ewomack

19 hours ago, John Conduitt said:

I might know a 'plaice'. eBay?

'Fancy goods' is anything with no practical use. Like the 'rare coin'.

I should have specified: a place that I can go to look at and be in the non-virtual presence of "notions, gewgaws, and fripperies." 😁 Full credit for this line of course goes to @DonnaML.

I accept that definition of "fancy goods" as very plausible. Similar to someone I knew, long ago, who would say "this room is for my pretties." And, upon entering said room, one only saw numerous, and largely valueless, resin collectibles.

19 hours ago, JeandAcre said:

Haven't checked, but I'm wondering whether, during this phase of the language, '(rare) coin' could denote 'coins,' along the lines of the current usage, 'coinage.'

I think the usage technically remains valid today, though less used, as a "mass noun" or a "non-count" noun that suggests excessive quantities. It means to insinuate - again, I think - that "we have so many coins we can't even count them, so we can only refer to our offerings as an insensible mass." So, that 1863 store may not only have been utilizing "fancy grammar" but also a highly connotative marketing tactic. In reality, they probably only had a few common corroded Byzantines. 😁

One of my favorite Civil War Tokens. Where today can you buy "Toys, Fancy Goods, Fishing Tackle, and Rare Coin?" If anyone knows of a place, please let me know!

And what exactly are "Fancy goods?"

Those are really nice and useful graphics @Sulla80 - I'm guessing they are animated .gifs?

I took two years of standard Arabic in college, but that didn't necessarily help me read old Arabic coins, though it definitely gave me a head start. This book really helped me make some progress in all types of Arabic coins. It even includes a short Arabic lesson at the beginning.

On 1/8/2024 at 10:01 PM, ela126 said:

What an excellent write up and a beautiful piece. Overall, that is certainly in the top 5% or better of available examples. You should be quite happy with it.

Thank you! I really appreciate your kind words. And yes, I am pretty happy with the coin. As I said above, it looks even better in hand. I find myself looking at it often.

On 1/8/2024 at 10:01 PM, ela126 said:

I have yet to get one of these great pieces, but I have at least one I’m proud of:

Basil 1 - SB 1709 - Constantinople - 7.6g 

This is a well appreciated coin as it has that great deep green patina. Won a few years ago at a Leu auction.

That is a nice example of an enthroned Basil I. That is a nice green patina as well. I have the same type for Leo VI and it has a similar patina. They couldn't get the throne quite right though, it seems. The left side doesn't seem to really match the right side. The throne on my Leo VI looks similarly askew. It's still a fantastic type. I actually find such little idiosyncrasies in Byzantine coins part of their appeal.

Leo VI (AD 886-912); Constantinople; Æ Follis; Obv: +LEOn bAS - ILEVS ROM* Leo enthroned facing, wearing crown and loros, and holding labarum and akakia; Rev: Inscription in four lines: +LEOn / Eh ΘEO bA / SILEVS R / OmEOh; 6.90g, 28.00 mm;  Sear 1728

On 1/8/2024 at 10:22 PM, Orange Julius said:

Great coin and a fun to read write up. Thank you! I don’t have many of my Byzantine coins photographed but I do have a picture of my Leo VI… the disliked son. 

Leo VI, AE Follis, Constantinople. LEON bASILEVS ROM, crowned bust facing with short beard, wearing chlamys, holding akakia / LEON EN QEO BA SILEVS R OMEON legend in four lines. SB 1729, DOC 8.

Thank you as well! That's a nice Sear 1729! Some of the patina looks a little like uranium under UV light, which is stunning. I would say "poor Leo" for being the disliked son, but he did end up on the throne eventually, though arguably at quite a cost. His rise to the throne reminds me a little of Elizabeth I's - favored, then unfavored and imprisoned, wondering if she would survive, then on to the throne. Being a royal must have been frightening at times, if not a lot of the time.
 

On 1/9/2024 at 6:12 AM, Ancient Coin Hunter said:

Another of Leo VI, who issued apparently one of the most iconic types in this latter Byzantine era. In this case the light patina makes the devices stand out. This coin weighs in at over 8 grams

Another nice Sear 1729! Sear wrote that this coin was apparently issued in greater quantities than any other Byzantine coin. Because of that they seem to have helped define the series overall. It's probably difficult to prove that claim definitively, but I do see many of these around. I also picked one up a while ago.

Leo VI (AD 886-912); Constantinople; Æ Follis; Obv: +LEOn bAS - ILEVS ROM' Bust facing wearing crown and chlamys, holding akakia in l. hand; Rev: Inscription in four lines: +LEOn / Eh ΘEO bA / SILEVS R / OmEOh; 7.67g.;  Berk 918, Sear 1729

On 1/9/2024 at 12:05 PM, Valentinian said:

Here are a couple of types of Basil (867-886) that have not yet been shown:

Very nice examples! I don't see either of those very often, especially the bottom example (Sear 1710), which is quite nice. Though I don't think that those coins picture the future Constantine VII, who ruled from 913 to 959, but Basil I's "favorite son" Constantine, who died in 879, before Basil I. It looks like Leo VI was Constantine VII's father, born in 905 and made Augustus in 908. Leo VI had trouble fathering a son, similar to Henry VIII, but his fourth wife bore Constantine. Neither coin shows Leo, probably because he wasn't made Augustus until 870. Those are both great! Thank you for sharing!

