Post Your Favorite Coins of Justinian I, AD 527-565

Severus Alexander, I don't recall seeing a better decanummium than this one. Nice die work, strike, & condition.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

Bing, Judging by the diameter & light weight I'm guessing that this coin was struck late in Justinian's reign ?

 

You kow, I really have no idea since this era of coins is well out of my collecting interests. But it is a good observation, so I would like to know the answer if anyone knows.

 

As your coin isn't dated with the regnal year, it is before that coin reform, so it could be a very early issue of Justinian. It could have also been heavier but clipped when the follis was debased so that it can continue being used as legal tender.

 

Caesar Augustus, your idea of an early strike makes sense especially considering that Bing's coin is a profile portrait instead of the front facing view, much like the bronze coins of Anastasius I, AD 491-518.

 

This thread has shown many really great, high grade coins of Justinian. I want to show one I consider interesting because of what some will call a fault but I call a fact. The guys at Antioch made a perfectly centered 20 nummi, year 25 but the obverse, being perfectly centered has no legend because they used a 40 nummi obverse die much too large for the half size denomination. This coin is favored by most if the obverse is off center and shows part legend. Imagine how wide the border on the reverse would be if the obverse filled the die diameter. There are Byzantine bronzes that are interesting and fairly priced at the $5 this one cost. It would be nicer with less wear, I admit.

 

Doug Smith, that's an interesting freak, resourceful to say the least. Maybe the mint worker thought no one would notice.

 

I've been collecting Justinian bronzes for around 15 years and this is without doubt my favorite (and scarcest) one:

Justinian Half Follis; Perugia mint

Rev: Large K; INDI to left, II to right (Indiction Year 2); cross above, Pi below

 

Justinian I


BZ Justinian I 527-565 CE AE Folles 30mm 17g 40 Nummi M monogram

Justinian the Ugly!

BZ Justinian I 527-565 CE AE30 Folles 12-2g 40 Nummi M monogram

 

Justinian I- Decanummium (20 Nummi). Large I on reverse indicating number 10 in Greek. Struck in Constantinople.

 

My only Justinian:

Byzantine Empire
Justinian I, r. 527-565 A.D.
Constantinople Mint AE Follis/40 Nummi, 31 mm x 17.4 grams
Obv.: DN IVSTINIANVS PP AVG. pearl diademed, draped, cuirassed bust right, star on shoulder
Rev.: Large M, star to left, cross above, star right, officina letter Γ below, mintmark CON
Ref.: SBCV 160
Ex. DC Collection

 

I suspect that the operation was broken out into specific tasks and the guys holding the tongs on the reverse die and swinging the hammer just struck whatever blanks they were fed by the flan-making staff. Why a half-follis reverse die was used to strike a small flan on a follis obverse die is a bit harder to explain, but it seems fairly well established that the striking duo worked with more than one reverse die in rotation to allow them to cool between strikes. Perhaps the "tongs guy" (suppositor) was fed a smaller flan and chose a half-follis reverse (particularly if they were striking more than one denomination that day in that officina) without thinking about the obverse die in the anvil, then the "hammer guy" (malleator) just hit whatever was "presented" without questioning which die the suppositor had chosen or even being aware of the size of the blank.
Another possibility might be that near the end of the "shift", the half follis obverse die they were working with suffered a catastrophic break and a whole follis obverse die was the closest/easiest replacement to finish up the last of a consignment of blank flans.

 

Here are two of my three coins of Justinian I.
I really love the enthroned type on this follis from Antioch, or in this case Theopolis. Maybe someday I’ll go for the fractionals. Ex Baldwins.

My profile coin, a follis of Justinian made in Constantinople’s second workshop sometime during 540 or 541. Ex Ira and Larry Goldberg. By and large one of my favorite ancients.

 

The third one is a decanummi that is not very pretty.

 

Not my favorite, but I type not shown in this thread yet...



Justinian I. A.D. 527-565. Pentanummium

O: DN IVSTINIANS PP AV, pearl-diademed, draped and cuirassed bust right; R: VIC-TOR, Emperor standing facing, head left. holding spear and globe. Cherson mint. SB 197, 18x15 mm, 3.0g

 

Brian Bucklan, nice score! This is the 1st example I've seen from the Perugia Mint. The difference in die size is interesting too.

 

I favor it being completely intentional since there seem to be more Sear 230 coins with this oversize obverse die than there are with correct size ones. Errors and emergencies would not explain the number of them from several different years.

 

Certainly, few Byzantine bronzes can impress more than a reform Justinianic follis of years 12 or 13, but the Antiochene issues of later in the reign offer some interesting examples of inappropriate pairings of obverse and reverse dies.


Decanummium obverse die / half follis reverse die. Year 21 = 547/8. 9.23 g. 26.9 mm. S. 230; DO 238; H. 154a. The smaller obverse die is nicely framed (if a trifle off-center) by the larger flan.

Follis obverse die / half follis reverse die. Year 30 = 556/7. 7,76 g. 26.8 mm. S. 231; DO 237a; H. 155. And at no extra cost, the coin came with the A/N/N/O and mint mark engraved upside down!


Decanummium dies struck on a pentanummium flan. Year 25 = 551/552. 2.88 g. 17.2 mm. S. 237; DO 256; H. 158.


Not Antioch at all, but a 33 nummia from Alexandria. 538/65. 14.67 g. 30 mm. S. 246; DO 273; H. 164.


And now, for something completely different...
Justinian II, Hexagram, first reign, 692/95. 6.01 g. 26.4 mm. S. 1259; DO 17; H. 40.