Small Change For The Poor 350 To 600 CE

Small Change for the Poor: 350 to 600 CE
Mike Maier, April 2019
This fifth installment of the SCP project catalogue includes coins of two Wei dynasties in China; the
Mahakshatrapa, the Gupta Empire and some successors, the Kidarites, two different Alchon Hun states,
and the Pallava, in India, Nepal, Pakistan, Afghanistan, and Uzbekistan; the Aksumite Empire centered
on northern Ethiopia and Eritrea; and the Ostrogoths in Italy and the Vandals in Tunisia. Most of all,
there are late Roman and early Romaion (Byzantine) coins, a few billon but mostly bronze or copper:
from Egypt, perhaps, and from Turkey, Greece, Serbia, Croatia, Italy, and France; unofficial imitation
probably from Israel; and uncertain mint, unknown provenance—all too many coins. For several
specimens as well extended water baths provide temporary clarity of detail to assist in attribution.
Following the catalogue are references cited and an appendix: additions, revisions, and corrections to
the first four parts of the SCP catalogue.
Circa 350 (4th Cent. Q3)

236. Ramagupta of Malwa (Madhya Pradesh, India): copper 6 mm, 0.20 g – obv.
Garuda – assumed die axis 5, rev. Brahmi transliterated “…magu…” – dies too large for
planchet. Obverse is Garuda, the mount of Vishnu, visible as two prominent circles with two wings in
lower relief at either side of the body. Reverse is the middle letters of the monarch’s name, read left to
right. Though there is still some doubt about the identity of Ramagupta, the presence of the Garuda, the
dynastic symbol of the Gupta, is evidence that he was indeed the eldest son of Samudragupta, and
perhaps transiently his successor. Coin 236 might have been an issue of Ramagupta as viceroy over the
conquered Naga (e.g. Maier 2018 #227) and Malava kingdoms, the coins of which have been described
as the basis for those struck for Ramagupta, which includes at least three types and probably more than
one denomination. Coin 236, which weighs about 2 ratti according to the traditional Hindu system,
would have been the smallest of coined small change, though probably worth several cowries. The
coinage of Ramagupta has been found most notably in the vicinity of Vidisha and Eran. Ex- Early World
Coins. See Bhandare (2006), Kumar (2013), Pieper (2013 #883), and Gautam (2016?).
237. Mahakshatrapa (Western Satraps, Karddamaka Saka Kingdom;

Madhya Pradesh, India): lead 13 x 13 mm, 3.90 g – obv. Bull – die axis 7:30,
rev. Hill, river, Brahmi transliterated “200 80…” – perhaps half pana –
corroded, but the type is clear. Obverse is right-facing Brahma bull, the head of
which is mostly off the flan on this specimen. Reverse is the dynastic iconography of the Mahakshatrapa,
standard on the more well-known karshapanas (drachms) of this Gujarat-centered empire: a three-arch
hill, at either side of which are lunar and solar symbols which here are obscured by corrosion, with a
river below and a Brahmi date of the Saka Era at bottom, read left to right. The type seems to have first
produced in the first quarter of the Third Century and copied profusely by the Abhira Kingdom of
127
Maharashtra in the second half of that century, before revival by the Mahakshatrapa in the middle of
the Fourth Century. Like Coin 236, the lead Bull and Hill has been found most extensively in Malwa
rather than Gujarat, but more to the west than the coinage of Ramagupta. Ex- Early World Coins, my re-
attribution. See Bhandarkar (1921), Deyell (1977), Mitchiner (1979 cf. #622-623), Gupta (1992),
Bhandare (2006), Bud (2013), Pieper (2013 #831), and Zeno.ru (accessed 6/10/2018).
238. Aksum (Axum; Eritrea or Ethiopia): copper 13 mm, 0.85 g – obv.

Monarch, Greek “BACI_ΛЄYC” – die axis 1:30, rev. Cross, Greek “T…YTO APЄCH
T…” – slightly elongated flan, worn and unevenly patinated. Obverse is right-facing
bust of the king (negus), draped and wearing the royal cap, with well-formed Greek read clockwise from
lower left, all within a circle. Reverse is a Christian cross, in the relatively rare variety of Maltese cross,
within a thick or double circle, outside of which is a Greek legend around clockwise, mostly legible from
the top of the cross to about 7 h, usually translated as “May this please the country.” The type, a
celebration of the conversion to Christianity by King Ezanas sometime in the second quarter of the
century, is generally assumed to be a commemorative struck by successors, with perhaps some issues
for Ezanas himself. Aksumite use of the cross as a prominent device in the type, moreover, pre-dates the
Roman. Sub-types and die varieties abound: crosses that are usually Greek, with flared arms, and much
less often Roman or Maltese; obverse and reverse legends where letters are garbled, misplaced, or
replaced by Ge’ez; and reverse legend read counter-clockwise. Small, thin, and light cast imitations,
produced almost certainly in Egypt from the mid-Fifth Century to well into the Sixth, circulated in Roman
Egypt and as far north as Antiochia (cf. Coin 257); they did not circulate in the Aksumite Empire. The
monetary regime instituted by the kings late in the Third Century was tri-metallic, probably heavily
influenced by the Roman system. Copper and silver coins, much more than gold, circulated within the
empire, and for the most part, in urban areas, but we have little idea as to their purchasing power, much
less the names of the denominations. Be that as it may, the “anonymous” copper issues, including two
later types that also do not name the king (cf. Coin 269), are the most commonly encountered of the
Aksumite coinages. Ex- Early World Coins. See Mitchiner (1978 #383-389), Munro-Hay and Juel-Jensen
(1995 #52-JJ 81), Grierson (1999), Hahn (2000 #23 and 33), Tye (2009 #152), Bijovsky (2012), Bausi
(2013), Munzi (2014), and Zeno.ru (accessed 6/10/2018).
239A. Constantius II of the Romans, 337-361, Constantinopolis mint

(Turkey): billon 16 mm, 2.85 g – obv. Monarch, Latin “…A…” – die axis 6,
rev. Soldier, fallen horseman, Latin “FEL TEMP RE_…”, “·M·”, “CONS…” –
nummus – very worn but heavy, struck with AE3 dies too large for the planchet. Obverse
has almost no visible legend but bust right is diademed, not bare-headed, and so must be Constantius
Augustus. Reverse Roman soldier is barely discernible at upper right. The enemy horseman being
speared, though blending into his fallen steed, appears to be facing upward, wearing either a Skythian or
Parthian helmet; at least nine varieties of the position of the fallen warrior and a dozen varieties of
headwear have been identified. Legend, visible only at left, would be FEL TEMP REPARATIO in full. The
legend break, after RE, is one of seven possibilities for this ruler but was less often used than that of
Coin 239B. In the exergue the mint mark is clear, and the officina, though mostly off the flan, is probably
A or Δ. Just above the fallen horseman’s head is the letter M with large dots at either side. Though M is
128
one of several symbols that appear in the left field of this type (cf. Coin 239G), some have interpreted it
as a mark of value; regarding that, see Coin 239B. In any case, the type is the smaller-version
replacement of the maiorina (e.g., Maier 2018 #235 and cf. Coin 239G). Because the demonetization
decree of 354 seems to have targeted the centenionalis (e.g., Maier 2018 #230-234) as well as the
maiorina, I’ve adopted nummus as the term of convenience for this the remaining base-metal
denomination. Struck from 352/353 to 358, the AE3 Fallen Horseman is one of the most commonly
encountered ancient coin, of which several more examples follow, most with no trace of the silvered
surface that would have been evident on coins fresh from the mint. Ex- unrecorded, my attribution. See
Depeyrot (1992), Harl (1996), Kurth (2007), Trivero Rivera (2009), Abdy (2012), Sear (2014 #18301),
Kurth (accessed 2/20/2018), Pina and Marín (2018 type 24), and Bagnall and Bransbourg (2019).
239B. Constantius II of the Romans, Siscia mint (Croatia): billon 17

mm, 2.80 g – obv. Monarch, Latin “D N CONSTAN_TIVS P F AVG” – die axis
6, rev. Soldier, fallen horseman, Latin “FEL TEMP_REPARATIO”, “M”, Greek
and Latin “ΔSIS”, retrograde “Z” or square “S” – nummus – another heavy
specimen, roughly trimmed but struck on almost the right-size planchet and exceptionally well
preserved, including the silvering. Obverse has a fully legible legend and an undoubtedly idealized
portrait of the emperor, with fine details of his pearl diadem and elaborate drapery, though the
catalogue-described cuirass is barely discernible at the shoulder. Reverse has finely rendered horse,
atop which is a prostrate horseman, perhaps bare-headed, his shield at right, reaching toward the spear-
wielding, shield-holding Roman soldier, outsized here as well as on Coin 239A. Reverse legend is
complete, and the break, after TEMP, is the most common for this type, for both Constantius and his
cousin Iulianus (e.g., Coin 239D). First letter in exergue indicates the fourth officina of the mint, marked
by the next three letters, with the last symbol or letter having an unknown significance. Above the
horseman’s head, prominently, is the letter M. While one plausible hypothesis is that this M is not a
mark of value, another is that there was an attempt to peg the nummus at 1/1000 gold solidus, which
could hardly have been a success for very long, given the next set of currency reforms undertaken by
Iulianus once he was well established as sole emperor (see Coin 241). Another hypothesis is that the M
signified 1000 denarii, but given papyrological evidence that a solidus of 4.54 g nearly pure gold was
valued at 7.3 million denarii, then the exchange would have been 7,300 M-marked nummi, at a weight
of more than 50 Roman pounds. Likelier proposals are those of K. Harl, 5,000 denarii; and R.S. Bagnall
and G. Bransbourg, a myriad of 10,000 denarii, but revalued to 5,000 within a few years. Coins that had
lost their silvering might be heavily discounted, however. Ex- Early World Coins. See Depeyrot (1992),
Harl (1996), Tye (2009 cf. #73), López Sánchez (2012), Sear (2014 #18296), Kurth (accessed 2/20/2018,
#RIC VIII Siscia 369), Pina and Marín (2018 type 24), and Bagnall and Bransbourg (2019).
239C. Constantius II of the Romans, perhaps Antiochia mint (Turkey)

or unofficial issue: billon 16 mm, 2.15 g – obv. Monarch, Latin “D N
CONSTAN_TIVS P F …” – die axis 12, rev. Soldier, fallen horseman, Latin “…EL
TEMP RE_…IO” – nummus – oblong planchet struck with dies a bit too large. Obverse is diademed bust
of emperor to right, with nearly all the legend’s letters visible, even as some are just the bottom
portions. Reverse is soldier spearing fallen horseman, with legend visible mainly at left, breaking same as
129
Coin 239A. Although the exergue mint mark is off the flan, the legend break and lack of field marks (cf.
Coin 239B) narrow down the mint to six possibilities for the AE3 (16 to 20 mm) module. Most likely is
Antiochia: the fallen warrior appears to have braids and is reaching toward the Roman soldier rather
than clutching the horse. However, the horse’s haunch, meant to be between the horseman’s head and
the Roman soldier, looks like a horse’s head, and the lines indicating legs and arms of the horse and
rider are strange compared to other specimens; something is not quite right with this portrayal, despite
a good-quality obverse depiction. Possibly then, this is an example of the prolific unofficial issues that
continued past the last authorized production, in 358, to as late as about 380 (see also Coin 239E). At
least one catalogue dates official issues of this sub-type to 353-356, but the likelier chronology is that
the M-marked issues, Coins 239A and 239B for example, preceded the non-M coins. Ex- unrecorded, my
attribution. See Depeyrot (1992), Berthod (2011), Reece (2012), Sear (2014 #18287), Pilon (2016), Kurth
(accessed 2/20/2018, #RIC VIII Antioch 153 and 155), and Bagnall and Bransbourg (2019); cf. Kurth
(2007) and Pina and Marín (2018 type 24).
239D. Iulianus II (Julian the Apostate) Caesar of the Romans, 355-

360, Antiochia mint (Turkey): billon 18 mm, 1.80 g – obv. Monarch, Latin
“… IVLIANV_…” – die axis 12, rev. Soldier, fallen horseman, Latin
“…M…_REPARATIO”, Latin and Greek “ANΔI” – nummus – irregular or
broken flan, but large enough for the dies. There is no trace of silvering, like most examples of the type:
silvering was either quickly worn away or illegally removed. Obverse is bust right, though the bare head
of Caesar is indistinct for all the dirt (cf. Coin 239F); legend is visible at left. Reverse shows the helmeted
Roman soldier, towering over an encrusted depiction of the fallen warrior clutching his horse, shield at
right. The exergue, legible with some squinting, indicates the eleventh officina of the Antiochia mint.
This sub-type is said to have been struck from 355 to 356, and like Coin 239C, at a nominal weight about
2.5 g with 0.6 percent silver; more likely is 355/356 to 358, standard weight about 2.25 g and 0.5
percent silvering. By that time the nominal value was perhaps 5,000 denarii, exchanged at something
like 2,700 nummi to the solidus; and possibly the price at Antiochia for a modius of wheat, enough to
satisfy the grain needs of an adult male for about a week, would have been roughly 30 to 85 nummi
depending on the season and the harvest. Ex- Anything Anywhere, my attribution. See Depeyrot (1992),
Harl (1996), Sear (2014 #19061), Kurth (accessed 2/20/2018), Pina and Marín (2018 type 24), and
Bagnall and Bransbourg (2019).
239E. Constantius II of the Romans, perhaps Nicomedia or Heraclea

mint (Turkey) or unofficial issue: billon or bronze 16 mm, 1.15 g – obv.
Monarch, Latin “… P F AVG” – die axis 6, rev. Soldier, fallen horseman, Latin
“…ATIO”, perhaps “SM…B” – nummus – thin, ragged planchet too small for dies; encrusted and worn.
Obverse bust right is diademed, with only the end of legend visible at right, but both of those details
serve to identify the monarch as Constantius. Reverse, soldier and fallen horseman are discernible, but
not the horse. The end of the legend is visible at lower right. Three of the four letters of the exergue
mint mark are legible, and the obscured third almost certainly is either N or H. Despite the good quality
of the images and the legible inscriptions, the light weight of this coin could be taken as evidence for an
irregular issue: unofficial or counterfeit. In either of those cases production might have been by
130
overstriking existing coins or striking on cut-sheet blanks, and silvering was probably never applied,
under penalty of death. Irregular coinage seems to have been most widespread in northern Gaul and
Britain, where official coins of the type were not widely distributed, in contrast to Mediterranean areas.
Danube provinces too seem to have been plentifully supplied with official coin, yet irregular coins have
been found there as well. Ex- unrecorded, my attribution. See Gudea and Gӑzdac (2003), Berthod
(2011), Marsden (2012), Reece (2012), Sear (2014 #18276 and 18283), Kurth (accessed 2/20/2018), Pina
and Marín (2018 type 24), and Bagnall and Bransbourg (2019).
239F. Iulianus II Caesar of the Romans, Siscia mint (Croatia): bronze 17

mm, 1.90 g – obv. Monarch, Latin “… IVLIAN_VS NOB …” – die axis 6, rev.
Soldier, Latin “FEL TEMP_…”, “ASIS…”– nummus – another FEL TEMP
REPARATIO strike from Siscia, this one for Iulianus Caesar. Struck on too-small
planchet, Coin 239F has uneven patina and corrosion, especially reverse. Obverse shows bare-headed
Caesar, with legend break that seems to be typical of issues from this mint. Reverse is clear only at the
left-side legend and the exergue; left field is too far gone but possibilities are M, L, or no letter. Note
that the letter A, in both the obverse and reverse legends, was engraved with “feet.” Also remarkable is
the contrast in fabric and weight between this specimen and Coin 239B. Ex- unrecorded, my attribution.
See Sear (2014), Wells (2014?), Pina and Marín (2018 type 24), and Kurth (accessed 2/20/2018).
239G. Constantius II of the Romans, perhaps Roma mint (Italy) or

unofficial issue: billon 18 mm, 2.20 g – obv. Monarch, Latin “…_T…” – die
axis 12, rev. Soldier, fallen horseman, Latin “… R…_P…IO”, “S” – nummus –
oblong flan, heavily encrusted. Enough detail exists to establish the type,
where the sub-type is an issue for Constantius, with reverse legend break after RE and S in the left field.
The S-marked coins, it would seem, were struck circa 351 to 352, denominated perhaps as maiorina of
4.25 to 4.5 g, yet Coin 239G is half that weight. Based on the available metrological evidence the most
likely candidate for the mint is Roma, though Alexandria, Antiochia, Heraclea, and Thessalonica are all
possible. More probable still is unofficial issue, from sometime after the official production. Ex-
unrecorded, my attribution. See Harl (1996), Kurth (2007), Sear (2014 cf. #18105), Kurth (accessed
2/20/2018), WildWinds (accessed 9/29/2018), Pina and Marín (2018 type 24), and Bagnall and
Bransbourg (2019).
239H. Constantius II of the Romans: billon 18 mm, 2.70 g – obv.

