Anastasius I Æ Follis...

[ewomack]

About a week ago, I posted, as a sanity check, the dealer's pictures of this Anastasius I follis and it ended up arriving pretty quickly. Not surprisingly, it looks just as good as it did in the previous pictures. Below are my own pictures. I still really like the coin, especially for the price, but having the ability to roll it around under a light, the wear changes with the angle. The photo shows pretty much what it looks like straight on, with light above. If I tilt the coin back, more directly into the light, shiny areas appear and the coin looks more worn than the picture below. Nonetheless, the features still remain even in harsh light, but they wash out a bit. So this angle-relative wear, which some might find less attractive in certain dispositions, might explain the lower price of this coin. I'm still perfectly happy with it as-is. The details of the portrait remain visible, along with a fair amount of detail on the clothing and crown. All of the letters look perfectly legible as well. So, for the price, I'm pretty happy overall. Plus, I finally have a coin from the first Emperor that begins all of these Byzantine books I'm reading. Also, I'm not sure if this technically counts as a 5th century coin? I have a gap in my collection, which runs from the 1st century to the 4th, then picks up again in the 6th. Maybe I have the gap half filled? Or 1/10th filled... hmmm...

Anastasius I (491-518), Æ follis-17.41g, 33 mm, Constantinople mint; Obv: DN ANASTASIVS PP AVG, Diademed, draped and cuirassed bust of Anastasius right; rev: Large "M", delta below, cross above, star to each side, "COM" in exergue; Sear 19

Please post your Anastasius I coins!

 

[sand]

Hello @ewomack. Interesting coin. According to my notes, perhaps from Grierson, or perhaps from somewhere else, in 498 AD, Anastasius I created a 40 nummi bronze coin, called a "follis" by present day numismatists, which was supposed to be worth 40 of the old small nummus coins (therefore it had the Greek numeral for 40, the letter "M", on the reverse). However, the first version of the 40 nummi coin weighed only 3 grams to 10 grams, and had a diameter of 20 mm to 25 mm. Numismatists call this version the "small module". Ordinary citizens were unhappy with it, because its weight was nowhere close to the weight of 40 of the old small nummus coins. Therefore, in 512 AD, Anastasius I created a larger version of the 40 nummi coin, which weighed between 15 grams and 20 grams, and had a diameter of 31 mm to 40 mm. Numismatists call this version the "large module". This coin still did not weigh as much as 40 of the old small nummus coins, but it was large enough and impressive enough that ordinary citizens accepted it.

Therefore, if my notes are correct, then your coin is a "large module" 40 nummi coin, and was minted from 512 AD to 518 AD. Therefore, your coin seems to be from the 6th century AD. However, there are some relatively inexpensive late Roman coins, from the Western Roman Empire, and from the Eastern Roman Empire, which were minted in the 5th century AD, which you could try to acquire. Or, you could go after a nonclassical coin from the 5th century AD (barbarian, Middle East, India, Central Asia, East Asia, etc).

Here's my Anastasius I 40 nummi large module coin.

Anastasius I. AE 40 Nummi Follis Large Module. 512 AD To 518 AD. Constantinople Mint. Sear 19. Maximum Diameter 32.0 mm. Weight 15.33 grams. Obverse : Anastasius I Bust Facing Right. Reverse : Large M Greek For 40 Mint "CON" In Exergue Officina A Under Large M.

Edited October 24, 2023 by sand

[ela126]

Crawling into bed now. 
 

what you have is very attractive, for the price. Anastasius coins are rather rare with good details so you have gotten quite a nice piece. Certainly in the 10% of examples.

I’ll add some details tomorrow. I’ve gotten together a nice handful of Anastasius coins (although missing pictures on some it seems), as Byzantine is my focus and Anastasius and I shared the same miserly mentality when it comes to saving money, not spending frivolously. 
 

Antoich Follis - my most recent acquisition. Cleaned my me. 15.3g

Large module from Constantinople, same Sear as yours 18.1g

Pre reform nummus (so between 491-498)  0.70g

small module Constantinople Follis. In this case 5.05g, I believe DOC has it right that there is 3 module sizes, not 2. This is certainly an early one after 498, long before 512 I’d say.

