FORVM`s Classical Numismatics Discussion Board
Numismatic and History Discussion Forums => Classical Numismatics Books and References Discussion Forum => Topic started by: Carausius on June 18, 2015, 12:21:07 am
-
Since purchasing John Spring's Ancient Coin Auction Catalogues, I’ve become borderline obsessive about buying old auction catalogues for my library, both for provenance research and general research. In just the past year, I’ve acquired the following catalogues. I’m focusing on the Roman Republic, but I’ve accessioned a few Imperial and Roman-Egypt catalogues along the way. I’m pleased with the progress I’m making, but there are still some large, expensive holes (i.e. Martini, Prowe) and some stubborn, likely inexpensive sales that I just can't find (i.e. Myers 7, various Santamaria sales). In a few cases, I’ve settled for reprints where I doubt I can source an affordable original. Over time, I hope to rebind many of the currently softbound catalogues, but I’m already running-out of shelf space and hard bindings will absorb even more real estate.
1. Collezzione Haeberlin. A high quality, limited production reprint of the 1933 Cahn/Hess auction catalogue on good quality paper, with decent plates and handsomely bound in quarter-leather. Expensive, but a fraction of the cost of an original.
2. CNG 43 and 45 and Triton I (Goodman Collection). The Triton I is hardbound.
3. Glendining – October 1975 (Dr. H.F. Harwood Part I).
4. Leu/MuM 21/10/66 (Niggeler vol 2). Nice quality RR and provincial coins. Many of the Republican coins have provenance to earlier collections. In addition to the fine Republican coins, this catalogue contains some stunning drachms of Roman Alexandria with earlier provenance.
5. Leu 17 (Nicolas Collection). I had this catalogue hardbound in black “processed” leather. “Processed” leather is the leather equivalent of plywood.
6. Lanz 88 (Leo Benz Collection). Also hardbound in black processed leather.
7. Leo Hamburger No. 95 - May 1932. Recently purchased, but not yet received.
8. Munzhandlung Basel 6 – March 1936. I actually bought this catalogue for the Roman Egypt coins, but it also contains nearly 3 full plates of Republican.
9. Munzen und Medaillen 17 - December 1957.
10. MuM 19 - June 1959.
11. MuM 38 – December 1968 (Coll. Voirol). A gift from a friend. Lovely coins, many with provenance to earlier, important collections like Haeberlin.
12. MuM 43 – November 1970.
13. MuM 47 – November 1972. Huge offering of Aes Grave.
14. MuM 52 – June 1975. I recently acquired a coin with provenance to this sale.
15. Naville Ars Classica VIII – 1924 (Coll. Bement). An impressive sale of Roman coins, strong in both Republican and Imperial. Available for free online, but I’m old school and prefer to work with hardcopies.
16. Naville Ars Classica XV – 1930 (W.H. Woodward). A Father’s Day 2015 present, to be received next Sunday!
17. Dr. Buso Peus Auction 322 – 1988. Auction sale dedicated to a collection of about 650 Republican coins. Coins are mostly gVF, with a few better, but the collection is very broad. Per my recent thread on Forum, clues in this catalogue and in Banti’s Corpus Nummorum Romanorum lead me to suspect that this collection may have been Alberto Banti’s personal collection of Roman Republican coins.
18. Vecchi 3 – September 1996, A Collection of Roman Republican Struck Bronze Coinage. Huge selection of struck bronzes. I often refer to this catalogue when I need to see an example of any given struck bronze type.
19. Vecchi 9 – December 1997, Collection of the Coinage of Augustus.
20. NAC 10 – April 1997. Large selection of Aes Grave.
21. Russo, et al. The RBW Collection. Technically not an auction catalogue, but all the RBW auction sales combined into one, easy-to-use, chronologically-arranged, sylloge-format volume. A tremendous resource that I often use.
22. Rodolfo Ratto – January 1924 (Bonazzi). I ordered this recently, but have not yet received it.
23. Rodolfo Ratto 1927 Fixed Price List of Roman coins from the Republic through Augustus. Bound in modern half-cloth with mottled boards. I didn’t know it was hard-bound when I bought it, so I was pleasantly surprised upon receipt.
24. Rodolfo Ratto - 8/2/1928 (Morcom/Hands/Wertheim). An impressive sale with separate loose plates in a folder at the back of the catalogue. When I eventually re-bind this catalogue, I’m not sure whether to bind-in the plates or keep them separate.
25. Hans Schulman, Thomas Ollive Mabbott Collection, Parts I and II.
26. Sotheby’s, Duke of Northumberland Collection – ex RBW’s library, with his notes and bid sheet!
27. Sotheby’s, Eton College – ex RBW’s library, with his notes and bid sheet!
28. Stack’s – 1938 (Faelten Collection). Nicely hardbound in full cloth. The plates are mediocre; but Barry Murphy gave me a very fair deal, so I took a chance.
29. Stack’s – May 1978 (Knobloch I Republic). A recent purchase. I acquired the Knobloch II Imperial catalogue new in 1980 and I bought my first auction coin from that sale!
30. Frank Sternberg, Auction VII (November 1977). I recently acquired a coin with provenance to this sale.
31. Sydenham Collection. A mediocre-quality, Attic reprint of the 1928 original. At $30, it was better than nothing…barely.
EDIT: I forgot, I just bought two more old catalogues today from FORVM! CNG XII (Sep 1990), which includes part of Kerry Wetterstrom's collection of Roman Egypt bronzes, and Frank Sternberg 30 (1973). I need a bigger house...
-
I've 26 out of this list of 31. Our interests coincide! (as if I didn't know). And many more beside too. I actually declined a copy of the Faelten collection. Possibly the worst plates ever.
-
I actually declined a copy of the Faelten collection. Possibly the worst plates ever.
For some of the plates, that's likely true. Unfortunately, the worst of the plates happen to coincide with my collecting interests. The Ptolemaic silver and Byzantine plates aren't quite as bad. In any event, I bought it with eyes open - I was willing to take a chance because it was already hardbound and fairly priced.
-
Funny, Carausius, it seems that you and I caught catalogue fever at about the same time (no doubt making some acquisitions that are in auctions expensive for both of us!).
Since 2014, I've acquired all of Spring's Top Republican catalogues except for Bourgey 1972 Schott (horrible, horrible plates!) and Glendinging 1931 Nordheim/Evans. I think most of the Bourgey coins are at least covered in the Bourgey Republican Coin corpus that is still available new. I got pictures of the Nordheim plates at last time I was an the ANS yet I still search for a hardcopy which has proven elusive. Meyers 7 proved very hard but I eventually found a copy buried away on the internet. A worthwhile action to own IMO. I've got a Haeberlin coin that appeared in that auction.
There are some serious errors on Spring's Top RR list. Spring 465 - M&M 44 - has only 4-5 Roman Republicans. Spring 423, Leu 18 has NO RR in it! You can scratch those off of your needs if your concerned about RR.
One to add to your modern list for Republicans should be NFA Auction XXVII 1991 which I'm told is Roberto Russo's personal collection (though it's not advertised as such) of Roman Republicans and full of outstanding coins. Many NFA catalogues can still be found new in the shrink wrap and many of them are available hardbound. There are lots of nice coins lurking in the M&M catalogues, as you've no doubt found out.
I just bought a select run of Auctiones AG from the early 1973 - 1990 that I just received yesterday. The particular sales were based on my research at the ANS but there are some great coins in them and some of very extensive RR cast bronze offerings if that's your thing.
I know what you mean about the loose plates and rebinding. I've got Santamari's Magnaguti and Ratto's Martini that both have loose plates and are in desperate need of rebinding. I really need to talk over the options with the binder to see what my options are as a separate pouch would be cool and true to the original but I think practically speaking binding them in with the rest of the catalogue is probably the sensible choice. I bought Ratto's Morcom/Hands/Wertheim already bound so I didn't even know the plates were loose to begin with and it works just fine.
If you are ever able to visit the ANS in NY, do. Set aside at least a full day, perhaps more if your serious about researching your catalogues and which ones you want to own. You can preview them all there (though Meyer 7 is missing from their shelves too!).
C
-
Funny, Carausius, it seems that you and I caught catalogue fever at about the same time (no doubt making some acquisitions that are in auctions expensive for both of us!).
Acquiring Banti's Corpus last year was like learning to swim in the kiddie pool. Within a few months, I jumped into the deep-end of catalogue buying. I really haven't bought too many catalogues at auction and those that I have bought at auction have been mostly uncontested, sole-bidder situations; so, we have not impacted each other. Still, I'm glad to know that you will not be among my competition for the elusive Martini, Prowe, Quadras y Ramon, etc.
There are some serious errors on Spring's Top RR list. Spring 465 - M&M 44 - has only 4-5 Roman Republicans. Spring 423, Leu 18 has NO RR in it! You can scratch those off of your needs if your concerned about RR.
Yes, I had also caught both those errors, and I now double-check the full Spring description before blindly buying anything on the "top" lists.
I know what you mean about the loose plates and rebinding. I've got Santamari's Magnaguti and Ratto's Martini that both have loose plates and are in desperate need of rebinding. I really need to talk over the options with the binder to see what my options are as a separate pouch would be cool and true to the original but I think practically speaking binding them in with the rest of the catalogue is probably the sensible choice. I bought Ratto's Morcom/Hands/Wertheim already bound so I didn't even know the plates were loose to begin with and it works just fine.
I think the plates are probably much safer bound-in than loose. Safer from accidental tearing, folding and loss. However, I'm not sure whether there is adequate left-hand margin on the plates to simply bind them in "raw". I don't want the left side coin photos bound deep into the bend of the spine. I have heard of loose plates being "hinged" before binding. I think that means that the left side of the plate is glued to a strip of paper or fabric (to increase the left margin) and then bound, so that the plates remain fully visible. I suppose you could then trim the right side of the plates to eliminate any protruding excess; or, if trimming is not feasible, bind them in a separate volume.
Thanks for your advice and tips on the catalogues you mentioned. I may visit the ANS in January during NYINC week.
-
i started to get obsessed by catalog collecting a number of years ago. i gathered quite a few, although none of the really old auctions being discussed here, mostly from the 80's and 90's. i did love being on the NFA subscription list, however i finally realized that on my limited budget i'd rather collect silver than paper.
i still have them though, and actually do reference the Magna Graecia sections ocassionally...
http://www.librarything.com/catalog/Enodia&tag=Numismatic+Catalogs&collection=-1
~ Peter
-
Contributors to this thread will are already be aware of it, but for others reading, my website has an expanded and more detailed list than Spring for Republican types, and includes download links and sample photos
http://andrewmccabe.ancients.info/RRAuctions.html#oldauctions
To an extent, I've moved beyond Spring's list, having ticked most of its boxes, and am am focussed on what catalogues with between one and four plates of RR happen to include high quality coins with high quality pics. Spring's list of cats with 5+ plates of RR includes lots of duds with low quality coins or photos. There are many marvellous cats with plenty of good RR (though not 5 plates) that aren't on his list.
The reason this obsession is perpetually discussed among RR collectors is I think because of the very high hit rate combined with the limited number of sales needed to get those hits. A good proportion of my 50 top pre-1970 cats contain a coin I now own. That's the sort of hit rate that encourages one to become a betting man. Just one more cat and it'll have every coin I miss...
The real secret is however in FPLs, not covered by Spring. For example, the 1963 lists of Crippa in Milan have 14 plates of high quality Roman Republican, each coin good enough for a NAC sale. And that's just one dealer in one year.
-
i started to get obsessed by catalog collecting a number of years ago. i gathered quite a few, although none of the really old auctions being discussed here, mostly from the 80's and 90's. i did love being on the NFA subscription list, however i finally realized that on my limited budget i'd rather collect silver than paper.
That's a nice group of catalogues you've assembled, Peter. Regarding budget, most of the catalogues on my list were purchased for less than $30 each. There are high-priced, high-demand exceptions of course, like the Naville Ars Classica catalogues and the Ratto catalogues, but lots of good, old catalogues remain surprisingly inexpensive.
-
The reason this obsession is perpetually discussed among RR collectors is I think because of the very high hit rate combined with the limited number of sales needed to get those hits.
It helps the hit rate for an average RR collector that the Republican series included only limited gold and largely formulaic bronzes. As a result, the finest RR sales include many still-affordable denarii and bronzes in the plates. Compare this to Imperial sales where plates are often filled with aurei, stunningly artistic bronzes, or great rarities that only a few collectors could afford to buy today.
The real secret is however in FPLs, not covered by Spring.
Oh joy, something new for me to obsess on. :laugh: FPLs will require some research on my part - i.e. looking through the ANS library holdings, as suggested by Carthago - to see which are worth hunting. The alternative is to buy bulk lots of FPLs with fingers-crossed and hope for the best. Of course, the occasional "no brainer" shows-up from time to time, like the 1927 Ratto FPL included in my original post.
-
Received in todays mail:
Otto Helbing, Auction 63 (Coll. Prix) - April 1931. In lovely shape, except it is MISSING plates 1 and 2 ! I don't recall that being disclosed in the offer, so I'm following-up with the seller. If the seller fails to make it right, would any Forum member be able to send me a high-quality scan of plates 1 and 2 from this catalogue?
-
Received in todays mail:
Otto Helbing, Auction 63 (Coll. Prix) - April 1931. In lovely shape, except it is MISSING plates 1 and 2 ! I don't recall that being disclosed in the offer, so I'm following-up with the seller. If the seller fails to make it right, would any Forum member be able to send me a high-quality scan of plates 1 and 2 from this catalogue?
Prix plates 1 and 2 are Aes grave. Quite high quality. It was common for aes grave plates to be in double size fold out format which might explain their loss. Since the remaining 7 plates of Republican material are high quality and given that it's a rare item I'd be inclined to keep it. The Heidelberg uni site might have this catalogue and its plates - one doesn't need an especially hi res scan for aes grave. Or I can do you a scan in time. My own copy of Prix has a high proportion of the Byzantine coins cut out, which would be a disaster if I bought it for the Byzantines. But I didn't. A high proportion of auction catalogues I've bought over time have defects such as you and I describe, because they were ephemeral collectors' aids that were lucky to escape the bin. Unless I bought it from a specialised numismatic bookseller such as Kolbe I wouldn't expect any warranties re content. Ephemera tend to come as-is.
postscript: it's online at Heidelberg, linked to from my page http://andrewmccabe.ancients.info/RRAuctions.html
checking plates 1 and 2, I don't think any scan I could do would give a better result. Each page is 1100px by 800px and given a page is just one or two aes grave wide that's a reasonably high per-coin resolution
-
Unless I bought it from a specialised numismatic bookseller such as Kolbe I wouldn't expect any warranties re content. Ephemera tend to come as-is.
Thanks, Andrew. I will look at the Heidelberg site to see what I can pull from there. As it happens, I did buy the catalogue from a coin/coin literature dealer, so I would have expected disclosure of any missing plates. However, the offer was in a foreign (to me) language, which I translated before purchasing, but it's possible I missed the disclosure. If I missed it, then shame on me and I'm "stuck" with this hard to find catalogue. If there was no disclosure, I will likely still keep the catalogue, but may try to negotiate a reduced price for my reduced Prix !
-
postscript: it's online at Heidelberg, linked to from my page http://andrewmccabe.ancients.info/RRAuctions.html
checking plates 1 and 2, I don't think any scan I could do would give a better result. Each page is 1100px by 800px and given a page is just one or two aes grave wide that's a reasonably high per-coin resolution
+++ I agree, the Heidleberg scans should do nicely. I will want to find paper of comparable weight to the existing plates for a closer match, and I'll need to pay attention to sizing of the prints.
-
Received in today's mail:
Rodolfo Ratto - Jan 1924 (Coll. Bonazzi), which had been on order. Cover partly detached at spine (I planned to rebind it anyway) but otherwise in fine shape. A splendid catalogue! It is hand priced in light pencil throughout, though I've no way of knowing whether these are prices realized or a bidder's strategy notes.
-
Received in today's mail:
Rodolfo Ratto - Jan 1924 (Coll. Bonazzi), which had been on order. Cover partly detached at spine (I planned to rebind it anyway) but otherwise in fine shape. A splendid catalogue! It is hand priced in light pencil throughout, though I've no way of knowing whether these are prices realized or a bidder's strategy notes.
That's a great sale (isn't it Riche though?)!. I've got a price list but I think it may be the estimates and not PRL. Shoot me some of your prices and I'll double check.
-
Hand pricing is always prices realized, in my experience.
The amounts should also give it away: if always even multiples of 5, 10, 100 etc., estimates; if not, prices realized.
-
Received in today's mail:
Rodolfo Ratto - Jan 1924 (Coll. Bonazzi), which had been on order. Cover partly detached at spine (I planned to rebind it anyway) but otherwise in fine shape. A splendid catalogue! It is hand priced in light pencil throughout, though I've no way of knowing whether these are prices realized or a bidder's strategy notes.
100% certainly prices realised. Not even I would have a strategy to bid on each and every coin in a sale.
Riche is what the title page says, but it is Bonazzi. I've an old hand marked copy that says Bonazzi, before John Spring told us so.
-
"Riche collection" is simply French for "rich collection". I think I have seen "Riche" cited as though it were the name of the collector, however!
-
Received in today's mail:
Rodolfo Ratto - Jan 1924 (Coll. Bonazzi), which had been on order. Cover partly detached at spine (I planned to rebind it anyway) but otherwise in fine shape. A splendid catalogue! It is hand priced in light pencil throughout, though I've no way of knowing whether these are prices realized or a bidder's strategy notes.
100% certainly prices realised. Not even I would have a strategy to bid on each and every coin in a sale.
Riche is what the title page says, but it is Bonazzi. I've an old hand marked copy that says Bonazzi, before John Spring told us so.
"Riche collection" is simply French for "rich collection". I think I have seen "Riche" cited as though it were the name of the collector, however!
Well, there you are! And here I've thought it was Richie Riche's collection all this time. :-[
-
Hand pricing is always prices realized, in my experience.
The amounts should also give it away: if always even multiples of 5, 10, 100 etc., estimates; if not, prices realized.
Quite right, Curtis. I looked through the catalogue again and most of the prices noted are precise (i.e. 3, 7, 9, 36 etc). So, I am confident these are realized prices, though who knows if they are actually correct. I shudder to think of someone relying on the accuracy of my own hand-priced catalogues 80 years from now!
-
Hand pricing is always prices realized, in my experience.
The amounts should also give it away: if always even multiples of 5, 10, 100 etc., estimates; if not, prices realized.
Quite right, Curtis. I looked through the catalogue again and most of the prices noted are precise (i.e. 3, 7, 9, 36 etc). So, I am confident these are realized prices, though who knows if they are actually correct. I shudder to think of someone relying on the accuracy of my own hand-priced catalogues 80 years from now!
-
Thank you, Carthago! I will compare to my catalogue tomorrow.
-
That looks like prices realised to me. Full of odd numbers like 11 and 26. And it shows that lots have been combined in quite a few cases, which would happen live. I'm curious as to whether it'll match the handwritten numbers.
-
Note that Ratto was charging for this list: price 4 francs. So clearly prices realized on that account too, in addition to the odd numbers and combined lots. I have never heard of a dealer charging for the list of estimated prices!
-
Note that Ratto was charging for this list: price 4 francs. So clearly prices realized on that account too, in addition to the odd numbers and combined lots. I have never heard of a dealer charging for the list of estimated prices!
Glendinings used to charge a premium cost for post-sale priced catalogues. The scale was something like, illustrated pre-sale 2 shillings, unillustrated copies at the sale free, illustrated and priced post sale 5 shillings. I know because I've a bunch of Glendinings and in some cases the same catalogue with and without prices realised with a substantial difference in price. Recall that absent the internet, there wasn't alternatives to paying for the prices realised if you wanted to follow the market. That might also explain the tendency for sale participants to manually price everything.
-
I just got home and compared the hand-pricing in my catalogue to Carthago's official prices realized list. They are an exact match! Even the combined lots are correctly identified in my catalogue by bracketed prices. I'm very pleased to have a hand-priced copy of this important sale, and also pleased that the "pencil notations throughout" likely reduced the price I paid from the (non-numismatic) book seller!
Thanks again for sharing that photo, Carthago.
-
Received in today's mail:
R. Ratto - Feb 1930 - Collection Joseph Martini de New York. Original card covers with loose plates in integrated folder. Cover and plates folder a bit worn, but contents and plates in great shape. Happy to have this important sale catalogue checked-off my want list!
I will likely rebind this catalogue, but need to give serious consideration on how to handle the plates. Three of the plates are double-sized, folded aes grave plates. I could simply continue the integrated folder concept - the plates have survived well enough after 85 years in such a folder - but I do feel that there is greater risk of inadvertently damaging or losing plates with that approach. I could also have the plates hinged, so that the folded plates can be folded into the bound catalogue - like a Playboy centerfold. The Attic reprint of the Sydenham catalogue handles double -size plates that way, and it seems to work well. I would be curious to hear from any Forum members that have a rebound copy of the Martini or Sydenham catalogues - how were your plates bound?
-
R. Ratto - Feb 1930 - Collection Joseph Martini de New York. Original card covers with loose plates in integrated folder. Cover and plates folder a bit worn, but contents and plates in great shape. Happy to have this important sale catalogue checked-off my want list!
I will likely rebind this catalogue, but need to give serious consideration on how to handle the plates. Three of the plates are double-sized, folded aes grave plates. I could simply continue the integrated folder concept - the plates have survived well enough after 85 years in such a folder - but I do feel that there is greater risk of inadvertently damaging or losing plates with that approach. I could also have the plates hinged, so that the folded plates can be folded into the bound catalogue - like a Playboy centerfold. The Attic reprint of the Sydenham catalogue handles double -size plates that way, and it seems to work well. I would be curious to hear from any Forum members that have a rebound copy of the Martini or Sydenham catalogues - how were your plates bound?
I wonder who you thought might answer this question ;)
Sydenham - stitched in the centre of the page
Martini Ratto 1930 - stitched in the centre of the page
You can see exactly how it looks in the photo below.
However as a caution, my copy of Quadras y Ramon Bourgey Nov13 happens to have a poor quality copy of Martini Ratto 1930 bound in; in this copy, centre-stitching is also used but somehow the binding is so tight that one just can't see the coins at centre. It's tough to advise your bookbinder to bind-loose, but you may need to discuss it. All that said, those few aes grave at the centre of those three pages are not very consequential. I do have other catalogues where one edge is stiched in and the page folds out. Possibly if that's an option its worth discussing.
-
I had lucky provenancing spree on Friday evening: in a three hour period I found six provenances in Muenzen und Medaillen (Basel) fixed price lists from 1950s to 1980s. Of those six, one was a coin on its way to be sold, and one was a provenance I already had in my records. Four were entirely new, and three of those were pre-Novevember 1970, which is the Gold Standard when it comes to provenances. Here are the four:
(https://farm1.staticflickr.com/474/18826456868_a2c85447a8_n.jpg) (https://www.flickr.com/photos/ahala_rome/18826456868/)
Muenzen und Medaillen (Basel) List 189 April 1959 lot 41
(https://farm1.staticflickr.com/542/19083021982_5e5ae62d7f_n.jpg) (https://www.flickr.com/photos/ahala_rome/19083021982/)
Muenzen und Medaillen (Basel) List 215 September 1961 lot 71
(https://farm4.staticflickr.com/3634/3410393096_bfc655f02c_n.jpg) (https://www.flickr.com/photos/ahala_rome/3410393096/)
Muenzen und Medaillen (Basel) List 260 December 1965 lot 24
(https://farm1.staticflickr.com/538/19088704305_a5350f4594_n.jpg) (https://www.flickr.com/photos/ahala_rome/19088704305/)
Muenzen und Medaillen (Basel) List 352 January 1974 lot 32
On Saturday I continued my quest and scored zero when searching Schulten and MunzZentrum (except the famed MunzZentrum XXX 1977 sale from which I've about a dozen bronzes). But I learnt some things from the process I followed Saturday and from the success on Friday. The reason for my luck with Muenzen und Medaillen (Basel) is that their coins are typically of the quality I collect: rare coins in quite nice condition and commoner coins in really nice condition (but not FDC) such as the LEG II and the Faustus Sulla. But the sales I checked Saturday were mostly full of common coins in quite nice condition or rare coins in terrible condition. I realised it was pretty much inevitable that I'd find nothing. So for some catalogue series, one can quickly enough determine whether or not its likely to be useful. I did however on Saturday find three or four coins which I used to own but sold in recent years. Thus those catalogues reflect the quality of coins I collected maybe twenty years ago, and I've few of such coins in my collection today.
-
I would be curious to hear from any Forum members that have a rebound copy of the Martini or Sydenham catalogues - how were your plates bound?
I wonder who you thought might answer this question ;)
I had two likely candidates in mind. ;) Thanks for your reply. I'm not too keen on the center stitching, as I want to preserve full visibility. I'm leaning toward hinging and binding the left side of each double plate so that they fold-out. I'm hopeful this can be done in a single volume without page-sizing issues.
-
I had lucky provenancing spree on Friday evening: in a three hour period I found six provenances in Muenzen und Medaillen (Basel) fixed price lists from 1950s to 1980s. Of those six, one was a coin on its way to be sold, and one was a provenance I already had in my records. Four were entirely new, and three of those were pre-Novevember 1970, which is the Gold Standard when it comes to provenances. Here are the four:
(https://farm1.staticflickr.com/474/18826456868_a2c85447a8_n.jpg) (https://www.flickr.com/photos/ahala_rome/18826456868/)
Muenzen und Medaillen (Basel) List 189 April 1959 lot 41
(https://farm1.staticflickr.com/542/19083021982_5e5ae62d7f_n.jpg) (https://www.flickr.com/photos/ahala_rome/19083021982/)
Muenzen und Medaillen (Basel) List 215 September 1961 lot 71
(https://farm4.staticflickr.com/3634/3410393096_bfc655f02c_n.jpg) (https://www.flickr.com/photos/ahala_rome/3410393096/)
Muenzen und Medaillen (Basel) List 260 December 1965 lot 24
(https://farm1.staticflickr.com/538/19088704305_a5350f4594_n.jpg) (https://www.flickr.com/photos/ahala_rome/19088704305/)
Muenzen und Medaillen (Basel) List 352 January 1974 lot 32
On Saturday I continued my quest and scored zero when searching Schulten and MunzZentrum (except the famed MunzZentrum XXX 1977 sale from which I've about a dozen bronzes). But I learnt some things from the process I followed Saturday and from the success on Friday. The reason for my luck with Muenzen und Medaillen (Basel) is that their coins are typically of the quality I collect: rare coins in quite nice condition and commoner coins in really nice condition (but not FDC) such as the LEG II and the Faustus Sulla. But the sales I checked Saturday were mostly full of common coins in quite nice condition or rare coins in terrible condition. I realised it was pretty much inevitable that I'd find nothing. So for some catalogue series, one can quickly enough determine whether or not its likely to be useful. I did however on Saturday find three or four coins which I used to own but sold in recent years. Thus those catalogues reflect the quality of coins I collected maybe twenty years ago, and I've few of such coins in my collection today.
Congratulations on your discoveries. Not surprising, as they are great coins. You said recently that FPLs were the secret. Not too long ago, I saw several groups of MuM FPLs from the 1950s-1970s for sale. However, they were not complete, and I thought they had likely been picked-over, so I did not buy them.
-
I would be curious to hear from any Forum members that have a rebound copy of the Martini or Sydenham catalogues - how were your plates bound?
I wonder who you thought might answer this question ;)
I had two likely candidates in mind. ;) Thanks for your reply. I'm not too keen on the center stitching, as I want to preserve full visibility. I'm leaning toward hinging and binding the left side of each double plate so that they fold-out. I'm hopeful this can be done in a single volume without page-sizing issues.
I'd bind it it hinged on the left side so you can fold them out. I'm not by library at the moment to give specific examples, but I've got few catalogues that are bound that way it it works great. If they are larger than normal plates, you may be able to have them trimmed a bit to size and not affect the coins. I have a copy of Martini that it completely falling apart that I need to have bound too.
Nice addition to your library BTW. Monster sale!
-
Congratulations on your discoveries. Not surprising, as they are great coins. You said recently that FPLs were the secret. Not too long ago, I saw several groups of MuM FPLs from the 1950s-1970s for sale. However, they were not complete, and I thought they had likely been picked-over, so I did not buy them.
I have a mostly complete run of the M&M FPL's and there are some great coins in them, though it's hit and miss as to when they were offering RR. It seemed that the firm would focus on specific areas in each of their catalogues. Some would have no RR, some would have only a few, some would have a bunch. I hope to someday soon do a cheat sheet of the important ones (to me, Roman Republican) and I'll share it so maybe you could look to buy just those. I bought the majority of mine as a lot, bound years ago in multiple year groups. There were gaps in them that I've since filled for completeness and need to get all of them rebound to include the stragglers. Without a cheat sheet, however, it's hard to go looking for provenances in them because it's so hit and miss with the offerings.
-
I hope to someday soon do a cheat sheet of the important ones (to me, Roman Republican) and I'll share it so maybe you could look to buy just those. I bought the majority of mine as a lot, bound years ago in multiple year groups. There were gaps in them that I've since filled for completeness and need to get all of them rebound to include the stragglers. Without a cheat sheet, however, it's hard to go looking for provenances in them because it's so hit and miss with the offerings.
Some sort of index would be awesome. My fear with buying incomplete groups of FPLs is to find that the ancient-weighted lists had been cherry-picked. Buying complete runs or nearly compete runs, as you did, is one solution. Knowing the contents of each list in advance is another solution.
-
My fear with buying incomplete groups of FPLs is to find that the ancient-weighted lists had been cherry-picked. Buying complete runs or nearly compete runs, as you did, is one solution. Knowing the contents of each list in advance is another solution.
Exactly this happened to me. I bought a massive group of Glendinigs catalogues for quite a high price, dating from the 1920s to 1970s, only to retrospectively realise that the group was the residue of a pick process. I actually had that information in advance as the seller happened to be also retailing a number of individual sales for prices that seemed too high whereas the group of about 100 seemed a bargain. Well it wasn't. I was just stupid. I learnt something.
It's most cost effective, if one has the time, to spend time in a numismatic library. For one thing it helps in identifying what catalogues may be worth buying. And, as carthago and carausius already know, I produced a cheat sheet (website) on Republican auctions that was intended to take Spring to another level of detail. In turn, I relied on others most notably Warren Esty's site for my initial guidance on modern catalogues. Esty's site is really worth looking to.
http://esty.ancients.info/catalogs/
Most effective of all is to own, and consult, Banti for Republican coins or Banti-Simonetti for Imperial coins. I wonder what the equivalent resource would be for Greek coins.
-
What do we define as a "provenanced" coin? Just musing.
- anything illustrated in a pre-1971 document of any kind, whether a minor FPL or a Dardel line drawing in Cohen automatically counts, even if you bought the coin on fleabay
- I generally think of a coin that has appeared in any printed and illustrated pre 1990 sale as having a provenance. 1990 is arbitrary but it essentially means prior to the collecting career of most of us, and that means finding that provenance means having had to go back in time
- I also regard any coin that has appeared in two modern sales, with the initial appearance in a first class venue at least 10 years ago, to have a provenance albeit a somewhat weaker one. So for example a coin sold by a CNG e-auction that also appeared in an early NAC sale. Or a NAC sale coin ex the Goodman collection sold in CNG 43-47.
