Choosing Ancient Coins

"Buy the best coin you can afford." This pearl of numismatic wisdom is certainly true; true at least if your goal in collecting is capital appreciation. Unfortunately it oversimplifies the matter a bit for those of us who consider our coins in a different light than our stock portfolios. This page will illustrate some of the everyday considerations in choosing the right coin for our collection. I like to think of buying coins like buying shoes: you need to find a good fit that looks good to you and fits your needs and lifestyle. Michael Jordan and I don't wear the same shoes. His are bigger, dressier and look good with a $1000 suit. Mine are cheaper, smaller, more casual and go with jeans. Neither of us would be comfortable if we swapped footwear. So it is with coins. I could sell my entire collection and buy one really nice dekadrachm that would probably be worth more in a decade than it is today or I could keep the accumulated mass of junk that will be difficult for my daughter to sell when I pass on. Regular visitors of these pages know the kid is in for a rough time in the marketplace someday. I hope she is learning to use eBay! ;)

This page, again, will follow a format of query by example. Pairs of coins will be contrasted to point out some of the things we, as collectors, consider in deciding what to buy and what to leave behind. In some cases you might enjoy playing the game by deciding which of the pair you would prefer to add to your collection. In some cases the choice is more obvious. Very few ancient coins are perfect in every way. 99% of the coins I have seen offered as FDC (fleur de coin) were actually faulted VF being hyped by a seller in dreamland. Beginners often buy coins for no reason other than they are coins and take a while to learn how to select items that they really enjoy. A friend new to collecting just told me that of the first 65 coins purchased, 60 were pleasing and 5 were mistakes. Of the first 65 coins I bought, I enjoy owning 5 and have become bored with 60. The difference is that I started collecting in 1963 while my friend started in 1999. Perhaps this page will help some beginners along the road to discovery of which coins to buy and, more importantly, why.

This page is a supplement to my Grading Pages. Of the pages on my site that give me pleasure, I am most happy with the Grading Pages. I hope each visitor of this page will take the time to look over all of the materials on that series of pages and understand the complexity of the subject of grading ancient coins. Selecting coins is only partially a matter of grade. We will also consider style and interest of the type. Surely it would be nice if all our coins were in perfect condition and shouted some story from ancient history (note I do not own and will never own an EID MAR denarius of Brutus). The fact remains that we each must pick and choose according to our personal desires and collecting style. Some will choose to buy nothing; others will corner the market on slugs. The one that enjoys the collection process is the winner.

Syracuse, Sicily - Silver tetradrachm 470's BC

Syracuse, Sicily - Silver tetradrachm 420's BC - Boehringer 703 (V345/R481)

Wear is a very important consideration when grading and selecting a coin but it is not the only consideration. Our first two coins are both silver tetradrachms of Syracuse, Sicily, from the 5th century BC. On the left is one in a more stylized, Archaic style while the one on the right is finer and Classical. This general type was issued for a century and has been catalogued (nearly) completely by dies. We could get into a huge argument on which of the dies is the best work but I have always considered the face of Arathusa on R481 particularly well executed. The right coin shows that face but that is about all. By the time this coin was struck, the die was badly broken and missing a chunk behind the head. Perhaps to lessen the strain, the coin was struck very unevenly resulting in a great deal of flatness in the hair. The reverse on these coins is rarely fully on the flan and this example loses the heads of the horses. General overall roughness and harsh cleaning add to the spoiling of what could have been a masterpiece of art. Compare this to a much nicer die duplicate in the catalog for Classical Numismatic Group auction 50 lot 506.

The older coin on the left is much more pleasing in many ways but it is actually the more worn of the two. It is evenly struck and reasonably centered (not perfect, for certain!) and shows an amount of smooth, even wear. The coin on the right shows much less wear but lost more detail to the poor strike. Which coin is 'Fine'; which is 'Very Fine'. Your answer may depend on whether you are trying to buy or trying to sell such a coin. Both of these coins sold for about the same price. Which is the more desirable of the pair? I like the ugly one on the right with that charming face and a good representation of that soon to be fatal die break. I enjoy wondering how many more coins were struck before this grand die was destroyed completely. I like the Archaic style of the coin on the coin on the left and its pleasant balance. I like its clear legends and dolphins. Most collectors would prefer to own one coin that cost as much as the sum of this pair. I'll keep them both and dodge a hard decision.