Basil I founded the Macedonian dynasty, one of the most important dynasties in Byzantine history. His ambitions in the West also led some to deem him "the other Justinian." Born a peasant, a combination of talent and a series of very lucky breaks landed him influential friends, a huge fortune, and the admiration of emperor Michael III. After he became Michael III's bodyguard, the emperor ordered Basil to divorce his wife and marry the emperor's own mistress (imagine having to explain that one to your betrothed). Basil received approval to murder one of Michael III's uncles, Bardas, after he convinced the emperor that Bardas sought the throne. Possibly as thanks, Michael III declared Basil co-emperor in 866. Then, after Michael III started to openly court a new favorite heir, Basil and a group of supporters murdered both Michael III and this new favorite after the pair heavily inebriated themselves at a banquet. No one seemed to put up much of a fuss over this slaughter, so Basil became emperor immediately. Similar to many Byzantine emperors, Basil I came to the throne with plenty of blood on his hands. As emperor, Basil allied the East and West empires by teaming up with Holy Roman Emperor Louis II against the Arabs in 871. Many consider Basil I a competent emperor overall. Though often called "The Macedonian," scholars apparently don't agree on his actual origins. This uncertainty extends to his alleged son Leo, who became Leo VI following Basil I's death. Rumors lingered that Michael III had actually fathered Leo, not Basil. Leo himself may have agreed, since, after Basil I's death, he had Michael III reburied with imperial honors. Basil I apparently hated Leo and supposedly even physically beat him. Suspecting a conspiracy, Basil I had Leo imprisoned and almost had him blinded, but the Patriarch convinced him otherwise, since Leo's imprisonment alone had caused public riots. Basil I died while hunting, supposedly dragged 16 miles by his belt after getting entangled in a deer's antlers. He had planned to revise Justinian's law books, but the literary Leo, as Leo VI, ended up taking on this project during his own reign.

This follis depicts, from left to right, Leo (the future Leo VI), Basil I himself, and Basil I's favorite son, Constantine, who died in 879, much to Basil I's great dismay. Like many Byzantine coins, decent portraits also seem fairly difficult to obtain for this type. The sons usually look a little ghoulish, as they do here, but this example retains more detail than I've usually seen on numerous other examples. The very worn "+LEO" text to the extreme left is unfortunate, as are some of the worn peripheral letters on the reverse. But, as usual, with Byzantines one usually needs to take what one can get. The coin, around the size of a quarter, looks fabulous in hand. Historically, it captures an intriguing miniature snapshot in time. Eventually, the hated "son" would get the throne, while the father would outlive the favorite son. But none of that had presumably happened when this coin first appeared. What a memory to have pressed in copper, still visible over 1,100 years later.

Basil I (867-886) Æ Follis; Constantinople mint; Obv: +LEOh bASIL COhST AVGG, Facing half-length figures of Basil in center, Leo on left and Constantine on right, Basil wears crown and loros and holds akakia, both sons wear crown and chlamys; Rev: +bASIL COhSTAhN T S LEOhNEN QO bASIL S ROMEOh in five lines, "*" in exergue; 24mm, 7.89 grams; DOC 11.1, R. 1864, Sear 1713

Please share any Basil I coins you have!

Wow! Fantastic exhibit filled with amazing things! I don't live anywhere near New York, but if I did I would be taking a trip. Thank you for posting all of these images!

I wish my family had brought me to such amazing things. We usually went to Arby's.

Ancient coins can fill me with nostalgia, and what better time to be nostalgic for than the times of "the good emperors?"

Marcus Aurelius. AR Denarius. Struck 161/2 AD. M ANTONINVS AVG, bare head right / CONCORD AVG TR P XVII, COS III in exergue, Concordia seated left, holding patera, resting left elbow on statuette of Spes set on base. 18mm 3.4gm

Thank you for the comments everyone! I will likely never possess a top-notch collection that inspires swoons from the masses (i.e., I'm too cheap to buy ancient gold), but I'm nonetheless having quite a bit of fun buying these beguiling Byzantine bronzes. They appear to be an obscure acquired taste. I apparently have acquired it, perhaps obscurely.

Following my final 2023 purchase, I told myself that I was going to take an extended break from coins, but I already seem to have another one in the post on its way to me.

So much for discipline in 2024. It took me only 4 days to completely obliterate that resolution. I apparently have the resilience of a wet napkin.

I only acquired 14 coins in 2023, so a "top 10" feels a little excessive. Maybe a top 5? I've never done one of these lists before, so pardon me while I attempt to muddle through this tradition...
 

5. Greek Obol - Pisidia
Almost exactly a year ago, I bought my first Greek coin, a tiny, humble Obol. I had read about Obols in various ancient Greek Cynic works, so I thought I should experience at least one of them in person. Diogenes of Sinope's disparaging claim that "philosophers are worth 3 Obols" really hits home upon seeing one in hand. 😄 Yet it displays amazing artistry despite its miniscule size.