- I don't regard any retail purchase as being of significance in provenance terms, if it wasn't illustrated in a printed catalogue. Nor any e-auction sale unless supported by some earlier better printed sale. Nor the mention of a collector name in a context not associated with a major sale. Nor a coin whose only appearance was in a modern sale, even if a first class one such as Triton. These are just "where and from whom I bought the coin". That doesn't count as provenance to me. That's just purchase records. And if I buy from a dealer who bought at a recent auction, I record it as "NAC 123 via dealer J.Bloggs". In other words the interim ownership by the dealer isn't of consequence, only the printed sale the coin appeared in.
With this hierarchy in mind, my collection can be split into
1. old provenance coins as I defined above
2. coins bought from venues that are on the record and the sale can be found in acsearch etc
3. no provenance at all, and you'll just have to rely on my vouching for it when I say I bought it from a prestigious dealer or collector.
I've bought a lot privately over the years. So the last category is worrisome as it's much too large. But that's what I'm working on...
It's also a huge dilemma how to memorialise the provenance once found. Of course I mark pages with post it tabs and include information in my spreadsheet. But when I would come to sell, and mention that a coin comes from an Otto Helbing FPL in the 1940s, how can I demonstrate that to a dealer and his customer, neither of whom have my range of catalogues? I have considered copying and printing the coin image and description and a heading from the title page. A lot of work, and may prove inconveniently large for a seller to deal with.. One idea I've had is to write/print a link to an online record that includes a photo of a coin and its provenance. With short form links that's possible. For example
http://flic.kr/p/dVhhLd/
Which can be shortened on a coin ticket to an easily writeable length (NB this uses Base58 code which uses all upper and lower case letter and numbers except 0 O l I for avoidance of confusion), as follows
flic.kr/p/dVhhLd/
As you can see I've added provenance information below the coin. All this is a lot of work. But in terms of how it can enhance the value of a collection if done properly, it's time well spent
-
I think you are very strict concerning provenances. For me, provenance means to know who were the keepers of an item before me. That is independent of the intermediate dealer, auction house or sale, unless the previous keeper is mentioned. Unfortunately, more often than not, that information is withheld by most sellers. I did my best, even in the '90's to get more information on provenances but in vain. All I could do is keep track of the date and dealers name from whom I got a coin, and occasionally, sometimes much later, be lucky enough to find the true provenance. I know that the vast majority of my coins I bought twenty-five years ago come from a few old British collections, sold through dealers. But if that is all you know, you have nothing really. I cannot prove for any of those that they have been in my hands for that amount of time, nor where they were kept before. I could as well have bought them yesterday. Fortunately, I do not live in Germany...
-
I think you are very strict concerning provenances. For me, provenance means to know who were the keepers of an item before me. That is independent of the intermediate dealer, auction house or sale, unless the previous keeper is mentioned. Unfortunately, more often than not, that information is withheld by most sellers. I did my best, even in the '90's to get more information on provenances but in vain. All I could do is keep track of the date and dealers name from whom I got a coin, and occasionally, sometimes much later, be lucky enough to find the true provenance. I know that the vast majority of my coins I bought twenty-five years ago come from a few old British collections, sold through dealers. But if that is all you know, you have nothing really. I cannot prove for any of those that they have been in my hands for that amount of time, nor where they were kept before. I could as well have bought them yesterday. Fortunately, I do not live in Germany...
Yes I am strict. My provenance "situation" is at heart not as strong as yours, because 40% of my collection consists of Republican bronzes and a high proportion of these are ex Italian collections (even though they may have been found in Spain or elsewhere, simply because the nexus for Republican bronzes collectors is Italy). For understandable reasons those collectors will mostly have bought at retail rather than through a printed auction or FPL. In many cases I know for sure who the collectors were (B...; F....; R...; L...) and in quite a few cases two generations of collectors, and in rare cases even more (I have more than one coin that was owned by F then L then B then R). But nothing of this can be verified. So were I to name the various collectors, it would add nothing to my proven provenance trail but at the same time it might raise issues. So for that reason, for the remaining 60% of my collection that is actually amenable to being provenance, I'm dead keen on finding the very best quality provenances and the very best proofs.
-
Yes, I see your point. When it comes to evidence, it is the best or perhaps the only sensible way to go.
There are a few cases where I found some of my recently acquired coins of unknown provenance (as usual) back as a plate in a reference work (Banti or Sear). That is quite a thrill, but this only happens with the highest quality coins. Nothing goes on labels with my coins, but everything is kept in a database, keeping track of all coin details, their tray position, and any attachment I want (e.g. the scan from a catalogue or reference plate) but also links to ACSearch, Wildwind, Forum records, and so on.... At any moment I can locate all information of a coin in a particular tray, or vice versa. I find it ideal !
-
As a slight digression I wanted to draw the attention of RR silver collectors to one catalogue that may not be on their radars, but should be. Sotheby's 27-28 October 1993, sale of the NFA remains. 570 silver denarii all EF. The prior day's sale (it was a 3 day event) has a separate catalogue but almost no RR. The tricky thing about the 27-28 Oct sale is that the majority of coins are shown one side only and without weights, in group lots. But the photos are excellent and as the coins are all EF, one-sides provenancing is quit feasible.
-
What do we define as a "provenanced" coin? Just musing.
To me, it's documenting the ownership and sale of the coin as completely and as far back as possible. If it's sold 10 times in the past 20 years, I want them all and I note everything in my database including estimates and realized prices if available. I keep all of my tags as part of the provenance documentation.
In terms of quality, I care most about provenances before 1980 and really start to get excited on finding new provenances prior to 1970. My favorites come from auctions or FPL's prior to 1940. The best provenances come from major sales and prominent collections that can be verified through photographs or accurate line drawings.
I supply full provenance information when consigning, but I wouldn't release prior individual owners that aren't published, unless they are dead.
-
What do we define as a "provenanced" coin? Just musing.
To me, it's documenting the ownership and sale of the coin as completely and as far back as possible. If it's sold 10 times in the past 20 years, I want them all and I note everything in my database including estimates and realized prices if available. I keep all of my tags as part of the provenance documentation.
In terms of quality, I care most about provenances before 1980 and really start to get excited on finding new provenances prior to 1970. My favorites come from auctions or FPL's prior to 1940. The best provenances come from major sales and prominent collections that can be verified through photographs or accurate line drawings.
I supply full provenance information when consigning, but I wouldn't release prior individual owners that aren't published, unless they are dead.
I guess I'm mostly in the same place except that I really don't care at all about unverifiable intermediate steps (dealer buys from a published auction then flips to me). I've bought many coins through "flips". I bought four flipped coins this weekend, that, when I ever sell them, will probably be sold without the flipping dealer's name (sorry, not intending it to sound like that, but "flipping" is an ordinary adjective here!) Verifiability is what it's all about for me.
In terms of prior individual owners (that were not mentioned in a verifiable source), if I only could, I'd love to be able to name them because that is in a sense verifiable even if not in printed format. It's verifiable in that it's a matter of common knowledge that in the example I referred to, B..., F...., R...., and L.... are each known collectors of Roman Republican bronzes, indeed at least one of them is actually cited by Michael Crawford using his full name in his Collections list (RRC pp.126-130). But as most of these collectors are happily still with us, that means that I, sadly, can't use their names. Although I'd love to be able to do so.
-
Received in today's mail:
Bourgey - November 1913 - Monnaise de la Republique Romaine (Coll. Vidal Quadras y Ramon). In exceptional, original condition and unused. Only a bit of browning around the edges, as one would expect on a 113 year-old catalogue.
How do I know it's unused? Well, in addition to it being unmarked and unworn, it has two or three pairs of pages that are still conjoined on two sides - inadvertently uncut during the printing/binding process. It could not have been used in this state! Anyone using it would have sliced these pages apart.
-
Received in yesterday’s mail:
1. NFA XXVII (hardcover version). This is actually my first NFA auction catalogue. When I was a teenaged collector of ancient coins in the 1970’s and early 1980’s, NFA coins were beyond my limited budget. By the time I resumed collecting after a college/grad school respite, NFA was defunct. This catalogue is particularly strong in Roman Republican silver.
2. CNG 46 and 47. These complete my run of The Goodman Collection catalogues, supplementing CNG 43, 45 and Triton I. It killed me to pay for them, as I had received them for free when issued; but my original, free copies didn’t survive a “pre-move purge” between homes. I plan to dismember them and re-bind the Goodman portions in a dedicated volume.
I have found a good quality bookbinder with whom I have begun a binding project for my growing catalogue collection. My initial, low-risk test was to have the bookbinder bind the three, NAC “Collection of a Student and his Mentor” catalogues into a single volume. Results are shown below. I am pleased with the result and recently brought the bindery three more items for binding.
-
Carausius, you've been busy!
The Bourgey sale is a great addition and a rare catalogue. A great collection and to find it nearly new is incredible! Mine was in bad shape and I had it rebound so it's much better.
It's my understanding that NFA XXVII was Roberto Russo's personal collection of Roman Republican coins. I wonder if he was liquidating it to get NAC off the ground? It's great that you can still get many of the NFA catalogues hardbound and new.
I really like the label on the spine of your test binding. The few books I've bound have had the title stamped on the spine, but I think the little label is much classier. I've been assembling a complete run of NAC and CNG catalogues with the intent of creating a corpus for each auction house of strictly Roman Republican like McCabe has done with some of his. As I look at the beautiful catalogues, I'm not sure I can pull them apart. What if I decide to go Greek some day? :o
-
I wonder if he was liquidating it to get NAC off the ground?
From what I've read about Roberto Russo, I understand he had stopped collecting Republican silver in order to avoid conflicts of interest with his clients. So, perhaps he was liquidating to complete that break from collecting.
I really like the label on the spine of your test binding. The few books I've bound have had the title stamped on the spine, but I think the little label is much classier.
Thanks, I like it too! I picked the maroon leather for the label because it matched the color of the printing on NAC catalogues. In fact, I originally asked the bindery to use pale yellow cloth for the binding - to approximate the color of NAC catalogue card bindings - but the bindery did not have that color cloth. I went with tan as a close substitute. I like to maintain some visual connection with the original, just to help me find the catalogues on my shelf. I'm a very visual person.
I've been assembling a complete run of NAC and CNG catalogues with the intent of creating a corpus for each auction house of strictly Roman Republican like McCabe has done with some of his. As I look at the beautiful catalogues, I'm not sure I can pull them apart. What if I decide to go Greek some day?
I understand your reticence, and if I had a complete run or near complete run, I would think long and hard before dismembering them. Of course, it's a personal decision, and storage space must be one major consideration. The other consideration is the likely value of the catalogues as a resource. Andrew McCabe has mentioned the high hit rate of finding quality Republican coins in old catalogues. I don't know what the hit rate is for other series.
-
Received in today's mail:
Bourgey, December 1913 "Monnaise de L'Empire Romaine" (Coll. Vidal Quadras y Ramon, Part 2). Another excellent condition example, with just a bit of shelf wear to the spine and light browning at edges. Contents are crisp and near new. I will bind this together with the November 1913 catalogue of the Republican portion of the collection. This Imperial catalogue contains twice the number of plates as the Republican sale, and is about twice as thick. The two sales combined will make a nice volume.
One interesting coincidence. This catalogue, which I bought from a different source in a different country than the Part 1 Republican sale, also has several "conjoined" pages that were printed, but uncut by the printer. The pages were then folded and bound with one or two conjoined sides. This must have been a common issue with these two catalogues, and whether the pages remain joined is probably good proof as to whether the catalogue was used or not.
-
Received in today's mail:
Bourgey, December 1913 "Monnaise de L'Empire Romaine" (Coll. Vidal Quadras y Ramon, Part 2). Another excellent condition example, with just a bit of shelf wear to the spine and light browning at edges. Contents are crisp and near new. I will bind this together with the November 1913 catalogue of the Republican portion of the collection. This Imperial catalogue contains twice the number of plates as the Republican sale, and is about twice as thick. The two sales combined will make a nice volume.
One interesting coincidence. This catalogue, which I bought from a different source in a different country than the Part 1 Republican sale, also has several "conjoined" pages that were printed, but uncut by the printer. The pages were then folded and bound with one or two conjoined sides. This must have been a common issue with these two catalogues, and whether the pages remain joined is probably good proof as to whether the catalogue was used or not.
Another great sale. Congratulations on finding it in such fine condition! The catalogue portion of Part II of mine is photocopied though my plates are original. I've bound it together as well.
On the cutting of the pages, I've found that in a few of my catalogues. The most notable Martini with several of the pages not divided. Interesting, isn't it?
-
On the cutting of the pages, I've found that in a few of my catalogues. The most notable Martini with several of the pages not divided. Interesting, isn't it?
Yes, but unsurprising when you think of it. It's a sale catalogue such as dozens I get each year. I look carefully in my area and briefly flick through the pretty Greek or early Empire as well as checking for oddball sections such as group lots or Paduans. I wouldn't even flick through the pages covering Bactrian or anything eastern or LRBs or anything later. I'd be even less inclined to notionally flick through subjects that I know are of no interest if I had to cut each page to do so.
On page cutting, I've messed up a few old books by botched attempts with Stanley knives and such like to open uncut pages, wondering how in hell they did it so neatly, before it occurred to me that the simple way to uncut a book is all in one go with a guillotine press. Two cuts top and bottom chop chop, and every page is ready. It's easy for printers too. I wonder didn't they do it to preserve the newness of an unsold books, the equivalent of shrinkwrap. Most books were sold unbound so you'd have been expected to ask your binder to deal with it. My binder has a very impressive guillotine. Probably not much of this would apply to your average catalogue which as ephemera would neither be hardbound nor worth the bother of having guillotined after purchase (and you DID need to purchase these - cover prices were pretty high, 10 shillings or 5 Reichmarks being not unusual). I guess our 1930s collectors wielded letter openers but only on pages of interest.
-
Probably not much of this would apply to your average catalogue which as ephemera would neither be hardbound nor worth the bother of having guillotined after purchase (and you DID need to purchase these - cover prices were pretty high, 10 shillings or 5 Reichmarks being not unusual). I guess our 1930s collectors wielded letter openers but only on pages of interest.
Of course, these particular Bourgey sales are specialty catalogues; the first being all Roman Republican and the second all Roman Imperial. I cannot imagine a letter-opener-wielding dealer/collector leaving random pages conjoined, particulalrly if they paid 10 shillings or 5 Reichmarks for the catalogues out of an interest in these series. I think it more likely that either these were sent gratis to disinterested dealers/collectors who were on Bourgey's "good customer" list (as suggested in your first paragraph ), or they were "new old stock" that were never mailed to anyone.
I had no idea that this was a widespread issue in older books/catalogues, but it makes sense when you consider the old methods of manufacture and binding.
-
On the cutting of the pages, I've found that in a few of my catalogues. The most notable Martini with several of the pages not divided. Interesting, isn't it?
I'm surpised to hear that your Martini catalogue has uncut pages, as I think I know your source for that catalogue (from prior posts) and I would have expected that the previous owner would have cut them. Perhaps there is some "book collector value" to leaving them uncut and pristine. On the other hand, I can think of several reasons why numismatists would want the text fully visible - (1) as an index to the plates, (2) to confirm provenance of an un-plated coin or (3) to research recorded specimens of some rare type/variety.
-
On the cutting of the pages, I've found that in a few of my catalogues. The most notable Martini with several of the pages not divided. Interesting, isn't it?
I'm surpised to hear that your Martini catalogue has uncut pages, as I think I know your source for that catalogue (from prior posts) and I would have expected that the previous owner would have cut them. Perhaps there is some "book collector value" to leaving them uncut and pristine. On the other hand, I can think of several reasons why numismatists would want the text fully visible - (1) as an index to the plates, (2) to confirm provenance of an un-plated coin or (3) to research recorded specimens of some rare type/variety.
It was from the Kreindler's collection. I'm going to cut them when I get it bound.
-
It was from the Kreindler's collection.
That's what I thought, and why I mused that there might have been a reason they were left uncut. Although, Herb curated such a huge library, I suspect he just never got around to cutting them!
-
Received in today's mail:
1. Naville Ars Classica XI (Collection H.C. Levis), June 1925.
2. Leo Hamburger 96 (including some coins ex Jameson), Oct 1932.
Ordered, but not yet received:
3. P & P Santamaria, Oct 1949 - Magnaguti, Ex Nummis Historia I and II (two sale catalogues bound together).
-
Received in today's mail:
1. Naville Ars Classica XI (Collection H.C. Levis), June 1925.
2. Leo Hamburger 96 (including some coins ex Jameson), Oct 1932.
Ordered, but not yet received:
3. P & P Santamaria, Oct 1949 - Magnaguti, Ex Nummis Historia I and II (two sale catalogues bound together).
Some more great sales. You're really rolling on your library!
-
Some more great sales. You're really rolling on your library!
Yep, thanks. I've been making progress on my binding project as well. Over the weekend, I picked up my final "tests" which the bindery passed quite well. Two examples below. The first, all four Knobloch sales bound as a single volume in half green cloth with marbled boards, leather spine label. The second, Egger XXXIX (the Greek section of which is hand priced and named) bound in black half-calf with grey cloth boards. I left several more catalogues with the bindery for leather binding. Reviewing a very recently released catalogue of a former collector's library has been a budget-busting inspiration.
-
Some more great sales. You're really rolling on your library!
Yep, thanks. I've been making progress on my binding project as well. Over the weekend, I picked up my final "tests" which the bindery passed quite well. Two examples below. The first, all four Knobloch sales bound as a single volume in half green cloth with marbled boards, leather spine label. The second, Egger XXXIX (the Greek section of which is hand priced and named) bound in black half-calf with grey cloth boards. I left several more catalogues with the bindery for leather binding. Reviewing a very recently released catalogue of a former collector's library has been a budget busting-inspiration.
Those turned out great. I really like the labeling. I also know what you mean by the budget busting ideas. I tried to buy a few of those items but they were sold. It's definitely given me some binding ideas as well.
-
Very nice, Michael!
-
Hi Cara,
The bindery did an excellent job!
Meepzorp
-
Man, you guys are making me jealous. Would you be able to share with me prices realized lists for any of those old catalogs?
My email is rasiel@dirtyoldbooks.com, I'd be indebted!
Ras
-
PM sent.
-
On order, awaiting receipt:
1. Sambon/Canessa (1907) - Collections Martinetti & Nervegna. This catalogue had an encouraging summary in Andrew McCabe's auction catalogue web pages.
2. Glendining (1950) - Henry Platt Hall Collection parts I , II and the elusive part III. Parts I and II are priced and part I includes buyers names. Part III is quite rare, as the entire group of English coins was sold en bloc to Spink before the auction and the catalogues were not distributed.
3. P and P Santamaria (1958) - Collection Brunacci. I find many of these Santamaria catalogues, though relatively modern, particularly difficult to source. I have had some good luck with them over the past few weeks, but that comes after a year of searching. Still looking for Signorelli (1952).
-
On order, awaiting receipt:
1. Sambon/Canessa (1907) - Collections Martinetti & Nervegna. This catalogue had an encouraging summary in Andrew McCabe's auction catalogue web pages.
2. Glendining (1950) - Henry Platt Hall Collection parts I , II and the elusive part III. Parts I and II are priced and part I includes buyers names. Part III is quite rare, as the entire group of English coins was sold en bloc to Spink before the auction and the catalogues were not distributed.
3. P and P Santamaria (1958) - Collection Brunacci. I find many of these Santamaria catalogues, though relatively modern, particularly difficult to source. I have had some good luck with them over the past few weeks, but that comes after a year of searching. Still looking for Signorelli (1952).
All great catalogues. Especially Brunacci. You'll find Signorelli in time - RBW had more than one in his library that'll be at Kolbe in time. Platt-Hall and Martinetti & Nervegna are good but less difficult to find. I wasn't aware of Part III of Platt Hall being rarer - I think I've the Roman and Greek only.
-
On order, awaiting receipt:
1. Sambon/Canessa (1907) - Collections Martinetti & Nervegna. This catalogue had an encouraging summary in Andrew McCabe's auction catalogue web pages.
2. Glendining (1950) - Henry Platt Hall Collection parts I , II and the elusive part III. Parts I and II are priced and part I includes buyers names. Part III is quite rare, as the entire group of English coins was sold en bloc to Spink before the auction and the catalogues were not distributed.
3. P and P Santamaria (1958) - Collection Brunacci. I find many of these Santamaria catalogues, though relatively modern, particularly difficult to source. I have had some good luck with them over the past few weeks, but that comes after a year of searching. Still looking for Signorelli (1952).
The RR pieces in HP Hall are really outstanding coins and the plates in that catalogue are very good compared to later Glendining catalogues that go really downhill. I've got 3 coins from HP Hall of which one is now my avatar and another was an originally unprovenanced RBW coin. I actually got a chance to share with him that I found it in HP Hall which he thought was cool. Lot 586 for when you get your catalogue. ;)
All great additions to the library.
-
All great catalogues. Especially Brunacci. You'll find Signorelli in time - RBW had more than one in his library that'll be at Kolbe in time. Platt-Hall and Martinetti & Nervegna are good but less difficult to find. I wasn't aware of Part III of Platt Hall being rarer - I think I've the Roman and Greek only.
Prompted by this thread, I had another look at Signorelli and at Brunacci. The former (dated earlier - 1952) is a better sale - the coins are better quality, there's more of them, and the plates have significantly better printing, perhaps in part due to better plaster casts. Whilst browsing, I picked up another coin from Signorelli, lot 719:
(https://farm3.staticflickr.com/2891/11291758494_0e8dccf278.jpg) (https://www.flickr.com/photos/ahala_rome/)
I'm especially pleased as it's one of my favourite coins with a stunning reverse. I recall being with RBW when I bought it and he thought it especially nice. I already have lot 736 (Pompey Nasidia) from the same sale which is just below the Sicinia.
(https://farm1.staticflickr.com/414/18427208983_852ab14def.jpg) (https://www.flickr.com/photos/ahala_rome/18427208983)
On the one hand it's perplexing that I missed a coin a mere half a plate from another I'd found. On the other hand it's rather gratifying that there's provenances to be found in catalogues that I've perused many times. The whole point of this catalogue madness is, after all, provenance finds. I've one Brunacci (1958) ... not quite such a terrific coin.
(https://farm1.staticflickr.com/403/19121553446_690173038b.jpg) (https://www.flickr.com/photos/ahala_rome/19121553446/)
On results to date there's probably more for me to find in just these two sales. Whilst Banti is a great first go-to resource, its indifferent photo reproduction means I sometimes miss coins that I pick up in the original sale. I really hope I've missed an awful lot in all my catalogues as that would mean that I've happy years ahead to continue finding provenances.
-
Beautiful coins, Andrew... even the Brunacci! I'm a bit concerned that I may have jinxed my Brunacci catalogue acquisition. I posted it here before the seller confirmed its availability, and I've still not heard from them! We'll see.
I spent some time this evening curled in a chair with my very-nicely-bound, recently-acquired copy of Magnaguti I and II (bound as one), which arrived in the post a few days ago. Hard-binding these catalogues really does promote their enjoyment. With an original, card-bound catalogue, I feel compelled to sit at a desk and gingerly turn pages to avoid damage. A hard-binding frees me to more comfortably peruse. I was impressed that the Republican section of Magnaguti was arranged chronologically, rather than by Babelon.
EDIT: Yep, I jinxed the Brunacci catalogue. I received notice that it was already sold. I'll keep looking....
-
Man, like you guys I'm getting quite a bit of the old catalog fever too. For me, I have no interest in the physical object - which is a good thing considering the expense and space issues - but today I have a real heartbreaker on my hands. Normally I rip out the pages of the catalog so they scan better but I just can't bring myself to do so to a 1938 Sotheby's sale titled "The Reinhold Faelten" which Warren Esty was kind enough to sell me. This catalog has rather mediocre photography but the thing itself is a work of art. Each plate page has a rice paper separator to prevent damage. Am I making a big deal out of nothing? Would anyone be interested in buying or trading for another?
Ras
-
Normally I rip out the pages of the catalog so they scan better but I just can't bring myself to do so to a 1938 Sotheby's sale titled "The Reinhold Faelten" which Warren Esty was kind enough to sell me. This catalog has rather mediocre photography but the thing itself is a work of art. Each plate page has a rice paper separator to prevent damage. Am I making a big deal out of nothing? Would anyone be interested in buying or trading for another?
Faelten was a Stack's sale, not Sotheby's. Despite its poor plates, it is considered important by some simply because it was an early attempt by Stack's to photograph actual coins rather than plaster casts. So long as you understand that ripping a collectible catalogue apart will destroy some resale value, go ahead and rip it - but try to do so with minimal damage to anything but the spine. If the top and rear covers, pages and plates are undamaged and it remains suitable for rebinding, it should be interesting to some collector, although at a reduced price. I already have a hardbound copy of Faelten, so no interest here.
-
Man, like you guys I'm getting quite a bit of the old catalog fever too. For me, I have no interest in the physical object - which is a good thing considering the expense and space issues - but today I have a real heartbreaker on my hands. Normally I rip out the pages of the catalog so they scan better but I just can't bring myself to do so to a 1938 Sotheby's sale titled "The Reinhold Faelten" which Warren Esty was kind enough to sell me. This catalog has rather mediocre photography but the thing itself is a work of art. Each plate page has a rice paper separator to prevent damage. Am I making a big deal out of nothing? Would anyone be interested in buying or trading for another?
Ras
Faelten is easily obtainable so you're probably not destroying a priceless relic, but I couldn't bring myself to do it. What I have doing is using a Fujitsu ScanSnap SV600 to scan my older catalogues that I don't want to destroy. Works well for IMO. Here's a sample.
-
Man, like you guys I'm getting quite a bit of the old catalog fever too. For me, I have no interest in the physical object - which is a good thing considering the expense and space issues - but today I have a real heartbreaker on my hands. Normally I rip out the pages of the catalog so they scan better but I just can't bring myself to do so to a 1938 Sotheby's sale titled "The Reinhold Faelten" which Warren Esty was kind enough to sell me. This catalog has rather mediocre photography but the thing itself is a work of art. Each plate page has a rice paper separator to prevent damage. Am I making a big deal out of nothing? Would anyone be interested in buying or trading for another?
Ras
Though I passed by chances to buy Faelten several times due to its horrid plates, I'd like to get it for completeness (and this sounds likes well preserved example) but also to safeguard against you tearing it up (which shocks me - no pre 1970 sale should ever be dismembered!). I can offer as a swap a bunch of Glendinings catalogues from around 1970; Faelten has 25 plates of ancients and as my trade items are later in date, I'll be happy to pull out old Glendinings with double that, ie 50 plates of ancients, exact mix my choice as I'd not want to give away anything with RR so would need to check. I'd post to you wherever you are and you'd send me Faelten in UK. The precise number of cats I'd send would depend on plate count. How does this sound? If interested, lets swap addresses by PM.
-
Faelten is easily obtainable so you're probably not destroying a priceless relic, but I couldn't bring myself to do it. What I have doing is using a Fujitsu ScanSnap SV600 to scan my older catalogues that I don't want to destroy. Works well for IMO. Here's a sample.
Thanks for showing one of my coins in your sample! (AR 755, bought at a table in the NYINC bourse)
-
Faelten is easily obtainable so you're probably not destroying a priceless relic, but I couldn't bring myself to do it. What I have doing is using a Fujitsu ScanSnap SV600 to scan my older catalogues that I don't want to destroy. Works well for IMO. Here's a sample.
Thanks for showing one of my coins in your sample! (AR 755, bought at a table in the NYINC bourse)
I actually knew that was your coin but didn't do it on purpose. ;)
-
Sounds like a good deal to me Carausius. Please get a hold of me via email to arrange. I'll be very careful in scanning it before I send it to you.
Carthago, would you consider sharing with me that Bourgey PDF?
Ras
rasiel@dirtyoldbooks.com
-
Sounds like a good deal to me Carausius. Please get a hold of me via email to arrange. I'll be very careful in scanning it before I send it to you.
Hi Ras - did you mean me or Carausius in this message? I didn't read anything that sounded like a proposal in Carausius' messages (forgive me if something was arranged offline).
Andrew
-
Sounds like a good deal to me Carausius. Please get a hold of me via email to arrange. I'll be very careful in scanning it before I send it to you.
Hi Ras - did you mean me or Carausius in this message? I didn't read anything that sounded like a proposal in Carausius' messages (forgive me if something was arranged offline).
Andrew
Ras meant you, Andrew. I've got my Faelten.
-
Sounds like a good deal to me Carausius. Please get a hold of me via email to arrange. I'll be very careful in scanning it before I send it to you.
Hi Ras - did you mean me or Carausius in this message? I didn't read anything that sounded like a proposal in Carausius' messages (forgive me if something was arranged offline).
Andrew
Ras meant you, Andrew. I've got my Faelten.
I've sent Ras an offlist message, and dug out a group of nine Glendinings catalogues from 1965 to 1979 mostly illustrating areas of ancients that are of lesser interest to me eg archaics, eastern Greek, Byzantines, later Roman etc. A symbiotic trade I hope, given I'd have probably never bought Faelten and Ras would likely never have bought the Glendinings, yet both value what we are getting for free!
-
Each plate page has a rice paper separator to prevent damage.
Ras' reference to tissue guards between the Faelten catalogue plate pages got me thinking. I understand that the original purpose of tissue guards was to prevent fresh plate ink from smudging, sticking and bleeding onto the adjacent plate. Once the plates had dried, the tissue guards had likely outlived their usefulness. More importantly, in my old catalogues that still have their original tissue guards, the tissue paper is often browned well-beyond any browning to the plate paper. So, I assume that the tissue paper generally contained more acids that the typical plate paper. This makes me wonder whether the old tissue has become a risk to the longer term storage of the plates. Does acid from the tissue paper pose any risk to the adjacent plates? Is it a best practice to eliminate the tissue guards or (if tissue provides any continuing benefit) replace them with fresh, acid-free tissue, when rebinding?
-
Each plate page has a rice paper separator to prevent damage.
Ras' reference to tissue guards between the Faelten catalogue plate pages got me thinking. I understand that the original purpose of tissue guards was to prevent fresh plate ink from smudging, sticking and bleeding onto the adjacent plate. Once the plates had dried, the tissue guards had likely outlived their usefulness. More importantly, in my old catalogues that still have their original tissue guards, the tissue paper is often browned well-beyond any browning to the plate paper. So, I assume that the tissue paper generally contained more acids that the typical plate paper. This makes me wonder whether the old tissue has become a risk to the longer term storage of the plates. Does acid from the tissue paper pose any risk to the adjacent plates? Is it a best practice to eliminate the tissue guards or (if tissue provides any continuing benefit) replace them with fresh, acid-free tissue, when rebinding?
Here's a relevant page from the Smithsonian's conservation website:
http://www.si.edu/mci/english/learn_more/taking_care/acidfree.html
It seems your concerns are on point.
