ela126

wow thats a sweet patina and what good detail!

Yes this definitely could be the case. Seems purposefully done being so uniform. Some details being strong and others very weak…

This is an astonishingly good example. You see so many of these types and finally think one of the 95% examples are representative of the best for the type, but then you come across a likely “never circulated” example such as this. The facial relief abd overall strike quality is almost FDC, if one could say that for a Byzantine Bronze. i have two examples of Anastasius SB 19 I’m quite proud of, neither near the quality but still pleasing. i do wonder for both these examples, do they suffer from long lost stripped patinas which have had a good amount of time to heal, potential smoothing as well?… or are they what I’ve come across with Roman coins as “Tiber patinas” which never had dark formations allowed to cover the coin. Certainly the larger flan example might be a better type of this. larger module at 18.07g smaller module at 15.03g

@Simon agreed, until it’s here not much more could be said. Although I do wonder if someone has knowledge of a known fake which could put this to bed now. I have a bit of a cleaners eye and the roundness of the facial features, and legend has some hopes there is something more under a layer of dirt that I’m perceiving. This is a hope though and not a guarantee. Could just be an odd picture of a stripped coin.

Had my eye on this for a a few weeks… is that a super good looking Justinian - Antioch hiding under an oddly even layer of mud?… maybe?! This coin’s weight thought has me very worried, 15.84g… not even close to what an SB 218 weighs (between 20.5-23g for all examples I’ve come across). I asked the AH and they said the 15.8g was correct.. which is even more puzzling as they also confirmed the 40mm size. (Which is correct) won it for 25 euro with BP, and 5 euro super discount shipping, I guess I’m making the gamble. more than likely a fake and it’s just too much hassle to prove so I’ll be out some nickels… maybe I have an interesting fake on my hands, time will tell

Continued improvements! Glad to see you and your coins back.

I’ve shared this one before but I think for a Byzantine coin, with a potential (likely) fake desert patina, it’s still very attractive. justinian 1 - half follis - Antioch - 8.26g - sb 225

@Simon nice example, i jsut got one of these in myself of similiar quality. Yours is massive on comparison though at 9.21. Just weighed mine, 4.73g.. The portraits all seem similiar but your flan and die must have been a bit larger

@ewomack wow, that’s a stellar portrait. Really really good. certainly a coin you won’t need to upgrade, probably ever! Edit: love this website, but had something nice typed up and took a work call. Came back and it had timed out/deleted. Anyway, a brief few of my contributions. Nothing like @ewomack‘s example but interesting I suppose. Justinian 2 first reign - half follis - sb 1262 - 5.02g cool because it’s a cut coin, Harlan Berk mentioned many of these were from large constantine IV follis, which the weight and shape does account for. This is my pride and joy for a Justinian. Quite a rare piece as it has the Retrograde R with the officina. Nice large flan too. Surfaces aren’t perfect but what are you gonna do. Justinian 2 second reign - follis - Constantinople- SB 1427 - 5.92g Justinian 2 - 2nd reign - Follis - 1428 - 2.75g cool because Justinian and son Tiberius are both on it. Not a great example though, these seemed to have become more common recently, probably saw 6-8 sold in the last year.

I enjoyed the article, the Byzantines though, weren’t know for their vast amounts of silver coinage. Although the hexagrams had become rather commonplace by the middle of the 7th century. I don’t have the details in front of me, but since I see some Carolingian coins from Melle being shared, this is my Charles the Bald (I think, possibly Charles the simple, I get them confused. Apologize that it’s slabbed, one of my early acquisitions that I felt had to be slabbed.

very nice examples you have there, thank you for sharing. A little regretable my new piece doesn't contain the date, i bid on it as somewhat of a snack and was a bit surprised to see it closed where it did, so i can be happy with it. Do you agree with my assumption it might be a year 5 (or i guess if its a G it's year 6)?

Quite like this thread! Keeping with the recent theme of excellent strikes, here is one of my best billon scyphate coins. Nice amount of silver content (I’ve read about 7% at this time but I can’t cite that) IMG_6850.mov Alexis 1 - 1081-1118 Billon Aspron Trachy Constantinople SB 1918 4.68g

Goodness that’s a nice one. Best obverse I’ve seen on a Manuel 1

There is most certainly some difficulties in posting an “attractive” Byzantine. As Byzantine collectors we have our inherent biases to our coins with scarcity, historical significance as has been highlighted, or simply a specific issues that are deemed “excellent for type”. Problem is these biases do not allow us to simply post “attractive” as I think we’re drawn to think of them as “special” which can include many of the mentioned reasons. If we can remove all knowledge for a second and dig through our trays as a layman (maybe asking a family member?!). Would result in the most attractive, but maybe not most interesting coin?.. Here is one of my early acquisitions in Byzantine collecting. It is still special to me beyond being attractive itself, as I cleaned it and turned it from a unsellable $10 shipped coin on eBay, to what is seen here. The green and copper contrasts on a thick and deeply struck coin, along with the facial wear resulting in an empty gaze are what makes me appreciate it. Time of Heraclius sassanid occupation of Egypt (618-628) 12 nummi Sb 855 6.40g 19mm

Picked this one up several weeks ago. Bit of a rarity so despite the Fine condition, I thought I’d grab it. Contains the main points of the readable legend, worried portrait of the emperor, and the XXX for 3/4 Follis. I believe this is a year 6 (G) as it is the only Constantinople officina B example I’ve come across. These Phocas three quarter folli are considerably less common than the Tiberius II 3/4 folli. Phocas 602-610 3/4 Follis Constantinople SB 641 9.66g 28 x 26.5mm

I'm in the Lehigh Valley in Pennsylvania (40 miles from epicenter), felt it for about 6-7 seconds. My friend down in West Chester PA also noticed it.

@rishi7887 I’ve not determined where NGC draws the line, but the Bohemond III’s are graded on the 1-70 Sheldon scale, where an XF is a 45. For the commonality of the coin, a xf45 isn’t great, based on eBay values, I’d say that’s around an $75 coin. Prices go a bit steeper as the grading reaches 60… although we know those grades aren’t completely accurate. i actually just sold my slabbed example and picked up 2x better raw examples with money to spare.

Excellent 1642 example you have @Valentinian. I’ve heard the Christ Conquerors meaning on the reverse as well. I suppose that makes more sense than the nonsensical NNN for ANNO and XXX for a random date, as they are inverse anyway. the sb 1618 is meaningfully smaller, my example comes in at 20.5mm. Not to violate the one coin rule but there is a 1618 and 1642 next to each other. The diameters become apparent quickly. My example of the 1642 seems to leave off the last S yours has @Valentinian.

Oh man. Just one, difficult to pick. I don’t think I’ve shared this one in a while, it’s very nice in hand. Michael II This is listed in Sear on Michael I with Theophylactus, however many sources have now applied this to Michael II and Theophilus (damn guys maybe switch it up with the names). Really like the immobilized reverse NNN and XXX which has been running for a while at this point. solid strike, almost no wear and even patina. Michael II (Sear recognized as Michael I) Follis Constantinople Mint 5.04g SB 1618

coin 1 is a Anonymous follis, looks like an A2, during the time of Basil II. Not terribly great condition. These are pretty common for Byzantine coins. coin 2 is a Follis of Justinian I 527-565. Mintmark on the bottom reverse is Antioch, they adjusted their mint marks a lot during 525-560. Slightly less common coin but not rare. Regnal year 33. so ~560 AD.

My Theodore 1 which I’m rather proud of, Mary and baby Jesus on the obverse:

It’s a Heraclius from Alexandria, yes. From some brief research it’s prior to the Sassanid occupation in 618-628. The N, from an article I just found about Heraclian Alexandria pieces is due to Carthage die cutters coming to Alexandria and making this coin. The N simply signifies Nummi. i have seen a number of the heavily encrusted silver pieces which do seem to go for good deals, what was your cleaning process on that coin? I only collect Byzantine but I’ve debated purchasing a few heavily encrusted silver pieces to test out that process.

Just yesterday I snagged this off eBay for 16 dollars shipped, bought it probably Within 10 minutes of posting… some massive reseller.. even comes with an old Littleton tag. Also hoping the obverse picture is taken poorly. what makes it a deal is that N on the reverse between the I B. A rather special SB 854 with a total of 5 examples on acsearch. CNG has some better sold examples for 150-250 15 years ago. For 16 dollars, I’m thrilled.

Gambling/hunting for diamonds in the rough is almost my favorite part of the ancient coin hobby. Maybe 66% is attribution accuracy and 33% is cleaning opportunities/bad pictures… 1% is dumb luck magic. nice pickup

Wow that Romanus is good. Love it. Still need one myself. Here’s my Constantine VII, not a great flan but the portrait is nice.