Pisidia; Selge; c. 250 - 190 BCE; AR Obol; 0.89 grams; Obv: Facing gorgeoneion; Rev: Helmented head of Athena right,
astragalos to left; SNG Ashmolean 1546 - 50, SNG BN 1948-54
 

4. Anonymous Æ Follis - Attributed to Romanus IV Diogenes
At this time I'm picking up mostly Byzantine coins, so that includes the Anonymous Follis series. I found this example aesthetically pleasing, though Mary's face on the reverse looks slightly sandblasted. A fascinating series that displays Byzantine history, the ultimate long term victory of the iconodules, and the beginnings of the eventual end for the long running empire. Some of its greatest strengths were also some of its greatest weaknesses.

Romanus IV Diogenes AD (1068-1071); Constantinople; Æ Anonymous Follis, Class G, Obv: IC-XC to left and right of bust of Christ, nimbate, facing, right hand raised, scroll in left, all within border of large dots; Rev: MP-ΘV to left and right of Mary, nimbate, ands raised, all inside border of large dots; 26-28 mm. 10.2 gm.; Sear 1867

3. Anastasius I - Æ Follis
Decent portraits of the Emperor who initiated the era of "Byzantine Coinage" seemed really hard to find. Then, one random day (actually, it was October 17th, 2023), this coin appeared at what seemed like an amazing price. It's not perfect by any means, but it had everything that I wanted in an Anastasius I follis. I was very happy to fill that important historical gap with this example. I also picked up a copy of Metcalf's 1969 book The Origins of the Anastasian Currency Reform not long after this coin arrived.

Anastasius I (491-518), Æ follis-17.41g, 33 mm, Constantinople mint; Obv: DN ANASTASIVS PP AVG, Diademed, draped and cuirassed bust of Anastasius right; rev: Large "M", delta below, cross above, star to each side, "COM" in exergue; Sear 19

2. Anonymous Æ Follis - Attributed to Romanus III
Yes, another Anonymous Follis. Decent portraits on Class B examples seem almost non-existant, so I grabbed this one despite its slabbed state. The overstrike, in this case onto a Class A2, also appealed to me, since overstriking an anonymous type onto another anonymous type seems like a strange thing to do. It probably made sense at the time. The Obol above arrived at the very beginning of 2023 and this one arrived very near the end. The numismatic year began and ended on high notes.

Romanus III (1028-1034); Constantinople; Æ Anonymous Follis, Class B, Obv: IC to left, XC to right, to bust of Christ, nimbate, facing, holding book of Gospels; Rev: IS XS / BAS ILE / BAS ILE to left and right above and below cross on three steps; 29 mm. 10.2 gm.; Sear 1823

1. Romanus I Lecapenus - Æ Follis
This coin isn't rare, Sear even says that it was issued in "great quantities," and it isn't in absolutely top condition for its type (though it's likely above average), but for some reason I just can't stop staring at it. Its aesthetic appeals to me deeply in some ineffable way. Romanus I's fierce expression, the labarum leaning casually on his shoulder, the slightly off center cross on the globus cruciger, and the interesting meld of Latin and Greek on the coin's text make this a coin that I have trouble forgetting about. After it first arrived, I kept it in a Saflip out on my desk and found myself looking at it multiple times throughout the day. I even sent a photo of it to a few of my co-workers and they thought it was "cool" (though they also thought that I must have spent an absolute fortune on it, which I didn't). His reputation as "The Gentle Usurper" who reigned completely within the reign of Constantine VII Porphyrogenitus just adds to the appeal. For all of these reasons this has become not only my favorite coin of 2023, but one of my favorite coins in my entire pile.

Romanus I Lacapenus (920 - 944); Constantinople Æ Follis; Obv: +RwMAN bAS-ILEVS Rwm’ Facing bust of Romanus I, bearded, wearing crown and jeweled chlamys, and holding labarum and globus cruciger; Rev: +RwMA/N’ENΘEwbA/SILEVSRw/MAIwN; 27mm, 8.09g, 6h; R.1886-8, Sear 1760

I woke up today and it's 2024. Who would have guessed? At least I have an irrational preference for even-numbered years.

We celebrated last night with some fantastic okonomiyaki and amazing mango crepe cake (yes, it was $10.00 a slice, but worth it). The Japanese restaurant we went to even gave us a small private room complete with elaborate door curtain. A great experience overall.

Also, earlier that day I managed to finish reading my 50th book of the year. I read 60 last year, but I'll take 50 given that I work full-time and have some minor semblance of a life (which includes coins, of course).

I hope everyone had a great New Year!

That was an interesting observation, but I agree with @Simon's advice to use caution with this one.

