Valentinian

There is very little academic literature focusing on early Greek silver fractions. When states first minted coins for small transactions the coins themselves had to be small or very small because the value of a coin was in its precious metal and tetradrachms and drachms were far too valuable to use to buy a loaf of bread or a cup of wine, so smaller coins were produced. Eventually, it was realized that bronze coins could serve, but the earliest small-denomination coins were small silver coins. Here is a small Greek coin from Teos in Ionia. It is some fraction of an obol. But, which fraction? 6.2-5.9 mm. 0.12 grams. (Discussed further, below). Dated to 520-478 BC. We see many labeled with denominations like "obol," "hemiobol," "trihemiobol," "tetartemorion" (quarter-obol), and even "hemitetartemorion." Because the value depends upon the amount of silver, that is, its weight, when coins weigh different amounts we tend to call them different denominations. But we can wonder if the ancients really were that accurate in producing tiny coins of target weights and if their users could tell them apart in practice. City-states did not all use the same weight standards, but 0.7 grams is a typical target weight for an obol, 0.35 grams for a hemiobol, 0.18 grams for a tetartemorian, etc. Some "obols" are heavier. It is interesting that most ancient cities did not distinguish denominations by giving different denominations significantly different designs. Most cities used the same design, or a similar design, for all denominations. Even in later periods, for example, you don't distinguish an Alexander the Great tetradrachm from a drachm by the design; you do it by size (weight). When the sizes are very small, this can be a problem. Here is a case in point, Teos in Ionia, minting fractions c. 500 BC. Look at the sizes and weights of these four examples. Teos issued coins with griffins. What denominations are they? Their large coins have a griffin seated and smaller ones only the head. That is not to say coins need to be large to have a whole griffin. 7 mm. 0.33 grams. Full winged-griffin. Four-part incuse square. Here are many citations with weights.SNG Copenhagen Ionia, Teos, 1442 is a "hemiobol" of 0.54 grams of the same design. Weber 6213 volume III, page 309, is a "hemiobol" of 0.29 grams. [Note those are two quite-different weights called the same denomination.] Sear Greek II, 4578 has this design as a "trihemiobol, c. 1.48 grams" (which would make an obol nearly 1.0 grams. Maybe Sear's 4578 is really a "diobol" with an obol of 0.74 grams). DeCallatay (Archaic and Classiques) page 192 type 192 mentions an article by Balcer in SNR (1968) with 23 "tetartemoria" of c. 0.23 grams (I don't have the article and don't know the range) and 1 hemitartemorion of 0.11 grams. [See below for a 0.12 gram example.] Griffin's head only. Four-part incuse square.6.5 mm. 0.29 grams.Klein 481 is 0.23 grams. SNG Turkey I, Kayhan, 603 is 0.16 grams.Rosen 603 is 0.24 grams. Could a bartender tell it apart from this one? 6.2-5.9 mm. 0.12 grams. Same designs as above, but only about half the weight. The diameters are not much different. Here is another coin of Teos, with the Griffin's wing but not the whole body. 6 mm. 0.24 grams. A griffin with head and wing, but not the full body. Note the weight is similar to that of the head-only type (two coins above). If an ancient were to spend one of these at a tavern, did the proprietor have a tiny balance to weigh them? Did he heft it in his palm and have a feel for what it should weigh? Did he quibble if the weight is supposed to be 0.3 and it weighs 0.24? Is a coin of 0.12 grams just an inaccurate attempt at 0.24 grams and accepted anyway? I welcome your thoughts.Greek silver fractions are far more common in the ancient-coin market than they were before the internet made selling them much easier than it used to be. I hope that will provoke academic articles on early silver fractions. Show us some small Greek silver fractions and, if you have them, give their diameters and weights and supposed denominations.

Yes, it is a double die match. The positions of the letters confirm it.

