Coins of Tingi with Latin legends

Boyce, Aline Abaecherli
Numismatic Notes and Monographs
American Numismatic Society
New York
Worldcat Works




Open access edition funded by the National Endowment for the Humanities/Andrew W. Mellon Foundation Humanities Open Book Program.


Table of Contents




BY Aline Abaecherli Boyce

The ancient coinage of the towns of northwestern Africa usually has Punic legends. Except for the regal issues of Bogud II, Bocchus III, Juba II and his son Ptolemaeus, coins of Mauretania with Latin legends are scarce. Cirta in Numidia struck some coins with Latin legends under the regime of the Roman adventurer P. Sittius, an ex-Catilinarian turned mercenary who was given control of the territory as a reward for services to Caesar. 1 In Mauretania, Tingi, the modern Tangier, struck coins with Latin legends early in the imperial period, while coins attributed to Babba were struck under Claudius and Nero. From Caesarea (Iol) and Lix there are autonomous coins with the name of the town in Latin.

The few known coins with Latin legends struck at Tingi 2 were issued in the name of the town and sev- eral authorities, namely, Augustus, Agrippa, a certain A. Allienus, and finally, local officials called quattuorviri iure dicundo. New light can be thrown on this coinage by specimens in the E. T. Newell Collection, which now comprises the chief portion of the ancient coins at the Museum of the American Numismatic Society. These coins provide the names of moneyers not known before, and they add to known types two examples of a type which can definitely be dated in the reign of Tiberius. They are, furthermore, the first coins, so far as I know, to reveal the fact that the local officials of the town were called quattuorviri.

Recently Mr. Sydney P. Noe called my attention to a bronze coin in the Newell Collection which was published briefly by Mr. Edward T. Newell in The American Journal of Numismatics, Vol. XLVIII (1914), p. 72, Pl. IX. It may be described as follows:

1. Obv. Head of Baal, facing. Behind head, transverse sceptre. Around rim,


Rev. Two ears of corn, between which, reading from bottom to top, IVL TING. Around rim,

EX • D • D IV • VIR • IVR • D •

28 mm. 17.4 grams ANS (ETN), PLATE I, no. 2

The reading of the ligature, a common epigraphical feature of the coins of Tingi, is mine.

In searching for publications of this coin type I found an illustration of it in A. Delgado's Nuevo Método de Clasificacion de las Medallas Autónomas di España (Seville, 1873), II, 356 and Pl. LXXXIII, 18; but the obverse legend was illegible and the drawing only indicated the presence of letters. Nor was there a trace of the sceptre shown behind the head of Baal on the Newell specimen. The importance of the legend with the names of the moneyers on the Newell specimen was at once apparent: unless names of other officials appear on coins of the same type and denomination, we may assume that the coin illustrated by Delgado, like the Newell specimen, was minted by the quattuorviri Q. Fabius and his colleague L. Aurelius Seneca. The attribution of the coin illustrated by Delgado to Tingi is confirmed by the occurrence of IVL TING on the Newell specimen.

The discovery of the coin described above led me to search for other coins of the Roman period struck at this mint designated as IVL TING. In the Mauretania tray I found four coins with Latin legends, representing two types. There were two specimens of each type. The first set bears the name of three officials and is described below:

2. Obv. Head of Astarte to r. In front, EX D D; the whole surrounded by a laurel wreath.

Rev. Two ears of corn; between them,

L • imageM • L VAL • Around rim, Q FAB • image Border of dots.

25 mm. 10.0 grams ANS (ETN) PLATE I, no. 1

3. Similar.

Obv. EX D D

Rev. [L A]E M[L VAL] Q FAB

26 mm. 9.61 grams ANS (ETN) PLATE I, no. 3

The name Q. FAB. (Quintus Fabius) will be recognized at once as having occurred on No. 1, with the addition there, however, of the cognomen FABULLUS. The name of the fourth official is illegible on both Nos. 2 and 3 because of their worn condition at this point, but on his label for the two specimens Mr. Newell had indicated the name of a fourth official, C. IVL(ius) ATT(icus). A fourth name is indeed required here, for, as we have seen, the executive college at Tingi was made up of four men called quattuorviri, four being the regular number in the local collegia, though, in the titulature of municipal officialdom, the four are more frequently designated in extant coins and inscriptions as two groups of two men each, duoviri iure dicundo (who take precedence) and duoviri aediles (of lesser rank). The two chief men could strike without the aediles, as they did on No. 1, and the collegium could strike as a whole. But it would be strange to have only three quattuorviri mentioned as the minting authorities. 3 Since no trace of the name C. IVL(ius) ATT(icus) appears on either of the specimens, it is to be assumed that Mr. Newell derived the name of the fourth moneyer from its occurrence on a coin of identical type in Delgado (op. cit., p. 356 and Pl. LXXXIII, 19), where, of the officials' names, only that of C. Iulius Atticus (C. IVL. ATTIC.) is legible. The Newell coins in the Society's collection therefore, and the Delgado specimen, are mutually supplementary in establishing a complete list of the quattuorviri under whom Nos. 2 and 3 were struck. On these pieces the name of the town does not appear, probably because the space was taken up by the names of the two lesser quattuorviri. The name of the town might have occurred on the obverse, but no trace of it is evident. There is no doubt about the attribution of the coins to Tingi, however, for their obverse and reverse types resemble the types of other coins bearing the name of this mint in the Punic and Latin periods. The identification would be further confirmed if it could be shown that Q. Fabius Fabullus, who struck No. 1 with L. Aurelius Seneca is the Q. Fab(ius) who struck Nos. 2 and 3 along with L. Aemilius, L. Valerius, and C. Iulius Atticus. The identification of Q. Fabius Fabullus and Q. Fab. would, moreover, be of further importance, for if the names represent the same man, No. 1 and Nos. 2 and 3 are close in date.

The coins described above must be dated after 38 b.c., when Augustus conferred citizenship on the Tingitani, 4 for our moneyers bear names of Roman citizens, all of them adopted from names of old and prominent Roman families. These coins, however, may not have been the earliest coins with Latin legends struck at Tingi. There are bronze pieces bearing the name of the town in Latin and portraits of Augustus or Agrippa. The reverse legends of these coins are Punic. The types, of which there are no specimens at the American Numismatic Society, are described below. Along with them we shall list another piece bearing a portrait of Augustus, signed by a certain A. Allienus.

4.Obv. Head of Augustus to r. Behind, IVL TIN In front, AVGVST

Rev. Head of Baal facing. To r., transverse sceptre. Around rim, to 1., image

L. Müller, Num. de l'Anc. Afrique, III, 146.

A. Delgado, Nuevo Método de Clasificacion de las Medallas Autónomas di Espana, II, 355–356, Pl. LXXXIII, no. 14.

L. Charrier, Description des monnaies de la Numidie et de la Maurétanie, p. 74, no. 132 (Pl. XI).

PLATE II, no. 4

5. Obv. Head of Agrippa to 1. In front, M A G R I Behind head, P P A I V L TIN

Rev. Similar to no. 4.

