Choices

[Lucas H]

I know this ultimately boils down to personal preference, but I wanted to know what others thought about this topic.  I want a coin of a certain emperor to add to my collection.  I've looked and looked at the Forum's options on this emperor.  There are two coins that appeal to me and within my budget.  One is a worn example of a rare coin, and the other is a nicer example of a common coin.  The worn, but rare, coin has legible legends, and the devices are all there- it is far from a slug.  The nicer coin, is in much better shape, but it's a common issue.  They both appeal to me.  Again, I know this boils down to personal preference, but I'm on the fence.  How do you experienced collectors evaluate a decision like this?

[benito]

I took that decision when I started collecting. Quality first. And I convinced my son when he began collecting ancients ( with the idea of filling as many trays as possible) to follow.

[Lucas H]

Quality first

No doubt from looking at your gallery  .  What do others have to say?

[David Atherton]

If you're not specializing in this particular emperor why not go for quality? Rarity would have more appeal if you are collecting many different types of the same emperor and were looking to fill a 'hole'.

[Andrew McCabe]

I took that decision when I started collecting. Quality first.And I convinced my son when he
began collecting ancients ( with the idea of filling as many trays as possible) to follow.

I took the opposite decision. Rarity first.

I now have very many high quality, rare coins. How come? Once I bought an affordable rarity, there was no longer any rush to buy a moderately better quality specimen. Then when a bargain in great condition arrived, I bought that and sold the duplicate. Whilst I have still many extremely rare placeholders, my collection now also contains many lovely extremely rare coins. I now have 575 coins in my collection that rate Rarity-6 or rarer. Some are rather nice, for example:

(very rare denarius of Sextus Pompey and Marcus Minatius, bought on eBay)


(extremely rare bronze of Servilia with a Lion above the prow, part of a swap exchange)


(very rare denarius of Brutus, bought at auction on the spur of the moment when I realised no-one planned to bid on it)


Some still look like the following coin however:

(extremely rare Bes, or two-thirds of an As, with Liber on obverse and denomination mark Soo for 8 unciae)


Horses for courses.

The standard advice for beginners is to focus relentlessly on quality. I didn't and still have a superb collection composed of eBay misfits, unexpected auction bargains and wrongly described coins. Because I collect rare coins, this has given me a tremendous trading currency for swaps with other comprehensive collectors. Some of my best coins come from multiple-for-one swaps with others who really really wanted a particular coins I had.

I don't follow the recommended path but it has been a lot of fun to go my own way. However whilst you are making up your mind what path to make for yourself, the received wisdom is to go always for the better quality coin. Rare coins can always wait til later, because when you have a lot more experience it becomes easier to notice under-priced rarities. Whereas there are no under-priced nice condition common coins, so for nice condition coins the beginner collector is playing in the same field as the more experienced collectors.

[commodus]

Ultimately it is about which coin appeals to you most, but as a rule I must agree with Andrew, though I respect the others' positions. Generally, I prefer coins with a bit of circulation wear over pristine ones anyway. Perhaps it is the historian in me, but the coins that have been used have a greater appeal because of the very fact that they actually have been used. Some collect ancient coins for their artistry, but for me thay are a link to the people of the past and there is no better link than one which shows use. That's not to say I want beaten up slugs, either, though a clearly identifiable near-slug of a great rarity is still (for me) preferable to a pristine example of a common coin. In the end it is each to his own preference, but given the choice I'll almost invariably go for the scarcer type, though if the coin is a poorer example I may upgrade at a later date should a nicer example of the same coin come along for a good price.
Again, it is a matter of personal preference and there is no "right" answer.

[mcbyrne21]

I don't personally get too excited about rarity for a couple of reasons.  Rare or not, I will probably own only one examply anyway. Also, because my collection is small (less than 100 coins) and my budget is extremely limited (maybe $100/month), I would rather have several "common" coins than one extremely rare coin.  Otherwise my collection would be really small and I would not spend as much time with and enjoy it as much. Finally, the people I show and discuss my coins with are not collectors and therefore don't get excited about rarity.  For them, it's the idea of holding a coin that was minted 2000 yrs ago w/ Augustus' picture on it that is interesting, not that it is R3 but might be R4 (I think at that point their eyes usually gloss over).

To me, rarity is more important if you are buying/selling/trading coins like a dealer or if you are involved enough in the field to be doing some serious research (like many members here do).

So I guess my point would be (and as others have said) it depends on what you are collecting for.       

[commodus]

I agree about not collecting specifically for rarity. However, if it comes down to a choice between a high grade common coin and lower grade rare coin for about the same money, I will almost always find it preferable to choose the rarer coin.

