Constantine VIII & Basil II Anonymous Æ Follis, class A3...

[ewomack]

This one could now go into the recently posted "duplicates thread," as I already have an example of Sear 1818. This one seemed like an upgrade, though, and I liked the detail remaining on the hair, beard, nimbus, and certain parts of the clothing. The reverse text seemed legible and "good enough." It also looks overstruck, though I haven't determined over what exactly. Apparently, Anonymous class A3 has some controversy around it, though Sear (from 1986) and Andreas Urs Sommer's Die München Byzantinischen Reiches 491-1453 (2nd edition, published Dec 2023) both recognize Anonymous class A3. So I'm not sure what to think about that. The dealer did not label this coin as "Class A3," but I included it for consistency with the previous coin of the same type in my pile.

Constantine VIII & Basil II (976-1028); Æ Anonymous Follis, class A3, Obv: "+EMMA-NOVHA," Facing bust of Christ, left hand holding the book of Gospels, right hand making blessing gesture; Rev: "+IhSUS  XRISTUS BASILEU BASILE" in 4 lines; 27mm, 9.69g, 6h; DOC A2.41, Sommer 40.3.6, Sear 1818

Please share any Anonymous type coins you have!

[ela126]

@ewomack that’s a super attractive portrait with excellent bust detail as well. Very nice piece. Another excellent coin in the collection.
 

im pretty lazy with sharing my pieces, as always. I recently picked up the class C which is the largest, unwaxed coin of the bunch. Pretty satisfying for a 10 euro coins. The others are pretty nice as well. Have a class B in a slab, probably sell that one and get a raw piece. 

 

[Simon]

4 hours ago, ewomack said:

Anonymous class A3 has some controversy around it, though Sear (from 1986) and Andreas Urs Sommer's Die München Byzantinischen Reiches 491-1453 (2nd edition, published Dec 2023) both recognize Anonymous class A3.

It is not used in the academic world; it is used in the coin collecting community and to be honest I do like it as well.   

[Simon]

Another A3

A1

Class D

 

Class F

 

 

[mcwyler]

Very much the ugly duckling in this company, but this is my latest anonymous...

Anonymous temp. Alexius I, 1081-1118. Class K, Follis (bronze, 6.61 g, 25 mm), Constantinople. Facing bust of Christ Pantocrator. Rev. Facing half-length figure of the Theotokos (Virgin Mary), border of large pellets. DOC class K; SB 1901

[JAZ Numismatics]

Often when the bust of Christ on these types is as sharp as yours, the coin's been tooled. But I don't see any evidence of tampering. Just a well-struck, minimally circulated example. 

[Nerosmyfavorite68]

That's also an unusually nice portrait.  I'm assuming by the appearance that it came from the same dealer as usual. The Byzantines from there seem to be brown, for whatever reason.

Anonymous Follis Class A2 - 28mm, 12.25g four dots each -

The sub-variety is on my Excel sheet and not really worth looking up. It'd probably be an A3.  The large, old, perhaps original chip still leaves the coin at about the exact weight for this particular sub-variety.

Edited October 11 by Nerosmyfavorite68

[Simon]

An A2 from a group lot, very nice, the reverse seems slightly double struck. 

[ewomack]

On 10/10/2024 at 8:09 PM, Simon said:

It is not used in the academic world; it is used in the coin collecting community and to be honest I do like it as well.   

Ah, that makes sense. Someone else on this forum (I don't remember who) said that A3 wasn't recognized anymore, but I keep seeing it nonetheless. Your academic/collector distinction makes a lot of sense. My understanding is that A3, to the collector community, just represents a reduction of diameter and weight from the class A2, but it appears to have different decorative markings on the reverse as well.

On 10/11/2024 at 2:59 PM, JAZ Numismatics said:

Often when the bust of Christ on these types is as sharp as yours, the coin's been tooled. But I don't see any evidence of tampering. Just a well-struck, minimally circulated example. 

Thanks for sharing that. I didn't see evidence of tooling, either, but I'm no expert in recognizing tooling, so having another opinion helps a lot. Thank you!

On 10/11/2024 at 3:25 PM, Nerosmyfavorite68 said:

That's also an unusually nice portrait.  I'm assuming by the appearance that it came from the same dealer as usual. The Byzantines from there seem to be brown, for whatever reason.

Thanks for the comments. This one actually came from overseas, so a different dealer this time. But I know of which dealer you're referring to.

Nice examples everyone! Thanks for sharing! Keep them coming!