-
Each plate page has a rice paper separator to prevent damage.
Ras' reference to tissue guards between the Faelten catalogue plate pages got me thinking. I understand that the original purpose of tissue guards was to prevent fresh plate ink from smudging, sticking and bleeding onto the adjacent plate. Once the plates had dried, the tissue guards had likely outlived their usefulness. More importantly, in my old catalogues that still have their original tissue guards, the tissue paper is often browned well-beyond any browning to the plate paper. So, I assume that the tissue paper generally contained more acids that the typical plate paper. This makes me wonder whether the old tissue has become a risk to the longer term storage of the plates. Does acid from the tissue paper pose any risk to the adjacent plates? Is it a best practice to eliminate the tissue guards or (if tissue provides any continuing benefit) replace them with fresh, acid-free tissue, when rebinding?
Here's a relevant page from the Smithsonian's conservation website:
http://www.si.edu/mci/english/learn_more/taking_care/acidfree.html
It seems your concerns are on point.
Thanks! I became particularly concerned about this when I examined the plates in my recently acquired copy of Sambon - Martinetti & Nervegna (1907). The catalogue had most of the original tissue guards, but several were missing. I noticed that plates WITHOUT tissue guards were in slightly better condition than those WITH tissue guards! The margins on the tissue-less plates were brighter and the images seemed a bit fresher. The tissues were quite brown, and long-term exposure to that can't be good for anything.
Having researched further on some book collector sites, archival (ph neutral) glassine pages are recommended as a replacement for tissue guards. However, I'm not convinced that any replacements are really needed for our catalogues. In fact, I generally find the guards to be a nuisance when flipping through plates!
-
Hi Cara,
Thanks for bringing this up. I often noticed this too. The tissue paper in old books/catalogs is often very brown. I had always assumed that it is best to leave things alone and to try to keep things in their original condition. But this sheds light on the subject.
Meepzorp
-
There's an amusing paradox here. Catalogues with intact tissues have been handled less and are thus usually better preserved overall, and command higher prices as a result, than those where the tissues have been torn out or disintegrated. Even though the latter might have technically clearer photos. There's also a dilemma - I'm not inclined to tear stuff out of my catalogues given the wider damage that might cause. And a little longer after 80 years in place won't make a difference. So
- when I rebind I'll have the tissues removed
- I'll still continue to favour unseen catalogues with intact tissue for the reasons above.
-
There's an amusing paradox here. Catalogues with intact tissues have been handled less and are thus usually better preserved overall, and command higher prices as a result, than those where the tissues have been torn out or disintegrated. Even though the latter might have technically clearer photos. There's also a dilemma - I'm not inclined to tear stuff out of my catalogues given the wider damage that might cause. And a little longer after 80 years in place won't make a difference. So
- when I rebind I'll have the tissues removed
- I'll still continue to favour unseen catalogues with intact tissue for the reasons above.
Hi Andrew,
Thanks for clearing this up. That's a great way of approaching this subject matter.
Meepzorp
-
- when I rebind I'll have the tissues removed
- I'll still continue to favour unseen catalogues with intact tissue for the reasons above.
I agree on both points.
-
Here is fron page of my Old Auction Catalog from France.
Plates contain 2 fold outs of RR cast bronze.
Pekka K
-
Here is fron page of my Old Auction Catalog from France.
Plates contain 2 fold outs of RR cast bronze.
Pekka K
Hi Pekka,
Cover is interesting as its a house that rarely sells ancients but could we (or I) see those two plates please! If you could scan and contact me via PM that would be great. Or drop them below a reply?
Andrew
-
Here are PL3 & PL4 combined of 2 scans each:
-
Thanks Pekka, two great plates. None of my coins I think but I'll have a later look.
The arrangement with Ras makes me think there may be other scopes for international swaps. I've various stuff. A duplicate original Haeberlin for example. And some less rare.
-
Thanks for sharing, Pekka. Is a weight given for the bull/wheel Aes Grave (lot 17__)? It resemble my example of the type.
-
Must be 176, ... 122 gr. 65. Patine vert. T.B.
Pekka K
Edit: 2 newspaper clippings
-
Must be 176, ... 122 gr. 65. Patine vert.
Thanks! A bit heavier than my example, but identical style and the same "dimple" at 9 o'clock on the reverse. Possibly cast from the same moulds. I will need to closely compare them when I get home tonight.
The arrangement with Ras makes me think there may be other scopes for international swaps. I've various stuff. A duplicate original Haeberlin for example. And some less rare.
Interesting that you picked today to announce your duplicate Haeberlin. Just last week, I bought an original Haeberlin and it arrived in the post today. I have owned a high quality reprint for over a year, and I was satisfied with the reprint until our recent "40 Asses" thread prompted me to look at the reprint plate with a magnifier - pixels made the image pretty worthless. I may still keep the reprint for general use; plus it has the list of estimates and prices realized, which can be interesting trivia.
-
The arrangement with Ras makes me think there may be other scopes for international swaps. I've various stuff. A duplicate original Haeberlin for example. And some less rare.
Interesting that you picked today to announce your duplicate Haeberlin. Just last week, I bought an original Haeberlin and it arrived in the post today. I have owned a high quality reprint for over a year, and I was satisfied with the reprint until our recent "40 Asses" thread prompted me to look at the reprint plate with a magnifier - pixels made the image pretty worthless. I may still keep the reprint for general use; plus it has the list of estimates and prices realized, which can be interesting trivia.
Oops. Sorry! I sort of assumed that you - as with most key RR fiends - would have it already. It's not actually on offer - I don't wish to sell it for cash. But were something to offer me something perhaps rarer albeit maybe with fewer plates, or a bunch of interesting and older FPLs or something else I couldn't so easily find...
The plates on some original Haeberlins are pretty faded though they perform well under magnification. The best reprint has clear plates but perhaps pixelated as you suggest.
-
I’ve acquired a few nice catalogues over the last few weeks.
1. Cahn/Hess –Haeberlin Collection (1933). An original of this important sale in a decent quality cloth binding. I mentioned previously that I already owned a high-quality, limited production reprint of this catalogue (Lugano, 1977; 300 copies printed). Comparing this original to the reprint, I am very impressed with the reprint. The paper quality of the reprint is much better than the original (the reprint is nearly twice as thick as the original because of the heavier paper in the reprint), with no browning/yellowing in the reprint. The reprint also has the lists of estimates and prices realized bound in (both are missing from my original). With the naked eye, the reprint plates are nearly identical to the original in quality; only under magnification do the original plates really stand-out. The original plates magnify like an actual coin in hand. The reprint plates are heavily pixilated under magnification. So, I’ll keep them both, and probably favor the reprint for general use.
2. Dura/Sambon – Borghesi Collection (1881). This is an important, early sale featuring two of the earliest plates of ancient coins in an auction catalogue. Andrew McCabe’s website describes it well here (including a photo of a plate) - http://andrewmccabe.ancients.info/RRAuctions.html
They must have used very high quality paper for this catalogue, as every page looks as fresh and white as the day it was printed – there’s not even the slightest hint of yellowing or browning (even the tissue guards look fresh).
3. P & P Santamaria – Brunacci Collection (1958). I’ve tried to acquire this catalogue twice before and failed. Third time’s a charm, and I now have it in hand.
4. M. Ratto – Collection E. H. Schwing (1932). I bought this catalogue on a whim, without researching it first. Had I first read Andrew’s website description, I likely would have skipped this catalogue. It contains several high quality plates of aes grave, though the coins are not of tremendous quality or rarity, i.e. mostly prow types in F-VF condition. At least there are also a couple plates of decent quality Republican silver.
-
Ras' 1938 Faelten arrived today, and as soon as Ras remembers to share his address with me (!!), some Glendinings will be going the other direction. This Faelten is indeed a better than usually preserved example. Despite the ghoulish photography (from coins rather than casts), there's enough information from typical fingerprints such as edge dings or border dot intersections or offstrikes to identify potential matches for 90% of coins if examined very slowly and in good light. That's a heck of a lot of conditionality, but is sometimes rewarded by the high quality of the coins themselves. Oddly the one area where casts are not always reliable - edge shape - is ok here. My intent is to peruse it, very slowly, and in good light, perhaps even with my own coins for comparison in hand.
I attach a sample below that illustrates my comments. Note one of the Brutus reverses is upside down. Still very grateful to have these, there are upwards of 200 high quality Republican coins in the catalogue, and to be frank I'm hoping some of my ex-RBW coins might stem from here given US provenances.
-
Despite the ghoulish photography (from coins rather than casts), there's enough information from typical fingerprints such as edge dings or border dot intersections or offstrikes to identify potential matches for 90% of coins if examined very slowly and in good light.
I agree, it would not be easy to discover a lost Faelten provenance! Of course, provenance discovery is only one reason I buy these catalogues. Another reason is to confirm a stated provenance; and for that, the Faelten catalogue plates would suffice without too much effort. Although, I cannot remember ever seeing an "ex Faelten" coin for sale.
-
Despite the ghoulish photography (from coins rather than casts), there's enough information from typical fingerprints such as edge dings or border dot intersections or offstrikes to identify potential matches for 90% of coins if examined very slowly and in good light.
I agree, it would not be easy to discover a lost Faelten provenance! Of course, provenance discovery is only one reason I buy these catalogues. Another reason is to confirm a stated provenance; and for that, the Faelten catalogue plates would suffice without too much effort. Although, I cannot remember ever seeing an "ex Faelten" coin for sale.
The single appearance of Faelten on acsearch or cng relates to a copy of this catalogue that sold in 2007 for $18, and was described as dog-eared and delaminated. My copy is pretty smart with intact snow-white tissue guards.
-
A still-growing group of nicely bound auction catalogues on my shelf...
-
Looks nice!
-
I hit a lucky streak today - found 2 Haeberlins, a Ryan (Glendining 1952) and a Sydenham (Ratto). More later. Types were an aes grave as (Sydenham), Cr.405 Sors; Era to (Haeberlins), Antony/Octavia Cistophorus (Ryan). The four coins were cheaply priced even without the provenanced, so this has probably been a profitable day.
-
Congrats, Andrew. I don't provenance hunt currently, but if any of you come across my Aes Grave As, I hope you'll let me know:
https://www.forumancientcoins.com/gallery/displayimage.php?pos=-95173
-
I hit a lucky streak today - found 2 Haeberlins, a Ryan (Glendining 1952) and a Sydenham (Ratto).
Nice. New acquisitions or random finds?
Congrats, Andrew. I don't provenance hunt currently, but if any of you come across my Aes Grave As, I hope you'll let me know:
You've already got a pre-2011 auction provenance on that As, which is the critical point for avoiding MOU issues. Anything more would be gravy - but very fine gravy. Incidentally, your Aes Grave has a flan characteristic that I've noticed on many Janus/prow aes grave asses. Specifically, there is the appearance of a crack across the bottom quarter of the coin, visible on both sides, it runs below Janus' neck. I've seen this nearly identical characteristic on many asses. It almost looks like the coin has been repaired, but I'm sure that's not the case as I've seen it so many times before. Not sure if it is caused by cracked molds (casting equivalent of a die break) or some temperature problem with the casting. Maybe a good issue for a separate thread...
-
I hit a lucky streak today - found 2 Haeberlins, a Ryan (Glendining 1952) and a Sydenham (Ratto).
Nice. New acquisitions or random finds?
Random finds. I've been cataloguing my catalogues in Spring and noting in Spring where I've got a coin. So as I pull down each one of course I flicked through plates to see anything I wasn't previously aware of. A friend coincidentally pointed me toward the aes grave actually in context of saying it would be ok for US import as it is in Sydenham. The first Haeberlin I found was from a group that had previously yielded another Haeberlin a while back. So I went and carefully checked each coin from that group and found another Haeberlin provenance making three in all out of a group of six coins I bought two years ago. The Ryan was an Antony Cistophorus that has long been one of my favorite coins - not EF and so relatively cheap, but very beautiful. It's actually encouraging that I've found provenances for coins I'd previously checked. It means that more will follow.
-
What exciting finds, Andrew! I looked up the Ryan and it looks quite nice. Maybe you could post it for us to see what it looks like in the flesh???
I see I have 3 SORS to choose from in Haeberlin and I'm not sure what the other coin is. Sydenham, well, I'm not sure there either.
Good for you on finding so many. I've been on a bit of a provenance dearth of late. It's not for lack of trying. I have a full day blocked out (wife willing) at the ANS next month and we're going to change that dry streak! I've bought a ton of coins this year, most with that old collection look, and by golly, I'm gonna find them! ;D
-
Here are the four coins below the fold
Haeberlin 2500 Erato (per Phil Davis in Essays Witschonke). The flan shape aren't identical but from the reverse of the plaster cast picture you can see a lot of excess plaster and I'd assume the obverse (a different cast) also had excess plaster hand finished in a way that shifted the obverse bulge from 3pm (coin) to 2pm (cast). Fidelity of edge shape is a usual hazard with plaster casts as when lifted from the mould some plaster trimming is usually needed. Otherwise identical and same weight (3.82g)
Haeberlin 2190 SORS. Note the matching edge imperfections between 6pm and 8pm. Same weight.
Sydenham 32. The blob obverse 7pm and the dots under the prow are unmistakeable, and same 120 gram weight.
Ryan 1929. This is an easy match from the ding after R.P.C. And everything else. This was from NAC78, no provenance mentioned.
I also picked up the Autronia denarius from the recent RBW sale e364 lot 104 - Lawrence 46 = Hamburger 96 lot 388. This is a really rare coin to find nice and this is one of the best examples despite being only GVF so I put everything onto to it.
These five coins expand my list of classic provenances by a whole big chunk. They aren't so common even in my collection.
-
All great coins, Andrew! I don't yet have a copy of the Ryan sale - I'll need to keep my eyes open for that one.
-
Here are the four coins below the fold
Haeberlin 2500 Erato (per Phil Davis in Essays Witschonke). The flan shape aren't identical but from the reverse of the plaster cast picture you can see a lot of excess plaster and I'd assume the obverse (a different cast) also had excess plaster hand finished in a way that shifted the obverse bulge from 3pm (coin) to 2pm (cast). Fidelity of edge shape is a usual hazard with plaster casts as when lifted from the mould some plaster trimming is usually needed. Otherwise identical and same weight (3.82g)
Haeberlin 2190 SORS. Note the matching edge imperfections between 6pm and 8pm. Same weight.
Sydenham 32. The blob obverse 7pm and the dots under the prow are unmistakeable, and same 120 gram weight.
Ryan 1929. This is an easy match from the ding after R.P.C. And everything else. This was from NAC78, no provenance mentioned.
I also picked up the Autronia denarius from the recent RBW sale e364 lot 104 - Lawrence 46 = Hamburger 96 lot 388. This is a really rare coin to find nice and this is one of the best examples despite being only GVF so I put everything onto to it.
These five coins expand my list of classic provenances by a whole big chunk. They aren't so common even in my collection.
Ah, Erato! I didn't get your shorthand. Duh! I read the article by Davis online a few weeks ago before I got my Fides book. Anyway, yes, that looks like the coin. Well done!
I recognize the Cistophorus and it's so nice to see them with an old collection look. So many higher grade ones seem to be newer finds and over cleaned. Mine is and it will never tone so I'm waiting for the chance to get one with your look someday.
The Ryan sale is interesting to me in that it has 2 fabulous examples of the exceptionally rare Caesar captive denarii 452/4 & 5. It seems every 20th century auction with a strong RR collection has an Eid Mar (maybe even 2!), but you don't often see one much less both of the Caesar issues. Haeberlin had both, one of Ryan's came from Haeberlin but the other is much nicer than Haeberlin's. It was a fabulous sale and I don't have any coins from it. :'(
-
The greatest denarius rarity of all - excluding the mythical types such as Laterens Cr.358 - is probably Meta Cr.124/2. I'm not sure there's a meta in any auction sale at all though a couple are in museums - not even in Haeberlin or RBW (full disclosure - I found an example on eBay some fifteen years ago). Is anyone aware of an auction example?
-
At the end of a couple of days inventorising what "Spring" catalogues I have:
- I have, at home, originals of 53 catalogues listed by Spring, all with at least some RR material
- within those, I counted 28 provenances with a few coins multiple appearances, so somewhere between 20 and the 25 within the catalogues I own
- I've a bunch in with the bookbinder to add later to this list
- And there are also some old provenance coins I know about but where I don't have the catalogue
- So overall, probably 65 Spring catalogues in my collection and probably around 30 coins in my collection with pre-1970 provenance (Spring, though in theory going to 1980, in practice often stops shortly after the 1970 UNESCO convention date). There's maybe another 70 coins in my collection that I would hope one day to find old provenances for - I'm aware for example that I've undercounted aes grave and dioscuri denarii and fractions, which tend to be difficult to memorize and compare, and there's also an over emphasis on coins bought in the last 3 years of catalogue madness at the expense of older acquisitions. And there's still a zillion FPLs to find and go through even if I've hit most of the best auctions already. So lots still to come. But even 100 coins will still be less than 10% of my collection. However if I add in good modern provenances (NAC, CNG etc) I suspect the number will zoom up to maybe 40%. All the rest of my coins will have been bought retail or from ephemeral online venues. So be it. If I ever actually get to 10% old provenance and 50% good provenances I'll be pretty content.
Today I found two coins in 1960s Mario Ratto fixed price lists: In FPL 3/64:294 my Pompey Varro denarius, a beautiful coin. In FPL 4/68:160 my MP Victoriatus. Onwards and upwards!
-
I've spent the last couple of evenings working through catalogues, in a house keeping exercise. Didn't find much really new, just a couple:
Platt, 28th June 1923, lot 221:
(https://farm1.staticflickr.com/542/19083021982_90baa1e815_k.jpg) (https://www.flickr.com/photos/ahala_rome/19083021982/)
Leu 17, 3rd May 1977, lot 66, Nicolas collection
(https://farm6.staticflickr.com/5534/11251238943_0834719cd4_h.jpg) (https://www.flickr.com/photos/ahala_rome/11251238943/)
Both were surprise finds. I did however find a very great deal of housekeeping that needed to be done - many cases where I'd a provenance from a sales ticket but had not recorded it, or had done so untidily e.g. mentioning the Nicolas collection without lot number or auction date, or not tabbing the physical auction catalogue to show I'd caught the coin, or tabbing the physical catalogue but never entering in my database. The real fun is of course finding provenances. Writing them all down in a proper manner can be tedious..
-
The real fun is of course finding provenances. Writing them all down in a proper manner can be tedious..
Call me crazy, but I enjoy writing them down too! When I print flip and tray tags describing a lost provenance, I feel a sense of accomplishment and hope that the information will never again be separated from the coin, at least while the coin is in my custody and hopefully while in the custody of the next owner or two.
That's a nice pair you found, Andrew. The Scarpus, of course, is a scarcer type anyway and the iridescence hints that it's been around a while; but that Platt sale is not a catalogue that I would think to search - so very well done! The rudder denarius looks like a lovely example, with the characteristic Nicolas toning.
I have several coins that I'm particularly focused on, because I'm certain their provenances are waiting to be discovered. I just need to buy more catalogues until I find them! ;D
-
I’m trying to recover some provenance information from a ticket. This is what I have
Peus sale 355, 27th April 1998 lot 197 (this is the easy bit)
By HC 6/94 Jinn Grandt Nielsen
Ex Paul Proschowsky
Ex NF 9/10 57 nr.9
Might the last line on the ticket refer to a sale on 9 Oct 1957? Or 10th Sept 1957? Or something else? Anyone heard of these names? The ticket is in English.
This is the coin: (nice!)
(https://farm4.staticflickr.com/3779/11249829326_c53510ecb1_k.jpg) (https://www.flickr.com/photos/ahala_rome/11249829326/)
-
The real fun is of course finding provenances. Writing them all down in a proper manner can be tedious..
Call me crazy, but I enjoy writing them down too! When I print flip and tray tags describing a lost provenance, I feel a sense of accomplishment and hope that the information will never again be separated from the coin, at least while the coin is in my custody and hopefully while in the custody of the next owner or two.
That's a nice pair you found, Andrew. The Scarpus, of course, is a scarcer type anyway and the iridescence hints that it's been around a while; but that Platt sale is not a catalogue that I would think to search - so very well done! The rudder denarius looks like a lovely example, with the characteristic Nicolas toning.
I have several coins that I'm particularly focused on, because I'm certain their provenances are waiting to be discovered. I just need to buy more catalogues until I find them! ;D
An issue I have is that I don't yet have tickets. Of course I have an electronic database, but if you pick up the coin it's not obvious whether it's been provenanced or not, and if I mark a coin in a catalogue it's not obvious whether it's been marked in the database or not, and evidently if i find a coin I want to mark it immediately. The answer is to bridge these with paper tickets, such that the paper ticket confirms that both the database and the printed catalogue are appropriately marked. I thought to make very paper simple tickets with just Crawford number, simple description ("Annia denarius", "Victory triens"), the provenance info, and the unique code I assign to each coin. However I want to settle on a definitive name for my collection so I can have appropriate ticket blanks printed, and I've been mulling over a variety. Does anyone know any firm that prints customised ticket blanks? A further issue, which is more an affluenza problem - an overabundance of riches - is that I've very many coins privately purchased from RBW; in my database these are marked "RBW duplicates" but I also have masses of unsorted RBW tickets, very many of which include important provenance information, waiting discovery. And I've barely touched my own resources of catalogues in terms of going through them absolutely systematically coin by coin; sure, I'll not have missed a beautiful toned Pompey in my collection, but what about a marginal random L. Julius Bursio that comes from a thousand seemingly identical dies? And all those catalogue scans on my PC, and online sites such as Heidelberg university. It's akin to eating an elephant. There's such a wealth of provenance information just hidden in corners of my own home that hasn't yet been properly explored.
-
I’m trying to recover some provenance information from a ticket. This is what I have
Peus sale 355, 27th April 1998 lot 197 (this is the easy bit)
By HC 6/94 Jinn Grandt Nielsen
Ex Paul Proschowsky
Ex NF 9/10 57 nr.9
Might the last line on the ticket refer to a sale on 9 Oct 1957? Or 10th Sept 1957? Or something else? Anyone heard of these names? The ticket is in English.
Google tells me that Grandt Nielsen is a numismatist, who was active in the 1980s-1990s
Grandt-Nielsen, Finn: Mikel Lunge giør Sedler for andres Punge. Lokale danske pengesedler 1807-16. I: Festskrift til Jørgen Sømod, København 1984 side 69-81
Grandt-Nielsen, Finn: Danske Billetter - Nødpengesedler 1807-16, København (Dansk Numismatisk Forening) 1993 - forside
He probably also traded coins privately, no use for provenance. The "Paul Proschowsky NF 9/10 57 nr.9" may help.
More info (google): Paul Proschowsky was also Danish, and was head of the Dansk Numismatisk Forening from 1955 to 1965. So we are pretty safe in assuming NF 9/10 57 nr.9 refers to a sale (which?) in 1957.
More: Dansk Numismatisk Forening is actually a coin seller. So "NF" probably refers to one of their sales. Ted Buttrey will confirm Monday, but I think I've probably cracked it - It's "Dansk Numismatisk Forening sale 9th October 1957 lot 9".
-
The answer is to bridge these with paper tickets, such that the paper ticket confirms that both the database and the printed catalogue are appropriately marked. I thought to make very paper simple tickets with just Crawford number, simple description ("Annia denarius", "Victory triens"), the provenance info, and the unique code I assign to each coin. However I want to settle on a definitive name for my collection so I can have appropriate ticket blanks printed, and I've been mulling over a variety. Does anyone know any firm that prints customised ticket blanks?
I assume you mean tickets for your Abafil trays. I don’t personalize my tickets, but many of the dealers that we buy coins from, including Forum, have personalized tickets and I’m sure they could direct you to their source. Those personalized tickets will need to be small enough to fit into the smallest-opening trays you use (likely 1x1 inch for denarius-sized trays). That's not an issue if the personal logo or other motif is very small and limited to the margin; otherwise, on a small ticket, the logo/motif may use up valuable real estate which might be needed for a lengthy provenance. Did you plan to hand-write your tickets or print them from your computer? Unless you've got a remarkably steady hand, I recommend the latter. The information you’ve indicated that you plan to include should be sufficient – it’s about what I include on my tray tickets – and it’s a good failsafe for an electronic catastrophe. I like to print the information I could not easily recover in the event of a computer failure. So, besides very basic ID information and a few standard reference numbers, I include my “collection number” (which matches my electronic records), any provenance information and the price I paid for the coin (which I put in alphabetic code). Even with this limited amount of information, I must print my tickets two-sided and in tiny font that I will likely need a magnifier to read in 15-20 years!
As for the name of your collection, I say this: you are generally well-known by name among fellow-collectors of Roman Republican coins; you have an internet presence in your own name; you’ve published scholarly articles and edited books in your own name; and in several venues, including Forum, you’ve sold coins identified as ex Andrew McCabe Collection. In short, “Andrew McCabe” is your numismatic brand. Unless you have extenuating concerns about privacy, safety or taxes, why re-brand your collection with any other name? Absent those extenuating concerns, I would strongly suggest the “Andrew McCabe Collection.”
-
The answer is to bridge these with paper tickets, such that the paper ticket confirms that both the database and the printed catalogue are appropriately marked. I thought to make very paper simple tickets with just Crawford number, simple description ("Annia denarius", "Victory triens"), the provenance info, and the unique code I assign to each coin. However I want to settle on a definitive name for my collection so I can have appropriate ticket blanks printed, and I've been mulling over a variety. Does anyone know any firm that prints customised ticket blanks?
I assume you mean tickets for your Abafil trays. I don’t personalize my tickets, but many of the dealers that we buy coins from, including Forum, have personalized tickets and I’m sure they could direct you to their source. Those personalized tickets will need to be small enough to fit into the smallest-opening trays you use (likely 1x1 inch for denarius-sized trays). That's not an issue if the personal logo or other motif is very small and limited to the margin; otherwise, on a small ticket, the logo/motif may use up valuable real estate which might be needed for a lengthy provenance. Did you plan to hand-write your tickets or print them from your computer? Unless you've got a remarkably steady hand, I recommend the latter. The information you’ve indicated that you plan to include should be sufficient – it’s about what I include on my tray tickets – and it’s a good failsafe for an electronic catastrophe. I like to print the information I could not easily recover in the event of a computer failure. So, besides very basic ID information and a few standard reference numbers, I include my “collection number” (which matches my electronic records), any provenance information and the price I paid for the coin (which I put in alphabetic code). Even with this limited amount of information, I must print my tickets two-sided and in tiny font that I will likely need a magnifier to read in 15-20 years!
As for the name of your collection, I say this: you are generally well-known by name among fellow-collectors of Roman Republican coins; you have an internet presence in your own name; you’ve published scholarly articles and edited books in your own name; and in several venues, including Forum, you’ve sold coins identified as ex Andrew McCabe Collection. In short, “Andrew McCabe” is your numismatic brand. Unless you have extenuating concerns about privacy, safety or taxes, why re-brand your collection with any other name? Absent those extenuating concerns, I would strongly suggest the “Andrew McCabe Collection.”
Because I integrate bronzes with silver, my minimum tray opening is 40mm or so, so I can do quite large tickets. I plan to hand write because I want sturdy tactile card tickets which would be unsuitable for printing. I do plan to include my collector number.
I'm not in favour of Andrew McCabe collection simply because I've been rotating through duplicates for years, all of which are from my collection. The end result of decades of sifting and upgrading has to be a differently name group of coins. RBW didn't distinguish, as a result the "RBW" cachet has lost some value, whereas the NAC 61 coins remain very special. I learnt a lot from RBW and his sales, and one point is to distinguish the main sale from the duplicates very clearly. I have a number of names in mind. "Ahala". "Marius" (my favourite Roman). "Standard". "Canonical". "Principal Coins of the Roman Republic". But I could be persuaded to add my name to a modifier.
On RBW, he had marvellous provenances in NAC 61/63, but the provenances he missed defy belief. One is my bull snake and corn-ear quadrans.
[see third pic below post]
Aside from Vecchi 3 and Fallani collection, I now have:
ex Glendining 19th July 1950 lot 455 Henry Platt Hall coll. purchased by Spink
ex Leo Hamburger 19 Oct.1925 lot 203 Niklovitch coll.
Absurdly, were it not for these terrific provenances, the coin would be a marginal keeper for me. My keeper bronzes are rather nice.
Note the vast number of post-it index tabs in the pic below. I'm single-handedly keeping 3M in business.
-
But I could be persuaded to add my name to a modifier.
I do think your name adds "value". How about something like "The Andrew McCabe Ultimate Collection" or words to that effect? It's your legacy, of course. Just don't make the name so long that it can't fit easily on a collector's ticket! I don't necessarily agree that RBW's brand has been hurt by his duplicates. Maybe watered-down some, but collectors have learned to distinguish between the duplicates and the NAC auction coins. Personally, when I see a mediocre coin identified as ex RBW, I look at it even if below my quality standards, simply because I am attracted to the RBW brand.
On RBW, he had marvellous provenances in NAC 61/63, but the provenances he missed defy belief.
I'm surprised he missed that quadrans. I know he had a copy of Niklovitch, as I just received it from K&F!
Note the vast number of post-it index tabs in the pic below. I'm single-handedly keeping 3M in business
I hate to tell you this, but I learned yesterday while visiting my book binder that 3-M sticky-notes are not archival safe. I was dropping-off my collection of CNG catalogues with Goodman Collection coins, to be dismantled and bound in a single volume of just the Goodman pages. Several months ago, I had used 3-M sticky notes to mark the pages I wanted. When removing those yesterday, I could feel a light film left on the pages. My bookbinder told me not to use them in the future as they are not archival save. Who knew? I had a similar volume made of the CNA, Ltd. sales of the Wetterstrom Collection of Roman Egypt which I picked-up yesterday (picture below) bound in maroon half-cloth with hand-marbled boards and leather spine label with gilt. The Goodman book will be similarly bound.
-
I'm just going to have to live with the Post-Its risk. These tabs are such a fundamental means of navigating my catalogues and noting which coins I have and haven't that I can live with the risk it might damage the paper. I am careful however to avoid that the clear plastic part of the tabs covers a coin photograph, and in old style one sided plates I stick the tab on the back rather than the pictorial side of each plate.
Nice bindings! I'm expecting a tranche back from my binder any day soon.
I,spent four hours on the tedious part of provenancing today (updating records, and not so many at that). My brain is frazzled. So I'm going to do some fun provenancing (looking for matches) for a while now. The record keeping is really a slow process.
-
I'm just catching up to the thread. I always love seeing Andrew's workspace (or is it a laboratory?). Definitely passion there.
I'm awaiting my RBW sale lots as they should arrive next week. I've got a lot of new catalogues to organize and find space for...which doesn't exist today. I've definitely outgrown my library shelves.
I keep my provenance info in my database and only print tickets when the ticket I got from my seller doesn't have enough info on it to identify the coin. I usually will print out the provenance and include it with the coin flip for the next owner, provided the seller is passing on the tag. I hope they do.
Once I get my new lots, I'm going to get my a group of books rebound and repaired. You all know what some of those are.