First, these Michael VII folles do not fall into the anonymous follis category, at least according to Sear. It does appear the half follis did exist as Sear 1880a (one of the auctions pictured). Sear doesn't list any weight boundaries, but the book does try to represent at least relative sizes pictographically. Given the usual vagaries of such a process, the photo of the "extremely rare" 1880a looks smaller than the photo of the more common 1878. Measuring the photos gives a diameter of around 27mm for the full follis and around 19mm for the half follis (I admit this certainly isn't a rigorous method). So the listed sizes of those juxtaposed auctions confuses me, but the difference between 19mm and 22mm isn't immense, either. Sear adds to 1880a "As 1878, but struck on a smaller flan from smaller dies." Would a full follis have 22m or 25mm diameters (based on the auctions posted), but a half follis a 23mm diameter? Shouldn't the half follis have considerably smaller size? I don't know, it seems bizarre, but I have to admit that I don't know enough about these pieces to acknowledge anything beyond this confusion. There is also an "extremely rare" 1879 follis, but the differentiation listed is "As last (1878), but with IC -  XC beneath the transverse limbs of cross, and the stars above."

Interesting in any case. Something seems strange in the examples shown, but it's hard to say exactly what. It's probably due to my lack of experience with these pieces.

On 12/28/2023 at 8:40 PM, Valentinian said:

I started 50 years before you, but I appreciate what you have assembled. It is a very attractive group.

Wow. That is quite a head start. I will never catch up. I've heard "legends" from decades past that pretty much all Byzantines used to sell for almost nothing (with the usual "some exceptions"). That no longer appears true. Thanks for your kind comments. Also, I was definitely aware of your website and have used it over the past 1.5 years or so, but thank you for posting it again so others can be aware of it and get to know it.

On 12/28/2023 at 7:00 PM, ela126 said:

Correct on the podcast. Robin’s voice is quite good too so no pain listening.

Thanks for the confirmation. I need to start listening again.

On 12/29/2023 at 11:15 AM, Gordon Grant said:

Amazing coins,you have great taste 👍

Thank you! I really appreciate your nice comments. One often hopes that they are putting together something "decent," but only others can really confirm whether that's true beyond one's own self and opinions. Also, my wife would probably laugh at someone telling me I have "great taste." 😁 But if I told her, "they were just referring to my coins," then she would probably say "ah, okay. Never mind, then."

I agree with @ambr0zie above that, when one receives an item that appears damaged in the post, one should contact the shipper/dealer as soon as possible. Ideally, the same day it arrives. Thankfully, I have yet to received a damaged coin in the mail, but I have received other damaged items. I photograph everything, the package unopened (if the package looks damaged), any internal packaging and then the item itself. This will depend on the damage, of course. I send all of those photos to the shipper as soon as I can. As mentioned above, telling a dealer that "I just received this item and it appears damaged" as soon as possible helps remove suspicions that something may have happened to the item in the intervening days, that the receiver did something careless, or something happened accidentally after the coin was unpacked. I've sold many things online and if someone messaged me that "I received this damaged item five days ago," I would instantly wonder why they waited five days to tell me (unless they included an explanation). The one or two times this did happen, the person contacted me the day that they received it. It unfortunately happens.

It is very deflating to receive something damaged in the mail. It's a huge pain. So, sorry this happened to you @Nerosmyfavorite68. I hope it all works out. I've had no issues ordering with LAC (assuming that we're referring to the same organization), so I'm guessing they will do what they can. Let us know how it turns out.

Thank you for the nice comments, @Ancient Coin Hunter, @Al Kowsky, and @ela126. Though I have no great rarities, I've still enjoyed putting this collection together. I try to remain very picky by buying pieces that appeal to me visually, which probably helps explain why I only have 20 coins after 1.5 years. Sometimes, such as the Tiberius II Constantine, one can obtain only "good enough for the type" examples. I've passed on countless "almost" coins since I've started. I haven't decided whether I regret not buying one Irene example that I saw; I passed on it because, though it looked decent overall, it didn't show her cat-eared crown, which is something that I want to see on an Irene coin. The Anastasius I follis was shockingly cheap. Apparently, I bought it only minutes after it first appeared on VCoins, according to another member here who happened to be watching at that time. It's been great posting on a site with others who appreciate the sometimes askew aesthetics of Byzantine coins. I still remember the post, I don't remember by who - and it doesn't matter - where someone claimed that Byzantine coins were "objectively ugly." This seemed to suggest that liking them was some kind of a mistake. I still find that amusing.

11 hours ago, Al Kowsky said:

How did NGC grade grade the Romanus III bronze 🤔?

AU with an "overstrike" designation. The temptation to break it out of that slab still bubbles within me. It does have some greenish areas that I'll need to keep an eye on. If those begin to morph, I'll break it out immediately.

10 hours ago, ela126 said:

If you haven't begun the journey of listening to "History of Byzantium" by Robin Pierson is what truly has kept me hooked. 275 or so podcasts later (Leo 1 through 4th crusade so far), keeps you connected to the emperors and history while you enjoy the coins with them. Do check it out, can't recommend enough.

I'm pretty sure you're referring to this Podcast? https://thehistoryofbyzantium.com/  If so, I've heard at least one episode, but you're right, I need to hear more. Thanks for the recommendation!

12 hours ago, Ancient Coin Hunter said:

It appears that for a brief time there was a significant improvement in style and fabric, when compared with earlier and later issues. It may have had something to do with the contemporaneous artistic revival and increasing wealth and power of the empire as the Abbasids in Baghdad started to fade a bit.