[Oscarius]

In my case , I am very new to collecting ancients and don't feel I know enough to acquire rare specimens.

So for now, while I'm learning, I opted to put together a set of rather common, late roman commemoratives, by mint and officinae  in very nice condition.

I'm nearly half way complete and have spent only about what one moderately rare coin might cost, and actually have a couple that are rather scarce.

They're pretty much all the same coin but when you see them all together with the slight differences in style and color they are quite lovely.

But I really like Andrew McCabe's collecting approach and will keep it mind for the future.





 

[gavignano]

Rare coins can always wait til later, because when you have a lot more experience it becomes easier to notice under-priced rarities. Whereas there are no under-priced nice condition common coins, so for nice condition coins the beginner collector is playing in the same field as the more experienced collectors.

Good advice IMO.
Lucas- however, if you decide to specialize in a series, going for the rarest coin in the set, as soon as you see it, if its a good price, and you know what to look for, is often a great move. It may take years, and I mean years, before you see another example you like at a price you like.
Or the price can rise, sometimes dramatically.
About 2 years ago I saw the key to my campgate mint set for Constantine I, Ticinum mint. When I saw the price (about USD 48), I attempted not to pass out, (I have seen 2 other examples for sale in the last 5 years, at 150 and 200), bought it, and never have regretted it for a moment.

[casata137ec]

Lay-a-way. If you see a nice coin out of your price range here, that is the only way to go...rare or not. I unfortunatly decided a couple years ago to go with provincials and then greek bronze coinage as my main focus, and while there are extremely common provincials (see: niceaen standards) there are no "cheap" greek bronze...even cruddy coins are pricey compared to a lot of Roman Imperials. Even worse, I really like Sicilian and Magna Grecian coinage...needless to say I have to pick and choose what I buy and bide my time until somthing in my price range comes along.


My advice: buy the common coin outright and put the rare one on lay-a-way...or vice versa! Remember rare coins are RARE! lol Just because it is in the catalog now, it may be years (or never) before you see another.

Chris

[Andrew McCabe]

Rare coins can always wait til later, because when you have a lot more experience it becomes easier to notice under-priced rarities. Whereas there are no under-priced nice condition common coins, so for nice condition coins the beginner collector is playing in the same field as the more experienced collectors.

Good advice IMO.
Lucas- however, if you decide to specialize in a series, going for the rarest coin in the set, as soon as you see it, if its a good price, and you know what to look for, is often a great move. It may take years, and I mean years, before you see another example you like at a price you like.
Or the price can rise, sometimes dramatically.
About 2 years ago I saw the key to my campgate mint set for Constantine I, Ticinum mint. When I saw the price (about USD 48), I attempted not to pass out, (I have seen 2 other examples for sale in the last 5 years, at 150 and 200), bought it, and never have regretted it for a moment.

The dilemma when you are early in your collecting career is that you don't really know what rarities are important. Rare varieties which are the random choice of good or bad engravers on a Monday morning are completely unimportant. Spelling mistakes, omission or inclusion of dots, forgetting to leave out some symbol etc. There is almost no value placed on such "mint errors" in ancient numismatics.

Anecdote: Before I focussed on Roman Republican coins I recall buying a debased Argenteus of Licinius for GBP145 which had a spear rather than a sceptre over the emperor's shoulder. The type was not listed in RIC. At the time, the price was about twice what I would have paid for the type which was listed in RIC (some 25 years ago). It was not a good buy, because I never went on to collect such coins comprehensively, and when I went to sell it the reaction was "there are plenty of such random varieties in the late Roman period, who cares?". Perhaps someone does care but as I hadn't gone comprehensive, I didn't have the knowledge to say whether the variety was important or not.

Rarities which are a result of changes in government monetary policy, military upsets, political developments, changes in propaganda themes, such as completely different types, short-lived siege issues, a rare mint for an otherwise common issue, or rare magistrates or emperors on coins are tremendously important because they have a bearing on world history.

So if you start by collecting rarities, it is possible that you collect technically rare but essentially unimportant coins. Thus if you do decide to go for "comprehensive" collecting (which implies you will need to get the rare coins at some point) then I would encourage you to spend much more on books than coins at the early stage, and read read read relentlessly to discover what is important. Printed books which you have to buy still contain a great deal more information than any web-sources.

In the end, every early collector will make mistakes (mint errors!) in the early years. This is why the general advice to focus on quality holds good, because you can fix your mistakes by selling the nice coins you bought. I didn't follow that path, but the general advice to focus first on quality still holds good.

[benito]

"So if you start by collecting rarities, it is possible that you collect technically rare but essentially unimportant coins. Thus if you do decide to go for "comprehensive" collecting (which implies you will need to get the rare coins at some point).."
What is comprehensive collecting ?