Aspendos, Pamphylia - Silver stater 4th century BC - c/m bull of Ba'al

Selge, Pisidia - Silver stater 3rd century BC

Those who collect by style may disagree on which of the two Syracuse coins show the best art since both Archaic and Classical have their proponents. Two coins of neighboring cities of Asia Minor demonstrate the post classical decline in Greek art of the following centuries. On the left is a stater of Aspendos showing good classical style as produced (by both cities) in the 4th century. On the right is a coin of Selge produced a century later showing considerable decline in art. It is, to be kind, a bit crude. Few would prefer the later coin. On the other hand the coin on the right is struck on a wide flan showing all detail including the full beaded border. The earlier coin is off center enough to lose the outstretched arm of the slinger. Balancing the fault of the centering is the pleasing strike of the countermark placed fortunately to cause minimal damage to the design. Stamp collectors value centering and 'boardwalk margins' so the coin collectors who once collected stamps might place special value on this wide flanned coin. Most of us, however, would prefer the beautiful style and cute countermark of the coin on the left.

Akragas, Sicily - Bronze AE21 - 287-279 BC Apollo / Two eagles devouring hare

Akragas, Sicily - Bronze AE18 - 338-287 BC Zeus / Eagle devouring hare

Again, two similar coins each have some good points and bad. Both are later bronzes showing a head of a god on the obverse and a 'city badge' reverse. Coins of Akragas frequently show hares being devoured by eagles. The larger coin here is still a bit small of a flan to contain the entire scene losing both part of the hare and part of the front eagle. Still it is a pleasantly smooth brown and generally attractive coin. The smaller has a lovely green patina and very little wear. The eagle is well detailed. Unfortunately, Zeus is marred by heavy scrapes that are patinated indicating that they occurred in antiquity. I believe these are remnants of heavy flan adjustment marks that are part of the manufacturing process. Most collectors avoid damaged coins. Some are more forgiving of damage from antiquity than of coins injured in burial and recovery. A few even find added interest in coins that reveal details of the manufacturing process. Again, some collectors would consider the severe flan crack a major flaw even though it does not mar the types. I have a friend who values round coins with smooth edges and would never buy a ragged or cracked coin. I see cracks as normal. So, which is better? Do you prefer wear with some detail off flan or surface damage and cracked flan with a pretty patina and good detail? The head of Apollo is particularly pleasing and the execution of the reverse scene is finer on the left coin so I would prefer it to the other even if there were no surface damage to Zeus. Do you agree? ...or would you prefer to have neither coin in your collection? Certainly I would like to find a die duplicate of the left coin that has none of the flaws shown here. Perhaps someday I will.

Epirote Republic - Silver drachm 238 - 168 BC

Parthia - Volagases IV - Silver tetradrachm Nov. 152 AD

Two rather different coins illustrate the matter of centering. Both are slightly off center; perhaps 15%. The coin on the left is missing the space in front of the Zeus head ruining the balance of the coin. The right coin is off center favoring the front of the king's portrait losing nothing important behind the bust. While both may be off by a similar amount, the two are far from equal. I have a friend who collects Athenian coins who will not have a coin off center crowding the smile of Athena but the other way is no problem. We must all have our standards and preferences. To me, a pleasing balance of the design is very desirable so the Epirote drachm here is not much of a specimen even though it is reasonably attractive otherwise. The Parthian is more attractive to me than if it were perfectly centered. Moreover, the reverse favors the legend of the bottom losing most of the two lines at the top. Few of these coins will show all the lines of this complex legend. Favoring the bottom will allow reading the month date (APELAIOY = November) much more easily than the opposite situation. This was a truly fortunate coin. Centering is very much a matter for individual opinion. Some collectors greatly value coins that show full legends and design. Others will accept the loss of peripheral items as long as there is a nice portrait on the flan. We each must decide where we stand on this matter and buy coins that strike us as appropriate.

Kroton, Bruttium - Silver stater Middle 5th century BC

Kroton, Bruttium - Silver stater Late 5th century BC

Two similar silver staters from the same town offer a choice of type. On the left we see the characteristic Southern Italian Archaic use of a reverse die that is the negative (incuse) of the obverse design (minus decorations and legend). This is not a mint error but a numismatic fad that was observed by several cities in the region. A few years later the same city issued coins with the same city symbol, the tripod, but with a very pleasant type of an eagle perched on the head of a deer. These are two completely different coins. A general collection of Greek coins certainly needs one of the Italian Incuse issues but how could you reject the charm of the later coin? Could you hold having two die designs against the coin? I couldn't. I look forward to the day when US coins change from still heraldic eagles to active birds eating rabbits or deer. I guess the Greeks lacked TV so they had to put their gratuitous violence on the coins. ;) I could never be a collector seeking one type from each city or issuing authority. Choosing between coins like these two would just be too difficult.

