@PG, I agree with Maurice Tiberius and from what I can see of the exergue on the rev, it looks like CON (for Constantinople), so yes Sear 494 is as good of a guess as any. I see the ANNO to the left of the big letter M, but can't make out the regnal year or the officina. These are often overstruck on older Folles, so perhaps that explains some of the lack of clarity. I'm interested to see what Ron thinks about this one.
"If you climb a good tree, you get a push."
"The danger we all now face is distinguishing between what is authentic and what is performed."