Monarch, Latin “…N_TIVS P F AVG” – die axis 4:30, rev. Soldier, fallen
horseman – nummus – oblong flan, encrusted. Obverse is the usual right-
facing bust, with only bottoms of letters visible at left consequent to off-
center strike and too-small planchet. Reverse shows only the outlines of the battling warriors with no
trace of the horse. The exergue is large enough but too encrusted to show the mint mark; 15 mint cities
struck this type as an AE3 for Constantius Augustus and 13 each for Constantius Gallus Caesar and
Iulianus Caesar. Ex- unrecorded, my attribution. See Pina and Marín (2018 type 24) and WildWinds
(accessed 9/29/2018); cf. Sear (2014) and Kurth (accessed 2/20/2018).
131
239I. Constantius II of the Romans: billon 18 mm, 2.25 g – obv. Monarch,
Latin “…AN_TIVS P F AVG” – die axis 4:30, rev. Soldier – nummus – typical too-
small planchet, roughly trimmed. Obverse retains a fair amount of detail in
contrast to the well-worn reverse, which shows only a silhouette of the soldier and traces of legend and
exergue. The die axis of this specimen and the previous is unusual, perhaps a clue about where these
coins were struck. Many hundreds of sub-types are known for the AE3 FEL TEMP REPARATIO Fallen
Horseman, which was produced in enormous quantities. Ex- unrecorded, my attribution. See Kurth
(2007), Kurth (accessed 2/20/2018), and Pina and Marín (2018 type 24).
240A. Iulianus II Caesar of the Romans, Sirmium (Sremska Mitrovica,

Serbia) mint: bronze 17 mm, 1.70 g – obv. Monarch, Latin “…IA_...” – die
axis 6, rev. Monarch, Latin “SPES …_…VBLI…”, “...IR…” – nummus – ragged
flan, not quite large enough for dies, with worn, somewhat corroded obverse and relatively clear
reverse. Obverse is bare-headed Caesar facing right with two letters legible at upper left. Full legend
would be D N IVLIA_NVS NOB C, with the break indicating the mint Sirmium, an important
administrative center from the late Third Century throughout the Fourth. Reverse is long-torso emperor
standing left, holding spear at right and globe at left. Much of the legend is visible: another type for SPES
REIPVBLICAE (cf. Maier 2018 #210), hope for the republic, perhaps referring to Iulianus himself as heir to
Constantius II. Exergue has five letters, two of which are legible, the others conforming to the formula
officina followed by mint mark. Opinion seems to be divided as to whether this type was first struck in
355 as the half of FEL TEMP REPARATIO Fallen Horseman or in 358 as the successor. The latter seems
more plausible, in which case the nominal value would have been the same as Fallen Horseman. This
sub-type was struck until 361, including a year and a half during which Iulianus was proclaimed emperor
by the legions of Gaul but was not recognized as such by Constantius. Ex- unrecorded, my attribution.
See Depeyrot (1992), Harl (1996), Sear (2014 #19085), Wells (2014?), Lendering (2018), Pina and Marín
(2018 type 117), Kurth (accessed (9/4/2018, # RIC VIII Sirmium 81), and WildWinds (accessed 9/4/2018).
240B. Constantius II of the Romans, perhaps Lugdunum mint (Lyon,

France): bronze 12 mm, 2.05 g – obv. Monarch, Latin “…_TIVS P F …” – die axis 6,
rev. Monarch, perhaps Latin “…G” – nummus – AE4 module (≤ 15 mm) struck with
AE3 dies. Obverse shows partial legend, well-cut letters visible at right, but reverse has only traces of
letters, as if engraved by a different hand, with what looks like an angular G as the final letter in the
exergue. This SPES REIPVBLICAE type was struck at 14 different mints, in bronze rather than billon, with
a target weight of about 2 g, usually if not always with AE3 dies, often on AE4 modules. Authorized
production continued into 362 or perhaps 363, in lesser quantities than FEL TEMP REPARATIO Fallen
Horseman. Bronze nummi from this early date circulated well into the Fifth Century in a small-change
economy that paralleled the larger-bronze economy re-established by Anastasius I (e.g., Coins 260 and
261) and persisted into the Sixth Century or later especially in areas around the Mediterranean coast,
from the Levant to Spain, but also parts of Romania, Portugal, northern France... Ex- Anything
Anywhere, my attribution. See Depeyrot (1992), Harl (1996), Kurth (2007), Bijovsky (2012), Moorhead
(2012), Doyen (2014), Sear (2014 #18309), Wells (2014?), Mora Serrano (2016), Morrisson (2016), Pliego
(2016), Gândilă (2017), Pina and Marín (2018 type 117), and Kurth (accessed 9/4/2018).
132
240C. Constantius II or Iulianus II, 360-363, of the Romans, perhaps
unofficial mint: bronze 15 mm, 1.10 g – obv. Monarch, Latin perhaps
“…_VIVP…” – die axis 11, rev. Monarch, Latin “…ES REI_…” – nummus –
irregular or broken flan shows most of the type, in good-quality imagery, and not much of the legends,
though the obverse appears to be blundered. Possibly this is an unofficial issue, from the later part of
the century or the first half of the Fifth. Tiny coins of this type and Fallen Horseman too have been found
in northern Spain and southern France, at a median weight of 0.2 g at one find spot, probably dating to
the second half of the Fifth Century or later. Ex- Anything Anywhere, my attribution. See Gudea and
Gӑzdac (2003), Guihard et al. (2016), Pina and Marín (2018 type 117), and Kurth (accessed 9/4/2018).
241. Iulianus II of the Romans, Constantina mint (Arelate; Arles,

France): bronze 20 mm, 3.20 g – obv. Monarch, Latin “…IVLI_ANVS P F
AVG” – die axis 11, rev. Latin “VOT” / “X” / “MVLT” / “XX” enwreathed,
“P…N…” – centenionalis (perhaps double nummus) – struck a bit off
center and the flan as usual is roughly trimmed; both sides have circles of large dots around the
impressive design. Obverse is the left-facing bearded emperor, holding a shield and spear—imagery for
Iulianus as the supreme military commander. Most of the legend is intact, with a break common to 11
mints. Reverse enwreathed vow is a formula popular on the bronze coins of the Fourth (see. Maier 2018
#225 and Coins 244 and 245) and Fifth Centuries: here, a commemoration of the vows on the tenth
anniversary of rule—even though Iulianus did not last that long—with more vows for his hoped for 20th
anniversary. The exergue has traces of at least 3 letters, two of which are clear enough to identify the
mint, though the top oval of the wreath does not have the eagle that is usual for Constantina,
rededicated as such from Arelate in 353 by Constantius after the defeat of the usurper Magnentius. In
late 362 Iulianus reformed the coinage, instituting, or reinstituting, two larger denominations. Coin 241
is a representative of the small AE2 (21-24 mm) or large AE3, here called centenionalis to distinguish
from the still-circulating, de-silvered and no-silver small-AE3 nummus (Coins 239 and 240), of which the
centenionalis might reasonably be considered to have passed as a double. More impressive still was the
billon AE1 (> 24 mm) with a “pagan” bull reverse that has been called a double maiorina in contrast to
the billon AE2 struck for a few years beginning in 348 (e.g., Maier 2018 #235)—though that term is
misleading insofar as the intrinsic value was not much more than that of the maiorina. Still, the 2
percent fine AE1 Bull was intrinsically worth about eight times Coin 241, and it may well have been
tariffed at ten times as much—perhaps an example of the decargyrus, the silvered piece of ten. Ex-
Anything Anywhere. See Depeyrot (1992), Harl (1996), Hahn and Metlich (2000), López Sánchez (2003),
Abdy (2012), López Sánchez (2012), Sear 2014 (#19165), Pina and Marín (2018 type 61), Kurth (accessed
4/10/2018, #RIC VIII Arles 324), and NumisWiki (accessed 10/18/2018).
242A. Gratianus, 367-383, of the Western Empire of the Romans,

Thessalonica mint (Greece): bronze 16 mm, 1.75 g – obv. Monarch, Latin
“…ATIA…” – die axis 4:30, rev. Victoria, “…_REI…”, “A” – centenionalis – dies
a bit too large for planchet. Though corroded and dirty, enough details are clear to identify type of
Victoria advancing left holding wreath at left and palm branch over shoulder, with legend SECVRITAS
133
REIPVBLICAE—Security of the Republic—and sub-type, struck at Thessalonica for Gratianus. Obverse is
diademed bust right with a few letters of the legend discernible at left. Occupying most of the flan
reverse is Victoria, with part of the palm branch(?) hanging down the front of her head. A few letters at
upper right and officina mark A at left center are discernible. Victoria was a popular device for the
reverse of Roman coins from the late Third Century through the Fifth (e.g., Maier 2018 #217, 222, 223,
and 230; and Coins 246, 247, 250, and 253). Produced until 378, in large quantities in the early years of
the Valentinian Dynasty, this type is quite common. Ex- Anything Anywhere, my attribution. See
Depeyrot (1992), Sear (2014 #20113), Kurtz (accessed 7/17/2018), Pina and Marín (2018 type 102), and
Esty (2018 type 6).
242B. Valentinian Dynasty of the Romans, 364-392, perhaps Siscia mint

(Croatia): bronze 13 mm, 1.90 g – obv. Monarch – die axis 5, rev. Victoria, Latin
“…_REIPV…” – centenionalis – AE4 planchet struck with AE3 dies; legend is visible
only at right reverse. Despite the exergue mint mark being off the flan, the artistic style used for Victoria
is a clue that might indicate minting at Siscia. Though no symbols in the reverse fields are evident here,
both Siscia and Thessalonica used a large variety of such for their issues. The type was first struck in 364
or 365 as part of reforms by Valentinianus I that included improvement in the purity of the gold and
silver coinage; continuation of the increased issue of silver coins, begun about 355, such that there
seems to have been real circulation alongside bronze; and demonetization of billon coins in 371. The
AE3 bronze centenionalis of the Valentinian Dynasty, if indeed it was the same denomination as Coin
241, was reduced from roughly 3 g under Iulianus to a nominal weight of 2.25 to 2.5 g, and it became
the only small-change denomination, with an official tariff of five or six thousand denarii—4,500 or
about 3,000 nummi to the solidus—per Harl and G. Depeyrot respectively, the two numismatists who
have expressed the most interest in the value of base-metal coins during the Fourth Century. Ex-
unrecorded, my attribution. See Depeyrot (1992), Harl (1996), Moorhead (2012), Sear (2014), Pina and
Marín (2018 type 102), Esty (2018 type 6), and Bagnall and Bransbourg (2019).
242C. Valentinianus I, 364-375, Western Empire; Valens, 364-378, Eastern

Empire; or Valentinianus II, 375-392, Western Empire, of the Romans:
bronze 13 mm, 1.45 g – obv. Monarch, Latin “… VA…” – die axis 4:30, rev. Victoria
– centenionalis – dies too large for ragged planchet, which is comparatively light weight; crusty and
corroded. Though the type is certainly right-facing, diademed monarch and left-advancing Victoria, only
two letters are legible, on the obverse, which is enough to narrow the range of emperors. Still, this coin
could be SECVRITAS REIPVBLICAE, or an AE4 issue of VICTORIA AVGGG from Roma sometime during the
period 375 to 378, or an issue of VICTORIA AVGGG, AE3 becoming AE4, from Siscia, Italian mints, and
Gallic mints from 378 or 379 to 392. Less likely is VICTORIA AVGGG from Roma early in the reign of
Valentinianus III (cf. Coin 253). Given that production of small change seems to have declined during the
370s, surely there were unofficial issues of Valentinian coins as well (see also Coin 243C). Ex-
unrecorded, my attribution. See Depeyrot (1992), Sear (2014), Esty (6 and 12), Pina and Marín (2018
type 102 and 100).
134
243A. Probably Valens of the Romans, Thessalonica mint (Greece):
bronze 17 mm, 1.80 g, Latin “DN VALE…_ … A…” – obv. Monarch – die axis
4:30, rev. Monarch, labarum, captive, Latin “…LORIA RO_ …ARORV…”, “M”,
“A” – centenionalis – almost a correct module for dies, though flan is thin.
Obverse, shallowly struck and corroded, has the usual impersonal right-facing diademed bust with
enough of the letters visible to posit a short legend: Valens rather than Valentinianus. At upper right two
letters A of different sizes are close to each other, evidence that Coin 243A is an overstrike. Reverse, in
better condition, shows emperor advancing right, looking back at a captive he is dragging and holding a
labarum at right. Most of the legend is legible, and M in the left field and officina mark A in the right
serve to identify the mint despite the blurred exergue: Thessalonica, struck sometime between 367 and
378. Several hundred sub-types of GLORIA ROMANORVM Emperor Dragging Captive have been
observed for this type: variables include about 20 different obverse legend breaks for six emperors, 14
mints, and many officina and control symbols. Ex- unrecorded, my attribution. See Sear (2014 #19753),
Pina and Marín (2018 type 42), and Kurth (accessed 6/22/2018, #RIC IX Thessalonica 31).
243B. Valentinianus I or Valens of the Romans, Constantina mint

