An interesting Justin 1

[ela126]

This piece sold today at the Nummitra auction. Looking past the fake patina on it, it seems a very interesting due to the border. Almost never see Byzantine pieces, especially Justin 1 pieces, with anything extra on it.

at first glance it looks like an SB84 but my friend who bought it, and I, as well as a few others, haven’t been able to find any similar bordered coins. Anyone here familiar.?

[Nerosmyfavorite68]

Oh, I see what you mean!  No, I've never seen anything like that, although I never really heavily collected the profile folles. Up to recent years, all the Justin I's I owned were AB junk boxer's or a 'barbaric' ex-AB coin, with the blundered name, IAVSTINVS.

The only photographed examples I own, of more recent vintage, are these.

 

[Rand]

I agree, the OP pieces is very intersting. If it did not have a mintmark of Nikomedia, I would think of Antioch. It might be an early celebratory variety soon after Justinus came to power. I see no reason to doubt it originality, and it deserves to be a acknowledged as a catalogued variety of the type.

 

I dislike such artificial patina. Would it be easily removable without damaging the coin?

Edited September 7 by Rand
a typo corrected

[Zimm]

5 hours ago, ela126 said:

This piece sold today at the Nummitra auction. Looking past the fake patina on it, it seems a very interesting due to the border. Almost never see Byzantine pieces, especially Justin 1 pieces, with anything extra on it.

at first glance it looks like an SB84 but my friend who bought it, and I, as well as a few others, haven’t been able to find any similar bordered coins. Anyone here familiar.?

That type is a fascinating one. There seems to not have been a clear purpose for the emission. It clearly cannot date from early in his reign due to the mintmark (in the initial phases of his time on the throne, the mintmark still read "NIKOM", as under Anastasius. Thus this type must have been issued later). Hahn in MIBE lists both a follis (35a3) and a half follis (42a2) with the same border so it seems to have been a full emission for both of the main AE denominations of the mint, but gives no explanation for the border. (The decanummium was hardly struck under him, as had already been the case under Anastasius, and the pentanummium hardly had room for such details).


Nicomedia, in general, was very experimental under Justin I. Many coins feature the "cross above the bust" (though perhaps usually intended to be a part of the diadem?), or in some rare cases a star (MIBE 35a4 for the follis, MIBE 42a3 for the half follis). Additionally, there are two extremely rare emissions that depict the emperor crowned by two victories (38b) and the hand of God (35c, 42c) respectively. 

If there was a specific reason for the wreath (or chain, as Hahn described it) on the obverse, it will likely remain unclear to us, if it was anything more than an artistic choice.

Edited September 7 by Zimm

[ela126]

@Zimm thank you very much for the response. 
 

@Rand appreciate your comments. The new owner may choose to remove them, he’s a bit of a cleaner.

[voulgaroktonou]

6 hours ago, Zimm said:

That type is a fascinating one. There seems to not have been a clear purpose for the emission. It clearly cannot date from early in his reign due to the mintmark (in the initial phases of his time on the throne, the mintmark still read "NIKOM", as under Anastasius. Thus this type must have been issued later). Hahn in MIBE lists both a follis (35a3) and a half follis (42a2) with the same border so it seems to have been a full emission for both of the main AE denominations of the mint, but gives no explanation for the border. (The decanummium was hardly struck under him, as had already been the case under Anastasius, and the pentanummium hardly had room for such details).


Nicomedia, in general, was very experimental under Justin I. Many coins feature the "cross above the bust" (though perhaps usually intended to be a part of the diadem?), or in some rare cases a star (MIBE 35a4 for the follis, MIBE 42a3 for the half follis). Additionally, there are two extremely rare emissions that depict the emperor crowned by two victories (38b) and the hand of God (35c, 42c) respectively. 

If there was a specific reason for the wreath (or chain, as Hahn described it) on the obverse, it will likely remain unclear to us, if it was anything more than an artistic choice.

As @Zimm notes, Nicomedia issued some innovative types under Justin I. I have managed to obtain three examples of Sear 85A (Hahn 35c), and would love to add an example of Hahn 38b (emperor crowned by two victories), but I am not holding my breath in anticipation.

[ewomack]

I have never encountered anything like that border either on a Byzantine. It seems like the intent was to have the entire border displayed, with the oval flourishes visible both inside and outside the circular line, which might imply a larger flan to accommodate it? I don't know, but, depending on the intent, it seems like it might be a slightly fussy design to strike.

I also need to learn about fake patina. What marks the OP coin out as having fake patina? It seems to resemble what I've seen referred to as "sand patina," but I know very little in general about different patina types. I assume people who apply fake patine do this to make the coin look older and potentially more appealing to those who don't know better?

My only Justin I is a standard Constantinople issue, though it has a seriously mauled "M" on the reverse, and it's thicker compared to other Folles of the period that I have on hand.

Justin I (518-527), Æ follis- 17,95 gram- 31 mm, Constantinople mint; Obv: DN IVSTINVS PP AVG, diademed, draped and cuirassed bust right; rev: Large M, below, A; *-* in fields, above cross, CON in exergue; Sear 62; MIB 11

[ela126]

1 hour ago, voulgaroktonou said:

As @Zimm notes, Nicomedia issued some innovative types under Justin I. I have managed to obtain three examples of Sear 85A (Hahn 35c), and would love to add an example of Hahn 38b (emperor crowned by two victories), but I am not holding my breath in anticipation.

So that’s where all of these are! I’d love find one of these at auction, but they are quite rare.

[Nerosmyfavorite68]

The Nikomedia coins also seem to be slightly more prone to having a nice green patina, which is somewhat rare for Byzantines (why?).

[quant.geek]

I had that coin on my radar, but alas my eyes was shifted to work and ended up coming a few lots after that coin sold, so congrats to your friend on the acquisition...

[O-Towner]

On 9/7/2024 at 11:43 AM, ewomack said:

My only Justin I is a standard Constantinople issue, though it has a seriously mauled "M" on the reverse, and it's thicker compared to other Folles of the period that I have on hand.

Justin I (518-527), Æ follis- 17,95 gram- 31 mm, Constantinople mint; Obv: DN IVSTINVS PP AVG, diademed, draped and cuirassed bust right; rev: Large M, below, A; *-* in fields, above cross, CON in exergue; Sear 62; MIB 11

Just happened onto this thread and I noticed that your coin is not a standard issue, but an "eyes to Heaven" type with Justin gazing upward. Just thought you'd like to know.

Here it is with the proper angle on the obverse:

[ewomack]

19 hours ago, O-Towner said:

Just happened onto this thread and I noticed that your coin is not a standard issue, but an "eyes to Heaven" type with Justin gazing upward. Just thought you'd like to know.

Interesting. This same topic came up when I posted that coin here a while ago. Someone asked if this was an "eyes to heaven" issue and someone (I don't remember who) replied that there was no such issue. So, if you have documentation to the contrary, I'd love to see it, because my understanding is that there wasn't such a thing. But I'd rather it did exist. I didn't see anything in Sear about it, but Sear doesn't always include every special issue.

Edited September 24 by ewomack

[O-Towner]

To answer your question:  No, there isn't a reference number in Sear for it, it is just included in the description of RIC 62 (which is what your coin is). HOWEVER, in Sear it does say that there may or may not be a "cross rising from diadem" which your coin has and which certainly makes it scarcer and more desirable to Justin I collectors. Add to that the "eyes to Heaven" variety (not mentioned in RIC) and that just increases its value more.

Don't worry about it not being in Sear, it's definitely a better coin.