A tough debate on a coin

[kirispupis]

Ok, I know...But I'm having a tough time deciding whether to purchase a particular coin and could use some help. Here are the advantages and disadvantages I've come up with.

Advantages

• This would definitely be in my top 10 of the year.
• Although I already have a coin from this city, it's a tremendous upgrade.
• The city is one I have a soft spot for. It's definitely one where I'd like a shining example.
• The price appears very reasonable. A double-die match sold at auction realized 50% more after fees. That example was of a much lower grade, though lacked the defect this one has.
• I've done the research on the coin. All evidence points to it being authentic and historically it's from the period I would want.
• Although I'm a poor judge, I would rate this coin "of fine style." The die work is fantastic IMHO and these appear to me the best dies of a very broad type.
• Although I've had two expensive auctions recently, I struck out at CNG today and do not have any more expensive targets on the horizon (though the next Leu has yet to release).

Disadvantages

• I already have a coin from this city.
• Although the coin is attributed as rare, it's not. The type is extremely common with nearly 200 examples on ACSearch.
• Although the type is beautiful and interesting, if I really could choose any, there are others from this city I'd take before this example. However, that's getting truly picky.
• The coin has a defect, though it's nothing that would normally put me off. I believe the price is still fair despite the defect.
• It's expensive, though I've paid this much for a coin before.
• I've recently purchased two high-priced coins and should probably cool it.
• The coin has no provenance. I've already asked the seller for more details and don't have anything beyond 'a private collection'. I do trust this seller though. I've also purchased many coins, even at this price range, with no provenance.
• I'm trying to stay regimented by only purchasing coins I'm missing in one of my core collections, primarily because the holes in my collection are becoming more expensive to fill. This coin doesn't meet that requirement. It's a gorgeous example from a city I love, and my current example I bought because I never thought I could own a coin like this, but if I want to "keep to my guns" it clearly doesn't qualify.

Edited June 19 by kirispupis

[DonnaML]

It's very difficult to form an opinion without seeing what the coin actually looks like. Perhaps you could post a photo in one or more group private messages (maximum 10 participants in each) if you don't want to do so publicly.

[Roman Collector]

If you know already it's going to be one of your top 10 favorite coins of the year and the price is good, I say go for it. 

[robinjojo]

That's a toughie, though not an uncommon situation for many collectors.  Since this coin would be an upgrade, would then you sell your present example?  The money from that sale would be an offset to the purchase price.  

How many times does this coin appear on the market?  If only a few times say every five years or so, you might consider purchasing it, if, and this is very important, the coin really appeals to you at a very basic level. 

Generally speaking coin prices have been shooting up; demand seems strong.  Of course that can change.  Since this is a key coin that would be among the top ten in your collection, I'd speculate that its value should be solid and likely to increase over time.

Edited June 19 by robinjojo

[Steppenfool]

I voted “Skip” and I feel quite strongly about it 

My first point of argument would be that you have strong principles regarding your coin purchases.

• I'm trying to stay regimented by only purchasing coins I'm missing in one of my core collections, primarily because the holes in my collection are becoming more expensive to fill. This coin doesn't meet that requirement.

In my opinion, this hobby is one of those where its participants can easily be victims of enthusiasm, and the few rules we set ourselves are bulwarks against this. You have stated that you have a clearly defined system for purchasing coins. I would advise not neglecting this system. There’s probably an old adage about it, but the issue wouldn't be abandoning this particular principle, the real aberration would be initiating the abandoning of principles altogether. Once this is done, what chance do you have? 
 
My second point is regarding the following:

• Although the coin is attributed as rare, it's not. The type is extremely common with nearly 200 examples on ACSearch.

It sounds like this example is not nearly exceptional enough to skirt your principles. The “pros” section feels circumstantial and accidental rather than justified on any solid essential point. 

 

Edited June 19 by Steppenfool

[Sulla80]

I'm in the camp that say's "you've already answered the question" - you have clearly fallen for this coin : "It's a gorgeous example from a city I love, and my current example I bought because I never thought I could own a coin like this".  Here's a coin that I fell for recently - there is no logic to choosing this.  A bit about this coin in my notes on Coins & Cattle: https://www.sullacoins.com/post/of-greeks-and-cattle

 

[Sulla80]

6 minutes ago, Sulla80 said:

I'm in the camp that say's "you've already answered the question" - you have clearly fallen for this coin : "It's a gorgeous example from a city I love, and my current example I bought because I never thought I could own a coin like this".  Here's a coin that I fell for recently - there is no logic to choosing this.  A bit about this coin in my notes on Coins & Cattle: https://www.sullacoins.com/post/of-greeks-and-cattle

 

wait - maybe there is some logic even if the coin pre-dates the Mithridatic Wars by about 2 centuries.