(France): bronze 16 mm, 1.80 g – obv. Monarch – die axis 12, rev. Monarch,
labarum, captive, Latin “CONST” – centenionalis – thin planchet a bit too
small for dies, which were probably shallowly struck. Although reverse is more worn than obverse,
enough to make identification of the type difficult, the only legible letters are reverse, in the exergue,
which has the unusual formula CONST for the Constantina mint, struck 364 to 367. Unfortunately, none
of the field marks that are characteristic of the sub-types are visible: OF in the left field and I, II, or III in
the right. Aside from Emperor Dragging Captive, GLORIA ROMANORVM was used for several base-metal
types from about 325 to 425 (e.g., Coins 248 and 251). Ex- unrecorded, my attribution. See Sear (2014
#19429 and 19724), Pina and Marín (2018 type 42), and Kurth (accessed 6/22/2018, #RIC IX Arles 7a-7d).
243C. Perhaps Arcadius of the Eastern Empire of the Romans, 383-408,

probably unofficial issue: bronze 12 mm, 2.25 g – obv. Monarch, blundered
Latin “DJAXA…” – die axis 4:30, rev. Monarch, labarum, captive, blundered Latin
“LSОϽϽ…” – centenionalis – thick AE4 planchet struck with larger dies, not necessarily AE3 size; nice
dark patina. Though this is certainly GLORIA ROMANORVM Emperor Dragging Captive, the inferior
imagery and blundered legends, approximated above, mark it as an unofficial issue, albeit full weight,
perhaps heavily leaded. This type was produced for the four emperors of the Valentinian Dynasty until
378, apparently circulating alongside SECVRITAS REIPVBLICAE as the same denomination; and then again
for Valentinianus II, Theodosius I, and Arcadius from 383 to 392 at Thessalonica, Siscia, the Italian mints,
and Treveri, perhaps at a doubling in value as part of the currency reforms of Gratianus, for which see
the next. Ex- unrecorded, my attribution. See Doyen (2014), Sear (2014), Pina and Marín (2018 type 42),
Kurth (accessed 6/22/2018), and Esty (2018 type 5).
135
244. Valentinianus II of the Romans, eastern mint (Egypt or Turkey):
bronze 14 mm, 1.25 g – obv. Monarch, Latin “…VAL…” – die axis 6, rev. Latin
“VOT” / “XX” / “MVLT” / “XXX” enwreathed – nummus (half centenionalis) –
planchet too small for the AE4 dies and reverse off-center to left, with green patina covering all surfaces.
Obverse is the usual right-facing bust with enough letters at far left to identify the emperor. Reverse
celebrates the vows of 20 years of rule renewed for 30, which refers to the dynasty rather than the
young emperor, who was no more than four years old when this type was first struck for him in 378, at
all the eastern mints except Constantinopolis through 383; a minority opinion is 383 as the begin date.
From 378 to 381 Gratianus re-introduced the 1.25 to 1.5 g AE4 denomination, here designated as
nummus to distinguish from the AE3 centenionalis, which continued to be struck; and a 5.25 g AE2
maiorina, apparently otherwise known as decargyrus despite the coin having no silver. Although the
values may have been intended as 1, 2, and 4 nummi—perhaps 5, 10, and 20 thousand denarii—large
disparities in coin weights (cf. Coins 245A and 245B) probably were a major factor behind complaints
that would be lodged in the Roman Senate a few years later over complex exchange rates for nummi to
the solidus, one result being the practice of bulk exchange by weight. Ex- unrecorded, my attribution.
See Depeyrot (1992), Harl (1996), Moorhead (2012), Doyen (2014), Sear (2014), Kurth (accessed
4/10/2018), Esty (2018 type 24), and Pina and Marín (2018 type 66b).
245A. Theodosius I of the Romans, 379-395, Antiochia mint (Turkey):

bronze 12 mm, 2.15 g – obv. Monarch, Latin “D N THEODO_SIVS P F AVG” – die
axis 12, rev. Latin “…O…” / “X” / “MVLT” / “XX” enwreathed, “AN…” – nummus –
thick planchet slightly too small for the AE4 dies, which themselves are substantially smaller than those
for Coin 244. Obverse has fair amount of detail for the right-facing portrait while reverse, struck off-
center toward top of the flan, shows the part of the dotted border as well as the enwreathed vows of 10
years renewed for 20 and enough of the exergue to establish the mint as Antiochia but not the officina.
Though the type was struck for Theodosius from 379 to 388 at 10 mints, an attribution of 383 and later
for this sub-type seems reasonable given the small module. Another example of this common type
follows. Ex- Numismatics International auction, my attribution. See Sear (2014 #20588), Kurth (accessed
4/10/2018), Esty (2018 type 26), and Pina and Marín (2018 type 61).
245B. Theodosius I of the Romans: bronze 13 mm, 0.75 g – obv. Monarch,

Latin “D N THEODO_...S P F AVG” – die axis 12, rev. Latin “O” / “VT” / “X” /
“MVLT” / “XX” enwreathed – nummus – thin, light-weight yet not brittle planchet,
slightly too small for dies. Obverse could hardly be more different than Coin 245A: long-necked, young
head, which along with the low weight might have been taken in the past as an indication of a coin of a
young Theodosius II—an attribution almost universally no longer accepted. Also noteworthy are the
distinctive engraving of the letter T, especially reverse, and the placement of the O above the V and T in
what should be the unbroken first line of the reverse legend. Theodosius I was originally invested as
emperor in the east by the last of the Valentinians, and he is sometimes called “the Great” because of
his fervent embrace of Christianity (see Coin 246A). Ex- Anything Anywhere. See Sear (2014), Kurth
(accessed 4/10/2018), Pina and Marín (2018 type 61), and Esty (2018).
136
246A. Valentinianus II of the Romans, Thessalonica mint (Greece): bronze 13
mm, 1.00 g – obv. Monarch, Latin “D N VALENTINIANϒS … A…” – die axis 6, rev.
Victoria, captive, Latin “…BLICAE”, P-headed cross – nummus – AE4 planchet
slightly too small for the AE4 dies; heavily patinated, especially reverse, which has design more
discernible on the right side. Obverse is a small right-facing bust with young features. Reverse is Victoria
advancing left, looking right toward the captive she drags. Also at right are the visible letters of the
legend, which in full would be SALVS REIPVBLICAE, the well-being of the republic. In the left field is a P-
headed cross or cross-rho, a variation on the Christogram (cf. Coin 262); by this time Christian
symbolism is part of the design of many if not most coins. Although the exergue is unreadable, the
obverse legend with no break and the reverse left-field symbol indicate the mint of Thessalonica, struck
388 to 392. By 400 at the latest the official exchange seems to have been 6000 nummi to the solidus, but
undoubtedly market rates were highly variable and many transactions would have been made by
weight. The AE4 SALVS REIPVBLICAE Victoria and Captive was struck in huge quantities, and several
more examples follow. Ex- unrecorded, my attribution. See Depeyrot (1992), Harl (1996), Moorhead
(2012), Doyen (2014), Sear (2014 #20343), Pina and Marín (2018 type 135), and Esty (2018 type 39).
246B. Valentinianus II of the Romans, possibly unofficial issue: bronze 12

mm, 1.00 g – obv. Monarch, Latin “…ALENTI…” – die axis 1, rev. Victoria, captive,
Latin “…LIϽ…” – nummus – AE4 planchet too small for dies. Obverse has very small
head and like Coin 246A, the legend is unbroken. Reverse image is ambiguous but seems to be Victoria
with a very long, thin wing at right and a captive between her legs and the wing. The bit of legend that
shows at right is blundered, possibly a sign of an unofficial strike. Imitations, found in small quantities in
northern France and Belgium for example, continued to be produced. A financial incentive for those
issues must have existed, notwithstanding the conclusion of some numismatists that the minting of
small change was a loss for the state. In any event, the begin date for SALVS REIPVBLICAE Victoria and
Captive has not been settled: 383 or 386 or 388. In the East, the last year of official strikes was 395; at
Aquileia and Roma, production continued until 402 or later. Many of those coins made their way to
several sites in northern Gaul well into the Fifth Century and even the Sixth in a few, such as Reims,
contrary to hypotheses that circulation of copper coin ended there by 420 at the latest. Ex- unrecorded,
my attribution. See Doyen (2014), Kurth (accessed 4/10/2018), Pina and Marín (2018 type 135), and Esty
(2018 type 39); cf. Wigg-Wolf (2016).
246C. Theodosius I of the Romans, Alexandria, Antiochia, or Aquileia mint

(Egypt, Turkey, or Udine, Italy): bronze 12 mm, 0.90 g – obv. Monarch, Latin
“…ODO_SIV…” – die axis 6, rev. Victoria, captive, P-headed cross, Latin “A…” – nummus –
irregular AE4 planchet too small for dies and light weight. Obverse, though worn, is a good-quality
portrait. Crusty reverse shows blurred Victoria with captive, left-field symbol, and exergue. The type was
struck at 9 mints for this emperor. Ex- unrecorded, my attribution. See Sear (2014), Pina and Marín
(2018 type 135), and Kurth (accessed 6/18/2018).
137
246D. Arcadius of the Romans, Antiochia mint (Turkey): bronze 12 mm,
1.10 g – obv. Monarch, Latin “D N ARCADIVS …” – die axis 12, rev. Victoria,
captive, Latin “…_PVBLICAE”, P-headed cross, Greek “…Γ” – nummus – oblong
planchet not quite large enough for dies, but very well-preserved example. Reverse has Victoria and
captive as stick figures but in fine detail, including the trophy that Victoria carries over her right shoulder
and the P-headed cross in the left field. Though only Γ in the exergue is clear, that is enough to establish
the preceding letters as the mint mark ANT, a sub-type struck from 383 or 388 to 392. Ex- unrecorded,
my attribution. See Sear (2014 #20852), Pina and Marín (2018 type 135), and Kurth (accessed
6/18/2018, #RIC IX Antioch 67d).
246E. Arcadius of the Romans, Antiochia mint (Turkey): bronze 13 mm,

1.50 g – obv. Monarch, Latin “… ARCADIVS P F AV…” – die axis 6, rev. Victoria,
captive, Latin “SALVS REI_...LICAE”, Cross, Latin and Greek “ANΓ” – nummus –
relatively heavy planchet not quite large enough for dies; somewhat worn but most detail still evident.
Ostensibly a product of the same officina as Coin 246D, despite the shortened mint mark, Coin 246E has
a notably thicker style, including the lettering as well as the figures, with a cross in the left field replacing
the cross-rho. Ex- unrecorded, my attribution. See Sear (2014 cf. #20853), Pina and Marín (2018 type
135), and Kurth (accessed 6/18/2018, #RIC IX Antiochia 67d).
246F. Arcadius of the Romans, Constantinopolis mint (Turkey): bronze 13

mm, 0.60 g – obv. Monarch, Latin “D N ARCADIVS …” – die axis 6, rev. Victoria,
captive, Latin “SALVS REI_...CAE”, P-headed cross, Latin and Greek “CONSΓ” –
nummus – struck with too-large dies, as usual, and the very light, thin flan is corroded. Nonetheless,
much of the legends and all the exergue is legible. This sub-type has been attributed as 388 to 392.
Fourth and Fifth Century Roman bronzes—AE3 and AE4 of the eastern mints especially—have been
found in large quantities in southern India and Sri Lanka, where they undoubtedly served as small
change as well as they became models for imitative coinages. Ex- unrecorded, my attribution. See
Mitchiner (1978 #5164 and cf. 5165-5167), Sear (2014 #20847), Hoppál et al. (2018), Pina and Marín
(2018 type 135), and Kurth (accessed 6/18/2018, #RIC IX Constantinople 86c).
246G. Probably Honorius, Western Empire of the Romans, 393-423, Roma

mint (Italy) or unofficial issue: bronze 12 mm, 0.85 g – obv. Monarch, Latin
“…_IVS P F A…” – die axis 10:30, rev. Victoria, captive – nummus – irregular AE4
planchet too small for dies. Perfunctory imagery has a minimalist charm. Obverse has large legible
letters at right. Reverse has no detectable letters, but a trace of p-headed cross is at lower left. The
obverse legend break and the simple style point to Honorius as the emperor and Roma as the mint, or
just as likely, another unofficial issue (cf. Coin 246B). By this time imitations—some of which were cast
and others made of lead—seem to have ceased in Britain and perhaps the Danube and Balkan provinces
but continued to be produced elsewhere. Ex- unrecorded, my attribution. See Bijovsky (2012),
Moorhead (2012), Reece (2012), Doyen (2014), Moorhead and Walton (2014), Wigg-Wolf (2016), Pina
and Marín (2018 type 135), and WildWinds (accessed 10/30/2018).
138
247. Arcadius or Honorius of the Romans, Antiochia mint (Turkey):
bronze 16 mm, 1.90 g – obv. Monarch, Latin “…_V…” – die axis 6, rev.
Monarch, Victoria, Latin “V…_EXERCITI”, “AN…” – centenionalis – crusty,
unevenly patinated coin struck on AE3 planchet a bit too small for dies.
Obverse is the usual diademed bust right, with traces of legend around. Reverse is emperor at left,
facing a smaller Victoria who is about to crown him with a wreath. Legend, visible mostly at right, would
be VIRTVS EXERCITI in full: the valor of the army. Enough of the exergue letters are on the flan to
identify the mint but not the officina. VIRTVS EXERCITI Victoria Crowning Emperor was produced at the
six eastern mints in Egypt and Turkey from 395 to 401 or 402 as part of yet another round of reforms,
where Honorius demonetized the AE2 maiorina in the West and greatly reduced production of the AE3
centenionalis at western mints. Ex- unrecorded, my attribution. See Moorhead (2012), Sear (2014), Pina
and Marín (2018 type 85), and Esty (2018 type 45).
248. Tentative attribution: Aelia Eudoxia of the Romans, eastern mint

(Egypt or Turkey): bronze 12 mm, 1.30 g – obv. Monarch – die axis 6, rev.
Monarch – centenionalis – crusty, worn, unevenly patinated AE3 type, GLORIA
ROMANORVM, struck on irregular AE4 planchet. Obverse has a diademed head right; reverse seems to
have the Manus Dei, the hand of God holding a diadem, above the head of the enthroned empress,
which is the key to the attribution. This type was produced for the wife of Arcadius at five of the six
eastern mints in Egypt and Turkey from 395 to 403 or 404; but the low weight as well as the miserable
condition of Coin 248 could be interpreted as rather a reduced AE3 CONCORDIA AVG from a later
empress: Placidia, Eudocia, or Pulcheria, from 423 to 425, by which time the distinction between the
putative centenionalis and the nummus seems to have become blurred. It is somewhat difficult to see
Coin 248 as a centenionalis given that in 396 or 397 Arcadius and Honorius attempted to restore that
denomination to about 2.5 g, and the nummus to 1.5 g and 5400 to the solidus, though perhaps this
specimen was struck prior to that decree; and of course, unofficial issue can’t be ruled out. In any case
these reforms were intended to set the ratio of gold to copper at 1 to 1800, or a solidus for 25 Roman
pounds of bronze coin; and gold to silver at 1 to 18, a very high ratio that must have contributed
mightily, within a few years, to the disappearance of silver coin from circulation and the severe
reduction in production. Ex- Anything Anywhere, my attribution. See Grierson and Blackburn (1986),
Harl (1996), Hahn and Metlich (2000), Bijovsky (2012), Sear (2014), Pina and Marín (2018 type 85; cf.
type 9), Esty (2018 type 45), and Kurth (accessed 6/22/2018).

