Which Claudius would you keep?

Some of you may remember my current Claudius As:



I've had it now for a year, and while nice, I've always felt the portrait of Claudius could be improved on, as well as perhaps the strength of the legends on the coin.

Well, let me show you it's possible replacement. I need your advise, worthy successor or not? I will only be keeping one and the other will be sold off.



Here is why I think the second coin is an improvement...let me know if you agree with this or not:

1. Portrait of the second coin is more life-like and is closer in likeness compared to the known statues of Claudius. Ie. It has better style.

2. The obverse and reverse legends on the second one are a little easier to read (particularly the name Claudius, as well as the writing in the reverse.)

3. The die break on the obverse of coin #2, on the reverse of Claudius' head, adds more numismatics interest as it is a good example of ancient mint production damage (which makes for more interesting coffee table talk about this coin).

Well, what say you? Be honest, I'm asking for your opinions. Also, feel free to post your coins of Claudius.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

That's a tough one and I'll give you two answers from different points of view.

Answer 1: Sell the first and keep the second for reasons that you mentioned. #2 has a nice portrait and perhaps more unique characteristics. Also, very attractive visual appeal.

Answer 2: Keep the first and sell the second. (My ulterior motive for that answer is that if you offer it for sale—I may have the opportunity to purchase it )

 

I like the second coin more. It just has more overall eye appeal to me. Better struck, stronger legends it just appeals to me more.

 

I agree with all three points. I do especially think that the second coin has a finer-style portrait. For example, compare the rendering of the nose and lips on the second coin with the first. No comparison! Sell the first and keep the second.

 

#2 is a beauty. I would scoop that up if you havent already!

 

Yeah, both are mine now. I'm just trying to figure out if #2 is a big enough improvement on my old one...which would mean I'd sell #1 and keep #2 (the "upgrade")

 

The fields in the secondgive me pause.

 

#2 but we have had enough of these questions to believe the best answer is to sell both and buy one that does not require asking.

 

@Jwt708 Asking as a newbie and trying not to hijack the thread... what are you seeing with the fields?

 

I don't know what he sees, but I see an old coin with contemporaneous mint production damage in the form of a die break on the obverse, very faint and minimal smoothing (which would be due to more recent cleaning), perhaps evidence of slight die rust/damage on the reverse (which would have happened at the mint)....and average corrosion from burrial.

 

The second is no doubt better condition

 

I'll be the odd duck out and say I like the first. I just like the patina more. The surfaces of #2 bother me, die break and all and I have coins with them too. The portrait may be better in #2 but I don't see it as significant.

Do what Doug says, ditch both, get a better one.

 

Hmm, I'm in the minority too, but for a different reason. The two portraits are different enough in style to warrant keeping both coins. But it sounds like you already made up your mind. Do what makes you happy, that's all that matters.

 

It was the smoothing spots. Portrait is better. Maybe it's just my display. When you get it in hand I feel like the answer wich to keep will be easily answered!

 

For those saying "get better"', I wish I could. However, the coin I keep will be part of my $3000 Imperial 12 Caesars set. I am trying to keep it all on purpose at no more than $3000. I still need to do Nero and Galba and I have just over $800 to work with. Don't want to blow that on a super high end Claudius and ruin the challenge which I set myself....get the nicest set of 12 Caesars possible for under $3000 (must all be imperial portraits and not provincial). I'm trying to upgrade, where possible, for not much more money than earlier purchases in order to meet the challenge.

Maybe I should get a higher grade one, but then it won't be able to be part of my $3000 set. It wouldn't make sense to do that until after I've completed the challenge I set for myself.

 

I like #2 a bit better. If I were you I would keep both but I understand if you want to sell no. 1.

 

Can't wait to hear about the completion of your set and the challenges/ opportunities you encountered...that is if you were going to make a write-up.

 

I will. Of course I will, as it's been an eventful journey. But for a few lucky breaks I doubt I'd have as much budget to work with for my last two as I have now. Who knows, if I get a good break on Nero or Galba then perhaps I'll have enough money for a marginal/moderate upgrade of my Tiberius at the end of this (the weakest link in the group).

There is one thing you don't have to wait for my write up to figure out...doing a 12 Caesars set for $3000 is easy if you are willing to use provincial coins and posthumous coins, or coins with no portrait. Doing a set for $3000 of (1) nothing but imperials minted during the reign of that particular emperor, and (2) only coins with an Imperial portrait, is bloody hard.

Its easy to blow half that budget on 2 coins alone, Julius Caesar and Caligula, and that still leaves you with other somewhat pricey people like Tiberius, Galba, Vitellius, and Otho to contend with. It is a real challenge...which is why I'm doing it.

 

I like Doug's advice but post #15 explains the reason for the choice.

Since it's part of your specific-budget 12 Caesars set, and from what I gather looking at everyone else's 12 Caesars set, portrait seems to be the overwhelming focus for such sets. Given that, I'd keep #2.

 

There’s something wrong with #2 @Sallent . The only problem is that it’s not mine.