Leontius Æ Follis...

[ewomack]

Here stands another Byzantine coin from the time of the "twenty years anarchy." A time when neither the empire nor the coins it produced looked all that wonderful. Leontius overthrew Justinian II in 695, had Justinian's nose slit, and then exiled him to the north. Leontius probably wished he had done much more to the vengeful ex-emperor. As always in Byzantium, what comes around goes around, and in only three years Leontius found himself overthrown by the next "anarchy emperor," Tiberius III Apsimar. Leontius had his own nose slit and was sent packing to a monastery. Then when Justinian II returned in a fervent rage and regained his throne in 705, he had both Leontius and Tiberius III publicly humiliated (some say he used them as footstools while watching games at the Hippodrome, and Tiberius had his nose slit as well) and then executed. The empire thus saw 3 emperors in the years 685 - 705. Things wouldn't improve until Leo III introduced some stability in 717. Once again, this example probably qualifies as "good enough for the type," but the portrait alone drew me to it. None of the legend nor the globus cruciger appears, but some decent detail remains on the loros. The reverse looks either overstruck to oblivion or perhaps damaged. Remnants of the "M," the "A" of "ANNO," and the "Δ" of the officina do peek out from the morass somewhat. Despite everything, I wasn't sure if I would ever obtain a Leontius piece or not. Now my Byzantine pile includes at least one example of every emperor from Anastasius I to Tiberius III Apsimar (it picks up again in the 9th century). That tiny three-year gap between Justinian II's first reign and Tiberius III no longer exists. The remaining "anarchy emperors" pose much larger challenges than their predecessors.

Leontius (695 - 698), Æ Follis, Constantinople, Obv: Legend obscure, bearded bust of emperor facing, wearing crown and loros, and holding globus cruciger, small cross in right field; Rev: large M, ANNO on left, probably year 1, officinal Δ; 23-24mm, 4.01g, MIB 32 var., Sear 1334 var.

Please post your Leontius coins!

[quant.geek]

That is an outstanding coin! Very clear image of Leontius and a not too shabby reverse.  Congrats.  Here are  a few of my coins:

Byzantine Empire: Leontius (695-698) Æ Half Follis, Constantinople (Sear 1335; DOC III.9; MIB III.33)

Obv: Crowned facing bust of Leontius, holding globus cruciger; cross to right
Rev: Large K; cross above, A/N/NO and A across fields, Γ below
Dim: 20mm, 2.49g

 

Byzantine Empire: Leontius (695-698) Æ Follis, Syracuse (Sear-1344; DOC-18; Anastasi-295)

Obv: Leontius standing facing, wearing crown and loros, and holding akakia and globus cruciger
Rev: Large M; monogram above; SCL below

[Nerosmyfavorite68]

That's a good addition!  I am missing Leontius.  I've always wanted one.  The gold seems to be more common than the Constantinople folles.

[ela126]

Very nice piece @ewomack . Leontius has a distinct portrait and your coin captures that well.

@quant.geek as always, very nice pieces. Not sure I’ve ever seen a Sicily piece like that, or at least not in that condition. 
 

Leontius is actually my newest emperor pickup. So new, I don’t have it yet, apparently it just got in the mail from San Marino yesterday. 
 

It’s a Sear 1335, half follis, which seems to be the most common from what I’ve come across. It is very clearly a cut coin, likely from Constantine IV follis just as J2 half follis. (Although looking at the weight, maybe not, a heavy Heraclius piece or a Phocas follis) 3.32g

Pictures from Artemide Aste

 

Edited May 14 by ela126

[quant.geek]

That is a great piece!

[ewomack]

 

 

22 hours ago, quant.geek said:

That is an outstanding coin! Very clear image of Leontius and a not too shabby reverse.  Congrats.  Here are  a few of my coins:

I did really like the portrait on this one. For me it was possibly the only selling point. I'm glad you find the reverse "not too shabby" because I found the reverse to be pretty shabby, but perhaps I don't know better? 😁 I paid a little more for this one than I have for other Byzantines. I had received some good news at work so I decided to celebrate with a semi-expensive ugly coin. 😄

And, as always, you have some very nice pieces from what seems like a difficult to find era. The portrait on the half follis is pretty impressive.

