Old Auction Catalogue Madness!

[Andrew McCabe]

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.

[Carausius]

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.

[paparoupa]

- 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.

[Andrew McCabe]

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.

[Carausius]

Fabulous information, Andrew!  Thanks.

[Andrew McCabe]

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.

[Andrew McCabe]

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

[Andrew McCabe]

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.

[Carausius]

You are on a roll! Congratulations on these terrific provenances.

[carthago]

Great stories and wonderful provenances.  Also, thanks for the info on the Spink circulars! 

[Carausius]

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.

[Andrew McCabe]

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,


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...

[chance v]

Fitzwilliam mailed me a photocopy of a 1993 Munzen und Medaillen list. They were so nice and helpful via email. 

[Carausius]

Andrew,
All great finds, but identifying that Sulla triens in the Cohen and Babelon illustrations is an absolute miracle! 

[Andrew McCabe]

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.

[Molinari]

How do you know it was a sketch done in a few minutes?

That is a really cool match to find!

[carthago]

Fabulous finds Andrew and thank you for sharing. 

The Cohen is amazing IMO.

[Andrew McCabe]

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.

[carthago]

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 McCabe]

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!

[carthago]

Having just purchased a set of Cohen, I'm hoping to go through them carefully to do the same.  Thanks Andrew!

[Andrew McCabe]

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.

[Andrew McCabe]

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.

[Andrew McCabe]

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.

[curtislclay]

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".