Double overstrike?- 7th Century follis (possibly) overstruck on 3rd Century Roman provincial

I'm excited to share what is definitely the most interesting coin I've bought this year. It is an early 7th Century follis which I believe was overstruck on a Roman provincial coin minted more than 300(?!) years earlier.

At first glance, the coin looks to be a Byzantine follis overstruck on an earlier Byzantine coin, which was fairly common for the era. What makes this coin special is that there is a mysterious left-facing bust hidden in the background, which looks nothing like the crude portraits of the Byzantine era. I believe that the coin was actually overstruck twice, and the hidden bust is part of the earliest undertype.

After spending many, many enjoyable hours trying to figure out who this mystery man in the background could possibly be, my working theory is that the coin was originally struck as a 3rd Century Roman provincial bronze with "confronted busts", was then overstruck more than 300 years later under Byzantine emperor Justinian I or Maurice Tiberius, and was then overstruck yet again under emperor Phocas in 605 A.D.

I admit that I'm not 100% sure if my theory is right, but I'm hoping that with all of the collective Roman and Byzantine knowledge in this group, you'll be able to help me to finish solving this puzzle. It really is one of the most unique and interesting coins I've ever come across.

(For a good background on overstriking, here's a link to Doug's page on the topic) https://www.forumancientcoins.com/dougsmith/feac70byz.html)

Here's the coin, with the original description from the auction house:

Phocas, Follis (Bronze, 30 mm, 12.99 g), Nicomedia, RY 5 = AD 606/7. δ m FOC[A PЄR AV] Crowned bust of Phocas facing, wearing consular robes and holding mappa in his right hand and cross in his left. Rev. Large XXXX; above ANNO; to right, Ч; in exrgue, NIKO A. DOC 58a. MIB 69a. SB 658 var. (unlisted RY). Traces of overstriking, otherwise, good very fine.

It's not hard to see that my coin was overstruck on an earlier Byzantine follis. There is a large sideways "M" visible on the obverse, which comes from the reverse of the Byzantine undertype. But when I rotated the coin to the left, I was shocked to see an image jump out to me, almost as though I'd seen a ghost. The left-facing bust in the background was part of the earliest design of the coin, and is circled in the photo below.

Pretty cool, right? So, who is this mystery man?? At first glance, I thought that the bust resembled a 3rd Century "barracks" emperor, possibly Maximinus Thrax or Trajan Decius. But after getting the coin in hand and seeing it up close, I can't rule out that the face could actually be female. Here's a photo of the coin in hand...because the undertype is fairly faint, it wasn't easy to get a clear image up close. The bust is at 2-3 o'clock in my photo below.



What era did the original undertype come from?
To identify this, the first question is: what era did the first undertype come from? Was it Byzantine, Roman Imperial, Roman Provincial, something else? The bust certainly looks Roman, but could a coin from the Roman Empire really have still been around and available for overstriking 300 years later in 605 A.D.? I wouldn't have thought so, but after seeing @dougsmit 's spectacular 11th Century bronze overstruck on a Gordian III As, we know that this sort of thing is possible.

There are 3 things about this bust that seem very clear to me: 1) it is left-facing; 2) it is quite small; and 3) the portrait style does not look to be Byzantine.

With that in mind, I don't think that this bust came from a Byzantine coin, because I don't know of any pre-605 AD Byzantine coin with a left-facing bust that looks anything like this. I don't think it can be Roman Imperial either, because any imperial bronze of this size and weight would have a much larger portrait. And though it's definitely possible, I don't think that it came from a figure on a coin's reverse, because there's more detail in the face than is usually seen on a reverse figure.

So, what type of bronze coin might have a small, left facing bust with this portrait style? A Roman provincial bronze with "confronted busts "(i.e.- two busts facing each other) seems to be the most likely fit. This style was most popular in the 3rd Century, and large amounts of provincial bronzes with "confronted busts" have a similar approximate size and weight. Most importantly, on these types, each portrait had to be smaller so that 2 portraits could fit onto the coin, and 1 of the portraits would have to be left-facing.

After looking through MANY provincial coins of this style, I've found several possible matches for the undertype, but haven't been lucky enough to find a die match. I'll just share the two types that I think are likely the closest matches. The first is a dynastic issue of Valerian I, also from Nicomedia, which actually has 3 busts (Valerian I, Valerian II, and Gallienus). I think the left-facing bust of Gallienus on these types has a strong resemblance to the bust on my coin:

Valerian I, with Gallienus and Valerian II Caesar, Nicomedia, circa 256 A.D., (28mm, 12.5g)

There are also many coins of Gordian III and Tranquillina which resemble the bust...I think that the portrait of Tranquillina on this coin from Marcianopolis looks quite similar to mine.

Gordian III and Tranquillina, circa 241-244 A.D., Moesia Inferior, Marcianopolis.
https://rpc.ashmus.ox.ac.uk/type/27761

As for the second undertype, I believe that the coin was also overstruck on a follis of 6th Century emperor Justinian I. The obverse of my coin looks to be overstruck on the reverse of the Justinian I follis, as you can clearly see the remnants of a large M, a common reverse which signifies a "40 nummus" denomination. At 3-5 o'clock on the reverse of my coin, it shows what appears to be the letters SPPAV, which may be part of the obverse legend of a Justinian I follis: DN IVSTINIANVS PP AVG. The reverse of my coin with the letters circled and an example of a Justinian I follis are below:




I would LOVE to hear your comments, suggestions, and any other possible IDs you can think of for this mystery man (or woman), or for the Byzantine undertype. I'm FAR from an expert in this sort of thing and could certainly be wrong, so please don't be shy about telling me if I am. Very interested to see what everyone else can come up with. And of course, please feel free to share any of your favorite overstrikes. Thanks!

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

This is Fantastic, Into The Deep Weeds stuff, @Shea19. Wish I could be any help. Except, not likely. ...Other than that the residual obverse legend on the reverse (second restrike) leapt out at me. Guessing that this could be from more than one still-early Byzantine reign, since all you've got are titles.
...Except, this is Exactly Why people collect Byzantine overstrikes.
I've known people, better than me (well, at least numismatically), who have done so, precisely for this level of challenge.
...Best of luck.

 

If this is an undertype of the sorts suggested, the ghost face does not seem near enough to the center. The original coin would have had to be very off center or cut down from a heavier weight. Your coin too nearly matches the two proposed to be a major cut down. Similarly the positioning is not right for a reverse detail. I am not saying that this ghost is not an undertype but I simply do not see it --- yet?

You have provided excellent photos. My next step would be to rotate the coin so the ghost is right side up and light the coin in several different ways to see if any other detail pops up. When it comes to Byzantine overstrikes anything is possible. Keep searching and the answer might appear.

 

Shea19, You got yourself into a serious research project with this coin ! I wonder if the original coin might have been a late follis of Justinian I from the Rome mint, like the coin pictured below that sold on eBay ? The diameter & weight suggest a coin type like this.

Justinian I, Struck AD 536-553, Rome Mint, AE Follis: 11 gm, 29 mm.

 

Clear over strike. Interesting issue with that difference in time between the 2 "coins". Here's a coin which has Greek usurper Alexander Balas on obverse, some nearly 2 centuries BC. Reverse has something Roman like Concordia seated, and Roman Provincial like river god swimming. We can read also Alexander in Greek. There's also a big capital letter N. An overstrike with long centuries separating both "coins". What could all that mean ?!!

 

https://www.numisbids.com/n.php?p=lot&sid=2998&lot=400

 

Thanks! Yes, this is my first Byzantine overstrike, but definitely will not be my last. So interesting to try and piece these together.

 

Thanks Doug, I was very interested in your take on this. I knew that when I had it narrowed down to the portrait being either Gallienus or Tranquillina, I still had a long way to go.

That is an excellent point about the centering, and one I've struggled with. The positioning of where the hidden bust is just doesn't quite make sense, and probably rules out the Marcianopolis example.

The only thing on this coin I'm truly sure of is that the Phocas obverse was overstruck on the reverse of a Byzantine follis. The Phocas obverse die wouldn't have had a face like this, and neither would the reverse die of the Byzantine undertype. If it's not from an earlier undertype, where else could this face have come from? Or is not a face at all, and just happens to resemble one? I'll keep at it and try some different lighting and angles as you suggested, and hopefully something else may pop up.

 

This is a real possibility rather like every so often people report food items with the image of Christ. I am not saying there is not under-under-type but just that you have more work to do to be convincing.

 

Me too. I thought myself that my coin above was an over strike. But it turned to be a Nabataean coin of Aretas III, struck at Damascus circa 80 BC.

