A Reduced Size Follis of Justinian I

Discussion in 'Ancient Coins' started by Al Kowsky, May 1, 2021.

  1. Tejas

    Tejas Well-Known Member

    Thanks a lot :)
     
  2. Avatar

    Guest User Guest



    to hide this ad.
  3. Tejas

    Tejas Well-Known Member

    These folles can fetch high prices in outstanding quality and style:
    https://www.acsearch.info/search.html?id=673531

    https://www.acsearch.info/search.html?id=612271

    It is amazing though to see how quickly the style deteriorated.

    Here are the years 13, 15 and 16 (all from my collection):

    Screenshot 2021-05-03 at 13.56.35.png
    Screenshot 2021-05-03 at 13.55.46.png
    Screenshot 2021-05-03 at 13.59.04.png :
     
  4. Al Kowsky

    Al Kowsky Well-Known Member

    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 :jawdrop:!

    H_J_B_ 215th Bid-Buy Sale, image.jpg

    Another handsome large follis that recently sold at CNG E-Sale 469 for $1,120.00 is pictured below.

    CNG 469, lot 582, 6-3-2020, $1,121.00.jpg

    I was lucky to score this large follis before prices went crazy :wacky:, pictured below.

    NGC 3988264-008, AK Collection.jpg
     
  5. Tejas

    Tejas Well-Known Member

    Slightly off-topic, but here is a follis of Justin I. I find that these rather life-like folles of Justin I are quite scarce:

    Screenshot 2021-05-03 at 15.59.19.png
     
  6. Al Kowsky

    Al Kowsky Well-Known Member

    Tejas, That is an exceptional Roman style portrait & strong strike that should grade Ex Fine to my eye :woot:!
     
    ancient coin hunter likes this.
  7. BenSi

    BenSi Supporter! Supporter

    Another that goes to the larger side, Year 12 , pre pandemic.

    Justinian Follis Constantinople mint.

    42.04mm

    22.7gm
    k4.jpg
     
  8. Al Kowsky

    Al Kowsky Well-Known Member

    BenSi, That's a very handsome, well-struck follis with luster :happy:! 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 :D.
     
    ancient coin hunter and BenSi like this.
  9. Valentinian

    Valentinian Supporter! Supporter

    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!
     
  10. sand

    sand Well-Known Member

    EDIT : I initially posted my Justinian I coins here. But then, I decided to post my Justinian I coins, in a separate thread, so that I could ask, about the authenticity of them.
     
    Last edited: May 4, 2021
  11. Valentinian

    Valentinian Supporter! Supporter

    The follis of @robinjojo is far nicer than mine, but I got a hole-filler year-38 today:
    SB212JustinianYr38n2125.jpg
    35-32 mm. 17.95 grams.
    Much of it is flat struck, but the year is bold.
    Year 38 of Justinian was 564/5.
     
  12. Valentinian

    Valentinian Supporter! Supporter

    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:
    http://augustuscoins.com/ed/interesting/Justinian.html
     
  13. catadc

    catadc Well-Known Member

    I could not post it at the time, because the auction ended yesterday. This year 38 follis of Justinian was sold yesterday. 36 (?!) mm, 18.5 gr. It has a decent legend, but the engraving is not the best quality. And so we have 3 year 38 with 3 different pair of dies in one topic.
    Justinian 38.jpg
     
    Curtisimo and Tejas like this.
  14. Orange Julius

    Orange Julius Well-Known Member

    Similar to mine which I think is year 33.
    JustinianYear3X.JPG
     
    Curtisimo and Tejas like this.
  15. Severus Alexander

    Severus Alexander find me at NumisForums Supporter

    Just adding this to extend our latest Constantinople follis by one year. This is year 36 (562-63), the second last year that Constantinople issued them.
    justinian con year 36.jpg
    16.90g, 29mm
     
  16. Edessa

    Edessa Well-Known Member

    Justinian I, 527-565 AD. Byz_Justinian_AEFollis_SB163_Lanz0212.jpg 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.
     
    Bing and BenSi like this.
  17. Eric the Red

    Eric the Red Supporter! Supporter

    Picked this up today at my LCS, my first Byzantine

    20220112_193346.jpg 20220112_193325.jpg
     
    BenSi likes this.
Draft saved Draft deleted

Share This Page