well, i couldn't let 2014 end without a byzantine coin. or two...they came in a mini-lot. Anastasius I 491-518 AD Constantinople mint Follis 33mm 16.8 g SB 20 and............ Heraclius and Heraclius Constantine 613-641 Nicomedia mint 30mm 11.3g SB 834 the regnal year looks intersting on this one, it appears to be an "II over X", could be III, but i think the circular border of the coin gets in there. so is this year 12? or is it subtractive (year 8)? anyway, low end coins, but very nice color. and really not that low end for byzantines.
thanks guys petty darn, especially on the heraclius. looks better in had, couldn't quite get metal "black" enough in the pics.
I really do love the Byzantines. You are right when you say they are not that low end when it comes to Byzantines. The Anastasius is actually much better than most. The ragged flan of the Heraclius and Heraclius Constantine is very appealing and totally interesting. I like how they did such a crappy job that the O in ANNO looks like it is part of the mint name, making it ONIKO. I wonder if it was over stuck on an earlier piece? I dont know if that is the case here because if it is they did a good job and you cant see the underlying type. I really love the flan irregularity. I would welcome something like that in my collection. Somehow I managed to get good Byzantines and they ended up being from Nikomedia.
http://www.acsearch.info/search.html?id=39182http://www.acsearch.info/search.html?id=39182 Cool coin! Sear indicates this is II over II and the X you see is from 'noise' from the striking or undertype. The options are years 3, 4 and 5. Sear says the type is overstruck on just about anything and this one is obviously cut down scrap which makes it all the more interesting to me. I believe the small o is just a failure to plan ahead and not from the undertype. Compare it to this one: http://www.acsearch.info/search.html?id=39182 where the o in NIKO is small and raised suggesting a die cutter in the mood to experiment. Yours has more legend than these should be expected to have. If it has a fault IMHO it is the strong strike erased the undertype which would be nice if we could identify. Considering all the factors, I consider your coin equal to the one linked above which sold for 75 EUR. I would not pay $75 for it but considering it came as a lot, I doubt you did either and, again IMHO, consider it worth more than the Anastasius. Mine is a bigger mess and I'm not sure of the mint (just right of the smaller o in ANNO). If you like coins neat and clean, buy Byzantine gold. If you like messes, a specialized collection of Heraclius would seem an option.
now that's a wonderful byzantine mess! thanks DS, i wouldn't have figured that out. i didn't even notice it was overstruck..but pretty obvious now that it is pointed out to me (lines between figures on obverse. it was only 28 bucks for both coins, i figured that was a reasonable price for either alone.
Here is my Anastasius I coin. Anastasius I. AE Follis. 491-518 AD, Constantinople, 16g, 34.10mm OBV: DN ANASTASIVS PP AVG. Pearl diademed, draped, cuirassed bust right. REV: Large M, star to left, cross above, star to right, A below. Mintmark CON. REF: SB 19
These are always my two favourite Byzy-messes to post ... a couple of HERACLIUS Overstruck Heraclius. Æ follies (Countermarks) 610-641 AD ca. 616/7-621/2 Sicilian mint Diameter: 29 mm Weight: 12.77 grams Obverse: Crowned bust of Heraclius facing; to right, monogram; all within circular incuse Reverse: SCLs within circular incuse Reference: DOC 241b; MIB Km 4; SB 882 Other: Brown patina. Overstruck on a follis of Justin I from Constantinople, SB 63. Countermark very fine, coin near fine HERACLIUS AE 40 nummi follis. Struck at Syracuse, Sicily. circa 622 AD or earlier Diameter: 33.5mm Weight: 13.6g Obverse: Facing bust of Heraclius, monogram-cross beside, all within 9mm countermarked circle, bust of Anastasius clearly identifiable underneath Reverse Large M from original undertype, mintmark CON overstamped with SCLS mintmark Other: Overstruck on a large follis of Anastasius from Constantinople
