NICE Sestertius of Valerian I or Curiousity

I have read that the sestertius provided additional space for Rome's great celators to work on. Unfortunately, the sestertius began shrinking after Nero, the size sort of waxed and waned with some emperors - Marcus Aurelius comes to mind - then shrank again after Severus Alexander, until by Valerian I it was about the size of an As under Trajan, maybe a bit thicker. However, in the not so very expert opinion of the writer, the artistry of the sestertii of Trajan Decius and compares to anything preceding it, and that continued during the "Four Bad Years" that followed. When we get to Valerian I, the artistry was still there, at least I have always thought so.

I had not started this discussion in order to address the comparative artistry of emperors and their sestertii. Actually, the focus was supposed to be tooling and how it is is possible to tell if a coin is tooled. Sometimes it is easy - overly blocky letters, heavy lines, the coin just does not look right, or it is simply TOO perfect. In most instances it is easy to spot tooling. Other times it is not so easy.

I can pretty much recall the circumstances under which I have bought every coin in my collection. However, I simply cannot recall where the posted sestertius of Valerian I came from. Since I never knowingly buy a tooled coin - who wants a coin spoiled by modern hands - I am not sure where it came from. Most likely an ebay sale, since at one point I was searching for an affordable higher grade sestertius of Valerian.

If untooled, the coin is magnificent, showing Valerian with a light beard, a fully defined ear, little wear, and a beautiful black patina with small areas of red. If it is tooled (and it is, to some extent, I think), then it isn't much more than a curiousity, worth something to someone who doesn't mind tooled coins - and coins even with substantial tooling do sell, and sometimes for high prices - unfortunately.

So here it is - and the photograph does not show it as well as I had hoped. This is one of those issues that I think everyone will have an opinion on. It does look like one of the letters on the reverse is showing some signs of a second strike, which indicates a high grade coin. On the other hand, I only recall seeing one very high grade sestertii of Valerian I with a beard. There could be other reasons for that - high grade sestertii of Valerian are not too common, and a beard this light will quickly be worn away - if it doesn't get worn off during cleaning.

Perhaps the lack of detail on the figure on the reverse could be an indication of tooling - both sides of the coin should have the same amount of detail. However, some of the details could have worn off during the cleaning process or the reverse die itself could be worn. However, the difference in wear is the best indication. Also it doesn't have the "sharpness" expected on a really high grade bronze.

Valerian I, 28mm, 16.67 grams, "FIDES MILITVM" RIC 160

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

I cant tell too much from the photo, but I think it does have some tooling, certainly some smoothing. But its still a nice example (and I like the red patina on the obverse). They aren't the easiest to come across. I have this one here:

 

I really like these sestertii of Valerian. I don't know enough to have an opinion on the tooling, except to say they are pretty and I want one!

But I was wondering what the difference is between "tooling" and "smoothing"? Just curious.

 

I have always understood tooling to be artificial means to make devices (letters, hair, portrait, other features) stand out with greater sharpness and relief, whereas smoothing is primary devoted to creating smooth, uniform fields. So tooling=devices; smoothing=fields. Is that generally correct?

 

That makes perfect sense to me! Thank you.

 

Tooling is basically re-engraving, or if you like, artificially re-creating details that have naturally worn away. It is a process of either creating something which was never there or an attempt to replace what is now missing.

Smoothing is just like it sounds, and could perhaps be considered a part of the cleaning process. Sometimes there are encrustations which cannot be removed via the normal cleaning process, so it is 'smoothed' down to remove it. That type of soothing is generally accepted, but often cleaners go too far and smooth down defects such as pitting.

 

Thank you, Ken. I suppose smoothing could turn into tooling if the "smoother" got his burin too close to the lettering or devices. It would be interesting to see a video of somebody actually working over an ancient bronze. The process must be a delicate one (when done correctly).

 

Nice OP coin. I hope it is not tooled. My eye is not yet experienced yet to detect this.

 

I would agree that it is probably tooled, though you would know best with the coin in hand. It has obviously been smoothed quite a bit; and I would think that the portrait would have required similar smoothing, which should not have left all that beard detail intact. Ergo at least some of the beard detail has been tooled. (Perhaps before the smoothing, which would make the tooling harder to detect.) This makes other details suspect also.

At least that is my amateurish speculation!

 

that's my understanding as well - tooling, never good, smoothing - mostly ok

 

I disagree, I dislike smoothing as much as tooling. I do not intentionally purchase coins with either, I want them as original as possible. Others are welcome to form their own opinions of course. Cleaning to remove dirt is fine, but cleaning/smoothing to intentionally remove patina is a deal breaker.