@Sonorandesertrat said:
Even without Pogue's association, that piece would have some interest. It is clearly a well-worn (and well-traveled) Fugio.
Sure it would have interest, but the reason I posted is that even a coin like that doesn't have the provenance that @Moxie15 would like.
@Zoins I don't know, it is just that because it was once owned by Mr Pogue that a coin has more value makes no sense to me. I look at that as about the same as thinking that a 1960 vintage waffle maker is worth more because Elvis at a waffle made on it, or it was taken from Marilyn Monroe's house after she died.
This stuff happens, both with coins and waffle makers.
I will admit to a bit of auction fever there!
But for me, there was a bit more to it:
it's a PO-01, I've always wanted one and it's my only one
it's a Fugio, I've always wanted one and it's my only one
Would I do it again outside of auction fever? Perhaps, and perhaps not. It's not CAC
Another crazy thing is paying 10000% for a Neil Armstrong piece
Lots of strong prices on the Armstrong collection.
I'm a type collector and sometimes it's hard to get interested in a certain coin series (Braided Large Cents comes to mind) because of the availability and boring design elements BUT you need an example to complete your collection. For these series, a pedigreed coin fits perfectly with my collecting goals. It adds interest and a story with the coin rather than just being a coin to fit a hole.
@oldabeintx said:
To those who say provenance doesn't matter at all:
So you're telling me that a coin or medal that could be traced back to the estate of a Founder, TR, an early coin designer or engraver, early mint director, the cabinet of George II or Louis XIV (who collected) - that sort of provenance would not be of interest?
If it was available, I'd most interested in tracing the chain of ownership as an additional confirmation of authenticity. I don't collect anything US and consider the risk of counterfeiting low but would still prefer it.
In your examples, I'd find a provenance traced to the two kings you listed somewhat interesting. I don't care about any connection to other supposedly famous people who actually aren't famous. I also wouldn't pay any premium for it.
As a numismatic researcher, the provenance/pedigree is just one part of the "pin-the-tail-on-the-donkey" game we play with coins.
Every unique coin stands on its own, but is essentially mute. Researchers are the ones who give coins their voices by attaching pictures, auction appearances, grades, owner's names, variety attributions, private sales, rarity ratings, census rankings, stories, etc.
All of these attributes are used to promote and sell coins, to make them appear more desirable and to appeal to different collecting interests -- including yours.
Provenance/pedigrees really do not interest me....All coins have a history, and I can certainly imagine that Abraham Lincoln may have handled one of my Morgans....That being said, I do treasure coins that I have received from forum members, and keep them identified as such. True, that will mean nothing to future owners of these coins, but it means a great deal to me. Cheers, RickO
@ricko said:
Provenance/pedigrees really do not interest me....All coins have a history, and I can certainly imagine that Abraham Lincoln may have handled one of my Morgans....That being said, I do treasure coins that I have received from forum members, and keep them identified as such. True, that will mean nothing to future owners of these coins, but it means a great deal to me. Cheers, RickO
Lincoln died 13 years before the first Morgan dollars were struck.
Worry is the interest you pay on a debt you may not owe.
"Paper money eventually returns to its intrinsic value---zero."----Voltaire
"Everything you say should be true, but not everything true should be said."----Voltaire
@PerryHall..... Thank you... sometimes my mind has blank spots... or something.... Of course you are correct. Too bad they removed the 'embarrassed' emoji... I would put three or four in this post. Cheers, RickO
@ricko said: @PerryHall..... Thank you... sometimes my mind has blank spots... or something.... Of course you are correct. Too bad they removed the 'embarrassed' emoji... I would put three or four in this post. Cheers, RickO
Just change Morgans to Indian Head cents or Liberty Seated Dimes or Large Cents or.......
I know what you mean about history. I have some colonial coins and I sometimes wonder if any of the founding fathers ever carried any of them.
Worry is the interest you pay on a debt you may not owe.
"Paper money eventually returns to its intrinsic value---zero."----Voltaire
"Everything you say should be true, but not everything true should be said."----Voltaire
@PerryHall.... No, I will leave it as is.... I deserve the humiliation.... Keeps me humble and aware that I should check what I write before posting.... Thanks again... Cheers, RickO
the "Provenance" and Pedigree" debate again, it seems to never be settled. to me it's reminiscent of the old forum debates about the proper pronounciation of the word Disme, but I digress. whenever I hear the word "Pedigree" three things come to mind in no specific order --- that cute little dog on Pedigree dog food, AKC registered pets and some silly looking British guy with an ascot.
