This is an issue with many facets. Whichever stance one takes is likely to provoke entrenched and opposite views.
Meepzorp says that he was upset by some of the misattributions. As he is dealing with
his own
collection he is allowed to be upset or at least a little frustrated, though whether at himself or the original seller or at the situation one gets into with such worn ancient bronzes or some combination isn't clear. As to
choice of words, I tend to reserve "catastrophe" for unrecoverable situations such as discovering a coin is
fake or on a stolen coins register, having a coin explode in a shower of
bronze disease or break into pieces due to
crystallization, or dropping a coin onto a restaurant floor and realizing only hours later. Most of these events have happened to me. But
choice of adjective is poetic licence and I mentally translated the word to mean "upset" though evidently recoverable. As to the responses, it's all well and
good to say Meep might have been a more diligent buyer, or should have updated
his records over time. Let me now admit that I've bought
plenty of coins over the years with a
complete lack of reasonable due diligence, and as for my records, whilst they are in pretty
good condition, and regularly revised, I'm perpetually coming across substantial errors in what I've written down, sometimes taken from a dealer description and sometimes due to self induced carelessness. And sometimes these errors actually do matter. I recently bought a very curious
overstrike of a tiny bronze on a huge bronze and explained, on
Forum, based on the sellers lengthy write up, that it was a 34 BC
Ptolemaic overstrike done in
Cyprus related to the Donations of
Alexandria. In fact it was nothing of the kind but instead an
Italian imitative issue
overstrike. I estimate I paid four times too much for the coin due to its
attribution.
Still, as I pretend to be an expert on RR bronzes I'll eat the error, which was actually an inspired guess by the seller, although wrong.
Coming back to Meepzorp's misattributed coins, having considered all the posts in the
thread, I think the collector has a right to be as upset or relaxed as he wishes about the organization and writeups of
his own
collection. Whilst others of us might be more nonchalant about what we'd think of as inevitable or unimportant errors, I actually think that it's
good that Meep is sharing
his personal reactions to
his personal
collection organization. It adds richness to our discussions. It's also
very good for others to say that they would react differently, for the same reason, so long as it's not in a criticizing mode. For there are no rules about how we manage our own coins. Personally I keep many of mine in a big jam
jar which I use as a door-stop. No tags required.
PS: See Rule Number 1.