I am a US collector that has fallen for Byzantine folles. I took a plunge and bought a stack of them. Doing some sorting and such…. One of these I feel confident is struck over an earlier piece. Trying to hold it in a manner below where the light will show the image of a previous bust. And I am just wondering for my own edification. Was striking over previous folles a common practice? And was there a purpose in doing so?
Hello @Randy Abercrombie. Welcome to the dark, mysterious world of Byzantine coins. Yes, striking over a previous follis was a common practice in the Byzantine Empire. Sometimes, because of inflation, an old large 40 nummi follis was cut into 4 pieces, and each of the 4 pieces was overstruck as a 40 nummi follis. But, sometimes, an old 40 nummi follis was simply overstruck as a new 40 nummi follis. Why? I'm not sure. I'm not an expert in the subject. Perhaps to add legitimacy to the current Emperor. Coins were a form of advertising, and it was helpful to advertise that "This is your Emperor". Perhaps because of the current Emperor's ego. Perhaps it was a form of "Damnatio Memoriae" to try to erase a previous unpopular or unfavored Emperor from history. Perhaps copper for new bronze coins was not always easy to obtain. Here are a couple of overstruck examples in my Byzantine collection. Constantine IV AE 40 Nummi Follis. Minted 668 AD To 674 AD. Syracuse Mint. Sear 1207. DO 60. Maximum Diameter 23.1 mm. Weight 3.67 grams. Obverse : Constantine IV Bust Facing Front Beardless Holding Globe Cross. Reverse : Large M, Monogram Above, Standing Figure Of Heraclius On Left, Standing Figure Of Tiberius On Right, "SCL" Mint Below. Overstruck On Constans II Syracuse Follis 654 AD To 659 AD Sear 1109 DO 180. Justinian II The Slit Nosed. 1st Reign. AE 40 Nummi Follis. Minted 685 AD To 695 AD. Syracuse Mint. Sear 1295. DO 54. Maximum Diameter 21.7 mm. Weight 4.09 grams. Obverse : Justinian II Bust Facing Front, With Short Beard, Wearing Crown, Cross On Top Of Crown, Holding Globus Cruciger In Right Hand. Reverse : Large M, Monogram Above, "SCL" Mint Below. Overstruck On Earlier Coin Possibly Constantine IV Syracuse Follis Sear 1211 DO 64.
Here's a later example, of an overstruck 40 nummi follis, in my collection. Constantine X AE 40 Nummi Follis. Minted 1059 AD To 1067 AD. Constantinople Mint. Sear 1854. DO 9. Maximum Diameter 26.9 mm. Weight 5.05 grams. Obverse : Jesus Christ Bust Facing Front, Long Beard, Cross Halo, Right Hand Raised In Front Of Body In Blessing, Holding Book In Left Hand. Reverse : Constantine X Bust Facing Front, Bearded, Wearing Crown With Cross On Top And Pendilia, Wearing Modified Loros, Holding Cross In Right Hand, Holding Akakia In Left Hand. Overstruck On Earlier Coin Perhaps Constantine X Sear 1853 DO 8.
Overstriking copper folles was very common, especially for the "anonymous classes". I don't think it was a matter of emperors' ego : the anonymous folles don't have any image or name of emperors. It was just a question of lazyness : no need to melt old worn coins and make new flans, they were just overstruck, like a bored policeman at the airport who prints his stamp over older stamps on a passport. Constans II, Constantinople (641-668) Anonymous classes : Alexius I Comnenus, 1081-1118. Tetarteron
@sand and @GinoLR .... I just wanted to tell you both thank you for the enlightenment. You ancient folks just absolutely amaze me with your seemingly limitless knowledge of these pieces. Heck, I struggle to retain what little I can over 150 year old US issues in my little pea brain. You guys are absolutely amazing and I thank you.
