To Upgrade or Not to Upgrade??? a Republican dilemma

I do not usually upgrade coins for reason of condition. I do sometimes buy duplicates when the new one adds something the previous one lacked but usually there is something about the old coin that made me want it in the first place that results in my keeping both. Today the USPS delivered a dilemma of this ilk from last week's CNG auction. The coin below (also ex CNG but before they put things online) has been a favorite of mine for years. I have posted it on Coin Talk several times and even been proud of the fact that it is better than many of it's type. Why was I even tempted to buy another?


The type was a special issue by two Curile Aediles in 58BC with each man designing one side. What made the type special to me was the obverse side of M. Aemilius Scaurus, a Roman I have always considered to be very interesting.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marcus_Aemilius_Scaurus_(praetor_56_BC)
Details are not fully identical in all sources but one extensive write up can be found in Michael Harlan's book Roman Republican Moneyers and their Coins 63BCE-49BCE chapter 10.

The coin shows the submission of Nabatean king Aretas (named at the bottom of the obverse) who surrendered to (actually bought off) Scaurus making this the first Roman coin honoring an accomplishment(?) of the issuer himself rather one of his deceased ancestors. The hubris shown by doing this must have set Republican tongues wagging. This was a decade before Caesar was killed for offending turbo-Republicans (Brutus et. al.). Those interested can read the story in the Wikipedia link above but a highlight is his trial on charges for inappropriate activities for which he was acquitted with the aid of his lawyer, Cicero. The man was a protege of both Pompey and Sulla and mentioned (not in a favorable way?) in the Dead Sea Scrolls (according to Wiki - I failed to find it in photos online). Those who worship the Roman Republic as an example of how governments should work may want to find a hero other than Scaurus (but it is a cute coin). It has a second side but Hypsaeus was less splashy. If this coin were a vinyl record, Hypsaeus would be the B side.

Few coins of this type are even close to being full legend. Mine (above) shows a good part of the name Aretas but has lost the REX that preceded it. When I saw the coin below in the last CNG Electronic sale, I bid fully expecting someone else to want the additional legends and outbid me. They did not so here it is. I guess the lack of toning, lesser camel face and whatever other shortcomings they saw sent the smart money elsewhere. That's OK, little coin, I'll keep you until time brings you a tan as good as my older coin (or die trying). The dilemma is: do I need both of you?



408, Lot: 428
M. Aemilius Scaurus and Pub. Plautius Hypsaeus. 58 BC. AR Denarius (18mm, 3.99 g, 4h). Rome mint. Nabatean king Aretas kneeling to right, holding reins and olive branch before camel standing right / Jupiter driving quadriga left, holding reins and hurling thunderbolt; scorpion below horses. Crawford 422/1b; Sydenham 913; Aemilia 8; Type as RBW 1519. Good VF, lightly toned. Well centered for issue.

From the Andrew McCabe Collection, purchased from Den of Antiquity, 2014.


This would be a good place to show your examples of this coin and each is invited to add a comment on another highlight of Scaurus' life (or Hypsaeus' if you prefer).

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

Because you have excellent taste in ancient coins.

 

This exact variety, Crawford 422/1b, is not quite impossible to find with absolutely full legends, but close. (Crawford 422/1a, typically struck on somewhat less dumpy, more spread flans, is easier though still tough.) I've always wondered why the planchet makers and the die engravers couldn't coordinate their efforts so the entire image and inscription would actually fit on the flan. (One could ask the same question--with a lot more emphasis--of generations of Athenian engravers, who could've with just a bit more care saved generations of collectors the agony of full-crest angst!) One of mine; a nice example really, better than most, but well short of the Platonic ideal of the type:

 

Both are very nice to me @dougsmit !

LOL, as usual, I have to wear SUNGLASSES for @Volodya 's posting!


RR Aemilius Scaurus and Plautius Hypsaeus 58 BC AR Denarius camel scorpion quadriga 4.1g 19mm Rome Craw 422-1b

 

I would keep both coins. The former has good toning and nice eye-appeal. The latter is sharper with a better strike.

I have duplicates for less sound reasons than those.

 

Yes, this was exactly why I wanted the 'upgrade'. Yours is very nice 'for these' but suffers the same degree of off-flan letters that made me want the new one despite its poor strike. Yours is a very nice strike and has a great camel face.
Alegandron's coin has a bonus amount of REX at the expense of some Aretas but has excellent MSCAVR and both parts of EX SC. I'd call it far above average, too. With over 300 dies, there is bound to be some variations on what falls where but it is nice to have all the good parts on flan. If you go on Andrew McCabe's site you will see that my new coin was his #2 despite the fact that his #1 is missing a lot of legend just like my old and the other two shown so far. #1 was well struck; mine garbled. It gets worse if you want things on the reverse like PREIVE(R) CAPTV (few dies have the R; fewer coins allow you to tell if the die did).

I have not seen it yet. There must be many thousands of them I'll never see so that is no surprise.

 

As much as I like both examples, I personally would keep the new one and let the other one go. There are many minor and a few major varieties of this type and if they were different varieties I'd likely keep both, but this isn't the case here.

This is my example of the 422/1a variety which does not have the scorpion nor the "REX ARETAS". I hope to upgrade this one some day as well but it's a nice place holder for now:

 

Nice upgrade, Doug. Nothing wrong with wanting to improve an example IMO.

Here's mine. Similar tradeoffs as everyone else:

 

I've never seen one in person either (or even in the market at all in recent decades) but there are a few illustrated in Banti.

If keeping both is a realistic option, that's what I would do. The camel on your earlier example is quite nice, pretty well-struck and very well-engraved. It looks like a camel. I'd find it hard to let it go and have only the unusual camel--plucked chicken hybrid on the second coin as a reminder.

 

LOLOL ...I don´t know why but every time I see @Volodya´s silvers I remember the All Blacks... No Haka needed!!!

 

Wow, virtually all the legends! Nice, well done.

 

Looking at Banti, I had trouble telling which ones were full. I did see one nice one missing only The photo reproduction is not great. I am unclear by the arrangement of the sub-types in Banti. Several struck me as possibly just poorly preserved coins of a more standard variation. The Volodya coin shown here and my old coin are an unusual obverse variation lacking whatever is dripping down from the branch held by the king but they are not the same die. While probably best just considered a die identifier rather than a variety, Carthago's coin has the best scorpion. If the count of camel dies is correct at 356, one might have to ask just how many of these are needed in a collection before qualifying the collector as obsessive.

 

The guy with nine and a half croc coins of Nemausus can't have two of these? What kind of world is this!

The way I see it, your new coin is the better of the two, but the old coin has some of what it has better than the upstart.

Mine is a budget example. Almost all of the king's name but half the camel's head, decent toning but plenty of wear. Either of yours would qualify as an upgrade.

 

Four halves but all are 'different'. The question is not having more than one but whether they differ enough to have without making it a specialty based on minutia. To me this type has several things that relate to the story that make me prefer a coin showing that feature. Most have been discussed above but the major variation lacking the name of the king is, to me, important in relation to the question why. I like the theory mentioned in Harlan that the kingless coins came first but Scaurus realized that many people did not associate the scene with his 'accomplishment' so he modified the design to be sure people understood and applauded him.

On the reverse, I prefer coins with clear P and C praenomens and a clear COS showing that the reverse moneyer was honoring his ancestor (who captured Privernum). Scaurus' father and son were both also named Marcus adding confusion to our studies but it seems good to be clear that Hypsaeus was not also honoring himself.

 

Definitely a great topic for discussion. I must say that I have practiced an upgrading strategy on all of my coins. When I see a Judaean, Nabataean, Seleucid, or Roman coin that shows more of its legend or inscription—I will frequently purchase the coin and then set the less complete version aside for re-gifting later.

Here is my figure kneeling with camel coin. Not the same type I realize.

 

If I were @dougsmit I would keep the upgrade and sell the other. The new coin is fantastic. Here's mine:

 

How about giving the old one away to a beginner? like me? (I'm a beginner compared to you...) (Really I think Volodya's right, you should keep both!)

Scaurus is a great character in Colleen McCullough's "Masters of Rome" series.

Au contraire, this is a keeper... it is the very rare 422/1z variety, featuring E.T. rather than Aretas!

 

Bother are keepers Doug

 

When we start a numismatic collection, the vast majority of us acquire coins that will later be replaced by better preserved ones as our collection develops, or we have the money to progress, and get better pieces. I have in my opinion that coins in a state of conservation less than their duplicates, if they do not have a sentimental role in my collection, or if they are not a variant of a kind, subtype of legends or style, will be placed for exchange or resale.
Personally, I don’t see variations of style/subtype in both coins. So, if you don’t have sentimental fellings about the older coin, let it go.

 

Let me know when your placeholder is replaced. I love the banker's marks and that it is the other variety that I do not have.