The anonymous follis class A2 are detailed in terms of ornaments here: https://www.forumancientcoins.com/numiswiki/view.asp?key=Anonymous Byzantine Class A Folles Valentinian also dedicates to A2 class one page on his site: http://augustuscoins.com/ed/ByzAnon/ClassA.html What I found missing on both sources is the subtype of type 24 with IHSH / XRISTU on the first two lines on the reverse, instead of the standard IHSUS / XRISTUS. I could not find this variation referenced anywhere. I checked on acsearch the "IHSH / XRISTU" sold and checked on ebay for a few weeks. I believe that this type is not rare, because there were quite a few coins sold, although most were described as "IHSUS / XRISTUS", which makes their identification difficult. There are coins with clear border, so off-centered strike is out of question. It is clearly not a one-off die engraving error, because these were minted with several dies. I did not notice other A2 types, other than the type 24, with this exception. All coins have the same type of "A". Most seem to be around 8 grams. While checking online for specimens, I noted the first coin in the table below has 3 vertical dots on the book, which will make it alone a new subtype by the "ornaments classification rule". So, photos now. The specimens I found: The "standard" class A2, type 24: And the "exception": Any thought appreciated, as well as your pictures of the type.
I will revive this older and unsuccessful topic to present a IHSH coin sold for 300 USD on Heritage Weekly Auction 232014, lot Lot 61208. Described as "...AE follis (28mm, 8.03 gm, 6h). NGC MS 4/5 - 4/5....Interesting variety dropping the final S from the first two lines on the reverse". I do not understand the "MS" and the "4/5" for this coin, so I do not understand the price. With these coins, I start to believe that the price is entirely driven by how well the face of Christ is struck, and decorations, legends and the rest of the flan are insignificant aspects. Or maybe by the grade written on the slab. If this coin landed with a CT member, or if your understanding is better than mine, I would appreciate to be educated.
I would expect a coin with 4/5 strike would have hair on Christ and better legends. It is MS by their standards which considers nothing but wear. This is a classic case of why you need to look at coins and not labels. This is a nice coin that does not need to be hyped for sale.
I find the numeric value grading system to be little more than an attempt to render in numeric form what is mostly a subjective process. It is an attempt, well intention I guess, to distill a number of factors affecting a given coin's condition into two numbers: strike and surface, as well as overall grade. For more experienced collectors these numbers are noted, but they are only some of the information that needs to be taken into account when evaluating the coin in the slab. As Doug said, one needs to look at coins and not labels. Unfortunately the two numbers and the grade on the slab often become the sole determinants for many collectors who are less analytical and more inclined to bid up or purchase based on this limited information. That said, here is my best anonymous follis. It is a follis of Basil II and Constantine VIII, class A2. I have other examples that need to be photographed. I purchased it on MA Shops as an EF, which is a good, conservative grade I believe. I have no idea what NGC would assign to it as grade or surface, but it is no matter; it is not going be submitted for slabbing while I own it.
