With a Supplement on
The hoard which forms the subject of the present monograph was found in 1930 at Seltz, a village in the northeastern corner of Alsace, in the ruins of a house that had been destroyed by fire. 1 News of the find was immediately carried to Strasbourg. The next day, M. Claude F.-A. Schaeffer, then Associate Curator of the Musée Préhistorique et Gallo-Romain at Strasbourg, went to Seltz and was able to arrange for the purchase of the complete hoard, with the exception of a few coins which the finders retained as souvenirs.
The hoard was acquired by M. Schaeffer for the Cabinet Numismatique de la Ville de Strasbourg (of which he was then Curator), which received 2000 coins, and the Musée Préhistorique et Gallo-Romain, which received 1200. Of its share, the Musée kept for display only 198 coins and the jar in which the hoard was buried (see below), and distributed the remainder among members of the Cercle Numismatique d'Alsace.
The privilege of publishing this hoard was most graciously offered me by M. Schaeffer when I visited Strasbourg in the summer of 1933. As I could inventory on the spot only a few hundred pieces before returning to Paris, M. Schaeffer himself inventoried the 198 coins of the Musée, and the following month brought with him to the Musée des Antiquités Nationales at St.-Germain-en-Laye, where he had been named to the Assistant Curatorship left vacant by the death of Salomon Reinach, the 2000 coins of the Cabinet Numismatique. With the coins now within such easy reach of Paris, I was able to complete the inventory in the course of the following year. During this time, also, M. Schaeffer secured from several of the members of the Cercle Numismatique d'Alsace inventories of the coins in their possession. (Since only the more common types found in the hoard were distributed, the pieces in private possession not here catalogued—about 1/5 the total number—are presumably merely additional specimens of types already well represented in the Inventory-List below.) The photographs for the Plates were likewise furnished me by M. Schaeffer.
I wish to express here my thanks to M. Schaeffer for his kindness and his invaluable assistance. Thanks are also due Mr. Harold Mattingly of the British Museum, who very kindly answered my questions in connection with the inedita furnished by the hoard.
The coins were enclosed in a large earthenware jar which was buried in the soil in an upright position, its mouth presumably stoppered. This precaution did not, of course, indefinitely succeed in keeping out soil and moisture. At some time, moreover, the pressure to which the jar was subjected burst one of its sides, causing even greater exposure of the coins, so that when the hoard was found most of the coins were oxidized and many of them matted together. Few of the coins are badly corroded, however; most of them are merely covered with a thin patina of verdigris, and a considerable number are still "à fleur de coin."
The coins (folles) were originally rolled up in leathern containers, just as today coins of equal denomination are rolled up in slips of paper for convenience in handling. The ends of the containers were twisted to make them fit tightly. One such roll is preserved intact, 3 and traces of others from which the leathern containers have long since rotted away are to be found in whole or partial piles or "spilled piles" of coins matted together. 3 Though interesting in themselves, these rolls take on an added significance when we consider how the coins came to be called folles. The word follis originally signified "a leathern money-bag," and the name was later applied to these coins because, instead of being handled individually, they circulated in leathern bags which contained, presumably, a fixed number of coins—in other words, the coin-filled container, instead of a single coin, constituted a unit. 4 Have we not, then, in these leather-covered rolls of coins, the coin-filled containers in question?
The normal diameter for the follis as created by Diocletian in his monetary reform of 295 A.D. has been established as 27–30 mm. 5 There is apparent from the present hoard, however, a distinct tendency, especially in the Gallic mints, toward a slightly smaller coin, 25 or 26 mm. in maximum diameter, before about the year 299 or 300. Throughout the hoard, moreover, elliptical coins are as much the rule as coins approximately round. Thus, some "unreduced" 6 folles show minimum diameters as low as 23 mm. (Diocletian 15, 41; Maximian 57; Constantius 52, 57, 271), and maximum diameters as high as 31 mm. (Diocletian 325; Constantius 266; Galerius 10, 25, 70). "Reduced" 6 folles vary between 23 and 26 mm. Other characteristics also attest the lack of care in the minting of these coins. There are no fixed die-positions: obverse and reverse occur at almost any angle to each other. Few coins have an edge that is even approximately smooth, and a large number have fissures penetrating 10, 12, and even 15 mm. into the coin.
The hoard consists, with the exception of a single Antoninianus (Maximian 9), entirely of folles dating from 295 to 307 A.D. The Emperors represented are:
The hoard is in no sense a "collector's hoard," but is definitely representative of the "état de la circulation monétaire" 7 in the Gallic Rhineland at the time of its burial. The presence of the antoninianus (provided the coin is not an intrusion, for which there is hardly any indication) has interest as showing that, despite the fact that Diocletian's currency reform of 295 A.D. provided for the immediate supplantation of the antoniniani by the folles, 8 the smaller coins still circulated (or, at least, remained in existence) as late as 307.
The hoard contains numerous examples of the confusion of Emperors' effigies so frequent at this period—or, more exactly, of the substitution of the portrait of another Emperor, or of a stylized portrait, for the true image of the Emperor whose name appeared in the legend. This substitution, as Maurice has explained, 9 is found on coins issued in one half of the Empire in the name of an Emperor of the other half, or on coins issued shortly after the accession of a new Emperor whose portrait the mints did not yet have. In the present hoard, fortunately, the substitution of effigies does not enter appreciably into the already difficult problem of distinguishing the genio popvli romani folles of Maximian from the similar issues (especially in the Western mints) of Galerius as Augustus, coins in which the identity of obverse legend and reverse leave only the portrait of the Emperor as a criterion of distinction. 10
The Seltz Hoard contains the following inedita (No. 6 is in the possession of M. Robert Forrer; the rest are in the Cabinet Numismatique at Strasbourg):
1.Diocletian 66. Obv. IMP DIOCLETIANVS P F AVG. Head laureate, right. Rev. M SACRA AVGG ET CAESS NN. Usual figure. A.D. 303.
This type has hitherto been found only with the portrait of the Emperor laureate and either cuirassed or wearing a paludamentum (cf. Diocletian 65).
2.Diocletian 352. Obv. IMP DIOCLETIANVS P F AVG. Head laureate, right. Rev. SACRA MON VRB AVGG ET CAESS NN. Usual figure. A.D. 303–305.
This type has hitherto been found only with the obverse legend IMP C DIOCLETIANVS etc. (cf. Diocletian 346–351, 353–357). The legend of 352 does occur on coins of Siscia (cf. Diocletian 362–363).
3.Diocletian 360. Obv. IMP C DIOCLETIANVS P AVG. Head laureate, right. Rev. GENIO POPVLI ROMANI. Usual figure. A.D. ca. 300–301.
The Obverse legend is new for Siscia. Both … AVG and … P F AVG have been found heretofore, but not … P AVG (cf. Voetter, Numismatische Zeitschrift, 1920, p. 102).
4.Diocletian 365. Obv. IMP C DIOCLETIANVS PF AVGVSTVS. Head laureate, right. Rev. GENIO POPVLI ROMANI. Usual figure. A.D. 303.
The complete word AVGVSTVS, instead of the usual abbreviation AVG, is new.
5.Diocletian 376. Obv. IMP DIOCLETIANVS AVG. Bust laureate and cuirassed, right. Rev. SACRA MONET AVGG ET CAESS NOSTR. Usual figure. A.D. 303.
The mint-marks are practically illegible. The remaining traces of the exergue might suit PT* or PTR. As far as we now know, only the mints of Ticinum, Aquileia and Siscia struck this reverse legend; and no coin of this type is known which has a cuirassed portrait of the Emperor, 11 or which omits P F before AVG in the obverse legend.
6.Diocletian 377. Obv. IMP DIOCLETIANVS P F AVG. Head laureate, right. Rev. MONETA S AVGG ET CAESS NN. Usual figure. A.D. 303.
This type has hitherto been found only with the Emperor's bust laureate and either cuirassed or wearing a paludamentum (cf. Diocletian 68–70). It is quite possible that the cuirass or paludamentum originally was present but is no longer visible in the coin's present condition.
7.Maximian 250 and 251. Obv. IMP MAXIMIANVS P F AVG. Bust laureate and cuirassed, right. Rev. GENIO POPVLI ROMANI. Usual figure, with altar in form of candelabrum. A.D. 304–305.