Edited October 24, 2023 by ela126

[Al Kowsky]

12 hours ago, ewomack said:

About a week ago, I posted, as a sanity check, the dealer's pictures of this Anastasius I follis and it ended up arriving pretty quickly. Not surprisingly, it looks just as good as it did in the previous pictures. Below are my own pictures. I still really like the coin, especially for the price, but having the ability to roll it around under a light, the wear changes with the angle. The photo shows pretty much what it looks like straight on, with light above. If I tilt the coin back, more directly into the light, shiny areas appear and the coin looks more worn than the picture below. Nonetheless, the features still remain even in harsh light, but they wash out a bit. So this angle-relative wear, which some might find less attractive in certain dispositions, might explain the lower price of this coin. I'm still perfectly happy with it as-is. The details of the portrait remain visible, along with a fair amount of detail on the clothing and crown. All of the letters look perfectly legible as well. So, for the price, I'm pretty happy overall. Plus, I finally have a coin from the first Emperor that begins all of these Byzantine books I'm reading. Also, I'm not sure if this technically counts as a 5th century coin? I have a gap in my collection, which runs from the 1st century to the 4th, then picks up again in the 6th. Maybe I have the gap half filled? Or 1/10th filled... hmmm...

Anastasius I (491-518), Æ follis-17.41g, 33 mm, Constantinople mint; Obv: DN ANASTASIVS PP AVG, Diademed, draped and cuirassed bust of Anastasius right; rev: Large "M", delta below, cross above, star to each side, "COM" in exergue; Sear 19

Please post your Anastasius I coins!

 

Congrats on scoring a truly handsome coin 🤩! This coin has everything; a strong strike, perfect centering, & attractive patina that hasn't marred by cleaning. Pictured below is my only example of a 40 nummi coin of Anastasius, it pales by comparison to your coin 😒.

[JayAg47]

Here's my Anastasius with a 'pinocchio nose', 18g.

[Edessa]

My only Anastasius is a blast from the past, Ex Art Noot, June 1995.

Anastasius I, AD 491-518. Æ Follis (35mm, 16.23g, 7h). Constantinople mint, 4th officina. Struck AD 498-518. Obv: D N ANASTA SIVS PP AVG; Diademed, draped, and cuirassed bust right. Rev: Large M; cross above, six-rayed stars to left and right; Δ//CON. Ref: DOC 23f; MIBE 27; SB 19. 

[ewomack]

16 hours ago, sand said:

Hello @ewomack. Interesting coin. According to my notes, perhaps from Grierson, or perhaps from somewhere else, in 498 AD, Anastasius I created a 40 nummi bronze coin, called a "follis" by present day numismatists, which was supposed to be worth 40 of the old small nummus coins (therefore it had the Greek numeral for 40, the letter "M", on the reverse). However, the first version of the 40 nummi coin weighed only 3 grams to 10 grams, and had a diameter of 20 mm to 25 mm. Numismatists call this version the "small module". Ordinary citizens were unhappy with it, because its weight was nowhere close to the weight of 40 of the old small nummus coins. Therefore, in 512 AD, Anastasius I created a larger version of the 40 nummi coin, which weighed between 15 grams and 20 grams, and had a diameter of 31 mm to 40 mm. Numismatists call this version the "large module". This coin still did not weigh as much as 40 of the old small nummus coins, but it was large enough and impressive enough that ordinary citizens accepted it.

Therefore, if my notes are correct, then your coin is a "large module" 40 nummi coin, and was minted from 512 AD to 518 AD. Therefore, your coin seems to be from the 6th century AD. However, there are some relatively inexpensive late Roman coins, from the Western Roman Empire, and from the Eastern Roman Empire, which were minted in the 5th century AD, which you could try to acquire. Or, you could go after a nonclassical coin from the 5th century AD (barbarian, Middle East, India, Central Asia, East Asia, etc).

Here's my Anastasius I 40 nummi large module coin.

Anastasius I. AE 40 Nummi Follis Large Module. 512 AD To 518 AD. Constantinople Mint. Sear 19. Maximum Diameter 32.0 mm. Weight 15.33 grams. Obverse : Anastasius I Bust Facing Right. Reverse : Large M Greek For 40 Mint "CON" In Exergue Officina A Under Large M.

Thanks for the rundown, @sand. I suspected that the "large module" likely occurred in the 6th century.