Müller, op. cit., p. 146.

Delgado, op. cit., p. 356; Pl. LXXXIII, 15.

Charrier, op. cit., p. 74, no. 133 (Pl. XI).

PLATE II, no. 5

6. Obv. Head of Augustus to r. In front, AVGVS The whole in wreath.

Rev. Head of Baal, facing, between two ears of corn. Around rim, A ALLIENVS

Charrier, op. cit., p. 74, no. 135 (Pl. XI).

PLATE II, no. 6

No quattuorviri are indicated on any of these coins. The fact that for his reverse type Allienus combined two types that appeared separately on the local coinage of the quattuorviri (as well as on the local Punic coinage) does not require us to conclude that the coins of Allienus were struck at Tingi later than No. 1. The Baal head and the corn ears are familiar types of the coinage with Punic legends, 5 the common source to which both Allienus and the local moneyers went for their types.

The A. Allienus who struck at Tingi is probably no other than the erstwhile proconsul in Sicily, once a moneyer in Rome, who helped Caesar by dispatching forces against the Pompeians in Africa, and later joined the Republicans in the East. 6 Other prominent Romans were partisans of Caesar, joined the Republicans after his assassination, and later went over to Octavian against Antony. The coins of Allienus and the issue bearing the name and portrait of Augustus must date after 27 b.c. since the title Augustus was conferred at that time. 7 The type of Agrippa with the name IVL TIN may be regarded as of the same date. Since Agrippa died in 12 b.c. 8 we can place the coin bearing his portrait and the similar coin with Augustus' portrait between the years 27 and 12 b.c., an early date within the period being the more probable.

The coinage of Allienus was hardly local, for al- though it bore local types on the reverse, neither the town nor the moneyers are mentioned, one of which would seem to be required for a strictly local issue. The name of an imperial legate meant that it was struck under authority transcending mere local rights, even though it be supposed that the coinage was struck for such an event as the reopening of the local mint under a Roman charter. In any case, the local types on the reverse show that it was minted at Tingi. 9

The bilingual coins with the heads of Augustus and Agrippa were, on the other hand, clearly local, since they were issued by the town in its own name. The coins bore both Punic and Latin legends, Latin on the portrait side (name of Augustus or Agrippa and name of town), and Punic on the reverse, where the name as well as the head of the local Baal appeared. We have indicated in all cases the earliest date at which the coins could have been struck, 38 b.c. for the coins of the quattuorviri, and 27 for the bilingual coins bearing the names of Augustus and Agrippa. It is worth while to attempt to indicate within this chronological setting the relative date of the coinages described thus far. The existence of Punic as well as Latin legends on the coins honoring Augustus and Agrippa suggests that these were earlier than the coins of the quattuorviri, which bear only Latin legends.

To be sure, the quattuorviri might have struck at any time after the town was invested with citizenship in 38 b.c. But once they had begun to strike using Latin legends, it would appear strange if the town were later to strike bilingual coins honoring Augustus and Agrippa. 10 I offer the following as a suggested chronological order:

  • Allienus; not local but struck at local mint
  • Bilingual coins with portraits of Augustus and Agrippa
  • Coins of the quattuorviri.

The coinage of Allienus appears to represent the issue of an imperial legate struck at Tingi before the local coinage under Rome was issued. It is tempting to suppose that the most likely period for an Augustan legate to issue coins in Mauretania was before 25 b.c., when Numidia and Mauretania (though not all towns) became the kingdom of Juba II. In this case the coinage of Allienus would fall within the period 27–25 b.c. Our information about Mauretania, however, is too scanty for us to establish such a close dating of the coins with certainty. When the town issued coins in the names of Augustus and Agrippa, quite possibly the two men were being honored in the capacity of honorary quattuorviri, in which case the officials acting for them would have been praefecti, as we know they were at Carthago Nova in Spain. 11 Information about Agrippa's activities in this region, alas, is lacking. His statistical geography for this region is thought to have been compiled between 25 and 12 b.c., the latter being the date of his death. At Gades, across the straits, he was patronus and parens municipii. 12 Finally, Tingi issued coins in the name of its local presiding officials, the quattuorviri. We know from Nos. 1–3 that the moneyers signed in two ways: either the two quattuorviri of the higher status signed alone, with their full title in abbreviated form (IV VIR IVR D), or the college of four signed as a whole, their official status being indicated only by the general title IV (VIR). Evidently the quattuorviri iure dicundo alone signed the higher denomination of the large bronze pieces. 13

The chief officials at Tingi were not always called quattuorviri. Two pieces of evidence, though fragmentary, point to a time when the executive college was made up of duoviri iure dicundo and aediles. The first is a coin illustrated in Delgado (op. cit., p. 356 and Pl. LXXXIII, no. 16); variations of its legends are listed by R. Münsterberg, Die Beamtennamen auf den griechischen Münzen, Wien, 1914 (Sonderdruck aus der Numismatischen Zeitschrift 1911, 1912, 1914), p. 4 = 72, who does not, however, reproduce exactly the legend as given by Delgado.

7. Obv. Head of Baal to r. Around rim,


Rev. Two corn ears. Between them image Around rim TING image" image

PLATE III, no. 7

The legend of the coin illustrated in Delgado seems to indicate that it was issued by at least one duovir and one aedile. The word maior following TING, together with the absence of IVL and the presence of the crescent symbol which does not appear on other coins with Latin legends, suggests a change in political status or a distinction between groups, i.e., a double community in the territory; 14 but whether it implies colonial status is doubtful. The possibility that Tingi passed from the status of an oppidum civium Romanorum to a municipium of higher rank before it finally became a colony must not be overlooked. The Delgado coin may represent some such early stage.

The second piece of evidence indicating a change in Tingi's status is a sepulchral inscription which shows that the town became a colony with duoviri:

Q. Aelius Q(uinti) f(ilius) Gal(eria) Verecundus IIvir colon(iae) [Tingi]tan(ae) flamen colon(iae) eiusdem, ann(is) LX. H(ic) s(itus) e(st). S(it) t(ibi) t(erra) l(evis). Q. Aelius Faustio lib(ertus) idemque heres redempto a coheredibus suis solo et aedificio memoria optimi patr(is) praestitit. 15

"Quintus Aelius Verecundus, son of Quintus, member of the tribus Galeria, duovir of the colony of Tingi, priest of the same colony, lies here, after having lived for sixty years. Upon you may the earth rest light! Quintus Aelius Faustio, his freedman and likewise his heir, bought the ground and the structure from his co-heirs, and performed this office in memory of the best of fathers."

The only letters that need to be supplied in this otherwise perfectly preserved inscription are those which form the essential part of the town's name! There is, however, not much doubt about the correctness of the restoration [Tingi]TANAE. Traces of lower portions of the missing letters make the restoration certain, as does the amount of space to be filled. Our task therefore is to try to learn when Tingi's status was changed to a colonia with duoviri.

It seems clear from literary sources as well as from our inscription that Tingi eventually became a colony.