The altar in the GENIO POPVLI ROMANI reverse has hitherto been found only in coins struck by the mint at Lugdunum. Its appearance here in two coins from the mint of Treviri emphasizes the close association which must have been maintained between the two mints. 12 In addition, No. 250 has the POP VLI interruption of the reverse legend which is typical of the "altar" coins struck at Lugdunum, and No. 251 has the POPV LI interruption which appears on the contemporary (altar-less) issues of Treviri.
8.Constantius 18. Obv. CONSTANTIVS NOB C. Head laureate, right. Rev. GENIO POPVLI ROMANI. Usual figure. A.D. 299–300.
This type has hitherto been found only with the portrait of the Emperor laureate and cuirassed (cf. Voetter, Numismatische Zeitschrift, 1917, Tafel XXII). This coin would seem to be, then, a sort of transition piece, issued no doubt only for a short time, from the uncuirassed effigies of the preceding years to the cuirassed busts of the subsequent years. Cf. also Constantius 17, 60–64.
9.Constantius 290. Obv. IMP CONSTANTIVS P F AVG. Head laureate, right. Rev. SAC MON VRB AVGG ET CAESS NN. Usual figure A.D. 305–306.
This type has hitherto been found only with the obverse legend IMP C CONSTANTIVS etc. (according to Voetter, Numismatische Zeitschrift, 1925, p. 13; cf. No. 2, above. Cohen, however, lists such a coin under Constantius Chlorus No. 261).
10.Galerius 205. Obv. MAXIMIANVS NOB C. Head laureate, rt. Rev. SACRA MONET AVGG ET CAESS NOSTR. Usual figure. A.D. 304–305?
The only obverse legend of Galerius as Caesar hitherto found with this reverse is MAXIMIANVS NOB CAES (cf. Galerius 202–204, 206–215, 225). On the date suggested, see below, p. 13.
11 and 12.Severus 238–248 and 249–261. Obv. IMP SEVERVS PIVS AVG. IMP SEVERVS PIVS F AVG. Bust laureate and cuirassed, right. Rev. GENIO POPVLI ROMANI. Usual figure. A.D. 306–307.
These two obverse legends are hitherto unrecorded for Treviri. Their occurrence on coins in London was, indeed, reported many years ago, but Voetter (Numismatische Zeitschrift, 1918, p. 183 note 2) questioned the attribution of those coins to the mint of Treviri, since they are devoid of mint-marks (or were apparently so reported). Mr. Mattingly writes me that an example of IMP SEVERVS PIVS AVG is to be found in the collection of the Rev. E. A. Sydenham, and a specimen of IMP SEVERVS PIVS F AVG in the British Museum.
13 and 14. Constantine 238 and 287. Obv. FL VAL CONSTANTINVS N C. Bust laureate and cuirassed, right. Obv. FL VAL CONSTANTINVS NOBIL C. Bust laureate, wearing paludamentum, right. Rev. MARTI PATRI CONSERVATORI. Usual figure. A.D. 307.
The only obverse legend hitherto found with this reverse is FL VAL CONSTANTINVS NOB C (Constantine 239–286). Mr. Mattingly writes that there is a specimen of FL VAL CONSTANTINVS N C in the British Museum.
2 |
Coins are cited by their number in the inventory-list below.
|
3 |
Photograph in Forrer, op. cit., Plate XXXIX, 2. A hoard found at Wettolsheim in 1921 had similar remnants of coin rolls: cf. F. A. Schaeffer, publ. cited
in note 33, pp. 93–94.
|
4 |
Cf. T. Mommsen, Histoire de la monnaie romaine III (Paris, 1873), p. 105 and note 2; O. Seeck, Pauly-Wissowa Real-Encyclopädie der classischen Altertumswissenschaft VI, pp. 2833, 2835; J. Maurice, Numismatique Constantinienne III. p. XLI; F. von Schrötter, Wörterbuch der Münzkunde (Berlin and Leipzig, 1930), p. 200.
|
5 |
Cf. F. von Schrötter, ibid.
|
6 |
See below, p. 13.
|
7 |
A. Blanchet, Les trésors de monnaies romaines et les invasions germaniques en Gaule (Paris, 1900), p. VII.
|
8 |
Seeck, l. c. (note 4), p. 2834, holds that the antoniniani were not recalled from circulation by the government, but were "schlichtweg verboten."
|
9 |
J. Maurice, op. cit. (note 4) I, pp. 4–13.
|
10 |
Cf. P. Monti and L. Laffranchi, Bollettino di Numismatica e di Arte della Medaglia I (1903), pp. 8–9; O. Voetter, Numismatische Zeitschrift, 1917, p. 28.
|
11 |
Voetter, ll. cc. note 15, assigns all coins from these mints with cuirassed busts to the Second Tetrarchy. Such an assignation may, however,
be questioned.
|
12 |
The distribution of the coins among the mints represented is as follows:
Coins in the inventory list (below):
Treviri | 2054 |
Lugdunum | 174 |
Ticinum | 65 |
Roma | 58 |
Carthago | 54 |
Londinium | 45 |
Aquileia | 6 |
Siscia | 6 |
Antiochia | 2 |
Heraclea Thracum | 1 |
[Unattributed] | 3 |
2468 |
Coins not in the inventory list:
Unidentifiable | 14 |
Coins matted together and preserved thus for display 13 | 82 |
Total | 2564 |
This distribution is exactly what we might have expected in view of the provenience of the hoard. Less than 1% of the coins come from the Eastern mints, and among the Western mints Treviri is overwhelmingly predominant.
One of the coins classed as "Unattributed," Galerius 246, bears the mint-marks If, as is probable, the O is a badly struck Q, the coin is to be assigned to the mint of Roma (cf. Galerius 223).
The establishment of a chronological sequence of the exergual and field marks of the different mints, and the dating of the different issues of folles by this means, were first undertaken by Otto Voetter, who published the results of his researches on the mints of Carthago, 14 Alexandria, Antiochia and Lugdunum, Treviri, Siscia, Aquileia and Roma. 15 More recently, Lodovico Laffranchi has studied the issues during the First Tetrarchy of the mints of Londinium, Lugdunum and Treviri, with particular emphasis on the years 295–297. 16 Laffranchi astutely distinguishes a number of confusing issues, and some of Voetter's datings of the issues of Lugdunum and Treviri must be revised in the light of his study. Voetter's study on Carthago has now been superseded by that of Georg Elmer. 17
For Ticinum alone, of the mints more frequently encountered in this Seltz Hoard, there is no such study, so far as I am aware, for the period between the monetary reform in 295 and the abdication of Diocletian and Maximian in 305. I have attempted, by comparing the Ticinum coins of the present hoard with parallel issues from other mints, to establish a rough chronology of the Ticinum mint-marks found in the hoard. This chronology needs, of course, to be verified—or rather, modified and amplified—by a more complete study of the folles of this mint than is possible from the 65 examples at my disposal. Tentatively, therefore, I offer the following system of dating:
A.D. 300–1 | 301–2 | 302–3 | 303–4 |
A.D. 304–5 18 | 305 | 305–7 18 | 307–9 19 |
13 |
Cf. supra, pp. 1, 3.
|
14 |
In Mittheilungen des Clubs der Münz- und Medaillen-Freunde in Wien IV (1893).
|
15 |
In Numismatische Zeitschrift, 1911, 1917, 1918, 1920, 1923 and 1925, respectively.
|
16 |
Numismatic Chronicle, 1927, pp. 233–243.
|
17 |
Numismatische Zeitschrift, 1932, pp. 23–36.
|
The approximate date at which the Seltz Hoard was buried is easily determined. The latest coins in the hoard, struck in the names of the retired as well as the reigning Emperors, are: Diocletian 29–37 and 320–323; Maximian 27–41 and 515–559; Galerius 28–39 and 196–201; Constantine 1–2, 4–25 and 173–383; Maximinus Daza 3, 9–19 and 289–291. These coins belong to the so-called "first reduction" of the follis. This "first reduction," by which the follis was reduced in diameter to between 24 and 26 mm. and in weight to between 5.0 and 8.0 grams, is generally dated in the latter part of 307 A.D. or early in 308, 20 and constitutes a terminus post quem for the burial of the hoard. A terminus ante quem is found in the absence from the hoard of any coin of Constantine as Augustus, which title appears on his coins toward the end of 307 or early in 308. 21 The hoard must have been buried, then, after the "first reduction" of the follis, and at least before the coins of Constantine as Augustus had become numerous, if not altogether before they were struck—in other words, late in the year 307, or, at the very latest, very early in 308.