I looked in Sear under Anastasius I and that book has a section titled "Pre-reform copper coinage, A.D. 491 - 498" that includes only a single nummus (Sear 13, @ela126 posted one above). Then, immediately after, a section titled "Post-reform copper coinage, A.D. 498 - 518" follows. It sounds like your source (I think you said possibly Grierson?) had more detailed dates, but even Sear suggests that the "large module" version (the one I posted above is 33 mm) didn't appear until after 500. I recently purchased a copy of Grierson, so I should have a look. So, as you suggested, I'll need to go looking for a "true" 5th century coin. I would love to go backwards into Zeno, but I haven't yet seen many nice and affordable Zeno Æ coins.

And thanks everyone for the comments and coins. Keep them coming!

[O-Towner]

One of the somewhat controversial Ae follis types in the name of Anastasius is the "Antioch Emergency Coinage". There are quite a few different varieties which were struck in 540-542 AD in response to a supposed coinage shortage. Haven't really followed the conversation lately but here is my example (29.2mm, 11.0gms):

 

[ela126]

1 hour ago, O-Towner said:

One of the somewhat controversial Ae follis types in the name of Anastasius is the "Antioch Emergency Coinage". There are quite a few different varieties which were struck in 540-542 AD in response to a supposed coinage shortage. Haven't really followed the conversation lately but here is my example (29.2mm, 11.0gms):

 

No kidding… I know that exegue spelling is supposedly Justinian 536-539, it does look like the legend might be Anastasius tho… cool. Not familiar with this type.

A few other Anastasius I in my trays. Not as spectacular tho.

small module half Follis, 2.3g

 

large module half Follis, 9.7g

constantinople pentanummia

Antioch pentanummia

[Orange Julius]

Great coin! It’s late, so just going to post mine and snooze 💤 

[voulgaroktonou]

@Sand posted several days back a wonderful and concise summary of the Anastasian currency reform. Here are a few additional notes and photos to illustrate the various denominations of the initial and final reform.

I always love to read about Anastasius and his coins. Imagine the effect his reformed coinage would have had upon a populace used to those tiny nummi that must have had to circulate in bags!

The Anastasian currency reform developed in two stages. The first, in 498, consisted in the issuance of multiples of the nummus, denominations of 40, 20, and 10 nummi. Then in 512, the weights were doubled, and at the same time, a further multiple, the pentanummium of 5 nummi was introduced. The striking of the tiny nummi continued. In addition to their much heavier weight and size, the distinguishing feature of the reform coins is the reverse type, consisting of a Greek letter corresponding to the appropriate denomination. M = 40; K = 20; I = 10; ε = 5. Below are some examples of the various denominations. The first row reflects the initial, lighter reform of 498-512, and the second row, the corresponding denominations of the second reform of 512-518. The obverse images are on the left, while the reverses are on the right. All are from the mint of Constantinople, although the other mints followed the same development. The coins are, from left to right:

First row. Initial, lighter reform of 498-512.

Follis. 8.50 gr. 26 mm. Hr. 6. Sear 14; Hahn 22; DO 16; BNP 11-12.

Half follis. 3.76 gr. 20 mm. Hr. 6. Sear 24; Hahn 32; DO 21b; BNP 37.

Quarter follis (decanummium). 1.51 gr. 16 mm. Hr. 12. Sear 26; Hahn 34a; DO 19; BNP 44-50.

Nummus. 0.79 gr. 7 mm. Hr. 12. Sear 13; Hahn 40; DO 15; BNP 1-10.

 

Second row. Subsequent (heavier) reform of 512-518.

Follis. 18.17 gr. 36 mm. Hr. 6. Sear 19; Hahn 27; DO 23d, e; BNP 69-75.

Half follis. 9.07 gr. 31 mm. Hr. 6. Sear 25 (this coin); Hahn 33; DO 24d; BNP 14.

Quarter follis (decanummium). 4.16 gr. 22 mm. Hr. 6. Sear 28; Hahn 36; DO -; BNP –

Eighth follis (pentanummium). 1.90 gr. 16 mm. Hr. 7. Sear 29; Hahn 39; DO 26d; BNP 92.

[Simon]

Just to add to the subject, Metcalfs book on the coin reform is available, I don't call it a must have, but even though do not specialize in this time period, I would not give up my copy. Thin book with plates. 

I saw a copy for sale recently, If you pm me I will send the link and answer whatever questions I can. 

 

Simon

 

[ewomack]

If this is the book that you're referring to, @Simon, I found a copy online and ordered it. I don't know if was the same one you found, but there were a few for sale out there. I'm looking forward to reading it. Thanks for the reference to a book that I had not heard about before.

Edited October 27, 2023 by ewomack

[Simon]

9 hours ago, ewomack said:

I found a copy online and ordered it. I don't know if was the same one you found, but there were a few for sale out there. I'm looking forward to reading it. Thanks for the reference to a book that I had not heard about before.

 

Yes you found it, same book. fair price. 

Metcalf is an interesting writer, i the majority of his writings, most of his conclusions are hoard based information, he also changed his mind a lot through the years. Enjoy the book. 

[Ancient Coin Hunter]

Here's mine, it's quite large and hefty, hence post-reform follis

[Simon]

19.8 gm and 38.74mm 

Face is worn but still a nice, impressive coin.  I have been slowly letting go of my earlier Byzantine coins but this one not yet. It's a nice example of the coin reform. 

Some very nice examples on this thread. 

[voulgaroktonou]

Although I have shared these two coins before, while on the topic of Anastasius, I thought I'd bring them out again, in case others have not seen the type. When the weights of the follis and its fractions were doubled in 512, the mint evidently considered that the increased size of the flans would allow for a figural reverse type, a seated representation of Constantinople holding a globus cruciger. Examples exist for the follis (I know of three examples, Berlin, BM, and Triton XIX, lot 688), its half (three examples: mine, and two others in DO., and quarter (three examples: Barber Institute, mine, and the third, Leu Web Auction 11, lot 2129). But it evidently did not give satisfaction, and specimens are extremely rare today.

Anastasius I. Constantinople. 512-17. Half follis. 9.62 gr. 24.5 mm. hr. 8. Sear 25A; Hahn 20a (this coin). Ex Vecchi 8, Dec. 4, 1997, lot 401. Published in The Celator, April 1999, “A Pair of holed rarities”. This example is holed, as are two of the three known half folles as well as one of the three known decanummia. 

Anastasius I. Constantinople. 512-17. Decanummium. 4.30 gr. 20 mm. hr. 6. Sear 28A; Hahn 21. Ex Triton XV, lot 1573.

An example of the follis came up in Triton XIX, lot 688. However, when I saw where the bidding was going, I decided that Meat Loaf's song “Two out of three ain't bad” made a lot of sense. Another song lyric, in this case from John Entwhistle’s “My Wife”, also suggested the importance of restraint: “My life’s in jeopardy, shot down in cold blood I’m gonna be” (or would have been if I had purchased it.)

 

[ela126]

52 minutes ago, voulgaroktonou said:

Although I have shared these two coins before, while on the topic of Anastasius, I thought I'd bring them out again, in case others have not seen the type. When the weights of the follis and its fractions were doubled in 512, the mint evidently considered that the increased size of the flans would allow for a figural reverse type, a seated representation of Constantinople holding a globus cruciger. Examples exist for the follis (I know of three examples, Berlin, BM, and Triton XIX, lot 688), its half (three examples: mine, and two others in DO., and quarter (three examples: Barber Institute, mine, and the third, Leu Web Auction 11, lot 2129). But it evidently did not give satisfaction, and specimens are extremely rare today.

 

Anastasius I. Constantinople. 512-17. Half follis. 9.62 gr. 24.5 mm. hr. 8. Sear 25A; Hahn 20a (this coin). Ex Vecchi 8, Dec. 4, 1997, lot 401. Published in The Celator, April 1999, “A Pair of holed rarities”. This example is holed, as are two of the three known half folles as well as one of the three known decanummia. 

 

Anastasius I. Constantinople. 512-17. Decanummium. 4.30 gr. 20 mm. hr. 6. Sear 28A; Hahn 21. Ex Triton XV, lot 1573.

 

An example of the follis came up in Triton XIX, lot 688. However, when I saw where the bidding was going, I decided that Meat Loaf's song “Two out of three ain't bad” made a lot of sense. Another song lyric, in this case from John Entwhistle’s “My Wife”, also suggested the importance of restraint: “My life’s in jeopardy, shot down in cold blood I’m gonna be” (or would have been if I had purchased it.)

 

 

 

 

 

Holy crap! You have offically won at collecting Byzantine coins

[voulgaroktonou]

5 hours ago, ela126 said:

Holy crap! You have offically won at collecting Byzantine coins

You are overkind, but thank you. Mine is a modest collection, I assure you, but I have been working at it for 60 years.