-
I don't collect bonze, but I did find a set of provenances for a little Semuncia I picked up on a whim at the San Fran show in December. It came with a Joel Malter NFA ticket from the mid 1970's, but I found it plated in Ars Classica XVII 1934 and Ratto's Martini catalogue in 1930.
Those provenances made an interesting little coin quite a keeper in my book.
-
That's an exceptionally pretty coin and lovely provenances. Should you regret this bronze whim and not wish to keep it, there'll be willing takers.
-
Hi,
It also looks much finer in the photograph than it does in the plates. Nice coin.
Regards,
Mauseus
-
I don't collect bonze, but I did find a set of provenances for a little Semuncia I picked up on a whim at the San Fran show in December.
That's an uncommonly nice example of that type. No need to rush into bronzes though, Carthago. There's still plenty of nice quality silver out there. :evil:
-
This may be my longest provenance:
Triton 1 (2 Dec.1997) lot 1125 Goodman coll. ex Rollin & Feuardent Paris 1902, cf Cohen pl. LXVI Silia 2 (this coin) Fenelon Farez coll., cf Babelon 9 (this coin), cf Bahrfedlt Nachtraege 3, 1918, pl.IV,118 (this coin), cf RBW 292/3 as unique (this coin cited) via RBW coll. (duplicate)
Note the presence of the words "unique" and "duplicate" in the same provenance! Roberto Russo didn't think this coin to be real, which I mentioned in the RBW collection book, but before actually handling the piece which seems to me perfect as regards style, flan (conical section) and strike though with flan casting flaws that may have unnecessarily concerned him. Bahrfeldt, Cohen and Babelon also handled the coin without doubts. The second known specimen, also in the RBW coll., is a different die pair but same style and flan; as a philosophical point how, in 1800, one would know what was the correct flan and style to make a new piece from new dies on the correct flan, lacking any other specimen to copy?
-
Great provenance, Andrew! Was that coin the subject of a previous Forum thread in which we discussed the veracity of Dardell's etchings?
-
Great provenance, Andrew! Was that coin the subject of a previous Forum thread in which we discussed the veracity of Dardell's etchings?
Yes. I'm doing homework at the moment. Here are a few with three or more good provenances:
========================
NAC78 lot 1913 ex Auctiones 10 (1979) lot 507 ex Munzen Medaillen Basel FPL 215 (Sep.1961) lot 71 (CHF 300) ex Clement Platt, 28 June 1923, lot 221 (57 francs)
Kuenker 262 lot 7872 ex Lanz 88 (23 Nov.1998) lot 842 as unpublished with R.R.P.C. legend [just a pair of provenances, but an interesting numismatic note that was left off the more recent sale!]
Triton XI (7 Jan 2008) lot 616 ex CNG50 (23 Jun.1999) lot 1351 ex Schulman 243 (June 1966) lot 1501 ex Adolph Cahn 80 (27 Feb 1933) lot 548
NAC78 (26 May 2014) lot 497 ex Munzen Medaillen Basel FPL 385 (1977) lot 37 ex Santamaria Feb.1958 lot 739 Brunacci coll.
NAC63 (17 May 2012) lot 469 RBW coll. ex CNG43 (24 Sep.1997) lot 1767 ex Hess Leu 3 (27 Mar.1956) lot 349
Mario Ratto FPL 1964 lot 294 ex Giuseppe De Falco FPL Dec. 1960 lot 243 @38000 Lire via Naville 13 (22 Feb.2015) lot 138
NAC78 (26 May 2014) lot 454 JD coll. ex Auctiones 10 (1979) lot 403 ex Munzen Medaillen Basel FPL 189 (April 1959) lot 41
Triton XVII (6 Jan.2014) lot 536 ex Archer M. Huntington Collection, ANS 1001.1.10566 via The Hispanic Society of America 1955
Kuenker 262 (2015) lot 7661 ex Lanz 88 (23 Nov.1998) lot 226, Leo Benz coll. ex Munzen Medaillen Basel 52 (June 1975) lot 371
CNG e237 (21 Jul.2010) lot 237 = Alföldi 1974 type XIX, pl.CXLI,37 (this coin) Professor L.Fontana coll. [a book-plated coin is always nice]
NAC78 lot 1778 ex Lanz 88 (23 Nov.1988) lot 154 Leo Benz coll. ex Rodolpho Ratto FPL 1933-XI lot 236
CNG93 (22 May 2013) lot 1079 ex NAC61 (5 Oct.2011) lot 729 = RBW734 ex Sternberg 26 (16 Nov.1992) lot 237
Triton 1 (2 Dec.1997) lot 998 Goodman coll. with his ticket (acquired Spanish collection 1986)
NAC78 lot 544 ex Astarte XIX (2006) lot 850 ex Ratto FPL 1933-XI lot 135
NAC83 (20 May 2015) lot 256 Student Mentor coll. ex Lanz 44 (16 May 1988) lot 330 ex Mario Ratto FPL Apr.1968 lot 160
Leo Hamburger 19 Oct.1925 lot 229 Niklovitch coll. via V.England 10 Dec.1988 with dated ticket via RBW duplicate
CNG web item 873035 (2010) Professor Fontana coll. ex Ratto FPL 1933-XI lot 1000 ex Baranowsky 25 Feb.1931 lot 1246 Joseph Martini & Valerio Traverso colls. ex Ratto FPL 1927 lot 586 [eye-brow raising that a coin with three good 1920s-1930s provenances sold at retail with the old provenances of course lost, but now recovered]
CNG43 (24 Sep.1997) lot 1328 Goodman coll. ex Morgantina B hoard per CNG notes
Leo Hamburger 19 Oct.1925 lot 203 Niklovitch coll. ex Glendining 19th July 1950 lot 455 Henry Platt Hall coll. purchased by Spink ex Vecchi 3 13th Sept. 1996 lot 78 Fallani coll. via RBW duplicate
Peus 355, 27 Apr.1998 lot 197 ex Grandt-Nielsen ex Ex Paul Proschowsky ex NF 9/10 57 nr.9 (Numismatisk Forening sale 9th October 1957 lot 9)
NAC61 (5 Oct.2011) lot 214 RBW coll. ex C.Hersh ex Platt Hall Glendining July 1950 lot 461 ex Hamburger 96, 1932 lot 273 ex 1923 hoard = Hersh Overstrikes NC 1953 p.53,62d = RBW 199
NAC64 (17 May 2012) lot 907 JD coll ex Vecchi 17 (15 Dec.1999) lot 618 ex Peus 322 (1 Nov.1988) lot 36 with notes (1400 DM)
NAC64 (17 May 2012) lot 885 JD coll. ex Lanz 88 (23 Nov.1998) lot 8 Leo Benz coll. ex Kurpfälzische Münzhandlung (15 Dec.1978) lot 198
Munzen Medaillen 2 (27 Mar.1998) lot 308 ex Mario Ratto 26 Jan.1955 lot 18 Giorgio coll. (again just a pair, but it's for a 14/1 Aes Grave as which was an exciting discovery - it's very rare to provenance aes grave)
===========================
I'm working hard on this each evening at the moment. It's gratifying how far back you can push the average provenance-age with some concentrated work. I've just done a string of CNG coins for which I pushed their average provenance 'date' from 2010 to 2000. That's quite a big pushback given that many coins will have no older provenance than the date I purchased meaning those I do find typically go way back. The above list is typical - full of recent CNG and NAC dates yet mostly provenanced to before 1970. You can see the format I use from the above. A convention I use is that to start with the most recent printed auction or major online sale (such as CNG); minor esales which might go dark or private or retail purchases go at the end prefaced with "via": if they are unverifiable and inconsequential - e.g. a dealer-flip after an auction - they may eventually be left off my sale record. My format aims for zero ambiguity - no shorthand such as "Hess 11, 3, 10, 10" which leaves one entirely unclear whether this was Hess sale 11, March 1910, lot 10, or Hess sale on 11th March 1910, lot 10, or Hess sale 3rd November 1910, lot 10, or Hess sale 11 on 3rd October 1910 or Hess sale 11 on 10th March 1910 or whether all the 1910s should in fact be 2010.
It takes very little ink to spell it out.
-
Addendum: I just finished processing my CNG provenances. The typical purchase date remains unchanged - about 2010 average. The average provenance date is 1996 - pushed back 14 years through searches.
Of this sample of 128 CNG or Triton purchases, a mere 12 have a provenance date of 2011 or later (although I've bought many dozens after that date). And I'll work on those 12. I've got proven pre-2011-MOU dates for over 90% of this sample. And I'm barely starting - it can only get better. This emphatically kills the idea that coins on the market are generally the result of recent finds. They are not. My coins have been in collections for much of the last century and I can prove it. I expect a similar pattern once I move onto NAC and other venues.
Dickens: “Now, what I want is Facts. Teach these boys and girls nothing but Facts. Facts alone are wanted in life. Plant nothing else, and root out everything else. You can only form the minds of reasoning animals upon Facts; nothing else will ever be of any service to them.”
-
A delightful find this afternoon:
(https://farm4.staticflickr.com/3602/3350657707_de571cddb7_z.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/675ZNt)
Schulman 29 March 1949 lot 33, A.H. Drijfhout van Hooff collection. As it's a coin I bought relatively recently, privately, without provenance, cheap, and it's in exceptional condition, a really marvelous find. What led me to check the catalogue was a message I was writing on a different topic to someone who asked whether I had the catalogue; the related message also discussed the following coin:
(https://farm3.staticflickr.com/2881/11290958176_4be62e884d_b.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/icK7uG)
Triton XII (2009), AK Collection item A154. Those who know the AK coins will realise they were stuffed with definite and probable Haeberlin provenances. Haeberlin lists this type at the same weight 3.95grams, and in VF, which this would have graded in 1933. And it looks the right quality..
-
Yep, those AK group lots are full of great provenances. I bought one at last year's NYINC auction with a 1959 Munzhandlung Button provenance. I've bought several former AK Alexandrian coins with good provenances as well (Steger, Dattari, etc).
That was great luck finding the aes grave triens. While it is in exceptional preservation, because of the casting flaw, I might have expected fixed price list provenance rather than auction provenance.
-
This weekend, I went through my RBW Library lots that finally arrived last week. I think my favorite acquisition is Mionnet's price guide. 2 little books that run the gamut of Roman coins from the Republic onwards. Prices are in French Francs and there are some highly accurate line drawings. For instance, the aureus of Labienus is the coin currently in the British museum, but it was acquired by the BM in 1867 and my edition of Mionnet is 1827 so it was published while still in private hands. Neat stuff!!
Here's the auction description which does better than I can:
Mionnet, T.E. DE LA RARETÉ ET DU PRIX DES MÉDAILLES ROMAINES, OU RECEUIL CONTENANT LES TYPES RARES ET INÉDITS DES MÉDAILLES D’OR, D’ARGENT ET DE BRONZE, FRAPPÉES PENDANT LA DURÉE DE LA RÉPUBLIQUE ET DE L’EMPIRE ROMAIN. Seconde edition. Paris, 1827. Two volumes, complete. 8vo, contemporary matching blue quarter calf with mottled boards; flat spine ruled and lettered in gilt. (4), xxiv, 420; (4), 571, (1) pages; engraved frontispiece plate; 38 additional engraved plates of coins. Spotted; very good or better. The scarce second edition of the first substantial guide book to the value of coins, now augmented with handsomely engraved plates of coins. First published in 1815, with a more commonly encountered third edition in 1858
-
Nice set, Carthago! Congratulations.
It’s been a while since I’ve posted old catalogue acquisitions to this thread, but it’s not for lack of new material. I’ve acquired several nice additions recently, including a few from the RBW sale:
1. Hess (1912), Tolstoy Collection. A rare and desirable catalogue and one of Spring’s top catalogues for struck Republican coins. I bid on another copy of this catalogue last year and lost, so I was particularly happy to get this copy. Ex RBW Library.
2. Hamburger (1925), Niklovitz Collection. Ex RBW Library. Also on Spring’s top list.
3. Ars Classica XI, Levis Collection (1925). This replaces a poor condition copy that I acquired last year and is hand priced in ink. Ex RBW Library.
4. Ars Classica XVII, Burrage Collection (1934). An excellent condition copy. Ex RBW Library.
5. R. Ratto FPLs: I’ve picked up several Rodolfo Ratto fixed-price lists, including number I (Hadrian and his Family – 1931), number II (Palestine - 1932) and number VIII (Republic – 1933). These are in addition to two already in my collection. My goal is to assemble all 9 of the lists containing ancient coins in this series of 23 Ratto FPLs.
6. M. Ratto, Prof. Giorgio Giorgi Collection (1955). A fine collection of aes grave, Republican and Imperial coins.
-
Michael
Some great additions. From this set, I've found 2 (Niklovitz) and 5 (Ratto FPL VIII 1933) to be especially useful as in having coins that look like my collection - even if they aren't!
I've just completed a one-week long trawl through every one of CNG's printed auctions, from CNA1 on May 1st 1987 through CNG101 = Triton 19 this January. I scored 99 coins with provenances from these printed CNG sales (sometimes multiple), with the earliest being an aes grave as from CNA5 on Dec.9th 1988. I still have to do - a task for perhaps another year - the CNG Reviews, their web-shop and e-auctions. Of the 99 provenances, about one third were previously unknown to me, and about two thirds involved coins I originally purchased at a later date than their first appearance in a CNG sale (though sometimes from a later CNG sale), hence these provenances (either confirming, or finding for the first time) involved a trip back in time. For those wishing to do the same searches, CNA1 to about CNG50 are on issuu.com (google with the CNG number) and from about CNG60 onwards on their own website. That means there's a bit of a gap, but luckily my home library coverage bridged it.
Today I started on NAC. This kicked off well, with two from NAC1 (29 March 1989), neither previously known to me. I illustrate them below. Unlike CNG, which sold pretty modest quality ancients until they merged with Seaby - who seemingly brought the quality and connections to the deal - NAC started on a high note. My two NAC1 coins illustrated below the fold. Curiously the top one was provenanced in a much later NAC auction as "privately purchased in 1989". So much for not losing key provenances!
-
Below is a picture of the setup I use when I'm working on provenances. The relevant catalogue lies flat on my keyboard, whilst on the screen I scroll through my collection arranged in Crawford numbers. For those catalogues arranged in "family name" order, usually the anonymous types come first which I can check in Crawford order, and then I do a search on each name in turn: Aburia, Accolleia, etc. On the paper catalogue page, for each coin in turn I verify that it's a mismatch [sic]; I do this either using mental recognition of a very specific aspect of my coin that doesn't match. "my Crepusius has control letter S behind head, and this doesn't"; "my L.SATVRN is from the finer style engraver and this is from the cruder style engraver"; "my Dream of Sulla has a double scratch control mark before the face and flatness to the angel's head, this coin has neither"; "my Herennia has a perfectly centered obverse with a full border visible and this doesn't"; "my OPEI as has the O of OPEI touching the edge at 10pm and this doesn't". I've effectively memorised one key fact about each of my coins that rules out 95% of possible matches. In those cases where either I can't remember my coin's nickname so to speak, or there is a vague resemblance that I can't rule out, or I can't otherwise rule out a coin on page, I scroll through my photo listings until I find my coin. I then first check for edge cracks and offstrikes, either of which can quickly rule out a coin, and then for border-circle intersection with the coin's border, and only if these haven't ruled it out do I check carefully for a possible match. My provenance pickup rate runs at about 1/200 coins - in a 200 coin Roman Republican sale I typically find one provenance with quite some variation. As I rule out 95% just on a preliminary mismatch check, about one in ten coins where I need to do a close check with my piece on screen proves a match. This is a good enough ratio to maintain an incentive; two hours solid work on provenances usually yields between one and several hits. It's mentally tiring so 2 hours is about as much as I can do in a day; and I usually close up just after I've recorded a hit. On the page below, I just scored a hit: my AVR semis RRC 65/3, previously unprovenanced, is NAC9 (16 Apr.1996) lot 574. It sold for CHF 1500, at estimate. I paid £56 for it. It's 'value' (if coins can be considered to have an intrinsic value) probably lies somewhere between. As I've just scored this hit, I'm taking a break. Each coloured tab sticking from the left of the volume I'm checking is an NAC provenance, from some or other sale prior to NAC9.
Addendum: a test run on one catalogue: NAC H (30 April 1998), contents 330 Roman Republican coins. I was aware from my spreadsheet of two provenances within, both which I checked and marked. I found three more: a denarius with gryphon symbol RRC 182, a double-curule chair denarius RRC 434, and a semis with eagle and wreath; the latter was already provenanced to a Kuenker sale in 2007 but this added 9 more years. Both the denarii had no known provenances prior to my purchase in 2009 / 2014 respectively. Good finds. I marked them both in the catalogue using post it tabs with the lot number written to avoid confusion, and in my spreadsheet in my standard format. The process of checking a catalogue with 330 coins, verifying two provenances and entering three brand new ones, took one and a half hours. One multiplies this by dozens, hundreds, of catalogues and the hour total gets scary. Though ... it becomes soon apparent whether a given catalogue has my type of coins rather than typically much worse or much better ones, either of which can save a lot of time. NAC H was right on the button. I show below the three added coins. We may as well look at some coins after this tale of red tape.
-
Pay yourself 25 credits for that hit! It is grueling work, but very gratifying when those hits come in!
-
Andrew mentioned CNG's archives on ISSUU and I'd like to add a note about how I use these archives. These catalogs have been professionally processed using OCR so their text can be searched reasonably easily either in a single catalog(using the magnifying glass button) or en masse using Google site search. As an example, I recently purchased the following coin from an international auction site(the picture is theirs because I have yet to receive it). After I won it I first searched 'site:issuu.com/cngcoins "382/1b"' where 382/1b is the Crawford number for this type. That didn't turn up anything so I changed my search to "382/1a". Still nothing, but OCR isn't perfect, sometimes numbers get transformed or spaces get inserted where they shouldn't, so I tried the coin's reverse die number: "CCV". That returned only two results, one being a link to CNA XIV and the next a direct link to CNA XIV page 71 where, lo and behold, it's my denarius at the top-right corner (link for those interested (https://issuu.com/cngcoins/docs/cna_xiv/71)) . A bit more experimentation found that I could also have searched for the Sydenham number to find this coin.
Now, this isn't quite as easy as the upload-and-forget service that was recently discussed but it's so quick and easy that it's usually my third stop for provenance research(behind ACSearch and the CNG e-archives) and I always spend 5 or 10 minutes searching here before I consult my physical library. I do wish ISSUU had prices realized, as I note that when possible, but in its absence I simply note the estimate and move on.
-
Thanks for that information, Jordan. I did not know those catalogue scans were searchable! That will save loads of time and effort.
-
Man, I am depressed with envy after reading the last ten posts or so! I'd love to come over to your stashes but pretty sure you wouldn't want all that drooling on your catalogs :-)
Fortunately for me my desire is for the data rather than the physical books - and good thing too since I'd have no space for them even if I did. I have in digital form some 500 catalogs which I'm slowly splitting up into individual lots from the plates and categorizing to make searching easier. I'm still missing many of the 'big name' sales but little by little I'm getting a fairly good comprehensive library. This is my spreadsheet:
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1OBaC0uOINGzBYoH8fYl3UHm1CdoT3VnVwut22P0qSK8/edit#gid=862572875
If you're feeling particularly generous and can help me get any of the red ink out..... :-D
Ras
-
Thanks for that information, Jordan. I did not know those catalogue scans were searchable! That will save loads of time and effort.
Ditto, and I also didn't realise you could link to a specific page within the issuu documents. It potentially allows me to include a link to a coins prior appearance somewhere in my databases - without having to leaf through 150 pages, searching as I go along, to find some coin mentioned in a sale. Thanks Jordan.
Man, I am depressed with envy after reading the last ten posts or so! I'd love to come over to your stashes but pretty sure you wouldn't want all that drooling on your catalogs :-)
Fortunately for me my desire is for the data rather than the physical books - and good thing too since I'd have no space for them even if I did. I have in digital form some 500 catalogs which I'm slowly splitting up into individual lots from the plates and categorizing to make searching easier. I'm still missing many of the 'big name' sales but little by little I'm getting a fairly good comprehensive library. This is my spreadsheet:
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1OBaC0uOINGzBYoH8fYl3UHm1CdoT3VnVwut22P0qSK8/edit#gid=862572875
If you're feeling particularly generous and can help me get any of the red ink out..... :-D
Ras
Ras,
and I think we'd be interested in where your project is going. There's clearly mileage in making searchable provenance databases.
-
I happened to be perusing some of my old Naville/Ars Classica catalogues, and came across the following plate for lot 246 in Ars Classica VIII (1924) - Clarence S. Bement Collection. It certainly looks like a match to my Memmius, acquired a couple of years ago. Note in particular the edge ding at 12h on obv, and the reverse centering and poorly struck "S". The interior of the reverse shield and the obverse neck truncation look slightly different - shall I blame those on plate casting flaws or are these just near twins?
-
Michael
Yours are the same coin for certain. The differences are inconsequential, the edge nick at 12pm obverse isn't the result of the die but of coin damage, and that's not a coincidence.
I just had a pair I had to take a different view of - Knobloch 620 versus my Cr. 480/5b, pics below. Different coins, same die pair. Aside from the obviously similar offstrike what threw me at first was the raised mark under Victory - but that's explicable as a die flaw common to both as is the raised line above the star and that through the letter C - and slightly coincidental that both coins have an edge crack above the letter P, but the crack differs in shape and directions; other edge cracks differ, border intersections differ, mine is overall more complete in several aspects but marginally more worn, the nick at 1pm obv on mine isn't on Knobloch. I was initially concerned about mine being a copy but I realised that mine has plenty of details entirely missing from the Knobloch and the reverse applies too. Superficial differences due to a similar offstrike and same dies, but once you look more closely the resemblences crumble and one realises they are totally different coins. Whereas with a real match, the differences fade and the resemblences become more important.
-
I happened to be perusing some of my old Naville/Ars Classica catalogues, and came across the following plate for lot 246 in Ars Classica VIII (1924) - Clarence S. Bement Collection. It certainly looks like a match to my Memmius, acquired a couple of years ago. Note in particular the edge ding at 12h on obv, and the reverse centering and poorly struck "S". The interior of the reverse shield and the obverse neck truncation look slightly different - shall I blame those on plate casting flaws or are these just near twins?
Definitely a match. The overall coin looks the same proportionally, the 12h nick is a dead ringer, but also the minor flan flaws on the reverse at 1h and 8h appear barely visible on the cast photo. It's your coin. Congratulations!
-
...once you look more closely the resemblences crumble and one realises they are totally different coins. Whereas with a real match, the differences fade and the resemblences become more important.
Thanks for this sage advice, Andrew, which seems particularly appropriate to photos of casts, rubbings, etchings, and other facsimiles that we typically encounter in our old catalogues and books. These facsimile methods were not always precise.
-
Definitely a match. The overall coin looks the same proportionally, the 12h nick is a dead ringer, but also the minor flan flaws on the reverse at 1h and 8h appear barely visible on the cast photo. It's your coin. Congratulations!
Thanks, Carthago. I'm surprised I never found it before, as I've had the coin nearly 2 years and I've had the Bement catalogue for at least a year.
-
Definitely a match. The overall coin looks the same proportionally, the 12h nick is a dead ringer, but also the minor flan flaws on the reverse at 1h and 8h appear barely visible on the cast photo. It's your coin. Congratulations!
Thanks, Carthago. I'm surprised I never found it before, as I've had the coin nearly 2 years and I've had the Bement catalogue for at least a year.
I LOVE it when that happens! That slight glimmer of hope keeps us going!
-
Milestone report:
I've completed my catalogue review of
- all 101 CNG printed auctions
- all 107 NAC auctions incl. letter sales
- 14 13 Vecchi auctions - I'm missing 4,5,13,16 of the original 17
From these three sources I found 500 494 provenances (out of a collection of 1190, so I'm slightly over 40% "provenanced" by now). Essentially all my really old provenances also passed through one of these three houses (principally NAC and CNG) because that's where my high end coins have tended to come from.
Surveying the rest - 690 696 coins - probably one quarter have a very recent printed auction provenance I can lock immediately by just looking it up and writing it down. Most are coins I bought here and there from dealers such as Gorny, Kuenker, Hirsch, Vico, Aureo etc, that I just haven't got round to writing up properly; generally German and there is fair hope that I can find the same coins in older German sales. A further quarter were private purchases from collections that likely originated in Italy at some point though there's nothing I can cite, though I can cite my own photo-upload date as evidence of "out of Italy date". But a few may be findable in old Italian FPLs such as de Falco or Baranowsky. For another quarter I can cite my own retail purchase from a reputable dealer (without evidence) and trust you will believe me. And the final slice can never be provenanced because they represent recently found coins whose first ever market appearance was when they were sold to me by seller that cannot be cited as a provenance e.g. eBay or a vest-pocket dealer.
I'm using Warren Esty's listings http://esty.ancients.info/catalogs/ to guide my searches from about 1990 to date. Spring works well until 1975 or so, especially in conjunction with my own detailed review http://andrewmccabe.ancients.info/RRAuctions.html of pre-1970 sales. There's an inventory gap between 1975 and 1990 - no readily accessible source that says what is in those catalogues. Likewise for FPLs of all dates. Ted Buttrey's Fitzwilliam list is the most comprehensive http://www.fitzmuseum.cam.ac.uk/dept/coins/library/salescatalogue/ but doesn't list contents. It is however invaluable for putting an actual date to a numbered sale e.g. that Leu 86 was on 5th May 2003. The html lists are tedious to scroll through, so use the "Find on this page" browser function.
Overall I'm reasonably confident of getting to 60% documented provenances (citation to a printed catalogue or FPL) over the long run, and to able to cite provenances for 75% of my collection - including those cases where I write "Purchased from Baldwin's, 1996" on my own recognizance. However the CNG/NAC/Vecchi stream represents the low hanging fruit, so I expect progress to become very slow from now (once I've tackled the remaining recent provenances). I haven't yet done a comprehensive acsearch check or CNG e-auction check; hopefully they yield a few dozen more than I haven't already found.
The average provenance date of the 500 coins locked in so far is 1994 - i.e. based on the oldest reliable citation for each coin. For the next 60%, the average provenance date is going to be much more recent as I expect the great majority won't result in a date much earlier than my own purchase, in 2012 or whenever. Of course the 500 already documented will, over time, be pushed back a bit further by new finds. So there's still progress to be made laboriously going through every single of the remaining major dealers. Very often new provenance finds turn out to be intermediate e.g. I bought a coin in 2009, found a 1977 provenance, and later find a 1996.
Some coin types are persistently more difficult to recognise than others, especially types that generally come uniformly struck. Also tiny coins (sestertii). Some are generally easier e.g. bronzes with typical flan flaws.
In general, regardless of condition, my own collection coins are on average appreciably better struck, better style, and on larger flans than the market-average for a given condition for a given type. I guess that's my own built up expertise in choosing coming into play. But in those few cases when I persistently recognise that not to be the case for a given type that signals to me that I need to divest my current coin - I'm ok in having worn coins, so long as my worn coin is better than the flock. But I'm not ok having even well preserved coins if my GVF-EF example is persistently the ugliest one on the market. It's gotta go.
You get to know your own coins pretty well through provenancing work.
-
Andrew,
Kudos on completing that gargantuan task! Having read the description of your catalogue review method several posts above, I imagine this must have taken weeks of persistent work. The fantastic results speak for themselves.
Were most of these finds coins that you had purchased at the respective auction, but neglected to write down the acquisition information; or were they surprise finds?
I've recently bought many of the Vecchi catalogues, but not the few you're missing. I have not thoroughly reviewed them yet, but I should.
-
Andrew,
Kudos on completing that gargantuan task! Having read the description of your catalogue review method several posts above, I imagine this must have taken weeks of persistent work. The fantastic results speak for themselves.
Were most of these finds coins that you had purchased at the respective auction, but neglected to write down the acquisition information; or were they surprise finds?.
Only one third bought by me at the auctions that represent the coins' oldest provenance.
Of the rest, I probably had hints where to find the bodies in most cases - either a cited provenance or a ticket. But a substantial number - certainly over 100 of the 500 - were discoveries unknown to me.
These sources represent breadth (42% my coins went through just 3 catalogue sources!!!). Depth, in terms of how old, needs to come from older sources. An ideal sale will have both breadth (many coins provenanced) and depth (a scattering of famous and / or very old sales). Given some of my sample provenances I cited a few posts back, my collection should be well provenances in time - depth and breadth.
Ultimately there's a creaming curve as regards breadth - each 10% extra becomes more difficult. But as regards depth (age of provenance), great strides can yet be made. All those old look coins that have a Triton and NAC provenance can also be provenances to a 1930s FPL.
-
I wanted to show two of the biggest surprises:
- a tiny post-reform semuncia with corn-ear weighing just 2 grams, bought off eBay in 2007 for a few dollars, is NAC Autumn Sale 95 (26 Oct.1995) lot 455
- an even tinier silver sestertius of Caius Considius Paetus, just 0.8 grams, bought from a small retail dealer in 2006, is Italo Vecchi Sale 17 (15 Dec.1999) lot 779
12mm coins each. It's very difficult to match these tinies to a printed catalogue photo, but also wholly unexpected to find such coins bought on some dirt road some considerable way off the main highway of numismatics with venerable provenances. These sort of finds really give me hope. Might I find my nicest Pompey Minatia denarius (another fleabay item) in a Ratto sale some day?
-
February ended well for me, with lots of additions to my catalogue library.
1. Dorotheum, Apostolo Zeno Collection Parts II and III. Both the Roman parts of this large collection dating back to the 18th century.
2. P & P Santamaria, Signorelli II and III (1952-3). The Republic and Imperial parts of these scarce catalogues. I have been hunting these catalogues for over a year, and was happy to acquire both in the last month.
3. Emile Bourgey, Edouard Schott Collection (1972). One of the more difficult-to-find modern sale catalogues on Spring’s top Republican list.
4. Ratto FPLs: I’ve picked up Rodolfo Ratto fixed-price lists number IX (Republic – 1933) and number XIV (Greek). These are in addition to five already in my collection, which includes number I (Hadrian and his Family – 1931), number II (Palestine - 1932), number VIII (Republic – 1933), number XI (Greek Italy and Sicily -1934), and number XXI (Greek and Roman – 1939). Ratto issued a series of 23 fixed price lists from 1931-1939, of which 9 contain ancient coins. All are illustrated with high quality plates, making them useful for provenance research. I now have 7 of those 9 lists.
-
Banti-Simonetti (i.e. the 1974 Roman Imperatorial volumes of Banti) yielded the following new provenances today: see pics below, in order:
1. Scarpus RRC 546/4 = Hamburger 96 (25 Oct.1932) lot 619 Jameson coll. (60 RM) = Banti-Simonetti Avgvstvs 548/3 (this coin). I already found a 1922 provenance for this coin in a Platt sale, so no extension in time but a more illustrious collection pedigree.
2. Legion V RRC 544/18 = K. Kress 109 (24 Oct.1958) lot 749 (est.25 DM)= Banti-Simonetti Marcvs Antonivs 75 (this coin). It's tough to provenance legionaries.
