Jump to content

an assortment of mostly delightful, unusually large Byzantine AE's


Recommended Posts

My latest order came in.  This is only my second or third order from David Connors, but I've been very pleased with the Byzantine AE's from him.

The order was a hodge-podge, but they were mostly nice and the majority were on larger than average flans.

The descriptions are from David Connors, except for the colored text. I think I may have to correct one of the attributions.


Heraclius AE35 Follis Cyzicus.  year 3 


Obv: Helmeted, diademed, and cuirassed facing bust, holding cross and shield.


Rev: Large M; cross above, A/N/N/O - III  across fields; A  / KYZ.


SB 839.  610-641 AD.  10.69g.  Large thinner flan, overstruck on earlier coin. Flan slightly wavy.

I like the earthen highlights and large flan.  The portrait's not too bad for Kyzicus.

Save for a Seleucia AE, I have very few Heraclian AE's from post S-805. Almost all are Allen Berman junk box types.  I'm just not into the small coins.

The next probably would have been quite an expensive coin were it not for the ancient chip. Many thanks to folks here for the help identifying it as DO A2.41 / Forum type 41.



Anonymous Follis AE28 Follis. Christ Pantokrator.


Obv: Facing bust of Christ Pantokrator.


Rev: + IҺSЧS/ XRISTЧS/ ЬASILЄЧ/ ЬASILЄ in four lines; – ◊ – above and below.


12.25g.  DOC A2.41 / Forum type 41.

I believe this is only my second A2 type follis, and undoubtedly my nicest so far.  It serves as a snack to a couple of large-module ones I originally intended to buy, but got sidetracked.

I'd grade it at VF+.  Judging by the dirt and patination, the chip is very old and probably original.  The weight also jives (as does the size) to Do's type 41.  I wonder if it was an intentional adjustment by the mint?  Either that, or the flan broke while striking and they just kept it as-is.

This was just a throw-in because of the large flan size.  The coin itself is pretty average for type, a bit below the junk box' ones I'd get from Allen Berman (which were mostly fairly nice).



Heraclius & Heraclius Constantine AE35 Follis   Constantinople 


Obv: Heraclius, on left, and Heraclius Constantine, on right, each wearing crown and chlamys and holding globus-cruciger; cross above.


Rev: Large M; Christogram above, A/N/N/O


SB 805.  610-641 AD.  11.34g.   It looks like officina A to me and year 3 is my best guess.


Almohad Caliphate (Muwahid) Islamic Iberia AR14 Dirham 


AH 524- 640 (1156- 1272 AD).  1.54g.

Might anyone have any more specifics about this one?  I've always wanted one of these, so it was a no-brainer throw-in.

And now, for the best coin of the lot and while certainly not the most expensive of my coin buys this year, this piece is one of my top three favorites so far.  It's my nicest Phocas AE to date.


Phocas AE36 Follis. Constantinople.


11.87gm.  602-610 AD.

I think I might have to correct the attribution here.  Am I correct?  Nikomedia had a distinctive, thinner style for Phocas and even to my good eye, it looks like the mintmark is ..IKOgamma.  Year two, maybe?  S639?

Any thoughts about the undertype?

  • Like 9
Link to comment
Share on other sites

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.

Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Create New...