Odd little Byzantine 16mm/1.2g. Possible rarity John V Palaeologus Sear 2515

[Curtis JJ]

After owning and wondering about this coin's id for 5-6 years, I've gotta ask. (Well, I have a couple of these.)
I've researched as far as I can in that time, and this is the closest I get.

I would tentatively ID this as a slightly-small-for-issue John V Palaeologus (just the family name) AE follaro (the successor to follis, I think) -- Sear Byz 2515 (I don't have that volume hard-copy, so I'm goin with everyone else's ref).

John V Palaeologus Æ Follaro. Constantinople mint, 1379-1391 AD. D MH TP C P, Demetrius standing facing, holding spear, shield, & globus cruciger / Facing bust of John, holding cross-scepter; pellet to left.

Compare these images. They're crude, and I think the obverse and reverse are switched around, but is mine the same?
The one thing that makes me question the attribution is that my coin is the lightest of the 3, but that wouldn't be completely unusual for an 14th century Byzantine issue...
Does anyone recognize my coin as something else?

First, my coin--16 mm, 1.2g:
[BROKEN IMAGE LINK REMOVED BY ADMIN]

Then, wildwinds.com' only example -- 1.95 grams http://www.wildwinds.com/coins/sb/sb2515.html:
[BROKEN IMAGE LINK REMOVED BY ADMIN]

Finally, I found one at Coinarchives.com -- 1.59 grams http://www.coinarchives.com/a/results.php?search=sear+2515&s:

[helvetica]

I used my Byzants excel list and limited the quickfind column for obverse to "standing" and the quickfind column for reverse to "bust facing" and the "number of persons on obverse" column to 1 and it came up with two possibles:
John II
Th DI MI to left, T PI O C to right, St. Demetrius, nimbate, in military dress, no beard, standing, holding sword and shield
IW DEC, John, wearing crown and loros, bust facing holding labarum and cross on globe
Half Tetarteron
1118-1143 AD, Thessalonica
SB 1955

and

John V
DMHTPC P, St. Demetrius, standing, holding spear, shield, and cross on globe
no legend, John, bust facing
AE follaro, 1341-1391 AD, Constantinople
SB 2515.

Switching the two sides over and doing a similar search comes up with more  possibles, 4 tarterons and 4 half-tarterons. That letter at top left makes me wonder whether it isn't a coin of Alexius III.
SB 2015, BMC 39-40
SB 2016, BMC 41-42
SB 2017, BMC 44
SB 2018, BMC 43

[joma-tk]

I have voted 
tk

[Curtis JJ]

Helvetica, thank you for that chunk of research! I'm not that good at attributing Byzantine coins, or even finding the resources, so your input is really wonderful. I'll check out ALL those leads and see what I can find. I'm learning as I go with these (only started to see them in the last 5 years of 20+ collecting, when I decided to try my hand at uncleaned and bulk lots), and one thing I've learned with Byzantine coinage is that there is ambiguity pounded right into the flans themselves! Interesting about Alexius III--that's one that never crossed my mind. Nor did I notice the symbol/letter as such. Great info! (I'm also going after a class K anonymous follis now that I'm "certain" is Alexius I on most days, clueless on other days!)

I might've mentinoned it above, but I don't have any hard-copy Byz refs, just for Roman and Greek coins, and my auction catalog collection is long discarded, so it's limited internet resources for me (actually not so limited, but sometimes you want an authoritative volume, by a known single author or museum in your hand), once in a while a college library when I can find something useful there. So that's really helpful.

joma-tk: "Every vote counts!"
Or, as I prefer, Robert Penn Warren's (via "The Boss," Willie Talos/Stark, depending on book/movie) version: "If you don't vote, you don't matter!" (To be shouted in a Louisiana accent.) Just kidding, but thanks 

[joma-tk]

Dear Helvetica

It seems that you use indeed a nice tool. Have you developed it?
Is it available somewhere?

Dear Curtis

Your coin has absolutely nothing to do with Sear 1955 or Sear 2015-2018.
Forget them...

tk

[Curtis JJ]

tk, Your 2nd "vote" of confidence gives me some sense of satisfaction...

I guess I could strive to be at peace not knowing "for sure." ...
Who am I kidding?
That's never been me, and now that I'm trying to inventory my collection in a single Excel file, I MUST KNOW!!! (A ridiculous task to attempt, given the number of forgettable Roman AE4s, Constantinian coins worn thin, lumps of Greek bronze that used to show .... Alexander-or wait-Kassander-no its one of the Phillips for sure!-no, wait, that's a Roman provincial... and the odd one like this).

Well, in reality, I'm somewhere in between.

In any case, especially since the poll is split 50-50 right now, and I need to get some education in Byzantium, I'm going to check Helvetica's references. I'm in agreement, whatever tool that is, it sounds excellent.