3. Scarpus RRC 546/2 = Rodolpho Ratto (23 Jan.1924) lot 1353 Bonazzi coll. (CHF 30) = Banti-Simonetti Marcvs Antonivs 27/1 (this coin). From a famous collection.
4. Cassius Tripod RRC 500/1 = Mario Ratto 1969 FPL 2 (Apr.-Jun.1969) lot 121 (L.It. 260,000) = Banti-Simonetti Cassivs 27/1 (this coin). Old provenance Cassius Tripod's are among the rarest types in the Republican series.
5. Banti-Simonetti Avgvstvs 533/1 (this coin) private coll. (= Banti coll.). Bought at NYINC 2014, this pushes the provenance back to 1974.
The first five volumes are full of proper Roman Republican coin types. There's a few in volume 6, and nothing in volume 7 (provincials) or volume 8 (later family issues). I'd already scored a couple before, so these 5 make 7 in all. Not a vast haul given the scope of Banti-Simonetti but each important in its way. More surprising perhaps was that so many good old provenances I already knew of e.g. Haeberlin didn't feature in Banti-Simonetti, though they would almost certainly have featured in the later Banti Republican. I guess the resource base was different with a focus on mainly Roman Imperial coin sales.
-
I just went through Alberto Santini, Saggio di Catalogo Generale delle Monete Consulari Anonime con Simboli, 1939-1940 (actually it's dated year XVIII 1939/1940). As its title suggests, it's a catalogue of Roman Republican coins showing symbols (star, rudder, knife, staff and wing etc.). Every known type (gold, silver and bronze) is illustrated, sometimes from multiple examples, with either reasonably good quality line drawings or fairly poor photos. Many more examples are listed than pictured with sources about 80% museums (not useful to us) and 20% private collections or auctions (useful), and weights are given for every cited coin (very useful and unusual at the time). The private collection examples are the author's own coins (line drawings) and 1920s-1930s major auctions. However of the coins actually pictured the great majority are museum examples, with d'Ailly (Paris Bibliotheque Nationale collection) as the main source. So there's a fairly small chance of finding a private collection provenance. If it's a book you own because the second Punic war era, and bronzes, interest you, then it's probably worth the couple of hours to check it out, but unless you specialise in the 2nd Punic or in bronzes it's probably not worth laying out many denarii to acquire it. I didn't find any provenances for my coins even though those are the areas I focus on! It is still a well made book, with over 100 fold out plates using photographic quality glossy paper. Evidently there wasn't any shortage of, or other priorities for, high quality photographic printing material at the time.
-
Nice finds in Banti, Andrew. I must admit that I have none of the "green" set of Banti, but it looks like I should consider buying volumes 1-6. Regarding Hamburger 96, I was aware that some of that sale included ex Jameson coins, but I assumed they were limited to the Greek section. Do you think the Republican coins of that sale are all Jameson? I'm about to meet my binder (waiting in her parking lot as I type this) to have Hamburger's Niklovitz, 95 and 96 sales bound in two volumes.
-
Nice finds in Banti, Andrew. I must admit that I have none of the "green" set of Banti, but it looks like I should consider buying volumes 1-6. Regarding Hamburger 96, I was aware that some of that sale included ex Jameson coins, but I assumed they were limited to the Greek section. Do you think the Republican coins of that sale are all Jameson? I'm about to meet my binder (waiting in her parking lot as I type this) to have Hamburger's Niklovitz, 95 and 96 sales bound in two volumes.
You might as well get all of the green Banti-Simonetti. Vol 7 includes many Republican provincial pieces which you might as well get in case your interests expand; ditto for 8 (Livia, Caius, Lucius, later Agrippa), and by then you need more than half the full set. It's not usually so expensive.
I'm probably in error regarding Jameson, I inferred it from Spring. I bound 95 and 96 together, slim volumes.
-
You might as well get all of the green Banti-Simonetti. Vol 7 includes many Republican provincial pieces which you might as well get in case your interests expand; ditto for 8 (Livia, Caius, Lucius, later Agrippa), and by then you need more than half the full set. It's not usually so expensive.
I'm probably in error regarding Jameson, I inferred it from Spring. I bound 95 and 96 together, slim volumes.
Thanks for the tip re Banti. Yes, I'm also binding Hamburger 95 and 96 together in one volume. By two volumes, I meant Nikloviz in one, 95 and 96 in another.
-
Coins from good auctions have a devious way of finding their way home to me. Münzzentrum Albrecht XXX (21 Nov.1977) is a case in point. I wasn't at the auction (I was 14 and didn't have many DM). Nevertheless I now have eight coins:
1 via Hirsch 156
1 via Künker E6, actually bought by a fellow Forum member (Andreas), then reached me in a swap deal
1 via Bombarda coll. (private purchase)
1 via Hirsch 263 and Kölner Münzkabinett Kroha 77
1 via NAC 61 RBW collection
1 via NAC 63 RBW collection and H.W.Müller 43
2 via NAC 78 JD collection
Quite remarkable in the diversity of routes by which these coins have reached me. Evidently it was an excellent sale, in this case stuffed full of high quality Roman Republican bronzes. I have a similar experience with Triton 1. Didn't attend. Now own 18 coins from that sale, from multiple different later sources. I think this is a fingerprint of a truly great auction - when you don't bother attending and the coins get to you anyway. DESTINY!!!
-
I've been trawling Banti Roman Republican volumes, after finishing the Imperatorial volumes last week. I've Banti provenances all over the place from sales that I already knew featured in Banti. But I found some new time-extending provenances on a few coins too. Here are five new finds from the first 6 volumes (of 9)
494/43 Mussidia with facing head of Sol - ex De Nicola 1968 FPL 3 (Sep.1968) lot 300 = Banti Mvssidia 13/11 (this coin) via Gemini X and the Randy Haviland coll.
419/1 Lepidus AN XV PR HOCS commemorating the battle exploits of a 15 year old ancestor - ex Schulman 262 (14 May 1975) lot 1217 = Banti Aemilia 76/3 (this coin)
133/2a TAMP below horses ex Hirsch 155 (23 Sep.1987) lot 416 (450 DM) ex De Nicola 1969 FPL 1 (Mar.1969) lot 249 = Banti Baebia 2 (this coin)
251/3 Fabrinia triens ex Peus 322 (1 Nov.1988) lot 153 = Banti Fabrinia 3/3 (this coin) coll. AB (Alberto Banti)
210/3 Junia semis ex CNG45 (18 Mar.1998) lot 1506 Goodman coll. ex Peus 322 (1 Nov.1988) lot 96 = Banti Julia 5 (this coin) AB coll. (Alberto Banti coll.)
Five ordinary coins, that absent special circumstances I might eventually have sold. A good provenance counts as a special circumstance. It's interesting that the bronzes were Banti's own, reflecting more the lack of illustrated sales catalogues of bronzes at the time than the special qualities of the coins.
-
Nice finds! Certainly wise to spend the research time befor deciding which to sell.
-
I finished my Banti trawl and found one more previously-unknown provenance: 204/5 Saufeia quadrans, Triton 1 (2 Dec.1997) lot 1056 Goodman coll. ex Peus 322 (1 Nov.1988) lot 88 = Banti Savfeia 5/1 (this coin) A.B. coll. (Alberto Banti coll. before 1982). The evidence seems to show that the very interesting Peus 322 sale which contains many coins with symbols was probably the sale of Banti's own collection.
So in all six additions to the many existing Banti provenances from a nine volume trawl. I had hoped for more, but I'd forecast that new finds would become much scarcer once I'd completed my trawl of the relatively well provenance CNG and NAC catalogues. As a sidebar diversion I completed my S.C. Collection provenances: 13 coins, 9 with old provenances averaging 1963 composed of two Haeberlin collection coins and 7 others from the early 1970s. Completion status after the Bantis and SC: 538 provenanced coins out of 1195 or 45%, with an average provenance date of 1993 for those 538 (and evidently much more recent for the remaining 55%). I realise these updates are somewhat of a monologue, but just as with Meepzorp's collection-photography and website updates, I think it instructive to less experienced collectors to see what working your collection involves. All the provenancing I've done so far still represents only 50% of the shelf-volume of my catalogues - three shelves out of six - but laws of diminishing returns makes it likely there are less than a few dozen undiscovered finds in the remaining shelves. Those three shelves, acsearch, CNG e-auctions (printed already done) and a careful look at every physical piece of evidence I have - i.e. tickets - is what remains of work that's doable in-house. After that will follow the archives at the NAC office, and then finally the Fitzwilliam. I'll keep note of what's already been checked as I go along.
Once the provenancing work is complete, my next main task will be ticket arrangement, for which purpose I purchased 100 12-slot plastic pages in which to insert documentation of my collection in proper order. I'm unfortunately at ground zero as far as this is concerned; whilst I've apparently orderly boxes that I showed here before for my RBW and NAC tickets, the general situation for lesser sources is much more disturbing. There is a picture below that reflects the aftermath of my searching yesterday evening for S.C. collection tickets and their remnants. Viewer discretion advised. Do not look if you have a tidy mind. The good side of course is that this reflects much coin fun still to do.
-
It may seem like a monologue to you, Andrew, but it's a wonderful travelogue to me and I'm enjoying reading each post!
I have hit a dry spell in my provenance searching but not for lack of trying in my free time. I finally finished my Spring Top 40 with the acquisition of the Bourgey Schott catalogue that received last week (thank you Carausius! ;D) and I'm still going through my acquisitions from the RBW library which came in 6 big boxes!
I did find a nice provenance for a coin I acquired last year with no leads. Found it in the ANS photo file which lead me to a Stack's New York, December 7-8, 1989 Lot 3255 which in that catalogue led me to Stack's Frederick S. Knobloch Collection May 3-4, 1978, Lot 749. It's my only Knobloch coin and the picture can't do it justice. It's truly a sunning piece in hand and definitely has a old pedigree beyond 1978 so I'm not done with him yet!
P.S. I love the "Disturbing Tickets" picture!
-
Well done on the Knobloch and I agree it likely goes back much further. My own example of this type is a Huntington - HSA - ANS coin, all of which I date as "before 1955". I've two Knobloch's and coincidentally one reaches back further to ... Schott!! which you've just received. So Knobloch bought from the Schott sale and that should be the first place you check. Like, right now :)
-
The evidence seems to show that the very interesting Peus 322 sale which contains many coins with symbols was probably the sale of Banti's own collection.
I reached the same conclusion a while ago, as discussed in this Forum thread: https://www.forumancientcoins.com/board/index.php?topic=102443.0
I realise these updates are somewhat of a monologue, but just as with Meepzorp's collection-photography and website updates, I think it instructive to less experienced collectors to see what working your collection involves.
I completely agree - this has been an enjoyable, instructive and encouraging lesson in methods of provenance research. I've picked-up some tips; I'm sure others have too. The enormity of the task seemed overwhelming, but taken in shelf-bites (Banti this week; NAC catalogues next week; etc.) becomes less so.
Once the provenancing work is complete, my next main task will be ticket arrangement, for which purpose I purchased 100 12-slot plastic pages in which to insert documentation of my collection in proper order.
I encourage you to link each ticket slot to the applicable coin with some kind of numbering system, so that even a non-coin collector could marry a coin to its documentation.
I did find a nice provenance for a coin I acquired last year with no leads. Found it in the ANS photo file which lead me to a Stack's New York, December 7-8, 1989 Lot 3255 which in that catalogue led me to Stack's Frederick S. Knobloch Collection May 3-4, 1978, Lot 749. It's my only Knobloch coin and the picture can't do it justice. It's truly a sunning piece in hand and definitely has a old pedigree beyond 1978 so I'm not done with him yet!
That's a beauty, Carthago! That December 1989 Stack's sale was well-stocked with ex Knobloch Republican coins. I acquired an ex Knobloch 433/1 Brutus in an auction in January that had come from the 1989 Stack's sale with no earlier disclosed provenance. There was another coin in the same January auction with provenance to both the 1989 Stack's sale and the Knobloch sale. So, including yours, that's at least 3 Knobloch Republican coins in that 1989 Stack's sale that we know about.
-
Well done on the Knobloch and I agree it likely goes back much further. My own example of this type is a Huntington - HSA - ANS coin, all of which I date as "before 1955". I've two Knobloch's and coincidentally one reaches back further to ... Schott!! which you've just received. So Knobloch bought from the Schott sale and that should be the first place you check. Like, right now :)
Thanks for the tip, but alas, no. :'(
That's a beauty, Carthago! That December 1989 Stack's sale was well-stocked with ex Knobloch Republican coins. I acquired an ex Knobloch 433/1 Brutus in an auction in January that had come from the 1989 Stack's sale with no earlier disclosed provenance. There was another coin in the same January auction with provenance to both the 1989 Stack's sale and the Knobloch sale. So, including yours, that's at least 3 Knobloch Republican coins in that 1989 Stack's sale that we know about.
Thank you, Carausius. I was checking that Stacks auction literally at closing at the ANS so I didn't even look beyond that page. I'll need to check it out. Nice Brutus, BTW! ;D
-
Curious search tip which I'd better write down here before I forget it: I was scratching my head as to how to search the CNG shop database - as there are no "auction numbers" to narrow the search or tick things off. As a curiosity, I put in "denarius" as a search term. The results surprised me by coming out more or less in Crawford order - with some misplaced coins or series. At least as far as Crawford 220 where I've reached so far. That's very useful to know, as searches on family name could miss a lot of coins. So, search by denomination, and page through the results until you come to the Republican coins. Or "Janus" for the as, which i always use. I decided to do the retails first as they generally are of much higher quality than the e-sales. For the e-sales, search on sale number. Those online start at sale 50 (1-49 are not archived). Search on 50 gives you sale 350,250,150,50 in that order so skip to "last" and you'll find the double digit sale numbers first. Once you hit 100 it's straightforward.
Would a moderator agree to sticky this thread? It's evidently going to last forever but each time I need to search on "catalogue madness" to find it.
-
Curious search tip which I'd better write down here before I forget it: I was scratching my head as to how to search the CNG shop database - as there are no "auction numbers" to narrow the search or tick things off. As a curiosity, I put in "denarius" as a search term. The results surprised me by coming out more or less in Crawford order - with some misplaced coins or series. At least as far as Crawford 220 where I've reached so far. That's very useful to know, as searches on family name could miss a lot of coins. So, search by denomination, and page through the results until you come to the Republican coins. Or "Janus" for the as, which i always use. I decided to do the retails first as they generally are of much higher quality than the e-sales. For the e-sales, search on sale number. Those online start at sale 50 (1-49 are not archived). Search on 50 gives you sale 350,250,150,50 in that order so skip to "last" and you'll find the double digit sale numbers first. Once you hit 100 it's straightforward.
Would a moderator agree to sticky this thread? It's evidently going to last forever but each time I need to search on "catalogue madness" to find it.
Thank you for the tip, Andrew. I found 2 of my coins last night using your "denarius" technique. Neither extended provenances already known, but it did fill in stops along the way to my trays.
-
Sometimes it pays to tell a dealer what you are looking for, rather than rely on web shop listings or online searches. Yesterday, I sent my shrinking, old-auction-catalogue want list to someone and it paid-off with the following:
1. Baranowsky (1931)-Traverso/Martini. One of Spring's top struck Republican coin sales, and a bit of a white whale for me. Over the past year, I was outbid in the final minutes for a copy at auction and narrowly missed buying another copy on fixed-price offer.
2. Glendining (1931)-Nordheim/Evans, bound with Naville Ars Classica III (Evans). The first of these two was my real item of interest, and is also on Spring's top struck Republican sales.
Similar writing campaigns in the past have yielded some other difficult-to-find catalogues, including Quadras y Ramon, Schott, Hall etc.
I'm nearing completion of my set of Spring's top auction catalogues of struck Roman Republican coins. Only seven left to go!
-
Got 4 custom bindings back today, one being your recently acquired Baranowsky sale above. I had a custom die made to mimic the spine on the original sale. As you know, it's a beautiful catalogue cover, which I preserved as Page 1.
-
+++ They look fabulous. I like your leather/marbled board selections. You must be pleased. You'll enjoy the catalogues more without fear of them disintegrating in your hands!
I received my copy of the Baranowsky Traverso-Martini catalogue yesterday, and it will need to be bound soon. As typical (it's a thick catalogue with the text bound in sections different from the plates), the catalogue has split in half at the spine. Internally, it's in good shape.
-
Every few months, I bring a couple of my key old catalogues to my binder. Below are two that I picked-up at my last visit. Both volumes contain Leo Hamburger sales, so I bound them as a matched set. The first is RBW's copy of the Niklovitz Collection (1925), the second is Hamburger Auktions 95 & 96 (1932). All are bound in theee-quarter, tan English goat with "stone-pattern" hand-marbled boards, raised bands, black leather spine labels and gilt. I don't bind all of my catalogues this elaborately - some are more deserving than others.
-
This is really weird.
Compare
[top] Adolph E. Cahn 80 (27 Feb.1933) lot 548, on acsearch
[below] Andrew's Brutus 504 denarius, which I already recorded as coming from that sale ... but, the weird thing is that I found my record in a Cahn sale where the plate coin looked exactly as mine, with good surfaces. Note that every imperfection on my coin is visible on the Cahn plate coin, and the strike and edge defects are identical. But this Cahn plate coin has a lot more bad things going on - terrible surfaces, scratches that aren't on mine etc. Yet the Cahn 80 plate where I found my coin had the same coin with apparently perfect surfaces (it was in the RBW library and I found it whilst browsing the Kolbe sale).
I'm not sure what happened. Could printing defects cause these surfaces ... or degradation of the plate ... or, perhaps there was more than one version of the plate, where they messed up or damaged the plaster cast. Really weird anyway.
On a side note, as I always like to note new found old provenances here, the below illustrated Critonia denarius, which was close to getting the axe from my collection due to condition, I found today to be ex Kricheldorf 3 (25 Feb.1957) lot 902. The Kricheldorf sale was one of a group of ten that I bought in the recent CNG book sale for a moderate sum (albeit immoderate p&p), so I'm happy with this pot-luck find.
-
Perhaps it's my memory playing tricks with me, and the auction photo was as bad as this in every copy. I recall recognising my coin in print catalogue and I may have blanked out the terrible photo.
-
Are you sure yours isn't a cast of the original?
-
Or possibly the same coin, but expertly restored in the meantime, including smoothing out of pitting?
-
I'm not sure what happened. Could printing defects cause these surfaces ... or degradation of the plate ... or, perhaps there was more than one version of the plate, where they messed up or damaged the plaster cast. Really weird anyway.
As luck would have it, I just ordered a copy of Cahn 80 earlier this evening! I'll let you know in a week or so whether the plate in my copy looks the same as acsearch's plate.
Meantime, I would guess that the Cahn 80 plate is a bad plaster cast. I can't imagine that Cahn would have bothered making a plaster cast for the plates if the actual coin had such poor surfaces. Does the acsearch entry include the Cahn catalogue description? If the surfaces were so poor, I imagine there would have been mention of them in the description.
Congratulations on the Critonia.
-
the weird thing is that I found my record in a Cahn sale where the plate coin looked exactly as mine, with good surfaces. Note that every imperfection on my coin is visible on the Cahn plate coin, and the strike and edge defects are identical. But this Cahn plate coin has a lot more bad things going on - terrible surfaces, scratches that aren't on mine etc. Yet the Cahn 80 plate where I found my coin had the same coin with apparently perfect surfaces (it was in the RBW library and I found it whilst browsing the Kolbe sale).
I'm not sure what happened. Could printing defects cause these surfaces ... or degradation of the plate ... or, perhaps there was more than one version of the plate, where they messed up or damaged the plaster cast. Really weird anyway.
I just reviewed my hard copy of Cahn 80 and you have to look really close to see the surface issues on the picture, so the picture you posted online looks worse than the original in hand IMHO. If you were viewing lots in NY, the lights aren't always so great and I would think you could take it for it looking better than it does as a scan (how cool is that though; finding a key provenance while reviewing book lots!).
My guess is that it's a poor plaster cast and your coin is the way it should look.
-
The Cahn description is "sehr schoen" and that was before the years of grade inflation, in other words a very nice coin, of the quality typical for a Cahn sale. The coin has been through several other high end auctions including the 1966 Schulman Graham collection and a Triton sale and has pretty much perfect surfaces apart from the obvious ding in the obverse field and the neck scratch, both which you see on the Cahn plate. With carthagos view of the catalogue in hand it does seem to the case of a terrible plaster cast of a lovely coin. Oddly I bought an EF example of the same type at NYINC this year, and then discovered this terrific provenance for my old coin the next day; a few weeks later I also found the Schulman provenance. Given its provenance, I plan on keeping both coins now.
-
Wolf and twins didrachm: Adolph Cahn 80, 27 Feb. 1933, pics below. My 22nd confirmed pre-war provenance. That's my two year subscription covered with this find.
That's incidentally the same catalogue the Brutus discussed yesterday came from. So I was only 50% successful in the dark lights of the NYINC Kolbe sale, I missed this one. I've also noticed that other plaster casts in the same sale have diabolical surface issues.
-
Why did they make plaster casts back then instead of just photographing the coins?
-
Why did they make plaster casts back then instead of just photographing the coins?
Good question.
It provides far better photos (the bad exception above is NOT typical), labour costs were low a century ago, and in advance of photoshop and digital cameras, the chances of getting a direct photo even remotely good were minimal - imagine photographing your coins today in the absence of preview screen - whereas plaster cast photography was a known reliable technique. Also, photographic printing costs were then very high indeed (using a lot of silver) so if you were going to spend a lot of money photographing just a few coins - they always selected just the best coins rather than photographing everything - and the cost was anyway going to be high, you might as well spend the extra to make plaster casts and make the photos as good as possible. Furthermore, to make up the plates needed a second photograph - of the photos sitting on the background of the plate with numbers under (again, in advance of photoshop) using a copy stand. Evidently if you start with prints and then have to photograph those, they'll be a whole lot worse than starting with a sharp plaster cast. To see what "just photographing the coins" resulted in, you need only look at the Rheinhold Faelten 1938 Stacks sale - possibly the worst ever plates - and just about any catalogue from the 1970s which was after printing became cheap and labour costs for plaster casts became dear, but before photoshop allowed digital improvements; the 1970s represents the nadir of coin photography.
-
That's interesting. I know some academic works still do that, like HN Italy, for example. I bet HN Sicily will too. I'd imagine it is especially helpful for bronze.
-
That's interesting. I know some academic works still do that, like HN Italy, for example. I bet HN Sicily will too. I'd imagine it is especially helpful for bronze.
Yes, especially helpful for bronzes.
-
My Brutus with trophy is also Naville Ars Classica 17 (3 Oct.1934) lot 1045. It's rapidly becoming one of my best-provenanced coins.
-
Julius Caesar and Numonius Vaala, a rare type, Hirsch 34 (5 May 1914) lot 796, below. A 99 year gain on its previous Randy Haviland collection provenance. My Arria Secundus (Octavian) dates from 1909. I'm still seeking my Servius Rufus (Brutus) which has that typically old collection look - pic also below. 25th pre-war provenance, 6th over a century old. I'd forgotten my Apostolo Zeno (1750) and Northumberland (1856) in the prior count. I've finished my trawl through acsearch, and so far I've found two good old provenances - this coin, and my wolf and twins didrachm from a Cahn sale. Two observations on using acsearch
- it's a real problem when the auction exceeds 1000 lots. The OCR is ... as good as OCR usually is, in other words not much ... and the software doesn't allow you to page through lots after 1000 even if you use the offset:1000 term. acsearch becomes unusable for large auctions. What I've tried, with partial success, is to search on "roma" on the hope that the OCR will have occasionally have picked it up correctly. That might for example locate lot 1372. Then you have to manually search each number adjacent to it. 1371, 1373 etc. etc. It's really impractical. This needs fixing, at least so that when you use the "offset" command, you are still allowed 1000 results from that point onwards e.g. lots 1000-1999 for offset:1000
- There's no consistent ordering in the old catalogues though of course we just have to live with that. Sometimes it's the 'normal' order. Sometimes Rome is first. Sometimes the didrachm coinage is mixed in with the coins of Naples and the denarius Roman stuff is later. Sometimes it starts with Spain and then early Roman before resuming Greek and then the denarius coinage. Sometimes aes grave first and struck Roman at the very end. What works for me is to manually scroll through the first lots until I'm at least past Naples, and then use the offset command to page through until Greek coinage finishes.
The acsearch archives currently includes Cahn (most), Hess (very few), Muenzhandlung Basel (most), Naville Ars Classica (most), Bruder Egger (some), Jacob Hirsch (some), all predating 1940. I look forward to their adding later sales, especially from the 1970s and 1980s.
Addendum: I've just sent a box to my better bookbinder. Several books: Goltzius Fastos 1576, Fabretti Turin Collection 1860s, Comparette Aes Signatum. Remainder catalogues, about seven volumes with typically 3 or 4 bound together so about 25 catalogues. Virtually all old timers, pre 1970. My less better though price-efficient other bookbinder will get my chopped up modern catalogues with the Republican sections extracted.
-
Great finds. I haven't yet experimented much with acsearch's early catalogues. My tendency is to search Republican coins by Crawford number, which, of course, is completely useless for pre-1975 catalogues. I also don't know how acsearch has indexed these old catalogues. Are they using bare bones device descriptions in English, full attributions in English (a lot of work) and/or full original language (French, German) attributions from the old catalogue entries. How they go about entering these old catalogues in the database certainly impacts searching strategies.
Good luck with the catalogue bindings! I'm due to see my binder at the end of the month for another exchange. I'm also thinking about adding a new, long and low bookshelf beneath a double window in my office. This location has the added benefit of keeping the spines protected from the sunlight.
-
Great finds. I haven't yet experimented much with acsearch's early catalogues. My tendency is to search Republican coins by Crawford number, which, of course, is completely useless for pre-1975 catalogues. I also don't know how acsearch has indexed these old catalogues. Are they using bare bones device descriptions in English, full attributions in English (a lot of work) and/or full original language (French, German) attributions from the old catalogue entries. How they go about entering these old catalogues in the database certainly impacts searching strategies.
Good luck with the catalogue bindings! I'm due to see my binder at the end of the month for another exchange. I'm also thinking about adding a new, long and low bookshelf beneath a double window in my office. This location has the added benefit of keeping the spines protected from the sunlight.
They use OCR, which means in practice it's hardly searchable at all. They do seem to have manually corrected some, or perhaps the OCR worked better on some volumes than others. Even when the description is good there's often still nothing consistent you can search on.
Example of a reasonably well OCR'd description:
321 Herknieskopf r. Rv. P - LENT *P*F· (L-N) Thronender Genius populi Romani mit Füllhorn u. Szepter, von Viktoria bekränzt. B. 58. (Fcs. 40.—) Vorz. Abbildung Tafel IV.
Let me know what Crawford number you think this is! Once you've worked it out, try thinking how you might search for it.
Example of a less well OCR'd description:
♦>1314 Nonîa. M. Nonius Sufenas. Denar. Kopf des Saturnus r. Rv. Roma auf Waffen r, sitzend, wird von Victoria gekrönt. B. 1. F. d. c. Tafel 23 i · _ r\ i3 r' :i : Tr „· r ; „. „ τλ---------- r/- — c j a 11 _ λ r . · — r _ ..
A family name search on Nonia would capture this, but not many others. So in practice, for each catalogue I look for the Republican section and then browse the pictures, as if I had the catalogue in hand. It still has the major advantage that browsing enlarged pictures on a screen is a lot easier than browsing a darkened catalogue paper plate. But then the 1000 lot limit kicks in, so for larger sales one is left guessing.
It's still a good, and good value, service, but they need a lot more catalogues and a better way to browse that's not dependant on descriptions. Even if the description of the following was perfectly OCR'd, I doubt it would be recognised by many as being a Crawford 13/1 didrachm, and I can't imagine how one would search even on a perfectly reproduced text
*>12 7,29 Didrachmon mit ROMAAVO ! Bahrf. m. r. c. 1, 22. (Abge- „ „ Vorzüglich bildet T. III, 1) Willers T. II, 1 (dies Ex.) Feiner Stil
So, picture browsing has to be the way to go, and for that, acsearch will need better browsing tools.
-
For picture browsing, I'd be more inclined to use my actual catalogue (if I had it) or the University of Heidelberg online catalogues (if they had it). The greatest benefit to acsearch is the search capability, which seems hamstrung for these old catalogues. I don't see how the search function can improve without a TON of work. You'd have to either fully-translate the descriptions OR add basic denomination and device description to each illustrated coin OR add a modern, standard work reference to each illustrared coin. Ugh...
However, acsearch must have already started this process to some extent beyond mere OCR, as I have gotten occasional hits to old catalogues when I've used descriptive searches (vs. Crawford numbers).
-
For picture browsing, I'd be more inclined to use my actual catalogue (if I had it) or the University of Heidelberg online catalogues (if they had it). The greatest benefit to acsearch is the search capability, which seems hamstrung for these old catalogues. I don't see how the search function can improve without a TON of work. You'd have to either fully-translate the descriptions OR add basic denomination and device description to each illustrated coin OR add a modern, standard work reference to each illustrared coin. Ugh...
However, acsearch must have already started this process to some extent beyond mere OCR, as I have gotten occasional hits to old catalogues when I've used descriptive searches (vs. Crawford numbers).
There's a language thesaurus (since a long time back) for numismatic terms. That means when you put in a descriptive search it'll find the German equivalent in the text.
I'm happy to be paying acsearch a sub for extra services considering how many years I've used it for free. But once it becomes a paid for service, expectations climb rapidly; it took me 2 days to run out of catalogues to search and I've a two year subscription. A lot more content and improved browsing capabilities will be quickly needed.
I can verify that, contrary to most expectations, it is a lot easier to browse the acsearch old catalogue listings than the same in Heidelberg. Enlarged images, and the ability to match them beside your own coin make a big difference. It is worth the sub even at its current level of service.
-
Below aes grave semis is Haeberlin (1910) plate 44, 2, noted as ex Sarti, but also as being missing from the May 1906 Sangiorgi sale of the Sarti collection. Whilst the Haeberlin 1910 provenance is certain, a bit of sleuthing will be needed to pinpoint the coin to the Sarti 1906 sale. The weight of my coin is given by Haeberlin as being 86.5 grams. It isn't, it weighs 71.5 grams. It is surely not a coincidence that Haeberlin reports (but doesn't illustrate) Sarti sale lot 18 as being a semis of the same type weighing ... 71.5 grams. So, I believe my coin is Sarti lot 18, and the misreported weight to Haeberlin caused him to note as "missing in catalogue". I don't have the Sarti catalogue. Or, the pl.44,2 reference was placed beside the wrong coin in the table. Perhaps someone on list has the catalogue and could look up both lot 18 (and its picture, if any) and see whether there's a picture of my coin in the plates (either as lot 18, or as another lot). Evidently there's been a mixup but it would be nice to also be able to add the Sarti lot 18 provenance as definite rather than probable.
Postscript: in the excitement of my finding this provenance I put the coin down somewhere and now I can't locate it. It's probably somewhere soft and safe, as with the time I placed a denarius on the rubber buttons of my remote.