Of course the coin has to be all there, but if it is and meets my criteria then it also needs to have a great pedigree and typically the best coins end up having one.
this is an interesting statement by Realone because it calls into question the concept of "Finest Known" as well as "Highest Graded" for me, not equal descriptions. I would agree that many/most of the highest graded rarities have an interesting Provenance but are they necessarily the best coins?? probably they are in most instances, but did they get to be because of the Provenance?? I presume that there are many "Finest Known" coins out in the World without a great Provenance attached to them..........................yet. does that make them any less important, worthy or desirable?? if you can answer ye to that question I envision you wearing an ascot!!! the coins with the most notable Provenance(s) almost certainly were found, purchased and owned for a period of time by persons unknown, yet someone who simply has the ability to purchase them gets the notoriety of owning them in the Numismatic community.
personally, I have brought into the Numismatic light quite a number of important pieces of Exonumia, items which were hidden away by collectors unknown, many times ignorant of what they had. my name isn't attached to them and I don't think it should be. then again, I never did like the spotlight. the same thing can be said of many members here who have made the Hobby aware of coins and such that are important. just like many of the big Provenance names, though, nothing will be affixed to them for several decades.
BTW, I'm sort of partial to Norweb, but only because the family lived close to where I grew up.
@keets said:
the "Provenance" and Pedigree" debate again, it seems to never be settled. to me it's reminiscent of the old forum debates about the proper pronounciation of the word Disme, but I digress. whenever I hear the word "Pedigree" three things come to mind in no specific order --- that cute little dog on Pedigree dog food, AKC registered pets and some silly looking British guy with an ascot.
Of course the coin has to be all there, but if it is and meets my criteria then it also needs to have a great pedigree and typically the best coins end up having one.
this is an interesting statement by Realone because it calls into question the concept of "Finest Known" as well as "Highest Graded" for me, not equal descriptions. I would agree that many/most of the highest graded rarities have an interesting Provenance but are they necessarily the best coins?? probably they are in most instances, but did they get to be because of the Provenance?? I presume that there are many "Finest Known" coins out in the World without a great Provenance attached to them..........................yet. does that make them any less important, worthy or desirable?? if you can answer ye to that question I envision you wearing an ascot!!! the coins with the most notable Provenance(s) almost certainly were found, purchased and owned for a period of time by persons unknown, yet someone who simply has the ability to purchase them gets the notoriety of owning them in the Numismatic community.
personally, I have brought into the Numismatic light quite a number of important pieces of Exonumia, items which were hidden away by collectors unknown, many times ignorant of what they had. my name isn't attached to them and I don't think it should be. then again, I never did like the spotlight. the same thing can be said of many members here who have made the Hobby aware of coins and such that are important. just like many of the big Provenance names, though, nothing will be affixed to them for several decades.
BTW, I'm sort of partial to Norweb, but only because the family lived close to where I grew up.
I, too, prefer "provenance" to "pedigree". However, after looking up the latter, I'm convinced that it can be used properly for coins. Even Merriam-Webster includes "the origin and the history of something" as one of its definitions. Please note that they use the word "something", not "someone". So, you, I and anyone else who are bothered by the use of "pedigree", should probably get over it.
Mark Feld* of Heritage Auctions*Unless otherwise noted, my posts here represent my personal opinions.
@keets said:
the "Provenance" and Pedigree" debate again, it seems to never be settled. to me it's reminiscent of the old forum debates about the proper pronounciation of the word Disme, but I digress. whenever I hear the word "Pedigree" three things come to mind in no specific order --- that cute little dog on Pedigree dog food, AKC registered pets and some silly looking British guy with an ascot.
Of course the coin has to be all there, but if it is and meets my criteria then it also needs to have a great pedigree and typically the best coins end up having one.
this is an interesting statement by Realone because it calls into question the concept of "Finest Known" as well as "Highest Graded" for me, not equal descriptions. I would agree that many/most of the highest graded rarities have an interesting Provenance but are they necessarily the best coins?? probably they are in most instances, but did they get to be because of the Provenance?? I presume that there are many "Finest Known" coins out in the World without a great Provenance attached to them..........................yet. does that make them any less important, worthy or desirable?? if you can answer ye to that question I envision you wearing an ascot!!! the coins with the most notable Provenance(s) almost certainly were found, purchased and owned for a period of time by persons unknown, yet someone who simply has the ability to purchase them gets the notoriety of owning them in the Numismatic community.
personally, I have brought into the Numismatic light quite a number of important pieces of Exonumia, items which were hidden away by collectors unknown, many times ignorant of what they had. my name isn't attached to them and I don't think it should be. then again, I never did like the spotlight. the same thing can be said of many members here who have made the Hobby aware of coins and such that are important. just like many of the big Provenance names, though, nothing will be affixed to them for several decades.