The above considerations are of more than immediate interest, for they may help to fix more precisely the date of the "first
reduction" of the follis. Sydenham has shown
22
that the coins of Maximian
d n maximiano p f s avg
genio popvli romani or genio pop rom
(Maximian 27–41, 515–522)
and
imp c m avrel val maximianvs p f avg or
imp c val maximianvs p f avg
genio pop rom
(Maximian 523–559)
were issued from ca. March or April of 307 (marriage of Constantine to Fausta) until the late summer or early autumn of the
same year (when Maximian left Gaul to join Maxentius in Rome), contemporaneously with the similar coins of Constantine (as Caesar), in whose mints they were struck. Now theseissues of
Maximian consistof both "unreduced" and "reduced" folles. Sydenham suggests that the "reduced" folles may have been issued during Maximian's second visit to Constantine, i. e., after April 308.
23
If these "reduced" folles, which are present in the Seltz Hoard are to be thus dated, the absence from the hoard of any coin of Constantine as Augustus
is inexplicable. These difficulties are avoided, however, if we suppose the "first reduction" to have taken place during the
issuance of these coins in 307—during the summer of the year, for example.
24
18 |
Cf. J. Maurice, op. cit. (note 4) II, pp. 212–213 and Tableau IX.
|
19 |
And recurring for many years afterwards: cf. ibid., pp. 231 ff. and Tableau IX.
|
20 |
Cf. H. Mattingly, Roman Coins (London, 1928) p. 224; E. A. Sydenham, Numismatic Chronicle. 1934, pp. 155, 157.
|
21 |
Constantine's marriage to Fausta, Maximian's daughter, took place in March (probably March 31), 307 A.D., at which time Maximian
conferred upon his son-in-law the title of Augustus. Constantine, however, did not use this title on his coins immediately,
as was formerly supposed (e. g., by Maurice, op. cit. [note 4] II, pp. 13, 211), but first began to strike coins as Augustus very late in 307 or early in 308 A.D.: cf. E. A. Sydenham,
l. c. (note 20), pp. 155, 158–159, 166. The present Seltz Hoard confirms Sydenham's chronology.
|
22 |
L. c. (note 20), pp. 154–155, 166.
|
In 1900, Adrien Blanchet advanced the theory that deposits of Roman coins found in the Rhineland and westward (and, a fortiori, numerous contemporary deposits found within a limited region) were evidences of invasions of Germanic tribes into Gaul at the time of the burial of the hoard; and further, that the location of the different contemporary finds could serve as indices of the route taken by the invaders. 25 The theory is a good one, as Cagnat remarks, "à condition de ne point pousser les choses à l'excés." 26 It is no doubt true that in times of danger, such as those of the invasions, the inhabitants of the regions affected hid their valuables to keep them from falling into the hands of the marauders, and in many cases did not survive to retrieve them when the danger was past. But the number of other possible causes which might have motivated the hiding of any given hoard—avarice, for example, to name but one—are legion; and the habit which has grown up of seeing in each new hoard unearthed in France an indication of another barbarian inroad, 27 is to be deprecated.
The present hoard is a case in point. The only important Germanic invasions about the time of the burial of the Seltz Hoard of which we have any record are those of the Franks. We are told that in 306 A.D. Constantine beat back the Franks who had advanced into Gaul. 28 The Franks were again up in arms, and Constantine once again marched against them shortly after Maximian had rejoined him in Gaul in 308 A. D. 29 Maximian returned to Constantine after his expulsion from Rome by Maxentius. This expulsion took place ca. April of 308. Therefore, even if Maximian went straightway to Constantine, 30 the uprising of the Francs cannot be placed earlier than April or May of 308, and consequently cannot be considered the cause of the burial of the Seltz Hoard, which took place at least four months before. Moreover, an uprising of the Franks, who inhabited the territory around Cologne, can hardly have affected greatly the inhabitants of (what is now) Alsace, especially since Trèves stood as a bulwark between them and the Franks.
23 |
Ibid. Cf. infra, p. 17.
|
24 |
Seeck's dating of the "first reduction" early in 307 (Zeitschrift für Numismatik XVII [1890], p. 124) is based on the erroneous assumption that Constantine struck coins as Augustus immediately after receiving
that title from Maximian (cf. note 21).
|
25 |
Op. cit. (note 7). Blanchet reiterates and extends his theory to the Mediterranean world in Revue numismatique XXXIX (1936), pp. 3–70.
|
26 |
Revue archéologique, 1900, p. 336.
|
27 |
E. g., Forrer, l. c. (note 1), lacking precise data on the dates of the coins in this Seltz Hoard, suggests the great invasion of 313 A.D. as
the cause for its burial (Blanchet, l. c. [note 25], pp. 64–65, follows Forrer); cf. also pp. 184–189.
|
28 |
Eusebius, Vita Constantini i. 25; cf. Panegyr. Const. Aug. VI, 11–12 (ed. W. Baehrens, XII Panegyrici Latini [Leipzig, 1911], pp. 209–210).
|
The follis is generally defined as a billon coin, or as a bronze coin thinly coated with silver to give it the appearance of a silver coin. 31 The bases for these definitions are: 1) Codex Theodosianus ix. 21. 6, a constitutio of the year 349, which takes cognizance of the fact that many money-minters have been removing the silver from the maiorina pecunia and forbids the continuance of this practice under penalty of death; 2) the results of some scattered analyses, made during the last one hundred years, of bronze coins dating from ca. 300 to ca. 340 A. D. In the most comprehensive of these analyses the coins were supposedly all from the mint of Roma; other analyses, until quite recently, were limited to a single coin from Alexandria, Antiochia, Aquileia and Nicomedia. These analyses revealed the presence in folles of Diocletian and Maximian of silver varying in quantity from less than ½% to about 3% and once, 4.18%. 32 It does not seem to have occurred to the writers on the subject that the small amount of silver detected may have been an impurity in the ore used.
In view of the inconclusive nature of this evidence, it seemed obvious that careful analysis of some of the coins of the present hoard would be valuable, even if it did nothing more than lend support to the traditional view. These analyses promised to be all the more interesting, moreover, since the coins come from the Western Mints for which until recently sample analyses have been lacking. 33 Specimens from the mints of Treviri, Lugdunum, Ticinum and Carthago were therefore chosen which, judging from their silvery sheen, might be expected to have a relatively high silver content. The results show that none of these coins contained any silver, except for an occasional trace present as an impurity. 34 The "silvery metal" discernible on the surface of the coins was revealed, on careful examination, to be green (copper oxide), and we are therefore justified in calling into question the "traces luisantes d'argent" heretofore reported on folles and accepted as proof that these coins were silver-washed or -plated. 35 A systematic series of analyses for all the mints is of course needed before the final word can be said on the subject. A priori, however, there seems to be no reason why, at the same period and lacking special circumstances, the folles of some mints should contain silver and those of other mints not; and until further proof is forthcoming, we are probably justified in considering the silver found in the earlier analyses also as impurity. The higher percentage of silver found in those analyses need indicate nothing more than that the copper ore used in the Eastern Mints (and Rome ?) was richer in silver than that used in the Western Mints.
The definition of the follis, at least as issued during the period 295–307 A. D. by the four mints in our tests, must therefore be revised in the light of these findings. The follis was simply a bronze coin. Traces of silver occasionally found in these coins are impurities and not intentional additions.
What, however, of the constitutio cited above? It cannot be questioned that the government intended the maiorina pecunia to contain silver. However, is it justifiable to transfer bodily the dispositions of 349 A. D. to the period of the Tetrarchies? The history of continual variation in the bronze coinage in the first half of the fourth century makes such a transference more than ordinarily dangerous. An explanation of the meaning of the constitutio, on which I am far from prepared to insist but which I offer rather as a suggestion, is the following: The successive "reductions" of the follis proceeded until, about 340 A.D., the coin had fallen in weight to between 1.5 and 2 grams. In that year or not very long after, the weight was raised to between 4 and 5 grams. 36 May it not be that the maiorina pecunia to which the constitutio of 349 A.D. refers is this heavier coinage as distinguished from the lighter folles coined before the rise in weight? That even in 356 A. D., after a second rise in weight (in 351) to ca. 6 grams, 37 not all folles were of this "somewhat larger coinage" is shown by the summary of Codex Theodosianus ix. 23.1 in the Vatican MS, … ut nulli viatori liceat amplius a mille follibus portare neque centenales (small coins) vel maiorinas, if, as seems almost unquestionable, follis here signifies the coin and not the coin-filled container (cf. supra, p. 00).
