Technically, not the first I won, but Savoca, demonstrating the efficiency that the Germans are know for, got me my coins ridiculously fast and beat the other coins I ordered a month ago. I've come to enjoy the charm of the really ugly, poorly struck, misshapen Byzantine coins, however, I want to try to collect some really nice examples as well. Would be nice to have "ideal" versions of coins to go along with their funky siblings. First off is a coin that I think I like more than most of my gold Byzantine coins. Justinian's head is just massive and dominates the coin. I haven't seen another quite like it, though admittedly I haven't spent a lot of time searching. The lettering is mostly clear and the coin itself has a nice, glossy look to it. Truly, a coin worthy of such an important figure: Justinian I AD 527-565. Dated RY 13=AD 539-540. Nikomedia. 2nd officina Follis or 40 Nummi Æ 35 mm, 15,08 g D N IVSTINIANVS P P AVC, helmeted and cuirassed bust of Justinian facing, holding globus cruciger in his right hand and shield with his left, in field to right, cross / ANNO XIII NIK, Large M, above, cross, below, B DOC 117b; MIB 114; Sear 201. Next up is Justinian's nephew, Justin II and his wife Sophia. This coin is rougher, which I believe means the patina has been removed? In any case, this coin actually looks nicer in person, although I think it still looks pretty good in the picture. Again, the lettering is clear for the most part, as are the figures. Justin II and Sophia AD 565-578. Nikomedia Follis or 40 Nummi Æ 30 mm, 14,54 g D N IVSTI-NVS P P, Justin and Sophia, both nimbate, enthroned facing, Justin holding globus cruciger and Sophia holding cruciform scepter / Large M, cross above, ANNO II-II across fields, A below, NIKO in exergue. DOC 98a; Sear 369. Post your first or your favorite Byzantine Follis coins.
Anastasius Dicorus, 491-518 A.D. Type: Large AE Follis, 39 mm 19 grams Obverse: DN ANASTASIVS PP AVG, Diademed draped and Cuirassed bust right, star on right shoulder (rare) Reverse: Large M, Epsilon below. Cross above M, star in left field, Mintmark CON He was called Dicorus because he had one blue eye and one brown eye
@DiomedesofArgos congratulations on two very nice examples. They are looking really good and have excellent level of detail. I am on the hunt for a nice example of Justin & Sophia and I would be happy if I come across one as nice as yours. My first Byzantine follis was a Justinian one as well: Notice that it is same officina, same year, same mint as yours! But the big size difference is very interesting. As for my favorite follis, it is difficult to tell as it changes all the time. Today I feel that I really like this one:
Very fun coincidence! I'm not sure if it's known how many engravers would work in a single officina, but it's really interesting how different two coins can look that come from the same place and time. In theory, the two people who engraved the dies for our coins were peers who would see each other's work. Heck, the same guy could have engraved the dies for both of our coins.
Styling differences I understand. But the size? Maybe mine was struck on the last remaining bits of a batch of metal that was big, but not big enough for two coins. Actually, another thing to remember is that Justinian's plague was just starting to make its appearance, so maybe the mint had to make many HR changes that year... (RIP poor engravers)
Good point. As I am searching, the size of your coin is much more typical. Sear does list this coin as having larger and smaller versions, although I'm not clear if there can be larger and smaller examples in a single year.
Alas I have no Byzantine coins to share but I did win one lot from the Savoca silver sale last Sunday, Sent a Transferwise payment on Monday and was amazed that the coin arrived here in Colorado on Wednesday. The Transferwise transaction didn't even hit my bank account until Wednesday!
DOC's smallest diameter for this year is 39 and the lowest weight is 17.48 (not the same coin). They do have a year 12 listed as 34 and 15.30, which is fairly similar to my coin. Who knows? Bad quality control? Is there anything on mine that suggests fake? Besides that, I did find another fun giant head Justinian in DOC, this time from Cyzicus
Nice Byzantines you got there! Well, these are far from "ideal" but one of the great things about Byzantine folles is that bottom-feeders on a budget can collect them as well. Here is an array of mine from Justinian I and Justin II, all or most from eBay: Justinian I Nicomedia (with a hole): Justin II Constantinople Justin II Nicomedia Justin II Antioch Justin II Cyzicus
D.M., Nice score on both of your coins ! Your example of Sear 201 is indeed unusual as P.O.M. pointed out ; my example looks very much like his coin.