Larissa, Thessaly - Silver drachm 4th Century BC

Larissa, Thessaly - Silver obol 4th Century BC

Two coins from Larissa contrast demand for coins by size and rarity. On the left we have a very common type in the most common denomination, the drachm. On the right is one sixth of the drachm of very similar design. (In truth, this drachm is "ready to roll" while the obol is simply "grazing" but for our purposes here we will consider them the same.) The smaller denomination is very rare but, when available, sells for less than the common larger size. This is pretty much the situation for most ancient coins: big coins are more popular than small coins. Rarity means very little or nothing when it comes to price; demand means everything. Most people like big coins so there is more demand for one of the million drachms in dealer's trays than for one of the handful of fractions. I like the little fellows and I hope most of you will leave them for me. If you have good enough eyesight to appreciate these coins you may visit my page on Tiny Treasures. Sales and museum catalogs are full of large coins of great beauty but collectors interested in small denominations will need to search harder to find literature acknowledging the existence of these coins. Remember: rarity means nothing; demand everything. Demand what YOU want and patronize dealers that provide it.

Julia Domna - Bronze sestertius - 193-196 AD

Julia Domna - Bronze sestertius - 193-196 AD

Two coins of the same type by the same empress illustrates that choosing is just as necessary for collectors of Roman coins as it is for fans of the Greeks. These two coins are identical to many people's eyes but very different to mine. The style of the dies is quite different. I find both dies of the right coin far superior 'art' compared to the more clumsy efforts on the left. The left coin has a decent green patina (a plus) with some heavy scratches (minuses) and scrapes down to the brass (big minuses!!!). The right coin is worn rather smoothly (+) to the left coin's roughness (-) with toning (+) and deposits scattered in the fields (-). The right coin is lightly struck (--) and worn (---) with weak obverse (--) and no reverse legend (----) while the left coin has full (++) bold (+++) legends, a rather unusual situation for Severan sestertii. Which coin is the preferred choice? The current owner of these paid the exact same price for each of them and would love to find the coin from the right dies, boldly struck and patinated like the left but smooth and unscratched. Such a coin would sell for 5 times either of these.

Nero - 54-68 AD Orichalcum sestertius & two copper asses

Nero - 54-68 AD Orichalcum dupondius

Condition bears greatly on demand and price of coins. The three coins to the left of the yellow line are roughly 'fine' with surface problems here and there. The dupondius on the right is higher grade, perhaps VF, even though the radiate crown is slightly broken at the highest point due to a less than bold strike. Perhaps AVF/VF would be fair? It also has some scattered surface condition problems but, all in all, a decent portrait of an ugly Nero. The shocking part is that this small upgrade in condition makes the right coin sell for about the same price as the TOTAL of the left trio. Here is where your choice come to play. Which would you buy, the one or the three? Would you like an unworn Nero with full bold legends and smooth even surfaces? This would be 5 times the price of all four of these coins.

Buy the best coin you can afford but buy enough coins that you enjoy your hobby. In an average year I prefer to buy a number of rather ordinary specimens rather than spending all my allowance on one super toy. From a 'return of capital investment' standpoint, this is probably not the wise move. From a 'have fun with your hobby' standpoint, it is my only answer. You need to decide which path fits you as a collector. Are you a student, an accumulator or an investor? There is nothing wrong with each path or any of a thousand other intermediate methods of collecting as long as you realize what you are doing from the beginning. Are you spending 'mad' money on coins that you might have used for a dinner and movie (good plan) or are you investing money you will need for the kids' college or your own subsistence in retirement (very risky)? Find answers to what you want to get out of collecting and demand service from dealers to provide you with the coins that fit you best. Choose each coin carefully so you will have fewer surprises when it comes time to sell them (or leave them to the kids and let them worry what to do with all that old junk).

Did you notice that this page mentioned only a few of the condition factors from my Grading Pages and barely touched on which types are interesting and which are boring? The informed collector must address all of these features to evaluate each coin properly. Little good would be accomplished if I rehashed each and every one of these factors over and over but the point can not me made too often. Buy coins you like and find rewarding. Hopefully you will even know what it is about a coin that made you like it (at least part of the time). If you do not understand why one coin costs more than another, do the research necessary to figure it out. (It might be that the seller is in error; it might mean that YOU are!) Follow these simple rules and every coin you buy will be a 'bargain'.

Back to Main page

(c) 1999 Doug Smith