 

...Oh, right, with those notorious double portraits....

 

Pareidolia. I keep forgetting the word, but it's the term for the human tendency to see faces and other shapes in clouds and pieces of toast, etc.

 

Of all of the different possibilities of where this face could have come from (and believe me, I've considered many of them), it hadn't even occurred to me that it might not be a face at all, and might just be something else on the coin that looks like a face. Ughh...I really hope that's not what this is, but I admit that it would make sense.

@Valentinian , @Severus Alexander , @BenSi or any other Byzantine collectors, when you have a minute, would you mind taking a look at this and let me know what you think? Thanks!

 

I saw this post earlier and couldn't really see the bust... or at least for what I could see, the pareidolia explanation seemed to be the strongest one. But I figured I was probably not looking at it right! If you could draw on the possible face with more detail, showing where various facial features are supposed to be, maybe it will jump out at us?

 

Byzantine overstrikes can lead to a new type of madness. So your warned.
In the case of your coin it is possible but not probable. My assumption in regards to all overstrikes was the metal was reheated muddling the original image to begin with. Then 300 years time , if the coin was in and out of circulation it would have significant wear also destroying the original imagery. So honestly anything could be left and not necessarily in the correct position.
Overstrikes happened in the empire most commonly when shortages of bronze occurred. An excellent time for overstrikes was 1092 during the Alexius coin reform. However at that time, the new coins were smaller than the previous coinage so the overstrike were created on partial pieces of the previous coins.
So if the flan on your coin did not match it could have been trimmed down.
I do not think you have proved it with conviction and I am not sure that you will find enough evidence of coin A to prove it is the under type of coin B (Focus) but when your done examining it, I am certain you will know the Focus Follis by memory.
Enjoy the journey.

 

Interesting coin. Thanks for sharing. I saw plenty of Phocas / XXXX coins on acsearch.info (including yours). You can look and see if you find a better match.

cgb said this coin was struck over a Maurice Tibère (582-602). I looked for Maurice Tiberius (582-602) M and found an interesting coin -

This head is to the left of M. I did not see any to the right of M. Maybe you can find one with someone to the right of M.
Please give an update when you make progress.

 

Yes, pareidolia is the tendency to see something meaningful or identifiable in an object.

Apophenia is the related psychological phenomenon of finding patterns or meaningful connections between more than one item.

Both are normal human psychological phenomenon but can cause serious challenges to analytical / logical / critical thinking. I don't mean here where we are engaged in the simple task of looking for under types, etc. but out in the wider world such phenomenon can be behind the belief in some conspiracy theories, etc.

SC

 

Thanks....I find it so interesting that some people aren't able to see the face. I knew that I might be wrong about how the image got onto the coin, but the image of the face itself just looks so clear to me. I really hope it is not just my mind playing tricks on me.

I have very bad artistic skills, but I did my best to highlight the hidden face in the two photos below. It is a left-facing bust. I put a red dot just to the right of his eye, a green dot at the tip of the nose, and a blue dot at the chin. Does that help?




And another photo without the dots just for comparison.

 

I think that sums it up perfectly. This is the first Byzantine overstrike I've owned, and it definitely has been maddening, though pretty fun too.

I really appreciate all your input on this. I'm definitely more out of my depth with this than I had realized. I went back and edited the title of this post...I didn't want to imply that I had proved that this coin was a double overstrike, because I definitely haven't (and may never be able to). I've got a lot more research ahead of me on this. Very interesting point about the re-heating, which could at least explain the odd positioning of the "bust".

@rrdenarius Thanks for sharing those, I especially like the reverse on the second coin. I also really need to look through and see if there are any coins with anything near the emperor's shoulder/robes that might resemble a face when rotated.

 

Very interesting deepdive @Shea19! I do not have anything valuable to add to your attribution, but I enjoy reading the topic.

Some overstrikes are obvious, like this one I got:

An anonymous follis class F from Constantine X overstruck on an anonymous follis Class E from Constantine X as well. No idea why they choice to overstrike a coin from the same king, anyone any idea? @BenSi perhaps?

This one is a lot harder:

This Heraclius with Heraclius Constantine follis is overstruck most probably on another Byzantine follis. PP AVG can still be read on the obverse, so could be Anastasius, Justin, Justinian?