Coin Hoards and Hoarding in The Roman World Jerome Mairat Full Chapter

Coin Hoards and Hoarding in the
Roman World Jerome Mairat

Visit to download the full and correct content document:
https://ebookmass.com/product/coin-hoards-and-hoarding-in-the-roman-world-jerome
-mairat/
OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 08/04/22, SPi
OX F O R D S T U D I E S O N T H E R OM A N E C O N OM Y
General Editors
A L A N B O W M A N A N D R E W W I L S O N
OX F O R D S T U D I E S O N T H E R OM A N E C O N OM Y
This innovative monograph series reflects a vigorous revival of interest in
the ancient economy, focusing on the Mediterranean world under Roman rule
(c.100 bc to ad 350). Carefully quantified archaeological and documentary data
are integrated to help ancient historians, economic historians, and archaeologists
think about economic behaviour collectively rather than from separate perspectives.
The volumes include a substantial comparative element and thus will be of interest
to historians of other periods and places.
Coin Hoards and

Hoarding in the
Roman World
Edited by
J E R OM E M A I R AT, A N D R EW W I L S O N ,
and
C H R I S HOWG E G O
1
1
Great Clarendon Street, Oxford, OX2 6DP,
United Kingdom
Oxford University Press is a department of the University of Oxford.
It furthers the University’s objective of excellence in research, scholarship,
and education by publishing worldwide. Oxford is a registered trade mark of
Oxford University Press in the UK and in certain other countries
© Oxford University Press 2022
The moral rights of the authors have been asserted
First Edition published in 2022
Impression: 1
All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in
a retrieval system, or transmitted, in any form or by any means, without the
prior permission in writing of Oxford University Press, or as expressly permitted
by law, by licence or under terms agreed with the appropriate reprographics
rights organization. Enquiries concerning reproduction outside the scope of the
above should be sent to the Rights Department, Oxford University Press, at the
address above
You must not circulate this work in any other form
and you must impose this same condition on any acquirer
Published in the United States of America by Oxford University Press
198 Madison Avenue, New York, NY 10016, United States of America
British Library Cataloguing in Publication Data
Data available
Library of Congress Control Number: 2021948623
ISBN 978–0–19–886638–1
DOI: 10.1093/oso/9780198866381.001.0001
Printed and bound in the UK by
TJ Books Limited
Links to third party websites are provided by Oxford in good faith and
for information only. Oxford disclaims any responsibility for the materials
contained in any third party website referenced in this work.
Contents
List of Figures vii

List of Tables xiii
List of Contributors xv
PA RT I . A P P R OAC H E S
1. Introduction: Coin Hoards and Hoarding in the Roman World 3

Chris Howgego and Andrew Wilson
2. Simplifying Complexity 23
Kris Lockyear
PA RT I I . R E G IO NA L S T U D I E S
3. Hoarding in Roman Britain: An Archaeological and

Contextual Approach 55
Eleanor Ghey
4. Hoarding in Burgundy, France: Micro-Study of a Region 68
Antony Hostein and Pierre Nouvel, with the collaboration
of Bernadette Soum and Ludovic Trommenschlager
5. Coin Hoards of the Gallic Empire 89
Jerome Mairat
6. The Interface between East and West in Hoards from Southern
Greece and Macedonia 111
Athena Iakovidou and Sophia Kremydi
7. Coin Hoards from Roman Dacia 130
Cristian Găzdac
8. Third-Century Hoards of Roman Provincial Coins from
Moesia Inferior197
Ivan Bonchev
9. Coin Hoarding in Roman Palestine: 63 bc–ad 300 208
Joshua Goldman
10. Roman Coin Hoards from Egypt: What Next? 221
Thomas Faucher
vi Contents
PA RT I I I . L O N G EV I T Y O F C I R C U L AT IO N
11. The Imperial Afterlife of Roman Republican Coins and the

Phenomenon of the Restored Denarii237
Bernhard E. Woytek
12. Hoarding of Denarii and the Reforms of Nero and
Septimius Severus 273
Kevin Butcher and Matthew Ponting
13. Coin Supply and Longevity of Circulation: Three Case Studies
from Hoards in North-West Europe 282
Benjamin D. R. Hellings
14. The End of the Small Change Economy in Northern Gaul in
the Fourth and the Fifth Centuries ad294
Johan van Heesch
15. Forms of largitio and ‘Denominations’ of Silver Plate in
Late Antiquity: The Evidence of Flanged Bowls 313
Richard Hobbs
Index 335
List of Figures
1.1. Distribution of all hoards entered into the Coin Hoards of the
Roman Empire Project database, as at 2 August 2021 (n = 15,805). 12
2.1. Map of late Roman mints (triangles) and hoards (circles) in the
minimal dataset. N.B. the location of the Bulgaria hoard is inexact. 31
2.2. (a): two variables from the minimal dataset plotted as a simple
scattergram. (b): replacing the two axes of A with a single axis. 33
2.3. (a): the ‘default’ three-dimensional scattergram in the rgl package in R.
(b): the scattergram rotated to a particularly poor viewpoint.
(c): the scattergram rotated to a more optimal viewpoint. 35
2.4. (a): Triangular graph (also known as a ternary diagram) for three mints
in the minimal example. (b): A single-axis graph for the three mints created
by dropping the points down from the triangular graph. 36
2.5. Map from CA of just three mints from the minimal dataset. The dash-dot
line joins the three mints to emphasize the similarity between this
and Fig. 2.4. 37
2.6. Map from the CA of the minimal example. 38
2.7. Map of the hoards from CA of hoards closing ad 350–4. 43
2.8. Map of the mints from CA of hoards closing ad 350–4. 44
2.9. Quantity of coins minted in Trier in hoards in the second dataset. 46
2.10. Map of late Roman mints (triangles) and hoards (circles) closing ad 350–4. 46
3.1. Method of discovery of hoards from 1800 to 2009, showing hoards
found during archaeological investigation, by metal detector or other
methods (including during agricultural and building work). 58
3.2. Dated Roman hoards per mill by Reece period of latest coin, excluding
Iron Age hoards, (black), and Walton’s British mean without Richborough
(Walton 2012) (grey). 62
4.1. The ager Aeduorum.71
4.2. Territory of Noyer-sur-Serein (Yonne): map of rural settlements,
(a) early third and (b) fourth century ad.73
4.3. The rural settlements (villas) in the centre-east of Gaul: a typology. 78
4.4. Distribution map of the hoards found in the centre-east of Gaul. 80
4.5. Chronological classification of hoards found in the rural settlements
of the centre-east of Gaul. 82
5.1. Distribution map of the gold coins of Postumus: hoards and isolated finds. 90
viii List of Figures
5.2. Distribution map of the gold coins of the successors of Postumus: hoards
and isolated finds. 91
5.3. Distribution map of the denarii and quinarii of the Gallic emperors:
hoards and isolated finds. 93
5.4. Distribution map of hoards containing bronze coins of Postumus.
(Source: material recorded in Hollard (1992) with the following additions:
Saint-Lyé-la-Fôret, Bourg-Bland, and the Ardennes hoards.) 95
5.5. Distribution map of hoards and inscriptions found in Hispania
(hoards larger than 100 coins with a terminus post quem
between 260 and 280). 101
7.1. Roman Dacia. 131
7.2. Distribution map of hoards closing under Hadrian. 132
7.3. Hoards closing under Hadrian: entries per year of reign. 132
7.4. Distribution map of hoards closing under Antoninus Pius. 133
7.5. Hoards closing under Antoninus Pius: entries/year of reign. 134
7.6. Distribution map of hoards closing under Marcus Aurelius. 137
7.7. Hoards closing under Marcus Aurelius: entries/year of reign. 138
7.8. Distribution map of hoards closing under Commodus. 140
7.9. Hoards closing under Commodus: entries/year of reign. 141
7.10. Distribution map of hoards closing under Septimius Severus. 142
7.11. Hoards closing under Septimius Severus: entries/year of reign. 142
7.12. Distribution map of hoards closing under Elagabalus and
Severus Alexander. 144
7.13. Hoards closing under Elagabalus: entries/year of reign. 145
7.14. Hoards closing under Severus Alexander: entries/year of reign. 146
7.15. Hoards closing under Balbinus: entries/year of reign. 147
7.16. Distribution map of hoards closing under Balbinus and Gordian III. 148
7.17. Hoards closing under Gordian III: entries/year of reign. 149
7.18. Distribution map of hoards closing under Philip I. 152
7.19. Hoards closing under Philip I: entries/year of reign. 153
7.20. Distribution map of hoards closing under Trajan Decius and
Trebonianus Gallus. 157
7.21. Hoards closing under Trajan Decius: entries/year of reign. 158
7.22. Hoards closing under Trebonianus Gallus: entries/year of reign. 159
7.23. Distribution map of hoards closing under Valerian, Gallienus,
and Aurelian. 161
7.24. The sole hoard (Olteni) closing under Valerian: entries/year of reign. 161
7.25. Hoards closing under Gallienus: entries/year of reign. 162
List of Figures ix
7.26. Hoards closing under Aurelian: entries/year of reign. 163

7.27. Graphs of the distribution of mints. (a) Severus to Trebonianus Gallus;
(b) Valerian and Aurelian 165
8.1. The province of Moesia Inferior and its three regions as defined in
this chapter. 199
8.2. Hoards closing in the reigns of Gordian III and Philip the Arab
(ad 238–49). 200
8.3. Percentage of coins in hoards closing in the reigns of Gordian III and
Philip the Arab, by mint or area of issue, for the whole province and
by region, excluding the unattributed coins (as Table 8.1). 201
8.4. Hoards closing between the reigns of Trajan Decius and Gallienus
(ad 249–68). 203
8.5. Percentage of coins in hoards closing between the reigns of Trajan
Decius and Gallienus (ad 249–68), by mint or area of issue, for the
whole province and by region, excluding the unattributed coins
(as Table 8.3). 204
8.6. Hoards closing between the reigns of Claudius Gothicus and Diocletian
(ad 268–305). 205
9.1. Chronological distribution of coin hoards from Roman Palestine. 216
9.2. Quantities of hoarded coins, classified by metal, unadjusted. 217
9.3. Quantities of hoarded coins, classified by metal, adjusted by excluding
hoards of over 500 coins. 218
10.1. Discovery date of the coin hoards of the Roman Empire: total (black)
and Egypt (light grey). (Source: CHRE database, April 2017.) 222
10.2. Number of hoards from Roman Egypt by date of deposition. 226
10.3. Number of coins in hoards from Roman Egypt by date of deposition. 227
10.4. Numbers of coins in hoards from Roman Egypt by metal. 227
11.1. Octavian, cistophorus; RIC Augustus 476: Roma Numismatics 17
(28 March 2019), no. 627 (11.69 g, 12 h, 30 mm). © Roma Numismatics Ltd. 240
11.2. Octavian, aureus; RIC ‒ (NC 159, pp. 169ff.): British Museum,
reg. no. 1995,0401.1 (7.95 g, 12 h, 18 mm). © The Trustees of the
British Museum.241
11.3. Mark Antony, denarius; RRC 544/23: CNG Triton 23 (14 January 2020),
no. 631 (3.77 g, 5 h, 17 mm). © Classical Numismatic Group, LLC. 248
11.4. Gallienus, antoninianus; not in the reference works (NC 162, pp. 346ff.):
British Museum, reg. no. 2000,0402.1 (1.70 g, 12 h, max. 21 mm).
© The Trustees of the British Museum. 254
11.5. Roman Republic (anonymous), quadrigatus; RRC 28/3: CNG Triton 22
(8 January 2019), no. 780 (6.65 g, 5 h, 22 mm). © Classical Numismatic
Group, LLC. 255
x List of Figures
11.6. Trajan, restored denarius; Woytek 2010, no. 801: Tkalec 23 October 1998,
no. 154 (3.22 g, 19 mm). © A. Tkalec AG. 257
11.7. Marcus Aurelius and Lucius Verus, restored denarius; RIC Marcus
Aurelius 443: CNG 114 (13 May 2020), no. 903 (2.76 g, 12 h, 19.5 mm).
© Classical Numismatic Group, LLC. 259
11.8. Anonymously restored denarius (struck under Hadrian), RIC Augustus
208 (RN 174, pp. 183ff.): Saint-Omer, Musée de l’Hôtel Sandelin, collection
numismatique (3.59 g, 12 h, max. 22 mm). © CNRS, Centre Ernest
Babelon, Orléans. 260
13.1. Percentage of non-hoarded gold coin finds by issue period in North-West
Europe.284
13.2. Percentage of hoarded Neronian aurei by closing period in
North-West Europe. 285
13.3. Percentage of Neronian aurei in hoards by closing period in
North-West Europe (ad 54–192).286
13.4. Eastern denarii as a percentage of denarii struck ad 193–6/7 found
in hoards from Roman Britain with a minimum of 20 denarii struck
ad 193–6/7, by t.p.q. Data: Howgego (2002). 289
13.5. Eastern denarii as a percentage of denarii struck ad 193–6/7 found
in hoards from Roman Germany with a minimum of ten denarii struck
ad 193–6/7, by t.p.q. Data: Hellings (2016). 289
13.6. Percentage of Domitianic denarii in hoards by closing period in
13.7. Percentage of Vespasianic denarii in hoards by closing period in
13.8. Percentage of Domitianic denarii, dated to one year, for all closing
periods in hoards from North-West Europe. 292
14.1. The coins from the excavations of the site of the ‘cathedral’ of Tongeren.
(Data: van Heesch, Ben Amar, and Stroobants 2017). 296
14.2. Tongeren, the coins from the dark earth. Imitations of the Gallic
Empire are assigned to the period ad 275–94. 298
15.1. Detail from the congiarium scene on the Arch of Constantine, showing the
distribution of largesse in the form of coins to senators. Photo: C. Faraglia,
Neg. D-DAI-Rom 1 32.11, reproduced by kind permission of the Deutsches
Archäologisches Institut, Rom. 314
15.2. Examples of silver flanged bowls of the second half of the fourth century:
a plain bowl from the Hoxne treasure (left) and a decorated bowl from
the Mildenhall treasure (right). Reproduced with the kind permission
of the Trustees of the British Museum.325
15.3. A page from the Notitia Dignitatum showing possible flanged bowls
filled with coins. Bodleian MS. Canon. Misc. 378, fol. 42v, reproduced by
kind permission of The Bodleian Libraries, The University of Oxford.327
List of Figures xi
15.4. The upper panel of the venatio consular diptych showing a possible
flanged bowl being held by the central seated consul. Reproduced with the
kind permission of the National Museums Liverpool (World Museum).328
15.5. The insides of beads on four flanged bowl in the Mildenhall treasure: all
show the same die flaw, proving they were struck using the same die set,
except one (upper left) which must have used a different die set.
Reproduced with the kind permission of the Trustees of the British Museum.330
List of Tables
2.1. The ‘minimal’ dataset. 30

2.2. Numbers of coins of two mints in the hoards: (a) numbers of coins;
(b) expressed as per mill. 32
2.3. Numbers of coins of three mints in the hoards: (a) numbers of coins;
(b) expressed as per mill. 34
2.4. Diagnostic statistics from the CA of the minimal example. 39
2.5. Hoards closing ad 350–4. 42
2.6. Diagnostic statistics from the CA of hoards closing ad 350–4. 45
4.1. Hoards and gold finds discovered in the ager Aeduorum (current state
of research, July 2017). 74
4.2. Discovery date of hoards found in the ager Aeduorum (current state
of research, July 2017). 75
4.3. Hoards and gold finds (in parentheses) discovered in the ager
Aeduorum: t.p.q. and chronology (current state of research, July 2017). 75
4.4. Volume and chronological classification of hoards with a t.p.q.
between ad 250 and 330 found in rural settlements of
centre-east Gaul (P. Nouvel). 83
4.5. Distribution of hoards with a t.p.q. between ad 250 and 330 according
to their number of coins and the category of rural settlements where
they were found (P. Nouvel). 84
5.1. Hoards of over 100 coins from the Iberian peninsula with a terminal
date between ad 260 and 280. 99
5.2. Inscriptions of Gallienus and Postumus from the Iberian peninsula. 100
5.3. Proportions of coins from the Gallic Empire and the Central Empire in
selected hoards dated ad 260–74. Coins in the name of Postumus but
minted at Milan are included among the coins of the Central Empire, as
their place of minting and fabric make them closer to the coins of
Gallienus and Claudius II than to the pre-268 coins of Postumus. 103
6.1 The movement of local coins (ad 193–268). 118
6.2. Unpublished bronze hoards from the cemetery of Sindos. 123
7.1. The distribution of mints for coins from hoards in Dacia. 164
Philip the Arab, by mint or area of issue, for the whole province and
by region, excluding the unattributed coins. 200
xiv List of Tables
Philip the Arab, by province of issue, for the whole province and by
region, including the unattributed coins. 201
8.3. Percentage of coins in hoards closing between the reigns of Trajan Decius
and Gallienus (ad 249–68), by mint or area of issue, for the whole
province and by region, excluding the unattributed coins. 202
8.4. Percentage of coins in hoards closing between the reigns of Trajan Decius
and Gallienus (ad 249–68), by province of issue, for the whole province
and by region, including the unattributed coins. 203
10.1. Number of coins in Ptolemaic and Roman hoards from Egypt. 228
11.1. Structural overview of the restored coinages of the Principate. 261
13.1. Percentage of gold by issue period of coin and closing period of hoard,
from hoards in northwest Europe (ad 54–192). 288
14.1. Coins from the stratified context US 1006 in Tournai, dated ad 470–570
(28 coins, of which 18 are identified). Data: van Heesch (2012: 71–2). 299
14.2. Burials with coins from the Rue Perdue in Tournai (im. = imitation).
Data: van Heesch and Weinkauf (2016). 300
14.3. Roman burials with coins, second half of the fourth century. Data:
Lallemand (1966a; 1966b); van Heesch (1992). 301
15.1. Imperial largitio and possible largitio vessels, in ascending order of weight. 317
15.2. Flanged bowls, decorated and undecorated, in ascending order of weight.
The weights preceded by a ? indicate uncertainty over the intended
weight attribution if less than 85% of the intended weight (see discussion
in main text). 324
15.3. Flanged bowls with beaded rims, grouped by average bead size. 329
List of Contributors
Kevin Butcher, Professor, Department of Classics and Ancient History, University of

Warwick. His research interests include the Roman monetary economy, monetary history,
coin finds and coin circulation, Roman provincial coinage, and Hellenistic and Roman
Syria. Recent publications include: The Metallurgy of Roman Silver Coinage: From the
Reform of Nero to the Reform of Trajan (with Matthew Ponting, Cambridge, 2014); Regional
History and the Coin Finds from Assur. From the Achaemenids to the Nineteenth Century
(with Stefan Heidemann, Wiesbaden, 2017); Debasement. Manipulation of Coin Standards
in Pre-modern Monetary Systems (ed., Oxford, 2020).
Ivan Bonchev, Director, Pax Romana Ltd. He has a particular interest in the Roman coin-
age of Lower Moesia, and wrote his doctoral thesis on The monetary circulation of Moesia
inferior from the beginning of the 2nd century AD to the end of the 3rd century AD (as
referred to from the Bulgarian evidence) (University of Oxford, 2018).
Thomas Faucher, Archaeologist and numismatist, researcher at the Centre d’Études
Alexandrines (CNRS) in Alexandria, Egypt. He works on the economy of Graeco-Roman
Egypt, focusing primarily on Ptolemaic and Roman coinages, and is Director of the French
Archaeological Mission in the Eastern Desert of Egypt. Recent publications include:
Money Rules! The Monetary Economy of Egypt, from Persians until the Beginning of Islam
(ed., Cairo, 2020); Samut Nord. L’exploitation de l’or du désert Oriental à l’époque ptolé-
maïque (ed. with B. Redon, Cairo, 2020).
Cristian Găzdac, Professor of Security Studies, University of Cluj-Napoca and Researcher

1st class Romanian Academy. His research interests include the security studies, cultural
heritage protection, ancient numismatics. He is a member of the Coin Hoards of the
Roman Empire Project, University of Oxford. Recent publications include: Wealthy or not
in a time of turmoil? The Roman Imperial Hoard from Gruia (Mehedinti County, Romania),
(with Marian Neagoe, Oxford, 2018); Counterfeiting for Hoarding? The Roman Hoard Ulpia
Traiana Sarmizegetusa 2006 (with Ovidiu Oarga, Cluj-Napoca, 2020); Group and
Individual Tragedies in Roman Europe. The Evidence of Hoards, Epigraphic and Literary
Sources (ed., Cluj-Napoca, 2020).
Eleanor Ghey, Curator: Iron Age and Roman Coin Hoards at the British Museum. She
works on Iron Age and Roman coin hoards reported under the Treasure Act 1996 in
Britain and was a researcher on the British Museum and University of Leicester AHRC-
funded coin hoard project, with research interests in the Iron Age to Roman transition and
the archaeology of deposition and sacred space. Recent publications include: Iron Age and
Roman Coin Hoards in Britain (with Roger Bland et al., Oxford, 2020) and Hoards: Hidden
History (London, 2015).
xvi List of Contributors
Joshua Goldman, independent scholar. His research interests include the archaeology of
the Roman Levant, coin circulation in the Roman Empire, and the analysis of coin hoard
evidence. As a graduate student at the University of Oxford, he contributed to the Coin
Hoards of the Roman Empire Project, collecting coin hoard data from the Levant with an
emphasis on the region of Roman Palestine.
Johan van Heesch, former Head of Coins and Medals at the Royal Library of Belgium
(KBR). He is ‘emeritus professor with formal duties’ and teaches numismatics at the uni-
versities of Leuven (KU Leuven) and Louvain-la-Neuve (UCLouvain). His main research
topic is the coinage of the Roman Empire.
Benjamin D. R. Hellings, is the Jackson-Tomasko Associate Curator of Numismatics at
the Yale University Art Gallery. His research interests include the quantification of ancient
coin production and the Roman economy, the circulation and use of ancient coins, and the
use of numismatic ‘big data’ for research and teaching. His most recent publications
include ‘A linked frontier? Denarius finds within and beyond the frontier’ (in Alexsanderia.
Studies on Items, Ideas, and History. Dedicated to Professor Alexander Bursche on the
Occasion of his 65th Birthday, eds R. Ciołek and R. Chowaniec, Wiesbaden, 2021) and
‘Further considerations on the circulation of Augustan bronze coins in the Roman north-
west’ (in Detur Dignissimo. Studies in honour of Johan van Heesch, eds. F. Stroobants and
C. Lauwers, Brussels, 2020).
Richard Hobbs, Senior Curator of Romano-British and late Roman collections, the British
Museum. His research interests include the role of silver plate in elite societies in late
Antiquity, the material culture of Roman Britain, and the use of coinage at Pompeii. Recent
publications include: ‘Uses of decorated silver plate in Imperial Rome and Sasanian Iran’
(in Imagining the Divine: Exploring Art in Religions of Late Antiquity across Eurasia, eds.
J. Elsner and R. Wood, 2021) and The Mildenhall Treasure: Late Roman Silver Plate from
East Anglia (British Museum, 2016).
Antony Hostein, Directeur d’études at l’École Pratique des Hautes Études Paris Sciences et
Lettres Research University, France (EPHE-PSL). He studied Ancient history at the
University of Paris 1 Panthéon-Sorbonne, and taught there as an Associate Professor
before taking up his post at l’EPHE. His fields of research are Roman history and numis-
matics. He is the author of La cité et l’empereur (Paris, 2012) and Roman Provincial Coinage,
vol. 9: From Trajan Decius to Uranius Antoninus (AD 249–254) (with Jerome Mairat,
London and Paris, 2016).
Chris Howgego, Keeper of the Heberden Coin Room in the Ashmolean Museum and
Professor of Greek and Roman Numismatics in the University of Oxford. His current
research focuses on Roman hoards and hoarding, and on the coinage of Roman Egypt. He
is a Director of the Coin Hoards of the Roman Empire Project and of Roman Provincial
Coinage Online. He is also an editor of the series Roman Imperial Coinage and Roman
Provincial Coinage. He is the author of Ancient History from Coins (London, 1995), cur-
rently available in six languages, and has written widely on Roman coinage and history.
Athena Iakovidou, Research Associate, Academy of Athens. Her research interests include
Greek and Roman provincial coinage, numismatic circulation, iconography of the archaic
and classical periods, and digital humanities. Recent publications include: ‘The Battleground
List of Contributors xvii
of Humanities Data: Handling Multidisciplinarity and Diversity’ (with G. Chrysovitsanos

et al. in DARIAH Annual Event: Humanities Data. Warsaw, 2019); ‘Corinth and Athens:
Numismatic Circulation from the Late Republic to the High Empire’ (with S. Kremydi
in Fides. Contributions to Numismatics in Honor of Richard B. Witschonke. American
Numismatic Society, 2015); and ‘Nike in the Coinage of Epirus and the Adjacent Areas’ (in
Numismatic History and Economy in Epirus during Antiquity, Athens, 2013).
Sophia Kremydi, Research Director, Institute of Historical Research, National Hellenic

Research Foundation. Her research interests focus on Hellenistic and Roman provincial
coinages, numismatic circulation and coin hoards, history, coinage and institutions of
ancient Macedonia. Recent publications include: The ‘Autonomous’ Coinages under the
late Antigonids, (ΜΕΛΕΤΗΜΑΤΑ 79, Athens, 2018); and Les Alexandres après Alexandre.
Histoire d’une monnaie commune (edited with M.-Chr. Marcellesi, ΜΕΛΕΤΗΜΑΤΑ 81,
Athens, 2020).
Kris Lockyear, Senior Lecturer, Institute of Archaeology, University College London. His
interests include archaeological field methods, especially geophysical survey, the applica-
tion of multivariate statistical methods to archaeological problems, using coinage evidence
to study past societies, and the archaeology of Hertfordshire. He is currently leading the
community archaeology project to survey the Roman city of Verulamium. Recent publica-
tions include ‘Under the Park. Recent Geophysical Surveys at Verulamium (St Albans,
Hertfordshire, UK)’ (with Ellen Shlasko, Archaeological Prospection 2017), ‘Mind the Gap!
Roman Republican coin hoards from Italy and Iberia at the end of the second century BC’
(Numismatic Chronicle 2018) and Archaeology in Hertfordshire: Recent Research (ed.,
Hatfield, 2015).
Jerome Mairat, Collections Manager, Heberden Coin Room, Ashmolean Museum,
University of Oxford. He has a particular interest in Roman provincial coinage and the
coinage of the Gallic Empire. His publications include: Roman Provincial Coinage, vol. 3:
Nerva, Trajan and Hadrian (AD 98–138) (with Michel Amandry, Andrew Burnett, William
Metcalf, Laurent Bricault, and Maryse Blet-Lemarquand, London and Paris, 2015), and
Roman Provincial Coinage, vol. 9: From Trajan Decius to Uranius Antoninus (AD 249–254)
(with Antony Hostein, London and Paris, 2016).
Pierre Nouvel, Professor of Archaeology at the University of Bourgogne, Dijon (France).

He holds his degrees from Bourgogne and Franche-Comté Universities. His research inter-
ests include ancient material culture and settlement patterns in Gaul from the Iron Age to
Late Antiquity. He has published numerous articles on these fields in journals such as
Gallia and the Revue archéologique de l’Est.
Matthew Ponting, Senior Lecturer in Archaeological Materials, Department of Archaeology,

Classics and Egyptology at the University of Liverpool. His research interests include
archaeometallurgy in its broadest sense, especially non-ferrous and precious metals, the
production of ancient coinage, and the evolution of copper-based alloys in the Hellenistic
to early medieval Near East. Recent publications include: The Metallurgy of Roman Silver
Coinage: From the Reforms of Nero to the Reform of Trajan (with Kevin Butcher, Oxford,
2014); ‘Pretia Victoriae or just an occasional bonus? Analysis of Iron Age lead artefacts
from the Somerset Lake Villages’ (Oxford Journal of Archaeology 37, 2018).
xviii List of Contributors
Bernadette Soum, Archaeologist and numismatist at the Institut national de recherches

archéologiques préventives (INRAP), France. Her particular interests are the archaeological
contexts of numismatic finds of the Roman imperial period in Gaul, and she has published
on sites and assemblages from the region around Autun and the Côte d’Or.
Ludovic Trommenschlager, PhD student, École Pratique des Hautes Études, Paris Sciences
et Lettres Research University, (UMR ANHIMA) and Université de Lille, France. His
research interests include archaeological field survey, numismatics of the Roman empire,
and Gallia Belgica. Recent publications include: ‘Le monnayage issu de phases de
démantèlement : un cas complexe à interpréter’ (with G. Brkojewitsch, M. Legagneux, and
S. Marquié, Journal of Archaeological Numismatics, Volume 5–6, 2016: 95–110), ‘Le trésor
de Saint-Germain-lès-Arpajon’ (ed. V. Drost, Trésors monétaires 29, Bibliothèque nationale
de France, 2020), ‘La villa romaine de Grigy à Metz (Moselle)’ (ed. G. Brkojewitsch, supplé-
ment Gallia, 65, 2021).
Andrew Wilson, Professor of the Archaeology of the Roman Empire, University of Oxford.
His research interests include the economy of the Roman empire, ancient technology,
ancient water supply and usage, Roman North Africa, and archaeological field survey.
With Alan Bowman, he co-directs the Oxford Roman Economy Project, and with Chris
Howgego, he co-directs the Coin Hoards of the Roman Empire Project. Recent publications
include: The Economy of Pompeii (ed. with Miko Flohr, Oxford, 2017); Trade, Commerce,
and the State in the Roman world (ed. with Alan Bowman, Oxford, 2018); Recycling and
Reuse in the Roman Economy (ed. with Chloë Duckworth, Oxford, 2020).
Bernhard E. Woytek, Deputy Head of the Department of Classical Studies, Austrian

