voulgaroktonou

Dear @ewomack, It is common for this issue (Sear 1428) to be lacking full inscriptions. Of the 10 specimens noted in the DO collection, only 2 have reasonably complete inscriptions; 5 have only partial inscriptions (with one, DO 12c.1, reduced to 2 letters); 2 are noted as having illegible inscriptions, and on one, the inscription is off the flan. A very quick and cursory survey I just completed on acsearch for Sear 1428 ( take my findings “magno cum grano salis” because several of the coins may have been listed twice, and I rushed through them) supports DO’s comments. Of 54 specimens I looked at, 10 had full inscriptions, 10 had reasonably complete inscriptions, while 24 had only fragmentary inscriptions, and 10 lacked them entirely.

My Constantinople follis (Sear 1428) has a decent obverse inscription: dN IЧSTINIANЧS ЄT TIЬЄRIЧS P. 4.18 gr. 22.6 mm. 6 hr. Hahn 43, 2 (this coin); DO 12a. Ex Protonotarios collection. The inscription of my half follis (Sear 1431) is mostly off the flan save for the terminal letters ЧS P. 2.10 gr. 18.4 mm 6 hr. Hahn 45 ;DO (15a) = BM 10

Here's a miliaresion of Constantine VI with his mother: Constantinople, 780-97. 1.94 gr. 24 mm. 12 hr. Sear 1595; DO 4a; BM 6: ...and a follis of Irene's sole reign: Constantinople, 797-802. 5.59 gr. 24.6 mm. 6 hr. Sear 1600; DO 2; BNP 1-3; BM 2. Ex Protonotarios collection.

Happy to help whenever I can. We can all learn so much from one another!

Whether your new miliaresion is Leo III or IV, it is a nice one. Congratulations!

Dear @ewomack, you are quite right in pointing out the difficulty of separating miliaresia of the two reigns. Grierson noted in DOC 3,1, pp. 231-2, that the distinction is not always easily made when dealing with individual specimens, and that a clear difference is only readily apparent in extreme cases. In general, Leo III's miliaresia have a tall and narrow cross potent with long vertical bars at the end of the cross arm; the cross potent on those of his grandson tends to be shorter, with a broader cross arm, having short vertical ends. Below are one of my Leo III (Sear 1512) and Leo IV (Sear 1585) that I hope illustrate the difference. Although the DOC doesn't mention it, I have also noted a tendency that the earlier coins' inscriptions are more delicately rendered than on those of Leo IV. I did a quick acsearch on the two coins and not surprisingly saw quite a few that appear to have been assigned to the wrong ruler.

Even with the surface irregularities of the reverse (DOC regards the "cross side" as the reverse), this is a nice Leo III and C. V. Traces of all 3 circular borders are present. Some of my examples have been trimmed, removing these entirely. 🙂

Dear @sand, Your observation is a good one: "how the Catholics and the Eastern Orthodox people, worked together and worshiped together, as Constantinople was under siege". This thought was expressed in the 1979 movie version of Stephen King's 'Salem's Lot, which has the character Ben Mears mutter: "no atheists in foxholes", as he's waiting for a vampire to rise! Your John VIII has a very good inscription, as these things go! The name is quite clear!

On Tuesday 29 May 1453 an Ottoman army of ca. 80,000 men, led by Sultan Mehmet II, captured the city of Constantinople after a 53 day siege, ending the Christian Eastern Roman empire. Rather than submit to the Sultan's demand to surrender Constantinople, the emperor Constantine XI Palaiologos chose to die fighting in defense of the city and his faith. Although the 7,000 defenders fought bravely, the city's massive 5th c. AD walls, which had for a millennium proved impregnable to successive sieges, were no match for the Turkish cannon, and the Ottoman army overwhelmed the small defending force of Byzantines and their Italian allies. Once Constantine realized the city was lost, he plunged into the midst of the fighting and he perished along with his City. There have been numerous studies of the fall of Constantinople, but one of the most convenient for English readers is Sir Steven Runciman's The Fall of Constantinople 1453. The quoted sections that follow are from his wonderful book. On Monday the 28th, realizing the end was near, the emperor encouraged his small force by reminding them what they were fighting for. “To his Greek subjects he said that a man should always be ready to die either for his faith or his country or for his family or for his sovereign. Now his people must be prepared to die for all four causes. He spoke of the glories and high traditions of the great Imperial city. He spoke of the perfidy of the infidel Sultan who had provoked the war in order to destroy the True Faith and to put his false prophet into the seat of Christ. He urged them to remember that they were the descendants of the ancient heroes of Greece and Rome and to be worthy of their ancestors. For his part, he said, he was ready to die for his faith, his city, and his people.” That evening the last Christian service was held in the great church of Holy Wisdom, the Hagia Sophia, that for a thousand years had been the heart of Eastern Orthodox Christianity. Latin Catholic and Greek Orthodox put aside their bitter doctrinal differences. “Priests who held union with Rome to be a mortal sin now came to the altar to serve their Unionist brothers. The Cardinal was there, and beside him bishops who would never acknowledge his authority; and all the people came to make confession and take communion, not caring whether Orthodox or Catholic administered it. There were Italians and Catalans along with the Greeks. The golden mosaics, studded with the images of Christ and his saints and the emperors and empresses of Byzantium, glimmered in the light of a thousand lamps and candles; and beneath them for the last time the priests in their splendid vestments moved in the solemn rhythm of the Liturgy. At this moment there was union in the Church of Constantinople.” Although 15th Italian sources indicate that coins of this last Roman emperor were issued to pay the defenders of the city, only in the last 50 years have specimens been identified, and a small hoard of them surfaced in the early 1990s. Attached is a photo of two of them. The obverse depicts the image of Christ, while the emperor's portrait appears on the reverse. They are diminutive, modest silver coins, but their history speaks volumes. The signature of Constantine XI Palaiologos, 1448-1453, the last emperor of the Romans is from a contemporary chrysobull, or imperial decree. The wording follows very closely the inscriptions found on his stavrata and that of his immediate predecessors: + Κωνσταντίνος εν Χριστώ τω Θεώ πιστός βασιλεύς και αυτοκράτωρ των Ρωμαίων ο Παλαιολόγος :+ Constantine, in Christ, God, faithful emperor and autocrat of the Romans, the Palaiologos. My dear friend Fred and I used to imagine that we would one day travel to the City (Constantinople, not Istanbul), mount the surviving walls, replant a cross on Hagia Sophia, and afterward drink the emperor’s health. My friend has now entered the heavenly City, and is, I have no doubt, currently sharing a drink and kebab with Constantine himself.

Thank you!

Great coins, here, friends! As @MrMonkeySwag96 has noted, the continued high quality of the gold of this period contrasts strikingly with the unfortunate bronze issues, and silver has for all practical purposes ceased to be issued, save for rare ceremonial issues. Here are a few of my examples from the “Period of Anarchy”. First Photo, top row, from left to right, then second row: Leontius, Tiberius III, Justinian II (2nd reign). 695 – 711 Leontios, 695–98. Follis, Constantinople, 695/6. 7.65 gr. 28.1 mm. 6 hr. Sear 1334; Hahn 32. Ex Protonotarios Collection. Tiberius III, 698–705. Follis, Constantinople, 698/9. 7.51 gr. 29.7 mm. 7 hr. Sear 1366; Hahn 73; DO 8c. Overstruck on a follis of Leontios, which in turn had been overstruck on an earlier coin. Visible on the obverse on the left are ANNO and below, CON of the Leontios reverse, and on the reverse, the loros and globus cruciger of Leontios can be seen to the left of the mark of value, and above it, the remains of ANNO of the original coin. Justinian II (2nd reign), 705-711. Follis, Constantinople, 705. 8.08 gr. 30.2 mm. 6 hr. Sear 1426; Hahn 42a; DO 11a. Dated year 20, Justinian not considering his 10 years in exile as breaking the continuity of his reign from 685. Second Photo, top row, then second row, left to right: Philippikos, Anastasios II, Theodosios III (711-717) Philippikos, 711-13. Follis, Constantinople, 711/12. 2.99 gr. 22.2 mm. 7 hr. Sear 1455; Hahn 21; DO 9a. Overstruck on a follis of Justinian II (Sear 1428). When the reverse is turned 90 degrees to the right, one can see the portrait of Justinian as well as much of inscription of the host coin. The portrait of Justinian’s son Tiberios, however, has been obliterated by the overstriking. Anastasios II, 713-15. Silver Half Siliqua, Rome, 713-715. 0.21 gr. 8.4 mm. 6 hr. Sear 1482A (this coin); Hahn et al. unlisted. O’Hara, “A find of Byzantine silver from the mint of Rome for the period A. D. 641-752”, (Revue Suisse de Numismatique, v. 64 (1985), pp. 105-40, #26 (this coin). The reverse features a monogram for ROMA. This coin is not to scale with the others. At 8 mm., it’s tiny! Theodosios III, 715–17. Silver Hexagram, Constantinople, 715-717. 2.27 gr. 19 mm. 4 hr. Sear 1491; Hahn 12. Third Photo: Leo III and Constantine V, 717-741. What a difference a mint makes! Solidus, Constantinople, 720. 4.44 gr. 20.9 mm. 6 hr. Sear 1504; DO 3 var.; Füeg 3K (this coin) = Berk 216 (this coin) Tremissis (electrum), Rome, 721-41. 1.40 gr. 16.4 mm. 6 hr. Sear 1534; DO 87 Fourth Photo: OK, one more episode of anarchy. Artavasdos with Nikephoros, 742-743? (or Leo III with Constantine V?) Follis, Constantinople. 2.61 gr. 20.8 mm. 6 hr. Sear 1515; DO 36 (both as Leo and Constantine). Ex Protonotarios collection. Both rulers hold together a patriarchal cross. The senior, on the left wears a chlamys, while the junior, a loros. Half Follis, Constantinople. 1.20 gr. 17.6 mm. 6hr. Sear 1519; DO (37b) = Agora 1829b. (both as Leo and Constantine). As before. Most scholars place these 2 rare coins in the joint reign of Leo and his son Constantine. However, Henri Pottier, in his article “Restitution d’un follis a Artavasde, l’usurpateur usurpe (Constantinople 742/3)”, in Bulletin du Cercle d'Etudes Numismatiques, 26, 1 (1989) suggests on the basis of overstrikes, that they actually belong to the usurper Artavasdos. I hope he is right, for otherwise I will never have a portrait of Artavasdos in my modest collection…. …and will have to be content with my worn and scratched miliaresion. Miliaresion, 742-3. 1.73 gr. 20.9 mm. 11 hr. Sear 1745; DO 6; BNP 1. Ex Henri Pottier collection.

Yours is a nice example; they are typically flat, as are some of mine. But the inscription on your reverse is mostly quite clear and crisp. Nice coin!

Nope, "Nuttin’ bettr’n a Dawg" You got that right! ♥️

I can see why you love Indy so - she looks very sweet. Ours goes by his last name, Becket, and he is a Pem. Will be 3 in November. He comes to the office with me from time to time (I work in a research library at the Univ. of Cincinnati - our library consists of books on Greece, Rome, Byzantium, and modern Greece). Here's a shot of him standing outside the department office, checking out our Reading Room, and inspecting our book stacks..

She's gorgeous! A Pem / Aussie shepherd mix - I can think of nothing nicer! The best dog I ever loved was named Tetris, a Corgi/Shepherd mix. She was perfect. We miss her so. Our Pem is named Thomas à Becket; so named because, when he joined our family we figured our 3 other dogs, like Henry II, would inevitably ask, "who shall deliver [us] from this turbulent priest?" Thanks for sharing those wonderful photos!