[ambr0zie]

I have a few of them - I do not specialize in Byzantine but I think some examples are required. 

23 mm, 6,54 g.
Byzantine Empire. Attributed to John I - 11 December 969 - 10 January 976. Anonymous Æ follis class A1. Constantinople.
+ЄMMA-NOVHL, facing bust of Christ, wearing nimbus cruciger, two pellets in each cross limb, pallium and colobium, holding ornamented Gospels with both hands, to left IC, to right XC / +IҺSЧS XRISTЧS ЬASILЄЧ ЬASILЄ (Jesus Christ King of Kings), legend in four lines across field, circle below.
Sear 1793.

26,8 mm, 10,35 g.
Byzantine Empire. Romanus III or Michael IV, 12 November 1028 - 10 December 1041. Ӕ anonymous follis, class B. Constantinople.
+ЄMMA]NOVH[Λ, facing bust of Christ, wearing nimbus cruciger, pallium and colobium, holding gospels with both hands, to left IC, to right XC / Cross on three steps with pellet at each extremity, in fields IS - XS / BAS-ILE / BAS-ILE (Jesus Christ, King of Kings).
SBCV 1823.

 

27 mm, 4,10 g.
Byzantine Empire. Anonymous, time of Nicephorus III (1078-1081). Æ 40 nummi. Constantinople.
Bust of Christ Pantokrator facing, raising hand in benediction and holding Gospel book / Latin cross, with globus and two pellets at each end and short saltire cross at centre; crescents across upper field, floral scroll below.
DOC Class I; Sear 1889.

[Simon]

8 hours ago, ewomack said:

Ah, that makes sense. Someone else on this forum (I don't remember who) said that A3 wasn't recognized anymore, but I keep seeing it nonetheless. Your academic/collector distinction makes a lot of sense. My understanding is that A3, to the collector community, just represents a reduction of diameter and weight from the class A2, but it appears to have different decorative markings on the reverse as well.

Collectors knowledge of coins is based off of catalogs such as David Sears Byzantine coinage. When those catalogs were first written they were accurate to the current knowledge. New information is found all the time, by collectors and academics but the catalog does not change. New editions are not feasible, and collectors continue with the older information. 

A perfect example of this is the City tetarteron of the 12th century. It is very well documented that the tetartera from Constantinople mint have a silver content of 2 to 4% but very few collectors know this because the knowledge and proof was after David Sears catalog was written. 

Academics don't always agree , in fact in Julian Bakers newest book he eliminates the mint of Thessalonica in the 12th century, this he bases off one of a quote by Metcalf. He works with the theory all coins were made in Constantinople and shipped to where they were needed. I do not agree, nor do many of the academics then and now. 

Here is an interesting page for the symbols, they were thinking that the ornamentation could be used as mint marks. It was proven untrue by one of Metcalfs students. 

Anonymous Byzantine Class A Folles - NumisWiki, The Collaborative Numismatics Project (forumancientcoins.com)

 

[Simon]

I bought this oddity from Nomos to make into a ring, It was cut in antiquity, I have no idea how they did it, it is so smooth, not grinded down. They wrote A2, I think it came from an A1. 

 

Anonymous Folles, time of Basil II & Constantine VIII, circa 976-1025. Follis (Bronze, 16.5 mm, 4.04 g, 6 h), Class A2, Constantinople. [+ EMMA-NOVHΛ/ IC XC] Bust of Christ Pantokrator facing, wearing cross nimbus with two pellets in each arm, his right hand raised in blessing and holding Gospels in his left. Rev. [+ IҺSЧS/ XR]IST[ЧS/ Ь]ASILЄЧ/ ЬASILЄ in four lines. DOC A2. SB 1813. Carefully clipped to be used in jewellery. Dark green patina. Very fine.

This is an extraordinary example. At first sight one might wonder if it was carefully clipped to be used in a ring or a pendant, but no clear marks of clipping can be seen on the edge. In any case the transformation of this coin to jewellery is magnificent

[ewomack]

7 hours ago, Simon said:

Collectors knowledge of coins is based off of catalogs such as David Sears Byzantine coinage. When those catalogs were first written they were accurate to the current knowledge. New information is found all the time, by collectors and academics but the catalog does not change. New editions are not feasible, and collectors continue with the older information. 

A perfect example of this is the City tetarteron of the 12th century. It is very well documented that the tetartera from Constantinople mint have a silver content of 2 to 4% but very few collectors know this because the knowledge and proof was after David Sears catalog was written. 

