Discussion in 'Ancient Coins' started by Al Kowsky, May 1, 2021.
Thanks a lot
Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.
These folles can fetch high prices in outstanding quality and style:
It is amazing though to see how quickly the style deteriorated.
Here are the years 13, 15 and 16 (all from my collection):
Tejas, You're right about the decline in quality of the large folles . For collectors hunting for fine style examples the best years are 12-14. Pictured below is a gem that recently sold a Harlan Berk's 215th Bid-Buy Sale for $1,300.00 !
Another handsome large follis that recently sold at CNG E-Sale 469 for $1,120.00 is pictured below.
I was lucky to score this large follis before prices went crazy , pictured below.
Tejas, That is an exceptional Roman style portrait & strong strike that should grade Ex Fine to my eye !
Justinian Follis Constantinople mint.
BenSi, That's a very handsome, well-struck follis with luster ! There's just a slight bit of flatness on the high-relief head. I think if the M on the reverse wasn't so high & displaced so much metal the head would have been a complete strike . Never the less it's a special coin .
In agreement with you, I think it is a regular issue of Antioch. Those of us who spend years paying attention to coins of a particular sort, say, Byzantine coins of Antioch, often find coins for sale that are attributed--to our eyes--incorrectly, but in the dealer's eyes "close enough." The area of ancient coins is so vast that we cannot expect dealers to know it all. We can be happy when we know enough to occasionally acquire a coin we appreciate more than the dealer did (and, if at auction, more than other collectors did). But I'm sure it is not worth their while to track down every detail of a Byzantine bronze. You have something special with a remarkably late date. Congratulations!
The follis of @robinjojo is far nicer than mine, but I got a hole-filler year-38 today:
35-32 mm. 17.95 grams.
Much of it is flat struck, but the year is bold.
Year 38 of Justinian was 564/5.
Looking at the legend on mine, just above, I see some well-formed letters but not well-formed words. It looks like
V M AΛ S L L - ... O L S C N I
Almost none of that is right. I have issues from years 25, 31, and 33 that have are pretty close to reproducing the legible and correct
DN IVSTINIANVS PP AVG
from earlier issues.
I incline toward thinking this is still an official mint issue, but the mint staff was depleted and this engraver was illiterate. You can read about hard times at Antioch on my site here:
Similar to mine which I think is year 33.
Æ Follis (33mm, 20.01g, 6h). Constantinople mint, Fifth officina, dated Regnal Year 19 (AD 545/546). Obv: D N IVSTINIANVS P P AVG; Helmeted and cuirassed bust facing, holding globus cruciger and decorated shield; cross right in field. Rev: Large M between ANNO and X/YI/III; cross above; E below; CON in exergue. Ref: SB 163; Ratto 496; MIB 95a, DOC 44e. About Fine, some doubling on reverse.
Separate names with a comma.