Archaeological Institute, Austrian Academy of Sciences. His main research interests
are Roman numismatics, ancient economy, and the history of classical studies in the
early modern period. Publications include: Arma et nummi. Forschungen zur römischen
Finanzgeschichte und Münzprägung der Jahre 49 bis 42 v. Chr. (Vienna, 2003); Die
Reichsprägung des Kaisers Traianus (98–117) (2 vols, Vienna, 2010); Infrastructure and
Distribution in Ancient Economies (ed., Vienna, 2018); Ars critica numaria. Joseph Eckhel
(1737–1798) and the Transformation of Ancient Numismatics (ed. with Daniela Williams,
Vienna, 2021).
PART I
A PPROACH E S
Introduction: Coin Hoards and Hoarding

in the Roman World
Chris Howgego and Andrew Wilson
THE COIN HOARDS OF THE ROMAN EMPIRE PROJECT
This volume arises out of the first conference held under the auspices of the Coin
Hoards of the Roman Empire Project, on the topic of Coin Hoarding in the
Roman Empire, on 15–16 September 2016 in Oxford. The Project is a joint initia-
tive of the Ashmolean Museum and the Oxford Roman Economy Project. It is the
brainchild of Baron Lorne Thyssen-Bornemisza, to whom we are immensely
grateful for encouragement and support, and is generously funded by the
Augustus Foundation. The Project intends to fill a major lacuna in the digital
coverage of coin hoards from antiquity, complementing existing online treat-
ments of hoards from the Greek world and the Roman Republic. It aims to collect
information about hoards of all coinages in use in the Roman Empire between
approximately 30 bc and ad 400. Imperial coinage forms the main focus of the
Project, but Iron Age and Roman Provincial coinages in circulation within this
period are also included to give complete coverage of the monetary systems of
both the West and the East. The intention is to provide the foundations for a sys-
tematic Empire-wide study of hoarding and to promote the integration of numis-
matic data into broader research on the Roman economy.
The information gathered is being made freely available online through the
Project’s web application with the intention of saving researchers from repeatedly
gathering the same data and of allowing everyone to test hypotheses for themselves.1
The Project will also provide stable digital identities for Roman hoards as part of
linked open data initiatives for numismatics. The Project is informed by the scope
of the Oxford Roman Economy Project but the strategy behind data collection
and presentation is to remain as universal as possible, without any restriction to
the field of economic history. The data should, for example, equally facilitate analyses
1 Project web application: http://chre.ashmus.ox.ac.uk/.
Chris Howgego and Andrew Wilson, Introduction: Coin Hoards and Hoarding in the Roman World In: Coin Hoards and
Hoarding in the Roman World. Edited by: Jerome Mairat, Andrew Wilson, and Chris Howgego, Oxford University Press.
© Oxford University Press 2022. DOI: 10.1093/oso/9780198866381.003.0001
4 Chris Howgego and Andrew Wilson
of hoarding as a cultural phenomenon or quantitative studies of numismatic

iconography and the differential distribution of types.2 In short, we do not want to
prejudge the questions which researchers in the future may want to ask of the data.
The Project is currently entering its second phase. In the first phase, it aimed to
collect summary hoard data from as many Roman provinces as possible, as well
as inputting a selection of hoards at the level of the individual coin. As of the time
of writing (October 2021), the database contains information on 16,374 hoards.
The aim of the second phase is to record all hoards at the level of the coin, where
such data are available. That, of course, is a very substantial undertaking. The
primary objective must be to make readily available the substantial quantity of
published data but we should not forget the daunting amount of unpublished
material in museums. Thomas Faucher’s careful assessment in chapter 10 here of
hoards from Egypt, for example, reminds us that the Graeco-Roman Museum of
Alexandria and the Egyptian Museum of Cairo contain some 400,000 ancient
coins between them. Many of these will have derived from hoards.
The Project is managed by a small core team but could not succeed without its
extensive range of international collaborators. At the time of writing this includes
49 international institutions from 26 countries. Fourteen graduate students from
seven countries have already been involved. We are immensely grateful for the
way in which everyone has come on board. We list current collaborators at the
end of this Introduction, pp. 17–19. Collaborators are able to login and contribute
online through the Project’s web application. This results in a very flexible way of
working. Collaborations may be with national schemes for recording hoard data,
with existing research projects, or be set up as part of proposals for new research
projects. They may recognize generous donations of existing data or represent
entirely new initiatives to gather regional data. Graduate students engage with the
Project in various ways as part of their research, and interns or volunteers may
also be involved in data entry. Other collaborations may be technical, for example
to promote appropriate statistical analysis or the understanding of archaeological
context, circulation, or metrology. We are so far only scratching the surface of the
flexible ways to work made possible by new technology.
Not all coin hoards are great treasures; their contents vary from tens of thou-
sands of gold or silver coins to a handful of bronze. The Project employs a broad
definition of a coin hoard as any group of coins which appear to have been depos-
ited together. This has the merit of avoiding definitions which depend on the
interpretation of a hoard, for example as buried in an emergency, ritually depos-
ited, or simply lost. The underlying utility of the definition adopted is that such
groups provide evidence for which coins circulated together, or at least were avail-
able, in a given context. The Project pragmatically records all coin assemblages
that were originally published as hoards but assigns them to different categories,
such as ‘group of single finds’, where they fall outside the stated definition. When it
2 For examples of such iconographic study see Noreña (2011); Rowan (2012).
Introduction 5
is clear that a votive deposit was deposited as a single group we include it, but we
exclude serial votive deposits of individual coins over a considerable period.
Similarly burial or grave deposits may be useful for dating the circulation period
of coins.3 We record these as hoards where a group of coins was clearly buried
together, for example in a purse; otherwise, they may be recorded as a group of
single finds where it is deemed appropriate. We record other kinds of object
included in coin hoards, such as plate or jewellery, and also describe any surviving
containers and details of contexts. In addition, we systematically include single finds
of gold coins as their high value and archaeological behaviour merit their consider-
ation as hoards in themselves.4 For pragmatic reasons the Project does not seek to
record non-coin hoards, although they need to be borne in mind. To ignore them
involves the loss of a broader context for hoarding patterns, and indeed non-coin
hoards may be closely associated with hoards that do include coins.5
THIS BOOK
The aim of this book is to introduce the Project and to give an idea of its scope
and the range of research themes being addressed by those connected with it and
of the methodologies required. The volume reflects the range of the Project’s col-
laborations, with chapters by those gathering data on particular regions, by
graduate students, and by those employing hoard data to address methodological
considerations or monetary history. Future conferences will focus on particular
approaches, with themes informed by the connection with the Oxford Roman
Economy Project.
A feature of the current volume is the coverage of hoards from the west, centre,
and east of the Roman Empire. Such coverage is important in order to assess
interpretations in as broad a context as possible. Treatments of coin hoards across
the whole Empire are not unknown. For the Republic there is Lockyear’s import
ant statistical treatment, which includes much of methodological interest, and
which was based on Crawford’s catalogue of hoards, itself now available online.6
For the imperial period, there is still much of value in Bolin’s use of imperial
hoards to examine monetary change and behaviour, as is pointed out by Butcher
and Ponting in chapter 12 of this volume.7 We also have Hobbs’ survey of pre-
cious metal deposits, from ad 200 to 700.8 Although this is confined to Europe
and to precious metals, it demonstrates the advantages of analysing hoarding pat-
terns over a considerable geographical area and over a long period. The most
3 As discussed by van Heesch in chapter 14 and by Iakovidou and Kremydi in chapter 6.

4 For single gold coins behaving like hoards see Hiernard (1992: 106).
5 As Ghey points out in chapter 3.
6 Lockyear (2007); Crawford (1969); Coin Hoards of the Roman Republic Online: http://numismatics.
org/chrr/.
7 Bolin (1958). 8 Hobbs (2006).
s ignificant Empire-wide discussion of imperial hoards from a monetary perspective

remains that of Duncan-Jones, which unfortunately does not make available the
detailed underlying evidence, employs unreproducible statistical techniques,
and mixes important insights with a variety of implausible conclusions.9 We still
lack Empire-wide treatments of coin hoards which readers can interrogate for
themselves.
STATISTICAL TECHNIQUES
The Project seeks to encourage the application and development of appropriate

and reproducible interpretative techniques. This volume makes a contribution in
this regard through chapter 2, by Kris Lockyear, on the exploratory multivariate
approach using correspondence analysis. The technique is not novel, but the
point is to make the technique accessible to those with minimal mathematical
training through worked examples relating to hoards. If techniques are not
accessible there is a risk that they will be ignored. In his analysis of coin hoarding
under the Roman Republic Lockyear also employed cluster analysis to create
groups within datasets and to isolate odd items. The technique is usefully dis-
cussed there.10 During the conference Andrew Bevan explained the potential of
correlative modelling via multivariate regression and risk surface analysis.
Elsewhere he has described how to address the various influences on recovery of
archaeological evidence (including post-depositional preservation and modern
recording) via regression models, how to compare artefact distributions with
proxies for the historical distribution of people, and the use of relative risk sur-
faces to identify interesting spatial patterns in one dataset against the background
of another.11 All of these techniques are potentially of interest when trying to
interpret hoard evidence. For example, numismatic evidence is in general much
more frequent in Britain to the south-east of a line from the Humber to the
Severn but then many types of data (most obviously, the distribution of towns
and villas) show the same skewing to the south-east. How does the numismatic
evidence look when viewed against the background of such expected skewing?
These few examples of potentially useful statistical techniques are indicative only.
One of the features of future conferences connected with the Project will be to
explore such appropriate and reproducible techniques of analysis. We need to
address the paradox posed by Lockyear: that of having lots of data but using only
the most basic tools to analyse it.
9 Duncan-Jones (1994), with Metcalf (1995) and Howgego (1996).

10 Lockyear (2007: 179–203). 11 Bevan (2012).
Introduction 7
HOARD-LEVEL ANALYSIS
There is an excellent review by Peter Guest of many of the methodological

challenges in understanding the phenomenon of coin hoarding, which need not
be repeated here.12 This review emphasizes the archaeological perspective on
hoards as reflecting social practices and traditions rather than historical events
such as invasions, and also the possibility that some hoarding was a result of ritual
deposition with no intent to recover. It also asks the extent to which monetary
change may have precipitated hoarding.
A particular aspect of monetary change in some contexts is the demonetiza
tion of the coins being replaced. The connection between hoarding and demonet
ization has often been challenged on the basis that people would not just abandon
demonetized coins (pecuniae vetitae) which would still have had a metallic value.
First, this may be to confuse deposition and non-recovery. Second, we need to
take into account possible penalties for retaining forbidden coins:
But it shall be entirely unlawful for anybody to buy or handle forbidden coins
(pecuniae vetitae), because it is proper for the price of a thing to be in coins
established in public use and not in merchandise (merces). And finally, it is our
pleasure that if by any chance any coin other than that continuing in public use
shall be found in the possession of any merchant, it should be forfeited to the
control of the treasury with all the property of the offender.13
If measures like this had any teeth, the penalty of confiscation, not just of the
coins concerned but of all the offender’s property, provided an obvious motiv
ation for the concealment of demonetized coins. The legal aspects of the monet
ary framework deserve greater attention than they are usually given.
Guest’s review of methodological challenges was in a volume from a British
perspective, although it considers the Western Empire too. Hoarding in Britain
has also been the subject of a recent magisterial survey by Bland and the basis of a
major project based at the British Museum and the University of Leicester.14 The
key contribution of this project, summarized here by Eleanor Ghey in chapter 3,
is to demonstrate from the British data the value of a systematic consideration of
the archaeological and landscape contexts for hoarding. This is really the only
way to describe the phenomenon of ritual deposition and to assess its significance
within the overall pattern of hoarding. Antony Hostein and Pierre Nouvel also
demonstrate here the value of a detailed archaeological survey in relation to
Burgundy (chapter 4). Noteworthy are their observations that 80% of recorded
hoards derive from rural contexts and that among hoards from villa sites, the
12 Guest (2015), drawing on Guest (1994). 13 C.Th. IX.23.1 (ad 356).

14 Bland (2018).
largest hoards are characteristic of the wealthiest villas. They are thus helping to
develop a methodology to relate the physical evidence to the status of owners at a
local level.
The motivation for hoarding is an area in which an Empire-wide perspective is
obviously of value. By way of example, the connection between observed hoard-
ing patterns and disruption by warfare and invasion has been heavily problem
atized for the north-west,15 where it was once more or less taken for granted, but
is still the standard explanatory model for eastern Europe. This might in principle
reflect either differences in evidence or differences in interpretation, or some
combination of the two. The chapter here by Ivan Bonchev (chapter 8), which
rejects the link between hoards of civic coins and the Gothic invasion of the mid-
dle of the third century, usefully demonstrates how a more nuanced approach
may be applied to Moesia Inferior. In Greece, a concentration of hoards closing
with Gallienus may be associated with the Herulian invasion but, as Athena
Iakovidou and Sophia Kremydi point out in chapter 6, monetary change may also
have provided a motivation for hoarding. On the other hand, the connection
between observed hoarding patterns and military activity is patent in chapter 9,
by Joshua Goldman on Roman Palestine, where dramatic peaks are associated
with the First and Second Jewish Revolts. It is interesting to observe that the
‘invasion’ model is now being reasserted for north-west Europe, at least for par-
ticular contexts which can be tested: for example, where a hoarding horizon may
be correlated with evidence for the abandonment of settlements.16 On the other
hand not all external threats produce observable peaks in hoarding,17 and not all
peaks in hoarding require an external threat (in the sense of an invasion) as an
explanation. For example, if hoarding was a normal practice, then we might
expect the increased mortality of the Antonine Plague (ad 165–180s) and the
Plague of Cyprian (ad 249–c. 270) to have resulted in much higher levels of
non-recovery, and therefore in increases in the numbers of hoards from these
periods. But how would we distinguish hoards buried by owners who later died
of the Antonine Plague from those buried and not recovered owing to the
Marcomannic invasions, at least in frontier regions, or those not recovered because
of the Plague of Cyprian from those not recovered as a result of the military crises
of the mid third century? A monocausal explanation is out of the question. The
debate clearly has some way to run, and a properly balanced view has yet to
emerge. Hypotheses need to be tested by reference to detailed local evidence, but at
the same time there is much to be learned from an Empire-wide perspective.
The data becoming available through the Project are substantial. Interpretation
of this evidence inevitably faces methodological challenges. Three are singled out
here: the dating of deposition, the question of value, and the positivist fallacy.
15 Guest (2015); Hobbs (2006: 128–30). 16 van Heesch (2017).

