How do you like your Byzantines? Shaggy or neatly trimmed?

From the Robinson auction I added two Byzantine bronzes that are different in many ways. Byzantine bronzes are something of an acquired taste. Those who like their coins neat and tidy will prefer the gold. Copper tends to be ....... well, Byzantine.

The first is a duplicate of a coin I have had for many years and both are shown in the image below. Both are Heraclius SB883 countermarked on an earlier Heraculius SB 809. The new one (top) weighs 11.7g while the old one (bottom) is 6.4g. The flan for the bottom coin was trimmed down to its present size. Note the three straight edges and one curve from the original coin. Most of Heraclius' bronzes were restruck on something earlier but I can not identify the donor of this flan. The top coin was not trimmed so neatly. The edges are as sharp as a saw blade (it destroyed the envelope it came in). I wonder if I had it slabbed if it might set itself free???

Both coins show the dual portraits of Heraclius and Heraclius Constantine countermarked on the reverse of a follis of Constantinople, officina Γ, from year XXI (some letters are weak but they are there). On the original obverse is a large SCL denoting the countermark was from the Sicilian mint. Have you ever bought a coin because it was sharp? I have. For the record, the new 2017 coin was $5 cheaper than the other was in 1992. When we say ancient coins are 'long term' investments we mean 'loooong'.


My second new coin is celebrating its homecoming. It came in an envelope saying it was sold in 1979 by a dealer in the town where I live (no longer active). I do not know where it spent the last 38 years but it stayed with its envelope.

The coin is the smallest Byzantine copper denomination of the later period. This half tetarteron has the monogram of Manuel I on one side and his facing bust on the other. As these go, this one is not bad. It is the lighter standard version weighing 1.47g and 17mm diameter (thin!). The flan has been clipped leaving eight sides. I suspect an earlier coin was hammered flat befor trimming but the metal could have been from any source since there is no sign of earlier use.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

Here's a shaggy one:


Tiberius II Constantine AD 574-582 and Anastasia
Byzantine Æ half-follis; 5.02 g; 20.4 mm; 7 h
Thessalonica, AD 579
Obv: dmTibCONS TANTPPAV, Nimbate Tiberius and Anastasia seated facing on double throne; he holds globus cruciger, she a scepter
Rev: Large K; above, cross; to left, A/N/N/O; to right, regnal indicator V (=5); beneath, TЄS
Refs: Berk 398; DOC 23; SB 439.

 

This is my only Byzantine coin and I am sure I posted it before when I first got it. And it looks very messy since it is an overstrike (as I understand it). But I like it. I only really get 'turned on' by Byzantine coins when they are gold ones.
I believe the attribution is as follows (I had it down to two but can't remember on which I finally settled).

Nicephorus II (963 - 969 AD)
AE Follis
Mint: Constantinople
SBC 1782
26 x 24 mm.
9.53 gm.
Die position=6h
Obverse: Bust facing with short beard, holding labarum and globus cruciger. + nICIFR b ASIL ROM.
Reverse: Four line legend.
Note: Struck over a follis of Constantine VII.
S1782

 

Very nice additions, Doug! I may run counter to most, but I least prefer Byz. gold to the copper, or especially, the silver.

 

Heraclius and Heraclius Constantine - a bit shaggy

 

Romanus "Anonymous" Folle, not so shaggy

 

SHAGGY BYZ...


BZ Justinian I 527-565 CE AE30 Folles 12-2g 40 Nummi M monogram

 

Cool countermarks on those Byzantine AE's Doug!

I'll go with shaggy but at 10mm and .9gm I think this one has the maximum trim allowed.

Unidentified

 

I like 'em shaggy
I like 'em trim.
I like 'em with a bite
right outta the rim!


Theodosius III of Adramytium (715-17), AE follis, Syracuse. SB 1496.


Constantine X (1059-67), ΑΕ follis, Constantinople. SB 1854.


Anastasius (491-518), AE follis, Constantinople. SB 22, DOC 23m Berk 11 (2 recorded examples).

 

Those are all lovely examples. I don't yet have a Heraclius countermark, but here's an early follis, year 1 from Nikomedia, SB 833. (I quite enjoy the early (comical) portraits, but they aren't that easy to come by. @Voulgaroktonou's above is awesome.)


And here's my Manuel I half tetarteron, SB1980 with the St. George reverse. Weight is 2.44g:


Did you remember it and know it was "coming home" when you bid, or did you discover that only upon seeing the tell-tale envelope?

 

Here is one of my Byzantines with a sharp edge, SB 1762 (double overstrike),
SB 1762 is overstruck on a Follis of Romanus, SB 1760 which is overstruck on a Follis of Leo VI SB 1729

 

I will win this one! Here is one "shaggy" Emperor
AV Solidus ND Constans III 641-68
obv. The Emperor with son "future Constantine IV"
rev. Two other sons/ Heraclius/Tiberius
He ended up getting whacked by his chambermaid while in the bathtub, which resulted in him drowning.

 

How about spooky?

 

Or hundreds at a time?

 

Or Just right!

 

That's not a shaggy Byzantine,



That's a shaggy Byzantine.




I didn't buy this because of the scraggly flan, but it was definitely a plus for me!!

 

I would answer yes to both. Your tetarteron is much nicer than typical and I assume it was cleaned a while ago. Here are a few that I think fit this thread.

I would say that is true for these because they are common, I bought these in piles similar to the ANA photo above. Certainly your John VIII will appreciate much much more.

 

I do love me some ugly coins.

 

Frank Robinson said it came with a 1979 S&S Coins envelope but I never knew that dealer or went to Richmond until the 2000's. The coin sold for $12 marked down from $20 then. They are common but not all have decent detail.

 

Extremely shaggy.
Not attributed;