Pliny (Naturalis Historia, V, 2) and the Antonine and Ravenna itineraries indicate this. 16 It is fairly well established that other names for local presiding officials gave way to the term duoviri in the course of the first century a.d. This development may be regarded as completed in the time of the Flavians. The change is indicated in Spanish municipal law and in a Spanish inscription concerning the refounding of a town by Vespasian. 17 A town need not become a colony to undergo this change in terminology, but if a town with quattuorviri became a colony, these men were likely to be duoviri thereafter. The sepulchral inscription of Q. Aelius Verecundus shows that both developments had taken place at Tingi before Aelius' death. But since his name suggests that the inscription may be no earlier than the second century, nothing significant for us can be learned of the date of the colony's founding from this source.

There is no evidence for a colony at Tingi under Augustus. Carcopino's conviction that Tingi was an Augustan colony is based on evidence that is purely circumstantial, 18 and on the same kind of evidence a case can be made for believing that the town was not a colony at this early date. The coins of Tingi do not indicate its status, since the ethnic is merely IVL TIN, IVL TING, IVL Tingi. The absence of COL or C does not prove that a minting town had no colonial status. 19 Yet the practice of the mints of Spain and the legends of Spanish coins (which must be studied in any attempt to understand western Mauretania under the early Empire) suggest that colonies with a Julian or Augustan (and Octavian) foundation in that region indicated their status in their coin legends. Urso in Baetica and Pax Julia in Lusitania are exceptions to this practice, but this may be due to the fact that their coinage was confined to the first years of Augustus' principate. Many municipalities indicate their status in the legends. At the same time towns whose status does not occur in the Latin legends on their coins are usually municipia. Tingi may be likened to these.

Definite evidence for the granting of colonial status to Tingi assigns a foundation to the reign of Claudius. The Elder Pliny in his Naturalis Historia (Bk. V, 2) states that Tingi was named Traducta Julia when the Emperor Claudius founded a colony: Tingi ... a Claudio Caesare, cum coloniam faceret, appellatum Traducta Iulia. The statement regarding the renaming of the town has correctly been regarded as an error. 20 This does not mean that Pliny was in error as to the date of the colony. He evidently confused the Spanish town across the straits, Julia Traducta, with Tingi. Such an error could have arisen from the fact that under Augustus a contingent of settlers had been sent from Tingi, along with people from the neighboring town of Zilis and some non-Mauretanian Roman citizens to establish Julia Traducta across the straits. 21 Zilis, according to Pliny, was an Augustan colony. There is no assurance that the people forming the other two elements of the settlement were from colonies; nor is there any assurance that people from a colony (Zilis) necessarily founded a town of colonial rank, or that Strabo's account necessarily indicates a colony at Julia Traducta. 22 All parties to the foundation were evidently Roman citizens and founded a town which was permitted a coinage (PERM CAES AVG). 23 Zilis could hardly have been abandoned as a colony in the transfer of citizens to Spain in spite of Strabo's μετῴκισαν. This colony was evidently still in existence in Pliny's day (N.H., V, 2), and the town standing on the site today bears a name (Azila, Arzilla) which is descended from the name of the ancient town. 24 Consequently, the founding of Julia Traducta does not represent a total uprooting of a colony from Mauretania for transfer to Spain. The status of Julia Traducta in Augustan times is therefore an open question. And the evidence for the settlement of Julia Traducta adds no support to any theory that Tingi itself had an Augustan colony.

The absence of Julia Traducta from Pliny's list of towns in Baetica suggests that his sources for Spain did not mention the Augustan establishment of the town. On the evidence of coin types of Julia Traducta, some of which appear to celebrate Augustus' attainment to the office of Pontifex Maximus, while others feature the portraits of his grandsons C. and L. Caesar, Heiss has dated the coins between 12 b.c., the year in which Augustus became Pontifex Maximus, and various years before the deaths of the young Caesars in 2 and 4 a.d. (PLATE V, nos. 13–15). 25 Although the priestly symbols represented on the coins are not only those of the pontificate (the lituus of the augur and the flamen's apex being represented as well as the simpulum), the types may well commemorate the attainment to the office of Pontifex Maximus by Augustus in 12 b.c. If this is so, and if the new town was invested with the right of coinage upon its foundation, the foundation itself can be dated about the year 12 b.c. Now since Agrippa died in 12 b.c., this year is the lowest possible limit of his geographical account of Mauretania and Spain, and in fact of the whole geographical census used so extensively by Pliny. It may not be surprising therefore that Julia Traducta is completely ignored in Pliny's account of Spain (Bk. III). Yet when he wrote about Mauretania Pliny had had access to some information on Julia Traducta which led him to connect the name of the town with a colonial foundation at Tingi. 26

Pliny's obvious error in attaching the name "Traducta Julia" to a Claudian colony at Tingi does not vitiate the character of the rest of his account of the colonies in Mauretania. He names the Augustan colonies with such clarity and emphasis that the exact copying of an Augustan record is suggested. The names of the Augustan colonies are given in full: Julia Constantia Zilis, Julia Campestris Babba, and Julia Valentia Banasa. Babba and Banasa are called altera and tertia (of Augustus). For some reason not obvious (perhaps because there was no geographical census for the Claudian period available to Pliny), the colonies Pliny attributes to Claudius are not given their full imperial names: they are simply "Tingi," along with the impossible (for Tingi) "Traducta Julia," and "Lixos" or "Lixo" for the town which we call Lix. It therefore appears that Pliny had neither as full nor as authentic a source for the Claudian colonies of western Mauretania, as for the Augustan colonies. 27 When he sums up the whole colonial statistic of western Mauretania, Pliny writes: "There are five colonies in that province, as I have said." There is no inconsistency here. He has named five, three Augustan precisely, and two Claudian less precisely. Pliny evidently had an authoritative source for Augustan colonies, and he has not included Tingi among Augustan colonies. He has listed it as a Claudian colony, and in doing so has attributed to it the wrong name. Possibly Julia Traducta, too, was a Claudian colony. In any case the tradition (whatever his source) of the founding of Julia Traducta from Tingi appears to have been reversed in Pliny's mind: Julia Traducta gave its name to Tingi instead of Tingi's giving some of its people to Julia Traducta.

I suggest then that the facts about the Augustan towns of Tingi and Julia Traducta were obscured for us in a later period when their early relation was misunderstood — probably by Pliny himself rather than his source. Perhaps both towns received colonies under Claudius, who showed great interest in the development of the towns along the straits, as well as of those in the interior. In any case, Tingi was a Claudian colony and Pliny, misconstruing the records, or not bothering to verify an opinion of his own, contaminated the facts of a Claudian colonization of Tingi with the story of the original settlement under Augustus of Julia Traducta in Spain. If we are correct in our analysis of Pliny's account of western Mauretania, our coins with their simple ethnic IVL TING are not deceiving us as to the status of Tingi, but are struck in accordance with the practice of some municipalities like Julia Traducta and Julia Ebora in Spain.

All of the pieces of Tingi described thus far have been regarded as Augustan. Among the coins of Tingi in the Newell Collection of the American Numismatic Society there is a pair of bronze coins of identical type that are definitely post-Augustan. They differ from the three other Newell pieces of Tingi with Latin legends (Nos. 1, 2, and 3 above) in having neither local types nor names of local moneyers. But each bears on obverse and reverse a head that is clearly meant to be a portrait. At the same time they show on one side the letters IVL TIN, indicating that our town is the place that minted them. The portrait heads and the legends are crude in workmanship, but the latter leave no doubt as to the identification of the former. We describe the specimens below:

8. Obv. Head of Nero Caesar to r. In front, around rim, NERO IVL Behind head, TIN Border of dots.

Rev. Head of Drusus Caesar to 1. In front, around rim. DR [VS] Behind, VS Border of dots.

26 mm. 15.62 grams


9. Similar to no. 8.

Rev. DRV [S] VS

25 mm. 10.02 grams


It is clear that the portraits on the coins are meant to be those of Nero Caesar and Drusus Caesar, the grand nephews of the Emperor Tiberius and sons of Germanicus. They were prospective heirs to the principate from 23 a.d. to 29 a.d. after the death of Ti- berius' own son Drusus put an end to speculation on this point. 28 Though both portraits are crudely wrought, the head of Nero is the more impressive of the two. Nero was the elder. It is his side of the coin on which the town placed its name.

That the mint of Tingi struck coins bearing the portraits of the young princes who were, in the early days of the principate, instruments of the bitter and tragic feud manipulated by Sejanus for the succession to the imperial power is interesting from several points of view. For one thing, it is possible to date any coinage struck in their honor very closely. Tiberius presented them to the Senate after the death of his own son Drusus in 23 a.d.; 29 and their downfall through the ambitions and machinations of the praetorian prefect Sejanus can be dated from 29 a.d., when Nero was exiled with his mother, the elder Agrippina. Nero died in 31 and Drusus in 33 a.d. 30 We can assume therefore that such honors as they received in the provinces as well as at Rome are to be dated in the years immediately following 23 a.d., unless indeed the coinage here described was struck after their deaths. 31 It is almost certain that these pieces were struck during their lifetime. Similar honors were paid to them at Utica in Africa and at Carthago Nova and Caesaraugusta in Spain (PLATE IV, nos. 10–12). 32 It is not surprising that Spain and Africa were provinces which paid special honor to Nero and Drusus through local coinage. There was a close relation between the coinages of southern Spain and western Mauretania, as even a cursory examination of their types reveals. 33

Before the time of Nero and Drusus Caesar, Carteia and Acci in Baetica had struck coins celebrating Germanicus, their father, and Drusus, the son of Tiberius, as honorary quattuorviri in the one case, and duoviri in the other. 34 Since Nero and Drusus were themselves celebrated on the coinage of Caesaraugusta as duoviri, and at Carthago Nova as duoviri quinquennales, and received a similar honor at Utica in Africa, 35 we may assume that the appearance of their names and portraits on the coins of Tingi implies that here, too, they held honorary office, namely, that of quattuorviri. At Caesaraugusta two sets of types were struck in their honor, but only one type bears the honorary title of duoviri (PLATE IV, nos. 11, 12). 36 The absence of a title on the coins of Tingi, then, does not necessarily mean that they held no title to local office. Inscriptions of their prefects in Italy bear witness to their having held the duoviral office throughout the peninsula (Aquinum, Cures, Praeneste, Bononia, Formiae, Brixia, Hasta, and possibly Aquae Flaviae). 37 While Tiberius' son Drusus was still alive, the same man at Aquinum was prefect of Nero Caesar as well as of the Emperor for the second time and his son Drusus for the third time. Baetica has been called a little of Italy in Spain; and likewise it may be said that western Mauretania in Roman times was a portion of Baetica in Africa. Consequently, we may expect similar municipal customs in the Roman towns. But if Nero and Drusus Caesar held the quattuorvirate at Tingi, their prefects withheld their own names from the coinage.

The great lack of numismatic and epigraphical evidence from western Africa encourages speculation. Spanish coins show that Gaius, the later Emperor Caligula, like his elder brothers Nero and Drusus, received the honorary duovirate at both Caesaraugusta and Carthago Nova. One may wonder whether coins of Tingi honoring Gaius before his accession will some day come to light. Such coins would be of interest as bearing the portrait of the prince who, as Emperor, destroyed the King and Kingdom of Mauretania, paving the way for the complete incorporation of this land into the Roman Empire, under Claudius, his uncle and successor.

While this article was in press Michael Grant's comprehensive study of the bronze coinage reached me (From Imperium to Auctoritas. A Historical Study of Aes Coinage in the Roman Empire, 49 B.C.–A.D. 14. Cambridge Univ. Press, 1946). For additional evidence on coins similar to nos. 2, 3, 6 and 7 above and a different system of dating see pp. 177– 178 of this book. Here a few comments may be made on a number of points bearing particularly on coins known previously only through drawings.

Grant has presented evidence from a Copenhagen specimen (Pl. VI, no. 11) which suggests that the coinage of Allienus (no. 6 above) belonged to the local series. A fragmentary portion of the reverse legend may indicate that Allienus was a duovir. If Allienus can definitely be placed among the local moneyers, and if the peculiar features of no. 7 (see p. 12 above) are significant as they must be, it is possible to make further remarks on the relative position of the coins within the group, adding to and modifying what has been said above.

1) No. 7 is closer than any of the coins with Latin legends to the pre-Latin coins of Tingi because of these features: Baal head in profile, crescent and dot symbol. "MAIOR" seems to me to go with "TING" rather than to be a man's name. Was TING. MAIOR an earlier phase of IVL. TING., or was it a different community?

2) Nos. 1, 2, 3, and 6 belong together, no. 1 being perhaps contemporary with 2 and 3, and 6 following closely upon all three. I doubt very much whether no. 1 is to be separated from 2 and 3 by no. 7 (see comment above), as Grant (p. 177) has done, or that the difference between the number of signing officials on nos. 2 and 3 as against no. 1 means more than the signing of the larger denomination by the two higher officials of the college, while all members shared the smaller denomination.

3) Nos. 4, 5, and 6 were struck during or after 27 b.c. because 4 and 6 bear the name of Augustus (conferred in 27), and 5 must be contemporary with 4.

4) Nos. 4 and 5 are difficult to place because they are bilingual; they may be earlier than the coins signed by local officials, since the tendency was for the native language to yield to the Latin (as in Spain), but they may break into the group of local officials, separating 1,2, and 3 from 6, for some reason of constitutional significance belonging to the era after 27 b.c. when Agrippa was active reorganizing towns in Spain.

5) Nos. 1, 2, and 3 are so close in types and style to 6 that they, too, may be after 27 b.c.

