Representative selections

Mikey Zee posted the above to another thread but I moved it here to begin a new thread I hope will be found interesting at least to the general collectors among us. The question is what selection of coins would do well to represent a particular genre better than just a random handful of coins, in this case, Byzantine coins. I will post here what I consider to be an overview of Byzantines and note what I believe I am missing that would make my group a better representation of the whole. You are asked to tell me what you think I have overlooked or could have done better.

My first Byzantine selection seems appropriately from Anastasius who coin people will call the first Byzantine Emperor even though his claim to fame is more that he issued the first large M folles than actually starting a new Empire. I was going to include an Anastasius follis but CT only allows ten images per post and I ran out of room. What I show for Anastasius is his last pre-Byzantine AE4 nummis that was so small that he decided that the big forty nummi denomination was a good idea.

We do have to have a need for one of the large M coins so we might as well have one of the largest ones from Justinian I year 13 or 14 when the peak was reached.

...and a smaller denomination just to make the point that they existed. This is a ten nummi of Justinian.

Next I feel the need for a coin that shows the emperor and empress together. This is a Justin II and Sophia 20 nummi (picked because it is a denomination not used above and also a third different mint city just to mix things up).

Somewhere along the way we need to acknowledge the fact that there were gold coins even though my collection habits and budget will not have many of them. This is a solidus of Focas. If your idea of a Byzantine collection is all gold, you might want to throw in a bronze here and there. I need a silver coin of this period but I do not have one.


Next I wanted to demonstrate that the later days of the big M coinage got smaller and messier with coins overstruck and clipped to keep up with the weight standards. When it comes to overstrikes my favorite is this triple with design showing from Heraculius, Focas and Tiberius Constantine. Most coins were overstruck but there is a special place in my heart for one that allow clear identification of the components.


This is a Constans II cut down from earlier coins. It is overstruck but the feature that gave it a place here is the straight clips around the edge.


Should we mention that Byzantine coins were copied by neighboring authorities like this bilingual one from Emesa?

Along the way there are some really odd Byzantine side trips like this Basil II cast from Cherson.



After the big M period ended we see folles with a lot of text on the reverse like this Leo VI.


I should have known I could not do this in ten coins. The rest will follow.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

A highlight of the text reverse period was the huge series of Christ type folles many of which are called Anonymous because the name of the emperor does not appear on the coin. There are many 'classes' of these coins. This is an A2.


Later coins of the gold group are often alloyed with silver producing electrum. They vary greatly in alloy. This also illustrates that many coins showing Christ also show a portrait of the ruler. Here it is Michael VII.


Coins of the period in a relatively pure metal were struck flat like this copper of Alexius I.


Those alloyed with silver (billon or electrum) tend to be cup shaped). This is Andronicus I. Mary is on the obverse while Christ crowns the ruler on the reverse.
Later periods produced scraps of copper with little or no silver. Many were produced by Latin rulers or neighboring Bulgarians. This appears to be a copy of an Alexius III.

My final Byzantine is a very good silver coin of the next to last emperor John VIII. His brother Constantine IX was eliminated by the Ottoman Mehmed II ending the Byzantine Empire. Constantine's coins are very rare.


OK, what should I have included to have a good overview of Byzantine? You will note that I made no effort to make this fully informative completely identifying each coin. That would have made this post a book. Feel free to study these coins and decide which ones are needed for your Byzantine collection.

Feel free to start other threads to show what would be a solid basis for a collection of other specialties. Can you do yours in just ten coins? I failed here so don't feel bad if you have trouble.

 

I love what you have chosen and the reasons why you included them!!!

It has always seemed odd to me that I only have three coins from an Empire that lasted more than a thousand years after the collapse of the Western Roman Empire---especially considering my love of coins and history.

 

Thanks. I became interested in the concept when I got Robert Tye's book Early Word Coins and Early Weight Standards. He summarizes all Roman in 12 coins and Byzantine in 8 but it takes him 20 to do Islamic coins that strike me as all the same (text only) and at least as many to do cast Chinese. One thing Mr Tye and I do seem to agree on is the desirability of using common and important to the economy coins to represent a period. He does make some really strange choices like the Tetricus for late antoniniani but he did get me thinking about which coins really represent their times. A general collection done his way certainly frees one from the need to spend big money on coins that played no part in the economic history of the world.

 

DELETED

 

Well, I suppose you may not have liked how I was posting coins but the truth is that I don't have time to make an informative write up. I've done those before and felt that I was wasting my time when all I got was a like when I was hoping for some conversations about said coin(s).

But anyways, I am working on building my collection since I've been collecting for 4 years and I don't have near not even near close to the coins you do. That's fine though because it's all in due time. Don't get me wrong though, you have an awesome collection.

Kind of like you, I'm working on a collection all across the board which means that I am collecting from as many regions and types as I can within my budget and I also set collect for Roman Imperial coins which fulfills my happiness as a collector from both viewpoints of free form collecting and set collecting.

I have so very few Byzantines like most here that all the coins that I received will fill many slots because a lot of Byzantine coins are definitely set collectible like Roman Imperial coins are.