The more I learn about the "Byzantine era," the more fascinating I find it. I knew a classics professor once who specialized in Byzantine history, and she quickly disabused me of my notions that they thought of themselves as "Byzantine" at all (most probably just considered themselves Greek, not even Roman, she told me) or were crude inhabitants of an empty "dark age." The financial insitutions they created, the back-and-forth cross-influence with even-more-Eastern cultures (Arab and others around the holyland), networks of trade/communication across Eurasia....

Anyway, just as interesting as the peoples we now consider "the Greeks" and "the Romans," and I want to learn more. Coins AND the history/sociology of those 1,000 years.

[glebe]

Curtis - this is definitely S.2515 (see below for another example from the Despot sale via Berk's).
The type is clearly late Palaeologan, and is usually attributed to John V.

Ross G.

[Curtis JJ]

tk - I think Helvetica might be the administrator Helvetica with access to wildwinds' database (one more reason to weigh the alternative IDs carefully).

Glebe - thanks for the image! Someone on another thread mentioned that the photos can be as rare as the conis! (I know it sounds absurd, but you get the point.)

Tom E - yes, that's possible. I'm making my "standing" assumption based on the text of just one or two references, and hallowed as they are, I don't think the minters ever wrote down whether Demetrius is standing or not. Not sure ti makes a difference though, since we can just use "standing" as the convention for describing that particular imagery...interesting thought, though.

All - The accumulated images (and none attributed otherwise with such similarity that I've found) lead me to lean toward 2515, but I'm coming around to the opinion (more Zen than last post) that I don't necessarily need an RIC or Sear number to describe and appreciate this coin. To just think of it as an AE coin, probably minted in the Palaeologian dynasty, with "Demetrius standing with..." Possible follaro, tetarteron, half tet.

Appreciate all the input!

[glebe]

Here's another example from the Despot sale.
The saint on this type is obviously Demetrius and he seems to wearing a short military tunic and amour, as we would expect. But what else is shown below him left and right is anybody's guess - maybe a throne - maybe not.
Also I note that in her new catalog of the Ashmolean collection Eleni Lianti attributes this type to Manuel II, on the basis of a supposed long inscription, but I can't see where the inscription is supposed to fit.
I suspect that this type has been attributed to John V in the past at least partly on the theory that other rulers already have their follaros, so where else to put this one?
Incidentally, everyone at all interested in late Byzantines should buy Lianti's excellent new book (see below, from Spink or wherever) - it is essentially an affordable version of the post 1204 parts of DOC IV and V, and covers almost everything that the DOC's do, with good photos (although of course the coins can be a bit mouldy, just as they are in the DOC's).
It includes the Empires of Nicea and Thessalonica in good detail, and also the Latin Empire, the latter with better photos often than DOC IV - including pics of the elusive Jordanov Type IV (which came up on the Forum a few months ago) in both large and small module.

Ross G.

Eleni Lianti "“Late Byzantine Coins 1204-1453 in the Ashmolean Museum University of Oxford”, Spink, London, 2009

[Curtis JJ]

Those are some really interesting comments. How did this coin—how do these coins, i.e. those that do not have very distinctive features or (clear) legends—get precisely attributed to a very particular ruler like John V? Why not the other John's of the family Palaeologus? (Or an Alexius, a Manuel, or simply "Anyonymous Class K...")

I just take the word of the references. I don't have the knowledge to really challenge them seriously. But it's interesting when the references contradict one another, or just admit a level of uncertainty (I like that Wildwinds has a couple of those pages, sucha as the really early Electrum coinage that could be almost featureless). Because there is certainly uncertainty in these!

People (some people) say there is a legend, and I have no reason to doubt their authority, but I've never been able to make out where it is. There are the x's t's or crosses left of Demetrius... Interesting about Manuel II (or Manny 1?) -- someone else must think so, because when I first tried to identify it, somehow I came up with that name. All I remember of that is that I had it written on a tan little envelope followed by "?".

Not like the Roman Constantinian era (which had its own mysteries, to be sure) and there was basically a template for sticking bust, type of headwear, exergue mintmark and officina... Almost like a Mr. Potatoehead! They just changed the parts around for the appropriate time, ruler, status, location, denomination, etc. For me, that's the distinctiveness of that time and place in history: unlike the Greek and Byzantine coinage, with its wide and wild variations, for a few hundred years the Romans strove to bureaucratize the entire empire! The distinctiveness of the Greeks is their emphasis on aesthetic, bodily beauty--hence the beautiful lions and divine characters. The constrast fascinates me....especially the transitions (the decline of Imperial Rome and its progressively declining coinage; the Republican and Provincials which show some of the old Greek flair; then the chaos of the middle ages, though I admit to ignorance on the subject, just based on what my own eyes see and the little I've read so far).

[Paleologos]

more coins of this type......

[Paleologos]

btw ....I believe that this coin it is not a John V issue.

[Curtis JJ]

btw ....I believe that this coin it is not a John V issue.

Why would you say that, given the evident similarity in style of all those attributed at John V?

[Paleologos]

Because of its crude style,
 I estimate its posterior to the reign of John V , furthmore the coins that I have uploaded have been found in the same area , and in the same area  with them there have been found the following specimens of posterior emperors: