Need help for ID, I know it's also an overstruck. Don't think its a real Byzantine one. What do you think?
I'm inclined to think your coin is Byzantine, a follis struck over an earlier follis. I would go even further out on the limb and say it is probably a follis of Heraclius, based on the two standing figures. His bronze coinage is extremely crude, generally speaking. There are Arab imitations of Byzantine folles among other imitations, such as the one below, imitating the follis of Justin II and Sophia, from Gerasa. As you can see, the legend is blundered on the obverse, with tayyib (Arabic for good) stamped at the bottom. On the reverse, the symbol Γ, within the M is reversed, and ANNO, to the left has a star in the place of the O. Perhaps an O punch was not available, or the O was substituted by a star for astronomical reasons. There's another star above the XII.
For whatever it's worth, I'm liking what @robinjojo has to say the more I think about it. @robinjojo, your example demonstrates how Arab-Byzantines don't necessarily symptomize a decline in style per se. And, that much to your point, Byzantine AEs, only most emphatically of this period, just sort of Get to be crude All By Themselves.
Scrolling through VCoins, virtually all the two-emperor folles of Heraclius offered there are overstrIkes. I lean toward official, struck over an earlier issue as suggested above. That said, if an Arab copy, it would be Goodwin Pseudo-Byzantine type C.
I agree that the coin is from Heraclius. This is because both figures have a cross on globe. The large M on the reverse also belongs to this coin. But there is always a considerable size difference between Heraclius and Heraclius Constantine. The style is also different. See these coins from my collection. The figures on the coin of mine are more like the figures on the coins of Heraclius with Heraclius Constantine and Martina. But where is the third person? Too bad my coin is too worn to ID it really well.