29 |
Lactantius, De Mortibus Persecutorum 29.
|
30 |
There is some doubt on this point: cf. C. Jullian, Histoire de la Gaule VII (Paris 1926), p. 103 note 3.
|
31 |
E. g., T. Mommsen, op. cit. (note 4) III, pp. 98–99, 102; O. Seeck, l. c. (note 4), pp. 2832, 2834–2835; J. Maurice, op. cit. (note 4) III, pp. xxxii–xxxiv, xliii–xliv; E. A. Sydenham, Numismatic Chronicle, 1919, p. 155; Gercke-Norden, Einleitung in die Altertumswissenschaft II2 (Münzkunde, by K. Regling), 2, p. 29; M. Bernhart, Handbuch zur Münzkunde der römischen Kaiserzeit (Haale, 1926), p. 23; H. Mattingly, op. cit. (note 20), pp. 216, 223, 232; A. Segrè, Metrologia e circolazione monetaria degli antichi (Bologna, 1928), p. 436, and Enciclopedia Italiana, s. v. Follis; F. von Schrötter, l. c. (note 4); G. Mickwitz, Geld und Wirtschaft im römischen Reich des vierten Jahrhunderts n. Chr. (Helsingfors, 1932), pp. 83–84; G. Elmer, Verzeichnis der römischen Reichsprägungen von Augustus bis Anastasius
(Vienna, 1933), p. 26.
|
32 |
J. Maurice, op. cit. (note 4) III, p. xxxiv.
|
33 | |
34 |
Cf. the similar results in Schaeffer, ibid., and in R. Mond and O. H. Myers, The Bucheum (London, 1934) I. p. 119 (bronze coins, including "reduced" folles, from the mint of Alexandria).
|
35 |
T. Mommsen, op. cit. (note 4) III, p. 98 note 1, citing the Vezenaz Hoard described by F. Soret, Mémoires de la Société d'histoire et d'archéologie de Genève I (1841), pp. 240–241. Cf. F. A. Schaeffer, l. c., p. 94.
|
36 |
Mattingly, l. c. (note 20), places the change in 340, and gives the new weight as 5.18 grams. Mickwitz, op. cit. (note 31), p. 82, places the change ca. 344 and gives the new weight as 4.3 grams.
|
37 |
5.8 grams according to Mickwitz, ibid.
|
The following remarks may serve as a key to facilitate the use of the inventory-list hereinafter.
—In the description of the obverse portraits, the following symbols and abbreviations are used:
helm. = head helmeted
c = bust cuirassed
p = bust wearing paludamentum
r = bust wearing imperial robe; holding an olive branch and mappa or papyrus roll
—The reverses, being all of well-known types and easily identifiable by the legend or by the references cited, have not been described. A wide space between words, or a space within a word, indicates where the legend is interrupted by the figure.
In the mint-marks, both 6-pointed and 8-pointed (once 10-pointed) asterisks appear. The 6-pointed asterisk is represented in the printed inventory-list by .
The following abbreviations are used in the citation of references:
C. = Henry Cohen, Description historique des monnaies frappées sous l'Empire romain. 2e édition, Vols. VI (1886) and VII (1888). Since the coins of Galerius as Augustus are assigned by Cohen to Maximian (Maximien Hercule, Vol. VI), these are indicated by the letters C. (M. H.).
E. = Georg Elmer's article cited above, note 17.
L. = Lodovico Laffranchi's article cited above, note 16.
M and S = op. cit. supra, note 12.
S. = E. A. Sydenham's article referred to above, note 20.
V. = Otto Voetter's articles in Numismatische Zeitschrift, cited above, note 15. The references to these articles are given by the year of the periodical and by page, where the necessary references to Voetter's plates can be found.
1 |
Cf. R. Forrer, L'Alsace romaine (Paris, 1935), p. 187.
|
No. | Obverse | Reverse | |
LONDINIUM | |||
1–3 | imp c diocletianvs p f avg | genio popv li romani | |
4 | imp c diocletianvs p f avg | c | genio pop vli romani |
5–12 | imp c diocletianvs p f avg | c | genio popv li romani |
13 | imp diocletianvs avg | c | genio popv li romani |
14 | d n diocletiano felicissimo sen avg | r | providentia deorvm qvies avgg |
LUGDUNUM | |||
15–16 | imp c diocletianvs avg | c | genio popv li romani |
17 | imp c diocletianvs p avg | genio pop vli romani | |
18 | imp c diocletianvs p avg | genio popv li romani | |
19–21 | imp c diocletianvs p f avg | genio popv li romani | |
22 | imp diocletianvs avg helm., l., c, spear, shield | genio popv li romani (altar) | |
23 | imp diocletianvs avg | c | genio pop vli romani (altar) |
24 | imp diocletianvs avg | p | genio pop vli romani (altar) |
25 | imp diocletianvs avg | c | genio pop vli romani (altar) |
26 | imp diocletianvs avg | c | genio pop vli romani (altar) |
27 | imp diocletianvs avg | c | genio pop vli romani (altar) |
28 | imp diocletianvs avg | p | genio pop vli romani (altar) |
No. | Obverse | Reverse | |
29–36 | d n diocletiano p f s avg | r | qvies avg vstorvm |
37 | d n diocletiano p f s avg | r | qvies avgg |
TREVIRI | |||
38 | imp diocletianvs p avg | genio pop vli romani | |
39–40 | imp diocletianvs avg | genio popv li romani | |
41–43 | imp diocletianvs avg | genio popv li romani | |
44 | imp diocletianvs avg | genio popv li romani | |
45 | imp diocletianvs avg | genio popv li romani | |
46 | imp diocletianvs p avg | genio popv li romani | |
47 | imp diocletianvs p f avg | genio popv li romani | |
48–50 | imp diocletianvs p f avg | genio popv li romani | |
51 | imp diocletianvs p f avg | genio popv li romani | |
52 | imp diocletianvs p avg | c | genio popv li romani |
53 | imp diocletianvs p f avg | c | genio popv li romani |
54 | imp diocletianvs avg | genio popv li romani | |
55 | imp diocletianvs avg | c | genio popv li romani |
56 | imp diocletianvs avg | p | genio popv li romani |
57 | imp diocletianvs p avg | genio popv li romani | |
58 | imp diocletianvs p avg | c | genio popv li romani |
59 | imp diocletianvs p avg | c | genio popv li romani |
60 | imp diocletianvs p avg | c | genio popv li romani |
61 | imp diocletianvs p f avg | genio popv li romani | |
62 | imp diocletianvs p f avg | genio popv li romani | |
63 | imp diocletianvs p f avg | c | genio popv li romani |
64 | imp diocletianvs p f avg helm., rt., c | genio popv li romani |
No. | Obverse | Reverse | |
65 | imp diocletianvs p avg | c | m sacra avgg et caess nn |
66 | imp diocletianvs p f avg | m sacra avgg et caess nn | |
67 | imp diocletianvs p f avg | c | m sacra avgg et caess nn |
68–69 | imp diocletianvs p f avg | c | moneta s avgg et caess nn |
70 | imp diocletianvs p f avg | c | moneta s avgg et caess nn |
71–73 | imp diocletianvs avg | c | genio popv li romani |
74 | imp diocletianvs avg | c | genio popv li romani |
75–76 | imp diocletianvs p avg | c | genio popv li romani |
77–85 | imp diocletianvs avg | c | genio popv li romani |
86–87 | imp diocletianvs p avg | c | genio popv li romani |
88–197 | d n diocletiano baeatissimo sen avg | r | providentia deorvm qvies avgg |
198–319 | d n diocletiano felicissimo sen avg | r | providentia deorvm qvies avgg |
320 | d n diocletiano p f s avg | r | qvies av gvstorvm |
321–322 | d n diocletiano p f s avg | r | qvies av gvstorvm |
323 | d n diocletiano p f s avg | r | qvies avgg |
TICINUM | |||
324–325 | imp c diocletianvs p f avg | genio popv li romani | |
326 | imp c diocletianvs p f avg | genio popv li romani |
No. | Obverse | Reverse | |
345 | imp diocletianvs p f avg | genio popv li romani | |
346–351 | imp c diocletianvs p f avg | sacra mon vrb avgg et caess nn | |