BTW, I'm sort of partial to Norweb, but only because the family lived close to where I grew up.
I, too, prefer "provenance" to "pedigree". However, after looking up the latter, I'm convinced that it can be used properly for coins. Even Merriam-Webster includes "the origin and the history of something" as one of its definitions. Please note that they use the word "something", not "someone". So, you, I and anyone else who are bothered by the use of "pedigree", should probably get over it.
I was/am basically in alignment with your views, and a recent post here softened my stance on the issue. I now think that pedigree is appropriate in the context of mentioning that a coin was owned by a single (notable) collector. When discussing a coin's chain of ownership, provenance is the proper term, IMO. To wit:
This coin has an Eliasberg pedigree.
The provenance of this coin is Carter-Pogue-Hansen.
@keets said:
the "Provenance" and Pedigree" debate again, it seems to never be settled. to me it's reminiscent of the old forum debates about the proper pronounciation of the word Disme, but I digress. whenever I hear the word "Pedigree" three things come to mind in no specific order --- that cute little dog on Pedigree dog food, AKC registered pets and some silly looking British guy with an ascot.
Of course the coin has to be all there, but if it is and meets my criteria then it also needs to have a great pedigree and typically the best coins end up having one.
this is an interesting statement by Realone because it calls into question the concept of "Finest Known" as well as "Highest Graded" for me, not equal descriptions. I would agree that many/most of the highest graded rarities have an interesting Provenance but are they necessarily the best coins?? probably they are in most instances, but did they get to be because of the Provenance?? I presume that there are many "Finest Known" coins out in the World without a great Provenance attached to them..........................yet. does that make them any less important, worthy or desirable?? if you can answer ye to that question I envision you wearing an ascot!!! the coins with the most notable Provenance(s) almost certainly were found, purchased and owned for a period of time by persons unknown, yet someone who simply has the ability to purchase them gets the notoriety of owning them in the Numismatic community.
personally, I have brought into the Numismatic light quite a number of important pieces of Exonumia, items which were hidden away by collectors unknown, many times ignorant of what they had. my name isn't attached to them and I don't think it should be. then again, I never did like the spotlight. the same thing can be said of many members here who have made the Hobby aware of coins and such that are important. just like many of the big Provenance names, though, nothing will be affixed to them for several decades.
BTW, I'm sort of partial to Norweb, but only because the family lived close to where I grew up.
I, too, prefer "provenance" to "pedigree". However, after looking up the latter, I'm convinced that it can be used properly for coins. Even Merriam-Webster includes "the origin and the history of something" as one of its definitions. Please note that they use the word "something", not "someone". So, you, I and anyone else who are bothered by the use of "pedigree", should probably get over it.
Agree. I've looked up dictionary definitions and have run across similar definitions, if not the same one.
For those fixated on prior ownership, provenance may include much more. The gold $20 carried by Lt. Dixon when he went down with the Hunley; any number of shipwreck coins. Coins found in Pompeii. Coins found in time capsules or hoards. Any coin that can be traced to a time and place in history adds a dimension that has value, including the value of authentication.
Comments
I will admit to a bit of auction fever there!
But for me, there was a bit more to it:
Would I do it again outside of auction fever? Perhaps, and perhaps not. It's not CAC
Another crazy thing is paying 10000% for a Neil Armstrong piece
Lots of strong prices on the Armstrong collection.
I'm a type collector and sometimes it's hard to get interested in a certain coin series (Braided Large Cents comes to mind) because of the availability and boring design elements BUT you need an example to complete your collection. For these series, a pedigreed coin fits perfectly with my collecting goals. It adds interest and a story with the coin rather than just being a coin to fit a hole.
If it was available, I'd most interested in tracing the chain of ownership as an additional confirmation of authenticity. I don't collect anything US and consider the risk of counterfeiting low but would still prefer it.
In your examples, I'd find a provenance traced to the two kings you listed somewhat interesting. I don't care about any connection to other supposedly famous people who actually aren't famous. I also wouldn't pay any premium for it.
I find it interesting/amusing like most, nothing more.
As a numismatic researcher, the provenance/pedigree is just one part of the "pin-the-tail-on-the-donkey" game we play with coins.
Every unique coin stands on its own, but is essentially mute. Researchers are the ones who give coins their voices by attaching pictures, auction appearances, grades, owner's names, variety attributions, private sales, rarity ratings, census rankings, stories, etc.
All of these attributes are used to promote and sell coins, to make them appear more desirable and to appeal to different collecting interests -- including yours.