That is an interesting observation. The eighth century in particular didn't seem to produce many beautifully struck coins. I'm thinking especially of some of the amorphous blobs from the era of Justinian II, Leo III, and others. I don't yet have any coins from that century, partially because most look ragged and partially because they can cost exorbitant amounts. A coin of Irene remains on my radar, but I know that I'll have to shell out more than I'm usually willing to to obtain a decent example.

Pardon me some self-indulgence, but I also posted threads for all of those coins previously on this forum. Some led to interesting discussions, great coin examples from other members, and some participation from people who have either left or just haven't posted in a while. One interesting moment in the bunch was when @Curtis JJ realized that a small envelope that came with one of my Theophilus coins matched those from Phil Peck's collection. Mostly for me, but for anyone else interested, here are links to all of those previous discussions and the original post date.

Anastasius I (10/23/23), Justin I (3/17/23), Justinian I (8/13/22), Justin II (6/7/23), Tiberius II Constantine (11/18/23), Maurice Tiberius (8/18/23), Phocas (11/23/22), Constans II (2/9/23), Constantine IV (6/26/23), Leo V (1) (8/13/22), Leo V (2) (9/22/22), Michael II (10/5/22), Theophilus (1) (8/27/22), Theophilus (2) (4/5/23), Leo VI (1) (10/19/22), Leo VI (2) (8/4/23), Romanus I (11/24/23), Anonymous, Class B (12/26/23), Anonymous, Class G (9/20/23) , Manuel I Comenenus (5/26/23)

20 Byzantine Coins - Part II

Romanus I Lecapenus - 920-944
If forced to choose a favorite out of this lot, I might choose this one. Romanus I's story and the look of this coin make me want to stare at it continuously.

Romanus I Lacapenus (920 - 944); Constantinople Æ Follis; Obv: +RwMAN bAS-ILEVS Rwm’ Facing bust of Romanus I, bearded, wearing crown and jeweled chlamys, and holding labarum and globus cruciger; Rev: +RwMA/N’ENΘEwbA/SILEVSRw/MAIwN; 27mm, 8.09g, 6h; R.1886-8, Sear 1760

Anonymous Follis attributed to Romanus III - 1028-1034

This coin just arrived today, the 20th purchase of the lot.

Romanus III (1028-1034); Constantinople; Æ Anonymous Follis, Class B, Obv: IC to left, XC to right, to bust of Christ, nimbate, facing, holding book of Gospels; Rev: IS XS / BAS ILE / BAS ILE to left and right above and below cross on three steps; 29 mm. 10.2 gm.; Sear 1823

Anonymous Follis attributed to Romanus IV -1068-1071


Romanus IV Diogenes AD (1068-1071); Constantinople; Æ Anonymous Follis, Class G, Obv: IC-XC to left and right of bust of Christ, nimbate, facing, right hand raised, scroll in left, all within border of large dots; Rev: MP-ΘV to left and right of Mary, nimbate, ands raised, all inside border of large dots; 26-28 mm. 10.2 gm.; Sear 1867

Manuel I Comnenus - 1143-1183

"
Manuel I Comnenus (1143-1183), Æ Tetarteron; Thessalonica; Obv: ⨀/Γ/Є to left and P-over-w/Γ/O/S to right, half-length bust of St. George facing, holding spear and shield ; Rev:  MANɣHΛ ΔЄCΠΟΤ, bust of Manuel facing, holding labarum and globus cruciger; 20 mm,3.24g; DOC 18; Sear 1975

20 Byzantine Coins - Part I

I bought my first Byzantine coin in July of 2022 and that led to a frenzy of buying (for me, at least) to obtain more and more examples. A year and a half later, I have accumulated 20 Byzantine coins in all. I'm still not sure what set it all off, but it had something to do with the numismatic aesthetic of Byzantines sitting somewhere between classic Roman and medieval coins (I love both types). Their "strangeness" also appealed to me. Lines of rulers who, when I started, I had never heard of, untrodden paths to follow, my past visit to the very Byzantine cathedral of St. Mark's in Venice, the glimpses of Byzantium from my historic studies, etc. Though I still don't fully understand the obsession, I've enjoyed getting to know this obscure back closet of ancient numismatics, one that some people dismiss outright. I do understand, this road isn't for everyone. It apparently suited me just fine. So, here are those 20 Byzantine coins, in order of reign, in two parts because one can only upload so many images in a single post. I don't have anything particularly rare at this point, but I think I've acquired some decent-looking pieces, especially considering the average eye appeal of many obtainable Byzantine coins.