352 | imp diocletianvs p f avg | sacra mon vrb avgg et caess nn | |
353–356 | imp c diocletianvs p f avg | sacra mon vrb avgg et caess nn | |
357 | imp c diocletianvs p f avg | sac mon vrb avgg et caess nn | |
AQUILEIA | |||
358 | imp diocletianvs p f avg | sacra monet avgg et caess nostr | |
359 | imp diocletianvs p f avg | sacra monet avgg et caess nostr | |
SISCIA | |||
360 | imp c diocletianvs p avg | genio pop vli romani | |
361 | imp c diocletianvs p f avg | genio pop vli romani | |
362 | imp diocletianvs p f avg | sacra monet avgg et caess nostr | |
363 | imp diocletianvs p f avg | sacra monet avgg et caess nostr |
No. | Obverse | Reverse | |
HERACLEA THRACUM | |||
364 | imp c c val diocletianvs p f avg | genio popv li romani | |
ANTIOCHIA | |||
365 | imp c diocletianvs p f avgvstvs | genio popv li romani | |
CARTHAGO | |||
366–367 | imp diocletianvs p f avg | felix adv ent avgg nn | |
368 | imp diocletianvs p f avg | felix a d vent avgg nn | |
369–370 | imp diocletianvs p f avg | salvis avgg et caess fel kart | |
371–374 | imp diocletianvs p f avg | salvis avgg et caess fel kart | |
375 | imp diocletianvs p f avg | salvis avgg et caess fel kart | |
[UNATTRIBUTED] | |||
376 | imp diocletianvs avg | c | sacra monet avgg et caess nostr |
377 | imp diocletianvs p f avg | moneta s avgg et caess nn |
Mint Marks | Weight (grams) | Date (A. D.) | References |
9.50 | ca. 300–301? | C. 106. For date, cf. V. '20, p. 102. (Obverse type here same as at Siscia.) | |
10.45 | 303 | Unpublished (see above, p. 7). For date, cf. V. '17, p. 12). | |
9.85, 10.90 | 296–297 | C. 67; E. p. 26, No. 21. | |
10.45 | 297 | C. 67; E. p. 26, No. 25. | |
8.95, 9.15 | 297–298 or 299 | C. 438; E. pp. 27–28, No. 37. | |
8.80–10.95 | 298 or 299–304 | C. 438; E. p. 28, No. 41. | |
10.10 | 298 or 299–304 | C. 438; E. p. 28, No. 41 (and note ll). 1 | |
8.65 | 303 | Unpublished? (see above, p. 7). | |
8.40 | 303 | Unpublished? (see above, p. 8). |
No. | Obverse | Reverse | |
LONDINIUM | |||
1–3 | imp c maximianvs p f avg | c | genio popv li romani |
4 | imp maximianvs p f avg spear, shield | c | genio popv li romani |
5–6 | imp maximianvs p f avg (large heaed) | c | genio popv li romani |
7–8 | d n maximiano felicissimo sen avg | r | providentia deorvm qvies avgg |
LUGDUNUM | |||
9 | imp maximianvs avg bust radiate, rt., c | pax avgg | |
10 | imp c maximianvs p f avg | genio popvli romani | |
11 | imp c maximianvs avg | genio popvli romani | |
12–13 | imp c maximianvs avg | c | genio popv li romani |
14 | imp c maximianvs p avg | genio popv li romani | |
15 | imp c maximianvs p avg | c | genio popv li romani |
16–17 | imp c maximianvs avg | c | genio pop vli romani (altar) |
18 | imp maximianvs avg | c | genio pop vli romani (altar) |
19–21 | imp maximianvs avg | c | genio pop vli romani (altar) |
22 | imp maximianvs avg | c | genio pop vli romani (altar) |
23 | imp maximianvs p f avg | c | genio pop vli romani (altar) |
No. | Obverse | Reverse | |
24 | imp maximianvs p f avg | c | genio pop vli romani (altar) |
25 | imp maximianvs avg | c | genio pop vli romani (altar) |
26 | imp maximianvs p f avg | c | genio pop vli romani (altar) |
27–37 | d n maximiano p f s avg | c | genio pop vli romani (altar) |
38 | d n maximiano p f s avg | p | genio pop vli romani (altar) |
39–39a | d n maximiano p f s avg | c | genio pop vli romani (altar) |
40 | d n maximiano p f s avg globe, sceptre? | c | genio pop vli romani (altar) |
41 | d n maximiano p f s avg | c | genio pop rom |
TREVIRI | |||
42 | imp maximianvs p f avg | genio popv li romani | |
43 | imp maximianvs p avg | genio popv li romani | |
44 | imp maximianvs avg | genio popv li romani | |
45 | imp maximianvs p avg | genio popv li romani | |
46–49 | imp maximianvs p f avg | genio popv li romani | |
50–51 | imp maximianvs p f avg | genio popv li romani | |
52 | imp maximianvs p fel avg | genio popv li romani | |
53 | imp maximianvs avg | c | genio popv li romani |
No. | Obverse | Reverse | |
252–377 | d n maximiano baeatissimo sen avg | r | providentia deorvm qvies avgg |
378–514 | d n maximiano felicissimo sen avg | r | providentia deorvm qvies avgg |
515 | d n maximiano p f s avg | p | genio popv li romani |
516 | d n maximiano p f s avg | c | genio pop rom |
517–520 | d n maximiano p f s avg | c | genio pop rom |
521–522 | d n maximiano p f s avg | p | genio pop rom |
523–535 | imp c m avrel val maximianvs p f avg | c | genio pop rom |
536–559 | imp c val maximianvs p f aug | c | genio pop rom |
TICINUM | |||
560 | imp c maximianvs p f avg | genio popv li romani | |
561 | imp c maximianvs p f avg | genio popv li romani | |
562 | imp c maximianvs p f avg | genio popv li romani | |
563 | imp c maximianvs p f avg | genio popv li romani | |
564 | imp c maximianvs p f avg | sacra monet avgg et caess nostr | |
565 | imp c maximianvs p f avg | sacra monet avgg et caess nostr | |
566–567 | imp c maximianvs p f avg | sacra monet avgg et caess nostr | |
568 | imp c maximianvs p f avg | sacra monet avgg et caess nostr |
No. | Obverse | Reverse | |
569–571 | imp c maximianvs p f avg | sacra monet avgg et caess nostr | |
572 | imp maximtanvs p f avg | sacra monet avgg et caess nostr | |
ROMA | |||
573 | imp c maximianvs p f avg | genio popv li romani | |
574 | imp c maximianvs p f avg | genio popv li romani | |
575–576 | imp c maximianvs p f avg | genio popv li romani | |
577 | imp c maximianvs p f avg | sacra mon vrb avgg et caess nn | |
578 | imp c maximianvs p f avg | sacra mon vrb avgg et caess nn | |
579–581 | imp c maximianvs p f avg | sacra mon vrb avgg et caess nn | |
582 | imp c maximianvs p f avg | sac mon vrb avgg et caess nn | |
583 | imp c maximianvs p f avg | sac mon vrb avgg et caess nn | |
584–586 | imp c maximianvs p f avg | sac mon vrb avgg et caess nn | |
AQUILEIA | |||
587–588 | imp maximianvs p f avg | genio popv li romani | |
589 | imp maximianvs p f avg | sacra monet avgg et caess nostr |
Mint Marks | Weight (grams) | Date (A. D.) | References |
8.25–9.15 | 304–305? | C. 503. | |
8.10 | 304–305? | C. 504. | |
8.60 | 296–? | C. 179; V. '25, p. 10. | |
11.10 | 296–? | C. 179; V. '25, p. 10. | |
10.50, 10.55 | ?–305 | C. 179; V. '25, p. 12. | |
9.50 | 303–305 | C. 505; V. '25, p. 12. | |
9.45 | 303–305 | C. 505; V. '25, p. 12. | |
7.65–10.70 | 303–305 | C. 505; V. '25, p. 12. | |
9.40 | 303–305 | C. 502; V. '25, p. 12. | |
1 | 9.55 | 303–305 | C. 502; V. '25, p. 12. |
7.45–11.15 | 303–305 | C. 502; V. '25, p. 12. | |
8.90, 9.95 | 301 | C. 159; V. '23, p. 2. | |
10.60 | 304 | C. 504; V. '23, p. 2. |
No. | Obverse | Reverse | |
SISCIA | |||
590 | imp c maximianvs p f avg | genio pop vli romani | |
591 | imp c maximianvs p f avg | genio pop vli romani | |
CARTHAGO | |||
592 | imp maximianvs p f avg | felix adv ent avgg nn | |
593 | imp maximianvs p f avg | salvis avgg et caess avcta kart | |
594–595 | imp maximianvs p f avg | salvis avgg et caess fel kart | |
596 | imp maximianvs p f avg | salvis avgg et caess fel kart | |
597–601 | imp maximianvs p f avg | salvis avgg et caess fel kart |
No. | Obverse | Reverse | |
LONDINIUM | |||
1–5 | constantivs nob c | c | genio popv li romani |
6 | constantivs nob caes | c | genio popv li romani |
7–8 | constantivs nobil c | c | genio popv li romani |
9 | fl val constantivs nob c | c | genio popv li romani |
10 | imp constantivs p f avg | c | genio popv li romani |
11 | imp constantivs pivs fel aug | c | genio popv li romani |
LUGDUNUM | |||
12 | fl val constantivs nob c | genio popv li romani | |
13 | constantivs nob caes | genio pop vli romani | |
14 | constantivs nob caes | genio pop vli romani | |
15–16 | constantivs nob caes | genio popv li romani | |
17 | constantivs nob caes | genio pop vli romani (altar) | |
18 | constantivs nob c | genio pop vli romani (altar) | |
19 | constantivs nob cs | c | genio popv li romani (altar) |
20–22 | constantivs nob caes robe, sceptre | genio pop vli romani (altar) | |
23–24 | constantivs nob caes | c | genio pop vli romani (altar) |
25–27 | constantivs nob caes | c | genio pop vli romani (altar) |
28–30 | constantivs nob caes | c | genio pop vli romani (altar) |
No. | Obverse | Reverse | |
31 | constantivs nob caes | c | genio po pvli romani (altar) |
32–33 | constantivs nob caes | c | genio pop vli romani (altar) |
34 | constantivs nob caes | c | genio pop vli romani (altar) |
35 | constantivs nob caes | c | genio pop vli romani (altar) |
36 | constantivs nob caes | c | genio pop vli romani (altar) |
37 | constantivs nob caes | c | genio pop vli romani (altar) |
38–39 | imp constantivs avg | c | genio pop vli romani (altar) |
40 | imp constantivs avg | c | genio pop vli romani (altar) |
41–47 | imp constantivs avg | c | genio pop vli romani (altar) |
TREVIRI | |||
48 | constantivs nobil c | genio popv li romani | |
49–51 | constantivs nob caes | genio popv li romani | |
52–54 | constantivs nob caes | genio popv li romani | |
55–56 | constantivs nob caes | genio popv li romani | |
57–58 | constantivs nobil c | genio popv li romani | |
59 | constantivs nob c | c | genio popv li romani |
No. | Obverse | Reverse | |
60–61 | constantivs nobil, c | genio popv li romani | |
62 | constantivs nobil c | genio popv li romani | |
63 | fl val constantivs nob c | ? | genio popv li romani |
64 | fl val constantivs nob c | genio popv li romani | |
65 | fl val constantivs n c spear, shield | p | genio popv li romani |
66 | fl val constantivs nob c helm., rt., c. | genio popv li romani | |
67 | constantivs nob c | c | genio popv li romani |
68 | constantivs nob c | c | genio popv li romani |
69 | constantivs nobil c | c | genio popv li romani |
70 | constantivs nobil c | p | genio popv li romani |
71 | fl val constantivs nobil c | c | moneta s avgg et caess nn |
72–74 | constantivs nob c | c | genio popv li romani |
75–79 | constantivs nobil c | c | genio popv li romani |
80–159 | imp constantivs avg | c | genio popv li romani |
160–174 | imp constantivs p avg | c | genio popv li romani |
175–226 | imp constantivs p f avg | c | genio popv li romani |
227–255 | divo constantio pio shroud, robe | memoria felix | |
TICINUM | |||
256 | constantivs nob caes | genio popv li romani | |
257 | constantivs nob caes | genio popv li romani | |
258–259 | constantivs nob caes | sacra monet avgg et caess nostr |
No. | Obverse | Reverse | |
288–289 | constantivs nob caes | sac mon vrb avgg et caess nn | |
290 | imp constantivs p f avg | sac mon vrb avgg et caess nn | |
ANTIOCHIA | |||
291 | fl val constantivs nob caes | genio popv li romani | |
CARTHAGO | |||
292 | constantivs nob caes | felix adve nt avgg nn | |
293 | constantivs nob caes | salvis avgg et caess avcta kart | |
294–301 | constantivs nob caes | salvis avgg et caess fel kart | |
302 | constantivs nob caes | salvis avgg et caess fel kart | |
303 | constantivs nob caes | salvis avgg et caess fel kart |
No. | Obverse | Reverse | |
LONDINIUM | |||
1–2 | maximianvs nob caes | c | genio popv li romani |
LUGDUNUM | |||
3 | c val maximianvs nob c | genio pop vli romani | |
4 | c val maximianvs nob c | genio popv li romani | |
5 | c val maximianvs caes | genio popv li romani | |
6 | c val maximianvs caes | genio pop vli romani | |
7 | c val maximianvs nob c | genio popv li romani | |
8–9 | maximianvs nob caes | genio popv li romani | |
10 | maximianvs nob caes | genio pop vli romani (altar) | |
11 | maximianvs nob c | c | genio pop vli romani (altar) |
12–17 | maximianvs nob c | c | genio pop vli romani (altar) |
18 | maximianvs nob c | c | genio pop vli romani (altar) |
19 | maximianvs nob c | p | genio pop vli romani (altar) |
20 | maximianvs nob c | c | genio pop vli romani (altar) |
21–22 | imp maximianvs avg | c | genio pop vli romani (altar) |
23–25 | imp maximianvs avg | c | genio pop vli romani (altar) |
26–27 | imp maximianvs p f avg | c | genio pop vli romani (altar) |
No. | Obverse | Reverse | |
28–33 | imp maximianvs p f avg | c | genio pop vli romani (altar) |
34–38 | imp maximianvs p f avg | c | genio pop vli romani (altar) |
39 | imp maximianvs p f avg | c | genio pop rom |
TREVIRI | |||
40 | c val maximianvs nob c | genio pop vli romani | |
41–42 | maximianvs nob caes | genio popv li romani | |
43 | maximianvs nob caes | genio popv li romani | |
44 | maximianvs nob caes | genio popv li romani | |
45–47 | maximianvs nob caes | genio popv li romani | |
48 | maximianvs nob caes | genio popv li romani | |
49 | maximianvs nobil c | genio popv li romani | |
50 | maximianvs nobil caes | genio popv li romani | |
51 | maximianvs nobil caes | genio popv li romani | |
52 | maximianvs nobil c draped | c | genio popv li romani |
53 | maximianvs nob caes | m sacra avgg et caess nn | |
54 | maximianvs nob caes | c | moneta s avgg et caess nn |
55 | maximianvs nob c | c | genio popv li romani |
56 | maximianvs nob c | c | genio popv li romani |
57–58 | maximianvs nob caes | c | genio popv li romani |
No. | Obverse | Reverse | |
59–60 | maximianvs nob caes | c | genio popv li romani |
61 | maximianvs nobil c | c | genio popv li romani |
62–67 | maximianvs nobil c | c | genio popv li romani |
68–71 | maximianvs nobil c | c | genio popv li romani |
72 | maximianvs nobil c draped | genio popv li romani | |
73 | imp maximianvs avg | c | genio popv li romani |
74–83 | imp maximianvs p avg | c | genio popv li romani |
84–195 | imp maximianvs p f avg | c | genio popv li romani |
196 | imp maximianvs p f avg | c | genio popv li romani |
197–198 | imp maximianvs p f avg | c | genio pop rom |
199–201 | imp maximianvs p f avg | c | genio pop rom |
TICINUM | |||
202–204 | maximianvs nob caes | sacra monet avgg et caess nostr | |
205 | maximianvs nob c | sacra monet avgg et caess nostr | |
206–209 | maximianvs nob caes | sacra monet avgg et caess nostr | |
210–213 | maximianvs nob caes | sacra monet avgg et caess nostr | |
214 | maximianvs nob caes | sacra monet avgg et caess nostr | |
215 | maximianvs nob caes | sacra monet avgg et caess nostr |
No. | Obverse | Reverse | |
216 | imp c maximianvs p f avg | fides m ilitvm | |
217–218 | imp c maximianvs p f avg | fides m i litvm | |
