POLL Inspired by an EVP Post: Your Thoughts on Provenance

Aethelred · May 25, 2015 5:38AM

This morning I was reading THIS THREAD started by EVillageProwler. Since then I have been thinking about coins with know provenance and what , if anything, that means to me or anyone else.

I am wondering to what extent the collectors here value knowing who has owned coins in your collection, if it matters if the previous owner was famous or even if other types of provenance are more meaningful to you.

I have crafted a poll that I am sure will not do the subject justice, but I look more forward to your thoughtful comments.

EVillageProwler · May 25, 2015 6:40AM

My thoughts on provenance is more nuanced than the choices provided, but I voted nevertheless.

EVP

OriginalDan · May 25, 2015 7:23AM

I used to scoff at provenance or pedigree as unimportant or overvalued, but I kept finding myself asking "how in the world did this coin survive 200+ years and remain in such nice condition?" My primary interest in coins stems from their ability to connect me with past history.

So I guess for me it has to do with 1) does the provenance help me answer that question and 2) if that backstory is interesting or the individual is noteworthy or deserving of respect, that's a bonus.

determined · May 25, 2015 10:52AM

I chose:

A coin that was found in a context that adds to the history of that coin type (such as an archaeological dig)

Ownership by a previous (modern) person, no matter who they are/were, actually means little to me. I would prefer that a coin be found in the ground, then it goes to a dealer, then bought by me.

I guess I prefer the least provenance possible.

But thinking further I wouldn't mind if a coin's provenance was with one of my numismatic heroes. For example, Martin J. Price, Georges Le Rider, Edward T. Newell or Stephen Album.

Nap · May 25, 2015 10:58AM

I think provenance is cool but not necessary when I shop for a coin. Many times provenance is undocumented by whomever is selling a coin, but a little research will uncover it. I don't really care whether a coin was owned by a museum, because many collectors of yesteryear donated collections in entirety to museums, who proceeded to deascession things of low interest. Being part of a well known researcher's collection is nice, and you might even get your coin plated in a standard reference for that, but typically numismatist researchers aim for completeness and not necessarily high quality. Being part of a high quality collection likely will increase the selling price, but the collection itself is likely not of historic interest. Ownership by a celebrity is cool, but again of little historic interest. I think of the options listed, the context of the coin find is the most appealing to me.

I think provenance also adds a layer to authenticity.

I'd also add that a traceable provenance adds to the legality of ownership, especially with regards to high value items for which there is a thriving black market for recently dug and illegally exported finds. This is not so important to everyone, but there's always a chance the antiquities laws will at some point become more highly enforced in the future.

bronzemat · May 25, 2015 11:58AM

Easy, "I do not care about provenance at all". I have found coins that had been listed on heritage or harlan Berk and I make note of it but if a celebrity or some famous collector had it, meh. To me their dead or sold it for whatever reason and its history. Many like the John Q. Adams coins and I find his coins junk. I have yet to find any I like that was owned by him or his family. I sometimes think it silly to pay extra cause it was owned by someone else. But is it cool to find a coins records that date back to the 1800s or earlier?, sure. But I dont have stacks of reference books or catalogs to check nor do I wanna spend the time to for each coin I own.

My #1 is cost/cheap. My J. Caesar was $175, sure it isnt a portrait but its in decent shape. Ive gotten $100+ roman tetradrachms for $15-$40. I could go on & on. The next factor is just history of the coin itself, the emperor, reverse type or something along those lines. I would love a Jewish vespasian, but most are out of my price range or they get zapped cheap when I have no coin $ to spend. Same with tribute pennies.

SmEagle1795 · May 25, 2015 12:57PM

As mentioned, provenance is very helpful/necessary for coins subject to import restrictions. However, I quite enjoy knowing who owned my coins before I did. I just bought a coin from the famous Pozzi and Kunstfreunde collections, and definitely paid a premium for their numismatic and scholarly importance. I am also a sucker for museum pedigrees and archaeological digs, and have several well-known people on my list who had large collections and I'm looking for any representative coin from their collection.

So, I will say, "Yes to all" on this list

Iosephus · May 25, 2015 1:49PM

For my medal collection, I enjoy when a piece can be identified to a particular person's collection as part of its provenance, especially if the person is of some renown (e.g., authored works on medals). However, belonging to such a collection does not indicate that a piece itself is of high quality. I think of the Michael Hall collection sold a few years ago, which had many extremely nice pieces, but also many "meh" pieces. Similarly, the somewhat recent sale of the Günther Brockmann collection had many, many more "meh" pieces than nice pieces, in my opinion.

What I do get extremely interested about is when a specimen served as the plate medal for a standard reference. Again, not necessarily an indicator of quality, but I like to think that an author would choose the best example that they had access to for illustration.

