I ignored one of my own rules about duplicates

SmEagle1795

Normally, I try to avoid duplicates in my collection but recently I couldn't pass one up. Both coins are Sextus Pompey denarii of the "filial loyalty" variety.

I've had the first coin for a while and was mostly attracted to it for its obverse, a strong portrait of Pompey the Great with subtle details like wrinkles around his eye. The reverse also has an interesting style, with the left and center figures being particularly well struck. The third figure is off the flan, but that is very often the case on this issue, a result of attempting to fit a large design on a small coin. It hasn't bothered me, mostly because better centered coins don't come up very regularly and when they do, they tend to be from a few dies wherein the design is compressed, which I don't find as aesthetically pleasing.

My newest coin has a nice obverse, with a well-struck legend but not quite as nice of an overall style. The reverse, however, is what really sold me on it. I've never seen an example that even comes close to this complete and well-composed of a reverse. It's unfortunate that we can't split coins in half and reconnect them!

It brings me to a bit of a precipice: I have thus far avoided duplicates in my collection but this may be an instance where each coin is significantly different enough to justify keeping both. I'm still not 100% decided either way but I'm leaning toward keeping the pair, but trying to prevent it from becoming a trend which results in opening the floodgates of duplicates when I'm attempting to build a comprehensive rather than specialized collection.

My first:


My new example:


Post your duplicates, and before/after upgrades!

Zohar

In this case, I would keep them both as they complement each other. The newp has better centering on both sides, while the first coin is of finer style yet missing certain elements due to off centering.

Muygrandeoso

I know that I would keep them both

Pokermandude

Both are nice, but I prefer the second.

JCMhouston

Both nice, but obverse 1 and reverse 2 would indeed make a great coin.

lordmarcovan

Wow, he really looks like a muscular, bull-necked thug in the first example.

I can see how they complement each other, really, and why the reverse on the second example was a "must have".

Duplicates in an ancient coin collection are not quite so dull as when someone has duplicates of a more modern coin, since the ancients are all as individual as snowflakes, so to speak.

(PS- one member here has a "Box of 20" collection... of twenty 1964 Kennedy halves! I had to scratch my head. Thought it was a joke at first.)

NiceCurrency

I would keep both, they are simply stunning

a fantastic portrait of Pompey and then the other with this very busy reverse design entirely on the coin and in excellent condition

coffeyce

I really love the bottom one. I see no problem with duplicates. I have several cartwheel pennys and several identical date young bun vickys.

coinkat

But are they really duplicates ?

They look slightly different in their state of preservation and appearance leading one to make the argument that while they are the same type coin, both or worthy to be in the same collection without concern of calling one a duplicate.

Just trying to offer assistance. I have several coins of the same date in various grades and technically do consider them to be duplicates... but that is me and I am certain it is a minority view which is okay be me.

Automan

Extremely desireable coins, both. And, they aren't really duplicates at all... The legend in ex is different, or rather, differently organized. Same main type, yes, but different sub-types. Problem solved!

Cheers,

Auto

EVillageProwler

I'm in the camp that says the OP's two denarii aren't actually duplicates.

But even if they were duplicates, so what?!? A nice coin is a nice coin. Do we collect hole fillers, or do we collect nice coins? If budget is a concern (as it likely is for all of us in varying degrees), then we should raise funds by clearing out the lesser coins (not necessarily duplicates). Or, my preferred way of raising funds is to not tell the wife how much I spend.

EVP

nicholasz219

The toning on the second coin, both sides, is very attractive. I appreciate what you are saying about the first coin, but man I really love the second.

SmEagle1795

Thanks everyone! I think I will indeed keep both denarii. My main issue is that, so far, I've avoided duplicates entirely and have instead focused on upgrading coins. Having two coins of the same general type is a bit redundant from a historical perspective but I agree with the posts here that they're different enough to justify keeping

It will now be that much harder to hold myself back from buying duplicate Tarentum nomoi... curse the engravers for making an attractive series!

Automan

I think this thread wounderfully well illustrates the trade-off logic that has to be part of collecting; otherwise it will be no fun. If one sets an easy target, e.g. buying readily available, low grade coins that are very affordable (in realtion to the depth of one's own pockets), where's the challenge? On the other hand, pursuing coins that almost never become available in any grade and when they appear hurt you financially, may be too challenging to offer any collecting joy. Striking a balance that works for oneself may be the key to sustained interest.

Quite obviously, SmEagle1795's collecting targets include absolute top quality coins and a broad focus on select main types. An enviable trade-off...

Cheers,

Auto

LochNESS

I'm amazed at how different these are, in so many ways. Truly shocked. I am a fan of the second for many reasons, but mostly the toning. I would sell the first as I prefer the obverse of the newer piece in addition to the superior reverse.