Anastasius I - 491 to 518

Anastasius I (491-518), Æ follis-17.41g, 33 mm, Constantinople mint; Obv: DN ANASTASIVS PP AVG, Diademed, draped and cuirassed bust of Anastasius right; rev: Large "M", delta below, cross above, star to each side, "COM" in exergue; Sear 19

Justin I - 518-527

Justin I (518-527), Æ follis- 17,95 gram- 31 mm, Constantinople mint; Obv: DN IVSTINVS PP AVG, diademed, draped and cuirassed bust right; rev: Large M, below, A; *-* in fields, above cross, CON in exergue; Sear 62; MIB 11

Justinian I - 527-565

Justinian I Follis (540/1 - Year 14), Constantinople mint, Obv: DN IVSTINIANVS PP AVG, helmeted, cuirassed bust facing holding cross on globe and shield; cross to right. Rev: Large M, ANNO to left, cross above, XIIII (date) to right, A below, CON in exergue, Sear 163

Justin II - 565-578

Justin II & Sophie (Year 5, 569 - 570), Æ Follis, 31.4mm, 11.83g, Nicomedia, Obv: DN IVUSTINUS PP AVG Justin II and Sophie seated facing forward, each with nimbus, holding globus cruciger and cruciform scepter; Rev: ANNO U, large M surmounted by cross, with B below, NIKO in exergue, Sear 369

Tiberius II Constantine - 578-582

Tiberius II Constantine. 578-582 AD. Æ Follis (37mm, 16,64g, 12h). Constantinople mint. Dated year 5 (578/9 AD); Obv: d M TIb CONS-TANT PP AVC, crowned facing bust in consular robes, holding mappa and eagle-tipped sceptre; Rev: Large M; cross above, ANNO to left, u to right; CONE. MIBE 25; Sear 430.

Maurice Tiberius - 582-602

Maurice Tiberius. 582-602. Æ Decanummium 17mm, 3.1g Theoupolis (Antioch) mint. Dated RY 8 (AD 589/90); Obv: blundered legend, Crowned facing bust, wearing consular robe, holding mappa and eagle-tipped scepter; Rev: Large X; cross above, R below; A/N/N/O U/III (date) across field; Sear 536

Phocas - 602-610

On this forum, I described this very misshapen Phocas follis as exhibiting "ugly beauty" and many people agreed. Some agreed with the "ugly" and some with the "beauty." I think more agreed with the "ugly."

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

Constans II - 641-668

"The great beard." I think I read that one of his servants assassinated him in his bath with a soap dish.

Constans II (641-668), AE Follis / 40 Nummi, Syracuse, 652-3, AE 23-27mm. 6g. Constans standing facing, wearing crown and chlamys, holding globus cruciger in right hand; I/H/Δ to l., I/A to right / Large M; cross above; SCL. MIB 208; DOC 179; S. 1108.

Constantine IV Pogonatus - 668-685

I purchased this coin in person at the Harlan Berk offices in downtown Chicago. The staff on hand searched for maybe half an hour for it, even though I had a catalog number (it's an immense place). So, how could I not buy it when they finally presented it to me? They did give me a nice discount as well. A great experience overall that always comes back to me whenever I see this coin.

Constantine IV Pogonatus (668 - 685), with Heraclius and Tiberius, Æ Follis (20mm, 4.38 g). Syracuse mint; Obv: No legend, Crowned and cuirassed facing bust, holding globus cruciger; Rev: Large M, flanked by Heraclius and Tiberius standing facing; TKW monogram above, [SC]L in exergue; MIB 104; SB 1207

Leo V - 813-820

This was the first Byzantine coin that I purchased. I just searched VCoins for "Byzantine" and came across these two guys, unknown to me at the time, staring out at me intriguingly. Something told me to press the "buy" button.

Leo V AD 813-820, Æ Follis (23mm, 4.43 grams) Constantinopolis; LEON S CONST; facing busts of Leo (l.) and Constantine (r.);
Large M between XXX and NNN; cross above and A below; Sear 1630

This Leo V came with provenance from Wayne Sayles and a deaccession number from the Chrysler Museum

Leo V AD 813-820, Æ Follis (21.59mm, 5.48 grams) Constantinople Mint, Obv: LЄ-OҺ ЬASIL, crowned and draped bust facing, holding cross potent and akakia; Rev: Large M, [X/X/X] to left, cross above, N/N/N to right, A (officina) below, Sear 1629

Michael II The Amorian - 820-829

Michael II the Amorian (AD 820-829) with Theophilus Æ Follis; Constantinople mint; Obv: MIXAHL S ΘЄOFILOS, crowned facing busts of Michael (on left) and Theophilus (on right); cross above; Rev: Large M, X/X/X to left, cross above, N/N/N to right, Θ below; 29.12mm; 6.21 grams; Sear 1642

Theophilus - 829-842

Theophilus (AD 829-842) Æ Follis; Constantinople mint; AD 830-842; Obv: ΘEOFIL bASIL; Half-length figure standing facing, holding labarum and globus cruciger; Rev: ΘEO / FILE AVG / OVSTE SV / hICAS in four lines; 27.66mm; 7.46 grams; Sear 1667

Theophilus (AD 829-842) Æ Follis; Constantinople mint; AD 830-842; Obv: ΘEOFIL bASIL; Half-length figure standing facing, holding labarum and globus cruciger; Rev: ΘEO / FILE AVG / OVSTE SV / hICAS in four lines; 28mm; 8.26 grams; Sear 1667