[Andrew McCabe]

"So if you start by collecting rarities, it is possible that you collect technically rare but essentially unimportant coins. Thus if you do decide to go for "comprehensive" collecting (which implies you will need to get the rare coins at some point).."
What is comprehensive collecting ?

"Comprehensive Collecting" means (to me) collecting every single type and variety in a given series. The aim is to own 100% of the catalogued types, as well as  as many unlisted types as once can find.

That's what I have been doing with Roman Republican gold, silver, aes grave and bronze. There are large portions of Crawford's book where I have 90% or more of the listed types in my collection. In bronzes that has been hard work, but I have very many bronze series where I own the As, Semis, Triens, Quadrans and Sextans. It is the ancient equivalent of collecting coins by date and mintmark.

I am not saying it is a good thing. But it is what I've been doing over the last 20 years. It means compromising on quality because when you are looking to buy EVERY type then you can't always afford to get it in the best quality.

[benito]

"So if you start by collecting rarities, it is possible that you collect technically rare but essentially unimportant coins. Thus if you do decide to go for "comprehensive" collecting (which implies you will need to get the rare coins at some point).."
What is comprehensive collecting ?

"Comprehensive Collecting" means (to me) collecting every single type and variety in a given series. The aim is to own 100% of the catalogued types, as well as  as many unlisted types as once can find.

That's what I have been doing with Roman Republican gold, silver, aes grave and bronze. There are large portions of Crawford's book where I have 90% or more of the listed types in my collection. In bronzes that has been hard work, but I have very many bronze series where I own the As, Semis, Triens, Quadrans and Sextans. It is the ancient equivalent of collecting coins by date and mintmark.

Thanks Andrew. Ergo I am not a comprehensive collector . No problem then in going for quality rather than rarity. I like rarities though. And  no better music to my ears than " rare in this condition "

[areich]

It does not make much sense if it is a rare variant, if you are not a speciality collector. If it is a truly rare coin, it is a matter of personal preference. If I wanted to collect one coin of each emperor I could get, I would go for quality.

[Andrew McCabe]

It does not make much sense if it is a rare variant, if you are not a speciality collector. If it is a truly rare coin, it is a matter of personal preference. If I wanted to collect one coin of each emperor I could get, I would go for quality.

No amount of conversation will ever persuade collectors of quality of the point of specialist collections. My field of specialism - getting an example of every coin type struck - must seem so pointless, just as for a specialist collector such as myself, the randomness of collecting pretty coins seems equally difficult to understand. So I would not try to logically explain why I sometimes collect even variants. But some variants are terrific, so I can better explain with a couple of examples I like.

Scribonia variant with Anvil in place of the normal hammer or tongs. What makes this very rare variant special is of course that Anvil, Hammer and Tongs form a lovely set. It's also an intriguing decision to strike so few anvils...



SAFRA priapic dolphin variety. This is obviously an engraver having a silly moment variant. But I like the idea that silly moments could happen!





I guess at this level, even the most serious collector assesses variants as "interesting" or "not interesting" and collects accordingly.

[Lucas H]

I like this discussion, and it has given me much to think about.  If I was trying to do a comprehensive collection, I think I would try to get nice examples of common coins, and any example of rare coins.  With my choice, which coin to get for one particular emperor, I'm still not sure where I fall.  When I first started collecting, I was getting several lower quality coins instead of one nicer one.  Now that I have held, viewed, and collected a number of coins, I really prefer the sharp, nicer coins with legible legends, and I've gone back on at least two coins to get nicer examples than I started with.  But those are all relatively common, and I don't have many, if any, rarities in my 12 Caesar collection.  I'm still debating my own feelings on this choice.  

[Lucas H]

read read read relentlessly to discover what is important. Printed books which you have to buy still contain a great deal more information than any web-sources.

Mr. McCabe,

What type of reading are you recommending.  I have interest in the 12 Caesars, and I've read and reread the text portions of RIC I and RIC II.  I've read some general history books that have nothing to do with coins.  I've read everything I can find online.  What other reading recommendations do you have?  

[benito]

It does not make much sense if it is a rare variant, if you are not a speciality collector. If it is a truly rare coin, it is a matter of personal preference. If I wanted to collect one coin of each emperor I could get, I would go for quality.

