Jump to content

Zimm

Member
  • Posts

    93
  • Joined

  • Last visited

6 Followers

About Zimm

  • Birthday April 15

Recent Profile Visitors

539 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

568

Reputation

  1. The military mint issues you are thinking of are from "Neapolis" (usually indicated by the officina N, or the mintmark NEA, and not to be confused with the Neapolis in Italy), from the 25th regnal year of Heraclius' reign, just before the disastrous battle of Yarmouk. Unfortunately, however, your coin is a follis of Constans II & Constantine IV, from the 15th regnal year of Constans II's reign, often indicated by the K above the M, though sometimes there is just a simple cross. Below I have attached pictures of both a follis from Neapolis and the follis type you have (Sear 1010, Constans II). (Neither coin is mine)
  2. I do not have many coins from the Twenty Years' Anarchy. I've only recently gained interest in the period, as previously I had mainly focused on late Byzantine coinage. Additionally, I am limited in the budget I can dedicate to coin collecting, which means many of the scarcer emperors are simply out of reach for me. Here are some coins from the period I own, however I have already shared the majority of them recently here on the forums. Leontius: Sear 1334, Follis, Constantinople Tiberius III: Sear 1366, Follis, Constantinople Justinian II (Second Reign): Follis, Constantinople, Unlisted (Note the "R" before the officina letter. On Sear 1426 there is none, and on Sear 1427 it is an inverse R. This type is paralleled by the half follis MIB 44c) Leo III: Sear 1513a, Follis, Constantinople (Overstruck on Sear 1492, Theodosius III) This should make the overstrike easier to see.
  3. That is a wonderful example @ewomack. If I remember correctly, that example was, at least at some point, listed for sale by Baldwin on their website. Leontius has a rather distinct portrait from the other emperors of the period, making his coins quite easy to identify. For some reason, his Constantinopolitan folles seem to be disproportionately rare compared to those of Tiberius III or the other emperors of the Twenty Years' Anarchy, as only Theodosius III's folles seem to be rarer (though there are some individual types for Justinian II and Leo III that are of comparable rarity). The half folles from Constantinople and folles from Sicily seem more abundant though. I also managed to acquire my first follis of Leontius just this week, though unlike yours with a wonderful patina, mine has had it stripped by whoever owned it before me. Nonetheless, it's far better than I could ever have hoped to be able to find with my meagre budget. Photography and editing pictures aren't exactly my strengths, so excuse the poor photos.
  4. The coins of the late 7th and early 8th can be wonderful when properly struck, but most of the time the flans are simply abysmal. I've personally only gained interest in the period over the past year or so, so I don't have many coins to show. I lack good photography equipment, so please excuse the poor quality of the photo. Here is my example of Sear 1366 though.
  5. 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.
  6. 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.
  7. 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.
  8. 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.
  9. 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.
  10. 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.
  11. 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.
  12. 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.
  13. 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.
  14. 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).
  15. 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.
×
×
  • Create New...