i

ii
Introduction
Roman imperial coins are probably the most studied and written about era in the field of ancient numismatics. It
might be questioned why another book on the subject is necessary given the lopsided attention this part of history
has already received. Many of these books will focus on a limited topic or time period and study it in depth while
others attempt to tackle the entire length of the Roman empire. Some appeal to the casual history buff and others
are written for and by scholars. And all of them, including this effort, suffer from being quickly outdated thanks to
new discoveries of coins, historical data and analyses that constantly reshape old theories.

The aim of this book is to provide first and foremost the collector of Roman coins with an easy to use guide to
understand in as concise a manner as possible the corpus of money issued from the time of the first emperor to
the last; a period in history spanning over half a millennium. Naturally, as user-friendliness is given top priority for
the sake of the collector other users may be disappointed. The scholar will lament the exclusion of obscure issues,
the historian will find little new research, the investor and others concerned primarily with the worth of their coins
will find this book nearly useless and those whose interest lies in any subject not covered will rightfully feel
disenfranchised.

On the other hand Roman coin collectors will at long last find in a single book a comprehensive account of nearly
every variant of legend and type known for each of the over two hundred emperors, empresses and other
imperials in whose name coins were minted during this time. In addition, a full-fledged catalog of known coins is
also provided with each entry having a unique number to facilitate reference among collectors and students.
Traditionally, coin guides for ancient coins tend to have full pages of coin photographs at the end of the book.
While a more efficient and cost-effective approach, I have chosen instead to include the photographs at the end of
each emperor‟s section to make them more accessible. Every feature, again, has been crafted to make this
enormous amount of information as easy to understand as possible in as condensed a format as is practical.

Just like with any other reference book, the data herein could not possibly have been compiled without extensive
help from many others whose interests and expertise are as diverse as the coins themselves. Of particular
importance in this endeavor must be noted The Roman Imperial Coinage series of books which is largely
regarded as the most definitive and certainly most consulted work on Roman coins. This 13-volume set took the
better part of a century to complete and is, in fact, an ongoing project with the collaboration of many of the world‟s
top numismatists. Spink and Son, its publishers, have graciously allowed for the cross-referencing of their catalog
numbers to the listings in this book. David Sear, an author who has devoted his life to the study of ancient coins
has also allowed for similar cross-referencing rights to his own highly acclaimed books.

Many, many friends, too numerous to list have provided photos of their coins and sometimes the coins themselves
for inclusion. The Swiss numismatic firm of Leu donated hundreds of dollars worth of old catalogs, always a prime
ground for research. The British Museum provided photographs of some of the world‟s rarest coin photographs
free of charge. And I am equally indebted to CNG, Numismatik Lanz, Münzen & Medaillen and many other firms
and scores of individuals for making a wealth of information accessible over the last two years it has taken to put
all of it neatly across the space of a few hundred pages.

Rasiel Suarez
Co-founder
Dirty Old Coins, LLC
 iii
About Roman Coins
One of the most recognizable cultural traits of the Romans was how systematic and methodical they were. In war,
politics and art the Romans preferred a strict discipline and adherence to their rules. Naturally, this emphasis on
consistency carried over into their currency policies. For hundreds of years millions of coins were handmade by untold
numbers of craftsmen and almost every one is instantly recognizable to the collector or student as Roman. It is
remarkable that in good times and in bad they could be counted on to make one coin look nearly identical to the next.
Even to the bitter end, when coins were little more than metal scraps with scribbled on designs they retained a „look
and feel‟ uniquely theirs.

Asides from aesthetics the Romans were consistent as well with the content they chose to portray on their coins. From
them we inherit the legacy of mating a person‟s face to the obverse, appropriately referred to as „heads‟ informally,
with a design on the back. Many of the themes they chose to put on these reverses have also become staple
ingredients in modern western culture as well. The Romans were masters of propaganda and learned early on how to
exploit every element of a coin‟s design to further the imperial message of a strong and cohesive empire. To this end
they employed a vast number of symbols, insignia and inscriptions to drive home the point.

Most Roman coins feature religious or military themes. Issues of a civic or purely secular nature are relegated to a
secondary role and the few times they appear they are still meant to glorify the pomp and glory of the emperor and, by
extension, the Roman people.

Ancient coins have been collected since antiquity as ambassadors to the past. Augustus, the first Roman emperor, is
said to have amassed a world-class coin collection specimens of which he often gave to dignitaries. So many kings
and nobles from the middle ages on collected ancient coins that the collecting of coins itself became known as the
“hobby of kings”.

Nowadays there are millions of coin collectors the world over and many are discovering that owning an ancient coin
need not be hopelessly expensive. European metal detectorists are finding coins in record numbers of every culture
that made them. While the silver and gold ones are sold directly to dealers many of the coppers, which are found in
the hundreds of thousands every year, are individually too difficult and/or damaged to restore. These are therefore
often sold in their as-found state for as little as a dollar or two each. Any would-be archaeologist then has the chance
to restore, attribute and value their ancient coin and in the process have a lot of fun learning about ancient history.

Denominations
Roman coins came in many different denominations. The weight and metal type of each coin determined how much
purchasing power each coin had. Eventually, coin designs would to a certain extent explicitly state the value of the
coin but it is uncertain whether these official values were honored by merchants and the public in general.

The absolute base unit in Roman coinage is the Uncia, a small copper coin the size of a small button which was never
struck in large quantities and is today very rare. 16 Unciae are equivalent to an As which is the first commercially
functional coin. In turn, 16 Asses make up the famous Denarius, a silver, U.S.-dime sized coin which circulated for
hundreds of years and influenced coinage in just about every successive Western culture up into modern times.

Although a fascinating subject, it‟s disappointing to learn that we lack a good understanding of what the actual value of
Roman coins were. Necessary food staples were often heavily subsidized by the government to ensure their
accessibility. The emperor and his officials understood that a hungry citizenry was a grave liability. What records
survive, therefore, tend to point out these set prices but the going rate for other luxuries is largely speculative.

For what it‟s worth, a rough sketch of salaries would have a gold Aureus or Solidus as a month‟s pay for an ordinary
soldier. And a Denarius or two could be earned in a day by a skilled laborer. In turn, a family meal consisting of bread,
olive oil, wine and perhaps some meat would cost a Denarius or one of its equivalents.

For early imperial coinage the relative values are as follows:

1 Aureus = 2 Quinarii = 25 Denarii = 100 Sestertii = 200 Dupondii = 400 Asses = 800 Quadrans = 6,400 Unciae

Considering the expense in labor and materials that was borne in the production of the small-change Quadrans and
Uncia it‟s not hard to see why these denominations existed more as a theoretical currency keystone than as real
coins.
 iv
The first crack in the Roman economical machine appeared under the reign of Nero who cut back the purity of the
Denarius from 98% fineness (essentially as pure as could possibly have been refined on a large scale basis back
then) to 93%. The debasement did not link up with an official decrease in the nominal value of the coin itself so that
the extra 5% silver was clear and free profit for the emperor.

However, it took virtually no time for the public at large to see that the old Denarius was intrinsically worth more than
the new one. This created an immediate hoarding of the old silver coins which could now be melted and then sold as
scrap. In fact, finding today a pre-reform Denarius is considerably more difficult and expensive than Nero‟s new
Denarii.

From then on each new emperor lowered the fineness of the Denarii a percent or two so that by the time of Gordian III,
the last emperor to issue significant quantities of Denarii, a Denarius was actually no more than about 35% silver by
weight.

Another unintended effect was that as the silver coins became cheaper the copper ones became more expensive.
After all, each Denarius was now being made by more and more copper to fill in for the missing silver. What was
happening was that a 3 gram silver coin was 2 grams copper but the whole coin was still valued at several multiples
more than the Sestertii, Dupondii and Asses which weighed between 10-30 grams a piece. Therefore, rather than the
government risk striking copper coins which would only wind up being melted it chose to not strike them much in the
first place.

Gold on the other hand was considered sacred. As much as it may have pained each emperor to part with his
dwindling supplies of its most precious metal no soldier would risk his life unless it was for real gold. Not until the
situation had grown into a series of deep crises in the middle of the third century that emperors decided to tinker with
the next best thing: their weight. The Aureus which had traditionally weighed between 7-8 grams each went as far
down as just over 2 grams under the reign of Gallienus. How the paymasters kept a straight face on pay day is
anyone‟s guess and it‟s quite possible that the scam was masqueraded as salary increases by paying two or three of
these Aurei while, of course, the total outlay of metal was still below the traditional amount.

As the fineness in silver was steadily lowered, and the weight of the Aureus became erratic, new denominations were
introduced to further blur the government‟s cost-cutting schemes and attempts to curb rampant inflation. The silver
Antoninianus was introduced around the year 215 under Caracalla at a nominal value of two Denarii and, for gold, the
Binio was introduced a few years later as a double Aureus. Since gold coins were never a major part of everyday
commerce the Binio was a nonstarter but the Antoninianus drove the Denarius into extinction within 30 years of its
introduction. And it, too, would suffer severe debasement and reduction in weight.

By the mid-250‟s the Ant reached the critical low point in the silver-copper alloy, about 18%, where it no longer
resembled a silvery coin even when freshly minted. Debasing this coin further served no practical purpose because it
was blatantly obvious it was no longer silver. A decision was therefore made to stop making silver coins altogether
and simply apply a silver wash to the Ants as a last processing step of the coin blanks.

When new, these coins looked much better than the previous 18% silver Ants. However, shortly after entering
circulation the silver coating wore off across the high points of the coin to reveal the copper beneath. Many such coins
continued to circulate long after the silvering was fully gone and yet they were still officially considered silver coins!

By the early 290‟s the Roman economy was in a state of near-collapse as the old currency value schedules were
maintained relative to a silver coinage that existed only as a dim memory. The emperor Diocletian set into motion a
series of monetary reforms meant to rectify the situation. The Antoninianus was suspended and new denominations
introduced including a new Denarius of high silver content termed “Argenteus” (but officially worth 2.5 Denarii each)
and the Follis which had a negligible amount of silver but was as hefty as an old As. The Aureus would be reborn
under more predictable weights as well and the whole coinage system was overhauled from top to bottom in the
hopes of stabilizing the economy.

Some of the denominations caught on and some, specifically the Argenteus, would see a quick demise due to the
chronic lack of silver. What little silver was initially breathed into the Follis was pulled and the weight, too, dwindled
swiftly from a high of about 10g until it was a small copper coin of about 2-3g each within a few years‟
time. This reduced Follis enters the fourth century as the new de facto standard copper coin to serve the same general
purpose as the Denarius of two centuries before (if not the actual buying power). Since it is unclear what the Romans
of the time called it today‟s numismatists give it the generic term of a class three bronze or AE3 for short (AE is the
abbreviation for Aeratus, Latin for copper).
 v
Even though during the fourth century the AE3 is king there are several other important denominations. After
Diocletian‟s reforms settle into a new swing over the following years, a new gold standard is introduced under
Constantine I with the flagship Solidus, a successor to the old Aureus which is now made to unerring precision at 72 to
a Roman pound of gold, or about 4.4g a piece. It is so successful that it was still being made 500 years later under
Byzantine emperors easily outlasting the Denarius itself and, possibly, any other denomination to this age.

While the relationship between bronze coins and their silver and gold cousins are poorly understood the relative
values between silver and gold are as follows:

1 Solidus = 2 Semisses = 3 Tremisses = 24 Siliquae

The Siliqua is the last major successor to the old Denarius. It is thinner and lighter at only 2-3g each and never
approaches the popularity of the Denarius. Except for rare occasions it is the one denomination that is not survived by
the fall of the Roman empire itself in 476.

While the gold and silver remain stable into the fifth century and beyond the last days of the Western half of the
Roman empire see the bronze coinage shrink quickly into a morass of teeny coppers known as AE4‟s. They survive in
large quantities today but prove difficult to identify due to careless minting methods and heavily debased alloys which
fared poorly in the soil upon their loss or burial.

The following table lists the most important denominations with rare fractions and multiples being omitted.

Main Roman Imperial Coin Denominations

Denomination Metal Weight Value Circ. Dates Notes
Aureus Gold 7-8g 25 Denarii c.200 BCE – Weights fluctuate wildly mid-third century
305 CE
Binio Gold 5.5-6g 2 Aurei 251-310
Quinarius Gold 2.5-4g ½ Aureus c.200 BCE – Weights fluctuate wildly mid-third century.
305 CE Very rare
Solidus Gold 4.4g 24 310-c.963 The Solidus is reborn as Basil I‟s
Siliquae Histamenon Nomisma with same weight
and purity until replaced in the 1040‟s by
the Hyperpyron.
th
Semissis Gold 2.25g ½ Solidus 310-c.867 Rare prior to 6 century
Tremissis Gold 1.5g ⅓ Solidus c.380-c.867
1-½ Gold 1.7g 9 Siliquae 310-c.380 Scripulum is a measure of weight. Ancient
Scripulum name remains unknown. Extremely rare.
Denarius Silver 2.5-4g 4 Sestertii 211 BCE – Weights were never adhered to very strictly
244 CE but typical Denarius in Augustan times was
nd
3.8g dropping to 3.4g by 2 century and
sometimes as low as 2g under the Severan
dynasty. When first introduced in 211 BCE
the Denarius was tariffed at 10 Asses and
was retariffed to 16 Asses in 118 BCE.
Cistophoric Silver 10-12g 3 Denarii 27 BCE – 138 A denomination meant for use in the
Tetradrachms CE eastern provinces to mimic traditional silver
coinage in the region but using Latin
legends and imperial portraits.
Antoninianus Silver 3-5g 2 Denarii 215-285 The name of this coin in antiquity is
unknown. Present usage is named after
Caracalla whose formal name was
Antoninus and who first introduced this
coin. The radiate bronze coins under
Diocletian may be a separate denomination
or simply a size-reduced Antoninianus.
Argenteus Silver 3-4g 2-½ c.290-c.310 A severely debased Argenteus is minted in
Denarii Trier from c.310-319. Note also that this
coin is essentially the same as the light
Miliarense.
Quinarius Silver 1.3g- ½ 211 BCE – Rare
 vi
2g Denarius c.230 CE
th
Siliqua Silver 1.5-3g 1/24 310 – c.650 Weights were erratic but steadily
Solidus diminished over time from around 3g early
th
on to less than 2g by the 5 century.
Although sporadically minted during
Byzantine times it had been phased out of
general production by the 460‟s.
Miliarense Silver 3.5g- ~2 310-c.717 The Miliarense comes in three separate
5.2g Siliquae weight categories of uncertain value
relative to the Siliqua or Solidus except as
raw bullion weight. The “light” Miliarense of
approximately 3.5g, a regular ~4.5g coin
and the “heavy” miliarense of ~5.2g
Sestertius Bronze/ 22-30g ¼ 23 BCE – It is possible that the Sestertius continued
Brass Denarius c.275 to be struck in extremely limited quantities
2 Dupondii until Diocletian‟s reform in or around the
year 285. However, after the Severan
dynasty the Sestertius became increasingly
scarce and underweight, occasionally
falling to under 10g. Prior to 23 BCE the
Sestertius existed as a rare denomination
in silver. Its value however had always
been fixed to a quarter of a Denarius.

The Sestertius and the Dupondius are

typically struck from Orichalcum, a brassy
alloy.
Double Bronze 25-40g 2 Sestertii 251-274 Using the convention of radiate crowns for
Sestertius double value, the double Sestertius is an
exotic denomination begun under Trajan
Decius. Some rare pieces have been noted
weighing upwards of 44g but typical
weights hover around 25g. The last double
Sestertii were apparently minted during the
reign of Aurelian at a rather emaciated
weight of ~17g.
Dupondius Bronze/ 11-15g ½ 23 BCE – From the year 64 forward emperors on the
Brass Sestertius c.260 Dupondius are depicted with a radiate
crown. This visual aid eases the distinction
between it and the larger Sestertius and the
smaller As. Empresses do not get a similar
distinction until the 220‟s when a bust
resting on a crescent was introduced, a
feature which was never thoroughly
consistent in use.
As Copper/ 10-12g ½ c.280 BCE – It is often impossible to tell for certain
Bronze Dupondius c.275 whether a coin is a heavier than usual As
or a light Dupondius on those coins that
normally lack a radiate crown.
Semis Bronze 2-3g ½ As c.210 BCE – Rare and often struck anonymously. Last
c.180 CE issues were used in the outer provinces.
Quadrans Bronze 2.5-4g ½ Semis c.210 BCE –
c.180 CE
AE1 Bronze >25mm ? 360‟s Julian II introduces a large silvered bronze
coin of ~8.5g, quite possibly a rebirth of the
Follis. It is continued by Jovian and struck
in very limited quantities by Valens &
Valentinian I before disappearing. Large
copper medals and so-called “contorniates”
are minted sporadically from the early
300‟s and well into the 500‟s. They were
 vii
rare in their own time, struck for ceremonial
purposes, as presentation pieces or other
special occasions and unlikely to have
entered circulation as money.
AE2 Bronze 22- 2x AE3 (?) 350-c.390 The typical AE2 weighs 4-5g and is
25mm sometimes called a “Centenionalis” though
the term is far from universally accepted.
th
AE2‟s from the 5 century are exceedingly
rare but, strangely, seem to have had a
little revival under Leo I and his wife Verina
in the 450‟s.
AE3 Bronze 16- ? c.300-430 The greater part of extant ancient Roman
22mm coins fall under this category. Perhaps
hundreds of millions were struck during the
fourth century and seem to have served as
the general-purpose coin in commerce of
the day. They typically weigh about 3g
each and were largely phased out of
production by the last decade of this
century but erratic production continued
until Anastasius‟ reform in 498.
AE4 Bronze <16mm ? c.317-498 The AE4 is to the fifth century what the AE3
was to the fifth. They are found today in
large quantities but careless production
processes, poor alloys and small size
conspire against easy identification.
AE5 Bronze <12mm ? c.380-498 This class of bronze is proposed to
(proposed) differentiate them from the larger AE4‟s
th
struck in the first half of the 4 century
which were initially conceived as
posthumous coins struck in honor of deified
emperors and empresses and then as the
very large issue in celebration of the re-
founding of Byzantium as Constantinople.