219 | imp c maximianvs p f avg | fides m i litvm | |
220 | imp c maximianvs p f avg | fides m i litvm | |
ROMA | |||
221 | gal val maximianvs nob c | genio popv li romani | |
222 | maximianvs nob caes | genio popv li romani | |
223 | maximianvs nob caes | genio popv li romani | |
224 | maximianvs nob caes | sacra mon vrb avgg et caess nn | |
AQUILEIA | |||
225 | maximianvs nob caes | sacra monet avgg et caess nostr | |
CARTHAGO | |||
226 | maximianvs nob caes | felix adv ent avgg nn | |
227 | maximianvs nob caes | felix adve nt avgg nn | |
228–229 | maximianvs nob caes | felix ad v ent avgg nn | |
230 | maximianvs nob caes | salvis avgg et caess avcta kart | |
231–232 | maximianvs nob caes | salvis avgg et caess fel kart | |
233–235 | maximianvs nob caes | salvis avgg et caess fel kart |
Mint Marks | Weight (grams) | Date (A. D.) | References |
11.20 | 305–307 | C. (M.H.) 114. | |
9.35, 9.63 | 305–307 | C. (M.H.) 114. | |
10.00 | 307 | C. (M.H.) 114. | |
9.95 | 307 | C. (M.H.) 114. | |
7.95 | 296–? | C. 75; V. '25, p. 11. | |
7.65 | 296–? | C. 56; V. '25, p. 11. | |
10.25 | ?–305 | C. 56; V. '25, p. 12. | |
8.20 | 303–305 | C. 189; V. '25, p. 12. | |
12.20 | 303 | C. 188; V. '23, p. 2. | |
9.70 | 296 | ——; E. p. 26, No. 20. | |
9.70 | 297 | ——; E. p. 26, No. 28. | |
9.10 9.25 | 297 | ——; E. p. 26, No. 32. | |
9.45 | 297–298 or 299 | C. 190; E. pp. 27–28, No. 40. | |
7.45, 8.65 | 297–298 or 299 | C. 191; E. pp. 27–28, No. 36. | |
8.10–9.15 | 298 or 299–304 | C. 191; E. p. 28. No. 44 (hybrid) 1 |
No. | Obverse | Reverse | |
236–237 | maximianvs nob cabs | salvis avgg et caess fel kart | |
238–243 | maximianvs nob caes | salvis avgg et caess fel kart | |
244–245 | imp maximianvs p f avg | salvis avgg et caess fel kart | |
[UNATTRIBUTED] | |||
246 | maximianvs nob caes | genio popv li romani | |
SEVERUS II | |||
LONDINIUM | |||
1–3 | severvs nobilis c | p | genio popv li romani |
4 | severvs nobilissimvs c | p | genio popv li romani |
5 | severvs nobiussimvs caes | p | genio popv li romani |
LUGDUNUM | |||
6–8 | severvs nob c | c | genio pop vli romani (altar) |
9 | fl val severvs nob c | c | genio pop vli romani (altar) |
10 | fl val severvs nob c | c | genio pop vli romani (altar) |
11 | fl val severvs nob c | c | genio popv li romani (altar) |
TREVIRI | |||
12–72 | fl val severvs nob c | c | genio popv li romani |
73–75 | fl val severvs nob caes | c | genio popv li romani |
No. | Obverse | Reverse | |
76–138 | fl, val severvs nobil c | c or p | genio popv li romani |
139–237 | imp severvs p f avg | c | genio popv li romani |
238–248 | imp severvs pivs avg | c | genio popv li romani |
249–261 | imp severvs pivs f avg | c | genio popv li romani |
TICINUM | |||
262 | severvs nob caesar | virtvs av gg et caess nn | |
ROMA | |||
263 | severvs nob caes | sac mon vrb avgg et caess nn | |
CARTHAGO | |||
264 | fl val severvs nob caes | salvis avgg et caess fel kart | |
MAXIMINUS DAZA | |||
LONDINIUM | |||
1 | maximinvs nobilis c | c | genio popv li romani |
2 | maximinvs nobilissimvs caes | p | genio popv li romani |
3 | gal val maximinvs nob c | c | genio pop rom |
LUGDUNUM | |||
4 | maximinvs nob c | p and c | genio pop vli romani (altar) |
5 | maximinvs nob c | p and c | genio pop vli romani (altar) |
Mint Marks | Weight (grams) | Date (A. D.) | References |
7.50–12.60 | 305–306 | C. 37; V. '18, p. 183. | |
7.60–12.65 | 306–307 | C. 40; V. '18, p. 183. | |
8.55–10.90 | 306–307 | Unpublished for Treviri (see above, p. 9). | |
8.45–12.20 | 306–307 | Unpublished for Treviri (see above, p. 9). | |
9.10 | 305–306 | C. 70. | |
9.70 | 305–306 | C. 62. | |
6.35 | 305–306 | C. 64; E. p. 30. No. 65 (hybrid complementary to E. note 14). | |
10.55 | 305–307 | C. 75. | |
8.55 | 305–307 | C. 79. | |
9.20 | 307 | C. 56; cf. infra, Nos. 19, 290–291. | |
9.45 | 305–306 | C. 96; V. '17, p. 28 | |
9.00 | 305–306 | C. 96; V. '17, p. 28. |
No. | Obverse | Reverse | |
6 | gal val maximinvs nobil c | p | genio pop vli romani (altar) |
7 | gal val maximinvs nobil c | p | genio popv li romani (altar) |
8 | gal val maximinvs nobil c | p and c | genio pop vli romani (altar) |
9–11 | gal val maximinvs n c | c | genio pop vli romani (altar) |
12–14 | gal val maximinvs n c | p | genio pop vli romani (altar) |
15 | gal val maximinvs nob c | p | genio pop vli romani (altar) |
16–18 | gal val maximinvs nob c | c | genio pop vli romani (altar) |
19 | gal val maximinvs nob c | c | genio pop rom |
TREVIRI | |||
20–279 | gal val maximinvs nob c | c or p | genio popv li romani |
280–288 | gal val maximinvs nobil c | c | genio popv li romani |
289 | gal val maximinvs nob c | c | genio popv li romani |
290–291 | gal val maximinvs nob c | c | genio pop rom |
TICINUM | |||
292 | maximinvs nobili caes | p | genio popv li romani |
293 | maximinvs nob caesar | virtvs avgg et caess nn |
CONSTANTINE
No. | Obverse | Reverse | |
LONDINIUM | |||
1–2 | fl val constantinvs nob c | p, c | genio pop rom |
LUGDUNUM | |||
3 | fl val constantinvs nobil c | c | genio pop vli romani (altar) |
4–21 | fl val constantinvs n c | c or p | genio pop vli romani (altar) |
22–24 | fl val constantinvs nob c | c | genio pop vli romani (altar) |
25 | fl val constantinvs nob c | p | genio pop rom |
TREVIRI | |||
26–157 | fl val constantinvs nob c | p or c | genio popv li romani |
158–159 | fl val constantinvs nob caes | p | genio popv li romani |
160–172 | fl val constantinvs nobil c | p or c | genio popv li romani |
173 | fl val constantinvs nob c | p | genio popv li romani |
174–177 | fl val constantinvs nob c | p | genio popv li romani |
178–237 | fl val constantinvs nob c | p or c | genio pop rom |
238 | fl val constantinvs n c | c | marti patri conservatori |
239–286 | fl val constantinvs nob c | c | marti patri conservatori |
No. | Obverse | Reverse | |
287 | fl val constantinvs nobil c | p | marti patri conservatori |
288–320 | fl val constantinvs nob c | c | marti patri propvgnatori |
321–328 | fl val constantinvs nob c | c | marti patri propvgnatori |
329–336 | fl val constantinvs nob c | c | marti patri p ropvgnatori |
337–383 | fl val constantinvs nob c | c | principi ivve ntvtis |
MAXENTIUS | |||
CARTHAGO | |||
1 | m avr maxentivs nob caes | salvis avgg et caess fel kart |
1 |
Hybrid complementary to Galerius 233–235.
|
1 |
Hybrid complementary to Diocletian 375.
|
During the cataloging of the Seltz hoard, it became apparent that there was a wide variation in the weight of folles having approximately the same diameter. Furthermore, many of the coins were covered by what appeared to be a layer of white material. It was for the purpose of determining whether the variation in weight was due to differences in chemical composition and whether the coins were coated with silver, that samples were submitted for analysis. These samples consisted of small sectors cut from the coins in such a way that the identity of the remainder was not destroyed. The coins to be analyzed were selected by Dr. N. Lewis who also supervised the cutting of the sectors.