-
The May 1906 Sangiorgi sale of the Sarti collection is listed in the Fitzwilliam Museum auction catalogue index. If no one on the Forum can help, perhaps Ted Buttrey would assist. It certainly sounds like an indexing error by Haeberlin.
Great coin! I hope you find it again. ;D
-
the weird thing is that I found my record in a Cahn sale where the plate coin looked exactly as mine, with good surfaces. Note that every imperfection on my coin is visible on the Cahn plate coin, and the strike and edge defects are identical. But this Cahn plate coin has a lot more bad things going on - terrible surfaces, scratches that aren't on mine etc. Yet the Cahn 80 plate where I found my coin had the same coin with apparently perfect surfaces (it was in the RBW library and I found it whilst browsing the Kolbe sale).
I'm not sure what happened. Could printing defects cause these surfaces ... or degradation of the plate ... or, perhaps there was more than one version of the plate, where they messed up or damaged the plaster cast. Really weird anyway.
I just reviewed my hard copy of Cahn 80 and you have to look really close to see the surface issues on the picture, so the picture you posted online looks worse than the original in hand IMHO. If you were viewing lots in NY, the lights aren't always so great and I would think you could take it for it looking better than it does as a scan (how cool is that though; finding a key provenance while reviewing book lots!).
My guess is that it's a poor plaster cast and your coin is the way it should look.
I received my copy of Cahn 80 today. The plate of your coin doesn't look bad with naked eye, but magnified the surfaces look the same as on the acsearch scan. The only difference is that my plate is a bit darker and lacks the few white spots visible on tbe acseach scan. I still think the surface defects are casting flaws in the plate production.
From my quick inspection, I don't think the Cahn 80 catalogue ever had tissue guards, as there is significant ink bleed from the face of each plate to the rear of the previous plate. There is no sign of old tissue having been removed, and based on the severity of the image bleed, I doubt tissue was ever there. I suspect the white spots on the acsearch scan are the result of that image bleed.
-
This nice coin went unsold in NAC 84, and I bought it afterwards:
(https://farm1.staticflickr.com/501/18996589576_4ee7b78110_z.jpg) (https://www.flickr.com/photos/ahala_rome/18996589576/)
Despite it's nice provenance - ex Frank Kovacs coll. (the sale was cited but not the collector name). Today I added more: ex NFA 27 (4 Dec.1991) Roberto Russo coll. = plate coin Sear Imperators 110. Somewhat ironic that NAC missed a Russo collection coin, especially as NFA 27 is a sale renowned for exceptionally high quality coins; this my second coin from that sale, my other, also bought unprovenanced, is this nice dolphin rider:
(https://farm1.staticflickr.com/367/18390647093_e6e865d3de_z.jpg) (https://www.flickr.com/photos/ahala_rome/18390647093/)
-
I'm on a roll today.
(https://farm8.staticflickr.com/7362/11288409773_1b70c9b79b_z.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/icw3WH)
Knobloch coll., Stack's (3 May 1978) lot 331 (already known to me)
Signorelli coll., Santamaria (4 Jun.1952) lot 638 (new find today, and my third Signorelli coin).
... and
(https://farm6.staticflickr.com/5480/11249782176_eebd314529_z.jpg) (https://www.flickr.com/photos/ahala_rome/11249782176/)
Brunacci coll., Santamaria (24 Feb.1958) lot 59 (new find, my second Brunacci coin)
-
Great finds, Andrew. I'm surprised that Macer didn't sell in NAC 84.
Last week, I was perusing my collection of Munzen und Medaillen catalogues looking for coins in an upcoming European auction. Quite unexpectedly, I found the following, distinctive U.S. auction lot in MuM 38 ( 1968). Voila! Voirol! I won the lot .
-
This may be a good time to ask me for lottery number recommendations. I just hit another great provenance
(https://farm5.staticflickr.com/4063/4636133951_ac7ba381db_z.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/84Fp6Z)
H.C. Levis collection, Naville Ars Classica, 18 June 1925 lot 18.
So far today I've scored a Levis, a Brunacci, a Signorelli and a Russo, hot on the heels of a Sarti yesterday.
-
Great finds, Andrew. I'm surprised that Macer didn't sell in NAC 84.
Last week, I was perusing my collection of Munzen und Medaillen catalogues looking for coins in an upcoming European auction. Quite unexpectedly, I found the following, distinctive U.S. auction lot in MuM 38 ( 1968). Voila! Voirol! I won the lot .
Great find Michael - it's very troublesome to provenance tiny, anonymous coins (I expect this also happens with Greek fractions) and whilst I've a few anonymous sestertii that need provenancing, I've found none; also have a low percentage success with quinarii probably for the same reasons. These coins were produced in vast quantities around the 212 BC period, and then presumably lost, so there are many more dies than one would suspect and the types are less uncommon than one expects. So finding matches is tough!
I found another provenance from Ars Classica XI H.C.Levis collection, lot 214 a dupondius of Octavian. Interesting that in the black and white plaster cast pic, the coin looks considerably better than in my photo - it has a heavy mottled green patina that has been cleaned carefully to reveal a lot of detail (purists might consider it smoothed but I think the cleaner did his best to reveal an essentially great coin under a lot of covering) but the camouflage pattern obscures it in a colour version. Naville rated it as Superbe; I wouldn't go that far but it's a nice coin and I kind of waive my usual fussiness re overcleaning when it comes to a 1925 first rate provenance.
Now here is a curious thing. Both coins were available in the acsearch search that I concluded a few days ago. Yet I didn't find them, even though I must have looked closely. Also I've owned this sale - and the others I checked and found coins in today - for many years. So I'm obviously perplexed by my provenance blindness in not seeing these rather obvious matches until today, and now I wonder how efficient my acsearch browse has been after all!
I attach the two plate images below.
-
Andrew,
If you're interested in such trivia, my hand-priced copy of Ars Classica XI - Levis says: your Lot 15 sold for 105 francs; and your Lot 214 sold for 21 francs.
-
Andrew,
If you're interested in such trivia, my hand-priced copy of Ars Classica XI - Levis says: your Lot 15 sold for 105 francs; and your Lot 214 sold for 21 francs.
Added to my database! I often find that post-war CHF prices have barely changed til today, with 1970s sales often priced not much lower for mid-grade coins - symptom of a zero-inflation currency dating back decades - but those pre-war prices are massively cheaper than either would fetch today.
-
In December I noted the below-pictured cistophorus as being ex V.J.E. Ryan collection, Glendinings 1952. Today I found it also in Schulman 5th March 1923, collection of M.L. Vierordt from Bloemendaal. This is my first Vierordt coin and my 29th pre-war provenance.
I also acquired (via a gift) Santamaria XXI, 31 January 1921, 12 plates of Aes Grave and a key catalogue missing from my Spring list. Alas no provenances. Also a good quality bound photocopy of Santamaria 25 October 1951 which contains the Aes Grave from the Signorelli collection. Also no provenances.
-
I bought an incomplete run of Spink Numismatic Circulars from 1974-1997 today, off the shelves in Antiquariaat Kok in Amsterdam, for provenance checks. Twenty volumes (missing 4 odd years). They were listed at €35 each but we agreed on €25 per volume plus shipping to UK (just €60 extra). Each Num.Circ. year contains 10 issues of the Numismatic Circular. A random check through a couple of dozen individual issues averaged 15-20 illustrated Roman Republican coins per issue, so 3,000-4,000 illustrated RR in total over 20 volumes, all good quality - typical of a part 2 NAC sale with occasional better pieces. All volumes are nicely hard-bound. There are also scholarly articles in each issue, of at least as good quality as the Celator, so this really adds to the find. Those who know what provenance-quality catalogues normally cost will recognise this as a steal. What's more, these are relatively scarce. Kok also had later and earlier issues. The later volumes had markedly fewer coins and of lower quality, reflecting no doubt the dominance of CNG/Seaby and NAC from the mid 1990s onwards, and are hardly worth getting. Before the mid 1960s the volumes did not illustrate coins for sale - only the academic articles. 1967-1973 were missing; at some point Spink changed from unillustrated to fully illustrated in that time. Kok is a well know numismatic bookseller that I've bought from many times and whilst all its stock is listed on Abebooks, nothing beats shelf-browsing, nor could I have achieved such a substantial discount on the internet. You have to ask for the numismatic books when you go in the shop; they'll take your bags away and send you to the top floor to browse alone. Many other related interesting topics on the same floor such as antiquities and ancient history. Recommended stop-in for anyone visiting Amsterdam. My sample browse unearthed one provenance, of a coin I bought retail from Spink in the late 1990s, listed in a late 1980s Circular (much better!).
-
Great find and a great price. I'm sure I've seen some of these advertised for sale recently. I wish I could remember where!
-
I just completed my provenance searches of the CNG electronic resources (web-shop, online auctions and printed auctions). I've also via issuu.com searched all the early printed catalogues from CNA I, early Tritons, and the more recent CNR. For completeness sake I'd note that I still miss e-auctions prior to sale 50, presumably vanished into the ether, as well as the unillustrated web coins in the two or three printed sales whilst CNG was transitioning from fully printed to printed + esales. Whilst fresh in my mind, here is what I learnt
- the webshop can easily be searched using denominations. One finds that regardless of the search, results are presented divided into Greek, Provincial, Republican and Imperial, so you can just go to the section relevant to you. And within the presentation, results are ordered in an approximately normal manner as one would expect in a single sale listing, with a few errors. I haven't discovered how this is done as it's not evidently based on any single text attribute such as date, but I presume the coins are all categorised in some manner and that categorisation leads to an automatic normal sequence, the errors being where despite a correct actual description the coin was placed in the wrong box, e.g. some L.Piso Frugi and C.Piso Frugis are misplaced. I guess we really don't need to know but it is very convenient, and even works for Greek denominations since "didrachm" has a Roman Republican results sub-section.
- the eauctions can be searched by sequentially searching from 50 to 375, and scrolling through until you find the relevant section e.g. Roman Republican in each case. Results are backward ordered, but as soon as you get used to it, it's fine. For sales 50-99 you'll also pick up via the same search the relevant printed sales with the same number
- printed sales are all on issuu.com, with as I mentioned an exception for the early CNRs.
- the eauctions reveal a great deal about how prices have changed in the last 15 years. There was a jump in 2006-2007 (not coincident but just before the financial crash) and then another jump in 2011 - coincident in my area with the RBW sales. From about 2012 odd specialised coins e.g. unusual overstrikes, rare but worn varieties, saw a significant boost. I believe this is due to some specific collector on the market. The 2006-2007 jump inordinately affected better quality coins and some common but collector-desired types such as Caesar elephant denarii, but all types were affected to a degree. The 2011-2012 jump especially affected both better quality and unusual variety types, provided the latter were basically problem free.
- the eauctions are almost entirely composed of coins with at least one or more problems - could be surfaces, wear, offstrikes or bad dies. One almost never sees an all-round good coin in an eauction. The content of earlier eauctions varied wildly - perhaps all Greek in one sale and mostly Imperial in the next - but in the last five years they've settled down into standard sizes and proportions between all eras. However once in a while there is a special sale in one or other area, usually by a named person, such as Karl Sifferman, RBW duplicates, Professor Fontana - and in such cases one sees quite large runs of untypically nice coins.
- the web shop, in contrast, typically has problem free coins but of common types. These are invariably printed auction quality pieces but to list them as such would likely glut the market. So we have multiple anonymous 38/7 semunciae, Caesar elephants, Piso Frugi, Cassius tripods etc., listed one at a time. Makes sense. There are no dates on the web shop items but maybe CNG woud know.
- Whilst I picked up great numbers of good provenances from the printed sales, I drew a complete blank on the web shop despite the good quality coins, and almost a complete blank on the esales. Of course I found the coins I'd purchased in those venues but nothing else. I put that down to these venues being invariably "full retail pricing" and therefore unattractive to dealers looking to flip a coin to me later. Indeed if you want to get a sense of what normal retail pricing has been over the years, CNG eauctions are a good place to consult; results are very consistent for the same types at a given period.
I leave you with a picture of the one surprise provenance I did pick up:
(https://c5.staticflickr.com/3/2863/12879036844_4541f05e61.jpg) (https://www.flickr.com/photos/ahala_rome/12879036844/)
Purchased by me in 2014
CNG e250 (23 Feb. 2011) lot 250
Bank Leu - Spink - NAC Ceresio 3 sale (3 Oct.1992) lot 154
(can you imagine Leu, Spink and NAC collaborating on a sale?)
-
I realize this isn't an old auction catalog in the sense of the thread title but thought I'd share an interesting provenance find that I made recently. I happened to be looking at Wildwinds and found a provenance record(from an eBay seller in 2004) for the Minucia denarius posted below. It isn't rare nor in very high grade so it was a nice surprise to find any verifiable provenance, even if it doesn't go terribly far back. I'm going to try to go back later this week and run through all of Wildwinds' Roman Republican coins to see if I can find any others
-
I realize this isn't an old auction catalog in the sense of the thread title but thought I'd share an interesting provenance find that I made recently. I happened to be looking at Wildwinds and found a provenance record(from an eBay seller in 2004) for the Minucia denarius posted below. It isn't rare nor in very high grade so it was a nice surprise to find any verifiable provenance, even if it doesn't go terribly far back. I'm going to try to go back later this week and run through all of Wildwinds' Roman Republican coins to see if I can find any others
Good tip, and yes it is on-topic as the thread also includes online resources! I'd forgotten about this - Wildwinds scraped data from eBay for many years, and thus listings which are long offline may be recorded there. You've got an actual date (7th Feb.2004) and you can add "cited on Wildwinds, Minucia 9 example 1". Or if you want to omit any ebay reference in the future you could write "Wildwinds.com Minucia 9 example 1 (this coin), February 2004". Unless you've got the original WCNC ticket, it's rather pointless directly citing an ebay provenance that cannot be verified. So I'd tend to cite Wildwinds as the main, verifiable provenance, and if you want to put (WCNC, Feb.2004) do so in brackets after the Wildwinds ref.
-
I bought an incomplete run of Spink Numismatic Circulars from 1974-1997 today, off the shelves in Antiquariaat Kok in Amsterdam...
I've done an initial review of my Spink Num.Circ. volumes. These helped confirm or reconfirm provenances for six coins I bought direct from Spink, in most cases over-the-counter buys of items that featured in earlier Num.Circ. volumes. I did additionally find five surprise provenances, so far. They are illustrated below.
Crawford 53/2 anonymous denarius ex Spink Num.Circ. Oct.1989 lot 5209. An exceptional example.
Crawford 197-198B/2 anonymous semis ex Spink Num.Circ. Jun.1987 lot 3656, this a coin I bought in 2013 from Forum Ancient Coins
Crawford 391/3 Egnatia ex Spink Num.Circ. Feb.1981 lot 795
Crawford 463/2 Cordia ex Spink Num.Circ. Mar.1989 lot 957. This was the last coin I bought off Tom Cederlind. Inevitably slightly offstruck but the owl and helmet side are perfectly centred. This is a flip-over double strike.
Crawford 516/2 Mark Antony ex Spink Num.Circ. Dec.1988 lot 7693. Always nice to get a provenance for a good Imperatorial coin as it adds more in absolute terms to a coin's value.
I'm doing a second round of more detailed checking at the moment and am about half-way through, so I hope to find a few more before I'm done, though I must admit all of these jumped off the page as obvious matches on the first review. These eleven confirmed or newly found provenances are a positive vote in favour of my acquiring these vols. rather than for example just reviewing them at Spink. I'll have more detailed notes on contents of each volume once I'm done. It's a bit up and down in terms of both numbers and quality, though the five examples below ain't half bad (!).
These examples are pretty typical of the quality of the better coins in Num.Circ. listings. As noted before I'm expecting about 3,000 listings of RR coins in the 20 volumes, and perhaps the better third are around this quality, EF-ish.
-
Terrific coins. I look forward to your detailed notes. I do come across individual copies of Numismatic Circular for sale from time to time, and it would be great to know which are worth picking-up individually.
-
- the eauctions are almost entirely composed of coins with at least one or more problems - could be surfaces, wear, offstrikes or bad dies. One almost never sees an all-round good coin in an eauction.
For Greek coins this is not strictly the case. I got some coins from their eauctions which were sold several years earlier in their normal auctions (at higher prices and provenance lost in the meantime). Sometimes the consignors don't want to wait for a long time or are offered lower fees so they go for the eauctions.
-
Terrific coins. I look forward to your detailed notes. I do come across individual copies of Numismatic Circular for sale from time to time, and it would be great to know which are worth picking-up individually.
OK here they are Michael, pics below. First pic is an inventory of Roman Republican coins in every Num.Circ. 1973-1993 (excluding the missing 1976). There are 11 issues per year prior to 1981 (J,F,M,A,M,J,J,S,O,N,D) and 10 per year from 1982 (F,M,A,M,J,J,S,O,N,D). Total coins in my 20 volumes 3380 - just as expected - averaging 16 coins per issue. These are pretty well balanced. One in ten issues has zero RR, but all the rest have predominantly between 15 and 22 coins. So a lucky dip buy of a bulk lot will get you that. The high numbered 1986-87 volumes have unusually low quality coins. Apart from those, the coins average GVF but there's often a group of much better coins in individual issues. Unsolds are relisted about a year later so the net number of coins is maybe 10% less. One quickly realises that 10 times 20 coins in a year doesn't provide the diversity of a single collection of 200 coins. Many common issues such as Crepusius, L.Julius Bursio, M.Fonteius, M.Vargunteius, C.Aburius Gemini occur time and again with different coins, and in the case of the latter example and related issues around that time it seems Spink bought a hoard from the late 1st century BC. So, plenty plenty coins, but not the diversity you would get from a single collector sale. It oddly reminded me of CNG online shop coins, which I explained a few days ago had exactly these characteristics and for probably the same reason.
Second pic are my finds. Six were coins I'd already noted as having passed through Spink though with no reference. Six were new finds. I showed five earlier; I added just one more, Cr.351, but as I'd already displayed it in this thread with a 1957 provenance I won't show it again. The combination of the listings having predominantly common coins with lengthening time periods meant the find rate dropped off in time - I got nothing earlier than 1981.
The 1981 and earlier volumes are much better from a numismatic perspective. Smaller format yet they have about the same number of coins for sale but in much denser plates, and they are accompanied by much lengthier academic articles; from 1982 the articles took the form of 'numismatic notes', typically less than a page each. Of course the subjects include modern as well as ancients. But some are fascinating subjects - Durham Colliery Tokens, or Irish 1970's coinage overstruck by Unionist militants for example.
If anyone sees the missing 1976, or a run from 1994 onwards or prior to 1973, I'd love to pick them up in time.
-
Fabulous information, Andrew! Thanks.
-
Some new finds, first from the collection of Engineer Arturo Cuzzi of Trieste, Baranowsky 9 Dec.1929 lot 142 is the Brutus 504/1 denarius we discussed in relation to the Cahn 80 sale; I also picked up a copy of the Cahn 80 catalogue this week, which has this and another provenance.
Also, from the collection of Edmund Nordheim, a Hamburg collector who seems to have been a keen sailor judging from the fine competitive sailing yachts which he had built for him. The yawl Winifred, commissioned by him from Sibbick of Cowes and launched in 1901 is still sailing in Germany, as a cutter; two coins, lot 92, Arria & Octavian denarius for which I have an existing provenance further back to Meerzbacher 1909 and lot 130, a Cassius Tripod denarius which I previously knew only back to 1984 and of the very few good quality Cassius Tripod's that also has a good provenance.
Pics as usual below.
-
Karma was at work yesterday in a provenancing accident that must have been pre-destined; a bizarre sequence of event led to me identifying, buying and provenancing a coin - from its original 1969 catalogue - in the space of a minute.
The story starts in January this year. I was bidding for a totally disbound albeit first edition in German of Mommsen's work on Roman coinage in the RBW library sale - I already have the expanded and superior French version co-authored by the Duke of Blacas, but page numbering in all essential references refers to the German. Competition was strong and I eventually dropped out; I later discovered who the buyer was. About a month later an example of one of the rarest denarii in the Republican series came up for auction at a small venue, the early Rostrum Tridens denarius, Crawford 62/1. It was a very nice example; I bid online and believed I won it at a good price but was most disappointed a week later to find there had been a technical glitch and my last bid hadn't registered. The type is a hidden rarity because it's type-equivalent, the later Crawford 114, is so much more common and Babelon and RSC just list these as a single type, so many collectors are unaware the early type is so rare. As it turned out, the eventual winner was the same person who had won the Mommsen; a few weeks later I was surprised and pleased to receive in the post a package from the US containing a good quality hardbound reprint in German of Mommsen, a gift from my overbidder, who no longer had use for it. Good deeds outlast the man.
Fast-forward to yesterday, and there was another rostrum tridens in my sights, but this time it was a semis of the later series, Crawford 114/3, one of the finest preserved examples and from the Clain Steffanelli collection. I had logged in early, which was just as well as the auction started an hour before I'd anticipated due to some confusion over GMT/BST/CET/CEST, as sometimes happens. There was a long run of Roman Provincials on offer and I grabbed an old catalogue from a shelf and spent the vacant time browsing for provenances, and was also chatting live via text with two other Forum members (one who was in the air between Ireland and Newfoundland), whilst waiting for my lot. I'd been focused so much on the semis that I'd neglected to look much over the other auction lots, and it was with some surprise that I suddenly noticed a few lots ahead another example of the prized rarity Crawford 62/1 that I'd completely overlooked. I bid and won, and immediately on doing so I reached behind me and pulled out Crawford volume II to make absolutely sure I'd bought the rare rather than common type. Indeed I did, and thought to myself that the Crawford plate coin had a very ugly scratch, which is unusual for his plate coins and is indicative of the rareness of the piece. I looked back at my desk, where was lying open the random old catalogue I'd grabbed, actually a fixed price list from Giuseppe de Falco from December 1969 containing a strong run of early denarii, and saw that same type in the catalogue in better condition than the Crawford plate coin; it was the Bastianelli collection, which Crawford cited quite a bit in RRC and I believe also took plaster casts of, and I was wondering why he hadn't used the Bastianelli coin as his plate example when I noticed a small ding above the helmet that matched the coin I'd bought just a minute ago. Yes, the very same - I'd found a pre-1970 provenance for a coin in its original sale catalogue within a minute of buying it. When I think back on the sequence of events that led me to this point, I really feel this coin was destined for me ... and I capped it's purchase a few minutes later by buying the rostrum tridens semis I had been chasing.
After the auction I sat down and carefully went through de Falco FPL Dec.1969 and found another nice coin, indeed one which I'd illustrated as a provenance find from the Spink Num.Circ. only this week, an exceptional anonymous denarius. Then I had a glass of wine and thought about the day's luck.
Illustrated below
- the rare Crawford 62/1 rostrum tridens denarius I missed (I know ... it's better, but it wasn't destined to be mine)
- the rare Bastianelli Crawford 62/1, now mine
- Crawford 114/1, the common type, for comparison
- the rostrum tridens semis, Crawford 114/3, also bought yesterday
- my second Bastianelli provenance find yesterday, Crawford 53/2
-
Some new old provenances found today;
Julius Caesar Numonia Cr.514/2, ex Naville Ars Classica XV (2 July 1930) lot 1281 (I already have a Jacob Hirsch 1914, so this is an infill)
Antony and Fulvia Cistophorus, Jacob Hirsch XVIII (27 May 1907) lot 1835 coll. Friedrich Imhoof-Blumer. An important find, and my only Imhoof-Blumer coin so far. This coin also has a Vierordt 1923 and a V.J.E. Ryan 1952 provenance. I bought it at minimum in an NAC sale, unprovenanced. It was listed right after a nasty bright as a scratched saucepan mint state example in poor style and with bad surfaces which obviously sold for much more to someone who deserved to win it.
Anonymous denarius Cr.54/1, Mario Ratto 26 Jan.1955 lot 27 (2,600 Lire) Giorgio coll. Previously only a recent CNG and "Nancy Walsh coll." provenance, this also a good find, adding 60 years to its age.
Caduceus denarius Cr.108/1, Mario Ratto (1 Dec.1932) lot 137 coll. E.H. Schwing. I bought this in a group lot (!!!) which I purchased just to get this coin. It wasn't illustrated in the sale catalogue so this brings it from zero to 84 years old in one step. A marvelous find of a real rarity.
Bull Wheel semis, another Schwing coin, Mario Ratto (1 Dec.1932) lot 91. I already had a good provenance for this, Christie's (7 Dec.1965) lot 135 Northwick Park Capt. E.G. Spencer Churchill, but this makes it a really great provenance.
I also added another provenance to my Cassius Tripod denarius illustrated two posts above, Mario Ratto 26 Jan.1955 lot 140 (48,000 Lire) Giorgio coll. This coin now becomes NAC73 (18 Nov.2013) lot 228 Student Mentor ex Münzen Medaillen Basel 66 (22 Oct.1984) lot 477 ex Mario Ratto 1969 FPL 2 (Apr.-Jun.1969) lot 121 (L.It. 260,000) ex Mario Ratto 26 Jan.1955 lot 140 (48,000 Lire) Giorgio coll. ex Glendinings (9 Mar.1931) lot 130 Edmund Nordheim coll. = Banti-Simonetti Cassivs 27/1 (this coin).
Pics as usual below.
-
You are on a roll! Congratulations on these terrific provenances.
-
Great stories and wonderful provenances. Also, thanks for the info on the Spink circulars! +++
-
This week, I received the following old catalogues:
1. Credit de La Bourse, April 1995;
2. Vecchi Auctions 1-10;
3. TNA Auctions 1-3; and
4. Joel Malter, Rindge Collection sale.
Also, today, my bookbinder sent me the below photo of my just rebound, Baranowsky - Traverso & Martini (1931). I can't wait to have it in my hands.
-
I'm close to the end of my provenancing Odyssey as regards my own library resources; my old auction catalogues are near fully investigated and I've been moving on to books illustrating coins in private collections. So these regular updates of really terrific pedigrees will sadly end soon. But there's still a few more, five below.
1. Cohen 1857
P.SVLA Triens, Crawford 205/4, this actual coin illustrated in H.Cohen Medailles Consulaires, 1857, as Cornelia 12 on pl.LIII, and also by Babelon 1885 p.388 Cornelia 4. Multiple exact coincidences in flan shape and strike are probative.
2. Ratto 1930 Martini coll.
D. Junius Silanus Denarius, Crawford 337/3. I bid for this coin at NAC 78 and lost it; afterwards Phil Davis told me it was a really great quality coin and I should maybe have gone further. But as luck would have it, the winner listed it at retail a few weeks later with a reasonable markup and a took the second chance. Ex Auctiones 10 (12 June 1979) lot 353 ex Rodolfo Ratto (24 Feb.1930) lot 711 Joseph Martini coll.
3. Hamburger 1925 Niklovitch coll.
L.VLO L.F. STRABO denarius, Crawford 377/1. Quite a rare coin, and strongly struck though missing the thunderbolt behind the bull. Leo Hamburger (19 Oct.1925) lot 386 (32 RM) Niklovitch coll.
4. Ratto 1924 Bonazzi coll.
Octavian and Caesar dupondius, Crawford 535/2. I already noted on this list an Ars Classica XI H.C. Levis provenance. Now I add a slightly older Rodolfo Ratto (23 Jan.1924) lot 1432 Bonazzi 'Riche' coll.
5. Alfoeldi Caesar plate coin
Julius Caesar and P. Sepullius Macer lifetime issue, Crawford 480/10. Alföldi 1974 type VIII, pl.LXVI,37 (this coin) Professor L.Fontana coll. Curiously the coin didn't feature in the CNG sales of the Fontana collection, but came from a different source. I have an obverse die match to this coin with the seated Buca type,
(https://c4.staticflickr.com/4/3665/18402165403_34d120f43a.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/u38UDR)
First class provenances all, though I'm fearful this may be the last post I make with five such stars. The residual catalogues I've got to check are mostly very modern, and of dealers who don't usually quote older sources such as San Marino or Madrid sellers. But one lives in hope. The Fitzwilliam museum beckons...
-
Fitzwilliam mailed me a photocopy of a 1993 Munzen und Medaillen list. They were so nice and helpful via email.
-
Andrew,
All great finds, but identifying that Sulla triens in the Cohen and Babelon illustrations is an absolute miracle!
-
Andrew,
All great finds, but identifying that Sulla triens in the Cohen and Babelon illustrations is an absolute miracle!
More a stroke of luck than a miracle of identification, not so difficult of course once one sees the coin. The peculiar area of damage below the R of ROMA is expertly rendered, and the other flan shape oddities pretty faithfully too, as is the nature of the solid and dotted circles on rev and obv. Pretty remarkable when you consider this was a sketch done in a few minutes, not from an enlarged photo but from the coin with its encrusted green patina in hand. It's my second Cohen coin. I started searching with the bronzes plates as high quality bronze is much rarer than high quality silver, thus my 'good bronzes' seem more likely to prove a match. My other Cohen is also a bronze.
Once all this is done, and I've checked my provenance notes, I'll need to compile a long list of catalogues I'd wish to consult in future, perhaps using Ted Buttrey's online master list in combination with Spring plates count. At this stage any catalogue that even mentions rep* in Spring is fair game for examination.
-
How do you know it was a sketch done in a few minutes?
That is a really cool match to find!
-
Fabulous finds Andrew and thank you for sharing.
The Cohen is amazing IMO.
-
I finished my review of Cohen 1857 and have three more provenances to consider. Additionally, I reviewed the Bourgey compilation book of Roman Republican coins in their past auctions (Sabine Bourgey 1988) which yielded another coin, and also Elvira Clain Stefanelli's 1999 Smithsonian book about life in Republican Rome on its coins; that furnished one coin which is also one of my Cohen's and of course has a Clain Stefanelli provenance. I also found a provenance from the Bourgey Schott collection. Here goes:
1.
Scarpus, Crawford 546/6, Bourgey 17 June 1985 lot 113. Poor photograph, poorly cut out, of a not great coin, but they are the same - weight matches too.
2.
Pompey Pietas, Crawford 477/1b, Bourgey Schott coll. 21 march 1972 lot 325. This coin also has a Stack's 1978 Knobloch collection provenance.
3.
Baebia TAMP above, Crawford 133/2b, Cohen 1857 pl.VII Baebia 1 (this coin) = Babelon 1885 p.250 Baebia 1 (this coin). This is also a Haeberlin coin lot 346, and a Banti plate coin. No doubt about the Cohen match, the knock at 8pm obv. exactly matches as do all other elements of style and strike
4.
Amelius Lepidus Crawford 419/2, = Cohen 1857 pl.1 Aemilia 7 = Babelon 1885 p.128 Aemilia 24 = E.E. Clain Stefanelli, Life in Republican Rome on its Coins, 1999, p.43. This requires a little thinking on; Cohen always pulled half-offstruck legends fully on flan as he did with the exergue legend here, so this is as expected; the dies are a match, and the strike on both sides the same, the same flan bulges e.g. 8pm obv. and 2pm rev., the obverse dots match and the reverse circle carries from 7:30pm to 12:30 pm on plate and coin; it's a rare coin and especially rare with a complete obverse legend; the combination of flan shape, die match and strike seems decisive. Old toning.
5.
Acilia Semis, Crawford 255/2. A rare bronze type, evidently the same dies, unusually well struck on an unusually large flan, the 8pm wide obverse bulge and the 2pm narrower obverse bulge match as do the centering on reverse. Old toning.
Worth confirming whether "Cohen" equates to "Babelon" as the illustrations seem the same. It does not. Babelon uses all of Cohen's illustrations but many more extra as well, by the same engraver Dardel. The illustrations taken from Cohen are printed in much finer and better quality in the 1857 than in the Babelon version. It's also easier to peruse the plates in Cohen than the in-text ills. in Babelon. So dedicated provenance hunters should have both.
I also checked against the line-drawing version of RSC 1 (1948-1967 editions). It seems to again use the Dardel illustrations, so will be a fair alternate to Babelon or Cohen. With line drawings as with photos it does appear that repeated copying leads to lesser quality reproduction, and I prefer Babelon (first edition) over RSC1 and Cohen over Babelon as regards quality, and that seems to matter for fine judgements such as these comparisons require. AFAIK the photograph illustrations in RSC1 1978 are all of British Museum coins, thus whilst lovely to look at, practically useless for provenances. Though I'd love to be informed otherwise.
I would add that no other coins in Cohen came even close to a match. There's probably 1200 coins in Cohen, and of the remainder, 99% can be ruled out at first glance - incompatible strikes or styles, and half the remainder after a brief consideration, typically where there was a good overall style and strike match but a different flan shape or a present or absent edge crack. There wasn't a continuum of matches or many borderline cases.
-
andrew - do you know where the coins came from for Cohen's works? His collection, someone else's or a conglomerate?
Nice work btw.
-
andrew - do you know where the coins came from for Cohen's works? His collection, someone else's or a conglomerate?
Nice work btw.
I understand they were from many private collections. I first realised thus could be reliably used for provenaces when I saw NAC staff routinely consult Cohen for gold matches (even NAC wouldnt bother to look for a worn Acilia semis in Cohen). The collections may have included some that ended up in museum such as d'Ailly's in the BNF today; d'Ailly's coins were also drawn by Dardel for d'Ailly's three volume book and the latter has been used as the most reliably source of pictures for BNF coins until today. I personally verified the accuracy of Dardels drawings when I viewed and photographed coins in the BNF in Paris. It was very easy to match my photos to the d'Ailly plate coins, and the process also led me to a greater understanding of how Dardel worked - as an artist who tried to capture the spirit of what a coin looks like in hand through the flan shape, style and strike details, edge imperfections and such like, yet was less concerned with rendering the fine details of type devices such as hairlines or internal details in a prow. He tried to show coins as they would seem in hand whilst compensating for missing details eg bringing a legend half off flan onto the flan. After all this was intended as a handbook, not as a sale catalogue or 21st century provenance tool!
-
Having just purchased a set of Cohen, I'm hoping to go through them carefully to do the same. Thanks Andrew!
-
Having just purchased a set of Cohen, I'm hoping to go through them carefully to do the same. Thanks Andrew!
I really hope you have some successes. Your best hope of matches may lie with coins that have unusual strikes or odd shaped flans. Truly perfect well centred coins might be tough to match especially if from a series that often produced nice coins. Even if I found a match for my M.ABVRI GEM, mint state and centred, I'm not sure I'd believe in it.
My next task is those Babelon pics that are not in Cohen. I'm fearful that the extra pics may be reproductions of those used in d'Ailly (1866) in which case the extra coins may all be locked up in Paris. Let's hope not.
Line drawing comparisons are a lot harder mental work than photos. You have to run through a multi item logic list (style, die, flan shape, dots and border circle intersections, edge nicks etc) before considering the weight of evidence. There'll always be some aspect that's not exactly right, a wobbly line at the edge that doesn't quite match the edge imperfections on your coin, against which the larger picture of style, strike and shape have to be placed. Border circle visibility does seem to be a key fingerprint as do significant edge imperfections. You get a sense after a while what matters. But it's really hard work as compared with photos. Hard thinking needed.
-
I did Babelon, bronzes, this morning (those additional bronzes that didn't feature in Cohen), found nothing at all, and then turned to the preface of Babelon where I read:
"You will find in this book, especially for the bronzes, a great number of coins that haven't been illustrated in any previous book. I chose these mainly from the rich collection that Baron d'Ailly left to the BNF in 1877. (Such additional) coins described in this book, unless I've indicated another provenance, all come from the Coin Cabinet at the BNF".
The "other provenances" referred to seem mainly to be British Museum. The words "such additional" in the last sentence are implied by reference to the 1877 date (post Cohen) and reference to coins "illustrated in previous books" (Cohen), i.e. that "unless indicated ... all come from the ... BNF" refers to these extra coins.
So that's conclusive. There's no point in checking Babelon or RSC1 if you've already checked Cohen, and if you have both, then check only the latter. If you've only Babelon however, or only an early RSC1, you'll have to trawl through them all, as there's no indication which coins were prior Cohen illustrations and which are additional BNF coins. I guess there's theoretical value in checking every listing in Babelon to see whether there are any "other provenances" mentioned that are private collections yet not in Cohen, but I've found no such coins.
-
I just did Sear HCRI. I already had two coins
- 110 = 480/21 which I already shared on this list as being ex NFA XXVII Roberto Russo collection
- 127 = Crawford 496/2
Today I added
- 429 = RIC 276 quinarius
It occurs to me that 127 and 429 are also probably NFA coins though not NFA XXVII. I have not many NFA catalogues, but if anyone has a full run and spots either coin, it would be great if you shared it on list. Both illustrated below.
-
Andrew,
As I understand the French, Babelon is talking about coins described in his work, not coins illustrated there.
"You will find in this book, especially for the bronzes, quite a few coins that have not been described in any previous work. I chose these mainly from the rich collection that Baron d'Ailly left to the BNF in 1877. Finally I should inform the reader that specimens of all of the coins described in this book, unless I have indicated another provenance, may be found in the Coin Cabinet at the BNF".
-
Andrew,
As I understand the French, Babelon is talking about coins described in his work, not coins illustrated there.
"You will find in this book, especially for the bronzes, quite a few coins that have not been described in any previous work. I chose these mainly from the rich collection that Baron d'Ailly left to the BNF in 1877. Finally I should inform the reader that specimens of all of the coins described in this book, unless I have indicated another provenance, may be found in the Coin Cabinet at the BNF".
Curtis
Yes that's literally true as written, but it makes no practical sense - witness the whole host of "Cohen" coins in collections throughout the world today which are not provenanced in Babelon yet evidently not in the BNF, and the easily verifiable fact that Cohen describes but doesn't illustrate many coins that are later illustrated - using BNF d'Ailly coins - by Babelon. "Illustrations" is what this commentary must be about.
That's why I gave an interpretative sentence below my rendering, to explain how I read these sentences as intended. It would be meaningless to take it in a literal sense.
Andrew
-
Andrew,
But that is not what the French clearly states.
It makes perfect sense for Babelon to write that he is describing many previously unpublished varieties, mainly from the d'Ailly collection, and that the Paris collection contains specimens of all the coins he describes, unless he specifies another source.
If there are illustrations in Cohen of coins not in the French collection, though Cohen indicates with an F that Paris has a specimen, then apparently Dardel was drawing another original, say from the BM or from a private collection, because that other specimen was finer or more complete than the Paris specimen.
-
Andrew,
But that is not what the French clearly states.
It makes perfect sense for Babelon to state that he is describing many previously unpublished varieties, mainly from the d'Ailly collection, and that the Paris collection contains specimens of all the coins he describes, unless he specifies another source.
If there are illustrations in Cohen of coins not in the French collection, though Cohen indicates with an F that Paris has a specimen, then apparently Dardel was drawing another original, say from the BM or from a private collection, because that other specimen was finer or more complete than the Paris specimen.
Ok, got it. Yet it is surprising if it's true, as I know the Paris collection and am aware Cohen illustrates very many types not in Paris (even today); I would have to check in each case of a zero in Paris whether a collection is cited for an illustrated (or unillustrated coin) in Babelon; the one case in my own collection, of a type I know to be missing in Paris, does have a provenance (for my coin) listed in Babelon.
I think it is nevertheless still safe to ignore Babelon for provenancing purposes if one has reviewed Cohen. I guess there is a theoretical subset of coin types that are in Paris, not illustrated in Cohen, and illustrated in Babelon by an example not in Paris. But it can't be large.
Anyways, use Cohen for provenances of Republican types.
-
I came across this 82' TNA auction book at a used book store and I really like it. But, I don't know much about Numismatic literature. My tiny library basically consists of Sear RCV 1-4 and a few other books. It's hardbound leather and has some nice B/W plates along with auction info.
Here are some pics.
-
I came across this 82' TNA auction book at a used book store and I really like it. But, I don't know much about Numismatic literature.
Hi Phil. Funny coincidence, as I'd just mentioned a few posts above that I acquired copies of TNA sales 1-3 recently. They were lavishly produced catalogues. TNA was an auction venture by Tradart, who continues to produce lavish auction catalogues from time to time. Funny thing is I 'd never heard of TNA before I bought my lot, and suddenly they're everywhere! Yesterday, a certain numismatic book dealer had an auction in which TNA 1-3, all hardcovers, were sold as a group lot. Today, you post your chance find at a bookstore. I imagine that the hardcover TNA sales must have a good survival rate, as people are less likely to toss "books" in the dust bin vs. typical, softcover auction catalogues.
EDIT: For those interested in the number of Roman Republican coins in these TNA auction sales: Sale 1 has the most - about 4 plates; Sale 2 about 2 plates; and sale 3 only 1 plate.
-
Hey Michael, thanks for the info.
Glad I could contribute to the "madness". As I said, I don't know much about these catalogues but once I flipped open this book, I knew I had to buy it. The store also had the 3rd book and a series of Byzantine coin, hardcover books from the -Something-Wharton, Whittemore collection. Really nice books but a bit too pricey. I am just wading in the shallow end of this niche of the hobby so I'am reluctant to go impulse buying.
Thanks again,
Phil A
-
It's a while since I reported a provenance but I found a great one today, a pre-hoard match for a gold type where 90%+ of modern examples come from one hoard (or several closely associated hoards) reported in the 1980s. It's a gold 60 as piece, Crawford 44/2, and I found it in Spink and Galerie des Monnaies 15 Feb.1977 lot 424, a clear decade earlier than any of the hoard coins surfaced. No idea what it realised in 1977 but as I paid just half it's 1977 estimate three decades later I'm pretty pleased. This is actually my first provenance gold coin; as the commoner gold types of the Republic were produced in vast quantities before scattering to the winds, being incorporated in jewellery or melted down, provenances for any except the rarer types are very difficult to find. Pic as usual below.
-
Congratulations on that fabulous provenance find. I imagine you can thank the later hordes for the cost savings over the 1977 price! I'd love to add one of these to my collection one day.
I recently added a complete run of Frank Sternberg catalogues to my library. They are a great resource and underpriced!
-
Pictured below, my Crawford 36/1 aes grave libral as with prow to the left, now with a pre-1908 collection provenance:
Leo Hamburger (27 May 1929) lot 358 (est. 120 RM) Geheimrat von Kaufmann coll.
Richard von Kaufmann (29 March 1849 in Cologne; † 11 March 1908 in Berlin-Charlottenburg) was a German-Jewish political economist, art collector and patron, and Privy Councillor (Geheimer Regierungsrat) under Kaiser Wiljelm II.
-
Wow! They don't get much better than that (coin and provenance).
-
I echo Nick's response. The coin is terrific with fabulous style, and a prewar provenance for an aes grave is special indeed. Was this a chance find? That particular Hamburger catalogue is certainly not one I would pull off the shelf while searching for an aes grave, as Spring reports only a partial aes grave plate.
-
Those who browse this thread will be used to occasional photos of beautifully rebound auction catalogues with attractive gold spine lettering and ornaments. I've done a bit of auction catalogue shelf reorganisation, primarily with the aim of ordering and marking the catalogues with a Spring number, and for those whose publisher is unclear, also adding an auctioneer name and/or a famous-collector name. This was purely a functional upgrade, not in the least aesthetic, but given the likelihood that I'll perpetually retain these catalogues, sturdiness and clarity are my prime objectives. Pics below ... forget the aesthetics, this is a useful arrangement.
-
You could always replace the plastic labels with hand-written call tags, which would be the best of both worlds.
-
You could always replace the plastic labels with hand-written call tags, which would be the best of both worlds.
I kinda like it kitschy and practical. It suits my tastes. Somehow it reminds me of the Dynolabel tabs in the libraries of my childhood with the number 737 in Dewey Decimal (I hope some readers recognise that number). I'm very comfortable with plastic labels on my elegant leather bindings. Sort of already feels best of both worlds.
-
I suppose that's true!
-
+++ It's great seeing all of them hardbound and together like that! It's been a gradual process for me, but I'll get there.
The Dynolabels take me back to my childhood as well. I still have old binders etc with the Dynos intact. Dynolabels will last forever if undisturbed. But beware if you decide to remove them. I have some old, previously-Dynoed, coin wallets with characteristic strips of Dyno adhesive remnants. Of course, my experience is Dynolabels of 40 years ago!
Your arrangement makes sense - alphabetical by Spring number, with some variance due to mix-bound items. What is the significance of black vs pink Spring number labels?
-
+++ It's great seeing all of them hardbound and together like that! It's been a gradual process for me, but I'll get there.
The Dynolabels take me back to my childhood as well. I still have old binders etc with the Dynos intact. Dynolabels will last forever if undisturbed. But beware if you decide to remove them. I have some old, previously-Dynoed, coin wallets with characteristic strips of Dyno adhesive remnants. Of course, my experience is Dynolabels of 40 years ago!
Your arrangement makes sense - alphabetical by Spring number, with some variance due to mix-bound items. What is the significance of black vs pink Spring number labels?
I ran out of black. You wouldn't know it, but there's two rolls of black and just one of pink on those books. I guess I might swap the pinks for black once I restock. Then again I might not.
What appeals most to me is the sheer heterogeneity of the bindings. Both my old and new bookbinders tried to channel me into uniformity. Thankfully they failed.
The Spring alphabetical arrangement makes a lot of sense once arranged that way. I used to do chronological but this way for example I've all my M&M Basel catalogues together, from the 1930s to Auctiones (the latter good series oddly missing from Spring, as is Kricheldorf). Note I've a few duplicates.
-
The Spring alphabetical arrangement makes a lot of sense once arranged that way. I used to do chronological but this way for example I've all my M&M Basel catalogues together, from the 1930s to Auctiones (the latter good series oddly missing from Spring, as is Kricheldorf). Note I've a few duplicates.
That's how I organize mine - alphabetically by firm. In fact, I keep what I consider my classic catalogues - say 1970's and earlier - together in one area of my bookshelves alphabetically by firm and then chronologically within each firm.
A fine reference library, Andrew.
-
I think there is a lot to be said for the system used by the Coin Room in the Ashmolean Museum, Oxford: auction catalogues are separated first by country of origin, and then, within each country, alphabetically by dealer's name.
There is much that makes the catalogues of a particular country resemble each other, and differ from those of other countries. Therefore I, and I am sure many others, tend to think of catalogues by country: what U.S. catalogues do I have, what British catalogues, what Swiss catalogues, and so on. Therefore I want to keep the different countries separated on my shelves as well, making it easy to find a particular firm, and also to notice when that firm is missing. Firms may change names, but they rarely change countries, so the arrangement by nationality will keep the two parts of what is essentially the same series closer together.
-
Firms may change names, but they rarely change countries, so the arrangement by nationality will keep the two parts of what is essentially the same series closer together.
I'd probably tear my hair out (which I really can't afford to do) if I had to remember the old auction house's nationality in order to find their catalogues. I'd memorize locations eventually, but would prefer to just deal with names. I suppose the multi-lingual among us might have an easier time of it. Although, I think some auction houses wrote their catalogues in non-native languages, so the multi-lingual might be equally confused! I suppose the geographic approach might aid in tracing unknown provenances, if coins tended to stay within national borders.
I'll be curious to see whether any German firms change countries over the next few years.
-
Hi,
Somehow it reminds me of the Dynolabel tabs in the libraries of my childhood with the number 737 in Dewey Decimal (I hope some readers recognise that number).
Oh yes, I used to work for the British Library when I left university. 737.40937 is a very familiar number for part of the stock from the old National Central Library. We did store books irrespective of subject but by date of acquisition. By doing so you have al your empty shelf space at the end and not having to accommodate gaps in the middle of the shelves that eventually filled. It did mean that if something got misheved it took an age to find! It also meant that the card file index of the time had to be kept up to date and that used the Berghofer system where homonym author names were interfiled, eg Smith, Smyth, Smithe were all in the same run.
Regards,
Mauseus
-
There's been quite a few cross border auction houses in recent years. Aes Rude operated out of Chiasso Switzerland and later from San Marino, gradually becoming known as Titano. M&M might refer to the Basel or later German metamorphosis. ACR aka Bertolami sold from Rome then Munich and now London. The current LAC in London shifted from being Italian. Seaby still operates under its name in London and it wasn't until well into the CNR/CNA auction series that CNG's name began to be solely used as a US brand. Indeed the various Swiss bank branches have tended to merge so what we now know as Sincona once was several firms before it was UBS. But John Spring was cognizant of this and generally kept together all related auction houses, adding comments where necessary. The Ratto's stay together even though Rodolfo and Mario operated in both France and Italy. All -in-all, Spring took a pragmatic, mainly but not entirely, alphabetical approach that recognises successor companies and generally makes sense. Hence my Basel catalogues include the Auctiones series and lead on to the German M&M series, all under the initial letter M. Which I think is how it should be.
Most probably in a large library, national sections make sense. In mine, a mere 3 shelves of 1970s and earlier catalogues, Spring is good -enough.
-
737 Dewey is Numismatics and Sillography. Sounds specific enough. I can't imagine what 737.40937 addresses - some tiny obscure fraction of our hobby maybe.
-
Yes, everything after the decimal refers to subcatagories under the numismatic heading.
-
Most probably in a large library, national sections make sense. In mine, a mere 3 shelves of 1970s and earlier catalogues, Spring is good -enough.
I agree entirely.
The division by countries might be recommendable, if you were shelving all of the many catalogues and lists that you doubtless receive in the mail, no matter how important or unimportant their content might be.
-
Hi,
I think 737.40937 is Roman coins. It is a long time ago.
Regards,
Mauseus
-
Recently, I bought a nice run of later (1984-2004) Munzen und Medaillen auction catalogues. Shortly after they arrived, I flipped through them and identified sales 66, 73 and 88 as those with the most Roman Republican coins. Today, I had a free couple hours and thoroughly reviewed those three sales. To my surprise, I found one of my 2016 NYINC purchases in Sale 66 (1984), Lot 375. My photos below.
-
Today, I received a few old Jacques Schulman auction catalogues, and I found my below P.CLODIVS denarius in Schulman Auction 262 (14 May 1975), Lot 1249. Before today, I knew from online searches that it had appeared in a 2012 Heritage sale, so this is a significant improvement to its provenance history.
-
Two very beautiful denarii and well deserving of old provenances - they are the sort of coin that begs one to find a good old collection for them! Well done, excellent discoveries.
-
I had a very mixed day of provenancing work yesterday. It felt kinda bad, but I guess it was probably good in the end. I just hate it (!!!) when I find provenances for coins I no longer own. Two instances yesterday:
- Mario Ratto, sale 5, 1933, lot 59: L.Mussidius Longus and Fulvia denarius which I've just released from my collection. Darn! It had lovely surfaces but was quite worn and I replaced it with a sharper example
- Sotheby's Nelson Bunker Hunt collection, 19 June 1991 lot 651 was a C.Vibius Pansa denarius that was EF but whose surfaces I never really liked. I'm amazed that Hunt, with so much spondulix would have chosen to acquire a coin I only bought with some doubts and then got rid of. Still, I'd have liked to own a Nelson Bunker Hunt provenance.
- These two follow from another minor calamity where I disposed of a rather worn Mark Antony denarius which turned out to be from the fabled Stack's Faelten sale in 1938. When this happens it's sounds like fingernails on a blackboard, or tastes like biting on aluminium foil by accident.
On the upside, I discovered new provenances for both my Antony cistophori on the same day (pics below). The one with Octavia on the reverse is Hess Leu 41 (24 Apr.1969) lot 64 - a great provenance for a piece I bought at retail with no prior information. That with Dionysus adds a Stack's November 1967 Hall Park McCullough provenance, a truly great collection. It now becomes
Stack's Hall Park McCullough coll. (20 Nov.1967) ex Glendining V.J.E. Ryan coll. (2 Apr.1952) lot 1929 ex J.Schulman (5 Mar.1923) lot 539 M.L. Vierordt coll. ex Jacob Hirsch XVIII (27 May 1907) lot 1835 Friedrich Imhoof-Blumer coll. = Banti-Simonetti Octavia et M. Antonivs 20 (this coin)
This is a very common coin type. What was it about this exact coin that attracted Imhoof-Blumer, Vierordt, Ryan, McCullough and McCabe to it? It must have numismatic pixie-dust on it.
Another well provenance coin added two more steps; the club symbol as below, which adds the Garrett collection - another great name and my first Garrett coin which his catalogue says he bought from Spink in 1928. It now becomes
NFA Garrett coll. Part I (16-18 May 1984) lot 653 ($180) ex Spink Num.Circ. 10 Jun.1928 ex Leo Hamburger (19 Oct.1925) lot 229 (120 RM) Niklovitch coll. ex RBW coll. = Sear RCTV (2000) vol.1 p.192,632 (this coin)
I've so much exhausted the major catalogue searches that it's very rare I find a new famous old antique provenance excepting that is for coins I've got rid of :( but some additional late 20th century great collectors are very welcome!
-
Stack's Hall Park McCullough coll. (20 Nov.1967) ex Glendining V.J.E. Ryan coll. (2 Apr.1952) lot 1929 ex J.Schulman (5 Mar.1923) lot 539 M.L. Vierordt coll. ex Jacob Hirsch XVIII (27 May 1907) lot 1835 Friedrich Imhoof-Blumer coll. = Banti-Simonetti Octavia et M. Antonivs 20 (this coin)
I found yet another, and older, provenance for my cistophorus pictured above. It's a plate coin from Portraetkoepfe auf Roemischen Muenze, der Republik und der Kaiserzeit, Dr. F. Imhoof-Blumer, 1892. It's provenance is now:
Stack's Hall Park McCullough coll. (20 Nov.1967) ex Glendining V.J.E. Ryan coll. (2 Apr.1952) lot 1929 ex J.Schulman (5 Mar.1923) lot 539 M.L. Vierordt coll. ex Jacob Hirsch XVIII (27 May 1907) lot 1835 Friedrich Imhoof-Blumer coll. = Banti-Simonetti Octavia et M. Antonivs 20 (this coin) = Imhoof-Blumer, Portraetkoepfe auf Roemischen Muenze, 1892, pl.1,6 (this coin)
This becomes my oldest coin with an attested photographic record (1892). I've older attested through line drawings or later sales of earlier formed collections. The coin is cited in Imhoof-Blumer as an exemplary portrait of Octavia, which may explain how so many later collectors became attached to it.
-
That's a really great provenance from one of the most respect numismatists of all time! Congratulations!
-
A few nice 1960s provenances from Italian fixed price lists:
RRC 45/1 (incuse denarius variety)
Aes Rude Titano 58 (24 Sep.1994) lot 120 ex Luigi de Nicola FPL Sep.1963 lot 177 (Lit 20,000)
RRC 489/2 Lepidus denarius
NAC78 (26 May 2014) lot 489 JD coll. ex Lanz 88 (23 Nov.1998) lot 824 Benz coll. ex Giuseppe Nascia Ars et Nummus FPL Dec.1968 lot 223 (Lit.65,000)
RRC 525/4 Caesar portrait with Ti.Sempronius Gracchus
NAC78 (27 May 2014) lot 1900 JD coll. ex Kricheldorf 38 (28 Nov.1984) lot 555 ex Luigi de Nicola FPL June 1964 lot 384 (L.It 35,000)
RRC 546/3 Scarpus for Mark Antony
CNG e294 (16 Jan.2013) lot 608 Goldman Imperatorial coll. ex NAC63 (17 May 2012) lot 602 RBW coll. ex Émile Bourgey (17 Jun.1985) lot 113 ex Giuseppe Nascia Ars et Nummus Jan-Feb 1972 lot 150 (L.It. 135,000) = RBW1853
-
Those are terrific FPL finds, with three being pre-1970, and one quite close. I'll need to keep an eye out for de Nicola lists. Were the lists generally well-stocked with RR plates, or was it hit and miss?
-
Those are terrific FPL finds, with three being pre-1970, and one quite close. I'll need to keep an eye out for de Nicola lists. Were the lists generally well-stocked with RR plates, or was it hit and miss?
The de Nicola lists were especially rich in RR, the Nascia less so, and the Simonetti (no provenances) also less so. De Nicola were comparable to Crippa in quality of RR.
-
I don't normally collect old catalogues as I mostly collect LRB's, but I saw this passing on ebay at a very low bid and bought it as a curiosity. I thought this might be of interest to some of the viewers of this thread. Joseph Hamburger June 17 1908 Auction Catalog Greek And Roman Coins . Attached is one of the sellers photos. If there is interest I will scan and post the other plates when the book arrives.
-
A nice provenance for a Julius Caesar portrait denarius
NAC78 (27 May 2014) lot 1882 JD coll. ex UBS83 (8 Sep.2009) lot 124 ex UBS78 (9 Sep.2008) lot 1113 ex Münzen und Medaillen Basel (unspecified, noted in UBS sale)
becomes
NAC78 (27 May 2014) lot 1882 JD coll. ex UBS83 (8 Sep.2009) lot 124 ex UBS78 (9 Sep.2008) lot 1113 ex Münzen und Medaillen Basel FPL 109 (Jan.1952) lot 137 (CHF 115)
That's pretty far back in the M&M sequence. It's interesting that this coin doesn't appear in Alfoeldi's book on Julius Caesar portraits. The reason is old M&M fixed price lists include obverse photos only, from which I found this coin, and Alfoeldi needed both obverse and reverses for his die study.
-
A nice pedigree run, Andrew. I'm always envious of the high quality coins that used to be offered up in FPL's in the 50's, 60's and even 70's. Today, we fight over nice coins in auctions like gasoline in a Mad Max movie.
-
I don't normally collect old catalogues as I mostly collect LRB's, but I saw this passing on ebay at a very low bid and bought it as a curiosity. I thought this might be of interest to some of the viewers of this thread. Joseph Hamburger June 17 1908 Auction Catalog Greek And Roman Coins .
That J. Hamburger sale was pretty large, over 1600 lots. There are only 8 plates, but they are evenly split between Greek and Roman, which is nice. You may find these old catalogues addictive, particularly if there's any chance of finding one of your own coins in the plates. Let us know how you like it when it arrives.
A nice provenance for a Julius Caesar portrait denarius
I'll say! From 2008 to pre-1970 in one stroke, and an attractive style portrait to boot.
-
I'll say! From 2008 to pre-1970 in one stroke, and an attractive style portrait to boot.
So attractive, that I bought a second portrait from the same die.
-
Hi Everyone, just wondering if anyone has by any chance a copy of Auction Münzen und Medaillen Basel Cahn VII (1948)?
-
Harlan Berk has a copy.
-
A nicely provenanced gold aureus found browsing Christies catalogues:
(https://c7.staticflickr.com/4/3710/11293255886_d528c50789_n.jpg) (https://www.flickr.com/photos/ahala_rome/11293255886)
NAC72 (17 May 2013) lot 1362 ex Christies, Lord Astor of Hever coll. (28 May 1963) lot 1, John Jacob Astor (1886-1971) 1908 Olympic gold medallist, owner The Times newspaper, MP for Dover 1922-1945
-
I've been browsing English auctions and found a few more decent provenances for relatively recently purchased coins (pics below)
Octavian with Oxen
ex Sotheby's London (30 Mar.1995) lot 1034 (£330)
P.MAE.ANT
ex Christies Roma (18 Dec.1980) lot 138 (L.It.160,000)
Livineia with gladiators - a really stunning reverse
ex V.C Vecchi & Bonhams IV (4 Dec.1980) lot 358 (£400)
-
A nicely provenanced gold aureus found browsing Christies catalogues:
NAC72 (17 May 2013) lot 1362 ex Christies, Lord Astor of Hever coll. (28 May 1963) lot 1, John Jacob Astor (1886-1971) 1908 Olympic gold medallist, owner The Times newspaper, MP for Dover 1922-1945
Beautiful aureus, and congratulations on the great provenance. Coincidentally, I recently acquired a denarius by the same moneyer, and using acsearch and Banti, I found a nice provenance for it. Dealer's photo below.
Crawford 494/38; Banti 67/10 (this coin). Ex Künker Auction 280 (26 Sep 2016), Lot 396; ex Peus Auction 328 (1990), Lot 507; ex Kunst und Munzen, June 1977, Lot 209.
-
Today, I received a few old Jacques Schulman auction catalogues, and I found my below P.CLODIVS denarius in Schulman Auction 262 (14 May 1975), Lot 1249. Before today, I knew from online searches that it had appeared in a 2012 Heritage sale, so this is a significant improvement to its provenance history.
Perusing tonight through Sear, The History and Coinage of the Roman Imperators, I came across the plate for coin #184 and quickly realized that the plate coin is my P. CLODIVS denarius pictured several posts earlier in this thread! Of course, this occurred whilst researching a different coin entirely.
-
Today, I received a few old Jacques Schulman auction catalogues, and I found my below P.CLODIVS denarius in Schulman Auction 262 (14 May 1975), Lot 1249. Before today, I knew from online searches that it had appeared in a 2012 Heritage sale, so this is a significant improvement to its provenance history.
Perusing tonight through Sear, The History and Coinage of the Roman Imperators, I came across the plate for coin #184 and quickly realized that the plate coin is my P. Clodius denarius pictured several posts earlier in this thread! Of course, this occurred whilst researching a different coin entirely.
What a nice surprise!
-
I was provenancing yesterday; found just one coin but it was a good one - in a 1943 (!) Italian fixed price list. Regardless of finds, Provenancing is anyways fun, because one comes across all sorts of curiosities. Photos below all from yesterday.
1. A Cahn catalogue where quite a few of the plates were printed upside down ... but the page numbering and coin numbers were printed the right way. Rather amusingly, the printer from Munich included his name on each plate thus taking credit for the incomprehensible mess! I like to think about the conversation Cahn had with his printer when he discovered...
2. Santamaria fixed price lists from the 1950s with a curious format: a blank was left in the middle of one page and the FPL was then folded and glued in such a way that the blank bit was used as the address field. The addressee in this case was Bernareggi, another famous numismatist. Postage was 5 Lire.
3. Another Italian FPL from dealer Barzan and Ravioli in 1949 that has an obituary of Rodolpho Ratto on its front cover. A nice touch of respect. No photos in these FPLs unfortunately, a friend noted that one would have expected such a list to be literally stuffed with photos.
