Maurice Tiberius - The RY 21 Conundrum

Discussion in 'Ancient Coins' started by robinjojo, May 2, 2022.

  1. robinjojo

    robinjojo Well-Known Member

    I find, as I get older, moving rapidly to that time in one's life where hardware (body) and information processing (brain) becomes increasingly fraught. That which seemed pretty clear and straightforward becomes a bit foggier. So it is, I think, with this question: How can the regnal year on a Byzantine emperor's follis extend beyond his life?

    The case here is Maurice Tiberius, Byzantine emperor, who reigned from 582 to 602 AD. In 602 he was engaged in an uprising led by his eventual successor, Phocas. The rebellion culminated in the crowning of Phocas on November 23, 602, followed two days later with his entry into Constantinople. Maurice Tiberius and his sons were captured, sent to the harbor of Eutropius at Chalcedon, where he was forced to watch his five younger sons executed before he was beheaded himself. Maurice Tiberius' wife, Constantina and daughters were sent to a monastery. A few years later, upon the accusation that Constantina was conspiring against Phocas, she and her three daughters, Anastasia, Theoctista and Cleopatra were executed at the harbor of Eutropius in 605 AD. Such was the tragic end of Maurice Tiberius and his family. It's the stuff of a Shakespearian historical tragedy.

    Now, getting to the coins, I was ordering a regnal year 20 (601/2) follis, when I noticed one for sale with regnal year 21. Regnal year 21? Brain fog sets in. How could this be? So, I ordered the regnal year 21 follis as well; why not? The more the merrier.

    Here are two regnal year 20 folles (I'm missing Constantinople):

    Cyzicus

    D-Camera Maurice Tiberius follis Cyzicus RY 20 AD 601-2.AD 9.96g  Roma95 1486 Sear 519 5-2-22.jpg


    Antioch

    D-Camera Maurice Tiberius follis Antioch RY 20 AD 601-2.AD 10.61g Sear 533 5-2-22.jpg


    Here's the RY 21 follis from Antioch:

    D-Camera Maurice Tiberius follis Antioch RY 21 AD 602-3.AD 9.86g Sear 533 5-2-22.jpg


    So, here's my theory. The rebellion and the execution of Maurice Tiberius must have spilled over into regnal year 21. Apparently the Antioch Mint prepared a RY 21 reverse since Maurice Tiberius was still emperor. I don't think there are very many of these RY 21 folles around, since I assume they were recalled by the mint and melted shortly after his death and the usurpation of Phocas to the throne. None of the other mints, to my knowledge issued a RY 21 follis for Maurice Tiberius, so Antioch is the only mint to do this.

    I guess it is not really such a conundrum after all.
     
    Last edited: May 2, 2022
  2. Avatar

    Guest User Guest



    to hide this ad.
  3. Andres2

    Andres2 Well-Known Member

    I agree with your conclusion robin.
    another Maurice Tiberius with a thick layer patina:

    JC Maurice Tiberius 582-602 AD.jpg
     
    ominus1, Edessa, Johndakerftw and 3 others like this.
  4. dltsrq

    dltsrq Grumpy Old Man

    According to Wikipedia, Maurice Tiberius was crowned 13 August 582 and died 27 November 602. Phocas was crowned 23 November 602, some 103 days (if I added correctly) into Maurice's 21st regnal year. Sear lists coins of year XXI for the following mints and denominations: Constantinople (follis only), Thessalonica (half-follis, decanummium), Theoupolis-Antioch (follis, half follis), Catania (decanummium) and Syracuse (follis, decanummium). Dated coins at other mints extend no later than XX. It would be interesting to go through the relevant Dumbarton Oaks volume and compare the numbers of XXI-dated coins in that collection with other dates present to get an idea of rarity. Interesting stuff.
     
  5. robinjojo

    robinjojo Well-Known Member

    Thank you for the additional information. It would be very interesting to determine the population of known RY 21 examples versus RY 20. I know that Phocas and other emperors overstruck coins of their predecessors and I am sure that much of the coinage of Maurice Tiberius had this fate, especially the bronze coinage.

    I my searches I really haven't had much luck locating RY 21 coins for this emperor, but maybe I'm barking up the wrong tree.
     
    Edessa and dltsrq like this.
  6. robinjojo

    robinjojo Well-Known Member

    I just looked at the Maurice Tiberius folles on acsearch.info and I counted 16 RY 20 folles, all from Antioch, but no RY 21 folles from any mint.

    RY 21 folles must be quite scarce.
     
    Edessa and dltsrq like this.
  7. dltsrq

    dltsrq Grumpy Old Man

    The British Museum catalogue (1908) lists 5 Theoupolis year 20 folles but no 21.

    Maurice_XX.JPG
     
    Edessa and robinjojo like this.
  8. Voulgaroktonou

    Voulgaroktonou Well-Known Member

    I'm looking at Hahn's "Money of the Incipient Byzantine Empire Continued", Vienna, 2009. He notes year 21 copper for Maurice from the following mints:
    Antioch, Follis: officinae Γ Δ Ε S = Hahn 96c;
    Antioch, Half follis = Hahn 99c;
    Thessalonica, Half follis = Hahn 113D
    Thessalonica, Decanummium = Hahn 115D
    Catania, Decanummium = Hahn 137D
    Sicily, Follis: officina Δ = Hahn 139
    Sicily, Decanummium = Hahn 142. The last 2 have the mint signature CON, although Hahn, p. 58, notes that the mark was simply copied from the eastern model, based on the matching decanummium (H. 142), "on which CON also replaced the CAT signature."
     
    robinjojo likes this.
  9. dltsrq

    dltsrq Grumpy Old Man

    Dumbarton Oaks has 7 Antioch-Theoupolis year 20 folles and just 1 year 21.

    Maurice_DO.JPG
     
    robinjojo likes this.
  10. robinjojo

    robinjojo Well-Known Member

    I have one more potential RY 21 follis.

    This coin is from Constantinople. The XX on the reverse is pretty clear and there is a possible I below the final X. The strike is very crude and there are deposits near and within the date which makes determining whether or not it is a numeral difficult. Once I get the coin in hand I should be better able to tell.

    One thing that makes me think that this is a RY 21 coin is that the RY 20 for this mint has Maurice Tiberius in a consular robe, as is much of his coinage. On this coin he is in military garb, perhaps done so due to the rebellion?

    Also, look at the spacing of the XX on the first coin, compared to the second coin. The spacing is more compact on the first coin, possibly to accommodate the I.

    Maurice Tiberius follis Constantinople possibly year 21 12.45g 5-2-22.jpg

    Here is a follis, RY 20, Constantinople, for comparison:

    [​IMG]
     
    Andres2 likes this.
Draft saved Draft deleted

Share This Page