Constans II, 641-668. When Heraclius died his will (possibly dictated by Martina, his wife) gave the empire to Martina and his sons Constantine and Heraclonas. Martina tried to assume power. Constantine was an invalid and died (was poisoned?) after only three months. Martina and Heraclonas were left, but very unpopular, partly because of their support of a heresy. Demonstrations resulted in Martina and Heraclonas being disfigured and Constantine's 11-year old son elevated. His name had (also) been Heraclius but he took the name Constans (II) and began rule under the regency of the Senate. The Arabs had conquered Asia and most of north Africa. The Slavs occupied much of the Balkans. Constantinople was under continuous threat. In 663 Constans decided to move the government to Syracuse, Sicily, and stabilize Italy (and remove its riches). For five years the government was in Sicily and his coins from Sicily are common. 24 mm. 4.38 grams. Sear 1113, Syracuse. Struck 650/1 (Indiction year 10). Constans II had a long beard, visible on this coin. The reverse "K" has been turned into a monogram. Sometimes the mintmark for Syracuse, Sicily, is explicit: 25-23 mm. 3.97 grams. Sear 1108. Syracuse, Sicily. Constans standing I/A for 11 to the right, "I/N/Δ" flat to the left, so this coin is dated to 652/3 by uncommon indictional dating. "SCL" below the M for the mint. 22-20 mm. 3.74 grams. Sear 1005. Constantinople. This is the first Byzantine AE type with a Greek legend: ЄN TɣTo NIKA "In this, conquer," the Greek version of "In Hoc Signo Vinces" or "HOC SIGNO VICTOR ERIS" seen on coins of Vetranio and Constantius II in 350. Uncial m, with legend: ANA NEO [CIC] or ANANEOSIS = "renewal" [of good times, much like "FEL TEMP REPARATIO" in the 4th century]. Near the end of his reign there are dynastic types: 25-20 mm. 4.78 grams. Sear 1013. Constantinople. Constans II, facing bust with big beard, "K", for his name, to the right. M with Constantine IV (the next emperor) above and Heraclius and Tiberius to the left and right, each holding a globus cruciger.

But, you have a group which illuminates why collecting Constantius II can be so much fun. There are many interesting types and many mints with their own interest. And, the coin has an early Christian symbol, the cross-rho, on the standard. That coin is especially nice. It is very hard to get one better. I know, I've been trying for many years. It is only from Thessalonica. Mine has a good reverse, but the obverse is not so nice. 24 mm. 5.78 grams. RIC VIII Thessalonica 178. ex Praetorian Numismatics (Matt Geary) Oct. 8, 1997.

Those are three very nice scarcer types. I like the first type with a chi-rho, the anepigraphic second type, and the third with a Christian legend referring to the chi-rho.

The story of Heraclius has many twists and turns. There are many coin types that are interesting and related to history. 30-27 mm. 9.11 grams. This type is from the revolt, 608-610, before he took Constantinople and became Augustus. Notice the title in the obverse legend: CONSULII (not AVG). Minted at Alexandretta in Syria not far from Antioch. Site finds and patinas like this one show it was not from the famous Alexandria. Sear 722. Indiction year 14. ex Vecchi 8 (Dec. 1997). Here is a follis of year 2 from Cyzicus: 32-29 mm. 11.43 grams. Sear 839. Several mints used a type with three figures standing side by side: 30-21 mm. 4.72 grams. Heraclius Constantine (left), Heraclius, and Martina. Year 17 (626/7) KYΠPI for Cyprus. Grierson page 121 says "probably at Constantina". Sear 849. This type with three standing figures was extensively copied by the Arabs when they conquered Syria. Arab-Byzantine. 23 mm. 4.35 grams. Struck at the city of Tiberias on the Sea of Galilee in the "Jund of Jordan". Greek on the left and below and Arabic for "Tabariya" on the right. The Byzantines had a mint at Syracuse that overstruck earlier coins with large countermark-like dies: 32 mm. 14.49 grams. Countermark of a facing bust (of Heraclius) and a monogram for him opposite a countermark SCLs for Sicily. Sear 882 on an older coin of Justin. DOC Heraclius 241.6 His reign lasted from 610 to 641, which is a long time during which many world-changing events happened. Conflicts with the Sasanian Empire and then the Arabs make for interesting history and the coins of the period are fascinating. I have a page on the pronunciation of his name: http://augustuscoins.com/ed/Byz/Heraclius.html

Vast numbers of coins were issued in the name of Constantius II (324-337 as Caesar and 337-361 as Augustus). I have liked his AE for many years because they are relatively inexpensive, often even in pleasing grades. If you aim for a type set, the "soldier spearing fallen horseman" type is easy to find. It is so common and attractive that some collectors seek a mint set too; they want (at least) one from each mint. I have gone a different way, collecting (not very seriously) (at least) one of each his AE types. Failmezger's book "Roman Bronze Coins" makes it easy to extract a type-set list. (Of course, you can make the list yourself from RIC, but Failmezger did it for you.) Here is one of his scarcer types, recently acquired. This coin is not in very pleasing condition, but I was happy to find the type. AE3. 18.4-17 mm. 2.58 grams. VICTORIA CAESARIS, Victory advancing left with wreath and palm. Mintmark: ЄSIS RIC VIII Siscia 315 "Rare, 25 Dec. 350 - August 351". The early end, 25 Dec. 350, is the date Vetranio abdicated and the late end, August 351, is the date when Magnentius took over the mint. The issue is short, unique to Siscia, and shared with Constantius Gallus, for whom this reverse is proper. In this issue there is the same design with the legend VICTORIA AVGVSTORVM, proper for Constantius II. Please show us some coins of Constantius II.