"And when Archelaüs fell dangerously ill at Larissa, Sulla stopped his march, and cared for him as if he had been one of his own commanding officers. This raised the suspicion that the action at Chaeroneia had not been fairly fought, as well as the fact that Sulla released the other friends of Mithridates whom he had taken captive, but put to death Aristion the tyrant alone, by poison, who was at enmity with Archelaüs: the strongest ground for the suspicion, however, was his gift to the Cappadocian of about two thousand acres of land in Euboea, and his bestowing upon him the title of friend and ally of the Romans. At any rate, on these points Sulla defends himself in his Memoirs."

-Plutarch, Life of Sulla

[kirispupis]

31 minutes ago, DonnaML said:

It's very difficult to form an opinion without seeing what the coin actually looks like. Perhaps you could post a photo in one or more group private messages (maximum 10 participants in each) if you don't want to do so publicly.

The issue is that it's still for sale and IMHO the price is fair for a very popular type.

 

30 minutes ago, robinjojo said:

That's a toughie, though not an uncommon situation for many collectors.  Since this coin would be an upgrade, would then you sell your present example?  The money from that sale would be an offset to the purchase price.  

How many times does this coin appear on the market?  If only a few times say every five years or so, you might consider purchasing it, if, and this is very important, the coin really appeals to you at a very basic level. 

I would keep both examples because my current one is a bronze that's worth maybe $25 and the target coin is silver and a lot more. The overall type is extremely common. What's rare is for an example of this level of quality to be available within my budget.

 

24 minutes ago, Steppenfool said:

In my opinion, this hobby is one of those where its participants can easily be victims of enthusiasm, and the few rules we set ourselves are bulwarks against this. You have stated that you have a clearly defined system for purchasing coins. I would advise not neglecting this system. There’s probably an old adage about it, but the issue wouldn't be abandoning this particular principle, the real aberration would be initiating the abandoning of principles altogether. Once this is done, what chance do you have? 

This is very true. I've already violated it this year by picking up some Roman coins and I've since put a strict lid on it. Since then I've been very principled and have purchased from fewer auctions + sellers, though the last two were doozies.

 

12 minutes ago, Sulla80 said:

I'm in the camp that say's "you've already answered the question" - you have clearly fallen for this coin : "It's a gorgeous example from a city I love, and my current example I bought because I never thought I could own a coin like this".  Here's a coin that I fell for recently - there is no logic to choosing this.  A bit about this coin in my notes on Coins & Cattle: https://www.sullacoins.com/post/of-greeks-and-cattle

That's a beautiful coin! I hope I don't reveal the actual coin here, but there reason I've fallen for this coin is I spent a night at this city (though not in the actual ruins) and it was a magical experience. It's one of the favorite places I've been and I'd love to have a better example than my meager bronze. A chapter in one of my upcoming novels takes place there.

[kirispupis]

Okay, okay! I talked myself into it.

I'll now post the coin since I've procured it. 

The listing states these are banker's marks on the obverse + reverse, but I wonder if they're shallow test cuts. IMHO they're not distracting and I don't buy for perfection.

I believe this coin is a double die match - https://www.acsearch.info/search.html?id=6270797. It has a provenance to 1956, which helps verify the authenticity of this one.

This is Ravel Period V, 1009, which is a common Pegasi. However, even despite the cuts this looks higher quality than most specimens I see selling for a lot more. 

My current representatives from Corinth and photos taken there are viewable here - https://ancientcoinstories.com/corinth-2/

 

[Ryro]

STUNNING!!! I LOVE it!