Sapyx · May 25, 2015 8:19PM

Addressing each of the options:

"Currently famous people" tend not to be coin collectors. Many of the alleged "famous coin collectors" in actuality simply own a managed coin investment portfolio. I suspect the portfolio managers hope to extract a few more dollars out of the resale value by hyping the fact of prior "famous" ownership.

"Famous people of the Past" is slightly more relevant, as old "famous" collections are less likely to be synthetic portfolios than modern ones.

Museums, as far as I am aware, almost never sell their coins. For them, it's a philosophical thing: coin collectors are The Enemy. As such, a museum provenance would be unusual, and therefore worth preserving.

Archaeological provenance is of course the most valuable and relevant. It is also, unfortunately, the least likely to be obtained. Only a tiny handful of the ancient and mediaeval coins in my collection have a provenance that goes further back than "I bought it off some dealer someplace". I wish it were otherwise; I wish I could say for each and every one of them "This coin was dug up at xxx,yyy in Year zzz". But I can't.

Some of a coin's journey through history is preserved in the coin itself: the wear it receives in circulation; the patina from a long period underground; the traces of the cleaning required to make it look like a coin again. But most of its passage through time leaves no physical evidence behind. Provenance is an important component of this intangible history, and should be preserved wherever possible.

TIF2 · May 25, 2015 8:38PM

<< Museums, as far as I am aware, almost never sell their coins. >>

While not a frequent occurrence, museums do sometimes deaccession coins and they do bring a premium. I enjoy having coins with interesting provenances-- museum, famous collector, etc.

Here are a couple from my collection:

SICILY, Selinos.
Circa 410 BCE
AR litra, 11mm, 0.76 g, 1h
Obv: nymph seated left on rock, right hand raised above her head, extending her left hand to touch coiled serpent before her; selinon leaf above
Rev: man-faced bull standing right; ΣEΛINONTIOΣ above; in exergue, fish right
Ref: HGC 2, 1229; SNG ANS 711–2 var. (ethnic); SNG Ashmolean 1904–5; SNG Lloyd 1270 var. (same); Basel –; Dewing –; Rizzo pl. XXXIII, 6. Good VF, dark iridescent tone, some porosity. Rare.
ex Money Museum, Zurich;
ex Leu 79 (31 October 2000), lot 404;
ex Athos Moretti collection, #482, unpublished manuscript.

EGYPT, Alexandria. Gallienus
year 13, CE 265/6
tetradrachm, 21 mm, 9.1 gm
Obv: Laureate, draped, and cuirassed bust right
Rev: AVTKΠΛIKΓAΛΛIHNOCCEB; eagle standing right, holding wreath in beak, palm over shoulder; L IΓ across field
Ref: Emmett 3806(13), R1
Ex Museum of Fine Arts, Boston 88.203 (accessioned 1888); Benjamin Pierce Cheney Collection

asheland · May 26, 2015 12:25AM

I've always let the piece speak for itself, first and foremost. Provenance is simply a bonus to me, however if two equal quality pieces are options to me and
one has a provenance and the other doesn't, I'll likely go for the one with a provenance.
As you well know, my spoon being in that book certainly made it that much more interesting to me!

Aethelred · May 26, 2015 5:03AM

<< I've always let the piece speak for itself, first and foremost. Provenance is simply a bonus to me, however if two equal quality pieces are options to me and
one has a provenance and the other doesn't, I'll likely go for the one with a provenance.
As you well know, my spoon being in that book certainly made it that much more interesting to me!

>>

Good points and kind of how I feel on the issue most of the time.

SYRACUSIAN · May 27, 2015 4:33AM

Michael, except for the first choice (singer, politicians etc), you could have added all of the above, and that's what I would have voted. I will vote something just to see the results.

Provenance in milled coins adds much more value in the U.S. than elsewhere with few exceptions (such as the Colin Cooke sale of his farthing collection). Asheland's reply is close to what I feel too, even though it's 110% hypothetical.

A few years ago, a friend of mine, with a world class collection of world crowns, added a Greek 1833-A 5 drachmai NGC MS65 ,that practically everyone was certain that it would have graded SP65, including NEN that sold the coin. Said collector purchased it, which was already a triumph to locate this coin in gem condition (all in all, there are about a dozen with or without mm in 65-66, all in private collections). But he didn't stop there. Being the very knowledgeable collector that he is with an incredible numismatic library, he was able to prove, from some B/W photographs from the Pittman sale, that it was the actual JJ Pittman specimen. If NEN had had the time to do similar research, they wouldn't have sold this coin at the price that they did.