It looks as if it is overstruck by a coin of Heraclius. So, it is a Heraclius overstruck on a Phocas. There appears to be standing figure with feet at 8:30 on the obverse and head at 5:00, the rightmost of two or three standing figures, common types for Heraclius. The photo is oriented so the obverse of Phocas is up but the reverse of the Heraclius is up. There are some Xs on the reverse from Phocas upward from 7:00 toward 12:00 as the photo is oriented. The M from Heraclius is upright with ANNO above and the date to the right. Likely CON (the N is clear) below. It's time to get out a copy of the Dumbarton Oaks catalog and see if you can match up the types.

Can we have an update about fixing this? The Epic Byzantine Portrait thread still has this problem.

I took a new photo of the tiny Greek fraction in the first post: That can give you a better feeling for its small size. 5.6 mm. 0.22 grams. Tiny! I think a denarius and an AE3 can be properly appreciated from a good photo because we are so familiar with their sizes, but very large and very small coins make a much different impression in hand for being uncommon extremes.

Yes, I still have it. Here it is: Phocas, 602-610. 30-28 mm. 8.91 grams. Sear 641, year 6, CONE, Constantinople. Officina not in Sear (It has E for year 7, but not for year 6). Officina not in MIBEC (It also has E for year 7, but not for year 6). DOC Phocas 34 is year 7 with E.

Phocas, 602-610, (spelled "FOCAS" with an "F" on the coins) has a pretty distinctive portrait characterized by a triangular beard that comes to a point: Large at 35-32 mm and 11.65 grams. Sear 665 from Cyzcius, year 6. The previous coin had "XXXX" for "40". This one has the usual "M", but with the top rounded (uncial) 26-24 mm. 9.79 grams. Sear 672. Year 8, Antioch (as Theopolis). Here is one with Phocas accompanied by his wife, Leontia: 32-29 mm. 13.32 grams. Sear 639, year 1. Constantinople. Coins with both Phocas and Leontia can be small: 20-17 mm. 2.15 grams. Decanummia, with "X" for 10. Sear 675 from Antioch.

Cyzicus has some of the worst Byzantine portraits, and that is saying something: Maurice. Sear 518. Cyzicus. 30 mm. 12.68 grams. Another one of the same Sear number: 29.28 mm. 10.10 grams. His decanummia from Antioch came with the denomination in Latin (X) on some coins and Greek (I) on others: Sear 536. 18-16 mm. 2.63 grams. Sear 537. Antioch (as Theopolis) 18 mm. 2.56 grams. Most of his portraits are facing, but he does have some profile busts: Maurice. Sear 546. Alexandria. 21 mm. 3.36 grams.

I use "SB" for Sear Byzantine, "SR" for Sear Roman (his 5-volume series) and "SG" for Sear's two-volume Greek book.

Coins of Tiberius II (578-582) begin with the date "year 4" because he had been associate ruler (without coins in his name) under Justin II and when Justin II died Tiberius II was already in his 4th year. He ruled with Sophia because Justin II was erratic (some say "insane"). Year 4 coins are scarcer than the other dates. 32-29 mm. 13.9 grams. Year 4 at Nicomedia. Sear 440. Year 5 saw a coin reform that increased the size of the follis. The next coin is large, almost a big as the large Justinian I folles. 37 mm. 16.30 grams. Year 5. Sear 430. Constantinople. In year 6 the flans are still large: 38-34 mm. 16.58 grams. The dies are smaller than the flan. Again, Sear 430, but year 6. By year 7 the coins were already smaller. For copper coins Tiberius II may be most famous for his "XXX" 30-nummia pieces: 34-32 mm. 12.46 grams. Sear 432. Constantinople. The 30-nummia denomination is not unique to Tiberius II, but the vast majority of XXX coins are of Tiberius II. Let's see your coins of Tiberius II !

