an attractive Trajan Decius Sestertius, smoothing comments & composition of late Sestertii

[Nerosmyfavorite68]

Trajan Decius, 249-251. Æ Sestertius (30 mm, 16.08 g), Rome. Obv. IMP C M Q TRAIANVS DECIVS AVG Laureate and cuirassed bust of Trajan Decius right. Rev. VICTORIA AVG S C Victory advancing left, holding wreath and palm frond. RIC IV 126d; Cohen 117.

Domitian, 81-96. Æ Sestertius (35 mm, 21.16 g), Rome, 90-91. Obv. IMP CAES DOMIT AVG GERM COS XV CENS PER P P Laureate head of Domitian right. Rev. IOVI VICTORI / S C Jupiter seated left on throne, holding Victory and sceptre. RIC 702; BMCRE II, p.398, 439; Cohen 314

Valerian I, 253-260. Ӕ Sestertius (31 mm, 25.14 g), Rome, 255-256. Obv. IMP C P LIC VALERIANVS P F AVG Laureate and cuirassed bust of Valerian I to right. Rev. APOLINI CONSERVA S - C Apollo standing left, holding laurel branch and lyre set on rock. RIC 152; MIR 72h

 

I had intended to just mention these in 'post your latest ancients' and not do a dedicated writeup on them, but I had some observations about a couple of them, and didn't want to hijack other threads.

The Trajan Decius was the 'star' of this order.  The patina in person is more of a forest green, but it's still quite attractive, especially with the coin's charming portrait.  It's my best Decius sestertius/double sestertius, but there's a small sample size to choose from.

The throw-in coins are the ones which I have the most remarks about.

The Domitian's reverse is less obnoxious in person, also being darker and less patchy-looking than the photo.  There's no getting around the fact that it was overly smoothed.  The reverse is even subtly scyphate in person.  It was cheap for the type and just a throw-in, so no complaints there.

The Valerian was an even cheaper add-on and at least one can say that it wasn't overly smoothed. There is a bit of a puzzling furrow around the portrait, though.  I'm not a big fan of stripped coins, but it was ultra-cheap and the unusually high weight was the deciding factor.  The only thing which is interesting about this piece is that it's completely coppery-colored, not orichalcum.  When did sestertii lose the brass look?

 

[Qcumbor]

25 grams a Valerian sestertius ?
Wow, that's big by that tilme/period !

The Trajan decius is a nice coin with great patina and good portrait to it, congrats

Q

 

[JeandAcre]

In a purely aspirational capacity, I'm a pushover for late sestertii.  The Decius one is Terrific!  I'm with you; that was eminently worth the cheaper ones.  ...Otherwise, Nope, no help at all.

[Ancient Coin Hunter]

Usually Valerian and Gallienus sestertii are not cheap. Yours is better than normal size. As far as the metallurgy goes that is a good question. I would guess more base metal and less of an effort to arrive at a shiny golden look than earlier sestertii. (Orichalcum)

[Octavius]

I really like the patina on the Decius sestertius.

[Julius Germanicus]

On 2/20/2024 at 1:05 AM, Nerosmyfavorite68 said:

Domitian, 81-96. Æ Sestertius (35 mm, 21.16 g), Rome, 90-91. Obv. IMP CAES DOMIT AVG GERM COS XV CENS PER P P Laureate head of Domitian right. Rev. IOVI VICTORI / S C Jupiter seated left on throne, holding Victory and sceptre. RIC 702; BMCRE II, p.398, 439; Cohen 314

When did sestertii lose the brass look?

 

As for the composition of Sestertii, an X-rayfluorescence analysis of my Domitian Germania Capta Sestertius revealed it to include 83% copper, 15 % zinc, and small traces of tin and lead. This should roughly apply to your Domitian as well and without patina it should apear in an almost gold-like yellow like mine.

Sestertii lost their brassy look in the mid 160s AD and turned reddish when the expensive zinc component was reduced to save funds during the critical wars under Marcus Aurelius.

They regained a higher zinc component in the early years of Septimius Severus´rule (mid 190s), only to lose it again towards the end of the rule of Elagabalus.