Justinian from Rome

Justinian, like many others of his time, grew up on the stories of Rome's former greatness, how she had been the master of the known world and ruled many territories and peoples. By the time Justinian achieved the purple, only half of the classical Roman Empire remained, and it no longer even controlled it's namesake city, Rome. This was considered disgraceful by many in the empire, and was completely unacceptable to Justinian. A very ambitious man, he dreamed of reconquering the Western territories lost to the migrating barbarians in the last century, and so he sent out his armies and best generals to do just that. It wasn't until the end of the Gothic War in 552 AD that the Roman Empire finally was in control of Rome, by then a depopulated and rundown city, which had, along with the rest of Italia, suffered greatly during the war.

This decanummium of Justinian was struck in the imperial city itself. From looking at the chronology of events of this time, this was made either anytime from the early 540s to around 550 AD ( when the Ostrogoths briefly retook the city), or in the years following the end of the Gothic War until Justinian's death in 565 AD. It very much resembles my Baduila (Totila) decanummium (minted 550-552 AD) in size and style (also in chunkiness), and so if it was struck after the war it probably would have been made not too long afterwards, perhaps even as early as within a couple of years after. I don't know for certain but I'm pretty sure I have the general time ranges of minting down though.

Its definitely in better shape than a lot of the smaller denominations from this period are. The best part is the portrait, no doubt about it IMO. It happens to be the highest spot on the whole coin, too, so I thought that was really fortunate.

I waited almost a month and a half for it, but seeing it in hand, I now think it was definitely worth the wait.

Justinian, Byzantine emperor
AE Decanummium
Obv: DN IVSTINIANVS P AVG, helmeted, cuirassed bust facing, holding cross on globe in left hand and shield in right hand
Rev: Large I, star in left and right fields, all within wreath
Rome mint
Ref: SB 308, MIB 228


Here's a larger photo of the obverse to better show the details:

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

Superb portrait on that coin! A lot of detail for the series, not to mention character.

 

That is a nice example. Dont see them like that often unless you pay for it.

My only Justinian.

Justinian I, (527-565 A.D.)
Ae 1/2 Follis
O: DN IVSTINI-ANVS PP AVG,Diademed draped and cuirassed bust right.
R: Large K, cross to left, star above and below, officinia gamma to right.
22mm
9.9g
Constantinople mint
SB 164; Doc 33

 

Thanks John! Glad you like it.

 

My Justinian, but have yet to take my own pics....
Justinian I, AE Follis. Constantinople. 527-565 AD. DN IVSTINIANVS PP AVG, helmeted, cuirassed bust facing holding cross on globe and shield; cross to right / Large M, ANNO to left, cross above, regnal year to right XII, officina letter below, mintmark CON.

 

I can't help but notice my Justinian is wearing what looks to be a modified spangenhelm helmet, the headgear of choice for Germanic warriors of that time, and which were depicted being worn by kings on Ostrogothic coinage after Theodoric. It hardly looks like the helmet worn by Justinian on most other forward-facing bust coins of him. Perhaps a quick bit of die editing occurred right after the Byzantines retook the city, to make the portrait of Baduila/Totila into a more imperial-friendly Justinian? Or simply new ones were made, and the die engravers only had a vague idea what Justinian's usual coin portrait looked like, so elements of Ostrogothic regal dress made its way into the die engraving. I wouldn't be surprised either way. But I assume for this to be plausible, it'd have to have been after the 550-552 AD striking of Baduila facing coins.

 

Nice Justinian!

 

Nice!

 

One of the most epic periods in Byzantine history when they came very close to recombining the old empire. One of the finest general's in history "Belisarius" defeated the Vandals and the Gothic nation in Italy. But there was to be no turning back time and within a century Italy was lost as new tribes moved into the area. Rome did not want to be ruled from afar either. Ironic?

No offence intended but I've always wondered why Justinian's coins appear amongst the crudest of the Byzantine series. They are very important and have much power as relics of that era but artistically they are not the best to look at. Odd when considering the might of Justinian's reign and achievements such as the Hagia Sophia. He did not seem to care too much about how his image was portrayed on coinage.

Thoughts?

 

Hey, I think I've got one of these Justinian decanummi. It's only a guess, though (guessing Justinian, guessing Constantinople, guessing regnal year XXXII). It's in pretty poor shape and this is really not my area, so I wouldn't know even if it was just an imitative type. Yours really has an excellent portrait, btw.

 

He was too busy (re)conquering the world?

I never really understood why the Romans deviated away from the realistic portraits for something more generic and what is usually seen as "cartoony". Maybe they were just tired of paying top-solidi for real die engravers?

You seem to be right on the money. I see those on your coin also. While there is a chance its Justinian (probably a good chance), its not clear on your coin and could be revealed by going through the helvetica spreadsheet on Byzantines.

 

cool justinian VK...i'd like to get a roman mint byzantine for sure.

here's my only justinian decanumium...antioch mint.

 

Here's my other Justinian decanummium from Italy, this one struck at Ravenna (the capital of Byzantine Italy) in 564 AD (year 37 on the coin):



Note the very different looking helmet on this one than on my example from Rome, more in line with the standard design for his facing coins than the Rome issue. Also, it is somewhat smaller.

 

oh yeah...Ravenna is on my list also...and so is cherson..I think you have one of those don't you vk?

 

That's right! Surprised anyone remembered, but yes, I do have (only) one example from this scarce mint, a rare pentanummium of Justin I, with VIC-TOR reverse and emperor holding long cross:



For those that don't know, Cherson was a Roman/Byzantine city located where the biggest diplomatic crisis at the moment is happening (Crimea, Ukraine).

 

ah...there it is!

 

Dang VK, talking about a coin hard to find. I was looking at a half follis Rome mint. It was a decent coin cruddy at best but important none the less. I do like the fron t facing bust kind of like a solidus minus the gold. Was this an offical issue or coins ment to fill a shortage. I am always impressed with how you bring these outwardly unappealing coins to life and support my claim that I would like one of each!

Kudos my friend. I wish I had more time...

 

Hey Anoob, good seeing you again. Felt like I haven't seen you in forever!

The Ostrogoths before them made a decent amount of coinage, not on the level of the Byzantines but apparently just enough to help keep the Italian economy going. I don't know for sure if there was a coin shortage, but if so, I suspect the war would have been a major contributing factor. Whatever the case, my new coin is an official Byzantine Rome issue. Before, the Ostrogoths had struck coins in the names of the eastern emperors, but usually had something (like a king's monogram) that indicated it was minted by them in Italy (I actually got an example of one of these today, which I'll share later). This was done to recognize the superiority of the Roman emperor over the Ostrogothic monarch. Now, after the Byzantine takeover of Italy, coinage was being made more in line with Byzantine standards, with only the emperor's image and name gracing the coinage.

 

War sometimes has the opposite effect though - soldiers need to get paid in coin as they don't necessarily have the commodities to participate in a barter economy. In my collecting neck of the woods, there are numerous examples of coinage associated with soldiers' salaries.