17 Hobbs (2006: 128–30) points out that there are no hoarding peaks for Italy or for Gaul in the
early fifth century.
Introduction 9
The dating of hoard deposits may be key to interpretation: to what extent do

they correlate with exogenous shocks like invasions or plagues, with monetary
reforms, or with other potential causes? There are also different concepts to
unpack: dates of withdrawal from circulation, dates of deposition, and reasons for
non-recovery. The default mode is to assume withdrawal and deposition at the
date of the latest coin in a hoard. This may often be close to the truth but it pro-
vides only an approximation. Coins may have a considerable circulation life.18
Later coins may not have been available or earlier, finer coins preferentially
selected. In this vein Butcher and Ponting note here in chapter 12 that the pres-
ence of later coins of other denominations in mixed hoards from Pompeii dem-
onstrate that denarius hoards could be buried significantly later than we would
suppose from the denarii alone.
Independent controls on dating deserve serious attention. Archaeological con-
texts are of obvious importance but are available only in a small minority of cases.
Ghey discusses here examples of the disparity between deposition date and hoard
contents. Archaeological context may also help us to differentiate between dates
of deposition and the reasons for non-recovery. So the Neftenbach hoard appears
to have been deposited in the 260s, but was presumably not recovered because the
building in which it was found was destroyed in the 280s.19 Another potentially
useful independent control on the date of withdrawal from circulation is provided
by coin wear, as Hoyer has demonstrated by using regression analyses on hoards
of sestertii of ad 69–161 from Gaul.20 This technique can work only when we can
trust the weights of the coins recovered. Debased silver coins, for example, can
lose a considerable amount of weight by chemical leaching while buried.
Nonetheless this will be an important avenue to explore once the Project has a
more substantial body of data at the coin level.
Hoards may range from substantial treasures to a handful of small change.
Different explanatory models will apply. Hobbs in his survey of precious metal
deposits in Europe (chapter 15) addresses the question of value and so empha-
sizes the need to consider the whole range of precious metal artefacts hoarded,
and not just coins: an approach reinforced by the holistic treatment of silver in
the later Roman Empire which he advocates here. Value may shape hoarding pat-
terns. For example, one explanation for periods of deposition of huge hoards of
base metal coins, like late radiates, may be that gold or silver was not sufficiently
available to store large sums.21 This is also hinted at by the inverse chronological
correlation between hoarding and finds of single gold coins noted here, in chapter 4,
by Hostein and Nouvel for Burgundy.
18 Guest (2015: 110–11); Lockyear (2012). 19 von Kaenel and Kemmers (2009: 19–20).
20 Hoyer (2013).
21 An explanation also advocated here, chapter 14, by van Heesch to explain the hoarding of bronze
around ad 400.
How to assess value is in itself a challenge, with which Hostein and Nouvel
grapple. Hobbs used ‘equivalent gold weight’ to assess precious metal hoards but
that is not easy in default of a full understanding of finenesses and would be diffi-
cult to apply to base metal coinages.22 The problem for significant periods is that
we are unsure what denominations coinage represented and so cannot convert
into units of account. Eye-catching in this regard is the case made here by Butcher
and Ponting that Caracalla’s ‘antoninianus’ or ‘radiate’ may have been a single
denarius designed to be equivalent in metal content to, and so to facilitate the
withdrawal of, denarii produced before the Severan debasement in 194. This is
likely to remain a controversial subject. A strong case, advocated long ago by
Mommsen and then Mattingly and now widely accepted, can also be made that it
was a double denarius.23 That the radiate crown indicated a double denomination
is suggested by its use on the dupondius (double-as) and by the way in which
radiate crowns are clumsily doubled on radiates with twice as much silver as
others later in the century.24 Maybe older finer denarii were being bought back at
two denarii by being exchanged for radiates? Maybe this was a way of trying to
persuade people not to export older finer denarii outside the Empire to the north
by offering an equivalent or better deal? That would make the measure in some
ways antecedent to later developments such as the re-striking of denarii into radi-
ates in the middle of the century and the doubling of value (geminata potentia) of
some coins in circulation under Diocletian in 301, plausibly including radiates.
Or the radiate may not have been intended to retire older denarii at all. The point
is that it is hard to see how to resolve such debates with any certainty. The prob-
lem of unknown denominations is even more severe in the fourth century.
Butcher and Ponting also raise the important question of whether coins always
circulated at par, or whether they might sometimes be accepted at a premium (or
presumably a discount) to a nominal value. This suggestion opens up a world of
possibilities in the interpretation of monetary reforms and reactions but again is
very hard to assess in the almost total absence of direct evidence for the practice.
One hint might be that at Pergamum under Hadrian the moneychangers’ buying
and selling rates for denarii at 17 and 18 assaria (presumably asses) were both
above par (16 asses).25 Selling denarii at 18 assaria might be explained by an agio
to cover the costs of exchange but a buying price above par is harder to explain
away. An alternative explanation might be that civic assaria were not equivalent
to imperial asses. An inscription from Ephesus of ad 104 does appear to acknow
ledge the possibility of variation in the effective rate of exchange between denarii
and assaria. It is unclear whether this is a result of variation in the underlying rate
or in the cost of exchange (agio), especially as the phrase cannot be fully read on
22 Hobbs (2006: 17–24). 23 For the history of the debate see Butcher (2015).
24 Callu, Brenot, and Barrandon (1979). 25 Macro (1976).
Introduction 11
the stone and has had to be restored.26 There is also evidence for variable rates in
rabbinic sources, but these are late and unreliable.27 So there is not much to go on.
The question of how to express the value of hoards clearly requires further
thought.
We also need to remain very aware of the positivist fallacy. Our data for hoards
are so plentiful, and gathering those data takes so much work, that it is tempting
to fall into the assumption that what we have is representative of what there once
was, either in terms of hoards or of currency. Obviously hoards recovered by their
owners or others in antiquity are not available to us and patterns of reporting and
publication by region are very variable. Most of the precious metal coinage which
we now have has been recovered through hoards but how representative is it of
what there once was? Hoards also notoriously underrepresent small change in
most periods.
The first striking aspect is the enormous disparity in the distribution of
recorded hoards across the Roman Empire (Fig. 1.1). There are many times more
hoards known from Britain, not one of the richest provinces, than from the whole
of North Africa—although North Africa was one of the richest regions of the
Empire, judging by levels of elite personal wealth indicated by building inscrip-
tions. The numbers of hoards here cannot reflect the relative degree of monetized
wealth in these two different regions; instead, they are largely determined by dif-
ferent (modern) legal and cultural practices affecting the reporting or declaration
of hoards, and vastly different intensities in their study and publication over the
last 150 years or more. Such regional differences may also be heavily influenced
by such factors as variations in the cultural traditions of deposition and the over-
arching pattern of fewer surviving hoards in the more peaceful core provinces
(we only have access to those hoards which were not recovered in antiquity).
Some of the discrepancies in hoard densities between regions are undoubtedly
due to varying levels of effort of data input by the Project to date (much more
effort has been concentrated so far on hoards from Britain, Gaul, and the Balkans
than on e.g. Turkey, Spain, or North Africa), but many gross regional differences,
including the sharp contrast between Britain and North Africa, are unlikely to
change radically as more data on hoards that have been published are entered.
The patterns will remain subject to the enormous differences between levels of
reporting and traditions of study and publication of hoards between the northern
and southern provinces of the Empire. Comparisons and contrasts at an Empire-
wide scale therefore require awareness of such major publication differences, and
resultant caution in interpretation; but useful comparisons can still be made
between regions with similar levels of intensity of publication and research, or
within them.
26 I. Eph. 27, l. 251. 27 Melville Jones (1971); Howgego (1984–5; 1985: 54–5).
Fig. 1.1. Distribution of hoards with coordinates entered into the Coin Hoards of the
Roman Empire Project database, as at 2 August 2021 (n = 15,805). Within the empire,
differences in concentrations are heavily influenced by reporting, research, and
publication biases. Also some countries, including Germany and Austria, have yet to
be entered systematically into the database. Outside the empire, the map shows a
scattering of hoards into Russia as far eastward as the middle Volga basin, and there
are also hoards in Ethiopia and India. These result from donations of data. The
impression given of hoarding of Roman coins outside the Empire is deeply misleading
as no systematic attempt has yet been made to enter data from outside the Empire.
This will be an objective for Phase 2 of the Project. (Map: A. Wilson / Coin Hoards of
the Roman Empire Project.)
We have not yet sought systematically to include coin hoards from outside the
Roman Empire, although a number have already been entered. The distribution
pattern beyond the frontiers will therefore change significantly from what is
shown in Fig. 1.1 as we enter data for Germany, Austria, Denmark, Scandinavia,
Poland, and Ukraine from our partners who are working on these regions. Nor
have we yet included the Roman coin hoards from India.
It is vital to use what controls we have. For example, single finds may reveal a
pattern of circulation different from that of hoards28 and die studies can provide
an independent method for addressing the quantification of output.29 Contexts
28 A key theme of Hellings, chapter 13 here. 29 Duncan-Jones (1994).

Introduction 13
with exceptional preservation may remind us of what we do not normally see. So,
Pompeii gives us an insight into shop tills, purses, and the strong boxes of the rich,
and warns us that surviving hoards radically under-represent the availability of
precious metals in peaceful core provinces.30 Otherwise Italy all but ceases to
hoard silver coins after the end of the first century bc.31 We also have to reckon
with regional hoarding preferences: for gold, silver, and bronze. Concentrations
of gold hoards in the coastal regions of north and west Gaul may have more to do
with hoarding preferences going back to the Iron Age than with the geographical
availability of aurei.32 Surviving published silver hoards are skewed towards the
northern frontier, which is partly to be explained by their use for military pay.33
But how much of this is to do with regional hoarding preferences or insecurity on
the frontier?34 If patterns of silver hoarding are so strongly connected with the
military why are there so few found in military contexts on the eastern limes?35
For the later Empire, Guest observes that 58% of all recorded hoards containing
silver coins between 300 and 500 were found in Britain.36 The pattern of produc-
tion by mint suggests that such a strongly skewed pattern has more to do with
deposition preferences than with original circulation.37 In relation to bronze,
Mairat notes in chapter 5 that the hoarding of sestertii and double sestertii in the
Gallic Empire was a regional phenomenon; single finds indicate that such bronze
was available more widely than hoards suggest.
Once the Project has achieved a balanced Empire-wide coverage of hoarding
patterns we will be better able to understand the phenomenon of hoarding, but
we have already been able to indicate useful progress on the basis of regional
studies.
COIN-LEVEL STUDY
The Project is not only about coin hoarding as a phenomenon but also, import
antly, about what can be done with the numismatic evidence of the hoards them-
selves. The full coverage of hoards at a detailed coin level is in the future, but the
data gathered in the first phase of the Project includes summaries of the coins in
hoards and a start has been made in recording detailed coin data which begins to
show what can be done.
30 Duncan-Jones (2003); Andreau (2008); Centro internazionale di studi numismatici (2007).

31 Italy: Lockyear (2007: 34) citing Guest (1994). 32 Guest (2015: 107).
33 Guest (2015: 106).
34 A question which Guest (2015: 106–7) fails to ask in relation to silver although he does ask it in
relation to gold.
35 Howgego (2014). 36 Guest (2005: 29).
37 cf. Guest (2005: 30): as a circulating coin the siliqua was no more common in Britain than
elsewhere.
Selectivity of coins for hoarding may be patent. It presents a methodological

challenge but also a significant opportunity. It is a trap for those falling into the
positivist fallacy, as the coins in a hoard may not accurately reflect the balance of
coins in circulation, even of the denomination concerned. But it is also poten-
tially of great interest for discerning the monetary behaviour of those doing the
selecting. In default of documentary evidence for most periods—legal sources for
the fourth century make that something of an exception38—most of our under-
standing of reactions to monetary reform must be based on the identification of
such selectivity. This is central to the analysis here by Butcher and Ponting of the
effects of the Neronian and Severan debasements. Importantly they also note that
behaviours vary, some hoarders discriminating by silver content, and others not.
Woytek notes (chapter 11) that the contradictory evidence for the continued cir-
culation of Antony’s legionary denarii suggests regional variations in selectivity.
Selectivity on the basis of silver content is also noted in chapter 7 by Găzdac for
Dacia. Mairat observes that selectivity may apply to bronze also (chapter 5); hoard
evidence suggests the early rejection of Postumus’ double sestertii, which did not
weigh the equivalent of two sestertii.
Our evidence for circulation comes, by definition, from either hoards or single
finds. Hoards provide the vast preponderance of evidence for the duration of
coins in circulation, although archaeological context may be important too in
special situations, such as the closely dated army camps on the Rhine.39 Particular
coinages might dwindle in circulation over time or be deliberately withdrawn at
some point. Duration of circulation concerns not only the end of circulation of a
given coinage but also the beginning. We need to be alert to the possibilities of
the delayed arrival of issues in a region or the resupply of old coin, as pointed out
in chapter 13 by Hellings. Of course, the circulation life of coins also has a bearing
on the interpretation of the dates of withdrawal from circulation of the hoards
themselves, so we need to beware of circular reasoning.
Hellings explores here the importance of hoard evidence as a control on the
interpretation of single finds, for which we generally know only the date of pro-
duction and not the date of loss. Even where we have archaeological contexts for
single finds, they face the considerable problem of residuality, where coins are
found in contexts later than the date of loss as a consequence of layer disturbance.40
Van Heesch demonstrates in chapter 14 how the patterns of coins in secure burial
contexts may be used to expose such residuality.
Duration in circulation is critical to our understanding of monetary history.
Several contributions here are germane. Van Heesch demonstrates the usefulness
of burial or grave deposits for establishing the regular renewal of coinage and
demonetization of earlier issues in the fourth century. Woytek carefully reviews
38 Hendy (1985). 39 For an introduction to the bibliography see Kemmers (2006).