The first mainstream AE4‟s appeared late

in the 340‟s but were abandoned within a
decade until 379 when the emperor Gratian
authorized the minting of a small coin of
about 12mm diameter. This smaller module
would quickly eclipse the AE3 in popularity
and is apparently the main engine of small
commerce for the entire fifth century with
larger bronzes becoming practically
nonexistent during this period. Its weight
hovered around 0.9-1.14g and by the early
400‟s settles into a diameter range of about
10mm.
 viii
Coins of Other Ancient Cultures
In learning about Roman coins it is helpful to be able to distinguish them from other ancient coins. A short guide is
presented outlining the major differences between these.

Let us examine first the coins which we will be dealing with in this book. Roman imperial coins span a period of over
500 years beginning, technically, with the first issues following the Roman Senate‟s bestowment of the title Augustus
th
on Octavian in 27 BC and gradually blending into what will become known as the Byzantine culture in the 6 century.
During this entire period almost every coin minted within the borders of the Roman empire will feature a ruler from the
present imperial court as a portrait on the obverse of each and every coin. This trait alone is so consistent that it
becomes an easily identifiable signature which can be used to quickly rule out the majority of other ancient coin-
making cultures. The second main features are the inscriptions themselves which although 1,500-2,000 years old are
still often perfectly readable to anyone familiar with the Latin alphabet.

Roman imperial coins are the most plentiful and cheapest coins of antiquity. It is therefore a safe bet that any coin
from antiquity that has a person‟s portrait and has at least partially readable Latin legends can be assumed to be a
Roman coin.

Roman imperatorial coins immediately precede the imperial period. This rather brief numismatic period extends from
shortly before the death of Julius Caesar until Octavian is given his title of Augustus; less than 20 years in all.
Numismatically, this period blends characteristics of the Roman republican period before and the coming imperial age.
Among these are the first examples of living persons being featured on coins.

The imperatorial period issues some gold and copper coinage but are of excessive rarity today. The Roman economy
during this time is nearly monopolized by the silver Denarius.
 ix

The Republican period precedes the Imperatorial and the Roman coinage of the day is heavily influenced by Greek
art. From about 200 BCE until near the end of Julius Caesar‟s life these coins will employ the usual Roman rebadged
Greek gods with Latin inscriptions but are otherwise similar in makeup to contemporary Greek coins. As was the case
with imperatorial Rome, the Denarius is the backbone of the economy.

The Greeks were the inventors of coins. From about 550 BCE until conquered by the Romans they strike millions of
coins in all metals but prefer silver as the medium of exhange. Greek coins undergo several periods whereby the art
styles change significantly. The coins make heavy use of traditional Greek mythology. As a whole, the written word is
moderated or unused so as to not compete with the art which is generally regarded to be the greatest numismatic
legacy the world has witnessed.

There are several contemporary cultures which issued coins during the Roman imperial period. After the various
Greek nations fell one by one to the Romans the skills of their moneyers were put to good use. Unlike other regions
within the Roman empire the Romans allowed for the issue of their own autonomous coinage using Greek legends
and traditional themes so long as the various Roman gods and, most importantly, the incumbent emperor were
featured prominently. As a class, Roman provincial coins, or more specifically, Greek imperial as they‟re more
appropriately termed, are very similar to Roman imperial coins with the only major difference being the use of Greek
legends. They were also restricted to bronze and limited runs of silver but never gold which was a privilege reserved
for Rome on most occasions. The last of these provincial coins are struck in the late 200‟s and coins with Greek
legends will not reappear until the Byzantine period.
 x

Immediately to the east in what is now known as the Holy Land coins had been made for centuries. The Jews and
other nearby civilizations produced a distinctive coinage paralleling the Roman imperial period and then incorporating
some of its elements after the region was annexed by the Romans. Asides from the use of Hebrew and other archaic
alphabets the coins scrupulously omit any representation of living beings, particularly humans, which was considered
sacrilegious.

The Greek and then Roman empires‟ most formidable enemies were the Persians with whom they constantly
quarreled. They left behind a significant body of numismatic material that began shortly after the Greeks themselves
invented coinage and evolved over time into the modern Islamic currency.

Coins issued in antiquity will look quite exotic to Western eyes from the inscrutable inscriptions to the designs.
Portraits feature equally exotic headgear and dress.

The Celts were not one people. They were a diverse number of tribes inhabiting all European regions not under direct
Roman control. They include Spanish, British, Germanic and near-eastern nations of semi-nomadic makeup and
lumped together under the Roman pejorative “Barbarian”. The extent of their coinage was limited insofar as their
economies were more primitive. However, trade was an important element of their various civilizations and many
found the convenience of coinage.

The style used on Celtic coins is hard to reign in given how dissimilar the various tribes were. Most uniquely
distinguishable is their abstracted portraiture and rendition of animals, particularly horses.
 xi

Minor Celtic tribes along near the Roman empire‟s borders were influenced and occasionally even Romanized to a
degree. What commerce they engaged with amongst themselves, outsiders and Romans alike was presumably
facilitated with their acquired wealth, mainstream Roman coins and coins of their own making which closely
resembled official issues. The bulk of these mimic Roman bronzes of the fourth century with varying degrees of
craftsmanship but all are connected by the thread of illiterate “writing” in place of true inscriptions.

After the fourth century these tribes amalgamated with other Celts to form new tribes and would continue to copy the
core Roman currency well into the sixth century, often taking care to honor the nominal Byzantine emperor of the day
who was still regarded as the legal sovereign of the former Roman lands. Bronzes ceased to be made in any
appreciable quantities but gold production began in earnest under the banner of the Vandals, Ostrogoths, Avars,
Merovingians and many others.

As the Roman influence vanished and the Byzantine influence waned these tribes now began to slowly disassociate
themselves from the old empire and instead issued coins honoring their own kings. In the vacuum that was left the
inhabitants of Western Europe gained stronger identities and new cultures were born giving way to the medieval
period.

Coin craftsmanship will for the next 1,000 years be far below the standards of the Greeks and Romans and acquire a
look and feel unique and easy to identify. However, a thorough knowledge of European medieval coinage is intricate
th
and difficult to master. It will not be until the 16 century when Arabic numeral dating on coins and the eventual
introduction of machine-stamped coins that the modern age of currency is born.
 xii

Meanwhile the Byzantines carry on the political legacy of the Romans by continuing the now ancient imperial tradition.
Spanning a full millennium the Byzantine currency undergoes many changes over the years. The ending section of
this book introduces the Byzantine age while the coins are still fully indistinguishable from their Italian counterparts. In
fact, at this stage the mints in Constantinopolis and Rome still closely coordinate their coin production to give every
appearance of a seamless monetary system and, by extension, a solidly unified empire.

The book closes with the reign of Anastasius who is a pivotal figure in reforming coinage in a new direction that breaks
with the past. Numismatic historians prefer to pin this date as the start of the Byzantine period.

There are other cultures in ancient times where coins were struck. Highlighted above are a few of these. Next to the
coins of Persia, India has the most extensive variety with many different kingdoms striking unique designs which
occasionally borrow Western elements but are always infused with a healthy dose of regional relevance.
 xiii

Identifying Roman Coins

The first step in learning anything about a coin is to be able to decipher the clues given in its design. Fortunately,
Roman emperors wanted you to know who was pictured on the coin‟s obverse. Even better, the Romans gave birth to
the Latin alphabet making the inscriptions quite readable assuming they‟re not too worn or missing. Lastly, the coins
themselves follow very predictable conventions in their designs so that what is learned for one coin can be applied in
identifying the next.

The typical Roman coin will look something like this:

At first that string of letters may seem daunting to interpret. While each letter appears recognizable it looks like one
big, alien word. For all their inventiveness, the Romans seem to have ran out of steam after designing the letter Z and
the idea of spacing between words never really caught on. Dots occasionally serve this function but normally the coin
lettering will be all bunched up like in this photo.

The Latin alphabet used in Roman times is somewhat shorter than the English one. There are no J‟s, U‟s or Y‟s.
Instead, an I is used where a J would normally be found and, likewise, a V is the U or Y stand-in. All writing is always
upper case.

Knowing this, in the sample photo the string of letters encodes not only the name of the emperor, in this case
Maximian which is readable starting the third letter in, but also several of his titles. Since there were many titles
bestowed on emperors the only way to cram them into the available space was to abbreviate them. In this particular
coin the first two letters are D and N which stand in Latin for Dominus Noster (Our Lord), then MAXIMIANO (a Latin
form of the name Maximian), FELICISSIMO (roughly translating to “most dutiful”), then SEN (short for senior) and
lastly AVG for Augustus, the most important imperial title. A literate Roman back then would understand this
inscription to mean something like “Our Lord Maximian, most dutiful senior Augustus”.

The reverse reads PROVIDENTIADEORVMQVIESAVGG. Breaking this up yields Providentia Deorvm Qvies Avgg
which translates to “By the providence of the Gods there is peace”. This particular coin speaks therefore of the
peaceful transition of power from the emperor, Maximian, to his appointed successor.

Other coins will follow this basic principle and the connection to modern coins should be obvious thereby making the
identification of each one easier. On the other hand, many ancient coins will prove more difficult to figure out because
they‟re worn, damaged or have legends that are too difficult to make out. Those features that are visible will have to
suffice in correctly attributing the coin. It is unfortunately not unusual to find a coin that resists identification because
there is simply too little to go on. However, even in these cases it should at least be possible to determine the
approximate age and region of the coin.
 xiv

How to Use This Book

In the following pages you will find a format that will become familiar from emperor to emperor. After a short biography,
known coin inscriptions and designs are broken down into four parts. Not every legend will be found with every bust or
reverse type and the known combinations are given in a numbered listing known as a catalog. The available
photographs of the busts and reverse designs are then organized into plates at the end of the section.

1. The name of the ruler followed by title and reign dates. In the case of empresses dates given are for when they
were born and died.

2. A short biography of the ruler.

3. Notes on the availability and general pricing of his or her coins.

 xv
4. Known bust types for this ruler. The general order of description is to list first what, if anything is worn on the
head and then continue to list the type of dress visible on the bust and, finally, whatever the effigy might be
holding with his right hind followed by his left hand.

In a few cases coin obverses will have a design rather than a portrait. A lettered listing will follow with known
types.

5. Obverse legends known for the ruler, arranged alphabetically.

6. Reverse legends.

7. Description of known types.

8. Mint location. City name is given as known in antiquity. See elsewhere in introductory section for current name
and location.

9. Metal type and denomination. AU is for gold, AR silver and AE is copper.

10. References to listings in other catalogs for the same catalog are provided where researched and/or available.
Blank spaces in this field may mean either that the coin is unlisted or is listed in a work not researched by the
author.

11. Photographs of the busts and types. Photographs are not to scale.

12. Catalog entries are provided in a numbered sequence that includes the most common known combinations of the
busts, types and legends. In addition, mintmarks and the occasional note unique to this listing will be entered after
the combination.

A listing that reads, for example, B1, O1, R05, T20 simply means that a coin is known with bust number 1,
obverse legend number one, reverse legend five and reverse type number 20. Leading zeroes are added where
necessary in order to make the headings line up and sort correctly. The numbers reset for the next ruler.

Where a coin has field markings in addition to the exergue a “/” will separate the field from the exergue. A coin
therefore that has an A in one of its reverse fields and XXX in the exergue will be described as A / XXX. If a coin
has field markings in both fields it might then read A / B / XXX. Where the arrangement may present confusion
additional comments will be provided.
 xvi
Mintmarks
For hundreds of years Rome kept a close eye on the output of its coins. As there were only a few mints operational at any
one time, with Rome itself reserving the lion‟s share of this output, quality control and accurate bookkeeping was a task
that the mint officials could handle without resorting to the practice of placing marks on the coins themselves to know what
was going on. However, near the latter half of the third century, the quality of the coins had suffered greatly under the
stress of inflation and a centralized system made for an impractical way of distributing the (cheaper) currency being made.
It was at this time that mintmarking really began to take hold and, within a few years, the process had become the most
intricate and methodical the world would ever witness.

Although silver and gold would eventually get some mint marks here and there it was the low value bronze denominations
which received full attention in this area. Oddly, down to the very last days before the fall of Rome even the sorriest little
copper would be duly impressed with the mark of its city of origin and, frequently, its officina as well.

The big idea therefore was for the government to keep track of who was making what and how much of it. Specie in gold
and silver had such tight controls that general accounting practices were generally sufficient to minimize corruption and
fraud. Copper coinage on the other hand was being produced on a very massive scale. Each mint each year may have
made hundreds of millions of coins and, not surprisingly, most were of the copper variety meant for general circulation.
This scale of manufacture would not be repeated again until the industrial age so a system for all those coins coming into
circulation was imperative.

The treasury‟s primary need in accounting was to make sure the correct number of coins were being made to pay off the
government‟s expenditures. Each mint was therefore bound to a number of rules that they were to follow both for
accounting as well as to ensure a supply of coins that were as seamless in terms of look and feel from one mint to the
next. Designs were therefore carefully coordinated between the various mints and for specific lengths of time. The
painstaking practice of ensuring that every single coin looked essentially identical from one end of the empire to the other
and a level of detail that dictated the precise, hyper-correct placement of individual letters and other design elements can
be considered as part of the quintessentially Roman way of precision engineering.

The very first mintmarks employed under the Roman imperial period usually consisted of cryptic symbols just meant to
reveal the city of origin. This practice was far from widespread and given the normal variances from region to region it is
now known without doubt that some coins were made in certain locations or at least general areas even without these
mintmarks based on stylistic differences alone. But these differences were much too subtle for administrators to bother
with. When the need presented itself the mint marking system was put into place and within a matter of a few years the
practice was more or less standardized across hundreds of thousands of square miles.

No sooner than explicit mint marks begin appearing that

identify each city of origin than it becomes necessary to
break it down further into individual series and, as noted
above, often the officinae involved too. A typical late
Roman bronze will often carry additional symbols that
reveal separate production runs.

Understanding this system is complex and their

meanings are not always universally agreed upon. But
generally speaking some conventions can be followed
with enough consistency that they soon become familiar
to the collector.

The first step then is to identify the name and location of

all these mints. The map on the following page identifies
the main ones in operation during the fourth and fifth centuries.
 xvii

In addition to the above locations, several other cities hosted mint operations during brief periods. Sometimes an emperor
on a war campaign chose to bring along these facilities to ensure a close eye on the soldiers‟ payroll. A partial list of minor
mints includes:

Ambianum – Amiens, France Palmyra – near Tadmur, Syria

Barcino – Barcelona, Spain Narbo Martius – Narbonne, France
Carnuntum – near Vienna, Austria Tarraco – Tarragona, Spain
Colonia Agrippinensis – Cologne, Germany Tripolis – Tripolis, Turkey
Laodiceia ad Mare – Laodikeia, Syria Viminacium – Kostolac, Yugoslavia
Ostia – near Rome, Italy

Now that we‟ve taken a brief overview of their names

and locations let‟s take a look at the mint marks
themselves.

The simplest type of mint mark just wants to identify its

city of mintage and the first thing to remember is that it
almost always will be located on the bottom of the
reverse of the coin. This area, typically delineated by a
line separating the design from the mintmark itself, is
called the exergue. This bronze coin belonging to
Constantius Gallus, a minor figure of the fourth century,
was minted in Sirmium given the readable string
ASIRM). The A and the dot would have provided an
administrator extra information useful in pinning down who was responsible for making the coin and at what approximate
time. One might consider how this level of detail has never to this day been found again and should give pause to wonder
just how meticulous these people were! In the meantime and for the purpose of cracking the system let us remember that
the mint city will be an abbreviation consisting of one to several letters and will usually be embedded with additional
symbols. Learning how they abbreviated their city names is usually the first step in recognizing where a particular coin was
made. Relatively few, unfortunately, are generous enough to spell out the first four letters of the city name like in this
example!

Barring the many exceptions that will be found, some forms of usage predominate:

Alexandria: ALE
Antioch: ANT or ANA
 xviii
Arles: A, ARL, CONS (after being renamed Constantia in the fourth century. To distinguish from Constantinople the
officina letter always precedes the CONS in Arles and always comes after the CONS for Constantinople issues)
Aquileia: AQ
Constantinople: CON or CONS
Cyzicus: K, KYZ or MKV
Heraclea: H, HT, HERACL or HERAC
London: L, ML or LON
Lugdunum (Lyons): LG or LVG
Nicomedia: N, NIC, NIKO
Rome: R or RF
Sirmium: SIRM
Siscia: SIS or SISC
Thessalonica: TES or TS
Ticinum: T
Trier: TR

Whenever possible, the above “keys” should be visually isolated from other symbols preceding or stuck on as suffixes.
Another very popular convention used was to use the form SMxy where x would be the 1- to 3-letter city code followed by
y, the officina. SM stood for Sacra Moneta (sacred mint).

The officina is simply and literally the office or internal department in charge of minting the coins. The physical building
that housed the machinery and staff for minting coins may have had up to a dozen or more simultaneously operating
officinae. Sometimes each officina would be given the task of dedicating its output to a certain design or emperor but more
typically they shared equally in the output. Each was therefore expected to stamp their coins with the signature of their
crew; all, again, for the sake of full accounting. The officinae were identified by a numbering system whose nomenclature
depended on their general location. Cities in the western half of the empire normally used an ordinal sequence where you
would have the first, second, third and so on officinae. This being Latin, they would have used the words prima, seconda,
tertia, qvarta, etc. They would then use the first letter of each ordinal along with the city code. For example, a coin from
Rome could have a mintmark RP (Roma Prima) which would indicate that it came from the first officina. Just as often you
could have the officina letter precede the city code so that a QA would indicate the fourth officina for Arles.

A logistic problem occurs when we arrive at the fifth officina, qvinta in Latin, because there is obviously no way to
distinguish between the Q for qvarta and qvinta. The Romans evidently didn‟t burn too many mental calories on this one
and in these cases just grabbed the fifth Greek alphabet letter E. On the rather rare instances where a sixth or greater
number officina was operating they resorted to using more Greek characters.

The eastern mint cities tend to use letters from the

Greek alphabet to accomplish the same task. The
sequence begins A, B, Γ, Δ, E, S, Z, H, Ө and I. They
can go further for series that were very popular, for
example a ΔE would be the sum of letter values 4 and
th
5 from the above sequence to arrive at the 9 officina.
Normally however only the first four to five letters were
used and, by the fifth century when fewer coins were
being made, it was usual to have only A and B
operating

Matters become trickier when unrelated symbols get

appended to these codes but the general form should
be recognizable as the ancillary symbols change
frequently from issue to issue while the relative
position of the city code and officina do so less often.
Where the collector comes across a coin with many
letters and symbols jumbled together it might well be
daunting to sort it all out but with increasing familiarity
with the system it is only a matter of time before a
casual glance will tell you all you need to know to
identify each coin... provided, of course, that the mintmark is still visible.
 xix

Pricing and Grading

Almost every coin collector is interested, if not obsessed, with the worth of their coins. Despite the occasional, overly-
serious numismatist admonishing the newer hobbyist in playing this down in favor of just learning and studying the coins
the truth is that it is an integral part of the fun of collecting. The collector therefore desperately needs a pricing guide to
know what to expect when adding or selling pieces from the collection.

I can‟t do that.

There are no shortage of pricing guides out there for ancient coins but the bitter truth is that they‟re all laughably
inaccurate and in the end up confusing more than giving real-world use. There are several reasons for this. Unlike the
case with modern coins there are no „population reports‟ to indicate how rare or common each coin type is in an absolute
sense. Over time, coins that were previously rare become less so thanks to new hoard discoveries and sometimes coins
that are temporarily plentiful vanish from the marketplace. Then there is the issue of where you buy and sell coins. An
exclusive dealer may list a given coin for several hundred dollars while another can offer the very same type for a $100
and you could spot the same on eBay for $50. It happens ALL the time.

In light of this there is little point in taking the trouble to give even a rough price range for each coin catalogued. Depending
on your personal level to stomach risk and how much research you want done on your behalf you will feel comfortable
shopping in a venue where prices should be more or less stable for that tier. This ultimately will be the true learning
grounds. However, this book at least notes general trends for each emperor and where possible further broken down by
the major denominations. This should hopefully be enough to spur the collector to do a little comparative research to
identify what is a bargain and what is clearly overpriced.

Every coin book geared towards the collector will repeat the mantra about grading and conservation and I will be pedantic
enough to repeat it here. It is an unwavering truism that conservation beats rarity in all but the most extreme cases. Unless
you have come across a major rarity assume that the worth of your coin will very largely depend on its visual appeal. An
ancient gold coin will in most cases look mint state or nearly so because it likely traded hands infrequently until it was lost.
Bronzes on the other hand range from the abominable to strikingly well preserved (but should never look coppery like
modern, untoned copper coins. This is an unequivocal indication of harsh cleaning!). Silver coins tend to be fairly well
preserved but will show the most wear since many of them traded for many decades.

A mint state coin will command a premium. The rule of thumb is that in coins beauty sells and rarity is only a secondary
factor in determining value. Of course, this “rule” applies only in a general sense. A rare coin be it for type or ruler WILL be
marketable assuming a decent state of preservation and the rarest types/rulers will stil be very sought even when poorly
preserved. However, a poorly preserved rather common coin will find almost no interest among your fellow collectors.

So what are the grading standards? Just as is the case with modern coins ancients are graded along much the same
lines. One can even get an ancient coin slabbed just like a modern coin and will carry a grade using the American grading
standard... a practice that finds quite little support among die-hard ancient coin enthusiasts. But this book does not
concern itself with grades for the simple reason that nowadays grading ancient coins is largely irrelevant. Unlike the mail
order catalogs of years gone by one typically buys a coin from a well-photographed coin today in a glossy color catalog,
the internet or on site at a coin show. There is therefore little need for a grade as such since the visual confirmation of
what you would be getting is infinitely more useful than the information conveyed by an assigned grade of questionable
value.

For what it‟s worth, let‟s examine what the general consensus is regarding grading:

Rather than waste time with an euphemistic grades of AG, G or VG, the lowest rung of collectible ancient Roman coins
are thankfully just described imperfect as they are. In most cases wear as such won‟t be the major issue with these coins
 xx
but rather unsightly toning, die cracks and/or other structural problems, or a bad case of corrosion. Coins with any but a
small part broken off are hardly ever worth anything on the market.

Those coins graded “fine” will be found to be essentially intact in terms of overall design but with a considerable portion of
its initial detail worn off or obscured by corrosion. This represents the bulk of ancient coins available today.

You would expect a Roman coin in Very Fine or VF condition to be overall problem-free and with all its major features
visible. Some wear and/or small imperfections are to be expected including coins that are slightly off-center.

An EF (extremely fine) coin is in practice the highest grade coin you can hope to come across. Excepting coins given the
holy-grail grade of FDC, see next, which probably no universal body of numismatists will agree on by the way, the EF coin
is as good as it gets. To achieve this grade it should have only a touch of wear (if not outright mint state), be well centered,
struck from new dies, be whole in every way and basically say “Hey, I‟m beautiful and perfect. Buy me”. It will be rare to
find a bona fide EF bronze.

FDC is French for Fleur de Coin, the ne plus ultra of the numismatic world. It‟s a term unfortunately much abused by both
the inexperienced and those of shaky morals who will indiscriminately give any coin the grade without a second thought,
often adding a few seemingly pre-requisite + or ! signs to drive home the point. Sigh. A real FDC coin needs no such
gimmicky hype for it should be instantly breathtaking and considered the very paradigm of that type. In fact, a purist will
say that by definition this excludes all bronzes by mere reason of their toning which, however attractive, has degraded
them from perfection. Whatever. It‟s ok to ignore any coin marketed as FDC that does not instantly dazzle.

In a sense, so long as you can rely on the picture, it‟s ok to ignore any assigned grade :-)
 xxi
Bibliography

R. A. G. Carson and J. P. C. Kent. Late Roman Bronze Coinage. New York: Sanford J. Durst, 1989.

Harold Mattingly and Edward A. Sydenham. The Roman Imperial Coinage Vol. I. London: Spink & Son, Ltd., 1923

C. H. V. Sutherland. The Roman Imperial Coinage Vol. 1. London: Spink and Son, 1984

Harold Mattingly and Edward A. Sydenham. The Roman Imperial Coinage Vol. II. London: Spink & Son, Ltd., 1926

Harold Mattingly and Edward A. Sydenham. The Roman Imperial Coinage Vol. III. London: Spink & Son, Ltd., 1930

Harold Mattingly, Edward A. Sydenham and C. H. V. Sutherland. The Roman Imperial Coinage Vol. IV pt. 1. London: Spink & Son, Ltd., 1936

Harold Mattingly, Edward A. Sydenham and C. H. V. Sutherland. The Roman Imperial Coinage Vol. IV pt. 2. London: Spink & Son, Ltd., 1938

Harold Mattingly, Edward A. Sydenham and C. H. V. Sutherland. The Roman Imperial Coinage Vol. IV pt. 2. London: Spink & Son, Ltd., 1949

Harold Mattingly, Edward A. Sydenham and Percy H. Webb. The Roman Imperial Coinage Vol. V pt. 1. London: Spink & Son, Ltd., 1927

Harold Mattingly, Edward A. Sydenham and Percy H. Webb. The Roman Imperial Coinage Vol. V pt. 2. London: Spink & Son, Ltd., 1933

C. H. V. Sutherland and R. A. G. Carson. The Roman Imperial Coinage Vol. VI. London: Spink & Son, Ltd., 1967

C. H. V. Sutherland and R. A. G. Carson. The Roman Imperial Coinage Vol. VII. London: Spink & Son, Ltd., 1966

J. P. C Kent. The Roman Imperial Coinage Vol. VIII. London: Spink & Son, Ltd., 1981

J. W. E. Pearce. The Roman Imperial Coinage Vol. IX. London: Spink & Son, Ltd., 1951

J. P. C Kent. The Roman Imperial Coinage Vol. X. London: Spink & Son, Ltd., 1994

David R. Sear. Byzantine Coins And Their Values. London: Seaby, Ltd., 1987

Reference Catalogs Cited

BMC British Museum Catalogue
Bastien Pierre Bastien
Le monnayage de l'atelier de Lyon : de la reóuverture de l'atelier par Aurélien à la mort de Carin
BN Catalogue de la Bibliothèque Nationale
C Henri Cohen Description Historique des Monnais Frappeés sous L‟Empire Romain
Calicó Xavier Calicó The Roman Avrei vols. I & II
Cr. Michael Crawford‟sRoman Republican Coinage
Depeyrot Georges Depeyrot Les monnaies d'or de Dioclétien à Constantin I (284-337)
Estiot Sylviane Estiot Ripostiglio della Venèra: Nuovo Catalogo Illustrato
Gnecchi Francesco Gnecchi Medaglioni Romani
Göbl Robert Göbl Moneta Imperii Romani
LRBC Late Roman Bronze Coinage
MIB W. Hahn Moneta Imperii Byzantini
Ratto Rodolfo Ratto Monnaies Byzantines
RIC The Roman Imperial Coinage vols. I - X
S David Sear Roman Coins and Their Values
SB David Sear Byzantine Coins and Their Values
Shiel Norman Shiel The Episode of Carausius and Allectus: The Literary and Numismatic Evidence
SNG British Academy Sylloge Nummorum Graecorum; various collections as noted
Tantalus The Tantalus Registry at http://www.tantaluscoins.com/index.php
Wildwinds The Wildwinds database at http://wildwinds.com/coins/ric/i.html
Vagi David Vagi Coinage and History of the Roman Empire Vol II
xxii