Picked up another Byzantine from the 10th century, this time its of Leo VI "the Wise". Either the son of emperor Michael III or his successor Basil I, Leo VI was born in 866 at Constantinople, and became co-emperor alongside Basil I. The two had a rough relationship; at one point Basil almost had young Leo blinded. In 886, Basil went to his grave believing Leo had something to do with his fatal hunting accident. Leo succeeded Basil, and the new emperor quickly consolidated his rule and appointed allies to positions close to him, and sought to bring certain groups under control, such as the aristocratic families and the Orthodox Church. He also did not tolerate injustice or corruption of any kind; legend says he sometimes roamed around the capital disguised, and would weed out corrupt guards by attempting to bribe them with money. Leo's wars were a mixed bag. He successfully put the heat on the Arabs on the eastern borders, invaded Armenia, and had the Magyars attack the Bulgarians in the north. But his attempt to take back Cyprus failed, and Constantinople and Thessalonika were attacked by the Rus and Muslim forces respectively. Leo VI died in 912 and was succeeded by his brother Alexander. Leo VI, Byzantine Empire AE follis Obv: LEON bASILEVS ROM, crowned, bust facing with short beard, wearing chlamys and holding akakia Rev: +LEON EN QEO BA-SILEVS R-OMEON legend in four lines Mint: Constantinople (struck 886-912) Ref: SB 1729
Thanks Anoob. Yeah, this was one type I really sought and absolutely needed to have one with a face on it, since I very much like the frontal busts of these later Byzantine folles.
Another winner, Jango => sweet, sweet addition!! Ummm, hopefully I'm allowed/invited to toss-in my two cents? (or my follis in this case)
Seeking clarification of the history you relate, I looked at the attribution (dates) of my relevant Byzantine coins and am more confused. Googling for more information has so far only raised more questions. For instance, I recorded the date of this follis of Basil I with Constantine VII as 867-876. Basil I ruled until 886 and Leo VI took over. Thinking I'd just made a typo (and I found many on my website while writing this), I rechecked Wildwinds. Nope, that's what is recorded. Thinking Wildwinds made a typo or that the date reflects when Constantine VII died, I looked at other sources. The Buerger Collection writeup had this to say about a Basil I + Constantine VII AV solidus: Hmm. So, I'm still unsure of the correct dates for this coin. Unless it is known that production of the type stopped three years before the death of Constantine VII, it seems that the date range should be 867-879. Either Wildwinds is wrong, the Buerger Collection info is wrong, production of the type was stopped three years before Constantine VII's death, or there is some other explanation I haven't though of. As for Leo The Wise, I have examples of each of his folles: SB 1728 SB 1729 SB 1730, with Alexander, Leo's younger brother and successor
I don't collect Byzantine but I would probably make an exception for any of the coins on this thread.
Curiosity question: What factor of Byzantines attracts or repels members of this list? Somewhere along the time they cover in one metal or another they span a wide range of beauty, interest or workmanship. I know people attracted to the super crude bronzes where making an ID can be a challenge. I know people fond of the formal late Christian art. I know people who collect according to the interesting stories of the reigns (plagues, blinding your relatives etc.). What is your take on Byzantine? Justinian I large module follis Heraclius overstrike Anonymous Christ type follis Michael VII electrum Alexius III cup shaped trachy John VIII silver (latest reasonable Byzantine - the last emperor Constantine XI is super rare)
I just noticed that all my examples have facing portraits so maybe that is what attracted me. There are profile portrait Byzantines but facing is more common.
Hmmm, you're correct ... I only have a half-dozen Byzantine examples, yet all of them are front-facing (oh, and all of the portraits are kinda crude looking ... ummm, kinda like the adults decided to let their kids mint the coins during this era?!!) ... but as you also stated, the coins have cool back-stories and whether you like the style or not, they are certainly recognizable, eh? (yah, all coins are cool and I merely try to pick a few from each of the coin eras)
Ok, I'll bite. Answer: First what repels me from Byzantine Bronze coins is general lack of completeness of the intended design and condition of the great majority of available specimens of most types. Second what repels me from Byzantine Silver is price. Many of the gem specimens are pretty expensive, but if you can make conditional exceptions than a nice one can be had a few hundred dollars. Third what repels me from Byzantine Gold. Price. The general obscurity of emperors after the demise of the ancient empires. I would have a tough time rattling off Byzantine emperors after say AD 1000. What I do love and what draws me to a particular Byzantine piece is a combination of factors. Price: I have to be able to afford it. Assuming a can afford whatever Byzantine piece available to me... Emperor: If them emperors has an exceptional and noteworthy reign or somehow contributed to human history then I would love a coin of the ruler. Condition:The coin has to be at least what I would consider VF- for Bronze, F + for silver and EF for Gold. (Notice I have no Gold, but if I am going for gold I will go for the gusto.) Style: The coin I select would ideally be a coin of the time in the reign of said emperor that reflect highest artistic style available. For example the super big Justinian Follis. Not the piddly late ones. Now If I found a year XXX or equivalent in high grade, I would buy it, but not before the giant early 40 piece. Mint: I like Nikomedia and favor the style and seemingly better condition of the mint products. I would accept a coin from any mint. I would only make conditional sacrifices if the mint were Italian or African. Andronicus III Paleologus Andronicus I Comnenus Justinian I Anastasius Khusro II
i collect a little bit of everything, so byzantine coins are in my collection for the same reason as anything else...a combination of aesthetics, cost, and timing (when i can spend the cash). in general though, i like the art style ...not high greek stuff i now, but it's ...quaint? plus all the weirdness is cool, messed up flans, crazy overstrikes, schyphate coins.
I agree with Anoob, at least on the reasons for not buying Byzantine coinage. I just can't get interested.
I am really surprised Bing! You can't get interested in Byzantine coinage? Your not one of those people who thinks Rome died in AD 476? Or you just don't want busted coins made from dies carved by preschoolers.
I'm with Bing. Most of my Byzantines were from a large mixed lot. I'd hoped to become interested while sifting through them but I remain lukewarm and have been debating whether to sell most of them. If I sell them I'll probably become interested in Byzantine history a week later .
=> wow Jango, you're one lucky-pup!! ... it sounds like nobody else wants to bid on your coin-targets!! (that's awesome, my parrot-lovin' friend!! ... go get 'em!!) Again => I love your new Wise Leo pickup!! Cheers
I know the Roman Empire continued after the fall of Rome, but, in my mind, it wasn't the same thing. And you are right. The Byzantine coinage lacks the artistic qualities of the early Roman and the Ancient Greek coins. It's just not my collecting niche.
