Ancient - Which would you Buy?

Out of curiosity, if you were going to buy one, which of these two would you buy? Why? They are both Hadrian Billon Tetradrachms, attributed as SNG Cop 393, BMC Alexandria 645:

OBV: AΥT KAI TΡAIAN AΔΡIANOC CEB, laureate head left
REV: L EN-NEAKΔ (year 19), naked bust of Nilus right, wearing taenia, lotus on head, cornucopia on shoulder

1. Cost: $46.99 shipped


2. Cost $398 shipped

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

Neither. I would wait for one with better surfaces. These do usually come porous, but you can still find a much nicer specimen.

 

I have no idea how rare this type of coin might be, but I don't think I've seen it before. Anyways, the question remains Ardman. You ARE going to buy one. Which would you buy? The one that will set you back less than $50 or the one closer to $400?

 

If I really wanted the variety I'd buy the $50 coin and keep an eye out for a better one.

Edited to clarify: The more expensive one holds only marginally greater eye appeal for me, so I wouldn't spend 8x more for it.

 

HAHA! I could swear that when I posted the prices weren't listed. There are effectively no differences between the two coins. Both are, in my mind, unacceptably porous. The first has a flan crack on the obverse, while the second has a bit of unsightly encrustation on the reverse.

If I must choose one, there is no contest - I would take the $50. The second is hideously overpriced. Such a steep price would be considered high even for a much better preserved specimen.

 

I agree with Bill. These are not very scarce, I have seen them for sale a number of times and I am not even looking for them.

Put a gun to my head and I buy the cheap one. This coin type is a stretch to be valued at $400 for a perfect specimen, which this one isn't. Plus, I actually prefer the style of the cheaper reverse over the expensive one. Better detailing of ancillary devices.

 

If it was my money this cheapskate would take the $50 one. I could care less if the legends are not all there. The crack sucks on the first one but isnt a deal breaker to me.

The second one is just horribly overpriced and shouldnt even be a consideration.

Also I can live with porous and the $50 one I could live with.

 

I suppose I just wanted to show the disparity of prices between coins of similar condition. Neither are great, but a 1000% difference (I think that's right - my math is a bit fuzzy)?

 

I don't collect Greek provincials, but if I had to choose, definitely the first one. It comes close to the condition of the second coin at 1/8 the price. In this case I would sacrifice a bit of quality to keep more money in my wallet.

 

Hey VK, it's a Roman provincial of Hadrian.

 

I know, but aern't they called Greek provincials also?

 

Hmmmm, I dunno. But I'm glad to have you back.

 

Usually called Roman Provincial or Greek Imperial.

 

Greek Imperial! That's the phrase I meant! Thanks medoraman!

 

Man, I'm glad we got that all cleared up.

 

I'd buy them both ...

 

... ummm but seriously, I wouldn't buy either of those coins ... well, unless there is some sort of "Where's Waldo" animal hidden somewhere on the coins!?

 

Steve, you should just invest your money in helping this poor college kid out with a nice Ostrogothic coin, just sayin...

 

Now you've gone and done it. You hurt my feelings!!! I bought one of the two, and I'll bet you can figure out which one.

 

Don't be sad ... I like the coins (they're just not my style, ya know ... no "animals"!!)

=> oh, but I'm almost 100% sure that you bought the $50 version (I actually liked it better anyway)