End Notes

1 L. Müller, Numismatique de l'ancienne Afrique, III, 64–65, 194; cf. his attribution in the Suppl. to Vol. III, p. 67; E. Muret, "Monnaies rares ou inédites du Cabinet de France," in Rev. Num., ser. 3, vol. I (1883), pp. 67–69; E. Babelon, "Quelques remarques sur des monnaies d'Afrique et d'Espagne, III," in Rev. Num., ser. 3, vol. VII (1889), pp. 502–506; L. Charrier, Description des monnaies de la Numidie et de la Maurétanie (Macon, 1912), p. 26, nos. 73–75 (P1. VI); Pauly-Wissowa, Realencyclopädie der classischen Altertumswissenschaft, s.v. "Sittius," no. 3, cols. 409–11; St. Gsell, Histoire ancienne de l'Afrique du Nord, VIII (Paris, 1928), 150–161.
2 The name was variously given by ancient authorities, who never apply to it the Julian name which appears on the coins. (Pliny, N.H., V, 2 is regarded as having erred in associating the name of the Spanish town Julia Traducta with Tingi; see pp. 16–20 of this paper.) This suggests the persistence of the Punic name at the expense of the longer, more formal Roman title. There is no single form of the town's name in Punic Greek, or Latin. The form most commonly used by Latin writers was Tingum, with Tinge and Tingi as variants; by Greek writers, Τγγις with variants (consult Corpus Inscriptionum Latinarum, vol. VIII, pt. 2, p. 854; Windberg in Pauly-Wissowa, op. cit., vol. VI A, s.v. "Tingis," cols. 2517–20). IVL TIN and IVL TING occur on the coins with Latin legends. The name of the town might have been Julia Tingi, comparable, for instance, to Col. Jul. Gem. Acci (for the Celtiberian Acci), or to Calagurri Julia in Spain. Gsell, op. cit., VIII, 200, note 5, accepts this form. But Julium Tingum, and especially Julia Tingitana are further possibilities; cf. a coin cited by Charrier, op. cit., p. 74, no. 134 (Pl. XI), with the fragmentary reverse legend ...GITAN (from Lorichs, Recherches numismatiques, Pl. XLI) and CIL VIII, 21813: populus Tingitanus; also the inscription on p. 13 of this paper: colon(iae) [Tingi]tan (ae).
3 Occasionally we find only one duovir or one quattuorvir striking, as sometimes at Carteia in Spain and at Cirta, Clypea, and Utica in Africa; but I do not know of any case where three of four municipal officials served as moneyers. At Clunia in Spain four men were moneyers, as at Tingi (A. Heiss, Description générale des monnaies antiques de l'Espagne, Paris, 1870, pp. 229–230). Coins attributed to Parium in Mysia bear the names of duoviri, a sacerdos, and a praefectus pro duoviro (W. Wroth, Catalogue of the Greek Coins of Mysia, London, 1892, pp. 102–103).
4 Cass. Dio 48, 45, 3.
5 The facing Baal head also appears on coins of Semes (Regling, "Zum Fund von Jubadenaren in Alkasar," in Zeitschr. f. Num., 1910, p. 27) and apparently on coins of Emerita in Lusitania. Delgado, op. cit., p. 11, no. 32 (Pl. XXI); a specimen in the Newell Collection.
6 Grueber, Coins of the Roman Republic in the British Museum (London, 1910), II, p. 559; Pauly-Wissowa, op. cit., s.v. "Allienus," col. 1585.
7 January 16, 27 b.c. For the evidence see Pauly-Wissowa, op. cit., s.v. "Augustus," col. 2370.
8 Vell. Pat. II, 96, 1; Livy, Epit. 138; Pliny, N.H., VII, 8 (6), 45–46; Dio, LIV, 28, 3.
9 It is interesting to note that under the Roman legate and Roman local government the local types of the Punic coinage are respected and kept, and that in the case of Allienus two local types appear together on the reverse with the legate's name.
10 In Spain Celtiberian or Punic legends thus gave way to Latin. For bilingual coins in Spain see Heiss, op. cit., pp. 216, 218–219, 285, 302–303, 316, 323, 341, 353, 356, 365–366, 371, 381, 412, 421–422. Heiss discusses the bilingual coinage on pp. 58–59. In Africa bilingual coins that can be dated seem to end with Bocchus III or soon thereafter. At any rate, Juba II does not employ them, except at Semes, and of course on the joint coinage with his queen, who uses Greek.
11 F. F. Abbott and A. C. Johnson, Municipal Administration in the Roman Empire, Princeton, 1926, p. 63; Pauly-Wissowa, op. cit., s.v. "Duovir," col. 1819.
12 Heiss, op. cit., p. 350, nos. 42–46 (Pl. LIII); Müller, op. cit., III, 150.
13 The two higher officials signed the larger denomination at Celsa, Turiaso, Caligurris (G. F. Hill, Notes on the Ancient Coinage of Hispania Citerior (Numismatic Notes and Monographs no. 50), The American Numismatic Society, 1931, pp. 81, 167, 176–179 and at Cluny (Heiss, op. cit., p. 230).
14 For such communities see Kornemann in Pauly-Wissowa, Realencyclopädie, s.v. "conventus," cols. 1187–1188; "municipium," cols. 598, 609; cf. col. 547, no. 234; col. 531, no. 109.
15 The inscription was published by L. Chatelain and J. Carcopino, with a good photograph, on pp. 159–160 of "Epitaphes romaines de Tingi," in the Bulletin de la Société des Antiquaires de France, 1934; Rev. Arch., ser. 6, vol. VI (1935), p. 222, no. 63.
16 Itineraria Romana, vol. I: Itineraria Antonini Augusti et Burdigense (Leipzig, 1929, Tingi colonia; vol. II: Ravennatis Anonymi Cosmographia et Guidonis Geographica (Leipzig, 1940), ed. J. Schmetz, p. 42, Tingi colonia.
17 Corpus Inscriptionum Latinarum, vol. II, 1963, ch. 24; Abbott and Johnson, op. cit., p. 370; W. Liebenam, in Pauly-Wissowa, Realencyclopädie, s.v. "duoviri," col. 1805; CIL, vol. II, 1423. Cf. 1305, 1314, 1315, 1470, 1727, 1730, 1731, 4464, 4466. The change in title may have taken place in accordance with a general municipal law. Liebenam, Städteverwaltung in römischen Kaiserreiche, Leipzig, 1900, p. 252, makes an observation which may appropriately be quoted here: "Wer die lange Reihe der lateinischen Inschriften, welche von städtischen Beamten Kunde geben, durchmustert, gewinnt alsbald den Eindruck, dass die kommunale Verfassung unter einen mächtigen Willen gebeugt in der Kaiserzeit immer einformiger wird."
18 In the Bulletin des Antiquaires de France, 1934, pp. 165–166, Carcopino cites the inscription on p. 13 of this paper to support his previous claim (in Hesperis, vol. XVII, 1933, "Volubilis regiae Iubae," pp. 9–10, 17, 20) that Tingi was a colonial foundation of Octavian and was, like Zilis (see Pliny, N.H., V, 2), attached to Baetica. He notes that Aelius Verecundus belonged to the tribus Galeria, the tribe to which Octavian assigned all Roman or Latin colonies he constituted in Spain (W. Kubitschek, De Romanorum Tribuum Origine ac Propagatione, p. 188). The fact is that the tribus Galeria was not thus generally shared by such colonies in Spain, as a glance at Kornemann's list in Pauly-Wissowa, Realencyclopädie, s.v. "coloniae," will show. Nor was the assignment of the Spanish colonies to the tribus Galeria only an Octavian or Augustan assignment. The Galeria is, moreover, conspicuous in the Spanish imperial province of Tarraconensis rather than in the senatorial province of Baetica, which had the closest relations with Mauretania across the straits.
19 For instance, "COL" did not appear regularly with the name of the town on the coinage of Corinth until the time of Domitian (the legend GEN COL COR describing the type of the colony's genius struck for Nero and Agrippina being the exception), though the names of the duoviri appeared through the time of Galba (B. V. Head, Catalogue of Greek Coins in the British Museum. Corinth, etc., London, 1889, pp. 58–93; Earl Fox, "The Duoviri of Corinth," in Journ. Internat. d'Archêol. Numismatique, II [1899], 89–116; Corinth: Results of the Excavations Conducted by The American School of Classical Studies at Athens, vol. VI, Coins. 18961929, by Katharine Edwards, pp. 16–40).
20 Corpus Inscriptionum Latinarum, vol. VIII, Pt. 2, p. 854; Kornemann in Pauly-Wissowa, Realencyclopädie, s.v. "coloniae," col. 559, no. 354.
21 Strabo, Geogr. (ed. Jones, Loeb Class. Lib.), III, 1, 8 (C. 140). For recent discussions of these towns see L. Chatelain, Le Maroc des Romains (Paris, 1944) pp. 33–49, and R. Thouvenot, Essai sur la province romaine de Bétique (Paris, 1940) pp. 152, 166–7, and especially 191–2.
22 imageν δὲ καὶ Ζimageλις τimageς Τίγγιος ὰστυγείτων, ὰλλὰ μετᾠκισαν ταύτην εἰς τὴν περαίαν 'Ρωμαῑοι, καὶ ἐκ τimageς Τίγγιoϛ προσλαβόντεϛ τινάς ἕπεμψαν δὲ καὶ παρ᾽ ἑαυτimageν ἐποίκους, καὶ ὼνόμασαν Ίουλίαν Ίοζαν τὴν πόλιν. The verb ῝οὶκίζειν῞ and its compounds may refer to "settlements" in general, as well as to colonies in a technical sense.
23 Heiss, op. cit., p. 336.
24 Müller, op. cit., III, 154; H. Rackham in Loeb Class. Lib. ed. Pliny's Natural History, II (London, 1942), 218, note c.
25 Heiss, op. cit., p. 337.
26 Presumably Pliny could have learned of the foundation of Julia Traducta through additions to Agrippa's Commentary or through other Augustan sources.
27 Pliny's dissatisfaction with recent or contemporary sources is reflected in his tirade against the equites in this very passage (V, 12).
28 Tacitus, Annals, III, 49; IV, 8; IV, 10; IV, 12: "non dubia successio"; IV, 59: "Neronem proximum successions."
29 Suetonius, Tiberius, 54.
30 Tacitus, Annals, VI, 23; Suetonius, Tiberius, 54; 61; cf. Gaius, 7.
31 Posthumous coinage could have been struck for them only in the reign of Caligula, their younger brother, who honored them on his coinage at Rome, but apparently did not include them in the posthumous coinage of his family (Agrippa, Germanicus, and Agrippina) at Caesaraugusta in Spain (Hill, Hispania Citerior, pp. 94–95 and Pl. XVIII) where they were honorary duoviri during their lifetimes (Hill, p. 92 and Pl. XVI, 2).
32 Müller, op. cit., II, 161, nos. 362–366; Heiss, op. cit., p. 271, nos. 28–29 (Pl. XXXVI); Hill, op. cit., pp. 91–92 (Pl. XVI, nos. 1 and 2). Hispalis in Baetica struck coins with the portraits of Nero and Drusus (Heiss, op. cit., p. 394), but, as at Tingi, there is no indication that they held honorary office.
33 On Mauretanian money found in Spain see Müller, op. cit., pp. 144 and 155; on Spanish money in Africa, P. Monceau, Grecs et Maures d'après les monnaies grecques du Musée d'Alger, extrait du Bulletin de Corresp. Africaine, 1884, nos. V-VI, pp. 13–15. Under the early empire Juba II and his son Ptolemaeus, kings of Mauretania, were celebrated as honorary duoviri on coins attributed to Carthago Nova (Heiss, op. cit., p. 269; Charrier, op. cit., p. 119, no. 261; Pl. XVII, no. 260; p. 138, nos. 325–327; Pl. XX; cf. Monceau, op. cit., p. 14). For the strategic importance of Mauretania in relation to Spain see St. Gsell, Histoire ancienne de l'Afrique du Nord, VIII (Paris, 1928), pp. 159 and 286, and R. Cagnat, L'armée romaine d'Afrique, I (Paris, 1912), pp. 253–254; see also Pauly-Wissowa, Realencyclopädie, s.v. "Mauretania," cols. 2368–2369. During the Roman Republic and the civil wars of the first century b.c. armies and partisans went back and forth between Spain and Mauretania. At least one town under Augustus was attached to Baetica (Pliny, V, 2: Zilis; unless the reference is merely to the transfer of people from Zilis to Spain as the town Iulia Traducta), and in the short reign of Otho the Maurorum civitates were made part of the province of Baetica (Tacitus, Hist., I, 78). There are clear indications that in the third century a.d. Mauretania Tingitana was a part of Baetica (Rufus Festus, c. 5: "trans fretum etiam in solo terrae Africae provincia Hispanarum est, quae Tingitana Mauretania cognominatur"; CIL, VIII, 21813.
34 Heiss, op. cit., p. 332, no. 29 (Pl. XLIX): Carteia (no portraits); p. 257, no. 12 (Pl. XXXIII): Acci (portraits).
35 For the references see note 32.
36 Hill, op. cit., p. 92 (Pl. XVI, 2). There is no indication of honorary office on a coin of Hispalis bearing the portraits of Nero and Drusus (see note 32).
37 W. Liebenam, Städteverwaltung in römischen Kaiserreiche, Leipzig, 1900, pp. 261–263, note 4.















Broadway at 156th Street

New York 32, N. Y.


Vols. 1–13: Monthly, May, 1866–April, 1879.

Vols. 14–46: Quarterly, July, 1870–October, 1912.

Vols. 47–53: Annually, 1913–1924.

With many plates, illustrations, maps and tables.

The numbers necessary to complete broken sets may, in most cases, be obtained. An index to the first fifty volumes has been issued as part of Volume LI. It may be purchased separately for $3.00.


  • Sydney P. Noe. Coin Hoards. 1921. 47 pp. 6 pls. 50c.
  • Edward T. Newell. Octobols of Histiaea. 1921. 25 pp. 2 pls. Out of print.
  • Edward T. Newell. Alexander Hoards — Introduction and Kyparissia Hoard. 1921. 21 pp. 2 pls. Out of print.
  • Howland Wood. The Mexican Revolutionary Coinage, 1913-1916. 1921. 44 pp. 26 pls. Out of print.
  • Leonidas Westervelt. The Jenny Lind Medals and Tokens. 1921. 25 pp. 9 pls. Out of print.
  • Agnes Baldwin. Five Roman Gold Medallions. 1921. 103 pp. 8 pls. $1.50.
  • Sydney P. Noe. Medallic Work of A. A. Weinman. 1921. 31 pp. 17 pls. Out of print.
  • Gilbert S. Perez. The Mint of the Philippine Islands. 1921. 8 pp. 4 pls. 50c.
  • David Eugene Smith, LL.D. Computing Jetons. 1921. 70 pp. 25 pls. $1.50.
  • Edward T. Newell. The First Seleucid Coinage of Tyre. 1921. 40 pp. 8 pls. $1.00.
  • Harrold E. Gillingham. French Orders and Decorations. 1922. 110 pp. 35 pls. Out of print.
  • Howland Wood. Gold Dollars of 1858. 1922. 7 pp. 2 pls. Out of print.
  • R. B. Whitehead. Pre-Mohammedan Coinage of N. W. India. 1922. 56 pp. 15 pls. Out of print.
  • George F. Hill. Attambelos I of Characene. 1922. 12 pp. 3 pls. Out of print.
  • M. P. Vlasto. Taras Oikistes (A Contribution to Tarentine Numismatics). 1922. 234 pp. 13 pls. $3.50.
  • Howland Wood. Commemorative Coinage of the United States. 1922. 63 pp. 7 pls. Out of print.
  • Agnes Baldwin. Six Roman Bronze Medallions. 1923. 39 pp. 6 pls. $1.50.
  • Howland Wood. Tegucigalpa Coinage of 1823. 1923. 16 pp. 2 pls. 50c.
  • Edward T. Newell. Alexander Hoards — II. Demanhur Hoard. 1923. 162 pp. 8 pls. $2.50.
  • Harrold E. Gillingham. Italian Orders of Chivalry and Medals of Honor. 1923. 146 pp. 34 pls. Out of print.
  • Edward T. Newell. Alexander Hoards — III. Andritsaena. 1924. 39 pp. 6 pls. $1.00.
  • C. T. Seltman. A Hoard from Side. 1924. 20 pp. 3 pls. Out of print.
  • R. B. Seager. A Cretan Coin Hoard. 1924. 55 pp. 12 pls. $2.00.
  • Samuel R. Milbank. The Coinage of Aegina. 1925. 66 pp. 5 pls. $2.00.
  • Sydney P. Noe. A Bibliography of Greek Coin Hoards. 1925. 275 pp. $2.50.
  • Edward T. Newell. Mithridates of Parthia and Hyspaosines of Characene. 1925. 18 pp. 2 pls. 50c.
  • Sydney P. Noe. The Mende (Kaliandra) Hoard. 1926. 73 pp. 10 pls. $2.00.
  • Agnes Baldwin. Four Medallions from the Arras Hoard. 1926. 36 pp. 4 pls. $1.50.
  • H. Alexander Parsons. The Earliest Coins of Norway. 1926. 41 pp. 1 pl. 50c.
  • Edward T. Newell. Some Unpublished Coins of Eastern Dynasts. 1926. 21 pp. 2 pls. 50c.
  • Harrold E. Gillingham. Spanish Orders of Chivalry and Decorations of Honor. 1926. 165 pp. 40 pls. $3.00.
  • Sydney P. Noe. The Coinage of Metaponium. (Part I). 1927. 134 pp. 23 pls. $3.00.
  • Edward T. Newell. Two Recent Egyptian Hoards — Delta and Keneh. 1927. 34 pp. 3 pls. $1.00.
  • Edward Rogers. The Second and Third Seleucid Coinage of Tyre. 1927. 33 pp. 4 pls. $1.50.
  • Alfred R. Bellinger. The Anonymous Byzantine Bronze Coinage. 1928. 27 pp. 4 pls. $1.50.
  • Harrold E. Gillingham. Notes on the Decorations and Medals of the French Colonies and Protectorates. 1928. 62 pp. 31 pls. $2.00.
  • Oscar Ravel. The "Colts" of Ambracia. 1928. 180 pp. 19 pls. $3.00.
  • Howland Wood. The Coinage of the Mexican Revolutionists. 1928. 53 pp. 15 pls. $2.50.
  • Edward T. Newell. Alexander Hoards — IV. Olympia. 1929. 31 pp. 9 pls. $1.50.
  • Allen B. West. Fifth and Fourth Century Gold Coins from the Thracian Coast. 1929. 183 pp. 16 pls. $3.00.
  • Gilbert S. Perez. The Leper Colony Currency of Culion. 1929. 10 pp. 3 pls. 50c.
  • Alfred R. Bellinger. Two Hoards of Attic Bronze Coins. 1930. 14 pp. 4 pls. 50c.
  • D. H. Cox. The Caparelli Hoard. 1930. 14 pp. 2 pls. 50c.
  • Geo. F. Hill. On the Coins of Narbonensis with Iberian Inscriptions. 1930. 39 pp. 6 pls. $1.00.
  • Bauman L. Belden. A Mint in New York. 1930. 40 pp. 4 pls. 50c.
  • Edward T. Newell. The Küchük Köhne Hoard. 1931. 33 pp. 4 pls. $1.00.
  • Sydney P. Noe. The Coinage of Metaponium. Part II. 1931. 134 pp. 43 pls. $3.00.
  • D. W. Valentine. The United States Half Dimes. 1931. 79 pp. 47 pls. $5.00.
  • Alfred R. Bellinger. Two Roman Hoards from Dura-Europos. 1931. 66 pp. 17 pls. $1.50.
  • Geo. F. Hill. Notes on the Ancient Coinage of Hispania Citerior. 1931. 196 pp. 36 double pls. $4.00.
  • Alan W. Hazelton. The Russian Imperial Orders. 1932. 102 pp. 20 pls. $3.00.
  • O. Ravel. Corinthian Hoards (Corinth and Arta). 1932. 27 pp. 4 pls. $1.00.
  • Jean B. Cammann. The Symbols on Staters of Corinthian Type (A Catalogue). 1932. 130 pp. 14 double pls. $3.00.
  • Shirley H. Weber. An Egyptian Hoard of the Second Century A.D. 1932. 41 pp. 5 pls. $1.50.
  • Alfred R. Bellinger. The Third and Fourth Dura Hoards. 1932. 85 pp. 20 pls. $1.50.
  • Harrold E. Gillingham. South American Decorations and War Medals. 1932. 178 pp. 35 pls. $3.00.