Who can resist a JJ Pittman pedigree on such an important coin? (because for a very short period amount of time, I too had a Canadian 1936 cent owned by Pittman, one of the hundreds that he had in rolls.....) But the added financial value is entirely a personal matter.

SYRACUSIAN · May 27, 2015 4:37AM

TIF2, I voted museum provenance, because it sounded the most coveted of all before I read your reply. Congrats!

covers · May 27, 2015 7:50AM

I would add a new option ...

I value provenance if it includes a collector who is noted for having a discerning eye for both quality and rarity.

Some collectors who meet that standard are unknown to the majority of collectors until their collections hit the market.

TIF2 · May 27, 2015 9:20AM

<< TIF2, I voted museum provenance, because it sounded the most coveted of all before I read your reply. Congrats!

>>

Thank you, Dimitri!

I'd like to add that there are collectors among us whose coins will undoubtedly convey a coveted provenance in the future. SmEagle's coins (Colosseo Collection), for example, are curated with great care and research. I and a few others here are fortunate to own ex Colosseo coins. The thought of future premium isn't particular important to me-- I do not plan on selling and have no heirs-- but I am pleased and proud to own a couple. The two I own represent his cast-offs, in the sense that he upgraded or had a duplicate, but they are very desirable nonetheless.

Philip II tetradrachm, ex Colosseo Collection

Septimius Severus, Circus Maximus denarius, ex Colosseo Collection

I bet there are few other Collectors Universe members whose coins will also carry a premium in the future.

STLNATS · May 27, 2015 9:54AM

I voted for the historical context option which is the only one of even modest - and I mean modest - economic value to me. So an interesting follow up question would be, amongst those who value a provenance, how much would you actually be willing to pay for it? 10%, 20%, more or less?

Eric Newman, arguably one of the great American scholars/numismatists of the 20th century, is disposing of much of his coin and currency collection. And many pieces are fetching amazing prices but I think because they are amazing items and probably not due to the personal connection. Some of the colonials that are plate notes might be exceptions altho a number of these are incredibly rare and desirable on their own. A portion of his currency, much of which was St Louis related, was sold less than a month ago. I was delighted to get 7 notes, several of which filled key holes in my collection and all well below my max bid. My bids were based solely how important the piece was to my collection. The tie to Eric is a nice to have, but frankly I just focused on the notes and would have been just as happy to have purchased the same note elsewhere had it been less expensive or better grade - ie the provenance didn't factor at all into my calculations. Collecting is as much a personal statement as much as anything else, so while this works for me I realize others use different metrics in their valuation which is why it's always interesting to see others approach their purchases.

What fun!

SYRACUSIAN · May 27, 2015 7:00PM

I forgot one more provenance that I truly love: coins previously owned by Darksiders.

With the amount of deals that I've had over the years with most of you, including some that are no longer with us, it would be a gross lie to claim that I've kept them all. But the majority is still here, including three scale models of 1950-1960s U.S. cars that I bought from theboz over a dozen years ago.

The few coins that I 've won in giveaways are sacred. The one from that famous trip to Charlotte comes to mind, an Italian 10 centessimi, but there are plenty of others which I received as gifts and those too are coins that are sacred. As for coins bought, it's hard to let them go, if anything because the Darksiders that sold them to me, have such a great eye for coins!

SYRACUSIAN · May 27, 2015 7:11PM

<< 

<< TIF2, I voted museum provenance, because it sounded the most coveted of all before I read your reply. Congrats!

>>

Thank you, Dimitri!

I'd like to add that there are collectors among us whose coins will undoubtedly convey a coveted provenance in the future. SmEagle's coins (Colosseo Collection), for example, are curated with great care and research. I and a few others here are fortunate to own ex Colosseo coins. The thought of future premium isn't particular important to me-- I do not plan on selling and have no heirs-- but I am pleased and proud to own a couple. The two I own represent his cast-offs, in the sense that he upgraded or had a duplicate, but they are very desirable nonetheless.

Philip II tetradrachm, ex Colosseo Collection

Septimius Severus, Circus Maximus denarius, ex Colosseo Collection

I bet there are few other Collectors Universe members whose coins will also carry a premium in the future.

>>

You are welcome. I have a feeling that I've already seen that gorgeous tetradrachm, I think that I remember the toning. BTW your website is consistent with your collection: stunning! This isn't a compliment but the simple truth.

Bjorn · May 28, 2015 4:51AM

My choice isn't included - a long and varied provenance, with occasional periods of 'disappearance', stretching into the 1600s or 1700s. That said, such a provenance would tend to exist for quite spectacular or desirable coins.

POLL Inspired by an EVP Post: Your Thoughts on Provenance

Comments