40 See, for example, Butcher (2002: 28–9).
Introduction 15
the impressive duration of Republican coins in circulation and their interplay

with later coinages. Butcher and Ponting grapple with the difficulty of identifying
reactions to monetary reforms through hoards: perhaps more hoards than we
suppose were correlated with monetary reforms but are incorrectly dated on the
basis of the latest coin they contain.
The geography of circulation is of interest as well as the chronology. Again, the
chapters here include much which is pertinent. At a micro-level, Găzdac notes a
contrasting pattern of silver coinage on civilian and military sites in Dacia under
Philip I. Civilian sites show a greater proportion of denarii, whereas military sites
are relatively stronger in radiates. He concludes that soldiers were at the time paid
in radiates. At a macro-level, Mairat explores the relationship of circulation to
political control in relation to the Gallic Empire. Gallic Empire coins are largely
absent from the rest of the Empire, and initially Central Empire coins are largely
absent from the Gallic Empire. He argues against outright prohibitions, and in
favour of monetary and economic explanations. He explains the fact that coins of
the Central Empire do not enter the Gallic Empire in quantity until after 268 by
the observation that until then the greater fineness of Postumus’ early radiates
kept them out, but that his subsequent debasement let them in. He also addresses
the apparent paradox that the coins of Postumus are uncommon in Hispania
despite clear evidence that it was part of the Gallic Empire. Hoards there reveal a
stronger (possibly indirect) connection with Syria than with the Gauls. As the
connection with Syria is also evident in the fourth century an economic explan
ation seems appropriate. Lockyear shows how we can assess statistically such
important evidence for inter-regional movement of imperial coin in the fourth
century, which is evident as a result of decentralized production at identified
imperial mints.
Iakovidou and Kremydi trace the changing balance of Roman and civic issues
in the currency of Achaea and Macedonia. They also demonstrate a dramatic
increase in the mobility of local issues in the third century, a phenomenon
observed elsewhere and requiring explanation.41 Bonchev notes the relevance of
the circulation of civic coinage to the movement of people and the important
subject of mobility.
THE FUTURE
We are in the early stages of a project which will be of relevance to a wide range of
major themes within the Roman economy. These can only be addressed system-
atically once the hoard-level data are properly representative, at least of what has
41 Howgego (2014).
been published, or when more progress has been made with the daunting task
of entering detailed coin-level data. We will want to define the overarching
chronological and geographical patterns of hoarding, differentiate in as far as
possible the contributions to those patterns of original hoarding, non-recovery
in antiquity, modern recovery, and publication, and try to explain the underlying
patterns.
Much of monetary history hangs on the hoard evidence. That is how we can
measure the withdrawal or demonetization of old coinages and trace the con-
nections with the recycling of old coin now becoming apparent from the
metallurgical evidence.42 We need to examine the patterns of hoarding in
relation to monetary manipulations by the government; indeed, that is more
or less the only way to trace the response to such reforms. This is an important
but tricky area. As Butcher and Ponting note here, reactions can be variable,
not least because popular understanding affects behaviour. The velocity of
money in an economic sense cannot be directly measured,43 but rates of wear
can be, by tracing the changing weights of particular issues over time through
hoards. Speed of circulation is also of interest, although we have as yet no
satisfactory way to measure it.44
The circulation of coins provides important data to test against models of
the Roman economy, including the extent to which it was integrated rather than
cellular.45 It will also illuminate the important but challenging topic of mobility.46
Fundamental to the Oxford Roman Economy Project will be the quantification
of coinage output and the coined money supply. Duncan-Jones attempted such
calculations on the basis of a selection of hoards.47 The Coin Hoards of the
Roman Empire Project needs to make significant progress with recording at
detailed coin level before it can properly address either relative or absolute
quantification, but a start has been made. The substantial Reka Devnia hoard
from Bulgaria (81,096 coins) has often been used as a proxy indicator for
denarius output. As part of the Project, Marguerite Spoerri Butcher has already
completely revised the coin- level data for this hoard. Together with Ben
Hellings she has tested the representation of selected issues in Reka Devnia
against data from north-west continental Europe and from Romania.48 Coin
survival in terms of relative frequency proved to be very similar for the three
datasets and should therefore reflect original production levels. This is inter-
esting given Lockyear’s observation that large hoards are often not typical.49
This shows the way forward for this particular topic, and may stand as a statement
of intent to address the others.
42 Butcher and Ponting (2014). 43 For velocity see Howgego (1992: 3, 12–16).
44 Lockyear (2007: 205–24) for a thoughtful treatment. Mairat here uses the evidence of hoards to
measure the speed of diffusion of coinage from Syria to Spain.
45 Howgego (1994). 46 Howgego (1985: ch. 3; 1994); Bonchev (this volume, chapter 8).
47 Duncan-Jones (1994); with Metcalf (1995). 48 Hellings and Spoerri Butcher (2017).
49 Lockyear (2007: 228).
Introduction 17
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
The conference in Oxford on Coin Hoarding in the Roman Empire was organized by Philippa
Walton, and Jerome Mairat commissioned additional chapters and initially took the lead in
editing the volume, before Andrew Wilson took over this role. Philippa worked for the Project
for its first three years as Research Fellow. One of her key contributions was to bring her
experience of the Portable Antiquities Scheme to bear on the framing of the Project and to
ensure that archaeological perspectives on coin hoarding were properly taken into account
in its design. Jerome masterminded an elegant and appropriate data structure, oversaw the
creation of the first version of the web application, and imported huge quantities of data. We
are grateful to both of them for their effort; and to Matthew Ball for assistance with the
preparation of the Index.
The Project is directed by Chris Howgego and Andrew Wilson, and funded by the
Augustus Foundation through the generosity of Baron Lorne Thyssen-Bornemisza. The
current team includes Cristian Găzdac as Consultant and Marguerite Spoerri Butcher as
Research Fellow. A significant contribution has also been made by Simon Glenn as a fixed-
term Research Assistant. The web application has been brilliantly developed, and is main-
tained, by the Web App and Mobile Team of the University of Oxford.
COLLABORATORS
Our project is an ambitious one and can succeed only through collaboration with numer-
ous organizations, individual scholars and graduate students currently studying hoarding
throughout the Roman world.
At present, we have established partnerships or data exchange agreements with the
following:
Organizations
International
Antike Fundmünzen in Europa
European Coin Finds Network
Nomisma, numismatic concepts for Linked Open Data
Austria
The Austrian Academy of Sciences
Institut für Numismatik und Geldgeschichte, Universität Wien
Belgium
Cabinet des Médailles, Bibliothèque royale de Belgique
Bulgaria
Rousse Regional Museum of History
Croatia
Archaeological Museum in Zagreb
Denmark
Royal Collection of Coins and Medals, National Museum of Denmark, Copenhagen
Egypt
Institut français d’archéologie orientale: La monnaie égyptienne
France
Bibliothèque nationale de France
École Pratique des Hautes Études
Équipe ANHIMA (CNRS)
Institut national de recherches archéologiques préventives
Université Paris 1 Panthéon-Sorbonne
Société française de numismatique (TAF — Corpus des trésors monétaires antiques
de la France)
Germany
Die Akademie der Wissenschaften und der Literatur, Mainz (Fundmünzen der
Antike-Project)
Goethe Universität, Frankfurt am Main
Münzkabinett, Staatliche Museen zu Berlin
Römisch-Germanische Kommission, Frankfurt
Römisch-Germanisches Zentralmuseum, Mainz
Greece
The Institute of Historical Studies, National Hellenic Research Foundation, Athens
Hungary
Hungarian National Museum
Israel
The Israel Antiquities Authority
Italy
Università degli Studi di Milano — Department of Literary Studies, Philology and
Linguistics
University of Padova — Department of Cultural Heritage: Archaeology, History of
Art, Cinema and Music
University of Salerno — Dipartimento di Scienze del Patrimonio Culturale
Università di Trieste — Dipartimento di Studi Umanistici
Lebanon
Department of History and Archaeology, American University of Beirut
North Macedonia
Archaeological Museum of the Republic of North Macedonia
Netherlands
Leiden University
National Numismatic Collection, De Nederlandsche Bank (NUMIS)
Poland
The Finds of Roman Coins in Poland Project
The University of Warsaw
Romania
Institute of Archaeology and Art History, the Romanian Academy, Cluj-Napoca
Introduction 19
Serbia
Archaeological Institute Belgrade
Slovakia
Trnavska univerzita, Katedra klasickej archeológie
Slovenia
Narodni muzej Slovenije
Switzerland
Swiss Inventory of Coin Finds (SICF) / Inventar der Fundmünzen der Schweiz (IFS) /
Inventaire des trouvailles monétaires suisses (ITMS)
University of Basel, Institute of Ancient History
Tunisia
Faculté des Sciences Humaines et Sociales, Tunis
Musée National du Bardo
Turkey
Anadolu University
Ankara University
UK
British Museum and University of Leicester: Hoarding in Iron Age and Roman
Britain Project
Department of Classics and Ancient History, University of Warwick
Institute of Archaeology, University College London
National Museums Scotland
USA
Yale Department of Classics and Yale University Art Gallery
Individuals
Dr Rob Bennett, author of Local Elites and Local Coinage: Elite Self-Representation
on the Provincial Coinage of Asia 31 BC–AD 275 (2014), is adding data for Asia
Minor and Syria.
Dr Cristian Găzdac of the Institute of Archaeology and Art History, the Romanian
Academy, Cluj-Napoca, provided a large dataset of hoards from Dacia and adja-
cent provinces.
Dr Richard Hobbs of The British Museum provided a digital dataset of hoards from
Hobbs, R. (2006). Late Roman Precious Metal Deposits c. AD 200–700. Changes over
Time and Space (British Archaeological Reports, International Series 1504). Oxford.
Prof. William E. Metcalf provided an unpublished dataset of 180 denarius hoards at
the level of the coin.
Dr Albana Meta is adding data for Albania.
Dr Emilia Smagur of the Institute of Archaeology, University of Warsaw, is adding
data for India and Sri Lanka.
REFERENCES
Andreau, J. (2008). ‘The use and survival of coins and of gold and silver in the Vesuvian
cities’, in Harris (2008), 208–25.
Bevan, A. (2012). ‘Spatial methods for analysing large-scale artefact inventories’,
Antiquity 86: 492–506.
Bland, R. (2018). Coin Hoards and Hoarding in Roman Britain AD 43−c.498. London.
Bland, R. and Calomino, D. (eds) (2015). Studies in Ancient Coinage in Honour of
Andrew Burnett. London.
Bolin, S. (1958). State and Currency in the Roman Empire to 300 AD. Stockholm.
Brenot, C. and Loriot, X. (eds) (1992). L’or monnayé III. Trouvailles de monnaies d’or
dans l’occident romain. Paris.
Bricault, L., Burnett, A., Drost, V., and Suspène, A. (eds) (2017). Rome et les provinces:
monnayage et histoire. Mélanges offerts à Michel Amandry. Bordeaux.
Butcher, K. (2002). Small Change in Ancient Beirut. Coins from BEY 006 and 045
(Berytus 45–6). Beirut.
Butcher, K. (2015). ‘Debasement and the decline of Rome’, in Bland and Calomino
(2015), 181–205.
Butcher, K. and Ponting, M. (2014). The Metallurgy of Roman Silver Coinage: From the
Reform of Nero to the Reform of Trajan. Cambridge.
Callu, J. P., Brenot, Cl., and Barrandon, J. N. (1979). ‘Analyses de series atypiques
(Aurélien-Tacite-Carus-Licinius)’, Quaderni ticinesi di numismatica e antichità
classiche 8: 241–54.
Centro internazionale di studi numismatici (2007). Presenza e circolazione della mon-
eta in area vesuviana: atti del XIII Convegno organizzato dal Centro internazionale
di studi numismatici e dall’Università di Napoli Federico II, Napoli, 30 maggio–1
giugno 2003. Rome.
Crawford, M. (1969). Roman Republican Coin Hoards. London.
Dörtlük, K., Tekin, O., and Seyhan, R. (eds) (2014). First International Congress of the
Anatolian Monetary History and Numismatics 25–28 February 2013. Istanbul.
Duncan-Jones, R. (1994). Money and Government in the Roman Empire. Cambridge.
Duncan-Jones, R. (2003). ‘Roman coin circulation and the cities of Vesuvius’, in Lo
Cascio (2003), 161–80.
Guest, P. (1994). A Comparative Study of Coin Hoards from the Western Roman
Empire, Ph.D. thesis, UCL.
Guest, P. (2005). The Late Roman Gold and Silver Coins from the Hoxne Treasure. London.
Guest, P. (2015). ‘The burial, loss and recovery of Roman coin hoards in Britain and
Beyond: past, present and future’, in Naylor and Bland (2015), 101–16.
Harris, W. V. (ed.) (2008). The Monetary Systems of the Greeks and Romans. Oxford.
Introduction 21
Hellings, B. and Spoerri Butcher, M. (2017). ‘Quantifying relative coin production dur-
ing the reigns of Nerva and Trajan (AD 96–117): Reka Devnia reconsidered in the
light of regional coin finds from Romania and the Northwest’, Revue Belge de
Numismatique et de Sigillographie 163: 53–86.
Hendy, M. F. (1985). Studies in the Byzantine Monetary Economy c. 300–1450.
Cambridge.
Hiernard, J. (1992). ‘Les découvertes de monnaies d’or romaines en Poitou, Limousin,
Saintonge et Angoumois: typologie des sites et circulation’, in Brenot and Loriot
(1992), 101–10.
Hobbs, R. (2006). Late Roman Precious Metal Deposits, c. AD 200–700: Changes over
Time and Space (BAR International Series 1504). Oxford.
Howgego, C. (1984–5). ‘The relationship of the issar to the denar in rabbinic literature’,
Israel Numismatic Journal 8: 59–64.
Howgego, C. (1985). Greek Imperial Countermarks: Studies in the Provincial Coinage
of the Roman Empire. London.
Howgego, C. (1992). ‘The supply and use of money in the Roman world 200 B.C. to
A.D. 300’, JRS 82: 1–31.
Howgego, C. (1994). ‘Coin circulation and the integration of the Roman economy’,
JRA 7: 5–21.
Howgego, C. (1996). Review of Duncan-Jones 1994, JRS 86: 208–9.
Howgego, C. (2014). ‘Questions of coin circulation in the Roman Period’, in Dörtlük,
Tekin, and Seyhan (2014), 307–17.
Hoyer, D. (2013). ‘Calculating the use-wear rates of Roman coins using regression
analysis: a case study of bronze sestertii from Imperial Gaul’, American Journal of
Numismatics 25: 259–82.
Kemmers, F. (2006). Coins for a Legion: An Analysis of the Coin Finds from Augustan
Legionary Fortress and Flavian Canabae Legionis at Nijmegen (Studien zu
Fundmünzen der Antike 21). Mainz am Rhein.
Lo Cascio, E. (ed.) (2003). Credito e moneta nel mondo romano. Bari.
Lockyear, K. (2007). Patterns and Process in Late Roman Republican Coin Hoards,
157–2 BC. Oxford.
Lockyear, K. (2012). ‘Dating coins. Dating with coins’, OJA 31.2: 191–211.
Macro, A. (1976). ‘Imperial provisions for Pergamum: OGIS 484’, GRBS 17: 169–79.
Melville Jones, J. (1971). ‘Denarii, asses and assaria in the early Roman empire’, Bulletin
of the Institute of Classical Studies 18: 99–105.
Metcalf, W. E. (1995). Review of Duncan-Jones 1994, Schweizerische Numismatische
Rundschau 74: 145–59.
Naylor, J and Bland. R. (eds) (2015). Hoarding and the Deposition of Metalwork from
the Bronze Age to the 20th Century: a British Perspective (BAR British Series
615). Oxford.
Noreña, C. F. (2011). Imperial Ideals in the Roman West: Representation, Circulation,

Power. Cambridge.
Rowan, C. (2012). Under Divine Auspices. Divine Ideology and the Visualisation of
Imperial Power in the Severan Period. Cambridge.
van Heesch, J. (2017). ‘Coin hoards and invasions? The evidence of sites’, in Bricault
et al. (2017), 399–413.
von Kaenel, H.-M. and Kemmers, F. (eds) (2009). Coins in Context I: New Perspectives
for the Interpretation of Coin Finds: Colloquium Frankfurt a.M., October 25–27,
2007 (Studien zu Fundmunzen der Antike 23). Mainz am Rhein.
Simplifying Complexity
Kris Lockyear
INTRODUCTION
Numismatists, especially applied numismatists, collect large quantities of data

which are often presented as cross-tabulations: the columns are usually date or
period, perhaps mint or issuing authority, and the rows are hoards, archaeological
sites, or parishes, with each cell of the table containing the number of coins found.
Table L from Roman Republican Coinage is a classic example.1 Being able to say
something useful or interesting about such large collections of data requires us to
be able to see patterns in those data.
This chapter presents a statistical method, Correspondence Analysis (CA), which
enables the researcher to simplify the complexity of such collections of data and to
tease out the underlying patterns, thus ‘letting the data speak’ and facilitating inter-
pretation.2 Unfortunately, CA is often seen as a ‘complex’ technique with some
appearing to consider it a black art that only those who have undergone long and
arduous trials can possibly hope to comprehend. This chapter aims, therefore, to
simplify the complexity of the method and to demonstrate that anyone with basic
mathematical skills can undertake and interpret a CA without any recourse to
complex mathematics or a deep understanding of statistical theory.3
It may come as a surprise to anyone familiar with my past research that some 32
years after first applying CA to coin data4 I feel the need to explain the technique
once more.5 Two examples will illustrate my reasons (and frustrations). First, dur-
ing the plethora of conferences on hoards and hoarding held during 2015–16, I
observed that for the overwhelming majority of papers only two methods of data
analysis were used: the bar chart and the distribution map. The bar chart was first
used by William Playfair in 1786 although he doubted its utility.6 Although there
were earlier chloropleth maps, the earliest distribution map was probably that
1 Crawford (1974: 642). 2 Volpato (2014).