249 (renumbered from 167B). Kidarites, Samarkand mint (Uzbekistan): silver or
billon 9 mm, 0.25+ g – obv. Monarch – die axis 12, scyphate rev. Archer – example of
one of the latest issues of Monarch and Archer from Samarkand (cf. Maier 2017B
#167A), with large-featured head on the obverse and interesting patterns making up the archer, much
like a sub-type attributed to a Fourth or Fifth-Century Kidarite occupation of Samarkand, which has an
inscription in front of the king’s face—an area snapped off from Coin 167B. An interesting question is
the denomination system for this centuries-long coinage of Monarch and Archer. Generally, these coins
are attributed as obols, but an alternative proposal is an almost 4 g drachm that gradually became 0.3 g
139
silver or billon, while another is silver drachm, hemidrachm, obol, and maybe hemiobol, distinguished by
module. There was also a copper of the same type. Ex- Early World Coins, my re-attribution. See Zeimal
(1996), Mitchiner (2004, cf. #1554-1555, attributed to Third Century BCE Chorasmia), Grenet (2005),
Cribb (2010), La Vaissière (2011), Bakker (2017), and Zeno.ru (accessed 3/25/2019).
250. Honorius of the Romans, Antiochia mint (Turkey): bronze 16 mm,

1.90 g – obv. Monarch, Latin “D N HONORI_VS …” – die axis 11, rev.
Constantinopolis, Latin “…ORDI_A AVGG”, Latin and Greek “ANTΓ” –
centenionalis – planchet a bit too small for dies but a well-preserved coin with many fine details and
most lettering visible. Obverse front-facing emperor is cuirassed and helmeted, holding a spear behind
his neck and a shield at right. Reverse, enthroned Constantinopolis holds a small wreath-bearing Victoria
at right. Although Coin 250 is much more impressive than the Coin 248 centenionalis, its weight is not
very close to the 2.5 g standard. This type was produced at four eastern mints in Turkey from 401 to
403, and it is not commonly encountered. Ex- unrecorded, my attribution. See Sear (2014 #20995), Pina
and Marín (2018 type 6), Esty (2018 type 47), and Kurth (accessed 6/22/2018, #RIC X 99).
251A. Honorius of the Romans (Egypt or Turkey): bronze 16 mm, 1.85 g –

obv. Monarch, star, Latin “… HONORI_…” – die axis 12, rev. Monarchs, Latin
“…ORI_A ROMA_NORVM” – centenionalis – oblong planchet carefully struck to
include the type and much of the legends, all with a beautiful dark patina. Obverse is the usual right-
facing, diademed bust, but with a star behind his head. Reverse introduces a depiction of the three
emperors, a heretofore unique motif. If the center figure, here the young Theodosius II, is the most
important, as posited by L. Brubaker and H. Tobler, then the “Glory of the Romans” is the continuation
of the Theodosian Dynasty with the investiture of the son of Arcadius and Aelia Eudoxia. Following their
interpretation of the iconography, the second rank is held by the figure at left: is it Arcadius, the senior
emperor, or Honorius, because Theodosius surely is facing his father Arcadius at right? Or perhaps P.
Grierson is correct in asserting that the second rank is at the right? In any case, the AE3 GLORIA
ROMANORVM was produced at the eastern mints as the Three Emperors type from 403 or 406 to 408,
continuing as the Two Emperors type until the death of Honorius. Ex- unrecorded, my attribution. See
Grierson (1999), Brubaker and Tobler (2000), Sear (2014 #21007-21012), Pina and Marín (2018 type 47),
Esty (2018 type 48), and Kurth (accessed 6/22/2018).
251B. Arcadius, Honorius, or Theodosius II, Eastern Empire, 402-450, of the

Romans, perhaps unofficial issue: bronze 12 mm, 1.80 g – obv. Monarch – die
axis 1:30, rev. Monarchs – centenionalis – thick, small planchet shallowly struck with
AE3 dies, and reverse off center toward top of flan with two extraneous thick lines that might be part of
an under-type. The imagery, though little more than silhouettes of the bust right obverse and three
emperors reverse, seems considerably cruder than Coin 251A but for all that might still be an issue of an
eastern mint rather than an unofficial strike. By this time bronze coinage was increasingly leaded and,
the standard for the centenionalis was reduced from about 2.5 to 1.9 grams. By 425 the centenionalis
would be demonetized, both east and west. Three distinct monetary areas were now beginning to take
shape, per Harl: eastern, from Egypt to the Danube provinces, all under the control of Constantinopolis;
140
central, including Italy, North Africa, and Mediterranean Gaul and Iberia; and western, most of the
Iberian Peninsula as well as most of Gaul, the Rhine area, and Britain. This analysis should not be taken
as hard and fast, however, at there was still a fair amount of fluidity well into the Sixth Century: not only
did nummi from Italy move in quantity to northern Gaul and Palaestina, for example, but centenionales
from the east, beginning with this type, went at least as far west as Italy, and small copper coins from
northern Africa under the Vandals (e.g., Coin 258) have been found all over the Mediterranean and even
as far north as the Netherlands and Romania. Ex- unrecorded, my attribution. See Harl (1996),
Moorhead (2007), Bijovsky (2012), Moorhead (2012), Doyen (2014), Doyen (2015), Morrisson (2016),
Pina and Marín (2018 type 47) and Esty (2018 type 48).

252. Tentative attribution: Simhavarman II of the Pallava Kingdom, ca.
436-470, perhaps Kanchipuram mint (Tamil Nadu, India): potin 16 mm,
1.35 g – obv. Bull, snake, conch – assumed die axis 12, rev. Chakra – thin flan
with beautiful black patina, irregular or broken but in either case struck off center. Obverse is a Brahma
bull facing right, the dynastic symbol of the Pallava Kingdom, showing a large dewlap but no head.
Above is a wavy line meant as a snake, and across the top, three symbols, of which only the faintest, at
right, can be identified as a conch. Because this iconography replicates in part that of a seal on a copper-
plate land grant by Simhavarman II, the key to the attribution of several coin types, the left-most
symbols may be meant as srivatsa–representative of Sri, goddess of good fortune—and crescent. On the
other hand, the middle symbol, just behind the snake’s head, does not look like either a srivatsa or a
crescent. Reverse is an elaborate chakra (cf. Maier 2018 #228) and traces of an under-type at upper left.
Bull and Chakra is known in several sub-types, and other types with similar obverse iconography,
attributed to this king and perhaps some of his successors, feature reverse srivatsa, svastika, or conch,
and less common, tree in railing, elephant, or ship. Generally, these coins are 20 ±2 mm and 2 to 4 g,
struck in copper, bronze, and potin. Their value was high enough that cast counterfeits were produced.
The Pallava Kingdom, one of the successor states to the Satavahana Kingdom (e.g., Maier 2017A #121
and Maier 2017B #129 and 157), at its height included much of coastal Andhra Pradesh as well as Tamil
Nadu. Unlike the Satavahana, the Pallava struck no silver, and unlike their contemporary rivals, no gold.
Their initial coinage, lead types from the Third Century CE, was followed by copper, bronze, and potin
struck intermittently from the Fourth until well into the Seventh Century. Ex- Anything Anywhere, my
attribution. See Krishnamurthy (2004 cf. 61-63 and 214-216), Cribb (2013), Pieper (2013 cf. #749-750),
Bhandare (2015), and Zeno.ru (accessed 7/11/2018).
253A. Valentinianus III of the Western Empire of the Romans, 425-455,

Roma mint (Italy): leaded bronze 11 mm, 1.15 g – obv. Monarch – die axis 12, rev.
Victoria, captive – nummus – characteristically dumpy planchet, too small for dies as usual, and crusty
and corroded but fair amount of reverse detail. Obverse, struck a little off-center to right, has a long-
faced, diademed bust to right. Reverse Victoria is at left dragging captive at right, and she almost
certainly holds a wreath at left despite an encrusted flan crack. Only traces of lettering are visible on
either side of the coin, and so the wreath is the key to the type: legend would be VICTORIA AVGG, an
acknowledgment of Theodosius II in the Eastern Empire, and usually a Christogram is at lower left—a
141
type produced only at Roma from circa 430 to 437, at a standard roughly 1.1 g that was instituted no
later than 425 in both the Eastern and Western Empires. In 445 another decree specified that money
changers would get a solidus from the state for 7200 nummi so long as they gave the public at least 7000
for the same exchange. At that time the daily wage for a cavalryman was 180 nummi, which was also a
typical price for a modius of wheat (cf. Coin 239B) in what was left of Roman Africa after the Vandal
conquest. Ex- Anything Anywhere, my attribution. See Depeyrot (1992), Harl (1996), Hahn and Metlich
(2000), Moorhead (2012), Canovaro et al. (2013), Bransbourg (2015), Pina and Marín (2018 type 145),
and Esty (2018 type 70).
253B. Tentative attribution: Valentinianus III of the Western Empire of the

Romans, Roma mint (Italy): leaded bronze 11 mm, 0.85 g – obv. Monarch – die
axis 1:30, rev. Victoria – nummus – corroded and dirty, but almost certainly another Victoria type struck
with dies too big for the small, thick planchet, which again is characteristic of issues from Roma for
Valentinianus III. Several Victoria types were struck in large numbers for Valentinianus and his father
Honorius. Some debate exists over whether Italian production declined dramatically in the 450s, by
which time the Western Empire was little more than Italy, itself hard pressed by waves of invasions.
Some numismatists suspect that lack of recovery of later issues might be due to their small size and
difficult identification because of poor strikes and poor preservation. In any event, the Victoria types
were imitated extensively: for example, at an unofficial mint probably near Aquileia, which had been
closed in the late 420s, and somewhere in the vicinity of Athens. Ex- Anything Anywhere, my attribution.
See Burrell (2007), Bijovsky (2012), Moorhead (2012), Asolati (2016), Morrisson (2016), and Esty (2018
types 66, 69, 70).

254. Skandagupta of the Gupta, ca. 455-467/480 (Madhya Pradesh or
Gujarat, India): silver 13 mm, 1.75 g – obv. Monarch – die axis 6, rev. Bull,
Brahmi transliterated “Parama Bhaga Sri Skandagupta Kramaditya” – drachm
(perhaps rupaka, karshapana, purana) – irregular, cracked flan but otherwise carefully struck, though
obverse die was a bit too large. Obverse is the sacred image of the maharaja, distinct from his
predecessors insofar as he wears no mustache. Reverse is a Brahma bull facing right, with a surrounding
legend that begins at 6:30 h and continues clockwise, with the second word abbreviated, roughly
translated: great devotee of Vishnu, Lord Skandagupta Kramaditya. Many sub-types exist, based upon
the legend. Coin 254, for example, omits not just the imperial epithet maharajadhiraja but also the
several known forms of its abbreviation. The Gupta first struck silver coins circa 410, with the conquest
by Chandragupta II and Kumaragupta of the Mahakshatrapa (e.g., Coin 237), from whose widely
accepted currency the Gupta adapted the type, style, and metrology for their own extensive silver
coinage. Post-Gupta regimes, in turn, continued the Mahakshatrapa/Gupta-style coinage (e.g., Coins 255
and 256), and S. Bhandare, questioning the attribution to the Vaishnavite Gupta of money with the
Shaivite imagery of the Brahma bull, has suggested that Coin 254 might be post-Gupta as well. Ex- Early
World Coins. See Mitchiner (1978 #4879-4882), Gupta (1992), Bhandare (2006), Tye (2009 #755), Bud
(2013), Pieper (2013), Bhandare (2015), Gautam (2016?), Bakker (2017), and Zeno.ru (accessed
6/26/2018).
142
255. Skandagupta of the Gupta, probably post-reign imitation (India): billon
11x9 mm, 2.00 g – obv. Monarch – assumed die axis 10:30, rev. Altar, Brahmi
perhaps transliterated “Sri Skandagupta” – drachm – crudely struck on debased
metal and so undoubtedly the altar type, though the altar is barely discernible. Obverse is bottom half of
bust, and reverse has a few visible Brahmi letters. Like the Monarch and Bull, Coin 255 represents a new
type introduced by Skandagupta for use in the western provinces. However, the majority of the crude
Altar drachms are post-Gupta imitations, probably struck in Gujarat and found across northern India. Ex-
Early World Coins. See Mitchiner (1978 #4874-4878), Tye (2009 #756), Pieper (2013 #876-877),
Bhandare (2015), and Zeno.ru (accessed 6/26/2018).
256A. Maitraka Kingdom of Valabhi (Gujarat, India): silver or billon 15 mm,

1.75 g – obv. Monarch – die axis 10:30, rev. Trident, Brahmi legend – drachm –
low-grade silver planchet lightly and carelessly struck, with obverse off center,
showing only the face and necklace of the Mahakshatrapa/Gupta-style image, but with three dots
serving as the mouth and chin. Reverse is a trident, the emblem of Valabhi, with curvy outer tines. The
encircling Brahmi legend is visible from about 9 to 3 h, and though the letters are beyond my capability
to decipher, they match catalogued specimens described as later issues. Struck by the Maitraka for
roughly 300 years, perhaps beginning during vassalage to the Gupta, the type may well have
commenced under a Sarvva Dynasty that was subject to the Mahakshatrapa. Ex- Early World Coins. See
Deyell (1977), Mitchiner (1978 #4892-4896), Bhandare (2006), Tye (2009 #757), Pieper (2013 #914), and
Zeno.ru (accessed 6/29/2018).
256B. Maitraka Kingdom of Valabhi (India): billon 11 mm, 1.95 g – obv. Monarch
– die axis 12, rev. Trident, Brahmi inscription – drachm – thick flan with copper
appearance, struck with too-big dies. Obverse is a detailed portrait of fierce if not
grotesque appearance. While the reverse has a trident in a different style from Coin 256A, the legend
has similarly well-formed letters. Still, Coin 256B is probably a later issue if only because the metal is
more debased. Though the Maitraka Dynasty had many kings, the legend on their drachms, unlike those
of the Mahakshatrapa and Gupta, seems to have been frozen. Ex- Early World Coins. See Mitchiner
(1978 #4897-4898), Pieper (2013 #915), and Zeno.ru (accessed 6/29/2018).
257. Marcianus of the Romans, 450-457, Antiochia or Constantinopolis mint

(Turkey): bronze 10 mm, 1.05 g – obv. Monarch, Latin “… N MA…” – die axis 12,
concave rev. Latin “MARCIANVS” Monogram enwreathed, Greek “Θ” – nummus (kerma, lepton) –
thick module too small for dies. Shallowly struck obverse has small head right and traces of legend from
bottom left to top right, interrupted by two flan cracks at right. Reverse is dominated by the monogram
of Marcianus and a large S within the legs. Above is theta, which narrows the possible mints to two of
the six—including Thessalonica but not Alexandria—that struck the type; other symbols are star, cross,
X, and cross within circle, as well as no symbol. D. Kurth has identified 20 varieties of this monogram, of
which four were used for imitations by the Vandals. The wreath is visible only at upper right and left,
and the exergue is off the flan. Though the evidence for Eastern production during the second half of the
Fifth Century has been interpreted variously, the most compelling scenario is that suggested by Harl and
143
elaborated by Moorhead and G. Bijovsky: production of the nummus remained strong, even as the
weight and thus the value against gold continued to slide downward and areas such as the lower
Danube were ill-supplied with small change. By this time if not earlier, too, sealed bags of counted or
weighed coins contained not just official strikes but were supplemented liberally with coins that were
demonetized, unofficial including cast and lead as well as struck copper, non-Roman, and even blanks.
Ex- Anything Anywhere, my attribution. See Depeyrot (1992), Harl (1996), Hahn and Metlich (2000),
Burrell (2007), Moorhead (2007), Bijovksy (2012), Guest (2012), Moorhead (2012), Sear (2014 #21395 &
21399), Pina and Marín (2018 cf. type 129), and Kurth (accessed 7/4/2018).

258. Vandals, probably Carthago mint (Carthage; Tunisia): copper 9 mm, 0.50 g –
obv. Monarch – die axis 12, rev. Latin “D” enwreathed with “IXI” – nummus – well-
made coin but dies struck on too-small planchet. Obverse is diademed bust right, with only half of the
head on the flan but enough to show a long neck and prominent chin and jaw. Whether this image
represents the Emperor of the Romans or the King of the Vandals and Alans is an unresolved question.
On the other hand, new finds of the type have come to light that invalidate the old conclusion that the
die axis was generally 3 or 9h. Reverse, the prominent D is universally interpreted as a mark of value,
with the majority opinion being 1/500 silver siliqua of 100 denarii, whereby five nummi make a denarius
and 12,000 equal a solidus. At the bottom of the wreath below the D, usually off the flan in catalogued
specimens, is an equally prominent elongated X bounded by I on either side. This symbol, which also
appears on the Monarch and Star nummus, is another mystery. The chronology of the D nummus,
moreover, is contentious. The majority opinion favors Gunthamund, king from 484 to 496, who did
indeed institute a silver coinage with marks of value but also royal legends in Latin. Equally likely, then,
is a “proto-Vandal” type, an anonymous municipal issue struck after the Star nummus, perhaps
sometime in the 460s or 470s to 484 or later. Another alternative, though not necessarily applicable to
these nummi, is espoused by A.M. Stahl: copper coinages of the Vandals and the Ostrogoths (e.g., Coin
264), both of which carry marks of value, started after the reforms of Anastasius rather than before,
contrary to the opinions of most numismatists. In any case, the Vandal currency system would
eventually include eight denominations, five of which were copper. As for the D nummus, the most
frequent find spots are in northern Africa and Italy. Ex- Early World Coins. See Wroth (1911 p. 35 #150-
151), Grierson and Blackburn (1986 #13-14), Harl (1996), Berndt and Steinacher (2008), Bijovsky (2012),
Stahl (2012), Morrisson (2016), and Gennari et. al (2018); cf. WildWinds (accessed 7/9/2018) and
Zeno.ru (accessed 7/11/2018); cf. Hahn (1973).

259. Northern Wei (China): cast copper 23 mm, 2.75 g – obv. Chinese transliterated
“Wu Zhu” – rev. full inner rim – qian – corroded, but clear characters, read right to
left. This Wu Zhu is one of several revivals of the Han coin of the realm (e.g., Maier
2017B #180) by various dynasties, especially during the Sixth Century. The issues can
be difficult to distinguish (cf. Coin 263), but this one has zhu that protrudes above the
hole, and so is probably one of several varieties—all of which have long, thin characters—of a commonly
encountered sub-type that was first cast in 510 during the Yong Ping era, whence the name of the sub-
144
type. Light and thin unofficial coins were produced as well. The Northern Wei Dynasty was a northern
Chinese empire ruled by the Toba people, northern “barbarians” who became Sinicized. In the last 60
years of their dominion, including the split into eastern and western (see Coin 263) dynasties, the Wei
produced a substantial coinage of good quality. Ex- Early World Coins, my re-attribution. See Mitchiner
(1978 cf. #5478), Sullivan (1979), Thierry (1988 Fig. D), Thierry (2001), Hartill (2005 cf. #10.23), and
260. Anastasius I of the Romaions (Byzantine Empire), 491-518,

Constantinopolis mint (Turkey): copper 19 mm, 3.95 g – obv. Monarch,
Latin “… N ANASTA_SIVS...” – die axis 7, flat rev. Greek “K”, cross, “B”,
countermark – 20 nummi (half follis) – worn example of small-module
reform coinage struck from 498 to 512; by this point Romaion, Vandal, and Ostrogoth coinages had
become copper rather than bronze. Obverse bust right is the “sacred image” of the emperor, a
characteristic portrayal going back to the earliest days of the Roman Dominate (e.g., Maier 2018 #218A
and 218B). The legend, though weak in spots and worn away at lower left, differs from catalogued
specimens in that the break is to the right of the top of the emperor’s head. Reverse is dominated by the
Greek letter K, which serves as the value mark. To the left is a cross and at right is the officina mark,
again in Greek, another characteristic—inscriptions mostly Latin but a little Greek, too—going back to
imperial coinage of the second half of the Third Century (e.g., Maier 2018 #205). A star should be above
K but instead there is perhaps an under-type. At bottom is the top half of a star, beneath which is a
punch-mark, probably a crescent or half-moon, that would have revalued Coin 260 as 10 nummi after
the standard weights for copper coinage were doubled in 512 (see Coin 261). Apparently, however,
punch-marking of the K denomination was much less common than for the 40 nummi. The small-module
coinage that was not re-validated by punch-mark was either demonetized or sent away, to Phoenice
Maritima Province for example, where a closed monetary system might have been in effect until the
middle of the century. In any event, this sub-type was struck from 507 to 512, at Nicomedia as well as
Constantinopolis. Impetus for the Anastasian reform surely was that the solidus was trading at too many
nummi, 16,800 at Constantinopolis in 498, such that an increasing amount of taxes was paid in kind; and
the tiny nummus (e.g., Coin 257), the only small-change coin in general circulation, was becoming too
expensive to produce in mass quantities, one expedient being miserable strikes with too-worn dies on
too-small planchets (e.g., Coin 253B). The new set of denominations included 10, 20, and 40 nummi, and
from 512, 5 nummi. Even if there was no new production of the nummus after 498—a debatable
proposition—the denomination continued to circulate, in some places for centuries, apparently as the
preferred coin in many areas of the empire. Ex- Anything Anywhere, my attribution. See Hahn (1973 cf.
#32), Sear (1987 #24), Harl (1996), Grierson (1999), Hahn and Metlich (2000 cf. #32), Burrell (2007),
Bijovsky (2012), Moorhead (2012), Mansfeld (2016 cf. #1.49), Morrisson (2016), Abou Diwan (2018),
WildWinds (accessed 7/6/2018), and Zeno.ru (accessed 7/12/2018).
145
261. Anastasius I of the Romaions,
Constantinopolis mint (Turkey): copper 36 mm,
17.05 g – obv. Monarch, Latin “D N ANASTA_SIVS PP
AVG” – die axis 6, rev. Greek “M”, cross, stars, “Є”,
Latin “CON” – 40 nummi (follis) – chipped obverse;
perimeter dotted circle is visible both sides, though
worn, on this large-module follis reminiscent of the
old sestertius. Obverse emperor is three-quarters facing with diademed head to right. Legend, which is
completely intact, is noteworthy for change from P F, Pius Felix, to PP, Perpetua; and AVG, where G
looks like an angular C or slightly curved Γ. Reverse, struck with a die smaller than the planchet, is
dominated by the value mark M, with a cross above, stars at each side, officina letter within the “legs,”
and mint mark in the exergue. Catalogues describe six-ray stars and eight-ray, but here, though the right
star has six rays, the left has six and a half, a doubled ray at 12 h. The number of rays and their direction
perhaps served as a control mark, certainly a die variety. As for the official tariff of the 40-nummi follis
against the solidus, values from 288 to 722 have been proposed for the small module of 498 to 512; and
for the large module, opinion seems to be about evenly divided as to whether the exchange was halved,
so that the copper to gold ratio stayed the same, or the exchange remained the same, such that the
copper to gold ratio was doubled. The reality would seem to be that the value of the copper coinage
against gold continued to be dependent upon the weight of the coins. In any case, silver coin seems to
have played a minor role in the Romaion economy during the Sixth Century, except in the lands of the
Ostrogoths and Vandals conquered by Iustinianus I, and so the follis was the most valuable piece that
most people might expect to handle. Ex- unrecorded. See Hahn (1973 #27), Campbell (1985), Sear (1987
#19), Lhotka (1989), Harl (1996), Grierson (1999), Hahn and Metlich (2000 #27), Abou Diwan (2008), Tye
(2009 cf. #118), Bijovsky (2012), Mansfeld (2016 cf. #1.23-1.35), Morrisson (2016), Gândilă (2017),
WEGM (2017), and WildWinds (accessed 7/7/2018).
262. Iustinus (Justin) I, 518-527, or Iustinianus (Justinian) I, 527-565, of the

Romaions, unofficial issue (probably Israel): copper 13 mm, 0.70 g – obv.
Monarch – die axis 9, rev. Christogram, Greek “B” – perhaps 5 nummi
(pentanummium) – very thin and light with design that is characteristic of imitations produced in the
vicinity of Ashqelon perhaps around the same time, circa 522 to 540, as official issues from
Constantinopolis and Nicomedia. Obverse is corroded but appears to have bust right; left is also known.
Reverse Christogram has very small head of Rho with faint B, copying the officina letter of official issues,
at left, and a bit of the curve of the denomination mark Є at right. Other specimens do not have those
field marks and so might be mistaken for a nummus of the Carthago mint for Iustinianus. By this time
most of the major dioceses of the Romaion Empire had a mint, and only one mint, but unofficial coinage
filled monetary gaps from time to time and place to place. This example circulated in Israel and Gaza
into the early Seventh Century, alongside official, heavier issues of the pentanummium (cf. Coin 266),
and one must wonder if the values could have been the same. Ex- Anything Anywhere, my attribution.
See Hahn (1973 cf. #32-33 and 93), Sear (1987 #92-93, 169, and 206; cf. 283), Hahn and Metlich (2000
cf. #32-33, 93, and cf. 206), and Bijovsky (2012 Figure 113).
146
263. Hou Yi of Western Wei, 535-556 (China): cast copper 24 mm, 2.55 g – obv.
Chinese transliterated “Wu Zhu” – rev. full inner rim – qian – another sub-type of Wu
Zhu, long attributed as Sui Dynasty first produced in 581. A hoard found in a securely
dated royal tomb is irrefutable evidence of an earlier date, probably coins mentioned
in the annals as cast in 540 and 546 by the Western Wei contenders for supremacy
over northern China. Coin 263 has right character wu with an angular shape and zhu with top left
“triangle” that leans along the outer rim. Sui Wu Zhu, a bit less common, looks more like the obverse of
Maier 2017B #180 but with an inner rim by wu only, same as Coins 259 and 263. Ex- unrecorded, my re-
attribution. See Mitchiner (1978 cf. #5480 and 5490-5492), Thierry (1988 Fig. A – A”), Hartill (2005
#10.25, cf. #10.26), Tye (2009 #1111), and Zeno.ru (accessed 7/9/2018).
264. Ostrogoths, probably Ravenna mint (Italy): copper 18 mm, 1.85 g –

obv. Ravenna, Latin “FELIX R_ΛVE…” – die axis 6, rev. Latin “RAVE” monogram
enwreathed with “X” at bottom – 10 nummi – oblong planchet struck carefully
to capture most of the intended design. Obverse is crowned personification of
the city, with most of the legend visible. Reverse, monogram has a little cross bar below the head of R
which together with the legs of R make an A; other sub-types are no cross bar and Christian cross above
the monogram. Mint and chronology have been the subject of much speculation. My inclination is to
accept E.A. Arslan’s hypothesis: Ravenna, circa 526 to 539, after which the city fell to the Romaions. The
light weight of this specimen, in contrast to the 4.5 g of the contemporaneous large-module 10 nummi
of the Romaions, could be taken as evidence in support of an earlier date, on the other hand. Note too
that Roma has been suggested as the mint. Ostrogoth and Vandal coinages included municipal and royal
issues, but Ostrogoth had gold in addition to copper and silver. Both are complex enough as to yield no
scholarly consensus on the details of chronology and how the systems worked. Ex- Early World Coins.
See Wroth (1911 #36-38), Hahn (1973 cf. #72), Grierson and Blackburn (1986 #145-149), Harl (1996),
Berndt and Steinacher (2008), Arslan (2011), Stahl (2012 #33.35), Calomino and Maurina (2017 cf. Figure
13), and Kurth (accessed 7/9/2018).

265. Narana of the Alchon Huns, perhaps Kapisa mint
(Afghanistan): copper or billon 24 mm, 3.35 g – obv. Monarch –
die axis 12, rev. incuse Monarch – drachm (perhaps vimshopaka) –
thin and broad Sasanian-style flan, indifferently struck. Obverse is
right-facing king, portrayed with the elongated head typical of
eastern Hun iconography and adornments of a necklace probably of pearls, a diadem with the two ends
hanging down to his shoulder, and a crown, here partially off the flan, that is described as a buffalo
head. At lower right, blurred, is the king’s arm holding a floral or grain arrangement, and at upper right
might be a tiny Brahmi letter: sri, na, and the two-letter nara are known sub-types. Reverse lacks the
Sasanian fire-altar scene (cf. Maier 2018 #195) commonly found on Hunnic coins but is not really uniface
because of the mysterious shallow incuse bust—the negative to the positive of the obverse bust—that
seems to be a characteristic of many Hunnic issues. At any rate, the attribution of the king’s name is
147
tentative, but a good case has been made that this monarch was a different person from the Narendra
who struck coins in Gandhara. Though the chronology could have been any time between circa 530 and
600, Coin 265 is certainly part of the latest issues of drachm struck by the Huns. Ex- Early World coins,
my re-attribution. See Mitchiner (1978 cf. #1444), Tye (2009 cf. #764), Vondrovec (2010 #150 var. 2 and
3), Tandon (2013 #41), Bhandare (2015), Bakker (2017), and Zeno.ru (accessed 7/15/2018).
266. Iustinianus I of the Romaions, Theoupolis mint (Antiochia;

Antakiyah, Turkey): copper 15 mm, 2.00 g – obv. Monarch, Latin
“…ITINI_ANVI PP …” – die axis 6, rev. Greek “Є” with cross as middle stroke,
star – 5 nummi – obverse bust right is off-center low, with blundered legend common to this mint.
Reverse is a small star, again with six and a half rays (cf. Coin 261) rather than the usual six or eight; and
a large mark of value, with the cross as the center stroke of Є serving not only as a Christian symbol but
probably as the mint mark: the first letter of Theoupolis, City of God, renamed from Antiochia by
imperial decree in 528 following two devastating earthquakes. The Є type was first struck in 529 at this
mint, which had been reopened in 512, and at other mints later, but this sub-type was produced
sometime between 538/539 and 565, with the majority opinion being 550 and later. In 538 Iustinianus
experimented with an increase in the value of copper against gold and the weight of the follis, but that
was soon followed by several stepwise decreases in the weight of the follis (see Coin 271)—brought on
in no small part by the plague that began in 541/542, another major earthquake in 551 centered on
Beirut, the immense costs of the wars to reconquer the western Mediterranean, and the payments to
the Sasanians to keep the peace in the eastern provinces. Again, there is no scholarly agreement on the
value of the follis against the solidus following the reform of 538. Be that as it may, by about 550 the 5-
nummi coin was becoming the smallest in circulation, largely replacing the nummus, the production of
which ceased by the end of this reign, with the probable exception of Carthago; there, in in formerly
Vandal Africa, five nummi might have bought a subsistence diet. Elsewhere prices seem to have been
considerably higher. Ex- Rudnik Numismatics. See Hahn (1973 #161), Sear (1987 #244), Harl (1996),
Hahn and Metlich (2000 #161a), Abou Diwan (2008), Bijovsky (2012), Mansfeld (2016), Morrisson
(2016), WildWinds (accessed 7/9/2018), and Zeno.ru (accessed 7/11/2018).

267. Lichhavi Kingdom (Nepal): leaded copper 27 mm,
9.70 g – obv. Lion, Brahmi transliterated “Sri Ma…” – die axis
6, rev. Goddess, lotus, Brahmi transliterated “Sri Bhogini” –
pana – despite corrosion, the type and most of the legends are
clear. Obverse is a lion facing left, above which is part of the
legend Sri Mananka, meaning the seal of Lord Mana. This is a
reference to King Manadeva, who circa 464 established a dynasty in the Kathmandu Valley independent
of the failing Gupta regime. The elegantly conceived reverse is a goddess seated on a lotus flower. This
could be Lakshmi, wife of Vishnu, but another possibility is the goddess Bhogini, who is named in the
legend, but might instead, or as well, refer to the wife of Manadeva. Rather than an issue of that king,
this coin probably is a commemorative, struck during the late Sixth and early Seventh Century; in any
case it is a representative of the first instance of coin produced in Nepal, probably inspired by Kushana
148
coinage. At least four sub-types are known, including ferro-magnetic issues, and many dies varieties are
extant. Epigraphic evidence is proof that the denomination is pana, with 16 such equal to the purana, a
unit of account rather than a silver coin (cf. Coin 254): in essence, the monetary system of the Lichhavi
was that of the Maurya. This pana, however, was heavier, generally 11 rather than 9 g (cf. Maier 2017A
#80), though several successive types struck until circa 700 gradually became as light as 2 g or less. Ex-
Early World Coins. See Walsh and Verma (1973), Mitchiner (1979 cf. #197-197a), Rhodes et al. (1989 #1),
and Zeno.ru (accessed 7/11/2018).
268. Toramana II of Kashmir or post-Toramama imitation (India or

Pakistan): copper 20 mm, 7.10 g – obv. Shiva or Monarch, Brahmi
transliterated “…ramana” – die axis 12, rev. probably Lakshmi, water
pot, Brahmi transliterated “Ja…” – probably debased dinara (stater) –
substantial heft for a mid-size planchet, struck with dies too large. The by-now classic iconography,
standing figure and seated goddess, was popularized by the Kushana (see Maier 2018 #194) and
continued by the Gupta and their enemy, the Huns, including this grandson of the king by the same
name who invaded northwestern India—Toramana II, who established a Hun dynasty in Kashmir. J.
Cribb’s recent analysis of a hoard has led to the plausible suggestion that the obverse was meant as
Shiva rather than the traditional interpretation, a standing king. Noteworthy details visible on Coin 268
include a nimbus to the right of the head, a necklace, and a dhoti with leggings. Other specimens show
an altar at lower left and a trident at right, a hint of which is visible along the rim. Described as Gupta-
style Brahmi, the legend is unusual in that the letters are base against the rim, read from about 7 to 11 h
as Sri Toramana, though only the last three letters are legible here. Seated goddess, probably Lakshmi,
dominates the reverse, with the back of a lion below her feet; other specimens show the lion facing left
with head reverted. A flower pot is in the left field and a Brahmi letter is at right. Overall, the style
appears to be the “anonymous derivative” struck for 250 years or so after the generally finer-style
lifetime issues of Toramana II, whose reign has been put at either 530/540 to 570 or late Sixth to early
Seventh Century. This copper stater, as it has been conventionally called, likely should be attributed as a
dinara, per the reading by A. Cunningham of the Kashmiri history, as they were struck in succession to
the base-gold dinaras of the same type, and others earlier but similar, described by Cribb. Ex-
unrecorded. See Cunningham (1894 Plate 3 #2), Deyell (1977), Mitchiner (1979 #151-158), Rhodes et al.
(1989), Tye (2009 #765), Bhandare (2015), Cribb (2016), Bakker (2017), Cribb and Singh (2017), and
269. Hataz (Iathaz, Iathlia) of Aksum, ca. 590-610 (Eritrea or Ethiopia):

copper 15 mm, 0.5+ g – obv. Monarch, Ge’ez transliterated “NG…_...” – die axis
11, rev. Cross, Ge’ez complete translation “Mercy to the people” – broken or
irregular flan, shallowly struck and dirty. Obverse is described as a robed and crowned bust, fully facing
front. Traces of Ge’ez letters transliterated as NGS, for negus, are at left, while at right would be the
king’s name. Some specimens show symbols, probably serving as control marks, to the right or left of
the king’s chin. Reverse is a Christian cross, described as Greek style, within a diamond. Barely legible at
right are three of the eight letters of the legend, which is divided into letter pairs by crosses at each
point of the diamond. Some specimens are known with gilding within the diamond. Gilding, the
149
significance of which is unknown but may have been related to distinguishing denominations (see Part 6
forthcoming, Armah), was occasionally used on copper and silver throughout the course of Aksumite
coinage. Coin 269, which apparently was not gilded, represents a common type, though less so than the
anonymous issues (e.g., Coin 238). Ex- Early World Coins. See Mitchiner (1978 cf. #433), Munro-Hay and
Juel-Jensen (1995 #141), Hahn (2000), Bausi (2013), and Zeno.ru (accessed 7/13/2018).
270. Mauricius Tiberius of the Romaions, 582-602, Constantinopolis

mint (Turkey): copper 18 mm, 2.10 g – obv. Monarch, Latin “D N …” – die
axis 7:30, rev. Greek “I”, “Є”, Latin “CON” – 10 nummi (decanummium,
quarter follis) – irregular planchet struck off-center both sides. Obverse has
center-facing bust, described in catalogues as crowned, draped, and cuirassed. Because only two letters
of the legend are wholly legible, followed by part of a third, the attribution depends upon other details
of the type. Reverse has officina letter to left of the denomination mark I, and in the exergue the mint
mark is clear; better specimens would show a star to the left of the I and a cross above. Coin 270 is low
weight compared to the probable standard of 3.4 g but within the range of specimens, 1.73 to 4.11 g,
from consulted catalogues. By this time the 10 nummi was becoming the most common small
denomination, with the same or similar types struck at most mints. Ex- Anything Anywhere, my
attribution. See Gândilă (2009), Hahn and Metlich (2009 #73C and D), Sear (2014 #499-500), Mansfeld
(2016 #11.115), WEGM (accessed 12/11/2018), and Zeno.ru (accessed 12/11/2018).
271A. Mauricius Tiberius of the Romaions, Theoupolis

mint (Turkey): copper 31 mm, 11.60 g – obv. Monarch,
Latin “D N mAUPI_CNI P AUT” – die axis 6, rev. Greek “M”,
cross, Latin “ANNO” “XII”, Greek “Γ”, Latin “THЄUPS” – 40
nummi – roughly trimmed but still attractive specimen
despite some wear. Obverse is facing bust of emperor, still
the impersonal, sacred image, crowned and wearing consular robes, holding eagle-tipped scipio at right
and mappa at left. Legend is complete but for the P with the line above it, possibly indicating a meaning
of PP; blundered legends, on the other hand, were common for products of this mint. Reverse is an
angular M as the mark of value, replacing the curvilinear m used at this mint from 578/579 to 590/591.
At left and right is the Latin for the twelfth year of the reign, 593/594, an innovation for the coinage of
Iustinianus; note the small O, which is common and perhaps usual, and the flared extended stroke of the
second N, which is extraordinary. Above M is a Christian cross, with the officina mark between the legs
of the letter and the mint mark in the exergue. During this reign Theoupolis became the most prolific
mint, and the weight of the 40-nummi follis against the solidus was stabilized. Consensus is lacking over
the exchange rate, with opinions ranging from 180 to 600 or perhaps even 720, some of which seem to
be generalizations while others carry consideration of regional variations in the weight of the follis. Ex-
unrecorded. See Sear (1987 #533), Harl (1996), Grierson (1999), Hahn and Metlich (2000), Gândilă
(2009), Hahn and Metlich (2009 #96C), Bijovsky (2012), Mansfeld (2016 #11.264), Morrisson (2016),
Abou Diwan (2018), and WildWinds (accessed 7/12/2018).
150
271B. Mauricius Tiberius of the Romaions,
Constantinopolis mint (Turkey): bronze 28x31 mm,
11.00 g – obv. Monarch, Latin “D N mAVPC_...IbЄR PP A” –
die axis 12, rev. Greek “M”, cross, Latin “ANNO”, Romaion
symbol for “6”, Greek “Γ”, Latin “…O…” – 40 nummi –
typically crude product of this mint in comparison to issues
of Theoupolis. Obverse facing bust is cuirassed and helmeted, a revival of the iconography of Iustinianus.
At right the emperor holds a shield, barely discernible, and at left a Christian orb, a motif that first
appeared on a coin in an issue for Pulcheria Augusta more than 150 years earlier. The legend is intact
but for some wear at the top of the flan and a chip obscuring the last letter. Variations in the legend are
many and apparently fit a chronological pattern. Reverse, though laid out the same as Coin 271A,
notably differs in that the M is taller and narrower, the final letter of anno is in the exergue, and the line
above the exergue is short. Coin 271B was probably an overstrike of an older and heavier coin—coins
even twice as heavy had still been circulating in some places—that was clipped until the correct weight
was reached. This expedient was adopted almost undoubtedly to pay for the continuing warfare to
defend the empire’s overextended frontiers. Still, this reign would mark a century of sustaining the
reforms of Anastasius I, and indeed the copper coinage was struck in profusion. Ex- unrecorded. See
Sear (1987 #494), Hahn and Metlich (2009 #67D), Bijovsky (2012), Brubaker and Tobler (2012), Gândilă
(2012), and Mansfeld (2016 #11.26).
References
Most of these are available at Academia.edu or Digital Library Numismatic. When that is not the case,
Multnomah County Library has provided stellar service for many of the rest via interlibrary loans.
Abdy, R. (2012) “Tetrarchy and the House of Constantine” in The Oxford Handbook of Greek and Roman
Coinage, pp. 584-600, Oxford: Oxford University Press
Abou Diwan, G. (2008) “Un trèsor monètaire de Beyrouth: à propos de la circulation de monnaies
d’Anastase au Vie sieclé” The Numismatic Chronicle 168: 303-320+
Abou Diwan, G. (2018) “Base-metal coinage circulation in Byzantine Beirut 491-641 CE,” American
Journal of Numismatics (2) 30: 163-218
ANS = American Numismatic Society, MANTIS (an on-line searchable data base of the ANS collection),
New York, www.numismatics.org
Arslan, E.A. (2011) “La produzione della moneta nell’ Italia ostrogota e longobarda” in L. Travaini, ed., Le
Zecche Italiane Fino all’ Unità, pp. 366-413, Rome: Libreria dello Stato
151
Asolati, M. (2016) “La distribuzione della moneta bronzea ufficiale e imitativa in età tardo antica:
i casi dei gruzzoli di Gortyna 2011 (IV sec. d. C.) e di Aquileia 2011 (V sec. d. C.)” in Produktion und
Recyceln von Münzen in der Spätantike, pp. 199-215, Mainz: Verlag des Römisch-Germanischen
Zentralmuseums
Bagnall, R.S. and G. Bransbourg (2019) “The Constantian monetary revolution” ISAW Papers 14,
http://isaw.nyu.edu/publications/isaw-papers
Bakker, H. (2017) The Huns in Central and South Asia, Cambridge: Ancient India and Iran Trust
Bausi, A. (2013) “Kings and saints: Founders of dynasties, monasteries and churches in Christian
Ethiopia” in B. Schuler, ed., Stifter und Mäzene und ihre Rolle in der Religion, pp. 161-185, Wiesbaden:
Harrassowitz Verlag
Berndt, G.M. and R. Steinacher (2008) “Minting in Vandal North Africa: Coins of the Vandal period in
Vienna’s Kunsthistorisches Museum,” Early Medieval Europe (16) 3: 252-298
Berthod, D. (2011) Les imitations au type FEL TEMP REPARTIO,

https://independent.academia.edu/BerthodDavid
Bhandare, S. (2006) “Political transition in early 5th Century Gujarat: A numismatic reappraisal based on
silver issues of the Western Kșatrapas, the Guptas and their contemporaries,” Numismatic Digest 29-30:
69-107
Bhandare, S. (2015) “Space for change: Evaluating the ‘paucity of metallic currency’ in medieval India” in
H.P. Ray ed., Negotiating Cultural Identity: Landscapes in Early Medieval South Asian History, pp. 159-
202, New Delhi: Routledge India
Bhandarkar, D.R. (1921) Lectures on Ancient Indian Numismatics, Calcutta: University of Calcutta
Bijovsky, G.I. (2012) Gold Coin and Small Change: Monetary Circulation in Fifth-Seventh Century
Byzantine Palestine, Trieste: EUT Edizioni Università di Trieste
Bransbourg, G. (2015) “The later Roman Empire” in A. Monson and W. Scheidel eds. Fiscal Regimes and
Political Economy in Premodern States, pp. 258-281, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press
Brubaker, L. and H. Tobler (2000) “The gender of money: Byzantine empresses on coins,” Gender and
History (12) 3: 572-594
Bud, G. (2013) Evidence for Cultural Influence and Trade in the Coinage of the Western Kshatrapas,
https://oxford.academia.edu/GuyBud
Burrell, B. (2007) “A hoard of minimi from Sardis and the currency of the Fifth Century C.E.,” Revue
Numismatique 163: 235-282
152
Calomino, D. and B. Maurina (2017) “Roman, Ostrogothic and Byzantine coins from the castrum of
Loppio - S. Andrea (Trento-Italy)” in G. Pardini, N. Parise, and F. Marani eds., Numismatica e Archeologia.
Monete, Stratigrafie e Contesti. Workshop Internazionale de Numismatica, pp. 169-178, Rome: Edizioni
Quasar
Campbell, I.C.G. (1985) “An introduction to Byzantine coinage, 1 – Flavius Anastasius I ‘Dicorus’ 491-
518,” NI Bulletin (19) 3: 91-93
Canovaro, C., I. Callieri, M. Asolati, F. Grazzi, and A. Scherillo (2013) “Characterization of bronze Roman
coins of the fifth century called nummi through different analytical techniques,” Applied Physics A:
Material Science & Processing, on-line at https://link.springer.com/journal/339
Chameroy, J. and P.-M. Guihard eds. (2016) Produktion und Recyceln von Münzen in der Spätantike,
Mainz: Verlag des Römisch-Germanischen Zentralmuseums
Cribb, J. (2010) “The Kidarites, the numismatic evidence” in M. Alram, D.E. Klimburg-Salter, M. Inaba,
and M. Pfisterer eds., Coins, Art and Chronology II: The First Millennium CE in the Indo-Iranian
Borderlands, pp. 91-146, Vienna: Verlag der Österreichischen Akademie der Wissenschaften
Cribb, J. (2013) “First coin of ancient Khmer Kingdom discovered,” Numismatique Asiatique 6: 8-16
Cribb, J. (2016) “Early medieval Kashmir coinage – a new hoard and an anomaly,” Numismatic Digest 40:
86-112
Cribb, J. and K. Singh (2017) “Two curious ‘Kidarite’ coin types from 5th Century Kashmir,” Journal of the
Oriental Numismatic Society 230: 7-12
Cunningham, A. (1894) Coins of Mediaeval India from the Seventh Century down to the Muhammadan
Conquests, London: Bernard Quartich Ltd.
Depeyrot, G. (1992) “Le système monétaire de Dioclétien à la fin de l’empire,” Revue Belge de
Numismatique et de Sigillographie CXXXVIII: 33-106
Deyell, J.S. (1977) “A guide to the reading of ancient Indian coin legends, part 3,” Numismatics
International Bulletin (11) 1: 9-18
Doyen, J.-M. (2014) “SALUS REIPUBLICAE: Modelling the money supply in the middle Meuse Valley
between 390 and 480 C.E.” in I. Jacobs ed. Production and Prosperity in the Theodosian Period, pp. 127-
144, Leuven: Peeters
Doyen, J.-M. (2015) “Bronzes inédits d’Honorius et de Valentinien III,” Bulletin du Cercle d’études
numismatiques (52) 2: 24-29
Esty, W.W. (2018) Esty's Guide to Late Roman AE Coin Types, AD 364-450: A Complete List, at
http://augustuscoins.com/ed/ricix/index.html#contents
153
Gândilă, A. (2009) “Early Byzantine coin circulation in the eastern provinces: a comparative statistical
approach,” American Journal of Numismatics (2) 21: 151-226
Gândilă, A. (2012) “Heavy money, weightier problems: the Justinianic reform of 538 and its economic
consequences,” Revue Numismatique 169: 363-402
Gândilă, A. (2017) “A hoard of Sixth-Century coppers and the end of Roman Capidava” in I.C. Opriş and
A. Raţiu, A. Raţiu trans., Capidava II: Building C1 – Contributions to the History of Anona Militaris in the
6th Century, pp. 161-174, Cluj-Napoca: Mega Publishing House
Gautam, S. (2016?) Revisiting Indian History: Reading Gupta Coinage,

