Pius RIC 519b; worth some attention

[Diederik]

The first series of bronze coins of Antoninus Pius as caesar all bear the titles:
1)  IMP T AELIVS CAESAR ANTONINVS on obverse, and TRIB POT COS on reverse
The second series goes:
2)  IMP T AELIVS CAESAR ANTONINVS on obverse, and TRIB POT COS DES II on reverse (not a really spectacular change)
Then on the occasion of his accession appears:
3)  IMP ANTONINVS AVGVSTVS on obverse and TRIB POT COS DES II on reverse.
The titles are then slightly changed into:
4)  IMP CAES AELIVS ANTONINVS AVG on obverse and TRIB POT COS DES II on reverse.
On the occasion of becoming Pontifex Maximus a transitional series is issued:
5)  IMP CAES AELIVS ANTONINVS AVG on obverse and PONT MAX TR POT COS on reverse.
Of this last series only two coins are known: a sestertius and an as.
Up to this series the reverse types were Pietas, Concordia and clasped hands (a probable mule with Pax not included here)
When Pius thus becomes Pontifex, he drops the claim on  a second consulship (although some say that COS and COS DES II in fact mean the same) and adopts the Pax type, as if he wants to make peace with... The Senate most probably.
The series following 5 contain the name of Hadrian and the cognomen Pius:
IMP T AEL CAES HADR(I) ANTONINVS AVG PIVS - PONT MAX TR POT COS
and very soon afterwards the reverse reads: PM TR P COS DES II.
All these series were issued in just a few months, just as events caused them to change and some are really rare.
I never had a coin of series 5 until now, which I gladly show here.


Frans

[curtislclay]

Frans,

With that legend division CAE - SAR, your coin has to be a mule, an old obv. die as Caesar

[IMP T AELI]VS CAE - SAR AN[TONINVS], head bare r.

combined with an early rev. as Augustus,

PONT MAX TR POT COS S - C, Pax standing left.

I know a similar mule, but Pax SEATED and descriptive legend PAX in exergue: in Paris and in Oxford ex my first collection.  Cohen 574 describes the Paris specimen, so RIC Hadrian 1080 and BMC III p. 549 also have it from Cohen.

Your exact combination is new to my casts, and both dies are new too, though that means little since my casts cover only a few museums.

So you're still missing Issue 5, but this mule is even RARER and MORE INTERESTING!

[Diederik]

Curtis,
Thanks for your comment; it makes me sad (no 'real'5th series) and happy (unique until now).
This illustrates the hectic situation that must have been at the mint, changing dies within weeks or even days.
At a certain French site a sestertius of series 5 is for sale and the portraiture on that coin is definitely distinct from my coin here. In my fotofile I also have the 'real' as and that too displays a far more exhuberant head than this coin. A mule had not crossed my mind.
When I am at home, later today, I will post that coin for comparison.


Frans

[Diederik]

as promised.

F

PS could the 'as'  be a 'dupondius'?

F

[curtislclay]

The second one is obviously a yellow dupondius, and the same is probably true for the CGB specimen.

All of the few middle bronzes I know from this issue are dupondii.

EDIT:  Ah, the CGB coin is a sestertius not a middle bronze, so I don't have to add a new obv. type, Head laur. r., to my catalogue of the middle bronzes of this issue!

[Mullen Coins]

I am bringing up an old post with the hope that the experts can confirm that the coin I have is in fact a Antoninus Pius II AE Sestertius RIC 519B - In my research online, this post was the most helpful.

Here are images of my coin and I welcome opinions and information about rarity and value. 

[Mullen Coins]

Sorry.. here is image of reverse

[areich]

NGC usually get it roughly right, your coin is indeed a sestertius of Antoninus Pius (not the 2nd, there is no emperor we call by that name). In addition to the smoothing that is noted, your coin looks like the obverse was artificially blackened. Why only the obverse?

[Diederik]

I think it blackened as it has lain for many decades in a cabinet. Being cleaned, the fresh surface toned under the influence of oxygen and dampness, I suspect.


Nice coin btw; wish I had one in that quality


Frans

[Mullen Coins]

Thanks for the help.  My primary question is whether this is a RIC 519B - To me this coin appears to match the coin described by Frans Diederik in the original post point number 5 = that also suggests that this variety is quite rare but I do not know how that effects desirability and value.   

[curtislclay]

It looks like RIC 519a, not 519b which is the corresponding middle bronze.

It took Frans a long time to acquire such a sestertius, but it is nevertheless not a great rarity. A fair number of specimens and different dies are known.

I believe I once gave Frans a count of how many specimens and dies of sestertii of the different issues of 138 are in my collection of plaster casts, but I can no longer find it via a Forvm search.

Anyway, specialized rarity has virtually no effect on the market value of an ancient coin, because there are so many specialized rarities of ancient coins, and because there are very few specialized collectors who are on the lookout for rare varieties. The usual collector of ancients is a generalist who wants nice coins and historically or artistically interesting types, but doesn't care about rare legend varieties.

So it's the nice condition and fine portrait that will determine the market value of your coin, not the somewhat rare legend variety!

[Mullen Coins]

Curtis,

Thanks!  Very helpful and important to my ancients education!  Appreciate everyone's help.

Pat

[Diederik]

It took Frans a long time to acquire such a sestertius

Yeah, that's  true, but meanwhile I have the coin three times and two hybrids with the same reverse


Frans