Are they Collectible

I collected this Sestertius of Antoninus Pius Which is listed as rare. RIC 948 - Cohen 53.
In fact, the obverse reads HADR to left of Antoninus'head. The search lead me that Emperor Hadrian had no children and thus he adopted Antoninus Pius as his own son. By that time Antoninus was a member of the Senate (Senatus). After Hadrian's death, Antoninus struck few coins bearing partially the name of his adoptive father.
The reverse also reads in exergue " ANNONA AUG " and it figures the goddess seated left holding cornucopia with her right hand and a flower with her left hand. She was the goddess who supplied Rome with grains and cereals ( Ceres was her Greek counter part). My question is : Do wise collectors acquire such coins despite their low grade? I think this matter should concern everyone. Just an advice..
The coin weighs 24.64 g. Diameter is 32 mm.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

I like it! But then I never met a low-grade sestertius that I didn't like. Low-grade ancients are still art - in your example, you have an Imperial Roman portrait from the height of the Pax Romana, fully recognizable as Antoninus Pius, with a reverse depiction of Annona that is elegant despite the wear. What's not to like?

As for wear, damage, encrustations, holes, blotchy patina, these things just add to the appeal for me (and makes things affordable). Some people would prefer the Venus de Milo with arms, but I like her just the way she is.

But then I am not a wise collector. The ultimate question to answer is: do you like it?

Here's a sestertius of Antoninus Pius I recently obtained with a rare Parthia reverse - rare and unusual, I recently posted it, but enthusiasm was muted, probably because it is so worn. To a lot of collectors, something this cruddy is just not worth having at any price. I respect that approach, even if I don't follow it. https://www.cointalk.com/threads/taxing-not-fighting-parthia-an-antoninus-pius-sestertius.328720/



Here's another ugly Antoninus Pius sestertius - it has Juno Sospita on the reverse, which is a bit unusual for the period, and it has a nice heft to it in hand.

Antoninus Pius Æ Sestertius
(140-144 A.D.)
Rome Mint
ANTONINVS AVG PIVS [PP TR P COS III], laureate head rt. slight drapery on left shoulder / [IVNONI SOSPITAE] (?) S-C, Juno Sospita walking right, with spear & long shield, snake.
RIC 608 (or rev. leg. variety?)
(24.25 grams / 32 mm)

 

Couldn't have said it better myself @Marsyas Mike.

 

..nothings says authentic more than honest wear on a coin A. Pius dupondius

 

This!!

 

I also love those BIG BRONZES !

 

NAILED it!!!


And, if you really want to talk about some WEAR on coins, hear is an AE As worn so badly, they had to countermark it to give it value:


Augustus As four countermarks 25-23 mm 9.8g TICA AVG probably for Tiberius Augustus CE14-37 Dolphin

Kenneth Harl had a nice write-up about these types of coins. Basically worn bronzes, but were countermarked so that the Legions had small-change for their Denarii pay.

 

If you like handling coins and even carrying one around all the time, this is the coin. If you want to impress the big collectors with glossy catalogs, not so much. The coin is what it is and no more, no less. Resale is about zero; fun is more.

 

Here's a Sestertius of beautiful and fine condition. It has Emperor Gordian III on obverse and Sol on reverse. Weighing the difference with the OP coin, I wondered :
" Man.. if you like even ugly coins for whatever reason... Then you have reached the point or level of obsession ". And maybe that's we might unwillingly seek.

 

..you are such a philo sifer....

 

Oh, I like the countermarks. Very nice TICA example, Alegandron - by "very nice" I include the fact the host coins on these are almost always worn slick. I have a couple of these, but yours is nicer than mine - the reverse (dolphin?) is the best I've seen anywhere.

My low standards get even lower with countermarks - I've taken to using computer graphic techniques to highlight these. Here is a recent example - "P•P• in 8 x 6 mm oval" on an Augustus as. Very hard to see, thanks to a lot of green verdigris/patina/crud. There are a few examples I found online -it seems to be from Pannonia (where a lot of legionary countermarked issues are found), Pangerl 81. The weight's not too far off on this, so I suspect it was an official mint product rather than one of the puny knock-offs.

As for the larger issue of how ugly can things get before it is not collectable, this is an example of one special quality - the countermark - made this worth obtaining. The fact it came in a big lot and therefore cost $1.89 also influenced my purchase.

I wanted to post it at some point, and now I have an excuse!




Augustus Æ As
Imperial Moneyer As with
Pannonia c/m (1st C. A.D.)
[unreadable], bare head right ? /[unreadable] III VIR AAA [?]
around large S [C]. (Attribution uncertain)
Countermarks: P•P• in 8 x 6 mm oval
M. Pangerl Collection 81.
(8.29 grams / 25 mm)

 

To be honest, if I could afford pristine, NM examples of these ancient Roman bronzes, I would probably prefer them to the ones in my collection. But I can't, and so I hold onto these ugly ducklings that I found in lots of uncleaned coins:

Agrippina Senior
Wife of Germanicus
Bronze Sestertius
Rome mint, A.D. 50-54
Obv: AGRIPPINA M F GERMANICI CAESARIS
Rev: TI CLAVDIVS CAESAR AVG GERM P M TR P IMP, encircling SC
RIC (Claudius) 102
34mm, 26.1g.

Claudia Antonia
Daughter of Claudius
Bronze Dupondius
Rome Mint, A.D. 41-50
Obv: ANTONIA AVGVSTA
Rev: TI CLAVDIVS CAES AVG P M TR P IMP - Claudius, veiled and togate, holding simpulum, facing left, between S and C
RIC (Claudius) 92
26mm, 10.3g.

Vitellius
Imperator, 69 A.D.
Bronze As
Spanish (Tarraco?) mint
Obv: A VITELLIVS - IMP GERMAN
Rev: VICTORIA AVGVSTI - Victory, with shield inscribed S P Q R, between S and C
RIC 46
29mm, 8.4g.

 

Nice Coins.

I started buying some cheaper ancients here and there and am trying to learn some more.

The Vitellius on the bottom - wouldn’t that coin be able to be cleaned up a bit? Is that dried up dirt on the reverse that could be soaked and then brushed off?

 

Just came in yesterday: three worn sestertii from eBay - I haven't ID'd them yet, but 2 Marcus Aurelius (one a beardless Caesar) and Philip II - many problems, but low prices and well worth it for the portraits alone (as I see it):

 

I don't mind worn coins, in fact when showing non collectors they usually never ask if they're real! I do prefer coins that can be fully attributed but sometimes that's not possible.

In hand these two feel hefty and have a presence.


Marcus Aurelius Sestertius

M ANTONINVS AVG TR P XXV
Laureate bust right

IMP VI COS III SC
Victory standing right attaching shield, inscribed VIC GER to palm tree

26.41g

RIC 1029, Sear 4978, BMC1423

Ex-ANE

Worn but with a lovely smooth chocolate patina


Lucius Verus

L VERVS AVG ARM PARTH MAX
Laureate head of Lucius Verus right

TR POT VI IMP IIII COS II SC
Victory standing right holding palm in right hand and shield inscribed VIC PAR

Rome 166 AD
Sear 5384 RIC 1456

 

No, the top layers of that coin have corroded away. It has already been cleaned-- there is really nothing else that could be done to improve the coin and trying to do so would just make things worse.

 

TIF is correct. The coin was an unrecognizable blob of corrosion when I received it. I used electrolysis to remove the corrosion; what you see is what was left.