Roman Empire: bronze sestertius of Antoninus Pius, struck ca. 159 AD Obverse: ANTONINVS AVG - PIVS PP TR P XXII, laureate head right. Reverse: VOTA SVSCEPTA DEC III, veiled emperor left, standing and sacrificing at flaming tripod, S-C in field, COS IIII in exergue. Issuer: Antoninus Pius, Roman emperor (138-161 AD). Specifications: Bronze, 31.7 mm max., 26.9 g. Grade: NGC Ch F; Strike 4/5, Surface 4/5. Cert #5770260-003. Reference: RIC 1010, Cohen 1124, BMC 2068-2069. Provenance: Ex-Münzenhandlung Manfred Olding, Osnabrück, Germany, 8 May 2019.* Prior provenance to Heynen and Reusing/Schürer collections. Notes: The tribunician (TR P XII) and consular (COS IIII) inscriptions date this coin to circa 159 AD. Antoninus Pius is considered one of Rome's "Five Good Emperors", having ruled during a time of relative stability and prosperity for the Empire. Comments: While in a relatively modest grade, this coin has attractive, contrasting brown patina with nice surfaces. 023447S
That's a lovely coin with a lot going for it. It is well-centered, has complete legends, and smooth surfaces. The only strike against it is its grade. This doesn't bother me as it's to be expected with Antonine sestertii. The economy flourished in the mid-second century and coins circulated extensively. Just be careful to properly attribute this coin. The reverse doesn't say what you think it does. It actually reads VOTA SVSCEPTA DEC III. This marks it as BMC 2068-2069. Here's the BMC plate coin (2069): ... and the listing in BMC4: The coin with the longer VOTA SVSCEPTA DECENN III inscription is BMC 2070. Looking at RIC, your coin is RIC 1010; the coin with the longer inscription is RIC 1011. The listings in Cohen for this reverse type are as follows: Because yours has the TR P XXII obverse legend and is a laureate HEAD, not a bust, it's Cohen 1124. BMC and RIC do not note the existence of a laureate bust, but only a laureate head.
That was an impressively detailed breakdown on the attribution! I must confess that that part is my Achilles heel. It gives me headaches. I guess some folks revel in it, and more power to 'em. It's a chore for me.
@lordmarcovan Nice coin. I inherited some Roman coins from my grand father when I was a child. Most of them from the Constantine era give or take a ruler.
You're close! You've got the catalog numbers right; it's the description of the reverse inscription that is in error.
It looks like you've got a nice sestertius . The portrait is excellent & the attractive patina highlights the details. I'm no expert in grading ancient coins but would grade the coin Fine +.
This is an interesting variant of the same coin with a bare bust with drapery on the far shoulder and a fold of cloak in the neck.
BTW Without the drapery I would say that Pius' bare HEAD is shown. To me a bare bust would be something where part of the chest is shown, like on some coins of Hadrian.
10/10 for me, great appearance and detail, and a key coin to represent a long and peaceful reign. He never made it to the 30 year mark to pay off his pledge to the gods, but even a 20 year reign was an achievement considering the fate of many other emperors.
Any flaw I can find with this coin is basically nitpicking. You have a nice coin with excellent centering and some honest wear. If it were mine, the only things I could possibly even ask for are more of the letters on flan (even though they are fully readable, having the full letters just makes it that much easier), and a higher grade. Other than that, I think @Roman Collector's post pretty much covers it for me. If you ever intend to get into Antonine silver coinage, you should definitely find a copy of Cohen and the Reka Devnia Hoard book. Using these 2 together, you can get a much better idea of the rarity of 2nd century silver than any other single reference I know of gives you.
I gave it a perfect 10, because in my oppinion this coin is not only of fine style and free of problems, but in featuring the most attractive type of toning (light bown with contrasting highlights) in terms of pure eye appeal (at least in my eyes) stands out over 99 % of all Sestertii found on Ebay and 90 % of those found in auctions (I should know, because I have been looking for Sestertii of exactly this appearence for years, and wish all of mine would have this quality). Congrats, I wish it was mine!
I agree with pretty much everything you said here, except that pretty much nothing gets a perfect 10 IMO.
Question: would this coin in the OP be considered bronze or orichalcum? I put “bronze” in the description because it has that brown color, at least under the lighting conditions at my desk. But in the NGC photos it came out looking brassier, like orichalcum usually does, I suppose. But how much distinction is there between those alloys, really? I assume orichalcum is similar to brass. To be honest, the distinction between bronze and brass eludes me too, aside from the color. But I can clear that up with a quick Wiki dive.
Your coin looks really nice to me. I appreciate the Tibor patina and circulation wear. Antoninus Pius sestertius RIC 770 Felicitas 147 Roma ANTONINVS AVG PIVS P P TR P / COS IIII FELICITAS AVG S C C. 363 I gave it a high score for the rarity factor.
Well, I still like the OP a lot. Since it was posted, I got one too - not nearly as nice, however (with an iffy attribution): Antoninus Pius Æ Sestertius (158-159 A.D.) Rome Mint [ANTON]INVS AVG PIVS PP TR P XXII, laureate head right / [VOTA SV]SCEP[TA] DEC [III] [COS IIII in exergue], Pius standing left sacrificing over tripod. RIC III 1010; Cohen 1124. (23.65 grams / 30 mm) Attribution Note: There are many varieties of the VOTA SVSCEP... sestertius. RIC 1010 based on this: Obv.: XXII barely visible Rev.: Break at [SV]SCE-P, top. DEC (worn) at 3 o'clock.