Overstruck on what?

[moonmoth]

I don't normally collect Romaion coins, unless they're nice holed ones.  This is both holed and an overstrike, and cost a ridiculously small amount for such an interesting object (GBP 2.82). 

It is now a follis of Justin II and Sophia, with a Constantinople mintmark, 30mm x 32mm, 10.7g.  The previous Antioch mintmark is untouched, on the left of what is now the obverse.

It would seem odd for the same type of coin to have been overstruck at a different mint, so I conjecture that a coin of a previous reign, struck at Antioch,  has been gathered in for overstriking, and happened to be in Constantinople at the time.  Can anyone say what the underlying coin is?  I'm sure there's enough of the old obverse legend left for the experts to be able to tell.

Thanks ..

[Howard Cole]

It has to be Justinian I, since Anastasius I used ANTX as the mint mark for Anticoh (Theoupolis).  Justinian I was the ruler before Justin II and was the first to use the THE4P mint mark.  Also from the obverse legend you can see the TINIANVSPPAVG in the standard legend for Justinian I coins (D. N. IVSTINIANVS PP. AVG.).

[Douglas]

Just to add to Howard Cole's correct comment. It was quite common for coins to be overstruck on previous emperor's coins in the byzantine era. I have one coin that has no less than 3 strikes on it. I think it would be more unusual to find an emperor that overstruck his own coinaige...

[moonmoth]

Thanks, Howard and Doug.  There do seem to be a lot of overstrikes, as you say!  Identifying the original on an overstruck coin needs a good eye, which I don't have for Romaion coins.

Bill

[byzantiumcoins]

To me this coin appears to be Heraclius and Heraclius Constantine, Sear 805, Year 3Ê overstruck on a Follis of Maurice Tiberius of the Antioch mint. ( Sear 532 or 533, Year 8Ê )
Kind regards
byzantiumcoins

[moonmoth]

That's very interesting!  I'll go and look at some examples .. it looks as though I might have 4 coins in one here!

(later) Well, one of the figures looks nimbate, which doesn't seem to match the Heraclius examples I can find.  The three strokes at the top of the underlying obverse (now at 3 o'clock on the reverse) look right for Maurice Tiberius, but the legend doesn't seem to match, even allowing for variations.  Can you say what points led to your conclusion, please?

Thanks ..

[vercingetorix]

It is overstruck on a Maurice Tiberius follis of Antioch, regnal year 5 (586-587).

[moonmoth]

I'm not arguing - just trying to learn why it looks that way.  Now that you say the regnal year, I can see the marks, which are similar to a regnal year 4 example.  I can't find an example for year 5, but I expect that will look even more like mine.

[vercingetorix]

The legends of Maurice at Antioch are blundersed so don't look at that. The trefoil ornament (at 3 o'clock) is what you need and it points directly to Maurice, regnal year 5 or 8 which is less important really. This is the host coin. The one overstruck is indeed Heraclius and Heraclius Constantine, year 3. Most of the coins of this year are overstruck beacuse Heraclius struck a huge amount of bronze coins that year and the quantity of fresh metal was insufficient, hence the restriking.

[moonmoth]

vercingetorix, thanks for that very helpful information.

[byzantiumcoins]

Vercingetorix has explained that very well.
Even withought the rather clear details of the Maurice coin the weight of your coin already tells us that the host coin is not a Justinian.
A Justinian follis would be far heavier than your coin, even if you consider wear.
Kind regards
byzantiumcoins

[moonmoth]

byzantiumcoins, thanks to you also.  I do appreciate a clear identification, but really I'm not happy until I know why!  I have a lot to learn about these coins, and now I know more than I did.

[byzantiumcoins]

Here«s another one of the same coin with the same overstrike, first foto is an example of the host coin.
Kind regards
byzantiumcoins

[moonmoth]

Thanks.  Nice coins! I see from the trefoil ornament that the obverse of this one is overstruck on the host obverse, 180 degrees round.  (Learning in action!)

[byzantiumcoins]

I see from the trefoil ornament that the obverse of this one is overstruck on the host obverse, 180 degrees round.Ê (Learning in action!)

Exactly !
byzantiumcoins

[Pep]

Just to add to Howard Cole's correct comment. It was quite common for coins to be overstruck on previous emperor's coins in the byzantine era. I have one coin that has no less than 3 strikes on it. I think it would be more unusual to find an emperor that overstruck his own coinaige...

Actually, it's not all that unusual.  For example, many Half-Folles of Constans II from Carthage were restruck with later issues under that same emperor.  Here is an example of Sear 1059.  The legend is "C O N S T N T N" or something similar.  The undertype is Sear 1056 (" N T ", the first part of an obverse legend exclusive to Constans II, can be seen at 6 o'clock on the reverse).

Kevin