Here is my Byzantine grid at Tantalus.

http://www.tantaluscoins.com/coins/grid356.php


So, if you think that I should make better write ups so that you feel like posting coins in my thread, then I will. I ain't saying that to be a jerk, but to say that you are welcome to post coins in my thread if you like.

 

I missed what I said that caused this rebuttal but apologize for any offense. This site has become way too confrontational to be any fun. I encourage you to ignore all of my posts since they offend you.

 

I have no idea if it's confrontational or not since I haven't been around. But the thing is that I am not offended or I wouldn't be talking to you now. I'm just saying that I got the idea that you wanted to make a better post because all I was doing was posting coins and I explained why I do not make write ups. I hope you read that part.

This is what you said.

 

It does suck when you put a lot of time into a write up and don't get much feedback.

 

.

 

Not a bad overview Doug. My suggestions would be to include an Alexandrian issue, odd denominations and was the foundation of the only Sassanid/Byzantine coin. I would also include a miliarense, as silver was made for quite a few centuries even though the economy was dominated by copper/gold until near the end.

Personally, I think two overstruck byzantines might be overkill on that point. I have one cut in half then overstruck. Maybe something like that, one coin showing both being cut down and the overstrikes from the 7th century. This is only applicable if you want to minimize the number of coins being "representative".

Overall a very interesting exercise.

 

I seem to be a bit confused by the above posts which seem to be reacting to critique. I was under the impression Doug presented his group of 'representational' Byzantine examples in an attempt to display.......

"..... the desirability of using common and important to the economy coins to represent a period.... (it) got me thinking about which coins really represent their times. A general collection done his way certainly frees one from the need to spend big money on coins that played no part in the economic history of the world...."

I see no criticism implied or intended.

It seems M-man understands Doug's intent.

 

When I first started buying Roman Republican coins, after 30 years of collecting Roman Imperial and Greek coins, it was with the intention of acquiring only a representative selection of the Republican series. Good luck sticking to such a plan if you find the series interesting! Even if you fall down the rabbit hole like I did, the representative selection forms a good skeleton to a larger collection. I still have some "unrepresented" representative coins that I need to acquire - i.e. a social war denarius and Romano-Campanian didrachm. Social War denarii are scarce, and import restrictions have made provenanced didrachms cost prohibitive.

 

I admit a prejudice for the overstruck coins and perhaps more of my coins are overstruck because I don't avoid them as some do. I got another one today but can't show it until i get a clear example of the undertype to show how the coin got the way it is.

There are worse things than no feedback.

 

Uh, yeah, agreed... ooouuuuchh... Glad I have some NOW as "representative", vs my future "must get" purchases...

BTW, LOVE your avatar: I have the GOLD AV version...

 

Doug: I really enjoy your write-ups. This one is great because you know I enjoy BC Era collecting, especially around Roman Republic, Italia, and those Cities/States that interacted with the Roman Republic. However, I do have a couple Byzantine... your layout gives me the opportunity to understand, as well as give me a road map for "representative" additions to flesh out my collection. Yes, I can go to dealers and piece together a road-map, or read in my reference guides. However, you lay it out succinctly. Great job, and thanks!

 

You know, some people just like to read. When i scroll through CT and see a post by Doug, I always read it, because (1) I usually learn something I didn't know (often about a coin i already own) (2) he always writes from an interesting perspective (3) he writes well.

I don't always have something to contribute. I'm reasonably well-read on the history (which is why a series of emperor portraits appeals to me), but not so much the numismatics. So I sit and listen. Let's not worry too much about how many responses one gets.

The OP post was relevant to me. I was thinking the other day - do i really want to continue my Byzantine one-per-ruler collection, when I haven't finished my one-per Roman and one-per English collections? A lot of the Byzantine coins are mediocre with degenerate style, but some are fantastic. Do I really want tray after tray of mediocre stuff that I don't really love? What sort of collection could I instead make with Byzantines?

 

I am just starting to collect Byzantine, but am floundering a bit, trying to decide on a collection focus. @dougsmit i really appreciate you taking the time to do this write-up. Very informative, and it has given me some ideas on how to build my new collection...thanks!

 

Thanks. I really was hoping that someone would tackle a ten coin coverage of RR coins. I know I could do it but I am not a dyed in the wool RR fan like so many of you. Perhaps representative runs are more interesting to generalist collectors like me. There are about 200 RR coins I would rather like to own but that is a mall fraction of what exists.

I think this is a great question. From my standpoint, I agree with the statement below:

BUT I believe some are both degenerate and fantastic. Some are interesting because they are bad. Some of you might even agree with that or you would never want those RR Social War Italian coins. They are what they are and we love them for it.

 

I agree.....
"Some" members are clearly out to troll with their antagonistic threads...its obvious. I have simply chosen to ignore those who become confrontational.... they rarely have anything to say which I want to hear, so its no loss to me.
You, Doug, on the other hand have plenty I and others want to hear.... so please keep it up and remember, there are only a few "trolls" who WILL NOT ruin it for the rest of us!