Message:

<p>[QUOTE=&quot;Valentinian, post: 3004949, member: 44316&quot;]I just got an impressive half-follis of Justinian. The story begins with the coin reform of 538. </p><p><br /></p><p>In year 12 (AD 538/9) of Byzantine emperor Justinian (527-565) the follis (with an &quot;M&quot; = 40, as the reverse type) was reformed and made much larger, c. 40 mm in diameter (It had been c.32-20 mm.). Previous folles had a right-profile bust of the emperor. The reform introduced a facing bust. The first reform coins are huge compared to modern coins. The US half-dollar coin, which hardly circulates, partially because it is too large, is only 30.6 mm in diameter. </p><p><br /></p><p>For three years (12, 13, and 14) the very large size was maintained, and then folles gradually became smaller and smaller. Justinian reigned to year 39, by which time they are only 32 mm. If you want one Byzantine copper coin to impress your friends (or yourself), think of getting a follis of Justinian from the early years of the reformed coinage. </p><p><br /></p><p>[ATTACH=full]744223[/ATTACH] </p><p>Justinian, year 13 (539/540) struck at Nicomedia. 40 mm.</p><p>DN IVSTINI - ANVS PP AVG</p><p>Bust of Justinian in crested helmet facing, holding globus cruciger, cross in right field.</p><p>Large M, ANNO down left, X/II/I down right, cross above, B below (second officina), NIK in exergue.</p><p>Sear Byzantine 201.</p><p><br /></p><p>The corresponding half-follis (with a &quot;K&quot; = 20 as the reverse type) started out c. 30 mm. So, even the early reformed half folles of Justinian are impressively large. </p><p><br /></p><p>This example, 30 mm. is from year 14 and struck at Nicomedia.</p><p>[ATTACH=full]744220[/ATTACH] </p><p>DN IVSTINI - ANVS PP [AV]</p><p>Bust of Justinian facing, holding globus cruciger, cross in right field</p><p>Large K, ANNO down the left, XIIII to right, cross above, NI for Nicomedia below.</p><p>Sear Byzantine 203. </p><p><br /></p><p>Justinian may be the most famous Byzantine emperor. The ancient historian Procopius was a private secretary to Justinian&#039;s famous general Belisarius and wrote contradictory histories about the time of Justinian. One was very complimentary and recounts behavior and events that make Justinian worthy of being regarded as a great ruler. On the other hand, Procopius later wrote &quot;The Secret History&quot; which vilifies Justinian in every way imaginable. A week ago I was given a beautiful boxed copy of <i>The Secret History</i> and I am half way through it. No matter how well or poorly some policy turned out, Procopius attributes a bad motive to Justinian. I&#039;m sure some rulers are very bad, but the book is is hard to read because it is so negative. It is interesting that one historian can address the same historical time span in two completely different ways. We know modern reporting can be affected by &quot;spin.&quot; One view or the other (but which one?) of Procopius about Justinian is an extreme case.</p><p><br /></p><p>Byzantine coins are often not beautiful, but the emperors are interesting. I hope you have at least one Byzantine coin you can show your friends--and us![/QUOTE]</p><p><br /></p>

Your name or email address:

Do you already have an account?

• No, create an account now.
• Yes, my password is:
• Forgot your password?

Stay logged in