https://oxford.academia.edu/ShriyaGautam
Gennari, A., M. Cecchinato, and A. Ortu (2018) “I nummi vandali con “stella” e “D” in ghirlanda: quale
datazione?” Monete Antiche 101: 35-42
Grenet, F. (2005) “Kidarites,” Encyclopædia Iranica, at http://www.iranicaonline.org/ (accessed

5/23/2018)
Grierson, P. (1999) Byzantine Coinage, Washington: Dumbarton Oaks
Grierson, P. and M. Blackburn (1986) Medieval European Coinage, Volume 1. The Early Middle Ages
(5th—10th Centuries), Cambridge: Cambridge University Press
Gudea, N. and C. Gӑzdac (2003) “Odd 4th Century coins in the hoards from Banat,” Ephemeris
Napocensis XIII: 243-260
Guest, P. (2012) “The production, supply and use of late Roman and early Byzantine copper coinage in
the Eastern Empire,” The Numismatic Chronicle 172: 105-131
Guihard, P.-M., O. Olesti, J. Guàrdia, and O. Mercadal (2016) “Soutenir l’usage monétaire dans le nord
de la péninsule Ibérique au VIe siècle. L’exemple du dépôt de minimi de Llívia (Espagne)” in Produktion
und Recyceln von Münzen in der Spätantike, pp. 119-138, Mainz: Verlag des Römisch-Germanischen
Zentralmuseums
Gupta, B.L. (1992) Value and Distribution System in Ancient India, New Delhi: Gian
Hahn, W. (1973) Moneta Imperii Byzantini 1. Von Anastasius I. bis Justinianus I. (491–565), Vienna:
Östereichische Akademie der Wissenschaften
Hahn, W. (1975) Moneta Imperii Byzantini 2. Von Justinus II. bis Phocas (565–610), Vienna:
Östereichische Akademie der Wissenschaften
Hahn, W. (1981) Moneta Imperii Byzantini 3. Von Heraclius bis Leo III. / Alleinregierung (610–725),
Vienna: Östereichische Akademie der Wissenschaften
154
Hahn, W. (2000) “Aksumite numismatics – a critical survey of recent research,” Revue Numismatique (6)
155: 281-311
Hahn, W. and M.A. Metlich (2000) Money of the Incipient Byzantine Empire (Anastasius I – Justinian I,
491–565), Vienna: Östereichische Forschungsgesellschaft für Numismatik am Institut für Numismatik
und Geldgeschichte
Hahn, W. and M.A. Metlich (2009) Money of the Incipient Byzantine Empire Continued (Justin II – Revolt
of the Heraclii, 565–610), Vienna: Östereichische Forschungsgesellschaft für Numismatik am Institut für
Numismatik und Geldgeschichte
Harl, K.W. (1996) Coinage in the Roman Economy, 300 B.C. to A.D. 700, Baltimore: The Johns Hopkins
University Press
Hartill, D. (2005) Cast Chinese Coins, Victoria: Trafford Publishing
Hoppál, K., I. Vida, S. Adhityatama, and L. Yahui (2018) “’All that glitters is not Roman:’ Roman coins
discovered in East Java, Indonesia,” Dissertationes Archaeologicae ex Instituto Archaeologico (3) 6: 461-
492
Krishnamurthy, R. (2004) The Pallava Coins, Chennai: Garnet Publishers
Kumar, S. (2013) “Rewriting Gupta Genealogy. The mystery of King Ramagupta solved,” Journal of the
Oriental Numismatic Society 215: 23-25
Kurth, D. (2007) Helveticas Coins, http://www.catbikes.ch/helvetica/ billed as the world’s largest on-line
collection of photographed FEL TEMP REPARATIO coins.
Kurth, D. Helvetica’s Identification Help Pages, http://www.catbikes.ch/coinstuff/coins-ric.htm

spreadsheet-based compendia of mostly Roman imperial types and sub-types struck from ca. 253 into
the Fifth Century but also including some Third Century colonial issues.
La Vaissière, É. de (2014) “The Steppe World and the rise of the Huns” in M. Maas, ed., The Cambridge
Companion to the Age of Attila, pp. 175-192, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press
Lendering, J., ed. (2018) Livius.org: Articles on ancient history http://www.livius.org/
Lhotka, J.F. (1989) Introduction to East Roman (Byzantine) Coinage, New York: Sanford J. Durst
Numismatic Publications
Lindgren, H.C. (1989) Ancient Greek Bronze Coins: European Mints from the Lindgren Collection, San
Mateo CA: Chrysopolon
Litvinsky, B.A., Z. Guang-da, and R.S. Samghabadi, eds. (1996) History of Civilizations of Central Asia.
Volume III, The Crossroads of Civilizations: A.D. 250 to 750, Delhi: Motilal Banarsidass
155
López Sánchez, F. (2012) “Julian and his coinage: a very Constantinian prince” in N. Baker-Brian and S.
Tougher eds., Emperor and Author: The Writings of Julian the Apostate, pp. 164-182, Swansea: The
Classical Press of Wales
Maier, M. (2016A) Small Change for the Poor: 525 to 200 BCE,
https://washington.academia.edu/MikeMaier
Maier, M. (2016B) Small Change for the Poor: 200 to 25 BCE,

Maier, M. (2017A) Small Change of the Indic Lands: Bangladesh, India, Pakistan, and Afghanistan from
400 BCE to 200 CE, https://washington.academia.edu/MikeMaier
Maier, M. (2017B) Small Change for the Poor: 25 BCE to 200 CE,
Maier, M. (2018) Small Change for the Poor: 200 to 350 CE,
Mansfeld, S.J. (2016) Early Byzantine Copper Coins: Catalogue of an English Collection, Manchester: Ex
Officio Books
Marsden, A. (2012) “Recent research on irregular coinage in late Roman Britain” The Yorkshire
Numismatist 4: 53-72
Metcalf, W.E., ed. (2012) The Oxford Handbook of Greek and Roman Coinage, Oxford: Oxford University
Press
Mitchiner, M. (1978) Oriental Coins and Their Values: The Ancient & Classical World 600 B.C. – A.D. 650,
London: Hawkins
Mitchiner, M. (1979) Oriental Coins and Their Values: Non-Islamic States & Western Colonies A.D. 600 –
1979, London: Hawkins
Moorhead, T.S.N. (2007) “Excavation coins: the ancient and early mediaeval coins from the Triconch
Palace at Butrint, c. 2nd century BC – c. AD 600,” The Numismatic Chronicle 167: 287-304
Moorhead, S. (2012) “The coinage of the later Roman Empire, 364-498” in The Oxford Handbook of
Greek and Roman Coinage, pp. 601-632, Oxford: Oxford University Press
Moorhead, S. and P. Walton (2014) “Coinage at the end of Roman Britain” in F.K. Haarer et al. eds., AD
410: The History and Archaeology of Late and Post-Roman Britain, pp. 99-116, London: The Society for
the Promotion of Roman Studies
156
Mora Serrano, B. (2016) “Old and new coins in southern Hispania in the 6th Century AD” in Produktion
und Recyceln von Münzen in der Spätantike, pp. 139-153, Mainz: Verlag des Römisch-Germanischen
Zentralmuseums
Morrisson, C. (2016) “The African economy from the Vandals to the Arab conquest in the light of coin
evidence” in S.T. Stevens and J.P. Conant eds., North Africa under Byzantium and Early Islam, pp. 173-
198, Washington: Dumbarton Oaks Research Library and Collection
Munro-Hay, S. and B. Juel-Jensen (1995) Aksumite Coinage, London: Spink
Munzi, M. (2014) “La monnaie en Ethiopie, de Zoskalès à Haïlé Sélassié” in L. Cantamessa ed., Guide
Olizane Ethiopie. Au fabuleux pays du Prêtre Jean, pp. 43-46, Geneva: Olizane
NumisWiki – The Collaborative Numismatics Project,

http://www.forumancientcoins.com/numiswiki/view.asp
Pieper, W. (2013) Ancient Indian Coins Revisited, Lancaster, Penn.: Classical Numismatic Group
Pilon, F. (2016) “Les imitations du milieu du IVe siècle: production, diffusion, interprétation” in
Produktion und Recyceln von Münzen in der Spätantike, pp. 265-277, Mainz: Verlag des Römisch-
Germanischen Zentralmuseums
Pina, M. and J. Marín (2018) Identifying Late Roman Bronze Coins,

http://www.tesorillo.com/aes/home.htm
Pliego, R. (2016) “The circulation of copper coins in the Iberian Peninsula during the Visigothic period,”
The Journal of Archaeological Numismatics 5/6: 125-160
Reece, R. (2012) “Roman Britain and its economy from coin finds,” British Numismatic Journal 82: 8-28
Rhodes, N.G., K. Gabrisch, and C. Valdettaro Pontecorvo Della Rocchetta (1989) The Coinage of Nepal
from the Earliest Times until 1911, London: Royal Numismatic Society
Sear, D.R. (1987) Byzantine Coins and Their Values, London: Spink & Son Ltd.
Sear, D.R. (2014) Roman Coins and Their Values, Volume V: The Christian Empire, London: Spink and Son
Ltd.
Stahl, A.M. (2012) “The transformation of the West” in The Oxford Handbook of Greek and Roman
Coinage, pp. 633-654, Oxford: Oxford University Press
Sullivan, M. (1979) The Arts of China, Berkeley: University of California Press
Tandon, P. Notes on the Evolution of Alchon Coins, https://bu.academia.edu/PankajTandon
157
Thierry, F. (1988) “Wuzhu des Sui ou wuzhu des Wei?” Bulletin de la Société Française de Numismatique
4: 349-351
Thierry, F. (2001) “La fiduciarité idéale à l'épreuve des coûts de production: quelques éléments sur la
contradiction fondamentale de la monnaie en Chine,” Revue Numismatique (6) 157: 131-152
Trivero Rivera, A. (2009) “La Fel Temp Reparatio,” Monete Antiche (VIII) 4: 21-32
Tye, R. (2009) Early World Coins and Early Weight Standards, York: Early World Coins
Vondrovec, K. (2010) “Coinage of the Nezak” in M. Alram, D. Klimburg-Salter, M. Inaba, and M. Pfisterer
eds., Coins, Art and Chronology II: The First Millennium C.E. in the Indo-Iranian Borderlands, pp. 169-190,
Wien: Österreichische Akademie der Wissenchaften
Walsh, E.H. and D.P. Verma (1973) The Coinage of Nepal, Delhi: Indological Book House
WEGM (2017) History & Numismatics, http://www.wegm.com/coins/index/, on-line catalogue; despite

anonymity the author has won “Forvm Award For Numismatic Excellence”. Note, however, that the web
link seems to be broken as of 4/13/2019.
Wells, N. (2014?) SPES REIPVBLICE, https://independent.academia.edu/NickWells
Wigg-Wolf, D. (2016) “Supplying a dying empire? The mint of Trier in the late-4th Century AD” in
Produktion und Recyceln von Münzen in der Spätantike, pp. 217-233, Mainz: Verlag des Römisch-
Germanischen Zentralmuseums
WildWinds Project (2018) WildWinds: Reference, Attribution & Valuation for Ancient Greek, Roman &
Byzantine Coins, www.wildwinds.com/coins This on-line database has an image for every listed coin.
Wroth, W. (1911) Catalogue of the Coins of the Vandals, Ostrogoths and Lombards and the Empires of
Thessalonica, Nicaea and Trebizond in the British Museum, Oxford: Oxford University Press
Zeimal, E.V. (1996) “The Kidarite Kingdom in Central Asia” in History of Civilizations of Central Asia.
Volume III, pp. 119-133, Delhi: Motilal Banarsidass
Zeno.ru (2019) ZENO.RU – Oriental Coins Database, www.zeno.ru This on-line database has an image for
every listed coin.
Appendix: Additions, revisions, and corrections to the first four parts of the SCP catalogue
Maier 2016A #7 Syrakousai: the last line should now read, Greek cities of southern Italy and Sicily began
striking bronze coins in the third quarter of the Fifth Century, and Greek cities to the east rapidly
adopted the innovation of a highly fiduciary bronze coinage. References include three chapters in
158
Grandjean, C. and A. Moustaka, eds. (2013) Aux origines de la monnaie fiduciaire. Traditions
métallurgiques et innovations numismatiques, Bordeaux: Ausonius Scripta Antiqua 55 –
• Brousseau, L. “La naissance de la monnaie de bronze en Grande Grèce et en Sicile,” pp. 81-96;
• Kroll, J. “Salamis again,” pp. 109-115; and
• Gatzolis, C. “New evidence on the beginning of bronze coinage in northern Greece,” pp. 117-
128.
For coins of China in Maier 2016A, see Kakinuma, Y. (2014) “The emergence and spread of coins in China
from the Spring and Autumn Period to the Warring States Period” in P. Bernholz and R. Vaubel eds.,
Explaining Monetary and Financial Innovation, pp. 79-126, Switzerland: Springer International
Publishing.
• #8 Chu, contra Hartill (2005), was first cast circa 300 BCE; and 94 percent of specimens in one
hoard have the character variously interpreted as bei, shell, or huo, money.
• #18 Qin, square-holed round coins originated from the cosmological view that the heavens are
round and the earth is square; and again contra Hartill, the Ban Liang was first produced
336/335 BCE.
For coins of Karia at Maier 2016A, see Historia Numorum Online, an on-line searchable data base of the
Institut Ausonius, Bordeaux, http://hno.huma-num.fr/
• #20, Rhodos, Rhodos and Rose chalkous is here attributed to 408-385 and again from 350 to 300
BCE. The early dating is not explained.
• #30, which was tentatively attributed to Korinthos at Lindgren (1989), is almost certainly
Bargylia, dated 200 to 30 BCE, where obverse is Artemis and reverse legend above and below
Pegasos has been worn away.
• #45, Kaunos, obverse head is not identified as Alexandros and dating is generalized as 300 to
200 BCE; denomination is affirmed as chalkous.
For coins of the Lagids, Alexandreia mint unless otherwise noted, see
Picard, O., and T. Faucher (2012) “Les monnaies lagides,” pp. 17–108, and Marcellesi, M.-C.
(2012) “Les monnaies grecques et provincial romaines,” pp. 171-197, in O. Picard, C. Bresc, T. Faucher,
G. Gorre, M.-C. Marcellesi, and C. Morrison, Les monnaies des fouilles du Centre d’Études
Alexandrines: Les monnayages de bronze à Alexandrie de la conquête d’Alexandre à l’Égypte
moderne, Alexandria: Centre d’Études Alexandrines;
Wolf, D. (2016) “New observations on the Ptolemaic bronze coinage of Tyre,” Israeli Numismatic
Research 11: 29-45+;
Wolf, D. (2017) “The bronze coinage reform of Ptolemy II” in Caltabiano, M.C. ed., Proceedings
of XV International Numismatic Congress: Taormina 2015, pp. 540-545, Roma: Arbor Sapientiae; and
Lorber, C.C. (2018?) Face Values of Ptolemaic Bronze Coins of the Second Century BC,
https://independent.academia.edu/CatharineLorber.
159
• Maier 2016A #44 Alexandros and Eagle: the similar, slightly lighter type from the Series 2
denomination set established no later than 295 BCE by Ptolemy I was also an obol. The range of
modules and weights for the Series 3 type is wide and the distribution bi-modal, however, which
has led to a persisting hypothesis that the exact same type was denominated tritetartemorion,
the ¾ obol, as well as obol. The Lagid bronze denomination set, in any case, was based on the
weight standard used for that of Alexandros the Great; reference Picard and Faucher (2012),
Marcellesi (2012), and Wolf (2017), plus Lorber (2008).
• Maier 2016A #48 Zeus and Eagle, Tyros mint: bronze denominations were first produced at
Tyros for the Lagids early in the Third Century. While it is clear that the mint mark was the club
found in the reverse field, other questions are unsettled: whether the weight standard and the
types for the denominations were always the same as at Alexandreia, the primary mint—
questions that are underlain by uncertain chronology, including whether Coin 48 was Ptolemy III
or Ptolemy IV (222-205 BCE); reference Picard and Faucher (2012) and Wolf (2016).
• Maier 2016A #56 Zeus and Eagle: an example of the Series 5 currency, which was demonetized
toward the end of the reign of Ptolemy IV. The attribution of triobol should be considered
tentative rather than settled, based on some interpretations of papyrological evidence. Possibly,
too, Series 5 was a revaluation of modules current under Series 2, 3, and 4 (see Coins 44 and 48)
to different denominations, and the ΔI issues themselves seem to have been part of yet another
monetary reform; reference Picard and Faucher (2012) and Lorber (2018?).
• Maier 2016B #83 Zeus and Eagles: several hypotheses, rather than at least four, have been
advanced for the denomination of the “double eagle” type, ranging from 80 bronze drachmai
down to 10. In any case, there can be little doubt that the bronze coinage continued to be
reckoned against the silver standard on the old system of chalkoi and obols as well; reference
Picard and Faucher (2012) and Lorber (2018?).
• Maier 2016B #84 Isis and Eagle: first produced during the 150s BCE. As many as eight bronze
denominations were coined for Series 6 and 7, though not necessarily at the same time, and
there was substantial diminution in module and weight during the period beginning at some
point before 180 and continuing to sometime after 150 BCE; reference Picard and Faucher
(2012) and Lorber (2018?).
• Maier 2016B #85 Zeus and Eagles: again, several hypotheses have been advanced for the values
of the Series 7 denominations; reference Picard and Faucher (2012) and Lorber (2018?).
• Maier 2016B #106 Zeus and Eagles: denomination was probably 40 rather than 80 bronze
drachmai, with a value of obol on the silver standard, same as for Kleopatra VII. There were also
coins of similar weight and module with just one eagle and very light coins of the same type as
Coin 106, either of which might have been a different denomination, in addition to a 1.2 g Zeus
and Eagle coin that almost certainly was a pentadrachm. Official production must have been
voluminous, and unofficial copies abound, perhaps produced at several local mints, even as far
south as Sudan; reference Picard and Faucher (2012) and Lorber (2018?).
• Maier 2016B #124 Kleopatra VII: production of Series 10 probably began sometime between 44
and 37 BCE, and most likely this reform did not include a re-valuation of Series 9 Coin 106 from
80 to 40 drachmai; reference Picard and Faucher (2012).
160
• Additionally, cite Marcellesi (2012) and Wolf (2017) for Maier 2016A #22, Alexandros III, for
more corroboration of the bronze denomination set hypothesized by M.J. Price.
Maier 2016A #59 Katane: obverse jugate busts of Isis and Sarapis reflect the first diffusion of those
Egyptian gods via maritime trade routes, and their imagery was a staple of Mediterranean coinage until
the early Fourth Century CE. Reference Bricault, L. (2015) “The Gens Isiaca in Graeco-Roman coinage,”
The Numismatic Chronicle 175: 83-102+
Maier 2016B #97 Antiochos VII: per Bricault (2015), the reverse crown of Isis almost assuredly relates to
the king’s marriage to a Lagid princess.
Maier 2016B #114 Hasmoneans: per Burrell (2007), Fifth Century inhabitants of the Roman Empire did
not closely examine single coins, which generally ended up in sealed purses marked by weight or
number, and so even obsolete could circulate in that way.
Maier 2017B #131 Rhoemetalkes I: Revise text such that mint is attributed to Turkey but not specified as
Bizye; several types, and the largest, rather than most, have royal and imperial portraits, but all cite the
king and Augustus; 5 bronze denominations proposed, but metrology is complex enough to warrant
more work needed. The weight of the Thrakian assarion should not necessarily be described as a bit less
than 5 g nor lighter than the Makedonian counterpart—though Coin 131 is still “perhaps diassarion”.
There are civic coins, too, struck for this monarch. Add citation Paunov (2018 #RPC 1711), which is
Paunov, E. (2018) “On both shores of the Bosphorus: the coinage of Rhoemetalces I, King of Thrace (ca.
12/11 B.C. – A.D. 12/13) in O. Tekin, ed., Second International Congress on the History of Money and
Numismatics in the Mediterranean World, pp. 221-243, Antalya: AKMED
Maier 2017B #175C Kushana imitation: add citation, Ahmed, B. and M. Abu Al Hasan (2014) “Kushana
coins from Bangladesh: a preliminary study,” Journal of Bengal Art 19: 113-122
Maier 2017B #179 Pautalia: traditional attribution of denomination is triassarion contra my assarion and
the next lower denomination was the trihemiassarion (1½ assaria), per Grozdanova, L. (2017) “Some
aspects of the coinage issued from Pautalia for the empresses” in H. Popov and J. Tzvetkova eds.,
KRATIΣTOΣ: Volume in Honor of Professor Peter Delev, pp. 594-603, Sofia: St. Kliment Ohridski University
Press
Maier 2018 #194 Kanishka II: another possible identification for Ardochsho is Lakshmi: reference,
Ahmed and Abu Al Hasan (2014). Correction: the possible mints should be described as points west, not
east.
Maier 2018 #210 Tetricus I: add a concluding line, to the effect that moreover, the availability of pre-
reform coins must have been staggeringly high; and cite Kropff, A. (2007) “Late Roman coin hoards in
the west: trash or treasure?” Revue Belge de Numismatique et de Sigillographie CLIII: 73-86
161
Maier 2018 #217 Probus, 218A Diocletianus, and 218B Maximianus: all three have reverse with Iuppiter
holding Victoria who is about to crown the emperor with a laurel wreath; #218B is lacking Victoria in the
description of the type.
For coins of the Romans at Maier 2018, see Bagnall and Bransbourg (2019).
• #222B and 222C Licinius: another opinion is that the 12.5 denarii was struck only in 324.
• #223 through 226: another opinion is that revaluation of the billon coin to 100 denarii occurred
late 324 or 325, with the issue of the Camp gate coins (e.g. #226), which would mean that the
other coins were denominated as nummus of 25 denarii.
Maier 2018 #231A Constantinus II Caesar: per Sear (2011) the modern name of the Roman mint
Heraclea is Ereğli; into the Third Century CE it was Perinthos.
Maier 2018 #232 VRBS ROMA: per F. López Sánchez (2012), the reverse stars represent Remus and
Romulus, the sacrificed and the founder and so too the orderly succession of power in the “eternal city”.
Maier 2018 #233 Helena and Pax: cf. Brubaker and Tobler (2000, an alternative interpretation of the
iconography that I find unpersuasive).
Maier 2018 #235 maiorina of the Romans: reverse legend, last word is REPARATIO, not REPARTIO. The
helmet of the fallen horsemen appears to be short-tipped Skythian. Additionally citing G. Depeyrot
(1992) and Bagnall and Bransbourg (2019), note that opinion on the original face value is as little as 500
denarii as well as 10,000 or more. Also citing F. López Sánchez (2012), reverse motif is based on a
popular depiction of Alexandros overcoming an Archaemenid soldier and almost assuredly celebrates a
victory over the Sasanian Empire in 348, in another of the endless wars of Romans against Iranians. Also
add Trivero Rivera, A. (2009) to the references.
162

Small Change For The Poor 350 To 600 CE

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Small Change For The Poor 350 To 600 CE

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Small Change for the Poor: 350 to 600 CE

Mike Maier, April 2019

Circa 350 (4th Cent. Q3)

237. Mahakshatrapa (Western Satraps, Karddamaka Saka Kingdom;

238. Aksum (Axum; Eritrea or Ethiopia): copper 13 mm, 0.85 g – obv.

239A. Constantius II of the Romans, 337-361, Constantinopolis mint

239B. Constantius II of the Romans, Siscia mint (Croatia): billon 17

239C. Constantius II of the Romans, perhaps Antiochia mint (Turkey)

239D. Iulianus II (Julian the Apostate) Caesar of the Romans, 355-

239E. Constantius II of the Romans, perhaps Nicomedia or Heraclea

239F. Iulianus II Caesar of the Romans, Siscia mint (Croatia): bronze 17

239G. Constantius II of the Romans, perhaps Roma mint (Italy) or

239H. Constantius II of the Romans: billon 18 mm, 2.70 g – obv.

240A. Iulianus II Caesar of the Romans, Sirmium (Sremska Mitrovica,

240B. Constantius II of the Romans, perhaps Lugdunum mint (Lyon,

241. Iulianus II of the Romans, Constantina mint (Arelate; Arles,

242A. Gratianus, 367-383, of the Western Empire of the Romans,

242B. Valentinian Dynasty of the Romans, 364-392, perhaps Siscia mint

242C. Valentinianus I, 364-375, Western Empire; Valens, 364-378, Eastern

243B. Valentinianus I or Valens of the Romans, Constantina mint

243C. Perhaps Arcadius of the Eastern Empire of the Romans, 383-408,

245A. Theodosius I of the Romans, 379-395, Antiochia mint (Turkey):

245B. Theodosius I of the Romans: bronze 13 mm, 0.75 g – obv. Monarch,

246B. Valentinianus II of the Romans, possibly unofficial issue: bronze 12

246C. Theodosius I of the Romans, Alexandria, Antiochia, or Aquileia mint

246E. Arcadius of the Romans, Antiochia mint (Turkey): bronze 13 mm,

246F. Arcadius of the Romans, Constantinopolis mint (Turkey): bronze 13

246G. Probably Honorius, Western Empire of the Romans, 393-423, Roma

248. Tentative attribution: Aelia Eudoxia of the Romans, eastern mint

Circa 400 (5th Cent. Q1)

250. Honorius of the Romans, Antiochia mint (Turkey): bronze 16 mm,

251A. Honorius of the Romans (Egypt or Turkey): bronze 16 mm, 1.85 g –

251B. Arcadius, Honorius, or Theodosius II, Eastern Empire, 402-450, of the

Circa 425 (5th Cent. Q2)

253A. Valentinianus III of the Western Empire of the Romans, 425-455,

253B. Tentative attribution: Valentinianus III of the Western Empire of the

Circa 450 (5th Cent. Q2)

256A. Maitraka Kingdom of Valabhi (Gujarat, India): silver or billon 15 mm,

257. Marcianus of the Romans, 450-457, Antiochia or Constantinopolis mint

Circa 475 (5th Cent. Q4)

Circa 500 (6th Cent. Q1)

260. Anastasius I of the Romaions (Byzantine Empire), 491-518,

262. Iustinus (Justin) I, 518-527, or Iustinianus (Justinian) I, 527-565, of the

264. Ostrogoths, probably Ravenna mint (Italy): copper 18 mm, 1.85 g –

Circa 550 (6th Cent. Q3)

266. Iustinianus I of the Romaions, Theoupolis mint (Antiochia;

Circa 575 (6th Cent. Q4)

268. Toramana II of Kashmir or post-Toramama imitation (India or

269. Hataz (Iathaz, Iathlia) of Aksum, ca. 590-610 (Eritrea or Ethiopia):

270. Mauricius Tiberius of the Romaions, 582-602, Constantinopolis

271A. Mauricius Tiberius of the Romaions, Theoupolis

Berthod, D. (2011) Les imitations au type FEL TEMP REPARTIO,

Gautam, S. (2016?) Revisiting Indian History: Reading Gupta Coinage,

Grenet, F. (2005) “Kidarites,” Encyclopædia Iranica, at http://www.iranicaonline.org/ (accessed

Grierson, P. (1999) Byzantine Coinage, Washington: Dumbarton Oaks

Hartill, D. (2005) Cast Chinese Coins, Victoria: Trafford Publishing

Krishnamurthy, R. (2004) The Pallava Coins, Chennai: Garnet Publishers

Kurth, D. Helvetica’s Identification Help Pages, http://www.catbikes.ch/coinstuff/coins-ric.htm

Lendering, J., ed. (2018) Livius.org: Articles on ancient history http://www.livius.org/

Maier, M. (2016B) Small Change for the Poor: 200 to 25 BCE,

Munro-Hay, S. and B. Juel-Jensen (1995) Aksumite Coinage, London: Spink

NumisWiki – The Collaborative Numismatics Project,

Pina, M. and J. Marín (2018) Identifying Late Roman Bronze Coins,