Ron Guth, Chief Investigator
The Numismatic Detective Agency
Wow, very cool group. ⭐️
Provenance/pedigrees really do not interest me....All coins have a history, and I can certainly imagine that Abraham Lincoln may have handled one of my Morgans....That being said, I do treasure coins that I have received from forum members, and keep them identified as such. True, that will mean nothing to future owners of these coins, but it means a great deal to me. Cheers, RickO
Lincoln died 13 years before the first Morgan dollars were struck.
Worry is the interest you pay on a debt you may not owe.
"Paper money eventually returns to its intrinsic value---zero."----Voltaire
"Everything you say should be true, but not everything true should be said."----Voltaire
@PerryHall.....
Thank you... sometimes my mind has blank spots... or something.... Of course you are correct. Too bad they removed the 'embarrassed' emoji... I would put three or four in this post. Cheers, RickO
Just change Morgans to Indian Head cents or Liberty Seated Dimes or Large Cents or.......
I know what you mean about history. I have some colonial coins and I sometimes wonder if any of the founding fathers ever carried any of them.
Worry is the interest you pay on a debt you may not owe.
"Paper money eventually returns to its intrinsic value---zero."----Voltaire
"Everything you say should be true, but not everything true should be said."----Voltaire
@PerryHall.... No, I will leave it as is.... I deserve the humiliation.... Keeps me humble and aware that I should check what I write before posting.... Thanks again... Cheers, RickO
the "Provenance" and Pedigree" debate again, it seems to never be settled. to me it's reminiscent of the old forum debates about the proper pronounciation of the word Disme, but I digress. whenever I hear the word "Pedigree" three things come to mind in no specific order --- that cute little dog on Pedigree dog food, AKC registered pets and some silly looking British guy with an ascot.
Of course the coin has to be all there, but if it is and meets my criteria then it also needs to have a great pedigree and typically the best coins end up having one.
this is an interesting statement by Realone because it calls into question the concept of "Finest Known" as well as "Highest Graded" for me, not equal descriptions. I would agree that many/most of the highest graded rarities have an interesting Provenance but are they necessarily the best coins?? probably they are in most instances, but did they get to be because of the Provenance?? I presume that there are many "Finest Known" coins out in the World without a great Provenance attached to them..........................yet. does that make them any less important, worthy or desirable?? if you can answer ye to that question I envision you wearing an ascot!!! the coins with the most notable Provenance(s) almost certainly were found, purchased and owned for a period of time by persons unknown, yet someone who simply has the ability to purchase them gets the notoriety of owning them in the Numismatic community.
personally, I have brought into the Numismatic light quite a number of important pieces of Exonumia, items which were hidden away by collectors unknown, many times ignorant of what they had. my name isn't attached to them and I don't think it should be. then again, I never did like the spotlight. the same thing can be said of many members here who have made the Hobby aware of coins and such that are important. just like many of the big Provenance names, though, nothing will be affixed to them for several decades.
BTW, I'm sort of partial to Norweb, but only because the family lived close to where I grew up.
I, too, prefer "provenance" to "pedigree". However, after looking up the latter, I'm convinced that it can be used properly for coins. Even Merriam-Webster includes "the origin and the history of something" as one of its definitions. Please note that they use the word "something", not "someone". So, you, I and anyone else who are bothered by the use of "pedigree", should probably get over it.
Mark Feld* of Heritage Auctions*Unless otherwise noted, my posts here represent my personal opinions.
I was/am basically in alignment with your views, and a recent post here softened my stance on the issue. I now think that pedigree is appropriate in the context of mentioning that a coin was owned by a single (notable) collector. When discussing a coin's chain of ownership, provenance is the proper term, IMO. To wit:
This coin has an Eliasberg pedigree.
The provenance of this coin is Carter-Pogue-Hansen.
Again, just my humble opinion, FWIW.
Agree. I've looked up dictionary definitions and have run across similar definitions, if not the same one.
I have surrendered on a lot in my Life, I can't budge on this. my coins have a Provenance, my Dog has a Pedigree.
And if your coins are dogs they probably don’t have either.
For those fixated on prior ownership, provenance may include much more. The gold $20 carried by Lt. Dixon when he went down with the Hunley; any number of shipwreck coins. Coins found in Pompeii. Coins found in time capsules or hoards. Any coin that can be traced to a time and place in history adds a dimension that has value, including the value of authentication.
I agree even though my dogs are rescues and their Dams and Sires make no difference.
I think of lineage when seeing the term pedigree. Thus genetics. So I think provenance is more apt.
"Got a flaming heart, can't get my fill"