Slow Death of the Half Follis - Theophilus

[ela126]

Posting for the sake of making a post, I thought I’d highlight something I stumbled upon that is interesting.

I’ve had an attractive enough Theophilus (829-842) Follis for some time now that I thought was pretty neat. An SB 1667 from Constantinople. These seem to have pretty good portraits rather often and aren’t terribly tough to come across. Want to say I got this one for under $40. What struck me as interesting is the size of it at 8.69g is rather hefty, when coming out of the late 8th and early 9th century coins in the 4-7g range. However, while half follis (and even smaller denominations) did exist in the early-mid 8th century, they seem to have fallen out of fashion by the late 8th.

Cue my random find of a Theophilus Half-Follis, SB 1668 from Constantinople. I never thought about these coins and it was a rather random auction buy at $30. I now find these aren’t rare either and this is an average struck example.

What does strike me as interesting is the size compared to the Follis. This thing is tiny by comparison at 2.68g! Less than a 3rd the follis. Now we all know by this time the bronze weights were not closely monitored but this is a case where the common public would be able to tell the difference, even though most examples have no differing marks (some half follis have an additional small cross at the bottom right of the legend).

Looking later though, it seems half follis quickly fell out of favor again, with a small handful of undertermined mints putting them out, but really, not many at all. Did people have another method of doing very small transactions? I can’t say what the follis to solidi ratio was at this point.

please share any 8th it 9th century small denominations you may have!

[ambr0zie]

I have a chipped follis from Theophilus, bought a long, long time ago. 

18,6 mm, 2,8 g.
Byzantine Empire, Syracuse. Theophilus 829-842. Ӕ follis.
+ ΘEOFI / LOSbASI, diademed bust facing, wearing chlamys and holding globe cruciger / Large M at l., XXX, at r., NNN, above, cross, below, Θ.
DOC 30; Anastasi 548; Spahr 431; Sear 1681.

[ewomack]

That Theophilus half follis was pretty much it for the denomination, it seems. I took a quick stroll through Sommer after that type and saw another half follis under Basil I (Sear 1722) and a possible half follis (the listing for the smallest known type has a question mark after it) under Nicephorus III (no Sear number listed). After that, I didn't see anything. Dang inflation haunted the ancients as well.

I have no late small denominations, but I do have a few coins featuring Theophilus the iconoclast.

Michael II the Amorian (AD 820-829) with Theophilus Æ Follis; Constantinople mint; Obv: MIXAHL S ΘЄOFILOS, crowned facing busts of Michael (on left) and Theophilus (on right); cross above; Rev: Large M, X/X/X to left, cross above, N/N/N to right, Θ below; 29.12mm; 6.21 grams; Sear 1642

Theophilus (AD 829-842) Æ Follis; Constantinople mint; AD 830-842; Obv: ΘEOFIL bASIL; Half-length figure standing facing, holding labarum and globus cruciger; Rev: ΘEO / FILE AVG / OVSTE SV / hICAS in four lines; 27.66mm; 7.46 grams; Sear 1667

Theophilus (AD 829-842) Æ Follis; Constantinople mint; AD 830-842; Obv: ΘEOFIL bASIL; Half-length figure standing facing, holding labarum and globus cruciger; Rev: ΘEO / FILE AVG / OVSTE SV / hICAS in four lines; 28mm; 8.26 grams; Sear 1667

[ela126]

1 hour ago, ewomack said:

That Theophilus half follis was pretty much it for the denomination, it seems. I took a quick stroll through Sommer after that type and saw another half follis under Basil I (Sear 1722) and a possible half follis (the listing for the smallest known type has a question mark after it) under Nicephorus III (no Sear number listed). After that, I didn't see anything. Dang inflation haunted the ancients as well.

I have no late small denominations, but I do have a few coins featuring Theophilus the iconoclast.

Michael II the Amorian (AD 820-829) with Theophilus Æ Follis; Constantinople mint; Obv: MIXAHL S ΘЄOFILOS, crowned facing busts of Michael (on left) and Theophilus (on right); cross above; Rev: Large M, X/X/X to left, cross above, N/N/N to right, Θ below; 29.12mm; 6.21 grams; Sear 1642

Theophilus (AD 829-842) Æ Follis; Constantinople mint; AD 830-842; Obv: ΘEOFIL bASIL; Half-length figure standing facing, holding labarum and globus cruciger; Rev: ΘEO / FILE AVG / OVSTE SV / hICAS in four lines; 27.66mm; 7.46 grams; Sear 1667

Theophilus (AD 829-842) Æ Follis; Constantinople mint; AD 830-842; Obv: ΘEOFIL bASIL; Half-length figure standing facing, holding labarum and globus cruciger; Rev: ΘEO / FILE AVG / OVSTE SV / hICAS in four lines; 28mm; 8.26 grams; Sear 1667

Wonder examples. Really like the quality of your collection @ewomack. Portraits on all of them look excellent.

Yes from what I could tell, I think Alexander and Basil has a half follis, then not really much of anything. What strikes me though is in the late 10th/early 11th, the folli were 15-20g, but there’s no smaller coinage?! Seems odd from how it was in the in the 6th century with almost too many denominations to count!

There is a random half follis during Michael VII, SB 1880A I believe (might be the same Nicephorus III you’re mentioning), ~. Seems very random how it appears in 1071, but DOC and Sear both recognize. That’s it though, once the tertateron and half start up though; they work well as small change again.