Log in or Sign up
Coin Talk
Home
Forums
>
Coin Forums
>
Ancient Coins
>
Post your latest ancient!
>
Reply to Thread
Message:
<p>[QUOTE="robinjojo, post: 8334117, member: 110226"]For Byzantine coinage, I have lately focused on the later regnal years of Justinian I and other emperors. I find, especially for Justinian I, locating nice examples of his later regnal years a challenge. The coinage becomes cruder and the flans smaller, compared to the apex of his early reform folles.</p><p><br /></p><p>Here are a couple that I snagged in a recent Roma auction, 94.</p><p><br /></p><p>Constantinople, year 32, 558-59 AD, Sear 163.</p><p><br /></p><p>17.96 grams</p><p><br /></p><p>As typically crude as this coin is, the portrait is quite nice and the strike well centered.</p><p><br /></p><p>[ATTACH=full]1477478[/ATTACH] </p><p><br /></p><p><br /></p><p>Cyzicus, year 29, 555/56 AD, Sear 207.</p><p><br /></p><p>17.35 grams</p><p><br /></p><p>At first glance this coin has a regnal year of 28, but on closer examination there is an additional I below, next to the line separating the M from the KYZ. </p><p><br /></p><p>Again, the crudeness is very apparent, but again, the detail is quite good and the strike is well done, especially for this period.</p><p><br /></p><p>[ATTACH=full]1477479[/ATTACH][/QUOTE]</p><p><br /></p>
[QUOTE="robinjojo, post: 8334117, member: 110226"]For Byzantine coinage, I have lately focused on the later regnal years of Justinian I and other emperors. I find, especially for Justinian I, locating nice examples of his later regnal years a challenge. The coinage becomes cruder and the flans smaller, compared to the apex of his early reform folles. Here are a couple that I snagged in a recent Roma auction, 94. Constantinople, year 32, 558-59 AD, Sear 163. 17.96 grams As typically crude as this coin is, the portrait is quite nice and the strike well centered. [ATTACH=full]1477478[/ATTACH] Cyzicus, year 29, 555/56 AD, Sear 207. 17.35 grams At first glance this coin has a regnal year of 28, but on closer examination there is an additional I below, next to the line separating the M from the KYZ. Again, the crudeness is very apparent, but again, the detail is quite good and the strike is well done, especially for this period. [ATTACH=full]1477479[/ATTACH][/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
>
Post your latest ancient!
>
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...