Heraclius - SB 873 - More of a rarity than the price leads on?

[ela126]

I won this coin last night on eBay. Primary focus was a Carthage coin which was slabbed without a proper cleaning. I figured it’s a deal on a Carthage piece with good details, which coin be improved through a better clean, so it will be cracked out once I receive.

I then, after winning, looked up the coin and discovered it’s a SB 873. I’m not familiar with it. Through some searches I didn’t come up with much. Possibly meaning this a quite a rare piece…. I also found out the IE is for the 15 Indictional year, not Regnal year.. I don’t actually know which year this might be currently (I’m sure there’s a nice chart somewhere).

Does anyone else happen to have a SB 873? Or any other Heraclius Carthage pieces?

[ewomack]

It wouldn't surprise me if overlooked bargains still existed out there for Byzantine coinage.

According to Sear, 2 indictional year 15s for Heraclius exist - one corresponding to 611/12 (Regnal year 2) and the other to 626/7 (Regnal year 17).

The price quoted in Sear for 873 doesn't reflect the piece as particularly rare. Relative to other types, it's listed as only marginally more expensive. Sear's prices are quite outdated, but they can serve as a relative measure of rarity or desirability. But, things do change and coins can get reassigned rarity values as research progresses.

 

[ela126]

44 minutes ago, ewomack said:

It wouldn't surprise me if overlooked bargains still existed out there for Byzantine coinage.

According to Sear, 2 indictional year 15s for Heraclius exist - one corresponding to 611/12 (Regnal year 2) and the other to 626/7 (Regnal year 17).

The price quoted in Sear for 873 doesn't reflect the piece as particularly rare. Relative to other types, it's listed as only marginally more expensive. Sear's prices are quite outdated, but they can serve as a relative measure of rarity or desirability. But, things do change and coins can get reassigned rarity values as research progresses.

 

Thanks for the research and excellent point. I did see a rather low price listed in Sear as well, but I’ve found those aren’t always accurate. No examples in the DOC plates, although several of the more common sb 872. Only one example is reflected in Labarum as well. Holding History, while a great dealer, doesn’t seem to know Byzantine pieces well, and with a lower cost slab, wasn’t picked up by shoppers on eBay. (Including myself) 

With this coin being an unbearded specimen, and somewhat following the Revolt of the Heraclii coinage which is Indictional years 13 and 14, I’d bet this is the 611/612 specimen. I’d think if it were later, Heraclius Constantine would be represented as well.

Edited November 26, 2023 by ela126

[Celator]

Went looking for it in DO, but it's not in there haha. I believe it to be a scarce year 626/7. Interesting find. Don't have a Carthage, but did find this in a lot.

A contacted Sear and he replied "coin is indeed yr 29 and that IϚ is a transposed 7". Meaning it's an unpublished year 29 from Constantinople. 

[Ancient Coin Hunter]

That's a nice find. Carthage bronze is not that common.

[robinjojo]

On 11/26/2023 at 9:03 AM, ela126 said:

I won this coin last night on eBay. Primary focus was a Carthage coin which was slabbed without a proper cleaning. I figured it’s a deal on a Carthage piece with good details, which coin be improved through a better clean, so it will be cracked out once I receive.

I then, after winning, looked up the coin and discovered it’s a SB 873. I’m not familiar with it. Through some searches I didn’t come up with much. Possibly meaning this a quite a rare piece…. I also found out the IE is for the 15 Indictional year, not Regnal year.. I don’t actually know which year this might be currently (I’m sure there’s a nice chart somewhere).

Does anyone else happen to have a SB 873? Or any other Heraclius Carthage pieces?

That's a very nice coin!  I am not sure if cleaning would improve the coin's appearance. The surfaces are generally rough, and the deposits in the recesses do provide a contrast for the bold, well centered strike.  

I would be cautious and use distilled water, cotton swaps, with frequent inspections and rinsing.

Edited November 28, 2023 by robinjojo

[ela126]

23 hours ago, robinjojo said:

That's a very nice coin!  I am not sure if cleaning would improve the coin's appearance. The surfaces are generally rough, and the deposits in the recesses do provide a contrast for the bold, well centered strike.  

I would be cautious and use distilled water, cotton swaps, with frequent inspections and rinsing.

good points, it should be arriving tomorrow, being a Carthage coin its going to have a deep strike. Once i get it out of the slab i'll have to inspect closely. I do have a habit of removing find patina/dirt, which does nicely contrast coins at times. I somewhat closely follow Saul Roll's coin cleaning guidelines which say "sand patina is just dirt". I'll gauge this from what i believe the portrait improvment could be, especially the eyes.