Possibly: Anonymous follis. Attributed to Romanus IV, 9th-10th cent. AD. 27mm. Obv: Bust of Christ. Rev: The Virgin, orans. SB 1867 PeteB
Really, Really solid examples, @kentuckycoins and @Andres2. And, Rats, I don't have pics of mine, which would be anticlimactic anyway. But isn't Romanus more third quarter of the 11th century? Without checking, I'm thinking his claim to fame is losing the battle of Manzikert (sp? --throwing caution to the winds here) in 1071, eventually leading to the First Crusade.
Yes. Romanus IV ruled during the 11th century AD. Romanus IV ruled from 1068 AD to 1071 AD. And, Romanus IV lost the battle of Manzikert in 1071 AD. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Romanos_IV_Diogenes
When sorting out the Anonymous folles, look here: https://www.forumancientcoins.com/numiswiki/view.asp?key=Anonymous Follis Yours is an exceptional example of class G most likely during the time of Romanus IV but I prefer just using the class letters since the reign attributions have been known to be revised and you never know what will come next as new hoards are discovered. Mine, as are many, is overstruck on a follis of Constantine X. You can see the undertype at 10 o'clock looking over Christ's halo.
...I really do love the St. Mary orans on these. Right, this is wallowing in the obvious, not to mention reiteration of what other people here have said, with that much more eloquence and erudition. But I'll do it anyway. The thing about these anonymous folles is how they really amount to miniature ikons.
This was one of the types that got recycled into the new denomination, the tetarteron. Only of Alexius I coinage but they were made quickly so the under types have a partial showing, notable the boarder of dots. Here are three different types of tetartera , they all show the dots. Granted these coins were smaller than most of the anonymous follis series so they were restruck on partial flans.
I find this type very appealing in terms of iconography. The coin just exudes the Byzantine character for this period, quite charismatic, I think.
@BenSi, until you pointed this out (Ahem, Minor Detail), I had no idea that tetarterons were anything except fractional folles. --Nope, it never landed on me that, for one, you never get both denominations in the same issue. --Including the successive, transitional ones of Alexius I. It really was reducible to a denominational zero-sum game. I justs learned something.
