Duplicate coins in your collection

[ambr0zie]

Every ancient coin is different, even the ones having the same reference number. Dies can be different, wear levels can be very different, toning...

To clarify - I am not talking about similar coins (same obverse/reverse but different year or different mintmark.

It is very unlikely (although I have seen cases) for a collector to have a double die match in the collection (although I have seen this happening, I know @dougsmit owns 2 Julia Domna denarii, double die match).

However, when not a double die match, you can consider the coins non duplicates... or not fully duplicates.

I checked my personal catalogue to see what coins I have with the same reference numbers. They were not bought on purpose (I never felt the need to upgrade my coins. In 2 occasions the pairs were in the same lots; the 3rd one was from a lot, doubling one from an older lot. The 4th was so different in style that I can consider them different coins (although I initially thought they are from different mints)

 

So here goes

Both - Crispus AE follis.. 320-321 AD. IVL CRISPVS NOB C, laureate head right / CAESARVM NOSTRORVM around laurel wreath containing VOT V. Mintmark ASIS star. RIC VII Siscia 161.

Same mintmark and same catalogue entry (not exactly visible in my pics, I should probably take newer pics. Wasn't particularly happy with the situation (they were in my first even ancients purchase) but it wasn't a disaster. One coin identified for free, since I was a total beginner 🙂

--------------

In the same auction I bought a lot of 8 denarii. I was eagerly expecting them - I still like denarii more than any other denomination. Found 2 Vespasian denarii being duplicates .... but wasn't very bothered. Initially I thought there were 3 of them, and that would have been a slight issue.

 Vespasian (69-79) Denarius
AD 75
Obv: IMP CAESAR VESPASIANVS AVG, laureate head right.
PON MAX TR P COS VI
Type: Pax, naked to waist, seated left, holding branch extended in right hand, left hand in lap
RIC 772

"False duplicate" - as a total beginner, at first glance I couldn't see the difference between the 2 denarii and this one, until I noticed the clockwise legend (I found this very interesting as I didn't know legends can be written on coins in both ways) plus the reverse showing the same Pax but with a caduceus.

 

----------

The third one - I am not even sure if it is a duplicate. The first entry is my first denarius, from the first lot (described as "Roman Bronze"). I was extremely happy to have a hidden denarius there. Although I knew it was cheap, holding a denarius (and with Trajan's portrait, very important for me!) was one of the best numismatic feelings. The second (sad fact - wear level is low, but the coin is badly damaged) came in a lot I bought a few months later.

 

Obverse IMP CAES NER TRAIANO OPTIMO AVG GER DAC: Bust of Trajan, laureate, draped, right
Reverse P M TR P COS VI P P S P Q R FORT RED: Fortuna, draped, veiled, seated left on chair without back, holding rudder set on ground in right hand and cornucopiae in left
RIC II Trajan 318

-----------------

The last is my favorite.

Julia Domna AR Denarius. Rome, AD 193-196.
IVLIA DOMNA AVG, b of Julia Domna, hair waved and coiled at back, draped, right / VENERI VICTR, Venus, with drapery falling below hips, standing with back turned, head right, holding apple in extended right hand and palm sloped to the left in left hand, resting left elbow on column
RIC IV Septimius Severus 536 (denarius), RSC 194

Duplicate? technically yes. but I consider them different coins. Reverses are clearly different styles, the second shows a zombified Domna, and overall a different aspect. Both were bought as individual purchases and - as a coincidence - from the same auction house, but I don't usually buy from them. It just happened.

 

Do you have examples in your collection? Let's see them, and perhaps with the reason for the purchase.

[thenickelguy]

In a recent topic I started (and am not quite done with) titled

Can anyone tell the difference between a stag and an antelope on Gallienus coin

The last sentence I posted was
"It brought me to a new question about dies but that is for another topic."

It seems this new thread has addressed my question exactly!
Thanks!

I thought of how a particular coin design may have been introduced but how many different dies with the same specific information had to be made for the strikings.

Each one being pretty much the same but since they were individually made, there were obviously going to be differences in positioning of legend, size of lettering and ruler or deity busts and also the differences in subjects and figures. Same coin, different die. Ah-ha!

Edited June 6, 2022 by thenickelguy

[maridvnvm]

I can do double die matches too..... When you specialise enough you stumble across them.

Septimius Severus denarius

Obv:– IMP CAE L SEP SEV PERT AVG COS II, Laureate head right
Rev:– MONET AVG, Moneta seated left, holding scales and cornucopiae
Minted in Emesa, A.D. 194 - 195
References:– RIC -, RSC -

Probus Antoninianus

Obv:– IMP C PROBVS • P • F • AVG, Radiate, cuirassed bust right
Rev:– COMITI PORBI(sic) AVG, Minerva standing left, holding olive-branch and spear and resting left hand on shield
Mint – Lugdunum (I in exe) Emission 7 Officina 1. A.D. 280
Reference:– Cohen -. Bastien 315 (example c). RIC 69 Bust type F var (PORBI in error not listed in RIC)

One of the examples cited by Bastien of 315 - the standard PROBI coin, 315c - Voetter, is also PORBI from the same reverse die. No examples cited in Bastien Suppl. II.

 

[maridvnvm]

I do non die linked duplicates too.

Septimius Severus denarius

Obv:– IMP CAE L SEP SEV PERT AVG COS II, Laureate head right
Rev:– BONA SPEI, Spes standing holding flower and lifting skirt
Minted in Emesa, A.D. 194 - 195
References:– BMCRE -, RIC -, RSC 55d (citing Tinchant cat.)

The double dots on the second example don't change the attribution but make it different enough to be a very different coin.

[Spaniard]

I have a lot of duplicate coins in my Kashmir set as each shows different aspects....

Kshemagupta 950-957/8 AD
Copper Kaserah or Punchshi 
Obverse- Goddess Ardochsho/Lakshmi seated facing in half lotus position, with Nagari legend 'Di' to left 'kshema' to right
Reverse- King standing facing and sacrificing at altar holding trident, with Nagari legend 'Gupta' bottom right

[thenickelguy]

What a contemporary copy means exactly, I don't know?

No 1. Tetricus I, Gallic emperor 271-274

 

IMP C TETRICVS PF AVG, Draped and radiate bust right
PAX AVG, Pax holding olive branch and scepter
RIC 100

Gaius Pius Esuvius Tetricus, (flourished 3rd century), rival Roman emperor in Gaul from 271 to 274.

Tetricus was a Gallic noble related to the usurping ruler of Gaul, Victorinus, and to Victorinus’ mother, Victoria. Upon the murder of Victorinus, Tetricus, who was governor of Aquitania, was proclaimed emperor, apparently backed by the influence and money of Victoria. During his short and nominal reign, the monetary inflation of the 3rd century reached its peak. Gaul experienced extensive invasions by Germanic tribes, and Tetricus was threatened by successive mutinies. When the emperor Aurelian (reigned 270–275) appeared in Gaul with an army, Tetricus concluded a private treaty with him and then deserted to him during the Battle of Châlons-sur-Marne (274; now Châlons-en-Champagne, in France). Aurelian forced Tetricus to march in his triumph and then pardoned him and appointed him governor of southern Italy.

No 2. Tetricus I, Gallic emperor 271-274

 

IMP C TETRICVS PF AVG, Draped and radiate bust right
PAX AVG, Pax holding olive branch and scepter
RIC 100
Very nice portrait with an attractive patina on a severely reduced flan. May be a very good quality contemporary copy.

Tetricus I Emperor of the Gallic Empire reign 271–274 AD

Gaius Pius Esuvius Tetricus, (flourished 3rd century), rival Roman emperor in Gaul from 271 to 274.
 

[Orange Julius]

4 minutes ago, thenickelguy said:

What a contemporary copy means exactly, I don't know?

No 1. Tetricus I, Gallic emperor 271-274

 

IMP C TETRICVS PF AVG, Draped and radiate bust right
PAX AVG, Pax holding olive branch and scepter
RIC 100

Gaius Pius Esuvius Tetricus, (flourished 3rd century), rival Roman emperor in Gaul from 271 to 274.

Tetricus was a Gallic noble related to the usurping ruler of Gaul, Victorinus, and to Victorinus’ mother, Victoria. Upon the murder of Victorinus, Tetricus, who was governor of Aquitania, was proclaimed emperor, apparently backed by the influence and money of Victoria. During his short and nominal reign, the monetary inflation of the 3rd century reached its peak. Gaul experienced extensive invasions by Germanic tribes, and Tetricus was threatened by successive mutinies. When the emperor Aurelian (reigned 270–275) appeared in Gaul with an army, Tetricus concluded a private treaty with him and then deserted to him during the Battle of Châlons-sur-Marne (274; now Châlons-en-Champagne, in France). Aurelian forced Tetricus to march in his triumph and then pardoned him and appointed him governor of southern Italy.

No 2. Tetricus I, Gallic emperor 271-274

 

IMP C TETRICVS PF AVG, Draped and radiate bust right
PAX AVG, Pax holding olive branch and scepter
RIC 100
Very nice portrait with an attractive patina on a severely reduced flan. May be a very good quality contemporary copy.

Tetricus I Emperor of the Gallic Empire reign 271–274 AD

Gaius Pius Esuvius Tetricus, (flourished 3rd century), rival Roman emperor in Gaul from 271 to 274.
 

A contemporary copy is simply a coin made about the same time (or perhaps a bit later but still ancient) as those from official mints but made to fill the need for small change lacking in their geographic area. Usually the style is a giveaway that a coin is not from an official mint. Some are quite well done and could nearly pass for official mint products, while others stick out as copies due to nonsensical legends, different engraving style or differing flan attributes.

[thenickelguy]

Well, thank you very much Orange, does No 2. look to be a "contemporary copy" to you?

[Alegandron]

I goofed up in reverse!  Purchased what I thought were the Crawford 44/5 Early Series of Denarii...  Whelp, nope.

Got one, posted it, and @red_spork, the early RR EXPERT pointed out my BOO-BOO!  Nope not it.  Rather it was a 68, minted a little later.  RATS.  HOWEVER, he stated that I had a Crawford 68... which are VERY HARD to fine.  Cool.

RR

AR Denarius

214-208 BCE

Roma R X behind -

Dioscuri R ROMA linear frame stars

Sicily

RARE Cr 68-1b

 

Soooooooooooooo.  I decide to stay on mission and find my Craw 44/5.  COOL!  Found it...

HOWEVER, one again, @red_spork saw my post (yeah, I was a happy clam with my 44/5!)... NOPE, you goofed in reverse AGAIN.  Not a 44/5, RATHER it is ANOTHER VERY HARD TO FIND.... Sicily 68/1b!  

WHOAH!  Cool... am I a dope, but a LUCKY DOPE!

RR

Anon

AR denarius

Roma 211-206 BCE

ROMA incus Dioscuri single horn-helmet Sear--

Craw 68-1b SICILY ISSUE RARE was cr 44-5

 

Nope, not gonna give either up!  Too hard to find these... and, at the time, I did not know what I was looking for!

 

[Orange Julius]

3 minutes ago, thenickelguy said:

Well, thank you very much Orange, does No 2. look to be a "contemporary copy" to you?

That’s a tough one as the style looks close to official, the legends look to be what you’d expect… but as your description notes, a coin diverging significantly from the normal size and weight from an official mint product could be an imitation. The line between official and copy gets really blurry at the end of the Gallic emperors (Tetricus) as official mint standards were down and coins varied greatly in size, weight, engraving quality. With these, sometimes whether official or imitation can’t be determined with certainty … and I think this is the case with your coin too.

[LONGINUS]

 

These coins have symbolic appeal to me.

Taurus the bull is the horoscope sign of the two most beautiful women in my life — my mother and my wife.

When angry, both of them can give me a look that could turn a man to stone 🥶 🤣 !

 

 

Also — As far as my Judaean coins are concerned — I have multiples of many and could fill up your thread with examples of various prutot — Hendin numbers etc — but I won’t do that to you  — Great post @ambr0zie

 

 

Edited June 7, 2022 by LONGINUS

[shanxi]

A double die match from my collection

Both examples are listed by RPC online.

I always find excuses to keep a coin. Either there is a difference (I keep it) or it is a double die match as in this case (very unusual, I keep it) 🙂

 

double die match of:
Lydia, Hierocaesaraea
Lucilla (Augusta, 164-182)
Bronze, AE 19
Obv: ΛΟVΚΙΛΛΑ СЄΒΑС, Draped bust right.
Rev: ΙЄΡΟΚΑΙСΑΡЄΩΝ, Artemis standing right, holding bow and drawing arrow from quiver on back.
Æ, 19.2mm, 5.34g
RPC IV online 1588-6 (this coin)
Æ, 19.3mm, 5.33g
RPC IV online 1588-9 (this coin)

 

[Dafydd]

I don't have a double die match that I know about but I have a couple of duplicate coins as a result of job lots but the most irritating duplicate I have  is one that hasn't arrived yet.  I won the coin at the London Coin Ltd Auction that ended on the past weekend.  I had convinced myself that I did not have this Marc Antony denarius (Legate XIII) and put in a decent bid hoping to secure it. I have a number of fleet denarii as I have been building my fleet for some years inspired by @Bing  with his OP's and threads about these  in the "other place". 

After placing the bid the day before the auction I was checking my coins against some sites such as CoinArchives and guess what? I have one I took in a trade some years ago. I then found my original lousy photographs as well that I hadn't titled at the time.

This is my original coin.

And this is the one that is on the way.....

Denarius Marc Antony (c.32-31BC) Obverse: Praetorian Galley right ANT AVG III VIR R P C, Reverse: Legionary eagle between two standards LEG XIII , RSC 42, 3.35 gm.

I didn't think it proper to try and cancel the bid because of my dim wit and stupidity so I let it stand and prayed it would hammer at less than my maximum bid. It did thankfully and under estimate.  It is a better coin than my original but I didn't bid for the condition I was chasing the fleet number. I suppose it could have been worse and could have been more worn than the original coin but I struck lucky. It cost me significantly less than the fourree XIII sold in the Roma auction in February so I guess no one was really after this other than myself. Of interest, I noticed in my searches  that more  of these  Legion XIII  denarii appear to have bankers marks than several  of other Legions. I wonder if this Legion had a reputation for distrust or there were significant numbers of fourrees to this Legion and merchants distrusted them? 

Another explanation is that they were posted at a later date in areas that had not seen them before.

I'll take better care in future on how I bid. 

 

Edited June 8, 2022 by Dafydd

[ambr0zie]

@Dafydd- your legionary coin is clearly an upgrade so that is not a bad situation. I don't think you would have issues in trying to sell the initial coin.

I had a similar situation when I bid on an Antoninus Pius denarius I already had. I like clasping hand reverses so I bid (live) on a denarius I already had, and in a decent condition. Fortunately, I lost - my bid could have been the winner.

[Kamnaskires]

I've got a number of duplicates, but these two are very special. They may be the only extant/known examples of this particular subtype of the Elymaean ruler Kamnaskires IV - so I appear to have cornered the market on this particular Elymaean variety. They are the two plate coins used for the subtype in Pieter Anne van't Haaff's Catalogue of Elymaean Coinage. Furthermore, the lower coin was purchased from the estate of a collector whose rare last name strongly suggests was a relative of mine. I did not know him personally, but am pleased to - in a sense - keep the coin in the family.

Kamnaskires IV

c. 63/2 – 54/3 BC, AR obols
Van't Haaff 8.2.3-1 (these two coins)
Top coin also in the Parthia.com database as PDC 10496.

[Spaniard]

Wonderful coins Bob...So there are no other coins known! That's amazing and what a couple of beautiful examples...Little treasures.

Not tried to family tree the ex owner of your 2nd piece?...

[Finn235]

Beautiful examples!

I have a few duplicates, for various reasons

First off, die matches among Indo-Sassanians are generally rare, and those extant die matches give an idea of which series were rare to begin with, versus those which were initially very large, with very low survival rates. One of my favorite sets starts off with a pair of double die matches

Followed by another set of double die matches that shares the reverse die of the first two

And a totally different obverse style sharing the same reverse

Which itself is an obverse die match to this one with a different reverse

 

Then I have these two, which I call the "Curse of the Obscure Rarity"

Also a pair of double die matches, these are both extremely rare Nabataean coins of Obodas II with his wife Hagaru. The bottom one was a surprise from a Naumann lot in 2018, and the top I spotted and sought out in a Roma lot in 2020. It is an ~R2/R3  issue, known from perhaps a dozen specimens, and fetches healthy prices at auction:

https://www.cngcoins.com/Coin.aspx?CoinID=381217

Sadly, this is of course too obscure and too pricey for a venue like eBay, and both CNG and Leu refused them as a consignment, so I'm stuck with them.

And then sometimes I end up with really nice LRBs from job lots that I either can't list, or don't attract any bidders at what I would consider a minimal starting price, so I just keep them, even though they are entirely superfluous to my collecting focus

[Ryro]

Nice thread idea my friend!

It's always fun comparing examples...

[akeady]

I don't intentionally buy duplicates - different symbols on some RR issues don't count as duplicates, of course! - hence 11 of Cr. 340/1 and so on.

However, I'm not always good at keeping on top of what I've got and have unintentionally ended up with duplicates.   By not keeping track of what I was bidding on, I ended up with three of the same type with the space of about 3 weeks in 2020 (Cr. 244/1).

17th September, H.D. Rauch:

27th September, Naville:

Finally, on 7th October I got a nice one from NAC:

 

I've still got the three, but I suppose in the long term I might just keep the last one.

ATB,

Aidan.

Edited June 12, 2022 by akeady
To add my name

[Roman Collector]

If only I could combine the obverse of the first with the reverse of the second! It's a middle bronze struck exclusively for use in Britain. Hoard data from Bath indicates it was struck AD 153-155.

Faustina Jr, AD 147-175.
Roman Æ as or dupondius, 10.82 g, 26.3 mm, 11 h.
Rome, AD 153-55.
Obv: FAVSTINA AVG PII AVG FIL, bare-headed and draped bust, right.
Rev: VENVS S C, Venus standing left, holding apple and leaning elbow against a column.
Refs: RIC --; BMCRE p. 856 *; Cohen 271; Strack 1323; RCV --.


Faustina Jr, under Antoninus Pius, 147-161.
Roman orichalcum dupondius, 11.60 gm, 25.5 mm, 2 h
Rome, AD 153-55.
Obv: FAVSTINA AVG PII AVG FIL, bare-headed and draped bust, right
Rev: VENVS S C, Venus standing left, holding apple and leaning elbow against a column
Refs: RIC --; BMCRE p. 856 *; Cohen 271; Strack 1323; RCV --.

Here's the listing from Moorhead's article on "Coins of British Association":

 

 

[John Conduitt]

I thought I had lots of duplicates, but apparently not. It just feels like it when you get one and have the tough decision of what to keep. Perhaps it's also because I'm going for a 'one per emperor' collection, so having 6 of Antoninus Pius is excessive. (Although I love Antoninus Pius's coins).

I have two of these because the second one came along with a more complete horse, which isn't too easy to get. The first, though, has rarer dies, and better surfaces, although it doesn't look like it from my terrible photo.

Antedios Iceni Silver Unit, 10-40

East Anglia. Silver. Horse right, corn-ear mane, pellet daisy above, pellet triad and ANTĐ monogram below. Double moon emblem on vertical wreath (S 441; ABC 1645; VA 711, 715).

I have these two of Galerius. I got the second because it came from an interesting hoard (Langtoft Hoard I) but my first is a nice example and I can't part with it.

Galerius AE1, 300-303

London. Bronze. Laureate cuirassed bust right; MAXIMIANVS NOB CAES. Rev: Genius standing left, modius on head, naked but for chlamys draped over shoulder, holding patera and cornucopiae; GENIO POPV-LI ROMANI (RIC VI, 15).

Lastly, I have these of Gratian. They're both beautiful with lustre. They're from different hoards, which in my collection means they might as well have different catalogue numbers.

Gratian Siliqua, 367-375

Trier. Silver. Pearl-diademed, draped, cuirassed bust right; DN GRATIA-NVS P F AVG. Roma seated left on throne, holding Victory on globe and sceptre; VRBS - ROMA, TRPS• in exergue (RIC IX, 27f). First: East Harptree (Somerset) Hoard 1887. Second: Otterbourne (Hampshire) Hoard 1978.

[Etcherdude]

1 hour ago, akeady said:

I don't intentionally buy duplicates - different symbols on some RR issues don't count as duplicates, of course! - hence 11 of Cr. 340/1 and so on.

However, I'm not always good at keeping on top of what I've got and have unintentionally ended up with duplicates.   By not keeping track of what I was bidding on, I ended up with three of the same type with the space of about 3 weeks in 2020 (Cr. 244/1).

17th September, H.D. Rauch:

27th September, Naville:

Finally, on 7th October I got a nice one from NAC:

 

I've still got the three, but I suppose in the long term I might just keep the last one.

ATB,

Aidan.

@akeady you are certainly consistent. Beautiful denarii.