Some claim that the Byzantine emperor Phocas (602 - 610) deserves historical condemnation as the "Caligula" or "Nero" of Byzantium. Others think that this reputation comes largely from the propaganda of his usurpers. Still others think that propaganda definitely played a role in Phocas's historical fate, but that he also didn't do an exactly stellar job as emperor, either. He revolted against the emperor Maurice and then found himself revolted against by Heraclius. Such were the times. I really like the chaotic look of this bloated and uneven Follis, and I especially like its ominous portrait. Phocas, despite the historical interpretation one follows, remains one of the most fascinating and debated figures in Byzantine history. Please post your Phocas coins! Phocas (602-610), Æ Follis (33mm, 11.79g), Cyzicus, Dated RY 4 ? (605/6); Obv: δN POCAS+PERPAVG, Crowned bust facing, wearing consular robes and holding mappa and cross, small cross to left; Rev: Large XXXX, ANNO above, II/II (date) to right, KYZA, Sear 665
Very nice piece. By the time Phocas took over, the bronze coinage was not anything to be proud of. This beauty contradicts this state- ment. Well struck. This one is definately a keeper.
That is a really stunning piece. From this and other examples, it does look like the celators of Cyzicus during this reign produced particularly vivid portraits. "The coinage of Phocas is instantly recognizable, depicting what is clearly a true portrait. Not only does Phocas' coinage move back towards a realistic portraiture, as well as breaking the 5th and 6th century convention of depicting emperors as beardless, with his shaggy beard and pointed eyes he makes no effort to flatter himself or hide his barbarian origins."
