann!

Poland. Sigismund III Vasa (1587-1632) AR 6 Groschen. Danzig, 1596. Crowned and draped bust right / Crowned coat of arms. Kopicki 1240. 4.72g, 28mm, 12h.

I collect Polish coins and use https://coinstrail.com/catalog/poland to find provenance. Recently, coins from auctions 1920-1930 have been added there. A good resource for finding provenance. Look at photo

[Severus Alexander]

2 hours ago, Olek1984 said:

I collect Polish coins and use https://coinstrail.com/catalog/poland to find provenance. Recently, coins from auctions 1920-1930 have been added there. A good resource for finding provenance. Look at photo

This looks like a good resource... thanks, @Olek1984!

[NewStyleKing]

It's interesting that I don't see any provenance claims for the Tigranes ll tetradrachms that seem to be in quite a few major dealers offerings. It's obvious to one and all there as been a major hoard find  and parcels have been smuggled out and portioned off!  Pity no one seems to know where they were found, and was it a mixed hoard?  That's provenance for you and the sort of provenance that is valuable, not the pointless other sort, except it seemingly increases the value.I see no one on this site knows anything of its provenance.......

Photo Roma

 

[John Conduitt]

1 hour ago, NewStyleKing said:

It's interesting that I don't see any provenance claims for the Tigranes ll tetradrachms that seem to be in quite a few major dealers offerings. It's obvious to one and all there as been a major hoard find  and parcels have been smuggled out and portioned off!  Pity no one seems to know where they were found, and was it a mixed hoard?  That's provenance for you and the sort of provenance that is valuable, not the pointless other sort, except it seemingly increases the value.I see no one on this site knows anything of its provenance.......

Photo Roma

 

Perhaps undeclared hoards will be the next target for the authorities.

[NewStyleKing]

19 minutes ago, John Conduitt said:

Perhaps undeclared hoards will be the next target for the authorities.

But I thought the individual coins already was, what's the difference? No provenance is no provenance!  Interestingly people are still buying them when ,technically, they will have no value since they have no prov! And thus without a researchable prov then it's just scrap metal!

What type of prov is acceptable in future....Ebay  2013  Lanz...is that good enough....afterall Germany is NOT the original source for many Greek coins...never was! Was there a secret Athens mint in ancient Munich! You see Even , say, a 1930's auction is not prov only recent pedigree..my Salton coin is only a late pedigree.....where they got it from they never revealed! Goldberg, then Palmyra Heritage doesn't cut the mustard. Maybe I should melt it now!

I would love all coins to have a proper history for numismatical research purposes. The nearest is UK PAS.  But then it goes to a museum and it then disappears into a dungeon where they hope it is forgotten about and the staff can steal it and sell it on the black market.  Just where did IGCH 2056 go...... who cares......there is no record since we refused the offer to catalogue it...nudge, nudge, wink, wink!!! 

[Rand]

I do not know the details of Greek law, but I doubt it is specific where the coins owned by the state are stored or displayed.

It might be legit to pass the Eid Mar aureus to a distinguished individual for 'storage' and 'public engagement', such as showing off at parties.

[Salomons Cat]

I see several rational reasons why provenance should increase the value of a coin. 

Just hypothetically:
Just imagine that forgers become better at imitating ancient coins. Suddenly in year 2030 many coins enter the market that cannot be distinguished from real ancient coins.
You own 2 aurei of emperor Sponsianus that you bought in 2023. To prove that the coins are original ancient coins you just use the image search engine of acsearch that shows that these coins were sold in 2023 in an auction. You can also prove that you bought these coins. 

So, maybe at some point in the future it will be essential that you have any kind of provenance that dates back to any time before the year 2030 to prove that a coin is an original. That's why I think that any kind of provenance should have some value. 

Right now we live in a time in which we can photograph coins and easily look up their provenance online. I think that we should take advantage of that.