Log in or Sign up
Coin Talk
Home
Forums
>
Coin Forums
>
Ancient Coins
>
But It has the That John Kom feeling.
>
Reply to Thread
Message:
<p>[QUOTE="BenSi, post: 3221167, member: 95174"]I purchased this coin at auction believing it was misattributed, It was not a John III Vatatzes but a John II Komnenus. Why? Because the portrait reminded me of the other coins I own of John II.</p><p><br /></p><p>Now when studying the coin in the web I found out three rulers issued this coin all based on its originators (John II). Why would the Latin empire then John III imitate a coin of a ruler dead 50 years before? Perhaps simply because His gold coins were trustworthy and without critics.</p><p><br /></p><p>I read several sources for information in an attempt to prove my coin was an official Constantinople issue of John II and not of John III Vatatzes, after reading published catalogs, academic articles I was left with a sincere form of doubt these coins can be attributed visually. However most of the literature discusses the Thessalonica issue not the Constantinople issue, the difference seems to be squat characters and smaller but thicker flans, the plates in the articles and books make this difficult in some cases to tell the difference.</p><p><br /></p><p>According to Pagona Papadopoulou The only way certain is metal analysis, the 12th century coins were 20 ½ carats the later imitators were only 18 carats. I have not tested the coin as of yet, as usual I am lacking the time to do so soon.</p><p><br /></p><p>But here is my example,</p><p><br /></p><p>32mm slightly flat</p><p><br /></p><p>4.38gm </p><p><br /></p><p>[ATTACH=full]838659[/ATTACH] </p><p>My last read on the subject” <u>John II Komnenos Emperor of Byzantium In the Shadow of Father and Son.”</u> The final chapter is on coinage by Pagona Papadopoulou , in it , she cites an excellent paper by Eleni Lianta that is on Academia. It is 50 pages and has a comparison of pieces that are part of museum collections.</p><p><br /></p><p><a href="https://www.academia.edu/35195487/John_II_Comnenus_1118-43_or_John_III_Vatatzes_1222-54_Distinguishing_the_Hyperpyra_of_John_II_from_those_of_John_III_.pdf" target="_blank" class="externalLink ProxyLink" data-proxy-href="https://www.academia.edu/35195487/John_II_Comnenus_1118-43_or_John_III_Vatatzes_1222-54_Distinguishing_the_Hyperpyra_of_John_II_from_those_of_John_III_.pdf" rel="nofollow">https://www.academia.edu/35195487/John_II_Comnenus_1118-43_or_John_III_Vatatzes_1222-54_Distinguishing_the_Hyperpyra_of_John_II_from_those_of_John_III_.pdf</a> </p><p><br /></p><p>I am just beginning with the gold coinage of this time period my knowledge is limited, so if you can add to it with your own experience dealing with this coinage it would be appreciated.[/QUOTE]</p><p><br /></p>
[QUOTE="BenSi, post: 3221167, member: 95174"]I purchased this coin at auction believing it was misattributed, It was not a John III Vatatzes but a John II Komnenus. Why? Because the portrait reminded me of the other coins I own of John II. Now when studying the coin in the web I found out three rulers issued this coin all based on its originators (John II). Why would the Latin empire then John III imitate a coin of a ruler dead 50 years before? Perhaps simply because His gold coins were trustworthy and without critics. I read several sources for information in an attempt to prove my coin was an official Constantinople issue of John II and not of John III Vatatzes, after reading published catalogs, academic articles I was left with a sincere form of doubt these coins can be attributed visually. However most of the literature discusses the Thessalonica issue not the Constantinople issue, the difference seems to be squat characters and smaller but thicker flans, the plates in the articles and books make this difficult in some cases to tell the difference. According to Pagona Papadopoulou The only way certain is metal analysis, the 12th century coins were 20 ½ carats the later imitators were only 18 carats. I have not tested the coin as of yet, as usual I am lacking the time to do so soon. But here is my example, 32mm slightly flat 4.38gm [ATTACH=full]838659[/ATTACH] My last read on the subject” [U]John II Komnenos Emperor of Byzantium In the Shadow of Father and Son.”[/U] The final chapter is on coinage by Pagona Papadopoulou , in it , she cites an excellent paper by Eleni Lianta that is on Academia. It is 50 pages and has a comparison of pieces that are part of museum collections. [url]https://www.academia.edu/35195487/John_II_Comnenus_1118-43_or_John_III_Vatatzes_1222-54_Distinguishing_the_Hyperpyra_of_John_II_from_those_of_John_III_.pdf[/url] I am just beginning with the gold coinage of this time period my knowledge is limited, so if you can add to it with your own experience dealing with this coinage it would be appreciated.[/QUOTE]
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
Coin Talk
Home
Forums
>
Coin Forums
>
Ancient Coins
>
But It has the That John Kom feeling.
>
Home
Home
Quick Links
Search Forums
Recent Activity
Recent Posts
Forums
Forums
Quick Links
Search Forums
Recent Posts
Competitions
Competitions
Quick Links
Competition Index
Rules, Terms & Conditions
Gallery
Gallery
Quick Links
Search Media
New Media
Showcase
Showcase
Quick Links
Search Items
Most Active Members
New Items
Directory
Directory
Quick Links
Directory Home
New Listings
Members
Members
Quick Links
Notable Members
Current Visitors
Recent Activity
New Profile Posts
Sponsors
Menu
Search
Search titles only
Posted by Member:
Separate names with a comma.
Newer Than:
Search this thread only
Search this forum only
Display results as threads
Useful Searches
Recent Posts
More...