Life is indeed a series of compromises - coins are no exception.

Have you ever been a situation where you are looking at a coin that you have been looking for along time, and that you are on the cusp of buying it or placing a bid. What's holding you back is that the coin does not meet your ideal of what it should be, however, in your calculus the issues, be they surface condition, strike, or flan condition are offset by the desire to finally acquire an example.

Here's an example. Many years ago I owned a nice Julius Caesar denarius, the elephant type. It was a fine coin, as I recall, though I know that memory can be selective, and I have been sorry to have sold it. The sale was for a worthy cause - raising funds for the down payment on our house in 1993. But still there was a sense of something "loss". I was actually able to buy back some coins of that sale from my local coin dealer, but not the Julius Caesar denarius.

So I've been looking around in an informal and thoroughly unsystematic way to buy a replacement. That effort was delayed because of shifting interests over the years, to world coins and early Latin American coinage. Now that I've reentered ancients, actually since 2018, I've concentrated on collecting owls, both Athenian and imitative.

Then a Julius Caesar denarius appeared in a Florida auction. Actually there were two, one not slabbed (okay with me) that had really nice centering and a second one slabbed with a slightly off center strike.

Here are the coins. Sorry for the grainy image, it is from an online shot of the catalog.



The bidding for the first coin was very strong and quickly exceeded my budget. The prices for this type is very strong, for understandable reasons, especially due to the really nice obverse, though the coin has been lightly cleaned. I had to pass. With the buyer's premium the cost was far too high for me. The next lot went up for bidding, so I had to make a determination. This coin type is available online and through other auction houses. The quality of coins offered vary considerably in condition and grade. Like Athenian owls they were made for utilitarian reasons, in this case to pay the troops who would be mumbling ominously had pay been not forthcoming, so speed of production no doubt ruled.

So I bit the bullet and won the second lot at a lower cost. The obverse is off center, the reverse better centered and the coin has generally nice toning. NGC grades this coin as AU, strike 4, surface 5. I don't know if I agree, being incline to be more conservative in coin grading. It is a compromise coin, but at least that gap from nearly 30 years ago has been filled. That the coin is slabbed holds no weight for me, but it is still in the slab as you can see.



So, what are your stories of compromise? Thanks

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

Nice Caesar denarius! I can see why you are attracted to it. The elephant looks a lot better than most. I also like the jellyfish or whatever it is on the reverse.

Nearly every coin I buy is a compromise. I can't afford the best examples. But upgrading is expensive. So I try to look at the probability that a better example will come up within my budget in a reasonable timeframe (a few years). If the probability is low, I buy (or bid). Here is an example.



I really like the portrait on this Otho. The name is complete and the entire legend nearly so. It is well centered and there is very little wear. Pretty much the same can be said for the reverse. But, there is an area of weak strike in the hair. I was willing to accept that comprise because it may be a very long time before I find a similar example with a better strike within my budget.

 

I think sometimes my whole collection is a compromise. But, after saying that I'm happy with it. I know if I hadn't been required to get three kids educated it would be different, but one has to what one has to do.

 

I'd say this is the most realistic way to look at it. If you're not paying whatever is necessary to get the best examples in the world, then you are compromising!

But I guess the question being asked is, "According to the standards that you have established for yourself based on budget, aesthetic preferences, etc.... Do you ever compromise?"

I do from time to time, however, I tend to make compromises on cheaper coins as opposed to more expensive ones. I have a certain list of coins that I'm after, and when it comes to the high priced ones (Julius Caesar for instance), I only want to buy that coin one time. Therefore, I wait until one comes along that I'd be happy with and pay what is required to get it.

With the cheaper ones, I tend to think, "I can get a great version of that coin at any time". So, sometimes I buy lesser examples of those for the purpose of making myself feel good about temporarily filling some holes!

Edit: Both very nice coins by the way. The Elephant Caesar isn't on my list, but that Otho would certainly not be a compromise according to my standards.

 

That Julius Caesar elephant type might be just a tad bit off center, but it still looks a amazing! You definitely got an excellent example there. Not gonna ask what you paid for it but I expect a pretty penny.

 

Both coins- Caesar and Otho are great! @savitale lots of Othos out there are with a wear on the wig! So i think you got something that is within 20-25% of the top quality Othos!

Congratulations @robinjojo and @savitale

 

That's a very respectable elephant denarius! If you feel dissatisfied, I'd be very happy to trade it for my own!!!


Here are five of the ones I've sold in years and decades past. I'd only really like to have the top one back. Maybe the better of the fourrees (the one shown a second time in the NGC holder).


Yeah, I really want that one back! No worries, I'm sure it's well-loved by the buyer.


Fourree


Fourree

(Images from a blog post I made about these a while ago)

 

Looks like yours is the best

 

Well Robin it appears that you were able to acquire a very beautiful coin; the history alone and who may have held it stirs the imagination. I can understand the feeling of loss, but... we all do what we can and enjoy what we have as well.
Thanks for posting, friend...

 

I totally agree. The issue of compromising often comes with the higher priced coins, especially if you are on a limited budget.

I think that is why the vast majority of the coins, ancient at least, are in the VF range, perhaps a little towards EF. I am perfectly happy to have a circulated coin that is pleasing in some way. I don't let issues such as horn silver or other surface deposits, unless they're so thick they obscure the coin, really turn me way from a coin. This is view that I've come to as I get older. When I was young coins had to be bright and shiny or with a nice attractive tone. Collecting ancient coins changes one's view on these things I believe.

