A Justinian tremissis, Sear 173F from Thessaloniki?

[Bannerknight]

A few years ago I bought what I first thought was a standard Justinian tremissis (Sear 145), see picture below. But I noted the absence of a star below the globus cruciger. 

Could this be a tremissis from Thessaloniki (Sear 173F), as described in the quote by Sear (1987, page 65)? 

I have noted that Hahn in his 1981 article "New Light on the Thessalonican "Moneta Auri" in the Second Half of the Sixth Century", page 181 states that the starless Justinian tremissis might be a mule between a Justinian obverse die and a Justin II reverse die, se quote below.

This position seems to be supported by Metcalf, in his 1984 article "The Mint of Thessalonica in the Early Byzantine Period", page 115, where he lists the tremisses of Justin II with star omitted.

So my question is: Could this be a tremissis from Thessaloniki, possibly minted during Justin II?

Does anyone have other literature tips that might shed light on the topic? I have searched for the original Oeconomides and Touratsoglou article on the 1948 Thessaloniki hoard, but not found anything. Does anyone know if it exist in electronic form?

All comments would be highly appreciated!

 

Edited October 5, 2024 by Bannerknight

[Simon]

I was taking a quick look for you and even though I was unable to find a match I did run across this. I thought this was interesting even though it had to do with finds from Palestine ,the last few lines and note might assist you. 

Fifteen semisses are registered in our database. They can be classified into two chronological groups according to the direction of the rho-cross $, which was in- verted in 552. The semissis minted in Thessalonica and found in the Ḥ. Marus syna- gogue treasury is a unique specimen (Fig. 55; IAA 16987; MIBE:46, 116 No. V24). Attribution to this mint is based on stylistic comparison with local copper coins. No definitive chronological distinctions can be made regarding the tremisses. 53 53 Hahn argues that the same lattening of the relief as on the later solidi is noticeable here, but this principle is not easily applicable for the tremisses I have checked.

I know that is slim but I thought it worth sharing. It came from 

Gold Coin and Small Change: Monetary Circulation in Fifth-Seventh Century Byzantine Palestine

By Gabriela Ingrid Bijovsky

The full book is available on Academia, looks nicely written. 

(14) Gold Coin and Small Change: Monetary Circulation in Fifth-Seventh Century Byzantine Palestine | Gabriela Ingrid Bijovsky - Academia.edu

[Bannerknight]

Thank you for taking the time to look this up. The publication you refer to is quite interesting in itself. If I remember correctly, the difference between Constantinople and Thessaloniki is often stylistic, as I believe is argued in Hahn and Metcalfe's 1988 publication "Studies in Early Byzantine Gold Coinage".

[Hrefn]

Harlan Berk’s Roman Gold Coins of the Medieval World, and Wolfgang Hahn’s Studies in Early Byzantine Coinage (ANA Studies no. 17) do not shed any light.  The latter does suggest that the output of the Thessalonican mint was substantial, but the tremisses are probably not recognized as distinct from those of Constantinople.   Additionally, persons concealing hoards tend to avoid minor denominations in favor of full solidi, and I suspect this would have a significant impact on the number of tremisses which have survived.   

[Rand]

A nice tremissis @Bannerknight, neat and good style.

I must say that I could never appreciate the suggested stylistic differences. The style of tremisses from Constantinople has many minute variations and errors in legend and styles. Tremisses without a star exist under Anastasius but are not considered to be from Thessaloniki. Seeing two stars would be far more convincing. Two stars were typical of Thessaloniki solidi during earlier reigns. Unfortunately, this rule was broken under Justinianus.

My most recent Thessaloniki solidus, still somewhere in the post.

[Bannerknight]

29 minutes ago, Rand said:

A nice tremissis @Bannerknight, neat and good style.

I must say that I could never appreciate the suggested stylistic differences. The style of tremisses from Constantinople has many minute variations and errors in legend and styles. Tremisses without a star exist under Anastasius but are not considered to be from Thessaloniki. Seeing two stars would be far more convincing. Two stars were typical of Thessaloniki solidi during earlier reigns. Unfortunately, this rule was broken under Justinianus.

My most recent Thessaloniki solidus, still somewhere in the post.

Thank you, @Rand, you have a very nice solidus incoming there. As I stated in the original post, this tremissis might the mule suggested by Hahn. I have not found other examples on the net, or on specialized search engines like CoinArchive, Dumbarton Oaks, etc.

[Bannerknight]

3 hours ago, Hrefn said:

Harlan Berk’s Roman Gold Coins of the Medieval World, and Wolfgang Hahn’s Studies in Early Byzantine Coinage (ANA Studies no. 17) do not shed any light.  The latter does suggest that the output of the Thessalonican mint was substantial, but the tremisses are probably not recognized as distinct from those of Constantinople.   Additionally, persons concealing hoards tend to avoid minor denominations in favor of full solidi, and I suspect this would have a significant impact on the number of tremisses which have survived.   

Thank you @Hrefn I believe that makes the 1948 Thessaloniki hoard interesting. I have seen another starless tremissis on the net, but do not have the reference available. Searching for Sear 173 on different engines yields few relevant results. I am not aware of starless Justinian tremisses from other mints.

[Bannerknight]

The only other Sear 173F I have found is identified in in a post on the German Numismatikforum 20 years ago, see picture below.

https://www.numismatikforum.de/viewtopic.php?t=7683

It is identified as 
2) Tremissis - JUSTINIAN I - Thessaloniki (!!!), Sear 173F, fehlt im DOC
The obverse show some similarities to my own coin (although I'm not a stylistic expert) although the reverse is quite different. But it looks like this tremissis is quite rare, as well as not noted in the Dumbarton Oaks Collection.