  • Wm. Campbell. Greek and Roman Plated Coins. 1933. 226 pp. 190 + pls. $3.50.
  • E. T. Newell. The Fifth Dura Hoard. 1933. 14 pp. 2 pls. $1.00.
  • D. H. Cox. The Tripolis Hoard. 1933. 61 pp. 8 pls. 2 maps. $1.50.
  • E. T. Newell. Two Hoards from Minturno. 1933. 38 pp. 5 pls. $1.00.
  • Howland Wood. The Gampola Larin Hoard. 1934. 84 pp. 10 double pls. $3.00.
  • J. G. Milne. The Melos Hoard of 1907. 1934. 19 pp. 1 pl. $1.00.
  • A. F. Pradeau. The Mexican Mints of Alamos and Hermosillo. 1934. 73 pp. illus. 3 pls. $1.50.
  • E. T. Newell. A Hoard from Siphnos. 1934. 17 pp. 1 pl. 50c.
  • C. H. V. Sutherland. Romano-British Imitations of Bronze Coins of Claudius I. 1935. 35 pp. 8 double pls. $2.00.
  • Harrold E. Gillingham. Ephemeral Decorations. 1935. 40 pp. 11 pls. $2.00.
  • Sawyer McA. Mosser. A Bibliography of Byzantine Coin Hoards. 1935. 116 pp. $1.50.
  • Edward T. Newell. Five Greek Bronze Coin Hoards. 1935. 67 pp. 9 double pls. $2.00.
  • Alfred R. Bellinger. The Sixth, Seventh and Tenth Dura Hoards. 1935. 75 pp. 5 pls. $1.00.
  • Frederick O. Waage. Greek Bronze Coins from a Well at Megara. 1935. 42 pp. 3 pls. $1.00.
  • Sydney P. Noe. The Thurian Di-Staters. 1935. 68 pp. 11 double pls. $2.00.
  • John Walker. The Coinage of the Second Saffarid Dynasty in Sistan. 1936. 46 pp. 4 double pls. $1.00.
  • Edward T. Newell. The Seleucid Coinage of Tyre. 1936. 34 pp. 5 pls. $1.00.
  • Margaret Crosby and Emily Grace. An Achaean League Hoard. 1936. 44 pp. 4 pls. $1.50.
  • Agnes Baldwin Brett. Victory Issues of Syracuse after 413 B.C. 1936. 6 pp. 2 pls. 50c.
  • Edward T. Newell. The Pergamene Mint under Philetaerus. 1936. 34 pp. 10 pls. $2.50.
  • Charles C. Torrey. Aramaic Graffiti on Coins of Demanhur. 1937. 13 pp. 2 pls. $1.00.
  • Sydney P. Noe. A Bibliography of Greek Coin Hoards. (Second Edition). 1937. 362 pp. $4.00.
  • Naphtali Lewis. A Hoard of Folles from Seitz (Alsace). 1937. 81 pp. 5 pls. $2.00.
  • Harold Mattingly and W. P. D. Stebbing. The Richborough Hoard of 'Radiates.' 1931. 1938. 118 pp. 15 pls. $2.50.
  • Alfred R. Bellinger. Coins from Jerash. 1928–1934. 1938. 141 pp. 9 pls. $2.50.
  • Edward T. Newell. Miscellanea Numismatica: Cyrene to India. 1938. 101 pp. 6 pls. $2.00.
  • David M. Bullowa. The Commemorative Coinage of the United States 1892–1938. 1938. 192 pp. 10 pls. $2.50.
  • Edward T. Newell. Late Seleucid Mints in Ake-Ptolemais and Damascus. 1939. 107 pp. 17 pls. $2.00.
  • Alfred R. Bellinger. The Eighth and Ninth Dura Hoards. 1939. 92 pp. 13 pls. $2.00.
  • Harrold E. Gillingham. Counterfeiting in Colonial Pennsylvania. 1939. 52 pp. 2 pls. $1.00.
  • George C. Miles. A Byzantine Weight Validated by al-Walid. 1939. 11 pp. 1 pl. 50c.
  • Jaime Gonzalez. A Puerto Rican Counterstamp. 1940. 21 pp. 2 pls. $1.00.
  • Harrold E. Gillingham. Mexican Decorations of Honour. 1940. 53 pp. 17 pls. $2.00.
  • Donald F. Brown. Temples of Rome as Coin Types. 1940. 51 pp. 9 pls. $1.50.
  • Eunice Work. The Earlier Staters of Heraclea Lucaniae. 1940. 40 pp. 8 pls. $2.00.
  • D. H. Cox. A Tarsus Coin Collection in the Adana Museum. 1941. 67 pp. 12 pls. $2.00.
  • Herbert E. Ives. Foreign Imitations of the English Noble. 1941. 36 pp. 5 pls. $1.50.
  • Louis C. West. Gold and Silver Coin Standards in the Roman Empire. 1941. 199 pp. $1.50.
  • Arthur D. McIlvaine. The Silver Dollars of the United States of America. 1941. 36 pp. 1 folded pl. $1.00.
  • J. G. Milne. Kolophon and its Coinage: A Study. 1941. 113 pp. 19 double pls. $2.50.
  • Sawyer McA. Mosser. The Endicott Gift of Greek and Roman Coins. 1941. 65 pp. 9 pls. $1.50.
  • Edgar Erskine Hume. The Medals of the United States Army Medical Department and Medals Honoring Army Medical Officers. 1942. 146 pp. 23 pls. $3.00.
  • Phares O. Sigler. Sycee Silver. 1943. 37 pp. 6 pls. $1.00.
  • Sydney P. Noe. The Castine Deposit: An American Hoard. 1942. 37 pp. 4 pls. $1.00.
  • H. F. Bowker. A Numismatic Bibliography of the Far East. 1943. 144 pp. $1.50.
  • Sydney P. Noe. The New England and Willow Tree Coinages of Massachusetts. 1943. 56 pp. 16 pls. $3.00.
  • Nai Chi Chang. An Inscribed Chinese Ingot of the XII Century A.D. 1944. 9 pp. 2 pls. 50c.
  • George L. McKay. Early American Currency. 1944. 85 pp. 27 pls. Out of print.
  • Edward T. Newell. The Byzantine Hoard of Lagbe. 1945. 22 pp. 8 pls. $1.00.
  • James C. Risk. British Orders and Decorations. 1945. 124 pp. 76 pls. $4.00.
  • Bluma L. Trell. The Temple of Artemis at Ephesos. 1945. 71 pp. 28 pls. $2.00.
  • Karel O. Castelin. The Coinage of Rhesaena in Mesopotamia. 1946. 111 pp. 17 pls. $2.00.


  • Edward T. Newell. The Coinage of the Eastern Seleucid Mints from Seleucus I to Antiochus III. 1938. 307 pp. 56 pls. $6.00.
  • George C. Miles. The Numismatic History of Rayy. 240 pp. 6 pls. $4.00.
  • Alfred R. Bellinger. The Syrian Tetradrachms of Caracalla and Macrinus. 1940. 116 pp. 26 pls. $5.00.
  • Edward T. Newell. The Coinage of the Western Seleucid Mints from Seleucus I to Antiochus III. 1941. 450 pp. 86 pls. $10.00.
  • Jocelyn M. C. Toynbee. Roman Medallions. 1944. 268 pp. 49 pls. $10.00.
  • Edward T. Newell. The Coinages of Demetrius Poliorcetes. London. Oxford University Press, 1927. 174 pp. 18 pls. $5.00.