Academics don't always agree , in fact in Julian Bakers newest book he eliminates the mint of Thessalonica in the 12th century, this he bases off one of a quote by Metcalf. He works with the theory all coins were made in Constantinople and shipped to where they were needed. I do not agree, nor do many of the academics then and now.

Yes, I'm definitely aware that the first edition of Sear dates back to 1974 and the second edition to 1987. I've used Sear mostly for type references and to roughly gauge relative pricing, but it definitely has its limitations all of these years later. A third edition would be amazing, but I understand that very likely won't happen. That's why I opted to purchase the much more recent, and much more expensive, Die München Byzantinischen Reiches 491-1453, Second Edition by Andreas Urs Sommer. This book also appears targeted to collectors. I do not know the date of the first edition, but the second edition appeared around December 2023. It includes countless more photos than Sear, though none in color, and lists many more varieties. Not every entry has a corresponding Sear number, but everything has a reference number of the format n.n.n. (e.g., Anonymous Class A3 varieties encompass Sommer numbers 40.3.1 to 40.3.10; the coin I posted above appears to correspond to 40.3.1). European coin dealers sell this book, so I figured it must have some merit, though I admit I have no knowledge of the author Sommer and very little of the publisher, Battenberg, who appears based in Germany. Thankfully, I know enough German to "get by," because the book only uses German throughout. Now if I don't get enough detail from Sear, I open this hefty tome and make my way through the German (which hasn't proven too difficult yet).

I spent a little time, though not very much, in academia (I have a Master's in a field unrelated to numismatics), so I'm also aware of the disagreements there as well. I don't know very much about academic numismatics, where to watch for the latest research (I'm guessing the field has prominent journals), or who qualifies as the "eminent" researchers. Any advice on where to look for the latest in Byzantine numismatic scholarship? I would love to attempt to "keep up" with it (as much as that's possible outside of academia). Perhaps periodic searches in an online search engine such as JSTOR would suffice?

Edited October 13 by ewomack

[Simon]

4 hours ago, ewomack said:

That's why I opted to purchase the much more recent, and much more expensive, Die München Byzantinischen Reiches 491-1453, Second Edition by Andreas Urs Sommer. This book also appears targeted to collectors

I don't recommend it as a complete catalog. Sear has more in it. The catalog seems to be of his collection only. He skips many coins in the 12th century but he gives prices , more current than Sear. 

Still the most accurate and up to date are the DOC volumes, they are now free it just difficult in getting people to use them. 

As for the academics, you need to pick a time period, the experts really focus, after all we are talking over 1000 years of coins. My time period is 12th century so I prefer Hendy,very focused on 12th century. Metcalf was across the board, no real focus and hard to trust, he would write something in the 60"s then change his mind in the 70's. So people can quote his 60's works to make a point when he actually said something different in the seventies. He was brilliant but the body of work he left behind is very scattered.

Grierson i like but he was very conservative and limited in independent writing. 

Today most of the academics base their works on the above. I left out Morrison because I have not spent enough time reading the work. I just have the 2 volume catalog. 

For current articles I look for them on academia.edu and J Stor. 

[ewomack]

On 10/13/2024 at 7:08 PM, Simon said:

I don't recommend it as a complete catalog. Sear has more in it. The catalog seems to be of his collection only. He skips many coins in the 12th century but he gives prices , more current than Sear. 

Still the most accurate and up to date are the DOC volumes, they are now free it just difficult in getting people to use them. 

As for the academics, you need to pick a time period, the experts really focus, after all we are talking over 1000 years of coins. My time period is 12th century so I prefer Hendy,very focused on 12th century. Metcalf was across the board, no real focus and hard to trust, he would write something in the 60"s then change his mind in the 70's. So people can quote his 60's works to make a point when he actually said something different in the seventies. He was brilliant but the body of work he left behind is very scattered.

Grierson i like but he was very conservative and limited in independent writing. 

Today most of the academics base their works on the above. I left out Morrison because I have not spent enough time reading the work. I just have the 2 volume catalog. 

For current articles I look for them on academia.edu and J Stor. 

Thank you for the information!

I have neglected DOC too long. The books are very expensive and I've looked at them online, but I haven't yet formed a habit of using them.

[ela126]

@ewomack It's oddly currently down at the moment, but here is the entire DOC catalog in free digital format. it's down now but hopefully the link works soon.

Internet Archive Search: Dumbarton Oaks Byzantine Coins Whittemore