| Author |
 Replies: 16 / Views: 4,161 |
|
Pillar of the Community
Netherlands
847 Posts |
Hello All! In my collection I have this byzantine piece with 2 saints and K on the reverse. When is this coin been minted and was it constantinople?   |
|
|
|
Pillar of the Community
Russian Federation
5174 Posts |
It looks like a half follis (K) struck over a follis (M), but I'm not sure if this makes sense for anywhere in Byzantine history. (Could it be that the K is a particularly strong undertype?)
It is just visible that the follis was a year 21, which would presumably make it a 547 AD Justinian I (very unlikely, wrong size and style), a 602 AD Mautice Tiberius (not very likely, short partial year), a 631 AD Heraclius (most likely, if there's a good candidate for the overstrike), or a 662 AD Constans II (unlikely for an undertype, possible for an overtype).
If the overtype belongs to the follis, it is either Heraclius or Constans II - the other two didn't do double portraits (actually the latter's SB 1010 type on Wildwinds is a fairly close match, but there are enough similar types of Heraclius that I wouldn't rule him away).
(EDIT: if the little K to the right of the portraits is actually there, it would point to SB 810 of Heraclius. Could be an undertype detail, however.)
I have no idea about the half follis, unfortunately (the date, if any, appears to be obliterated and/or off flan), and I don't think the mint can be determined, either.
(Besides, there are cases of a coin struck at one mint overstruck later at a different mint - I think I actually have one of those!)
It's two emperors, not two saints, by the way.
|
|
Valued Member
Italy
78 Posts |
Actually a lovely coin  |
|
Moderator
 United States
23731 Posts |
Interesting coin, it is overstruck on an earlier coin and I agree that it was Justinian I. IMO this coin is Justin II and Sophia overstruck on a follis of Justinian I.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
Russian Federation
5174 Posts |
Well, Justin II and Sophia didn't have a year 21, and it would be strange to have a half follis overstruck on a follis (especially since a Justinian I follis would be huge). Besides, I don't think the style of the double portrait is right for that pair, anyway. I stand by my previous theory of a Heraclius SB 810 follis, regnal year 21 (631 AD), over an earlier half follis (perhaps of Justinian, for all I can tell, but probably later). If true, incidentally, it will make this coin eligible for the "walking back by decades" thread  |
|
Valued Member
Canada
266 Posts |
Its half follis of Heraclius over( or under?) a 3/4 follis (sear 812) also of heraclius.  Edited by arnoldoe
05/28/2017 8:11 pm
|
|
Moderator
United States
23731 Posts |
I see what your saying. But here is my thoughts on this coin. The coin was overstruck on an earlier example of a follis, we agree on that. But what I think has happened, is what you are saying is XXI has actually been altered to ANN (O missing) and if you look to the right of the K there is an X which would make it year 8 of Justin II reign 574/75 AD. This is one of those iffy coins.
|
|
Valued Member
Canada
266 Posts |
It perfectly matches a 3/4 follis, every detail you can see confirms it, the star between the obverse busts, the monogram to the left of heraclius etc..
I don't see anything that looks like it would match a Justin II coin...
|
|
Pillar of the Community
Russian Federation
5174 Posts |
Come to think of it - what the weight is? If it's ~10-12 grams, it's a SB 810 of year 21, just like I said originally. (Apparently due to a brief reform the coins of this particular year are heavier than usual for the type.) If it's ~5-7 grams, it's a SB 812. If it's ~3-4 grams, it's a SB 1010 (not ruling it out). If it's somewhere not in those ranges... could be anything really (even Justin II, though I still think the portraits don't match that). BTW, I think there's another X next to that X right of the big K, so (assuming it's not part of the other strike's mintmark, which it might well be if we're looking at a 3/4 follis) the year would have to be over 20, which pretty much only leaves Justinian I and later Heraclius. A Heraclius half follis of the late 630s would be way too small for this (well under 5 grams); a late Justinian I half follis from the 550s would indeed be about the right weight to be restruck as a year 21 Heraclius follis or 3/4 follis, however. (It would have to be 70-odd years old by then, mind you, but this isn't beyond plausibility.) [EDIT: on second thought, arnoldoe's pics made it clear that the undertype, whoever it is, is not Justinian but another double portrait - not sure if Justin II or Heraclius is more likely. Curiouser and curiouser.] For what it's worth, WEGM shows a very nice example of 3/4 follis of Heraclius from year 21, which is indeed a good match for this coin. Apparently a rarer date too! |
|
Moderator
United States
34423 Posts |
Quote:
Curiouser and curiouser. Fascinating discussion!  "If you climb a good tree, you get a push."
-----Ghanaian proverb
"The danger we all now face is distinguishing between what is authentic and what is performed."
-----King Adz
|
|
Pillar of the Community
Russian Federation
5174 Posts |
Quote:Fascinating discussion! The best part is, if it goes the way I (and arnoldoe) think it does, this coin would be eligible to advance the "walking back by decades" thread (year 21 of Heraclius = 630/31 AD). |
|
Moderator
United States
23731 Posts |
It's too bad we can't examine the coin in hand. Yes the weight would be very helpful and would be the deciding factor. I'm also trying to make out the head of the figure on the left, appears to be at an angle from the body from figure on the right. I also can't tell if there is Heraclius distinctive mustache and beard. Hopefully we can get a size and weight.
I think I might be, being swayed to agree with you two.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
 Netherlands
847 Posts |
Wow interesting stories! I have here the weight. it is 6,26 grams and the diameter aproxximatly 24mm
I am not an expert in this period. Just my 6th coin from byzantine period.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
Russian Federation
5174 Posts |
Almost certainly a Heraclius 3/4 follis then (probably SB 812); regnal year 21 (630/1 AD). Struck over (or under?) a 1/2 follis, regnal year 10+x (14? 23? couldn't find any example where the regnal year is set up like that), very possibly also of Heraclius. Appears to be eligible for the "walking back by decades" thread - currently looking for 630s |
|
Moderator
United States
23731 Posts |
With that size and weight It would make it a Heraclius, I stand corrected.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
Netherlands
847 Posts |
Out of curiosity is an coin like this rare and what would it be worth? I think I did pay 25-30 euro for it in the past
|
| |
Replies: 16 / Views: 4,161 |
Posted 05/28/2017 12:46 pm