 

21 hours ago, Nerosmyfavorite68 said:

That's a good addition!  I am missing Leontius.  I've always wanted one.  The gold seems to be more common than the Constantinople folles.

Thank you! Yes, one of the paradoxes of this era is that gold seems typically easier to find than bronze. The gold is still really nice, of course.

 

21 hours ago, ela126 said:

Very nice piece @ewomack . Leontius has a distinct portrait and your coin captures that well.

Thank you! Leontius looks a little like he could star in Lord of the Rings from this portrait. I like your piece as well. I hope the piece arrives soon.

 

Also, I'm not sure if anyone wonders why I do small history write ups for the coins I post (others do this too). I do it not for those of you here who very likely already know the history (plus, the history is readily available out on the web), but more to give some context (and maybe a little sensationalism) for people who may not know. I think that maybe the general lack of interest in Byzantines, at least in comparison to Greek and Roman coinage, is the relative lack of knowledge of Byzantine history. I knew very little about it until the coins dragged me in for their unique aesthetics. Now I find the entire history fascinating, which has heightened the interest in the coins, etc. After obtaining this coin, I joked morbidly to my wife that I now have a coin from all three emperors who had their noses cut off in a row in the beginning of "the anarchy." I found that the gruesomeness of some of the stories behind these coins seemed to make the subject more interesting to her (she has no interest in coins whatsoever). So, well, who knows?

I'm just glad to see more interest in this often neglected era of ancient numismatics. Thank you!

[Zimm]

That is a wonderful example @ewomack. If I remember correctly, that example was, at least at some point, listed for sale by Baldwin on their website. Leontius has a rather distinct portrait from the other emperors of the period, making his coins quite easy to identify. For some reason, his Constantinopolitan folles seem to be disproportionately rare compared to those of Tiberius III or the other emperors of the Twenty Years' Anarchy, as only Theodosius III's folles seem to be rarer (though there are some individual types for Justinian II and Leo III that are of comparable rarity). The half folles from Constantinople and folles from Sicily seem more abundant though. I also managed to acquire my first follis of Leontius just this week, though unlike yours with a wonderful patina, mine has had it stripped by whoever owned it before me. Nonetheless, it's far better than I could ever have hoped to be able to find with my meagre budget. Photography and editing pictures aren't exactly my strengths, so excuse the poor photos.

[ewomack]

10 hours ago, Zimm said:

That is a wonderful example @ewomack. If I remember correctly, that example was, at least at some point, listed for sale by Baldwin on their website. Leontius has a rather distinct portrait from the other emperors of the period, making his coins quite easy to identify. For some reason, his Constantinopolitan folles seem to be disproportionately rare compared to those of Tiberius III or the other emperors of the Twenty Years' Anarchy, as only Theodosius III's folles seem to be rarer (though there are some individual types for Justinian II and Leo III that are of comparable rarity). The half folles from Constantinople and folles from Sicily seem more abundant though. I also managed to acquire my first follis of Leontius just this week, though unlike yours with a wonderful patina, mine has had it stripped by whoever owned it before me. Nonetheless, it's far better than I could ever have hoped to be able to find with my meagre budget. Photography and editing pictures aren't exactly my strengths, so excuse the poor photos.

Thank you! I believe you are correct about the Baldwin's listing. As I've said, the portrait really drew me in to this one, despite the lousy centering and largely butchered reverse. If what you say is true about his Constantinople folles, and I'm guessing it is, that would explain the little extra money I had to pay to get this one. A "portrait premium" was probably also added. I like your piece as well. It sounds like it was a lucky find. It's also more complete than the one I posted. Some of the legend remains, the reverse is comprehensible, and I always like seeing the globus cruciger. Plus, I think your photo looks absolutely fine.