3 Baxter (2003: 16–17), a statistician, argued for much the same approach.
4 Lockyear (1989). 5 See Lockyear (2000; 2007) for previous attempts.
6 Tufte (1983: 32–3).
Kris Lockyear, Simplifying Complexity In: Coin Hoards and Hoarding in the Roman World. Edited by: Jerome Mairat,
Andrew Wilson, and Chris Howgego, Oxford University Press. © Oxford University Press 2022.
DOI: 10.1093/oso/9780198866381.003.0002
24 Kris Lockyear
drawn by Snow in his famous investigation of a cholera outbreak in London in

1854.7 Neither technique, therefore, represents the cutting edge of data analysis.8
The second example concerns my analysis of Crawford’s controversial die esti-
mates for the Roman Republic.9 That paper was written with the intention that it
would be easily understood. It used a basic computer simulation that consisted of
nothing more than vast quantities of simple arithmetic, and some basic statistical
significance tests. Before it was published Richard Reece said that he thought the
paper good, but it would be ignored by archaeologists and numismatists because
it involved numbers and graphs. In contrast, the paper’s referee felt the ‘first fif-
teen pages are unnecessary as anyone interested in coin production and mathem
atical modelling’ would know all this. As I hoped more than three people would
read the paper, I kept those 15 pages! Initially, I was heartened when George
Depeyrot stated ‘the paper of Kris Lockyear is a very good one. He cannot say
this, but I can.’10 Subsequently, however, Erik Christiansen published that he did
‘not understand a word of the underlying mathematics’.11 Most recently, and per-
haps most worryingly, Bernhard Woytek has dismissed ‘quantitative numismatics’
as being ‘insecure’, but went on to state that ‘it seems preferable to estimate pri-
marily relative fluctuations in coin output, which can be attempted on the basis of
the actual representation of issues in the material that has come down to us’ citing
his work for 49–42 bc.12 At the end of my paper I demonstrated that using
Crawford’s die estimates as an indication of relative sizes of issues rather than
absolute die counts resulted in figures which did indeed match the material ‘that
has come down to us’ for the period 157–50 bc extremely well, over a somewhat
larger time span than Woytek’s.
An interesting contrast can be made between the use of quantitative methods
and that of databases where, in the creation of online resources, numismatists
appear to be leading the field within the humanities.13 This paradox of having vast
amounts of data at one’s fingertips, but using only the most basic of tools to ana-
lyse it, is perplexing.
This chapter is divided into four parts. First, I examine the background to the
use of numerical techniques in archaeology and numismatics,14 and review where
we are now. Second, I show how we can reduce the dimensionality of our data
while retaining the essential underlying patterns. Third, I present a description of
CA using a relatively simple numismatic dataset. The final section presents the
analysis of a more complex dataset by way of illustration of the usefulness of
the method.
7 Tufte (1983: 24). 8 See also the paper by Friendly and Sigal (2014).
9 Lockyear (1999).
10 Mailing to the IronAgeCoinage egroup discussion list, 27 September 2000.
11 Christiansen (2004: 31, n. 27). 12 Woytek (2012: 330). 13 Geser (2016).
14 As numismatics is a specialist sub-discipline within archaeology, I use ‘archaeology’ to mean the
wider subject and ‘numismatics’ to refer to coin studies specifically.
Simplifying Complexity 25
STATISTICS IN ARCHAEOLOGY AND NUMISMATICS
In the period immediately following the end of the Second World War, many aca-
demic subjects not traditionally associated with quantitative methods began to
adopt ‘scientific principles’ in their research including the use of statistical tech-
niques, especially significance tests. The adoption of these approaches is reflected
in text books such as Social Statistics published in 1960.15 In archaeology, the first
book of which I am aware to explicitly examine the usefulness of these approaches
was that by Myers.16 The use of computers beyond statistics was also expanding.
A collection of papers published in 1965 on the use of computers in anthropology
included discussions concerning databases, linguistic analysis, and computer
simulation.17 Classification studies dominated the statistical discussion. In 1970,
the Royal Society and the Romanian Academy held a conference on Mathematics
in the Archaeological and Historical Sciences18 in Mamaia at which Clive Orton
received a round of applause for being the only speaker to show a slide of some
archaeology!19 During the 1970s application of such methods became more com-
mon and an increasing number of volumes were published.20 The first meeting of
the annual Computer Applications and Quantitative Methods in Archaeology con-
ference was held in 1973. Rightly or wrongly, statistical methods became linked in
the minds of practitioners with the ‘New Archaeology’, later labelled ‘processual
archaeology’. Colin Renfrew proclaimed that ‘the days of the innumerate are
numbered’.21
In the 1980s a range of essentially post-modern approaches developed within
archaeology under the umbrella term ‘post-processual’. Some advocates of
these new schools of thought explicitly rejected quantitative methods.22 As early
as 1988, Shennan complained that a gulf had developed between general archaeo-
logical practitioners and a handful of mathematical specialists.23 Unfortunately, it
would appear that over 30 years later, this gulf has widened.
Numismatics was not uninfluenced by these developments. Ravetz, for
example, developed her famous formula for plotting coin loss graphs in the
1960s,24 which is a re-expression of the standard method for calculating the
height of bars in a histogram with unequal bin-widths. In the UK, the work of
Reece and Casey was hugely influential.25 Reece’s use of ratios in his early work
is an excellent example of dealing with the problem of closure when using
percentages,26 a topic which is still controversial in archaeometry.
15 Blalock (1960). 16 Myers (1950). 17 Hymes (1965).

18 Hodson et al. (1971). 19 Orton (2017: 25).
20 For example, those by Doran and Hodson (1975) and Orton (1980).
21 Cited in Shennan (1988: 7). 22 For example, Shanks and Tilley (1992: 56–9).
23 Shennan (1988: vii). 24 Ravetz (1964: 206).
25 Casey and Reece (1974).
26 Reece (1974).
26 Kris Lockyear
An impression of the development of statistical techniques in numismatics