[Deinomenid]

31 minutes ago, kirispupis said:

common Pegasi

A very  beautiful common pegasi.  Also this type  may not be so common, or rather may be quite special. There was an expert  - Sir Charles Oman - who was  particularly impressed with this type. The article is old,  but interesting - Some  Problems of the Later Coinage of Corinth. He was a longstanding president of the Royal Numismatic Society. I have no idea what Calciati has to say  about that as I cannot afford the postage on his weighty tomes.

eg

Alone among all the series of the Corinthian mint, these nine pieces with symbols boar, ivy-leaf, plough, aegis, chimaera, Palladium, cornucopiae, and eagle [PI. IV. 3-8]-all invariably show round the head of Pallas a large wreath. Some see in it olive, some laurel, leaves. This addition to the normal type must have some meaning, as it never occurs before or after in the Corinthian series. As it lasts apparently for nine years - if the symbols, as is generally supposed, are annual signs - it points to some period of nine years in which the Corinthians imagined themselves to be blessed with a continual round of victories or of glorious peace. Looking round the chequered history of Corinth in the fourth century, I cannot identify any such period of marked and prolonged prosperity. Can it therefore be possible that the wreath marks the victories of the Hellenic league against Persia, of which Alexander was the champion and commander? The Congress at which he was nominated to that position had been held at Corinth, and the Corinthians may have considered themselves peculiarly bound to celebrate the successes of the league of which they had seen the foundation.
 

[Hrefn]

I arrived at this conversation too late to affect the final result.  But, I would have advised you to buy the new coin, and sell your old example. It is astonishing how that can take the financial sting out of a new purchase.  Having said that, I very seldom take my own advice.  I would almost always buy a new type rather than upgrade. 

My acquisition rate is very slow, and my collection has been formed over decades.  I have generally bought the best coin that I could afford in my area of interest, so upgrade opportunities are limited.  

I think you made the correct decision.  I love the Medusa aegis control mark.  The minor injuries the coin has received would not have dissuaded me, either.   

[CPK]

1 hour ago, kirispupis said:

Okay, okay! I talked myself into it.

I'll now post the coin since I've procured it. 

The listing states these are banker's marks on the obverse + reverse, but I wonder if they're shallow test cuts. IMHO they're not distracting and I don't buy for perfection.

I believe this coin is a double die match - https://www.acsearch.info/search.html?id=6270797. It has a provenance to 1956, which helps verify the authenticity of this one.

This is Ravel Period V, 1009, which is a common Pegasi. However, even despite the cuts this looks higher quality than most specimens I see selling for a lot more. 

My current representatives from Corinth and photos taken there are viewable here - https://ancientcoinstories.com/corinth-2/

 

Yes! You definitely made the right call. That is truly a gorgeous coin, and any misgivings you may have had will, I am sure, disappear as soon as you have it in hand!

As an added plus, it appears to have been purchased from our fellow member @Prieure de Sion. 😉 

[Sulla80]

1 hour ago, kirispupis said:

Okay, okay! I talked myself into it.

I'll now post the coin since I've procured it. 

The listing states these are banker's marks on the obverse + reverse, but I wonder if they're shallow test cuts. IMHO they're not distracting and I don't buy for perfection.

I believe this coin is a double die match - https://www.acsearch.info/search.html?id=6270797. It has a provenance to 1956, which helps verify the authenticity of this one.

This is Ravel Period V, 1009, which is a common Pegasi. However, even despite the cuts this looks higher quality than most specimens I see selling for a lot more. 

My current representatives from Corinth and photos taken there are viewable here - https://ancientcoinstories.com/corinth-2/

 

Beautiful coin - good decision and a great catch. Agree completely that the test cuts or bankers marks are not at all distracting.

[Roman Collector]

2 hours ago, kirispupis said:

Okay, okay! I talked myself into it.

I'll now post the coin since I've procured it. 

The listing states these are banker's marks on the obverse + reverse, but I wonder if they're shallow test cuts. IMHO they're not distracting and I don't buy for perfection.

I believe this coin is a double die match - https://www.acsearch.info/search.html?id=6270797. It has a provenance to 1956, which helps verify the authenticity of this one.

This is Ravel Period V, 1009, which is a common Pegasi. However, even despite the cuts this looks higher quality than most specimens I see selling for a lot more. 

My current representatives from Corinth and photos taken there are viewable here - https://ancientcoinstories.com/corinth-2/

 

Gorgeous!!! 