 

Thank you. I guess with coins or just about anything else we've owned memories (good and bad) often come with them. Yes, it is important to enjoy the present and not let the past dominate our thoughts.

 

Thanks.

Both coins have pluses and minuses, but the example I have is a nice one overall.

 

Those are very nice and interesting coins.

I haven't seen very many examples of fouree denarii. I wonder if any of them were actually used to pay the troops. If so, that wouldn't be very helpful to maintain morale.

 

That's a beautiful Otho denarius with a fine portrait of him!

The weak spots really don't detract from the coin's overall appeal. Well done!

 

Well that is an absolutely amazing example... congratulations!

We all have to make compromises to be sure... I have a very modest budget.

Mine has a test cut that certainly detracts from its value. But my dream was to own a coin such as this with a clear "CAESAR" - that was my only real requirement.
I feel very privileged to own this modest example:

 

Wow, that is a superb example and much better than my budget one!

 

Thank you all for your comments and coins! I think our love for this hobby is rooted both in personal interest along with an amazing array of coins in wide range of prices for many types, which makes collecting possible for all sorts of budgets.

Follow your bliss.

 

i don't know the price, but its a nice one...i don't have any JC"s coins yet...i'm am bidding one at the moment but....9_9...

 

I guess I could call this a failed compromise. Ar stater of Aegina "turtle" 404-405 BC Obv Land tortoise seen from above Rv Incuse square dived into 5 compartments HGC 438 12.07 grms 21 mm Photo by W Hansen
Back in 2018 I was looking to replace my "turtle" however I wanted one that was struck circa 445 BC. This one caught my eye and I decided that I liked it so much that even though it did not meet my criterion I would use it as a replacement for my other coin. Actually that idea didn't last for very long. I ended up keeping both finally replacing the other coin two years later. Oh well it was a good plan while it lasted.

 

I can see why! There are obviously multiple things about this one that are special, but my eye is drawn to the shoulders, can't remember seeing ones quite like that before. Hard enough to find one with four legs/feet on the flan, but feet are really nice, the legs too, especially the front right. Scales, toes, and claws are really well defined.

My first Tortoise was a compromise. I ordered it from a Colosseum Coin Exchange Mail Bid Sale around 1990 or 1991. (I was in jr. high school then.) I wanted a Stater, of course, but was happy to get this Drachm (5.01g):


Aegina Land Tortoise AR Drachm (Testudo Graeca Ibera)
Greek (Classical). Islands off Attica (Saronic Gulf), Aegina. AR Drachm (5.0g, 19.5mm, 3h?), struck c. BCE 350-338.
Obv: Land tortoise (prob. testudo graeca ibera) with segmented shell of 13 plates.
Rev: Large incuse square with skew pattern, two pellets (astragalos?) in one of five compartments (left, top or bottom?).
Ref: Millbank Period V (404-375 BC), pl. II, 16; HGC 6, 443; SNG Cop 520; SNG Lockett 2004 ("acorn").
Prov: Ex-Colosseum Coin Exchange, Hazlet NJ, Mail Bid Catalog ca. 1990-1992 (possibly MBS 53, 22 Jan 91; if anyone has the catalog, I'd love to know if that's it!).


Took over 20 years to upgrade to my AR Stater. (Still a compromise, since I went for one with a bad reverse so I could have a better obv.)


Aegina Land Tortoise AR Drachm (Testudo Graeca Ibera)
Greek (Classical). Islands off Attica (Saronic Gulf), Aegina. AR Stater (11.97, 20mm), struck c. 456-431 BCE.
Obv: Land tortoise (prob. testudo graeca ibera), segmented shell of 13 plates.
Rev: Large incuse square with five-compartment skew pattern with wide border.
Ref: Meadows Group IIIb; Millbank Period V (404-375 BC), pl. II, 10 (same obv. die); SNG Cop 516; Sear 2600. See also HGC 6, 437.
Prov: Ex- Gitbud & Naumann Pecunem 20 (3 Aug 2014), Lot 186.
Notes: Coin-in-hand video: LINK

And a couple more years to add the third to the set. I'd still like to have one of the very early archaic sea turtles. By Meadows' dating, this is the last of the sea turtles (and the one above the first of the land turtles, which I find odd, since the fabric/style are so different):


Aegina Sea Turtle AR Stater (leatherback, Dermochelys coriacea)
Greek (Archaic). Islands off Attica (Saronic Gulf), Aegina. AR Stater (12.19g, 21.5mm, 7h), struck c. 480-457 BCE (contested).
Obv: Sea turtle (prob. leatherback, Dermochelys coriacea), head turned sideways in profile, with trefoil collar and 'T-back' design, column of pellets on shell. Banker's mark: Incuse circle with cross and four sunken compartments.
Rev: Large 'skew pattern' incuse square with five sunken compartments.
Ref: Milbank period III, pl. 1, 14-15 (Banker’s Mark = p. 19, Counterstamp 15); Meadows Aegina Group IIIa; HGC 6, 435; SNG Cop 507; SNG Lockett 1970.
Prov: Ex-Nomos Obolos 16 (Zurich, 11 Oct 2020), Lot 772
Note: Incuse geometric design of the Banker's Mark (Milbank #15) is an interesting complement to the reverse imagery. Coin-in-hand video: LINK