can be gained by examining the bibliographic summaries published at each
International Numismatic Congress. None of the 1967, 1973, or 1979 bibliog
raphies mentions statistics or computing, nor is ‘methodology’ listed as a topic.27
It is only with the 1986 survey that computing and statistics is discussed, largely
in relation to metallurgy, metrology, and databases.28 Principal Components Analysis
(PCA), a technique related to CA, is mentioned in the context of metallurgical
analysis,29 whereas Ryan’s pioneering application of PCA to coin assemblages30 is
listed by Volk but not discussed. Most of the section on ‘Coin finds’ is similarly
dominated by discussion of databases.31 A landmark volume published at that
time was that edited by Carcassonne and Hackens.32 The following survey pub-
lished in 199133 is the first to have a section explicitly on methodology within
an opening ‘General’ section.34 Statistics is bundled with laboratory methods.35
Although only 18 publications are listed (half in the addendum), these do include
two guides to statistics in numismatics, both written by numismatists.36 The 1997
survey included a section on methodology with chapters on computer applications37
and statistics.38 The former was largely dominated by databases and contained the
first mention of the internet and email! Esty’s essay was almost entirely devoted to
various aspects of the process of die estimation and coin production, and reflects
the intense interest in this subject in the early 1990s. The following survey in 2003
followed a similar format with sections on ‘Computers and the Internet’39 and a
second essay by Esty.40 Wigg noted that despite earlier optimism, there had been
little or no standardization of numismatic databases, but was very optimistic
about the benefits of the internet. Esty’s essay is, once more, largely dominated by
questions of die studies and the estimation of the size of coinage issues.
Unfortunately, he badly misrepresents the usefulness of cumulative percentage
curves.41 The next survey, published in 2009, marks quite a change. Although
Computers and the Internet are still represented,42 again mainly dominated by
databases, there is no longer a section dedicated to statistics or the methodology
of applied numismatics. Similarly, Pett’s 2015 review discusses the explosion of
resources for numismatists on the web, but as regards the application of comput-
ing and statistics for the analysis of those resources, he is tellingly quiet.43
From this overview we can see the waxing and waning of the heyday of statis
tical techniques in numismatics and archaeology. Metcalf ’s comment—made
27 Carson et al. (1979); Mørkholm (1967); Naster et al. (1973); Nemeškal and Clain-Stefanelli (1973);
Rasmusson et al. (1967); Skaare and Miles (1967); Yvon and Mitchell Brown (1973).
28 Cowell (1986); Volk (1986). 29 Cowell (1986: 1033). 30 Ryan (1982).
31 Volk (1986: 1054–8). 32 Carcassonne and Hackens (1981).
33 Hackens et al. (1991). 34 Clain-Stefanelli and Hébert (1991). 35 Helly (1991).
36 Carcassonne (1988); Villaronga i Garriga (1985). 37 Jonsson (1997).
38 Esty (1997). 39 Wigg (2003). 40 Esty (2003). 41 cf. Lockyear (2007: 245–7).
42 Wigg-Wolf (2009). 43 Pett (2015).
Another random document with
no related content on Scribd:
hold you both responsible for them.” And Justine knew the faith of
Mary Kelly but too well.
“I wonder if I am to be arrested on our arrival in New York,” gloomily
mused the woman, who now felt herself entrapped. But her spirits
rose as she realized that once in the “Circassia” there would
probably be a visit from Harold Vreeland himself, at once. “If I can
only see him, warn him, then we are safe, for he will shield me,” she
exulted.
And Dr. Alberg, with August Helms, too, would be under her control.
Then it would be an easy matter to thoroughly forewarn the man to
whom alone she looked now for safety.
With true Gallic prevision, her secretly stolen hoard of the seven long
years past, as well as Vreeland’s bribes, was now all safely
deposited in her own name in Paris, and she could gaily laugh at the
wolf at the door. For there were also the two nurses between her and
a conviction.
“Yes,” she exulted, “I can snap my fingers at them, and say ‘Bon jour,
M’sieur Loup! Comment ça va.’”
The only thing now was to comfortably reach Paris. For she knew
that even across the sea she could draw upon Harold Vreeland’s
golden hoard. “He may even come over there, to me, at Paris, and I
can finish plucking him there.” With a demure sleekness, she plumed
herself and closely watched the inscrutable face of her beautiful
mistress. Justine well knew the awkwardness of a mistress daring to
arrest her confidential maid. There was, however, a perfect serenity
lingering upon the noble lines of the human mask which now baffled
even the velvety-eyed Justine, even though her wits were sharpened
by her fears.
In the period since the discovery of the abstraction of the vastly
important document, Elaine Willoughby had been fortified with Judge
Endicott’s calm counsels. She knew, too, that she was surrounded
with friends, lynx-eyed and active, and that her emissaries were in
the enemy’s camp.
It had only taken Endicott ten minutes to give her a list of her
probable friends and foes. “The whole thing proves that you were
known to be lulled into the idea that your precious deposit was still
there. No one would dare to threaten or blackmail you and produce
that paper; it is too risky. It would land all the gang into Sing Sing at
once.” He recounted all those whom its possession could possibly
benefit. “There is Garston, a rugged egoist, and a cool-headed,
middle-aged possible wooer. A man who would confidently pit his
money and place against Alynton, even though younger and a
thousand times his superior in any woman’s eyes.”
Elaine Willoughby listened in a hushed relief, for, as fond woman
often does, she had only told her aged Mentor half the truth. She had
merely hinted at Garston’s growing infatuation. “There is Vreeland,
whom I thoroughly detest, and think him at heart capable of any
sneaking villainy. Moreover, Noel also thinks so. Your generous
fancies have cost you dearly in the past, in your easily volunteered
faith. Separately or together this dangerous document would benefit
Garston and Vreeland.
“Now, mark me. Garston would use it, of course, only to bring you to
his arms. You would hear of it from him only, for that purpose only.”
“And Vreeland?” tremblingly demanded his client.
“Would blackmail you for a fortune if you ever fell in his power. I hate
his sleek ways, his insincere eyes, his cat-like moves.
“Minor enemies are Alberg and your French maid. This German
doctor shall not have sole charge of your health again. His
explanation about the nurse is a very lame one. Of course, you can
not pin him down, for he refuges himself behind an ignorance of your
loss, and points to her flight and the hubbub in the papers and the
police records.
“Of course, you were too ill to be bothered, and so you may have
been despoiled by either the maid or one or both of the nurses.
“Justine alone knew where the document was; she has been only
the agent of some one of the three; perhaps of all. A rich widow’s
doctor too may be her nearest foe. Why in God’s name did you not
have a reputable family physician? In your easy seclusion you
thought yourself safe.
“Now go away, and leave them all to me. All depends upon your
absolute unconcern, and leaving them to me. The rats will come
together as soon as you are out of the way.”
When Hiram Endicott said adieu, it was with a last injunction to
Elaine not to use either the telegraph or telephone in her absence.
“The fact is, my dear child, if you had married some good man
instead of dallying along with these discoveries, you would now be
proof against all such attacks.”
The grumbling old Judge thought of a golden-hearted, manly lover
whose secret he had unwittingly surprised, and sighed when he was
on his homeward way. “Given to a woman for her choice, a sly
knave, a handsome fool, and a man really worthy of her, she will try
either of the first two before ever thinking of the noble heart under
her feet. The experience of every other woman seems to be merely
thrown away. It is the song of the Pied Piper of Hamelin over again.”
The old lawyer swore a deep oath in his rage. “If I can not protect her
against the weaknesses of her own heart, I will at least punish some
of these banded rascals. For they will soon fall into my trap.”
To the astonishment of the mystified Justine Duprez, there was a
new butler on duty in the “Circassia,” a man whose cold and piercing
eyes made her tremble. And also a deft-handed, middle-aged
American woman, whose husband, an extra servant, was evidently
cast for “responsible duties.” And she could not divine the meaning
of all this, but she was tied down to her lonely rack.
The long day dragged away—a day of imprisonment and one of
isolation. There was no visit of the ardent-eyed Vreeland, that envy
of all rising men! And Doctor Hugo Alberg, too, was conspicuously
absent.
The Parisienne felt the toils closing around her, as her mistress
called her to her side before dinner. But the “Madame” was perfectly
unmoved.
“I am leaving here for some weeks, Justine,” she carelessly said. “All
your duties in my absence will be to continue to search this entire
apartment with Miss Kelly for the paper, which I may have mislaid.
Miss Kelly, who will remain here, will have entire charge in my name,
and I expect you to remain here with her. You will thus have ample
time to make a most careful search, and very likely you will find the
paper, only a mere formal legal document.”
The Frenchwoman gasped: “Of course, I am free to go out as I
wish?”
“Certainly, Justine,” was her mistress’ reply. “But always with Miss
Kelly, as she may need you to help her at any moment. I leave her
as my representative.”
The ashen pallor of fear tinged Justine Duprez’s cheeks, as she
bowed in silence. “They know all, and I—I—must hold Vreeland now,
between myself and the prison door.” Her mistress’ easy politeness
gave no ground for mutiny or quarrel.
The frightened maid knew not whither her mistress had departed
when the “Circassia” was deserted that evening by both the new
body servants and the Lady of Lakemere. Their use as a bodyguard
was all too evident.
But the resolute, pale-faced stenographer was on duty there and
ready to enter upon her new kingdom. There was but one forlorn
hope left to Justine—a hurried visit to August Helms, and to send the
janitor down to the Elmleaf with a message to Harold Vreeland. She
had not left the building, and her little absence was unnoted.
“Tell him that I must see him at once on a matter of life and death,
and that he must come to your rooms and wait there to meet me. It is
the only way, and he must come without a moment’s delay, for all our
sakes! Go!”
The stolid German janitor smiled over the ten-dollar bill, which he
pocketed, and after an hour’s waiting at the Elmleaf, learned from
the parchment-faced Bagley that Mr. Harold Vreeland was dining at
the Savoy with Senator Garston and Miss Norreys. A grand, private
“swell function,” and so, likely to be a late one.
“I’ll give him your message,” obligingly said Mr. Vreeland’s man. “I
’ave always to wait up for him, you know. He has to be undressed by
me. So, I am sure to see him.”
Helms was anxious to get away and sample the good “Münchner
Leist-brau” in his brother-in-law’s saloon near by, and so he yielded
up his story with a sly wink. “Fine girl, that Justine. They are all the
same—these pretty French maids.”
When he lumbered away, he did not realize that Judge Hiram
Endicott had received the message before the triumphant Harold
Vreeland had returned, flushed with both love and wine. The
blundering janitor had played into the enemy’s hands, and Bagley
had easily earned a heavy reward.
Before Vreeland sat in hiding the next morning, awaiting Justine in
Helms’ rooms at the “Circassia,” Hugh Conyers handed a cipher
dispatch to Mrs. Elaine Willoughby at Washington, on her way to
Asheville, in the far North Carolinian hills. “There is the missing link,
Madame,” said Conyers. “Vreeland and your maid have jointly
robbed you. This vulgar janitor is only their tool and paid go-
between. Doctor Alberg and Vreeland were shut up together for
some hours yesterday, and you will find that the janitor has probably
robbed your private letters in their interest. I’ll wire now to Officer
Dan Daly, and have him watched day and night. He is only a beer-
sodden fool. But we will just let them go on, and drop one by one,
into the trap. You will later find Garston lurking behind it all. I think I
begin to see his little game. Somehow, I distrust that man,” and he
murmured, semi-unconsciously, as he gazed at the agitated woman
beside him:
“Your lonely life has made you an easy prey heretofore to both
schemer and fortune-hunter. You will have now Romaine to guard,
and you need help. You can not go on and brave society’s natural
curiosity.
“And, no half explanations will do. When we have recovered your
missing document, you must abandon forever all your operations in
the Street, and go away to some safe European land, either
Sweden, Switzerland or Germany, and, moreover, under a good
guard.
“If you stay here, you need a resolute man at your side, one who
knows all your enemies, and one who can protect you. It is the
revenge of Nature’s laws. You can not be father and mother both to
your beautiful Cinderella—God bless her!”
“And do you think that my friends are in any danger over the loss of
the stolen document?” tremblingly said Elaine, fixing her eyes fondly
upon his earnest face.
“No,” said the journalist. “There has been time already to have struck
at them. The paper is only held to coerce you—either to gain over
your hand in marriage, or else, money will be the price of your safety.
“If it’s Vreeland, it will be merely money. If it’s Garston, and far the
more dangerous of the two—a man not foolish enough for criminal
blackmailing threats—then he wants to control both you and
Romaine.
“Of course, he has no claim whatever on Romaine. He would only
use her as the pivot to turn your heart toward him.”
Elaine Willoughby’s eyes were filled with sudden tears. “If I only
dared to tell you all!” she murmured.
But as their hands met, Hugh Conyers brokenly said: “I am yours to
the death; I can wait for your words, Elaine. Romaine is safe under a
watchful guardian. Roper was an old Wells-Fargo shotgun
messenger; a trusted Pinkerton man later, and as Romaine is Sara’s
roommate, and as Roper never leaves them by day, you and I can
wait here without fear till the demand is made on you.
“And then, you may find the two men whom I fear turn up together.
But the very moment they take any steps that indicate the
possession of the document, the tables are turned.
“They are then in our power. And Bagley may further trap Vreeland.”
“He may have sold his secret to Senator Garston,” faltered Elaine
Willoughby. “The only man on earth whom I fear.”
“Fear nothing, however, while I am at your side, and Endicott is our
Blucher in reserve. Our fears are always more real than our hopes,”
said Conyers, as he relapsed into a brown study. He feared a self-
betrayal.
The winsome woman at his side was gazing at him with a new and
tender light in her eyes. “How noble he is! How true!” she sighed; for
Hugh Conyers’ friendship was a rock in the desert of her life.
It was after four that afternoon when Harold Vreeland, plainly
dressed, sauntered into the rear entrance of the “Circassia,” and
sought the rooms of August Helms, the janitor. He was only waiting
for the final sale of a soul and to hear the full story of Justine. The
cold relegation to his routine duties at the office, and
Mrs. Willoughby’s message, had now cut off all hopes of a nearer
social approach.
“I must be very careful,” he mused. “These fellows down here are all
on the watch; and if Elaine abandons me, I am half stranded with my
winter’s extravagance and, my poor fifteen thousand dollars will not
go very far. But, Garston counsels me to keep cool, to play my old
game, and to post him. He must now give me his open aid, and
Elaine may not then dare to thrust me out.
“And if I married Katharine Norreys, that would be the fairest reason
for a transference into Senator Garston’s camp.
“He must give me his entire business in stocks.”
He had quietly dropped into his old business routine, and the waxen
mask of his face was unruffled even before Wyman and Noel
Endicott, his foes in ambush. He had in some dim way realized that
Elaine Willoughby had only used him as a lever to crush the dead
favorite, Hathorn. And he began now to fear her variable nature.
“I do not dare to accuse her,” he growled, “for Alida’s visits were a
treason to my trust. Does she know of them?” He breathed freer at
the rumors of the approaching marriage of the golden-hearted Potter
with the woman who was his natural mate. “That will keep her mouth
shut forever, for her own sake!” meanly exulted Vreeland.
When Justine glided into the dark back room of the janitor, her
excited lover cut short all tenderness.
“Tell me, for God’s sake, all you know! We can make an appointment
for South Fifth Avenue afterwards.”
He had brought a roll of crisp bills to stimulate Justine’s memory, and
when he slipped away half an hour later, his heart was throbbing
wildly. He was armed at all points now.
In his mean egoism, he saw the storm lowering only over Justine’s
head. “Bah! they will merely chase her over to Paris; a few thousand
will close her mouth there.
“And I can surely afford it, when I marry Katharine Norreys, a
millionairess in posse!”
He went directly to the Savoy Hotel, after sending up a beautiful
corbeille of flowers. His mind was made up at last. “Justine is all
right. She dare not talk. And they will seal her lips and send her out
of America.” He laughed lightly. “My capricious employer! You are
only playing my game for me. For I should not care to have Justine
Duprez as a bridesmaid. It will be well to have her out of the way.
Garston might use his sly arts on her.”
Lulled by his mean selfishness he forgot all his own risks, in
believing the now half-desperate maid to be the single object of
suspicion.
He little knew that the police were quietly watching every movement
of himself, Doctor Alberg and the now fretful Justine. The cool body
servant, Bagley, was a spy by night and day; and even janitor August
Helms and the two letter-carriers at the “Circassia” were under the
surveillance of roundsman Dan Daly’s friends in plain clothes.
A minute mark on every letter and a special time list enabled Miss
Mary Kelly, self-possessed and untiring, to compare daily her list with
the chief clerk of Station Z.
An average detention of two hours on every letter, and the use of
prepared decoys, told of the unfaithfulness of the janitor and the
collusion of the unfortunate Mulholland, who had succumbed to the
demands of a thirst beyond his salary. For the other letter-carrier had
vindicated himself, and aided to trap his fellow.
Harold Vreeland was now ready for his final bargain with the stony-
faced Senator James Garston. He had withdrawn himself from
general society, and, as envious swains said, was “making the
running” now on Miss Katharine VanDyke Norreys.
The tall, blonde beauty’s exquisite grace, her superb dress, her
Western free-lance wit, and all the brilliant glow of her youthful
freshness, accentuated the charms of golden hair and the almost
pleading violet eyes à l’Imperatrice Eugenie.
Once or twice Vreeland fancied that he had discerned a tenderness
beyond their relations in her manner to Senator Garston, but his
whole faculties were now devoted to the arrangement of his dual
future relations.
“I can easily get my price from Mrs. Willoughby—the price of her
peace—and I might find a way to discover and return the dangerous
paper.
“A voyage to London, hunting down Martha Wilmot, and then, a
return of the paper to her as a conquering hero.” In fact, the custody
of the paper now became a source of daily worry to him. He dared
not give it to any other. He feared to deposit it in any bank of the city
or in a safety vault.
“I am king over Justine while I have it,” he mused, “and to convey it
about me is a fearful risk. If I leave it in hiding, a house may burn,
and there is always the unexpected to fear. If I should fall ill—” He
began to grow morbidly cowardly.
He was lulled by Elaine Willoughby’s silence as to her loss. “Of
course,” he reflected, “Doctor Alberg, the two nurses and Justine
were the only ones who had access to her during the illness
following Garston’s sudden appearance. I am a ‘rank outsider’ in all
that.”
It was clear to him that the Lady of Lakemere had accepted Doctor
Alberg’s ingeniously contrived explanation as to Martha Wilmot’s
robbery. But the paper—the paper! What to do with it now?
In fact, Judge Hiram Endicott, after a long examination of the
newspapers and police records, had finally dismissed the frightened
German physician with the remark: “I suppose that this sly
adventuress of a nurse thought her patient had concealed some
bank bills or stocks in that womanly hiding place, the corset, and has
undoubtedly destroyed the private papers, which were of no value to
any one but the owner.” The able old lawyer calmed the frightened
doctor’s all too evident fear of losing his “star” patient.
Those same private papers, the original and the copy, had been
already shifted by Harold Vreeland, from time to time, through a
dozen different hiding places.
“Damn them!” he growled. “If I burn them, I am safe, but then I lose
my hold on Elaine. If I sell them to Senator Garston, I am in his
hands as a criminal, and forever in his power. I’ll make my bargain
with him, and then, cover over my breach with Mrs. Willoughby by a
well-devised return. If she would only give me a sign of her real
purposes!” He was in a quandary, and had no counsel.
He never knew that Hugh Conyers wrote the long and even
unusually friendly letter from Asheville, in which his patroness
announced her intention of a long voyage “for a complete rest and
change of air.”
A tour, perhaps, around the world via Japan, but he did know that he
was to assist Noel Endicott and his cool partner, Wyman, in the
routine business.
“Stocks appear to be standing on a dead level,” she wrote, “and so, I
will lose nothing in my absence.”
The clear intimation that he would receive fifteen thousand dollars a
year for his services, and that the “Elmleaf” apartment would be kept
up as an extra account, satisfied him.
“It will be unnecessary for you to write to me for orders. I may go on
from here,” the letter concluded; “and you will receive all my final
wishes later, through Judge Endicott, by the hands of Noel. Miss
Kelly, in charge at the ‘Circassia,’ will liquidate all the ‘Elmleaf’ bills
as usual, through Bagley. I shall close up both my rooms at the
‘Circassia’ and Lakemere. Please acknowledge the receipt of this to
my Asheville address.”
“By Jove! She is a cool hand!” cried Vreeland. “The Colorado
Springs humbug and the southern trip was only devised to outwit
Garston. She will go around the world and meet her child in a safe
hiding-place. Now I am ready to sell out to Garston for a substantial
consideration. I am safe, and, I can easily hoodwink her.”
CHAPTER XIII.
A WEDDING IN HIGH LIFE.
It was a week later when two alert-minded men faced each other
over a table in Senator James Garston’s private rooms at the Plaza
Hotel. No single thread of the tangle had been successfully followed
up by the restless Vreeland, save that Mr. Hugh Conyers, gravely
occupied in his usual duties, had returned to the office of the Daily
Clarion.
And of the whereabouts of Mrs. Elaine Willoughby, Vreeland knew
absolutely nothing, save that in a stolen interview with Justine
Duprez he learned that Miss Mary Kelly, now aided by her brother
and mother as inmates, was the caretaker of the superb “Circassia”
apartment. And so, Justine had a new mistress, pro tem.
The private secretary had handed to the French maid a note from
her absent mistress, bidding her remain on duty at the “Circassia”
until her own return. “Miss Kelly represents me; she will pay you and
give you her orders, carrying out my directions to her.” And Justine
dared not break away.
There was joy now in Justine’s anxious heart, for the stolen
interviews at her old rooms in South Fifth Avenue, perhaps, could be
soon renewed, Miss Kelly generously allowing the maid all her usual
outings.
And Vreeland had soon calmed the Parisienne’s growing fears.
“She must however know no more of my affairs now,” mused the
young broker. “She will be useless to me in the future game, as Fate
has dealt the cards.”
But he knew he might have some further use for her, to watch the
promoted amanuensis and to learn of Mrs. Willoughby’s movements.
“Yes, she must continue to intercept the letters. Thank Heaven, I can
always depend upon the janitor and Mulholland!” was Vreeland’s
flattering consolation to his soul.
“It is the only way to trace Mrs. Willoughby’s real movements and so
be able to post Senator Garston.”
He would have been disturbed had he marked roundsman Dan Daly,
a cool but shadowy pursuer of Justine Duprez on her every outing,
and known also that the untiring schoolboy brother was on his own
trail all the while.
The moving into the South Fifth Avenue lodging-house of a very
agreeable old French crony gave a neighbor to Justine’s resident old
hag, who speedily became a familiar visitor. And then through the
walls of that adjoining room, a carefully contrived peep-hole enabled
roundsman Daly’s all-seeing eye to witness the now infrequent
interviews of Vreeland and Justine.
“I shall not be happy until I place the jewelry on that scoundrel’s
wrists,” was Daly’s pledge to his own heart, for he had not forgotten
Vreeland—bully and coward! There was a growing score to settle—a
long one!
And so Vreeland and Justine had freely met in the fancied security of
their Fools’ Paradise.
But blissfully ignorant, over the wine, Vreeland in the crowning
interview, eyed the Western rising statesman. He was all on the alert
as he said: “Senator Garston, I am now ready to close with you.
“But first, you must plainly tell me all. Why do you wish to find this
girl?”
Garston carelessly knocked the ash off his cigar, as he coolly said:
“There is a large amount of Western property, a very large one, in
which that child has an interest, an interest moreover of which she
knows nothing. That is my real business with the girl, whose life story
I alone know—save the mother who has adroitly hidden her so long.
You see her presence would have embarrassed the social queen!”
“Who was her father?” flatly demanded Vreeland.
The Senator’s eyes hardened. “That is nobody’s business but mine.
It does not enter into our affair. And the property interests demand
my present silence.”
Vreeland shrugged his shoulders, and smiling, calmly said: “You
wish me, then, to play my part openly for you, while I am kept in the
dark?”
And Garston steadily replied: “What matters it to you, if you are well
paid?” His voice was steady, but there was a wolfish anxiety in his
eyes. “My professional secrets could not aid you.”
“My price will be a high one, and cash down or secured. Either cash
or stocks. Sugar stocks will do,” meaningly replied Vreeland.
“Damn it, don’t haggle!” cried Garston. “Tell me simply what you
want.”
Vreeland calmly pushed over a piece of paper on which he had
written six figures. “I want that, and then, I will marry Katharine
Norreys on your pledge of honor that you give to her an equal
amount as dowry. You are then to direct the whole future game. Of
course, there must be the usual preliminary society flurry over the
engagement. I am now ready to go over to you, body and soul. What
do you say? I serve you to the death, then.”
“And I am to own you, out and out. You are to keep near her and to
work my will,” demanded Garston. His voice was strangely eager, for
his struggling heart would have its voice.
“To the death,” answered Vreeland, “if you pay me first, and then
stand by Katharine and myself. It will be a union of heart, hands and
interest.”
“I’ll do it on one sole condition,” replied Garston.
“And that is?” eagerly said Vreeland.
“That you clearly understand that your life would be the forfeit of any
treachery. I must reach that girl. I am playing a game to the bitter
end. And you do not know what a foe that sleek woman can be.”
“All right,” said the young man, extending his hand. “The future will
show you what I am. We must take the risks together.”
“I will give you half in cash, the balance in stocks, and I’ll hand the
check for the cash over now,” said Garston, as he laid his revolver
on the table.
“Now, sir, let me see that girl’s picture. Tell me where she is, and I’ll
sign the check.”
His eyes were wolfish as Vreeland silently handed him the
photograph of the girl who had never known a father’s love. The
young man began his cool recital:
“The girl sailed from Philadelphia for Europe three weeks ago on the
steamer ‘Excelsior,’ under the assumed name of Alice Montgomery,
with Sara Conyers, the artist sister of the Clarion’s sub-editor, Hugh
Conyers. She was hidden away here in New York under the name of
Romaine Garland, and old Endicott, Conyers and the sister have
smuggled the girl quietly away from Lakemere. The two women are
now at the ‘Hotel Royal Victoria’ at Lucerne, and Hugh Conyers and
Endicott are watching every move that you make.”
A ferocious gleam lit up the Senator’s eyes. He signed the check
and passed it over to Vreeland. “I can handle both of them easily,” he
growled.
“Tell me the whole story now,” he said, leaning back with an air of
exquisite delight. “My money will do the rest. I’ll get to her easy
enough.”
“You’ll have to work quickly then,” answered Vreeland, “for Elaine
Willoughby has stolen away on an ostensible trip around the world
via Japan, but really to meet the girl and her train. There was a
private guard who went with the two women. My detective
recognized him, and the bodyguard is a cool and dangerous man,
too.” The Senator’s brow was blackened with a ferocious scowl.
“Damnation, she is clever,” cried Garston. “I wanted the daughter in
this country, for I can not quickly use foreign laws, and any open
violence, of course, would be madness. Tell me the whole story. I
must be at work at once. It is a serious matter; I must think it over.”
It was midnight when the two men separated, after drinking a bottle
of “Pommery” to the “ensuing happiness.” Garston’s eyes were at
last gleaming with a triumphant joy. His quick wit suggested the way
out.
“You are to stay quietly on in the enemy’s camp. I will let her think
herself unpursued. Her desire to hoodwink you is our only salvation;
and now I will prepare Katharine for your visit. Shake hands! Here’s
to your married happiness. You are getting a pearl of a woman—a
woman fit to be a queen.”
“I have made my fortune,” mused Vreeland, as he wandered back to
the “Elmleaf.” “They are both of them in my power, Garston and
Elaine. He shall never know that Elaine only found the girl by
chance. I will play them off the one against the other.”
But, in the silence of his room that night the wild words of Alida
Hathorn came back to him. Her parting curse, “I leave it to the future
to punish you!” “I don’t see where the game can break against me,”
he reflected, “I hold four aces!” And so he slept reassured.
He had read in the evening paper the announcement of the
forthcoming engagement of the “well-known club man and
millionaire, Mr. James Potter, to the charming widow of the late
Frederick Hathorn.” “Newspaper enterprise!” sneered Vreeland.
“Well, marriage seals her lips like many another sister who has
wandered a few steps from the path. I am safe now.”
So rapid was the march of Senator Garston’s executive energy that
a week later, under the caption of “Prospective Wedding in High
Life,” Vreeland read the prophetic intimation of his own union with
“the brilliant Western heiress, Miss Katharine VanDyke Norreys.”
“It is too late to recoil now,” he mused, “for this engagement will be
telegraphed by Conyers over to my ‘financial backer.’”
The barriers were down, and nightly, under the guise of the usual
preparations, Vreeland and Garston conspired against the woman
whose heart was burning with all a mother’s still unsatisfied love.
The Senator-elect was using all the mighty resources of his wit,
fortune and hardihood to trap the travelers and to circumvent the
wife who had defied him. And he wrought in a stern silence.
There was a little scene with Justine Duprez which was not down on
the bills.
And of that scene, roundsman Daly was at once made aware by the
reports of his woman spy, now the intimate friend of Justine’s old
garde-chambre.
A common curiosity and the confidences engendered over the
absinthe glass caused the two women to mark the comings and
goings of the handsome young broker and the lissome French lady’s
maid who had prospered so wonderfully.
For Justine’s hand was an open and a liberal one. Justine had, after
a storm of tears, gone away contented. In her heart she proposed in
the future to secretly reign over the new ménage of her young tyrant
and dupe.
When Vreeland had at last quieted his rebellious dupe, he explained
to her at once that in the new household there would always be a
commanding position for herself, should Mrs. Willoughby cast her
out on her return.
“So you see, Justine, I can always protect you, and then, when you
wish to go over and settle in Paris, you will always have me near you
as a protector.”
Harold Vreeland was now perfectly happy, and a little more than
usually self-assertive.
For, on Wall Street all men now envied the man who was cementing
a union which would practically control the profitable business
resulting from Senator Garston’s vast operations in stocks and
mines.
Garston was a financial battleship, and a man of mark, even on
Manhattan’s shores.
“Our policy, Harold,” genially remarked Senator Garston, “is to work
right into the enemy’s camp, and to take no notice of
Mrs. Willoughby’s little maneuvers. I shall open a large active
account with your firm. That gives us the right to be seen together at
all places and times. It will blind them all. And while I watch Alynton,
you can always keep an eye for me on that crafty young Wyman. Of
course, as soon as you are married, Katharine can note every move
of the woman we fear. Let them lull themselves to sleep. We will
make a strong team, us three! Katharine shall worm into
Mrs. Willoughby’s intimacy.”
And even in the bustling office of Wyman & Vreeland a deeper
respect was soon engendered for Vreeland’s brilliant, dashing
successes. “A Senator behind him, and with the handsome young
heiress as a wife, he will have fully as much weight as Wyman
backed by his uncle Alynton and the Endicotts,” so mused the
observant cashier.
In fact, Senator Garston’s handlings of Western and Southern roads,
far-away mines, added to the immense business of his bold strokes
in the leading securities.
“There is no good excuse for Alynton, Wyman nor Mrs. Willoughby
pushing you out of the firm as long as you really handle my
business,” said the acute Garston. “They would have no sufficient
business warrant in so doing, for naturally Alynton and myself are
bound by both party and personal ties, which must rise above any
petty quarrel. I can easily handle Alynton. He is, of course, the secret
business counselor of Mrs. Willoughby, and as she fears me, and
with reason, she will never strike at you, as long as our pact holds.
“And then, moreover, your marriage with Katharine Norreys removes
every possible social objection to continuing your supposed
confidential relations with the Queen of the Street. Any kind of a wife
brings you within the ‘safety line.’ Moreover, Mrs. Willoughby is really
fond of Katharine, and those blue eyes of the young lady’s are as
keen as a diamond’s flashes.”
“Will Alynton finally marry this strange woman?” was Vreeland’s
searching query.
The stony-faced Senator-elect sprang to his feet, livid with rage. And
Vreeland marveled as the angered man harshly cried:
“Never, by God! Impossible! How could he? There’s that girl—the
one whom I’ve sworn to take away from her. The mother can not
explain the presence of the child to her admirer.
“She dare not! For the Alyntons are all as proud as Spanish
hidalgos, and young Alynton is no fool. He would have to find out
that she had lied to him—that her whole past life has been a sham—
and no man or woman can ever deceive David Alynton twice. He is
merciless. I’ve been a fellow-director with him for years, and I know
him. I hold them both in the hollow of my hand.”
The Senator quickly saw that his rage had led him on too far, for the
young man’s eyes were open in amazement at the passionate
outburst.
“There are these property interests,” he grumbled, “and I suppose
she has hoodwinked the girl as to her rights. It’s the old game. I am
the only living man who can set it straight, and I will do so, in my own
way. I have sworn to do it for my own reasons, and to even up with
My Lady.”
When James Garston went away to direct his secret agents, now
watching Lucerne by its dreaming lake, and following the steamer
“Empress of India,” nearing Hong Kong, Vreeland tried to pierce the
mystery of Romaine Garland’s nurture.
“Can it be,” he pondered, “that the property which Elaine enjoys
really belongs to that child? That the young girl was artfully brought
up in ignorance of her rights? Has she been robbed? The young
beauty may have broken away inopportunely, and appeared here to
embarrass the youthful-looking beauty whom Alynton seems to
adore.”
He could see no possible solution of the problem. “Garston seems to
be enraged at the mere idea of Alynton’s intimate relations. Can it be
that a secret love in olden days has tied the proud Senator to this
wonderful woman? He is dead set against her drifting into Alynton’s
arms.” It was all a life puzzle.
He was ready for the meanest suspicions, but the observations of
Justine dispelled them.
“Only friends; nothing more,” had been the verdict of a woman who
would have gloried to have held her mistress in the clutches of
blackmail.
“And the love of the same woman has now, as usual, made Alynton
and Garston secret foes,” decided Vreeland.
He recalled the legendary source of Mrs. Willoughby’s tangible
fortune, some Western windfall of vast richness.
“She knew him before, she fears him now, and has spirited the girl
away to keep them apart.”
It seemed clear to Vreeland that some partner, or old associate,
perhaps a client of Garston’s in the wild West, had owned both the
property and the lovely woman in her flush of girlish beauty.
“It seems to be an old passion,” mused Vreeland.
“And now repulsed by the mother, whom evidently he has pursued,
Garston would use the girl as a lever for his revenge. Once a breach
effected with Alynton, and the girl his ally, then the Queen of the