[kirispupis]

2 hours ago, Deinomenid said:

A very  beautiful common pegasi.  Also this type  may not be so common, or rather may be quite special. There was an expert  - Sir Charles Oman - who was  particularly impressed with this type. The article is old,  but interesting - Some  Problems of the Later Coinage of Corinth. He was a longstanding president of the Royal Numismatic Society. I have no idea what Calciati has to say  about that as I cannot afford the postage on his weighty tomes.

eg

Alone among all the series of the Corinthian mint, these nine pieces with symbols boar, ivy-leaf, plough, aegis, chimaera, Palladium, cornucopiae, and eagle [PI. IV. 3-8]-all invariably show round the head of Pallas a large wreath. Some see in it olive, some laurel, leaves. This addition to the normal type must have some meaning, as it never occurs before or after in the Corinthian series. As it lasts apparently for nine years - if the symbols, as is generally supposed, are annual signs - it points to some period of nine years in which the Corinthians imagined themselves to be blessed with a continual round of victories or of glorious peace. Looking round the chequered history of Corinth in the fourth century, I cannot identify any such period of marked and prolonged prosperity. Can it therefore be possible that the wreath marks the victories of the Hellenic league against Persia, of which Alexander was the champion and commander? The Congress at which he was nominated to that position had been held at Corinth, and the Corinthians may have considered themselves peculiarly bound to celebrate the successes of the league of which they had seen the foundation.
 

Very interesting! I was only able to locate Ravel and Cammann, neither of whom provided any close dating for these issues. Ravel places them between 385-307 BCE, while CNG lists 350/45-285, Roma and Gorny-Mosch 345-307, and Leu and NAC 375-300. I only read snippets of Ravel, but he does believe the Period V pieces (of which this is one) changed by magistrate each year.

It would be great if die studies could somehow order these issues, but as I understand from Ravel the die usage was erratic (they switched dies when one became too hot) and thus it's nearly impossible.

[rasiel]

Here's a nugget of wisdom I keep hearing from people much older than me: you end up regretting a lot more the missed chances than the consequences of a poor decision 😉 

Rasiel

[robinjojo]

That coin is a real stunner, with an excellent strike, color, surfaces and very good metal quality.  I tried to enlarge the photo, but the resolution is not good.  The mark on the obverse could be a countermark, while the mark on the reverse seems to be a small test cut. 

I'm looking forward seeing your far superior photo of the new acquisition once it arrives.  Congratulations!

[ambr0zie]

Very late for the party. The coin is excellent, iconic type, great eye appeal, surely a top 10 coin for the year (for 99% of the collectors). The test cut/banker's mark does not distract indeed (and on the side with Pegasos it's that discreet I can't even spot it). And I suspect the price without the defect would have been much more serious.

I also wanted a Corinthian stater and I bought one from an earlier period (478-458 BC or according to other sources 515-450 BC for the type). Not the same appeal - archaic style (not the first choice of many people), circulation wear, imperfect centering - but it still is one of my favorite coins.  

[Qcumbor]

Before seeing the coin I was thinking you had already decided you would purchase it. After I've seen it, i wonder why one wouldn't. It's really beautiful !

Q

[Prieure de Sion]

8 hours ago, kirispupis said:

Ok, I know...But I'm having a tough time deciding whether to purchase a particular coin and could use some help. Here are the advantages and disadvantages I've come up with.

It is always a good idea to think carefully about a purchase. In the end, you have to want 100% - otherwise it's not a good purchase. You should still be able to enjoy it after weeks, months and years!

 

7 hours ago, kirispupis said:

That's a beautiful coin! I hope I don't reveal the actual coin here, but there reason I've fallen for this coin is I spent a night at this city (though not in the actual ruins) and it was a magical experience. It's one of the favorite places I've been and I'd love to have a better example than my meager bronze. A chapter in one of my upcoming novels takes place there.

I think this is a good reason - because you always have a personal connection to it. Coins that have a personal background usually have the strongest connection to them.

 

6 hours ago, kirispupis said:

I'll now post the coin since I've procured it. 

Ok, then I'm reassured. I read in my email this morning that the coin had been sold - but I didn't know that you had bought it. And since we've already spoken, I was afraid someone else had bought it. Now I see this thread this morning and I'm glad it was you who bought it.

 

8 hours ago, kirispupis said:

Although the coin is attributed as rare, it's not. The type is extremely common with nearly 200 examples on ACSearch.