Leo VI "The Wise" - 886-912

Leo VI (AD 886-912); Constantinople; Æ Follis; Obv: +LEOn bAS - ILEVS ROM' Bust facing wearing crown and chlamys, holding akakia in l. hand; Rev: Inscription in four lines: +LEOn / Eh ΘEO bA / SILEVS R / OmEOh; 7.67g.;  Berk 918, Sear 1729

Leo VI (AD 886-912); Constantinople; Æ Follis; Obv: +LEOn bAS - ILEVS ROM* Leo enthroned facing, wearing crown and loros, and holding labarum and akakia; Rev: Inscription in four lines: +LEOn / Eh ΘEO bA / SILEVS R / OmEOh; 6.90g, 28.00 mm;  Sear 1728

I no longer have my first slabbed coin, purchased years ago, but I remember it was a Morgan dollar in an old holder.  The coin's year escapes me.

My first slabbed ancient was a Julian II, which I do still have.

Julian II (360 - 363) AE1 (BI Maiorina); Thessalonika Mint; Obv: DN FL CL IVLIANUS PF AUG; Diademed, draped and cuirassed bust right; Rev: SECVRITAS REIPVB; Bull standing right, two stars above;*TESΓ in exergue; Ref: RIC 226; NGC Graded Ch. XF

This coin was supposed to arrive on December 23rd, but it missed the traditional "birthday" of its depicted icon and didn't arrive until the 26th. I didn't order it for that reason, I just thought the timing was somewhat amusing. Oh well. Showing a scowling image of Christ the Pantocrator (my wife's exact words upon seeing it were "he looks pissed off"), this Class B example of an Anonymous Follis appears overstruck onto a Class A2 Anonymous Follis, as Sear notes: "This type is often overstuck on the large-size folles of Class A2." Sear then adds "In the Dumbarton Oaks Catalogue Class B is assigned to the time of Michael IV." Sear assigns it to Romanus III, as did the dealer. Sayles apparently follows Dumbarton Oaks and also assigns it to Michael IV, as does Grierson. It could easily belong to either emperor, since Romanus III ruled from only 1028 to 1034 and Michael IV reigned from 1034 to 1041. The anonymous nature of these pieces obviously makes them difficult to attribute, but research unknown to me may have weighed the scales towards Romanus III.

A section of the legend "+EMMANOVHA" from the overstruck Class A2 follis appears to obverse left, along with a portion of the right side of the Class A2 nimbus, with its 2 pellets in the cross limb, to obverse right. Probably due to the overstrike, the text on the reverse appears fairly illegible, with some exceptions. Apparently, decent portraits of Christ on Class B folles remain difficult to find. From the numerous books and catalogs that I've perused, I have yet to see an example as clear as this one, which reveals the main reason that I decided to add it to my pile. As shown, it came slabbed, graded NGC Ancients AU with an unsurprising "overstruck" designation. I bought the coin, not the slab, and the slab made the coin aggravatingly difficult to photograph. Temptations to break it out gurgle within me. In certain light, splotches of green appear to mid-obverse right and in some tiny areas on the reverse (somewhat visible on the photos). These don't show in direct light. From what I can tell, it doesn't look diseased, but I'll keep a wary eye on it over time. These types continue to fascinate me given the history of iconoclasm in the Byzantine empire and their various and interesting depictions of Christ. It's also interesting why one ruler, if that is who made such decisions, would want to overstrike an anonymous coin of a predecessor. They're anonymous, after all. Perhaps at the time they circulated as far less anonymous than they appear to us now? Their attribution and association with a particular ruler was probably much more obvious at the time of striking.

Romanus III (1028-1034); Constantinople; Æ Anonymous Follis, Class B, Obv: IC to left, XC to right, to bust of Christ, nimbate, facing, holding book of Gospels; Rev: IS XS / BAS ILE / BAS ILE to left and right above and below cross on three steps; 29 mm. 10.2 gm.; Sear 1823

Please share your anonymous Folles!

Thank you for the best wishes, @panzerman. The same back for everyone else here! For me, the holidays present an excuse to enjoy a very long weekend. Though I admittedly enjoy the change in season and decorations everywhere, I've never really celebrated the holidays myself in any personal way.

A coin-based Christmas opportunity was missed this year, though. I ordered a Byzantine Anonymous Follis, Class B, with a decent portrait of Christ on it. Originally, the mail system said it would arrive on December 23rd, but it unfortunately missed and will now arrive on the 26th. I considered confusing my family by bringing the coin to dinner and passing it around (there are no fellow coin collectors in the lot and I've never been one to pass around religious symbols), but the postal system didn't accommodate that particular whimsy. So much for that.

I did observe Three Kings some years ago in Uruguay. I, the only native English speaker in the group, exchanged presents with others sharing a cabin overlooking the ocean. It was fantastic. We drew names and the poor person who chose me cursed his luck. He said "why did I have to draw the hardest one?!" 😄

Lastly, having read a lot about Germany above, I do faithfully observe a tradition begun by a German YouTuber... PIGMAS!

An interesting idea, but I never have put any interest in coins anywhere near my resume. There is no problem doing so, but it has nothing whatsoever to do with my career and I would hate it to distract from other interview questions. If I applied somewhere that involved coins, then I would definitely highlight it.

