Jump to content


  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited


About Zimm

  • Birthday April 15

Recent Profile Visitors

385 profile views

Zimm's Achievements

Community Regular

Community Regular (8/14)

  • One Year In
  • One Month Later
  • Dedicated
  • Week One Done
  • Very Popular

Recent Badges



  1. That’s a wonderful example, though sadly I think it’s Heraclius as opposed to Constans II. It’s actually from the 24th regnal year instead of the 14th, the first X being partially off-flan. If you look closely above the M, you can see a cross above a C, which is only seen on Heraclius’ coinage (on Constans II’s it’d be a K). The high weight and fineish style also hint at Heraclius. After the weight decrease in the 22nd regnal year the type began suffering from poor strike quality, making your example definitely belong to the better end of examples.
  2. Sadly I do not think your coin is a coronation issue, but rather a regular example of Sear 1918. Alexius I’s and John II’s busts can be quite similar to one another, but the one on your coin is clearly Alexius I. In addition to the bust itself resembling Alexius more, the regalia is also indicative of Sear 1918. Compare the examples below. First one is Sear 1918, the second your coin, and the third one Sear 1944. John II’s trachea have a simpler loros than those of Alexius II. Furthermore, your obverse design is simply double struck, weakly struck, and worn. It is nonetheless clearly just the standard obverse for Sear 1918; Christ seated on a throne, holding the Gospels with his right hand in benediction. You can clearly see Christ, the edges of the throne on both the left and the right side, as well as the X from the legend on the right side.
  3. I believe the coin is likely an imitation of Sear 2003, Isaac II (or an official issue in very poor style). If you look closely, you can make out the Virgin seated on a throne on the obverse, and the emperor holding an akakia and a cruciform sceptre on the reverse.
  4. I sadly have to agree with @ela126, the coin is a forgery. A lot of similar fakes have appeared on eBay in the last year or so.
  5. By this time the legends on Antiochian AE coins, especially the smaller denominations, were blundered, often beyond recognition. The way they were blundered of course changed from engraver to engraver, so seeing completely different legends on these types is completely normal.
  6. I believe the first coin is Sear 2377 of Andronicus II, with St. Demetrius on the obverse. I think I may see his shield near the bottom right corner of the obverse. The second coin seems to be Sear 2440 of Andronicus II & Michael IX. You can just barely make out that the obverse is supposed to be a legend in four lines.
  7. Thank you for the great write-up as always, those are very nice examples, especially the anonymous Magnesian tetarteron. I've been meaning to purchase the types you shared for a while now, but have just never ended up finding examples that I liked (or that fit into my budget). Sadly, the flat coins tend to often be very worn, with the faces and finer details having been worn away, especially for the later coins. I don't own that many great examples myself, but I do have a few types I enjoy. Here are some of my favourite examples of each denomination: Alexius I & John II - Pb Tetarteron - Thessalonica - Sear:-, DOC 37 (Ex. Gorny & Mosch 200, 2011) Obv. John on the right, bearded, wearing stemma, divetesion, collar-piece, and loros, holding akakia in left hand, holding onto shaft of labarum with right hand, St. Demetrius on the left, nimbate, wearing military tunic, breastplate, and sagion, holding onto sword with right hand, holding onto shaft of labarum right hand, ΔΜΙΤΡ - Ιω ΔΕϹΠΟΤ Rev. Alexius on the left left, bearded, wearing stemma, divetesion, collar-piece and loros, holding right hand on chest, holding onto shaft of long cross with left hand, Irene on the right, similarly dressed, holding left hand on chest, holding onto shaft of long cross with right hand, inscription obscured I guess this may be a bit too early of a type to share given it's from before 1204, but I find it a fascinating type regardless. It was issued in 1092/1093 in commemoration of John II's coronation as co-emperor alongside his father, Alexius I, and was seemingly the first tetarteron type ever issued. Due to the copper shortage experienced around that time, it was stuck in lead instead of copper, to which the mint of Thessalonica would switch for (most) subsequent Thessalonican tetartera. Andronicus II & Michael IX - AE Assarion - Constantinople - Sear 2440 Obv. +ΑVΤΟΚΡΑΤΟΡΕϹ ΡωΜΑΙΟωΝ Obv. Andronicus II on the left, bearded, wearing stemma, divetesion, collar-piece and loros, holding cruciform sceptre in right hand, holding onto shaft of labarum with left hand, Michael IX on the right, similarly clothed, holding cruciform sceptre in left hand, holding onto shaft of labarum with right hand, inscription obscured There isn't really much to say about the coin. It's one of the most common assarion types there is, but since the emperors still have a fair few facial features that haven't been worn away, I thought I'd share it. John V(?) & Uncertain Emperor - Billon Tornese - Constantinople - Sear:-, DOC:-, PCPC 367 (Ex. NAC 75, 2013, John V & Manuel II(?)) Obv. Cross within double border within legend, pellets in each quarter, +ΠΟΛΙΤΙΚΟΝ Rev. Uncertain imperial figure left, bearded, wearing stemma, divetesion, collar-piece and loros, holding right hand on chest, holding onto shaft of long cross with left hand, uncertain imperial figure right, bearded, similarly clothed, holding left hand on chest, holding onto shaft of long cross with right hand, uncertain legend This type is quite a perplexing one. As far as I could find, the only other example of the type is housed in the Ashmolean (originating from the Bendall Collection). The reverse of the type is misdescribed both in PCPC and LBC (due to the left side of the reverse being obscured), stating that the reverse has St. Demetrius crowning an imperial figure on the right, which my example disproves. Curiously enough it was assigned to John V & Manuel II by Bendall in the NAC 75 auction, but as the legends are hard to make sense of, I haven't been able to confirm the attribution. Below I've attached the Ashmolean/Bendall example of the type. What is however certain is that it's a very late type. Bendall, in his book, remarks that the type may very well be one of the last Politikon issues due to the lower weight and inferior silver content it has in comparison to the other Politikon tornesi, though it should be noted that the theory can neither be verified nor disproven without legends or hoard finds, however logical it may be. (Ashmolean example: 16mm, 0.29g, My example: 17mm, 0.57g) John VIII - AE Follaro - Constantinople - Sear 2568 Obv. Full-length figure of Christ, bearded, nimbate, in mandorla, IC - XC Rev. Full-length figure of John, bearded, wearing stemma, divetesion, collar-piece and loros, holding cruciform sceptre in right hand, Iω There isn't really much I have to say about the coin. It has the same crude style most examples of the type have and is equally worn. Thankfully the legend on the left-hand side of the reverse was preserved, allowing for confident identification of the type.
  8. Here is quite an interesting coin I purchased recently. From the looks of it, it seems to be missing from all major reference works. Andronikos II Paleologos - Constantinople - Trachy - Sear: -, DOC: -, LBC:-, LPC :- 23mm - 1,73g Obv: Half-length figure of St. Theodore, bearded, nimbate, wearing tunic, breastplate, and sagion, holding sword over should with right hand, holding scabbard in left hand, ⒶΓ ΘΕΟΔΟΡΟϹ Rev: Full-length figure of Andronicus, bearded, wearing stemma, divetesion, collar piece, and uncertain regalia, holding labarum in right hand and akakia in left hand, blessed by Manus Dei in upper right corner, ΑΝΔΡΟΝΙΚΟϹ ΔΕϹΠΟΤ ΠΑΛΕΟΛΟΓ The obverse design (St. Theodore holding a sword and scabbard) seems to be the same one as used on Sear 2346 (picture below, not my example), but the reverse lacks the circular legends and has a full-length figure of the emperor as well as a manus dei in the upper right corner. Due to the obverse design being linked to a Constantinopolitan issue, and due to the style being Constantinopolitan in general, I have assigned the coin to the mint of Constantinople. If anyone is able to find further examples of it somewhere (both published and unpublished), I'd be extremely thankful if you shared them here.
  9. That one sems to be the Latin Sear 2049 from Thessalonica, with Christ on the obverse and St. Helena & St. Constantine on the reverse with a large patriarchal cross.
  10. I think it may be Sear 2110 (John III Vatatzes) instead of Sear 2261. On the obverse of 2110 you have a beardless Christ, similar to the one present on your example, and St. Theodore on the reverse holding a trilobate sceptre, as can also be seen on your coin, instead of the Archangel Michael (holding nothing in his left hand).
  11. Here's an interesting Nicaean(?) coin I picked up recently. Obverse: Half-length bust of Christ, beardless, nimbate, IC - XC Reverse: Full-length figure of emperor on the left, bearded, wearing stemma, divetesion, collar piece, and jewelled loros, holding in right hand sceptre, holding onto globus with left hand. Saint Theodore(?) on the left, bearded, nimbate, wearing military tunic and breastplate, holding sceptre in left hand, holding onto globus cruciger with right hand, (uncertain legends) Although it may at first look like a standard clipped Nicaean issue, it's in fact quite a rare type with an uncertain attribution. As far as I could find, the only other example of the coin resides in the Ashmolean Museum at Oxford and was found in the Peter and Paul hoard. I have provided a picture of the coin below, as well as pictures from LBC and the hoard report of Peter and Paul hoard. The Ashmolean coin: The hoard report: The LBC entry: The Peter and Paul description, as well as the attribution itself, is flawed. The example found in the hoard had its obverse very weakly struck (and perhaps overstruck on a previous issue?), which is why it's almost completely obscured. For some reason, it was interpreted as Mary seated on a high-backed throne, but the example I have acquired proves otherwise (It is actually a half-length bust of a beardless Christ). The reverse features a very unusual design with the emperor and a military saint(!) holding onto a globus cruciger together, which is a design usually connected with St. Constantine rather than a military saint. What I find fascinating about the coin are the style and the saint. The style seems to resemble the