And here we are at the discussion from the other thread - what is rare? 

Let's leave out the great depiction of Athena and Pegasus. My rarity referred to the fine preservation. Firstly, I have not found many of these coins with the inscription Medusa / Aegis. And not many of these types have the inscription so well preserved. And then look at the "q" mintmark under the Pegasus - also completely preserved. And "A" and "P" are also undestroyed. That is rare for me - to find a coin in these undestroyed details. It is always / often somehow a definition.

 

Then I hope you also like the coin in your hand. But with Vcoins and me, you always have the right to return it. 

[Kaleun96]

6 hours ago, Prieure de Sion said:

And here we are at the discussion from the other thread - what is rare? 

Let's leave out the great depiction of Athena and Pegasus. My rarity referred to the fine preservation. Firstly, I have not found many of these coins with the inscription Medusa / Aegis. And not many of these types have the inscription so well preserved. And then look at the "q" mintmark under the Pegasus - also completely preserved. And "A" and "P" are also undestroyed. That is rare for me - to find a coin in these undestroyed details. It is always / often somehow a definition.

Wouldn't it be better to just be upfront with why you're calling it rare? Auction houses do this when they say "rare in this condition". Though I'm not sure that would be accurate in this case either.

[kirispupis]

7 hours ago, Prieure de Sion said:

And here we are at the discussion from the other thread - what is rare? 

Let's leave out the great depiction of Athena and Pegasus. My rarity referred to the fine preservation. Firstly, I have not found many of these coins with the inscription Medusa / Aegis. And not many of these types have the inscription so well preserved. And then look at the "q" mintmark under the Pegasus - also completely preserved. And "A" and "P" are also undestroyed. That is rare for me - to find a coin in these undestroyed details. It is always / often somehow a definition.

As the purchaser of the coin, I'm fine with the attribution and with the proposed rarity. 

The type itself is Ravel 1009, which is usually described as an "aegis", and AFAICT it's one of the more common Pegasi. However, I do agree that the following are rare:

• The dies are fantastic. The level of detail on the "tentacles" is impressive and IMHO this is the best obverse die Ravel 1009 known. I found only one other coin with the same obverse (Athena) die.
• The level of detail is impressive. Even across Pegasi this is quite rare.

[Prieure de Sion]

2 hours ago, Kaleun96 said:

Wouldn't it be better to just be upfront with why you're calling it rare? Auction houses do this when they say "rare in this condition". Though I'm not sure that would be accurate in this case either.

I usually do this too - I usually write why I think it's rare myself. The buyer can then decide whether they agree with me or not. I don't want to advertise too much now, hence one coin sold. But I do ask for permission for a example. 

https://www.vcoins.com/en/stores/yoshua_three_coins/315/product/video_incl__rr__heinrich_der_lowe_henry_the_lion_herzogtum_braunschweigluneburg_berger_588_date_11421180_ad_bi_silver_brakteat_lion/2041873/Default.aspx

A "Double-R" for me because: "Very rare Brakteat type, i find only 2 (!) another examples at acsearch last 20 years - extremely fine condition, well centered, small edge break - stunning patina colour shade - fantastic stylistic presentation with the lion - an unusual depiction of other bracteates, a very fine detailed representation - not only an extremely rare type, also extremely rare to get in this condition"

Rare to find, rare in this condition.

But you can say - no - not a lovely rare condition for myself etc...

2 hours ago, Kaleun96 said:

Wouldn't it be better to just be upfront with why you're calling it rare? Auction houses do this when they say "rare in this condition". Though I'm not sure that would be accurate in this case either.

But sometimes I write a lot of text and forget to include some things. Sometimes my head is full of ideas.

 

1 hour ago, kirispupis said:

As the purchaser of the coin, I'm fine with the attribution and with the proposed rarity. 

The texts are only important when it comes to the basic data (size, weight, any errors, etc.) - the rest is mostly just advertising anyway. You must like the coin very much (condition, presentation, quality, price etc.) - then everything is fine and correct. No matter where you buy.

[Phil Anthos]

I think condition is a function of grade, not necessarily rarity. If I were to buy a coin based on its alleged 'rarity', and then show it to a friend who says "Oh yeah, I've got one just like it only not as nice", then for me the rarity bubble has just burst.

~ Peter