While browsing some of the upcoming auctions listed on Sixbid's website, I came upon this Vitellius sestertius: What I found amazing about this coin was the auction house's description of it, which I'll only partially list here: "Sestertius late April-December 69, Æ 24.82 g. Laureate and draped bust r. Rev. Pax standing l., holding branch and cornucopiae. C 67. RIC 118.Very rare. ---------------------------------------, otherwise good very fine / very fine" The dashes represent redacted text that I found to be surprisingly candid, especially for a major auction house and a coin estimated at around $3,000. I'm curious whether other ancient collectors of bronzes perceive the fairly severe issue about the coin that the auction house felt compelled to include in the description. I'll reveal the redacted text after giving any interested collectors a chance to pen their opinions.
'Heavily smoothed'? It would be refreshing to see that in the description, in fact I would be unhappy if it was not remarked on. The reverse smoothing is quite noticeable as the entire reverse patina is different.
I looked at another example on wildwinds and I wanna say smoothed but also heavily tooled. Robe & face are off, cornucopiae is weird looking. http://wildwinds.com/coins/ric/vitellius/RIC_0117.jpg I could be wrong but the wildwinds example looks to be from the same reverse die too, which shows the flaws on the OP coin.
Tooling on the laureate crown? Possibly the eyes/forehead area. I'd expect some more wear on that area given the wear on the draped shoulder.
I see the difference in patina that beef pointed out, but other than a weird looking Pax, I'm at a loss. I'll be curious and watching for the answer.
Here is the redacted text: "Heavily tooled on reverse..." Basically, the entire reverse is re-engraved to bring out the devices from the smoothed field. My guess is that because the obverse portrait is fairly artistic and the fields are not overly smoothed, the coin is estimated at CHF 3000. But purchasing a bronze that's so heavily tooled on the reverse would be a huge compromise for most collectors.
Never would have caught that. So here's my question. Given that the figure on the reverse is tooled, can we assume the green patina on both sides of the coin is artificial? It seems to cover parts of the figure on the reverse, but also much of the obverse. If so, how do they get such an authentic looking patina over the doctored surfaces?
I think the green patina is real, and used to cover the whole coin. The reverse was smoothed heavily and that patina was removed in the process except in the protected area in the devices.
It's great to see some auction houses being forthcoming about the quality of their coins. It's no surprise who ends up getting the best consignments.
I came to this thread late. I would have guessed smoothing on the reverse, but not tooling. It's a poor tooling job that doesn't bring out any better detail than that. Despite the reverse smoothing and tooling, I will guess that this coin will go for estimate or even higher, because the side that "counts", if you collect Roman portrait sestertii, as I used to do, is the obverse with the excellent Vitellius portrait!
I agree but would say it in the opposite way. As it becomes obvious which houses will pass along such coins without mention, it is obvious who will get the worst items. If I owned good coins, would I want them sold in a sale that also offered undescribed toolers?