4. A 1943 FPL from Oscar Rinaldi in Mantua. That's in the far north of Italy i.e. occupied territory. It features the Bonacini collection and contained eight excellent plates of high quality Roman Republican coins. I contacted Kolbe and Fanning who confirmed that they have not handled this catalogue in 30 years of trading, nor were aware of it. A true rarity.
5. Lot 231 from the Bonacini collection (my coin). I'll likely never own a copy of this catalogue unicorn but am immensely pleased to have a coin from the Bonacini collection.
Each day provenancing brings up magic like this. It's a great ancillary hobby.
Andrew
-
Further googling on Professor Bonacini, I've narrowed him down as being an expert in script and calligraphy in the university of Verona in the 1940s. He wrote a book on the subject:
Bonacini, Claudio, Bibliografia delle arti scrittorie e della calligrafia (Firenze, 1953).
What pins down the link to him being the collector is that he illustrated a postcard for the Philately society of Verona (below) in 1948. And I suspected he bought his coins with keen attention to their lettering and legend style and layouts. My coin ex this sale certainly has nice lettering.
I intend to have another look at the Bonacini RR sale plates from the perspective of typeface and legends.
-
$
-
I've bought this coin at a Swiss auction, with an old collector's tag attached. The cataloguer noted carefully that it probably came from Münzen und Medaillen VII, Basel 1948.
Curtis Clay and Justin Benton have now kindly provided me copies of the relevant pages from the auction catalogue held by the Harlan J. Berk library. As you can see it is definitely the same coin.
Thank you, Curtis and Justin!
-
I have a feeling the RR collectors will appreciate this. The Stacks 1978 sale of Knobloch's RR coins is now available online at archive.org and it allows you to download a PDF. You can find it at this link: https://archive.org/details/greaternewyorknu1978stac_p5c2
-
I have a feeling the RR collectors will appreciate this. The Stacks 1978 sale of Knobloch's RR coins is now available online at archive.org and it allows you to download a PDF. You can find it at this link: https://archive.org/details/greaternewyorknu1978stac_p5c2
That is a very important RR sale, and certainly worth the storage space for those that don't have a hard copy. Hard copies are generally cheap, but getting more difficult to find.
As an aside, my first major auction coin purchase was at the 1980 Stack's sale of the Knobloch Roman Imperial collection. I was 16 at the time!
-
I have a Galba "Roma Renascens" denarius that came with the the reference: "MMAG Basel 1975, listing 372, 23."
After some research I see there were actually number of MMAG Auction catalogues in 1975, none of which seem to be online. If anyone has the resources to check for this coin I would be very grateful and curious to know any associated sale information.
https://www.forumancientcoins.com/gallery/displayimage.php?pos=-88732 (https://www.forumancientcoins.com/gallery/displayimage.php?pos=-88732)
-
Optimo,
M&M 372 from 1975 is a fixed price list (FPL). M&M issued FPLs regularly. Numbers run all the way up to 609. I have FPL 372 from October 1975, and I attach below a photo of the lot 23 listing and plate. Lovely coin!
-
That's made my day, thanks for the research and pictures, Carausius!
I have amended the coin's details with this more precise information.
-
Hi guys, I'd like to make another request for information if I may. I've bought a coin at a recent auction described by the auction house as hailing from Vente Paris, Hôtel Drouot, 20 mars 1975, n°56. I know that quite a few auction houses work through Drouot, but no further details were supplied.
Would anyone have the auction catalogue by any chance?
-
I haven't posted on my old auction catalogue thread in some time. I wanted to highlight to anyone interested in old auction catalogues that Joe has been adding a large volume of old catalogues to the Forvm Ancient Coins retail shop. I've noticed some very important sales in the group, including the Hess sale of the Trau Collection and some Münzhandlung Basel sales. I have no financial interest in these catalogues. This is just a friendly announcement to all infected with the Old Auction Catalogue Madness. There's only one cure: more catalogues! ;) Keep em' coming, Joe!
-
I had been looking at Joe's copy of the Trau sale and mulling over buying it. Just scared about what the postage might be to the UK. Might work out cheaper to find a UK copy.
Mauseus
-
Michael,
since you appear to have "24. Rodolfo Ratto - 8/2/1928 (Morcom/Hands/Wertheim)", could you please check lot 4552 for me? I'd be quite grateful.
I'm following citations from RIC V.2 — it's supposed to be a Probus aureus RIC 306
i. IMP C M AVR PROBVS P F AVG
B. Laureate, draped bust r.
CLEMENTIA TEMP
Roma seated left on shield, holding Victory and sceptre.
If it is illustrated, I'd appreciate a scan or a photo.
Thanks,
G/<
.
http://probvs.net.probvs
-
vrtsprb, I posted in response to your PM here:
www.forumancientcoins.com/board/index.php?topic=116064.0
-
vrtsprb, I posted in response to your PM here:
www.forumancientcoins.com/board/index.php?topic=116064.0
Thanks.
In meantime, I've actually found that particular Ratto catalogue at BnF.
What threw me is that RIC V.2 refers to the Morcom sale as 1927 (print date), not the actual Ratto February 8, 1928 date.
G/<
.
-
A few weeks ago I bought an auction catalogue from Forum. I had been looking for a copy for about 1 year. Lucky for me Joe had a copy and posted it for sale. The catalogue arrived and my coin was pictured and described. The catalogue was Vecchi 13 September 1998. The coin was lot 757. RIC II part 1 mentions this sale in reference to my coin. Until recently my coin was the only one known. A few months ago @David Atherton also found one.
My sincere thanks to Joe for the catalogue.
Here is the coin.
Vespasian (69-79). AR Denarius (18.08mm, 3.50g, 6h). Rome, AD 75.
Obv: Bare head l. R IMP CEASAR VESPASIANUS AUG
Rev: Pax seated l., resting l. elbow on throne and holding branch.
PON MAX TRP COS VI
RIC II 773 (this coin); RSC –. Extremely Rare variety, near VF.
Ex Vecchi sale 13, 1998, 757.
Ex: St Paul Antiques auction 7 Lot 285 June 11, 2017
Coin depicted in the Wildwinds.com database.
-
Wonderful, Andrew. Congratulations on a rare coin and terrific provenance. The Vecchi series of sales from the 1990s are wonderful catalogues including some excellent specialist collections (Roman Republican bronzes in Vecchi 3; Augustus in Vecchi 9). I'd recommend buying more of this series if you've got the room.
-
Many thanks Michael for the kind comments. At the moment I am just trying to collect catalogues where I have coins listed or pictured.
-
Does an online version exist of the famed Leu 17, 1977 Nicolas auction? It seems to be a hard catalogue to find.
-
Not that I'm aware of. Several Forum members, including me, have copies of that catalogue, so if there is a certain type or lot that you a looking for, just ask.
-
It’s come to my attention a recent acquisition of mine came from M&M Basel fixed price list 391, July 1977, lot 23. The coin has a very dark tone so I am wondering if any collections were associated with this sale? I only have the plate photo, no further information.
-
Nice coin, and nice provenance! I have most of the MuM FPLs for that era, but I'm missing #391. Sorry. I'll see if I can get someone else to chime-in.
-
It’s come to my attention a recent acquisition of mine came from M&M Basel fixed price list 391, July 1977, lot 23. The coin has a very dark tone so I am wondering if any collections were associated with this sale? I only have the plate photo, no further information.
There's never any collections or provenance information associated with any M&M Basel FPL. Never seen even a single instance, and I've 98% of the lists from 100 to 609. Seems to have been policy never to disclose sources. That still remains policy for almost all fixed-price dealers as they buy to flip, so their sources are inevitably recent. To quote three current examples Ed Waddell doesn't disclose where his coins (just) came from though he may quote much older provenances. Nor does the Baldwin's FPLs. Nor do the Berk sales (effectively FPLs with potential to make offers). Auctions are different because the coins within may be old collections, but FPLs inevitably are recent auction buys (which you deliberately don't disclose so your clients won't find out where or how cheap you buy coins) or minor random purchases (which aren't very interesting to disclose). So FPLs old or new very rarely have provenance information.
I attach the cover, plate and text info from this sale.
-
My old auction catalogue madness has relapsed. I just bought this copy of Ars Classica 1 (Pozzi) ON SALE from the FORVM shop. Thank's, Joe! FORVM has some wonderfully useful catalogues in the shop, and the sale prices make them hard to resist.
-
I wonder if any Forum friends might have a copy of Pegasi Auction VI (8 April 2002)? I'm hoping to both confirm a provenance and see what breadcrumbs might be lurking within the lot description for a coin I've recently acquired. Thanks.
-
A wee bit of advertising... Not auction VI, but Pegasi catalogs...
https://www.forumancientcoins.com/catalog/roman-and-greek-coins.asp?param=16423q00.jpg&vpar=1385&zpg=92806&fld=https://www.forumancientcoins.com/Coins2/
https://www.forumancientcoins.com/catalog/roman-and-greek-coins.asp?param=16422q00.jpg&vpar=1385&zpg=92805&fld=https://www.forumancientcoins.com/Coins2/
-
Lest a classic thread die after only 5 years (now 7), I hope no one minds another entry (and that I get the images right -- larger ones linked at end). Two Greek coin provenances found “in the wild” in catalogs with their own provenance (Pozzi Collection, D. Weaver / T. Stanton, H.J. Berk; Libraries of Salton-Schlessinger, BCD, H. Christensen).
(I’ve read the replies for a long time without participating but have clearly been infected with the “madness” of catalog bibliomania. I’ve shared these two coins with different writeups elsewhere, not on Forum, linked at the end. Believe it or not, this is much condensed.)
First: Corinth AR Stater (ex Pozzi-Naville 1688 = Pozzi-Boutin 3756; for type: Ravel 1029, Calciati 419, BCD 110).
One of my first ancient coin purchases (c. 1991, ~12 years old). Bought at Glass Shoppe coins in Tucson, AZ – not from the owner (then, Halden Birt), but another guy who was there a lot (possibly Anthony “Tony” Tumonis, who later took over). They were cheaper then, but I still did neighborhood yardwork & saved up all year to buy one ancient coin every summer.
Happily, its sentimental value multiplied when, on its 100th anniversary, I was looking at the 1921 Naville - Ars Classica catalog of the Pozzi Collection, and found my coin illustrated (Lot 1688; No. 3756 in Boutin 1979). I don’t have a hard copy of the auction, but there are multiple acceptable copies online (e.g., Uni. Heidleberg (link (http://digi.ub.uni-heidelberg.de/diglit/kundig_naville1921_04_04/0003)), Bib. Nat. Fr. – Gallica (link (https://gallica.bnf.fr/ark:/12148/bpt6k9779820r/f9.item.texteImage)), INHA Fr. (link (https://bibliotheque-numerique.inha.fr/collection/item/49756-monnaies-grecques-antiques-provenant-de-la-collection-de-feu-le-prof-s-pozzi-vente-du-14-mars-1921?offset=4)), Archive.org (link (https://archive.org/details/Hirsch03141921/)), and elsewhere, all of which repositories have digitized many other important catalogs of ancient coins). The PRL is available, but I haven’t found a “named” copy – yet.…
(https://i.imgur.com/L8cF2ii.png)
I do, however, have the 1979 Pozzi collection catalog by Serge Boutin (not exactly a reprint). It has its own interesting provenance from the library of Mark Salton-Schlessinger & Lottie Salton (Kolbe & Fanning 161, 141, part of (https://bid.numislit.com/lots/view/1-4Y41BZ/pozzi-gulbenkian-milan-c)). I’m interested in the family’s coins/books as an important illustration of how gravely WWII and the Nazi regime affected the world of numismatics. Though it’s all post-WWII, I’m glad I bought some literature since I didn’t manage to get any ex-Salton coins at this month’s (ferocious!) Stack’s sale.
The new mystery is how my coin got from 1921 Lucerne to 1991 Tucson. I don’t think it’s cited in Ravel, and I haven’t found it elsewhere (except as a reference in Gemini VI [2010], Lot 801). A lot of Pozzi coins ended up with R. C. Lockett, but no luck there either. Maybe I’ll find it combing through catalogs and journals… Or it may remain a mystery.
Second: Athens “mass classical owl” AR Tetradrachm (ex-Weaver & HJB, mid-1970s).
The next coin and its recent background are less exciting, but still a nice reminder of forgotten moments, actors, and documents in the recent history of the ancient coin market (c. 1970s).
A mediocre example, it didn’t even merit its own listing at Morton & Eden 104 in 2019 (Lot 109, part of)(here (https://www.sixbid-coin-archive.com/#/en/single/l31510210)), so I didn’t hold out much hope for finding it illustrated in older catalogs.
(https://i.imgur.com/l02mkA1.png)
Since my interest in provenance research extends to catalogs, this “Note from BCD” on a mixed lot of American FPL’s caught my attention in a recent sale of “BCD Library Duplicates”:
This writer considers himself fortunate to have met some of the people that issued these lists. Sadly, they are not with us anymore and it is about time the numismatic community does something significant in their memory so that they will always be remembered. (Jacquier 49, 940 (https://www.acsearch.info/search.html?id=8507448))
It’s not quite what BCD meant, but, having found my owl in one of those lists, I’ve certainly tried to remember its authors and recognize their connection to the numismatic world.
The list in question is Douglas Weaver’s mail-order FPL from November 1975. It’s the first (or second?) by Tom Stanton after he joined Weaver and they “greatly expanded our ancient section.” A great thing about old mail-catalogs is that the addressee is often labeled on the back cover (often with postage still attached). This one was addressed to coin dealer Henry Christensen at his New Jersey business.
The same coin was illustrated one year prior inHarlan J Berk’s FPL #2 (Fall 1974), Lot 80 ( link (https://archive.org/details/harlanjberkcoanc0000harl/)). The prices were $295 (HJB) and $350 (DW; about $1,600 and 1,800 in 2022 USD – representing quite a loss of value over 45 years). Once I’d found a bit of backstory, I was really hoping for a collection history, but none is mentioned by Berk either. Perhaps someday I’ll find it in a 1973 auction!
More:
If anyone knows/knew any of the characters involved, I’m interested to learn more, of course. My previous writeups (incl. additional biographical & bibliographical refs. & my notes from Pete Smith's American Numismatic Biographies (https://archive.org/details/2012AmericanNumismaticBiographies) & Gengerke's American Numismatic Auctions (https://archive.org/details/AmericanNumismaticAuctions)):
Pozzi & Salton, (link here (https://www.reddit.com/r/AncientCoins/comments/rwg8ec/two_photos_of_one_of_my_favorite_coins_100_years/hrbmork/)) “A French Gynecologist Playboy, Nazis, and Numismatic Bibliomania.”
The owl, Weaver & Christensen (https://www.reddit.com/r/AncientCoins/comments/s4ox7a/interesting_backstory_for_one_of_my_athens_owl/hssbcpu/)
Larger images plus a few relevant others: https://imgur.com/a/c5sSFII (https://imgur.com/a/c5sSFII)
-
One of my first ancient coin purchases (c. 1991, ~12 years old). Bought at Glass Shoppe coins in Tucson, AZ – not from the owner (then, Halden Birt), but another guy who was there a lot (possibly Anthony “Tony” Tumonis, who later took over). They were cheaper then, but I still did neighborhood yardwork & saved up all year to buy one ancient coin every summer.
Amazing finding a Pozzi coin at age 12, in Tucson, being able to realize it’s quality. Also, finding enough grass in that desert city -- needing cutting -- to be able to afford a Pozzi coin!
I have not found anything of mine in Boutin’s Pozzi but I recently acquired the Ars Classica reprint. I have not checked … yet.
There are many interesting illustrated fixed price lists. No one knows much about many of them.
The first provenanced ancient coin I bought was a diobol of Methymna from the May 2001 FPL of Colosseum Coin Exchange (Ira Teitelbaum / Hazlet NJ). No listed provenance, but it turned out to have been part of the Rosen Collection of archaic coins, published in 1983. This got me on the CCE mailing list, so I got the last catalogs. (I no longer have them — I donated them to the ANS which lacked copies!)
Many people are chasing after pre-1970 provenances. There aren’t many illustrated FPLs from this period. There seems to be little interest in FPLs from later — and perhaps that will give us a chance to obtain FPLs cheaply for now.
I was able to obtain a run of Tom Cederlind catalogs from Lottie Salton (not part of K&L sale). I found a coin of mine in the December 2007 catalog. I already had older and newer provenances, but it added another data point.
Because of copyright law, these catalogs probably won’t make it online during our lifetime. No one thought to ask for permission to put them online when the dealers were alive. No one recorded ownership of the intellectual property when they passed, so we don’t know who to ask now. Many (most?) are also rare.
I am acquiring FPLs, but I am not scanning them. I have the start of an inventory so that I don’t double-buy, with a few notes like how many lots of ancients are present. I haven’t really organized the data or tried to write about them or put anything online about them.
-
Very nice finds Curtis! Excellent work.
...Many people are chasing after pre-1970 provenances. There aren’t many illustrated FPLs from this period. There seems to be little interest in FPLs from later — and perhaps that will give us a chance to obtain FPLs cheaply for now....
I've also been quietly accumulating older plated FPLs and have a few boxes of them now. I do need to get them organized, if only I can find the time to go through them and get at least their basic information into the rnumis databases.
My latest buy was around 150 of the Monnaies & Medailles SA Listes...some nice coins there and provenances are sometimes noted, which is helpful. I also like that there's a theme in each one...they're not just lists of 'everything'. Currently I'm scanning those.
There are some amazing Fixed Price Lists pre-1970 but there are also many which are just so-so, like auction catalogs I suppose. FPLs without plates I skip, and I also see that even the plated ones often don't bother with coin weights (though M&M and Leu do, from what I've seen so far).
Steve
-
Not terribly old catalogs, just going back to ca 2001 - all the gorgeous Künker catalogs can be found on their archive site:
Künker auction archive
https://www.kuenker.de/de/auktionen/katalogarchiv
Click on "Katalog im Internet" to the right of the catalog you want, then the pdf link.
There are a number of lovely collections including the Rainer Pudill collection and the Samael collection of ancient Jewish coins (the main sale then an addition sale a bit later)
-
Did anyone buy catalogs from the recent Lanz Library sales? I’ll limit myself to just a few here…
A major theme in my library/collection is “object biography” (provenance), so I went for stuff that was interesting specifically for being ex-libris Lanz.
(Note: Everything but Lanz 88 & Kunstfreund is available online in some form [Lanz 94 & 100 via ACSearch only]; links included in bibliographic info on my Catalog Collection pages [LINK (https://conservatoricoins.com/sale-catalogs/)].)
1. Custom Hardbound Leo Benz (Lanz 88, 94, 100).
(More notes & bibliography on my "Catalog Collection Favorites" page: [LINK (https://conservatoricoins.com/sale-catalogs/#Benz)].)
Leo Benz (1906-1996) was the most important collection of Roman sold in the era of Hubert Lanz – that is, after the deaths of Hubert’s brother Ernst (1945-1989) and their father, Hermann Lanz (1910-1998), who founded the firm in 1947 (and co-founded the IAPN in 1951).
Three catalogs: Lanz 88 (Republican), Lanz 94 (RIC 1) [646 lots, ACSearch (https://www.acsearch.info/search.html?term=&category=1-2&company=86&auction=38&order=0)], Lanz 100 (RIC 2) [682 lots, ACSearch (https://www.acsearch.info/search.html?term=&category=1-2&company=86&auction=60&order=0)]. I have one coin (Lanz 88, 407), a “biga of cupids” denarius from “Cousin Julius” Caesar (Craw. 320/1).
I’d never heard of HARDCOVER Leo Benz catalogs before. Anyone else? There was one other set [Lot 3435 LINK] (https://www.acsearch.info/search.html?id=9729039) (but partial, only 2 of 3 hardbound, "special edition in full cloth using the covers and spine of the paperback editions" [EDIT, 5Mar23: Apparently LAC now has the partial, listed for sale, no mention of provenance.]).
(https://i.imgur.com/nnJi9xK.jpg) (https://i.imgur.com/VcrJzFz.jpg)
2. Hand-Named Kunstfreund Sale ([Gillet], Bank Leu w/ M&M, 28 May 1974).
(More of my notes/biblio: [LINK] (https://conservatoricoins.com/sale-catalogs/#kunstfreundes).)
Most buyers’ names hand-written on the pre-sale “estimated prices” list. I “hand-redacted” my photo since many buyers are still living, so you’ll have to take my word for it. (If I’m wrong & they’ve already been published, this is much less interesting!)
I wonder if Hermann Lanz or one of his sons, Ernst or Hubert, made the annotations? (Need to compare handwriting…)
I may never have a Kunstfreund coin myself, but if anyone else has one, maybe I can say who the next owner was.
Kolbe & Fanning (Sale 165, Lot 10) [Lot 10 LINK] (https://bid.numislit.com/lots/view/1-6O6VB5/finely-bound-annotated-kunstfreundes-sale) just sold another (much nicer!) copy that was also partially hand-named. If the winner sees this: Maybe we have one complete list between us! Call me!
The only complete copy I’m aware of is the one sold at the second sale of BCD Library Duplicates [LINK] (https://www.acsearch.info/search.html?id=2561128). (The lot had a very dramatic description!) BCD emphasized the need for secrecy…
(https://i.imgur.com/C4FBVep.jpg)
3. "Sammlung Kommerzienrat H. Otto, Stuttgart," Hess 207 (Frankfurt, 1 Dec 1932), with Hermann Lanz’s library stamp & number.
(My "Slg. Otto" notes [LINK] (https://conservatoricoins.com/sale-catalogs/#Otto) and Stack's 1979 "Sawhill/JMU" annotations [LINK] (https://conservatoricoins.com/sale-catalogs/#Sawhill).)
I have one coin illustrated in Slg. Otto, a Messenia AR Hemidrachm/Triobol from Antony & Cleopatra's Greece shortly before Actium. The coin was later in BCD Peloponnesos, Part II [Lot 2327 LINK] (https://www.acsearch.info/search.html?id=622418), but the provenance was lost before BCD bought it. Naturally, I was especially excited to recover that one. (BCD bought the coin from Stack’s in 1979, from the Sawhill/James Madison Univ. Coll. Incidentally, my copy of the Sawhill/J.M.U. sale [LINK] (https://conservatoricoins.com/sale-catalogs/#Sawhill) is ex-BCD Library!)
Lanz never handled the coin in question, but they did BCD Corinth & BCD Euboia. I love all the network of connections across the “object biographies” related to that coin!
(https://i.imgur.com/hZyhl4w.jpg) (https://i.imgur.com/FcaTv7O.jpg)
4. Munzhandlung Basel 6 (Steger & Waldeck), also w/ Hermann Lanz’s “Bibliotheksstempel.”
(My annotations, biblio, coin photo, etc. [LINK] (https://conservatoricoins.com/sale-catalogs/#Basel))
My favorite thing about the Steger-Waldeck catalog is the lovely French annotations on the plates. They seem familiar, anyone else seen these before?
(Triptych, larger annotated plates [LINK (https://i.imgur.com/zgZbXno.jpg)].)
(https://i.imgur.com/MS43CPg.jpg) (https://i.imgur.com/D70xju9.jpg)
In addition to Hermann Lanz’s stamp, it has the signature of a previous owner. (Not necessarily the annotator.) Does anyone recognize the name?
(https://i.imgur.com/Z0vH3Sp.jpg)
-
I am pretty excited to add this to my Alexandrian sale catalogs subcollection (the 3 attachments are greatly reduced, for higher resolution plates or a ref. check, contact me or see [imgur LINK (https://imgur.com/a/gfAfp1E)]:
Ch. Dupriez (Brussels). Catalogue N. 97 (n.d., 1909). MONNAIES IMPÉRIALES GRECQUES EN POTIN FRAPPÉES À ÁLÉXANDRIE D’ÉGYPTE.
53 (3) pp., 1027 lots, 2 plates (black & white, 50 one-sided coins).
Later hardcover, green full imitation leather, gilt spine.
[Fitzwilliam, A-D [LINK] (https://www.fitzmuseum.cam.ac.uk/dept/coins/library/salescatalogue/SALECA-D.html); Spring –; BCD 2018, 2592 [LINK] (https://www.acsearch.info/search.html?id=5249387).]
“A note from BCD: … Especially interesting is catalogue 97 with its descriptions of no less than 1027 tetradrachms of Roman Egypt, a selection of them illustrated on two plates.”
(Jacquier 44 [13 Sep 2018], 2592, part of [LINK] (https://www.acsearch.info/search.html?id=5249387))
“Perhaps the largest listing of its kind in this specialized area, with two fine plates depicting examples of this debased third-century coinage. Very scarce.”
(Kolbe-Fanning 155 [1 Feb 2020], 34 [LINK] (https://bid.numislit.com/lots/view/1-2KX43T/potin-coins-of-roman-alexandria))
I haven't been mentioning my new catalogs on the discussion boards unless they're scarce or there's something special about them.
I've seen a few other copies for sale, but this one seems to be in better condition. Usually they're torn & chipped. Luckily the plates stood up very well. My copy was in 3 prior Bertolami Fine Arts e-Auctions [ACSearch LINK (https://www.acsearch.info/search.html?term=dupriez+97&category=0&company=9)], incl. EA 71 (in 2019), "Una collezione di cataloghi e listini" (I wish I knew whose!).
BnF's online catalog (Gallica) has other digitized Dupriez sales, but no entry for this one at all. It should be public domain now, so I'm attaching an image of the plates.
The catalog itself doesn't give weights, but briefly describes each rev. type and the regnal year. (I've never seen a coin provenanced to this sale, but no doubt some are floating about.) There's a nice 2-page intro.
-
Would any Forum friends have a copy of Kricheldorf Auction 29 (1975)? I am researching a coin and would like to see a sharp photo or scan of the plate for Lot 264. Thanks in advance,if you are able to help.
I'm glad to see my Old Auction Catalogue thread is still alive. The Madness continues...
-
The company still exists, perhaps they can help you: https://www.kricheldorf.com/en/contact
Regards
Altamura
-
Is it a Republican coin? Unfortunately I don't have Kricheldorf 29 (I have 34, 36-40, all ex Forum shop), but the Richard Schaefer notebooks (now online from the ANS' Roman Republican Die Project) include at least some clippings from the plates of that catalog. 22 Notebooks linked here (check the "processed notebooks" first at the end): http://numismatics.org/authority/schaefer_richard (http://numismatics.org/authority/schaefer_richard)
I discovered that I had a coin from Kircheldorf 29 that way. (Found two sets of photos there, actually. It's the same L. Julius L.f. Caesar [Cr. 320/1] that I posted above (https://www.forumancientcoins.com/board/index.php?topic=102458.msg779661#msg779661) with the Leo Benz catalogs.) If the notebooks included that illustration, there's a good chance Schaefer clipped them all out & included them in the notebooks.
It's not as quick as searching through acsearch or coinarchives, and you won't get the text from the description (or any prior provenance), but he usually includes the sale number, lot number, and (sometimes) weight written on the photos. (My example attached.)
Also, my (almost updated) catalog collection is listed here, I'm always more than happy to check if anyone sees something they've been wondering about: https://conservatoricoins.com/catalog-library/ (https://conservatoricoins.com/catalog-library/)
-
Thank you both for the replies. I may reach out to the firm and see if they can help. I had previously checked the Schaefer notebooks and did not find it, but I will double-check. Schaefer's notebooks are a die study, so the best available photos of the dies were typically chosen.
-
I've recently added some new stacks of old auction catalogs & fixed price lists, and some not-so-old. This group falls somewhere in between:
First image attached:
41 of the 50 Buy-Bid sales printed by Henry Lindgren's (1914-2005) Antioch Associates (San Francisco, 1994-2004). (I'm missing 1, 2, 4, 5, 7, 17, 20, 22, 45). He formed the firm to sell duplicates from his collection, but some of the introductions to later sales give the impression he was also buying and selling "inventory" (not just collection coins). Until c. 2001 he had been planning to produce a fourth volume in the series of books publishing his collection of Greek & Provincial bronze coins, but it was eventually abandoned. The coins intended for that volume were sold through Antioch or by direct purchase from Lindgren.
One interesting bonus is that these are from the RBW Library. A handful of the Fixed Price Lists were included as well, which were stamped & addressed to him, occasionally with his minor annotations. (He's deceased, but I've redacted the address in the photo out of abundance of caution.) He bought at least a few coins from Lindgren. That's one of my favorite things about collecting 20th century dealer lists sent by mail. I've got examples addressed to many recognizable collectors, dealers, numismatic researchers, etc.
The FPLs are not illustrated, and were mostly printed in The Celator anyway, so those weren't a big deal (aside from the address labels). The Buy-Bid Catalogs all consist of two large glossy, double-sided broadsheets. (Four extra large pages total, maybe 16 booklet-size pages or 8 legal size pages.) They usually include 150-200 lots, the majority of which are illustrated in black-and-white. The photo quality is typical for the 1990s, but the ink/paper are holding up pretty well compared to some catalogs whose photos are always very faded by now.
Second image attached:
I have maybe 10 or 12 coins from the Lindgren Collection, so I was hoping to find one or two. I ended up finding two that I already knew about:
1. Gordian III AE35, Tarsus. Lindgren & Kovacs (1985), 1635 = RPC VII.2 3060.29 [LINK (https://rpc.ashmus.ox.ac.uk/coin/461724)] = Gallery image: https://www.forumancientcoins.com/gallery/displayimage.php?pid=181200 (https://www.forumancientcoins.com/gallery/displayimage.php?pid=181200)
2. Otacilia AE27, Nicomedia Double-Neokoros Issue. Lindgren & Kovacs (1985), 177 = RPC VIII 20007.6 [LINK (https://rpc.ashmus.ox.ac.uk/coin/143014)].
Plus one surprise.
3. Elagabalus AE26, Moesia, Nikopolis. HHJ Nicopolis (2015-2021) 8.26.34.2 = RPC VI 1197 (Temp.) ex. 1 [LINK (https://rpc.ashmus.ox.ac.uk/coins/6/1197)], with more interesting provenance noted in my gallery: https://www.forumancientcoins.com/gallery/displayimage.php?pid=183361 (https://www.forumancientcoins.com/gallery/displayimage.php?pid=183361)
Given that it's a rare type and hadn't been published since Imhoof-Blumer (where it may not have been illustrated?), I assume this is a coin he would've intended for his volume 4.
-
One interesting bonus is that these are from the RBW Library. A handful of the Fixed Price Lists were included as well, which were stamped & addressed to him, occasionally with his minor annotations. (He's deceased, but I've redacted the address in the photo out of abundance of caution.) He bought at least a few coins from Lindgren. That's one of my favorite things about collecting 20th century dealer lists sent by mail. I've got examples addressed to many recognizable collectors, dealers, numismatic researchers, etc.
Some time ago, I bought a large run of Munzen und Medaillen FPLs which were formerly RBW's. They are an interesting time capsule on pre-internet collecting. These FPLs were mailed to RBW in the USA from Europe. As you can imagine, many of the coins were already sold by the time RBW tried to order something. He liked to put post-it notes on the FPL with details of his purchase efforts and the dealer's response. He would typically order multiple coins, and rarely succeeded on more than one, often none! I remember those days. I don't miss them. Frustrating.