Very cool to have a set from the different mints. I think the different coloring of the coins really adds to the charm as well
Weight standards and exact weight discrepancies of individual coins were not as closely controlled as modern collectors might prefer. Mine is a year later and 23.4g. This is nearing, but not yet at, the peak of weight standards.
Justin II folles varied in weight as well, apparently. At least in Constantinople, with a chi-rho indicating the heavier issue. A while back I started a thread on this (I repeat it below): A couple years ago when I first started in on Byzantine coins, I read our local library's copy of Byzantine Coins by P.D. Whitting. There I found a reference to a chi-rho variation of the very common Justin II-Sophia follis from Constantinople (Sear 360). Here is the quote: "The copper follis comes down sharply in weight and size during the reign...with an average weight of 13.5 g. There was, however, at Constantinople from the 5th regnal year onwards, a heavier issue (by a gramme) in parallel, distinguished by a Chi-Rho above the M on the reverse, as against the usual cross." (Byzantine Coins (1973), by P. D. Whitting, pp. 111-112) In my own small collection, I now have four examples of Sear 360, two with the chi-rho, two the cross. Indeed there is a weight difference, pretty much in accordance with Whitting, but Byzantine coins seem to vary so much in weights I was wondering if a "gramme" difference can really be attributed to a specific symbol within this issue? I have not had any luck finding other references to this weight change online. Examples of SB 360 abound, of course, and glancing through Coin Archives I saw some examples that conform to Whitting's information. Valentinian's recent post on Anonymous follis variations shows there is an impressive number of Coin Talk Byzantine experts out there - does anybody have any other information on this? Examples? Here are mine. Such a small sample is hardly conclusive, not helped by the fact my "chi-rho" examples are quite worn, but again, the heavier weigh for the chi-rho does hold true: The top two rows have the standard cross (year 11 and year 5): 12.15 and 13.93 grams The bottom two rows have the chi-rho (both year 6): 14.61 and 14.29 grams. https://www.cointalk.com/threads/by...h-chi-rho-above-m-special-heavy-issue.324682/
Very nice folles! I have a small (and slowly growing) group of Byzantine folles, but most are pretty low grade. I keep getting outbid on ebay for nicer ones. Mine this far are the anonymous types. One example:
I do not have a Justin II follis with chi-rho but do have a half. Neither have I made an effort to get all mints. Is it just accident or was officina B used more for AE? Does anyone collect these by workshop?
Wow, you guys really know your coins, I can't imagine myself having the patience to do what you do, thanks for the education.
Officina "special" assignments were made in Byzantine-era Constantinople, so it seems. I know very little about this, but I have a couple of examples from the reign of Anastasius. Officina E seems to have handled the odd-ball cases in bronze: Here is a small-module follis with star/cross/blank arrangement, found only with E (what looks like a crescent right is actually incuse - a countermark of some sort): Anastasius Æ Follis (Small Module) n.d. (c. 507-512 A.D.) Constantinople Mint DN ANASTASIVS PP AVG pearl diademed, draped, cuirassed bust right / Large M, star left, cross above, blank right, Officina Є (only) & CON below. SB 17; DOC 20a. (9.25 grams / 23 mm) Similarly, Officina E was the only one to issue the two-pellets over stars in the last year of Anastasius's reign. Anastasius Æ Follis n.d. (c. Sep. 517-July 518 A.D.) Constantinople Mint DN ANASTA[SIVS P P AVG], pearl diademed, draped, cuirassed bust right / Large M, dot over star over dot left, cross above, [dot over star over dot right], Є below, CON in ex. SB 21; MIB 28b. (16.81 grams / 31 mm) Notes: "According to Hahn, at the beginning of the last lustrum of Anastasius' reign (September 517), dots were added to all new cut coins. Since Anastasius died 10 months later (July 518), these coins are somewhat scarce."CT - Severus Alexander, Dec. 2017 "Only the 5th officina is recorded for this type with the M flanked...by a star with pellet above and below." FORVM I'm sure there are other officinal-specific variations.
@Marsyas Mike that's some interesting info I'll have to keep my eye out for some of those special varieties.
Those are two very nice examples, very well centered and nicely struck. They have a nice style as well, for Byzantine folles. I have so many Byzantine coins, it hard to say which one is my favorite, so here are a few from my eclectic collection: