ewomack Posted March 17 · Member Share Posted March 17 Justin I seems like another Byzantine Emperor difficult to find with a semi-decent portrait. The one below looked decent enough for me. It came with a large and surprisingly thick and chunky planchet of varying thickness. One look at the reverse made me wonder what happened here. It appears that the reverse maybe retracted inwards during striking, or maybe very soon after? The "A" of the officina appears below the left leg of the "M," where it usually appears directly between the legs. The leg itself above the "A" also looks fairly mangled. Also, the "C" of "CON" at the bottom looks like it would have appeared skewed had it survived. Has anyone seem a reverse anything like this before? Justin I (518-527), Æ follis- 17,95 grams- 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 As for Justin I himself, all I've really read about him is that he "set the stage for Justinian I." Historians seem to agree that he really remains unmemorable overall besides that one fact. 11 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sand Posted March 17 · Member Share Posted March 17 Nice Justin I portrait. An interesting coin. I haven't noticed many Byzantine coins, with a portrait with a heavenward gaze. Perhaps the coin was double struck, and perhaps the reverse die moved, between the 2 strikes. 2 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
O-Towner Posted March 18 · Member Share Posted March 18 (edited) Nice coin with the obverse bust accompanied by a "cross rising from front of diadem" which you can just make out in the photo. Doubt it's an eyes to heaven obverse, just a bit rotated. Definitely SB 62 Edited March 19 by O-Towner 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ewomack Posted March 21 · Member Author Share Posted March 21 Yes, I've never seen a reference to an "eyes to heaven" Justin I. I don't think I photographed it in the right configuration, either, so I probably skewed the effect. It's a nice thought, though. 😁 That coin still has one of the strangest reverses I've ever seen. Now if I could only find a similarly nice portrait for Anastasius I in an affordable range. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Valentinian Posted March 23 · Member Share Posted March 23 On 3/18/2023 at 4:39 PM, O-Towner said: Nice coin with the obverse bust accompanied by a "cross rising from front of diadem" which you can just make out in the photo. If you want to see Byzantine coins with this type of detail, I cataloged a collection of them and put them on-line here:http://augustuscoins.com/ed/ByzCross/Cross-above-head.html Here is my favorite--a really outstanding example:Justin I. Antioch. Sear 100.30 mm. 17.98 grams. 6:00.Bold cross above head.Officina Δ.Higher than usual relief on the portrait. 6 1 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Al Kowsky Posted March 23 · Member Share Posted March 23 On 3/17/2023 at 6:33 PM, ewomack said: Justin I seems like another Byzantine Emperor difficult to find with a semi-decent portrait. The one below looked decent enough for me. It came with a large and surprisingly thick and chunky planchet of varying thickness. One look at the reverse made me wonder what happened here. It appears that the reverse maybe retracted inwards during striking, or maybe very soon after? The "A" of the officina appears below the left leg of the "M," where it usually appears directly between the legs. The leg itself above the "A" also looks fairly mangled. Also, the "C" of "CON" at the bottom looks like it would have appeared skewed had it survived. Has anyone seem a reverse anything like this before? Justin I (518-527), Æ follis- 17,95 grams- 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 As for Justin I himself, all I've really read about him is that he "set the stage for Justinian I." Historians seem to agree that he really remains unmemorable overall besides that one fact. Nice score on the 40 nummi bronze ☺️. Justin I lived to be 77 years old 😮, which is remarkable for that time. Even more incredible, his predecessor Anastasius lived to be 87 years old 😲! Pictured below is a 40 nummi bronze issued by Anastasius, not as nice as your example 😉. 5 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
O-Towner Posted March 28 · Member Share Posted March 28 On 3/23/2023 at 1:12 PM, Valentinian said: If you want to see Byzantine coins with this type of detail, I cataloged a collection of them and put them on-line here:http://augustuscoins.com/ed/ByzCross/Cross-above-head.html Interesting site @Valentinian. Some coins I had never seen or knew existed. I would like your opinion on this Justinian (I think) follis from Nikomedia, a city that has no "cross" coins associated with it; Obv: D N IVSTINIAS PP AG; Bust right Rev: Large M, star to left and cross above and to right, A below; NIKM in exergue What's interesting is the four dots over the obverse bust which certainly can be construed as a cross when considering the seven dots within the rectangular incuse on the sleeve which clearly form a cross. I guess the first question is if this is Justin or Justinian (pretty sure it's the latter) when considering the obverse inscription. Secondly, do you consider both sets of dots as crosses? 5 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Valentinian Posted March 28 · Member Share Posted March 28 26 minutes ago, O-Towner said: I would like your opinion on this Justinian (I think) follis from Nikomedia I see it as Justin DN IVSTI - NVS PP AC where the "VS" is blundered. See coins somewhat like it from the Clark collection here:http://augustuscoins.com/ed/ByzCross/Justin.html#n86 The basic type is Sear 87--very like 86 but for the cross. I would think the dots at the end of the diadem are part of the diadem, not a distinct cross above it. I don't even see the dots on the shoulder as a cross. Engravers regularly made clear crosses (e.g. there are two on the reverse) and we don't need to decide that anything that might be a cross is a cross. 37 minutes ago, O-Towner said: a city that has no "cross" coins associated with it Nicomedia has many cross-above-head-coins as that site shows. 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Severus Alexander Posted March 28 · Supporter Share Posted March 28 I agree that's a nice portrait of Justin I, @ewomack! Not that easy to find on a follis. (I also agree with @sand that the coin is double-struck, which explains the way the reverse looks, and why the neck is oddly bent. Sadly not too unusual for Byzantine!) Here's my best portrait of Justin, same type: This is the "cross at the end of the diadem" variety that Warren discusses at his link above. I also like the star on the shoulder. 5 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.