Inspection of images in DOC and Hahn's MIBEC may help, but is far from conclusive. I suppose the minor differences may eventually be attributed to different mints using findspots. I have these examples which I have tried to attribute to mints (without confidence). Aside from "style" the differences I note are mostly at the top of the crown. Does it have a cross (more common for Tiberius II), crest, or trefoil ornament (common for Maurice, but not for Tiberius II). Cross (Year 1, crown not changed from coins of Tiberius II). Maybe Sear 514 from Nicomedia. Hahn 79B, given to Nicomedia. Don't let the legend with "TIb" fool you. Maurice had the name "Maurice Tiberius" and used "Tiberius" a lot. The dated coins of Tiberius II begin with year 4 (another good Byzantine story), so a year 1 coin can't be Tiberius II. Possibly Sear 521 from Cyzicus. Hahn 88. This one has MAVRIC making it Maurice, even with the cross on the crown. Cyzicus has a long tradition of coins with very poor style. If a portrait is really bad, think of Cyzicus as a possibility! (The "M" denomination has explicit mintmarks "KYZ" so we can tell. It is the lower denominations that are sometimes without explicit mintmarks.) The next one is possibly Sear 521, year 20, from Cyzicus. The style is much different, but it could be because of the passage of time. This one is 13 years later. The style is not as bad as usual for Cyzicus. The next one is possibly Sear 497 of Constantinople. Hahn 70C and D. Crested helmet: The next coins has the "trefoil ornament". The coin is mintmarked with a P-like symbol for "polis" for Antioch which called Theopolis ("City of God") at the time. She how the top of the crown has three projections? Sear 525. So, I didn't resolve the question about the mint and Sear number of the OP coin, but I did show some similar coins.

Most AE coins of Justin II include Sophia. Here is one that does not: Sear 378 from Antioch. 2/3 nice and 1/3 flat struck. Large at 33 mm and 19.35 grams. Struck year 1 Here is the corresponding 20-nummus piece. Sear 380, also year 1 at Antioch (called "Theopolis" in this time period) 28-26 mm. 11.68 grams. Next is a 5-nummus piece, also from Antioch. Sear 386. 15-14 mm and 1.41 grams. A monogram/Є+ with Є for "5". We spell "Sophia" with "ph", but at Carthage they spelled it with "F": Sear 395. 22.5-21.7 mm. 8.62 grams. KAR for Carthage. "S" in the usual position of an officina number. It is unclear what that means. I have seen an academic guess that there was only one officina and "S" stands for "solo". The obverse legend is clear and legible except for "VITA" which is (unusually for an obverse) supposed to be in exergue.

Most topics come up full width, but some have a column of information off to the right that makes every post narrow: Is there some way to eliminate the column on the right (that here says "74 5 dy 43 min")? I'd like to see the posts full-width, which they are not when that column appears.

I have collected coins of Justinian from Antioch, partially because of the interesting history of the city at that time (It even changed its name to Theopolis, "City of God," because of earthquakes) and the variety of mintmarks used at that city. Rather than post all the coins here, take a look at my web page on them: http://augustuscoins.com/ed/interesting/Justinian.html Here is one that is not yet on that page: Sear 214Follis. 34-32 mm. 17.63 grams.Mintmark: +THEUPThis type with Justinian enthroned facing occurs only at Antioch/TheopolisStruck 531/2-536/7 [Hahn]

Here are two coins of Justin, 518-527: Thessalonica mint, THESSOB in exergue 30-29 mm. 17.68 grams. Sear 78. DOC 23. MIBE 70 (same obverse die) 31-29 mm. 17.98 grams. Antioch mint ANTX in exergue Remarkably high relief and fine portrait, plus it is the "cross above head" variety. Sear 100. MIBE Justin 58

Here are two coins of Anastasius. The first is 20 mm and 5.09 grams, from Nicomedia, Sear 41. "NI" across the cross identifies Nicomedia. The second is a small-module pre-second-reform "M" of Constantinople. Only 25 mm and 3.58 grams. Sear 16

If this is the thread itself, good. However, if you are intending to start a new thread for the images, please include a copy of the timetable at the beginning so posters can easily know when to post. I mean, reproduce the "DRAFT" timetable in the first post of the new thread.

This coin has an obvious "LB" tilted the same way the example above has "LA" tilted. Aurelian and Vabalathus, 271-272 20 mm. 9.63 grams. Tetradrachm of Roman Egypt struck at Alexandria. AKΛ ΔOM AVPHΛIANOC CEB Bust of Aurelian right IAC OVABAΛΛAΘΟC AΘHNΟV... Bust of Vabalathus right Struck year 2 of Aurelian (LB) and year 5 of Vabalathus (LЄ).Sear III 11721. Milne 4330. Emmett "270-271" 3914.

Which article by Metcalf? Can you give us its citation?

That's impressive! The four you showed are outstanding. It is hard to find tetartera in such excellent condition. Here is my Alexius III (1195-1203), Sear 2015: 20.7-17.2 mm. 3.22 grams. St. George, nimbate, with curly hair, holding spear Θ ΓEP ΠOC Emperor standing facing with labarum and globus cruciger AΛΕΞ[IOC] ΔECΠOTHC Sear 2015, mint of Thessalonica. DOC 4.2 plate XXIV.5 and 4.1 page 415 "1197-1203"