I have no new orders out, so this coin remains my latest ancient and latest coin. It may also qualify more as medieval than ancient, but since it's Byzantine it feels like it straddles the two epochs (plus, I couldn't find the medieval thread). It features "the gentle usurper" (also the title of chapter 13 in Norwich's A Short History of Byzantium), Romanus I, who allowed the legitimate ruler, Constantine VII, to watch from the sidelines as he took the throne and held back the Bulgarians. Constantine VII eventually returned to power and Romanus I became a footnote within Constantine VII's reign. He doesn't really look like someone to mess with, either. The intermingling of Latin and Greek in the text is also interesting.

Romanus I Lacapenus (920 - 944); Constantinople Æ Follis; Obv: +RwMAN bAS-ILEVS Rwm’ Facing bust of Romanus I, bearded, wearing crown and jeweled chlamys, and holding labarum and globus cruciger; Rev: +RwMA/N’ENΘEwbA/SILEVSRw/MAIwN; 27mm, 8.09g, 6h; R.1886-8, Sear 1760

Nice obol. Diogenes of Sinope thought philosophers were worth three of these.

Strangely, I woke up this morning thinking about that very SNL skit. And here it is. Very bizarre.

Here's the Apostate himself finely arrayed in diadem and cuirass. Lookout Sassanids! Those pagans apparently knew their way around a color chart too! His look certainly is no bull!

Julian II (360 - 363) AE1 (BI Maiorina); Thessalonika Mint; Obv: DN FL CL IVLIANUS PF AUG; Diademed, draped and cuirassed bust right; Rev: SECVRITAS REIPVB; Bull standing right, two stars above;*TESΓ in exergue; Ref: RIC 226
 

And doesn't Maurice just look splendid decked out in a consular robe accessorized with mappa and an eagle-tipped scepter! Chirp, chirp! He looks way too fabulous to overthrow! All usurpers recoil at a well-dressed emperor! Don't you dare wear white socks with black shoes in front of this vivacious ruler!

Maurice Tiberius. 582-602. Æ Decanummium 17mm, 3.1g Theoupolis (Antioch) mint. Dated RY 8 (AD 589/90); Obv: blundered legend, Crowned facing bust, wearing consular robe, holding mappa and eagle-tipped scepter; Rev: Large X; cross above, R below; A/N/N/O U/III (date) across field; Sear 536
 

Double your pleasure! Leo V and Constantine step out together in style wrapped finely in matching chlamys and crowns! How long do those things take to put on again? It's certainly worth the wait, especially when presented in sensational scintillating stereo!! Did I hear an ancient swoon?

Leo V AD 813-820, Æ Follis (23mm, 4.43 grams) Constantinopolis; LEON S CONST; facing busts of Leo (l.) and Constantine (r.);
Large M between XXX and NNN; cross above and A below; Sear 1630

They certainly didn't call him "The Wise" for nothing! Leo VI looks absolutely stunning and "fashion wise" (wink wink) enthroned in sparkling loros, accentuated by a big big big labarum and adorable little akakia! Wow! Wow! WOW! Who says smart people can't also look good?

Leo VI (AD 886-912); Constantinople; Æ Follis; Obv: +LEOn bAS - ILEVS ROM* Leo enthroned facing, wearing crown and loros, and holding labarum and akakia; Rev: Inscription in four lines: +LEOn / Eh ΘEO bA / SILEVS R / OmEOh; 6.90g, 28.00 mm;  Sear 1728

The "Gentle Usurper" Romanus I is definitely "gentle on the eyes" in this eye-popping jeweled chlamys!! Step aside Constantine VII and let Romanus on the runway!! That gorgeous crown, globus cruciger and labarum just make you want his reign to go on forever! No wonder the Bulgarians ceded! Who wouldn't?!

Romanus I Lacapenus (920 - 944); Constantinople Æ Follis; Obv: +RwMAN bAS-ILEVS Rwm’ Facing bust of Romanus I, bearded, wearing crown and jeweled chlamys, and holding labarum and globus cruciger; Rev: +RwMA/N’ENΘEwbA/SILEVSRw/MAIwN; 27mm, 8.09g, 6h; R.1886-8, Sear 1760

I love the style of those coins! I've always wanted to get more of them. That is a nice one! They have a style similar to the "handhellers" of the same era. I see many coins of the same style when I search sites for "Mittelalter Pfennig."

The closest example that I have to that - mine is far rougher - came with the following attribution:"Mittelalter Deutschland. Pfennig (1441). Leichte Prägeschwäche. Sehr schön-vorzüglich. Augsburg-Bistum u. Stadt (gemeinschaftlich)."

Which a translation app turned into: "Middle Ages Germany. Penny (1441). Slight embossing weakness. Very beautiful-excellent. Augsburg diocese and city (jointly)."

You probably don't want to buy a read a book on the subject, but if you do, the following book might help.

I have heard this works very well. I picked some up a while ago "just in case," but I haven't had a chance to use it. I'm pretty sure I bought mine at Wizard Coin Supply.

https://www.wizardcoinsupply.com/verdigone/