All the samples had undergone surface oxidation. Some were covered with patches of green corrosion products. The best preserved specimens were those with the "white" coating. On close examination this too proved to be green. The color could be seen readily when the surface was viewed obliquely. Chemical tests confirmed the conclusion that this was a thin layer of a copper salt. Hence, all the samples submitted for analysis were corroded, but to a varying extent. None of the coins showed any evidence of having been coated with silver.
For discs of bronze of equal size, variations in the composition of the alloy would produce relatively small changes in weight. The range of weights covered by the coins under consideration was far too large for the differences to be attributed to this cause alone. Visual comparison of the sectors, supported by micrometer measurements, showed that the weights varied because the thickness of the coins varied. The values for the cross sections of the samples lay between 1.37 mm. for the lightest coin, No. 536, weighing 4.70 g., and 2.86 mm. for the heaviest coin, No. 514, weighing 13.70 g. Many of the sectors were thicker at the center than at the rim, the largest difference being 0.25 mm. This change did not occur uniformly either in the individual specimens or in the group as a whole. Because of this and the lack of constancy in the diameter of most of the coins, it was not possible to determine whether the thickness was exactly proportional to the weight. These irregularities probably originated in the casting* of the blanks, since the specimens showed little evidence of wear.
The preparation of the samples for analysis consisted in removing the surface layers by filing until bright metal was exposed. Since this would have resulted in too great a loss of metal for some of the smaller pieces, they were analyzed as received. The error thus introduced was small as the analysis for each coin totalled close to 100%. The chief factor limiting the accuracy of the determinations was the small weight of metal available for the analysis. All specimens were analyzed for copper, tin, lead, iron, nickel and zinc.
* |
One specimen (Maximinus Daza 35) was submitted to metallographic examination. This examination showed that the coin was made
in two separate steps, consisting of 1) the casting of a blank disc; and 2) the striking of the impression on this disc.
|
Inv. No. | Emperor | Date A. D. | Dia. mm. | Weight g. |
9 | Maximinus Daza | 307 | 26/27 | 7.10 |
35 | Maximinus Daza | 305–7 | 26/29 | 8.45 |
571 | Maximian | 304–5? | 25/27 | 9.15 |
594 | Maximian | 297–8 or 299 | 27/28 | 8.50 |
514 | Maximian | 305 | 27 | 13.70 |
535 | Maximian | 307 | 27 | 9.65 |
536 | Maximian | 307 | 25/26 | 4.70 |
14 | Galerius | 303–4 | 27/28 | 10.25 |
345 | Constantine | 307 | 23/26 | 5.75 |
Inv. No. | Mint | Cu % | Sn % | Pb % | Fe % | Ni % | Zn % |
9 | Lugdunum | 87.98 | 4.00 | 6.16 | 1.38 | 0.05 | — |
35 | Treviri | 87.89 | 4.49 | 6.55 | 0.92 | 0.04 | — |
571 | Ticinum | 92.57 | 4.61 | 1.74 | 0.47 | 0.04 | — |
594 | Carthago | 91.85 | 3.63 | 4.46 | 0.10 | 0.04 | — |
514 | Treviri | 89.67 | 5.52 | 4.22 | 0.98 | 0.04 | — |
535 | Treviri | 86.25 | 6.41 | 7.27 | 0.13 | 0.03 | — |
536 | Treviri | 85.66 | 6.28 | 7.79 | 0.52 | 0.05 | — |
14 | Lugdunum | 85.80 | 5.33 | 8.55 | — | 0.04 | — |
345 | Treviri | 90.27 | 4.43 | 5.30 | 0.37 | — | — |
Although the data are far too few to permit of definitive conclusions, the results do present several interesting features. It will be noted that the two coins of Maximian, Nos. 535 and 536, minted at Trèves in 307, agree closely in composition but differ decidedly from the follis of Constantine, No. 345, issued by the same mint in the same year. The simplest explanation would be to attribute the larger differences to lack of sufficient control in reproducing the mintage alloy in successive melts. Small differences would be due to lack of homogeneity in the individual melts or to the effects of corrosion. Since numerical data on the variations in composition which may be considered "small" are lacking, the coins cannot be classified with certainty on this basis. However, it is probable that the two folles of Maximian were struck from discs cast from the same melt, different from that in which Constantine's originated. These considerations lend special interest to the two coins of Maximinus Daza, nos. 9 and 35, issued at Lyons and Trèves respectively. The concordance between the analyses of these coins may, of course, be due to the chance production at the two mints of practically identical alloys. It is possible, however, that the folles had a common origin in that the blanks from which they were struck came from a supply common to both mints, or were borrowed by one from the other (cf. above, note 12). It would follow that the date of issue of no. 35, given as 305–307, would thus be fixed more definitely as the year 307.
The kind and amount of the minor constituents present in an alloy are not merely a measure of purity but frequently serve as indicators of ore sources. Of the two reported in these analyses, iron and nickel, the latter is more important. Iron is too widely distributed in ores of all types and may be too easily introduced into the metals by faulty processing, to serve as an indicator. Since nickel is frequently found in copper ores, its presence in a bronze is usually attributed to this source. With the exception of the follis of Constantine, all the coins contained a small practically constant percentage of nickel. This may be taken as indication that they were produced from ores of the same provenience. The location of the mines cannot be determined at present since analyses of ores from only a few scattered Roman workings are available. 1
The samples are notable for their high lead content and for the absence of zinc. The latter is sometimes found in coins of this period in amounts varying from traces to several percent.
The publication of these nine analyses constitutes a significant addition to the meagre data on bronze coins of the Roman provincial mints. The writer has been able to find previous analyses of only twenty-nine such coins.2 Three of these were issued under emperors included in the present analyses. Schaeffer 2c has reported on a coin of Constantine minted at Trèves between 309 and 313 A.D. which analyzed: Copper—90.6%, Tin—9.4%, Silver—trace. The value for tin probably includes all metals other than copper. Brazener's 2d analyses of Alexandrian coins contain an example of the mintage of Constantine and of Maximian. The compositions are:
Copper % | Tin % | Lead % | Iron % | |
Constantine (after 337 A.D.) | 91.39 | 3.78 | 2.81 | 0.13 |
Maximian (ca. 305 A.D.) | 96.95 | 0.87 | 1.09 | 0.20 |
Nickel % | Zinc % | Silver % | Antimony % | |
Constantine (after 337 A.D.) | 0.10 | 0.06 | 1.01 | — |
Maximian (ca. 305 A.D.) | — | 0.24 | — | — |
2a E. Bibra, Die Bronzen und Kupferlegierungen der alten und ältesten Völker, Erlangen, 1869, p. 84.
2b H. A. Grueber, Numismatic Chronicle, 1904, p. 244.
3 |
Bibra, loc. cit., pp. 56, 60, 62, 64.
|
1 |
N. Davies, Roman Mines in Europe, Oxford, 1935.
|
2c |
F. A. Schaeffer, Bulletin de la Société pour la conservation des monuments historiques d'Alsace, 1926, pp. 114–115.
|
2d |
W. F. Brazener, in The Bucheum, by Sir Robert Mond and Oliver H. Myers, London, 1934, I, p. 119.
|