Reply to Thread

Message:: [QUOTE="Voulgaroktonou, post: 4580192, member: 84047"]I've gotten a little out of the loop. I hope I've not caused unnecessary duplication. A few more mid ninth c...Michael I and Theophylact. Constantinople, 811-13. Miliaresion. 2.12 gr. 22 mm. 12 hr. Sear 1616; DO 3; BNP 1-3; BM 2-3; R. 1792; T. 4. [ATTACH=full]1134264[/ATTACH] Michael I and Theophylact. Constantinople, 811-13. Follis. 5.14 gr. 23 mm. 6 hr. Sear 1618; DO 8; BNP 1; BM 4-6[ATTACH=full]1134267[/ATTACH] Michael III, has been covered, I believe, but this is a well known example giving a rare late use of Latin titulature, with Michael described as Imperator and Basil as Rex. It's also the image I use for myself on Cointalk.Constantinople, 866-67. Follis. 9.11 gr. 27 mm. 6 hr. Sear 1693; DO 8; BNP 1-5; BM 11-12; R. 1849; T. 18. Ex Hunt Collection. Sotheby's Dec. 5-6, 1990, lot 476. Michael had criticized the Latin language as a "barbarous and Scythian tongue" in a letter to Pope Nicholas I. The curial reply was that it was "ridiculous for the emperors to call themselves Roman if they were ignorant of Latin" (quia ridiculum est vos apellare Romanorum imperatores et tamen linguam non nosse Romanam). This coin inscription was "evidence" that Latin was alive and well in Constantinople![ATTACH=full]1134274[/ATTACH][/QUOTE]