Areich 
Thats my favorite TR P ( though I prefered the crowned puber to the present simpson).
When I started collecting I took a decision.
1. Roman. Some deviations here after many years. 1 Philip II small bronze. A Vologases drachm.
2. From the bigatus (c. 216-215 BC) to Eugenius. One coin from each gens for Republican ( sorry Andrew,no bronze. But I do accept donations that will not be deaccesioned). One coin from each emperor for Imperial.
3. Best quality budget would admit and never hurry.
That was the base of the benito I collection ( almost finished with the exception of 1 emperor,two usurpers and 10 gens).
As benito I did not take too long , I started benito II ( my son was incorporated 6-7 years ago.)
Same as #1 but
a. Incorporating wifes and family of Emperors.
b. Four coins per Emperor. Bronze,silver,silver provincial,bronze provincial. Some leeway admited.
c. Best possible quality,portraits are important ,never hurry.
It has served me well.

[commodus]

From what I have seen of it in your postings here, you have a collection of very beautiful coins, Benito. I certainly cannot fault your collecting strategy, though mine is different.

[areich]

A specialty collection or a quality collection are both fine in my opinion. However, I have seen collectors paying for rare variants that would only be interesting to a specialty collector when they were not specialty collectors and calling those coins rare coins instead of rare variants of common coins. That is their right of course but when it is time to sell those coins again, they will be in for an unpleasant surprise.

[Andrew McCabe]

read read read relentlessly to discover what is important. Printed books which you have to buy still contain a great deal more information than any web-sources.

Mr. McCabe,

What type of reading are you recommending.  I have interest in the 12 Caesars, and I've read and reread the text portions of RIC I and RIC II.  I've read some general history books that have nothing to do with coins.  I've read everything I can find online.  What other reading recommendations do you have?  

Lucas

My website suggests a comprehensive reading list: although aimed at the Roman Republic, many of the books are general works, and many deal with Julius Caesar to Augustus, the first two of the twelve.

Comprehensive catalogues of Roman Republican coinage:
http://andrewmccabe.ancients.info/Catalogues.html#jump

Speciality books covering all of Roman Republican coinage:
http://andrewmccabe.ancients.info/History.html#jump

Glossy picture books and introductory handbooks:
http://andrewmccabe.ancients.info/Introductory.html#jump

Books relating to coins and history, and also important antiquarian books:
http://andrewmccabe.ancients.info/Coins_History.html#jump

Museum and auction catalogues, preceded by a discussion on rarity:
http://andrewmccabe.ancients.info/Auctions.html#jump

Books about coin hoards and about numismatic archaeology:
http://andrewmccabe.ancients.info/Hoards.html#jump

preceded by a number of specialist articles on coin hoards:
http://andrewmccabe.ancients.info/Hoards.html#Mesagne

Books about minting techniques, and about coins as a form of money:
http://andrewmccabe.ancients.info/Mints.html#jump

Books and articles about plated coins:
http://andrewmccabe.ancients.info/Plated.html#jump

Specialist books and articles about specific periods in Roman numismatics:
http://andrewmccabe.ancients.info/Studies.html#jump

Money before coinage:
http://andrewmccabe.ancients.info/EarlyMoney.html#EarlyMoney

Surveys of numismatic research, including the most recent 2002-2007 survey:
http://andrewmccabe.ancients.info/Research.html#Survey

Surveys of numismatic research 1966-1977 (relevance of these is that they were written by the same person, Michael Crawford, who wrote the comprehensive catalogue):
http://andrewmccabe.ancients.info/MHCSurveys.html

Bibliographies, books about books, numismatic history, and sources for numismatic literature:
http://andrewmccabe.ancients.info/Books.html#jump

Books about Roman Provincial and imitative coins:
http://andrewmccabe.ancients.info/Provincial.html

If you read all the books referenced above (I have!!!) it should be a good start to deepening your numismatic knowledge.

[Andrew McCabe]

It does not make much sense if it is a rare variant, if you are not a speciality collector. If it is a truly rare coin, it is a matter of personal preference. If I wanted to collect one coin of each emperor I could get, I would go for quality.

....
2. From the bigatus (c. 216-215 BC) to Eugenius. One coin from each gens for Republican ( sorry Andrew,no bronze. But I do accept donations that will not be deaccesioned). One coin from each emperor for Imperial.
.....

Some of the Republican gens are represented only in bronze!

The next logical step for one coin from each "gens" would be (to me more logical) one coin from each "mint magistrate". Collecting a single coin for a gens is as logical as representing the Julio-Claudian emperors by one coin. It's not SO tough to get one per mint magistrate although some magistrates are extremely rare.

[Andrew McCabe]

.... However, I have seen collectors paying for rare variants that would only be interesting to a specialty collector when they were not specialty collectors and calling those coins rare coins instead of rare variants of common coins. That is their right of course but when it is time to sell those coins again, they will be in for an unpleasant surprise.

Indeed. I agree.