coins of Theodore (cf. Sear 2067, which has both the regalia type featured on my coin, as well as the one seen on the Ashmolean example) and the earliest issues of John III. Even more fascinatingly the saint on the right seems to be bearded, making St. Theodore the likeliest candidate. St. Theodore does appear on both coins of Theodore I and John III (cf. Sear 2069, which was attributed to Theodore Laskaris until the discovery of an example with a legend fragment belonging to John), so that isn't enough to confidently attribute the coin to either of the emperors. That is why I find the Peter and Paul hoard attribution of John III controversial, as thanks to the presence of St. Theodore, Theodore Laskaris can't be excluded from consideration. Sadly this is likely another case where the only way to confidently attribute the coin will be to wait for an example with a more complete legend to show up. I thought I'd still share it here though as I found the type fascinating.
  12. @Nerosmyfavorite68 Those are wonderful examples. I personally think that your follis is one of Heraclius, not Maurice. It's common to see auction houses mistake coins of Heraclius for those of Maurice, but one of the clearest signs that a follis is of Heraclius is the bearded portrait (should the legends not be legible that is), which the portrait on your coin is. Additionally, the style is indicative of Heraclius' folles instead of those of Maurice. Here's my example of a Constantinopolitan follis of Heraclius. I don't have any better pictures at hand, so these will have to suffice: (And I'd like to add that I'm awful at taking pictures, so the coin looks far better in hand than in the pictures below 😂) And for comparison here's a follis of Maurice I own. As you can see, the bust is completely beardless
  13. I'm not much of a miliaresion collector myself, but once I saw this for sale, I could not pass on it. While the coin may look like a regular fourree solidus at first glance, that couldn't be further from what it actually is. Romanos I Lekapenos - Gilded AE Pattern Miliaresion - 931(?) AD - Sear: 1756, DOC: 19, BM: 43 Obverse: Facing half-length bust of Romanos, bearded, crowned, holding globus surmounted by patriarchal cross in right hand, bust surrounded by border of pellets between borders of dots, RΟΜΑΝΟ ΕΝ ΘΕω B' R' Reverse: Large cross potent on three steps, globus beneath, X at the intersection of the arms of the cross, stars on either side beneath the cross, design bust surrounded by border of pellets between borders of dots, IHSUS XRISTUS NIKA The type itself is quite fascinating. Many reference books have theorised that the coin could be an experimental design for a new miliaresion type from 931 AD when Romanos' co-emperor Christopher died. However, both the obverse and the reverse designs ultimately went completely unused, making these trial strikes the only coins with these specific designs. The most striking part of the coin, aside from it being struck in AE, is the extremely detailed bust on the obverse, which is even finer than the bust used on Romanos' solidi. Additionally, the stars below the cross on the reverse are unique to this type as well. For reference, since my example is in a relatively poor state, I have attached pictures of all the other examples of the type I could find below: (There is supposedly a fifth example in a museum in St. Petersburg, however, I was not able to find a picture of it) Frankly, I am not sure why my example is gilded. The most likely explanation in my mind is that someone tried to pass off the coin as a solidus and hence plated it in gold, but of course, it can't be said for certain why the gilding is there. Whatever the reason may be, I am extremely happy to have purchased the coin, and it is by far the most interesting coin in my collection (you don't see ancient/medieval pattern coins every day after all), hence I decided I could share it here on the forums as well.
  14. @voulgaroktonou That is a fascinating coin and a truly fantastic example. @Severus Alexander Given the context of @voulgaroktonou's example of a bearded Sear 22, the CNG comment no longer makes sense. Sear 14 and the (unlisted) type with the wreath are both small module issues issued during Anastasius' first reform, which would certainly seem to back up the theory, but Sear 22 is a large module issue, which makes it ineligible to be a part of the "experimental" series (which was theorised to have been issued near the beginning of the first reform). Or at the very least there were two (or perhaps three?) separate issues, all with bearded portraits, which would allow the CNG example to be an "experimental" issue, but that would raise more questions than it'd answer. I am surprised that that the bearded type(s) have not been discussed more widely given how distinct they are from all other issues.
  15. Here’s quite an odd discovery I made while looking through my collection today; one the folles of Anastasius I own seems to feature a bearded(!) bust. Now admittedly early Byzantine coins aren’t my expertise, but I can’t remember seeing a bearded bust of his before. Does anyone here happen to know anything about this strange bust type? I wasn’t able to find any information on it online, so all information is greatly appreciated. For context the type is an early small module type with a wreath on the reverse.
  • Create New...