Coin Hoards and Hoarding in The Roman World Jerome Mairat Full Chapter

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

Coin Hoards and Hoarding in The Roman World Jerome Mairat Full Chapter

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Coin Hoards and Hoarding in the

Roman World Jerome Mairat

Coin Hoards and

List of Figures  vii

1. Introduction: Coin Hoards and Hoarding in the Roman World 3

3. Hoarding in Roman Britain: An Archaeological and

11. The Imperial Afterlife of Roman Republican Coins and the

viii List of Figures

7.26. Hoards closing under Aurelian: entries/year of reign. 163

2.1. The ‘minimal’ dataset. 30

xiv List of Tables

Kevin Butcher, Professor, Department of Classics and Ancient History, University of

Cristian Găzdac, Professor of Security Studies, University of Cluj-Napoca and Researcher

xvi List of Contributors

List of Contributors xvii

of Humanities Data: Handling Multidisciplinarity and Diversity’ (with G. Chrysovitsanos

Sophia Kremydi, Research Director, Institute of Historical Research, National Hellenic

Pierre Nouvel, Professor of Archaeology at the University of Bourgogne, Dijon (France).

Matthew Ponting, Senior Lecturer in Archaeological Materials, Department of Archaeology,

xviii List of Contributors

Bernadette Soum, Archaeologist and numismatist at the Institut national de recherches

Bernhard E. Woytek, Deputy Head of the Department of Classical Studies, Austrian

Introduction: Coin Hoards and Hoarding

THE COIN HOARDS OF THE ROMAN EMPIRE PROJECT

1 Project web application: http://chre.ashmus.ox.ac.uk/.

4 Chris Howgego and Andrew Wilson

of hoarding as a cultural phenomenon or quantitative studies of numismatic

3 As discussed by van Heesch in chapter 14 and by Iakovidou and Kremydi in chapter 6.

6 Chris Howgego and Andrew Wilson

s­ ignificant Empire-­wide discussion of imperial hoards from a monetary perspective

The Project seeks to encourage the application and development of appropriate

9 Duncan-­Jones (1994), with Metcalf (1995) and Howgego (1996).

There is an excellent review by Peter Guest of many of the meth­odo­logic­al

12 Guest (2015), drawing on Guest (1994). 13 C.Th. IX.23.1 (ad 356).

8 Chris Howgego and Andrew Wilson

15 Guest (2015); Hobbs (2006: 128–30). 16 van Heesch (2017).

The dating of hoard deposits may be key to interpretation: to what extent do

10 Chris Howgego and Andrew Wilson

12 Chris Howgego and Andrew Wilson

28 A key theme of Hellings, chapter 13 here. 29 Duncan-­Jones (1994).

30 Duncan-­Jones (2003); Andreau (2008); Centro internazionale di studi numismatici (2007).

14 Chris Howgego and Andrew Wilson

Selectivity of coins for hoarding may be patent. It presents a methodological

38 Hendy (1985). 39 For an introduction to the bibliography see Kemmers (2006).

the impressive duration of Republican coins in circulation and their interplay

16 Chris Howgego and Andrew Wilson

18 Chris Howgego and Andrew Wilson

20 Chris Howgego and Andrew Wilson

22 Chris Howgego and Andrew Wilson

Noreña, C. F. (2011). Imperial Ideals in the Roman West: Representation, Circulation,

Numismatists, especially applied numismatists, collect large quantities of data

1 Crawford (1974: 642). 2 Volpato (2014).

drawn by Snow in his famous investigation of a cholera outbreak in London in

STATISTICS IN ARCHAEOLOGY AND NUMISMATICS

15 Blalock (1960). 16 Myers (1950). 17 Hymes (1965).

An impression of the development of statistical techniques in numismat­ics

A WEDDING IN HIGH LIFE.

You might also like

List of Figures vii

1. Introduction: Coin Hoards and Hoarding in the Roman World 3

7.26. Hoards closing under Aurelian: entries/year of reign. 163

2.1. The ‘minimal’ dataset. 30

s ignificant Empire-wide discussion of imperial hoards from a monetary perspective

9 Duncan-Jones (1994), with Metcalf (1995) and Howgego (1996).

There is an excellent review by Peter Guest of many of the methodological

28 A key theme of Hellings, chapter 13 here. 29 Duncan-Jones (1994).

30 Duncan-Jones (2003); Andreau (2008); Centro internazionale di studi numismatici (2007).

An impression of the development of statistical techniques in numismatics