i

ii

Introduction
Roman imperial coins are probably the most studied and written about era in the field of ancient numismatics. It might be questioned why another book on the subject is necessary given the lopsided attention this part of history has already received. Many of these books will focus on a limited topic or time period and study it in depth while others attempt to tackle the entire length of the Roman empire. Some appeal to the casual history buff and others are written for and by scholars. And all of them, including this effort, suffer from being quickly outdated thanks to new discoveries of coins, historical data and analyses that constantly reshape old theories. The aim of this book is to provide first and foremost the collector of Roman coins with an easy to use guide to understand in as concise a manner as possible the corpus of money issued from the time of the first emperor to the last; a period in history spanning over half a millennium. Naturally, as user-friendliness is given top priority for the sake of the collector other users may be disappointed. The scholar will lament the exclusion of obscure issues, the historian will find little new research, the investor and others concerned primarily with the worth of their coins will find this book nearly useless and those whose interest lies in any subject not covered will rightfully feel disenfranchised. On the other hand Roman coin collectors will at long last find in a single book a comprehensive account of nearly every variant of legend and type known for each of the over two hundred emperors, empresses and other imperials in whose name coins were minted during this time. In addition, a full-fledged catalog of known coins is also provided with each entry having a unique number to facilitate reference among collectors and students. Traditionally, coin guides for ancient coins tend to have full pages of coin photographs at the end of the book. While a more efficient and cost-effective approach, I have chosen instead to include the photographs at the end of each emperors section to make them more accessible. Every feature, again, has been crafted to make this enormous amount of information as easy to understand as possible in as condensed a format as is practical. Just like with any other reference book, the data herein could not possibly have been compiled without extensive help from many others whose interests and expertise are as diverse as the coins themselves. Of particular importance in this endeavor must be noted The Roman Imperial Coinage series of books which is largely regarded as the most definitive and certainly most consulted work on Roman coins. This 13-volume set took the better part of a century to complete and is, in fact, an ongoing project with the collaboration of many of the worlds top numismatists. Spink and Son, its publishers, have graciously allowed for the cross-referencing of their catalog numbers to the listings in this book. David Sear, an author who has devoted his life to the study of ancient coins has also allowed for similar cross-referencing rights to his own highly acclaimed books. Many, many friends, too numerous to list have provided photos of their coins and sometimes the coins themselves for inclusion. The Swiss numismatic firm of Leu donated hundreds of dollars worth of old catalogs, always a prime ground for research. The British Museum provided photographs of some of the worlds rarest coin photographs free of charge. And I am equally indebted to CNG, Numismatik Lanz, Mnzen & Medaillen and many other firms and scores of individuals for making a wealth of information accessible over the last two years it has taken to put all of it neatly across the space of a few hundred pages.

Co-founder Dirty Old Coins, LLC

Rasiel Suarez

iii

About Roman Coins

One of the most recognizable cultural traits of the Romans was how systematic and methodical they were. In war, politics and art the Romans preferred a strict discipline and adherence to their rules. Naturally, this emphasis on consistency carried over into their currency policies. For hundreds of years millions of coins were handmade by untold numbers of craftsmen and almost every one is instantly recognizable to the collector or student as Roman. It is remarkable that in good times and in bad they could be counted on to make one coin look nearly identical to the next. Even to the bitter end, when coins were little more than metal scraps with scribbled on designs they retained a look and feel uniquely theirs. Asides from aesthetics the Romans were consistent as well with the content they chose to portray on their coins. From them we inherit the legacy of mating a persons face to the obverse, appropriately referred to as heads informally, with a design on the back. Many of the themes they chose to put on these reverses have also become staple ingredients in modern western culture as well. The Romans were masters of propaganda and learned early on how to exploit every element of a coins design to further the imperial message of a strong and cohesive empire. To this end they employed a vast number of symbols, insignia and inscriptions to drive home the point. Most Roman coins feature religious or military themes. Issues of a civic or purely secular nature are relegated to a secondary role and the few times they appear they are still meant to glorify the pomp and glory of the emperor and, by extension, the Roman people. Ancient coins have been collected since antiquity as ambassadors to the past. Augustus, the first Roman emperor, is said to have amassed a world-class coin collection specimens of which he often gave to dignitaries. So many kings and nobles from the middle ages on collected ancient coins that the collecting of coins itself became known as the hobby of kings. Nowadays there are millions of coin collectors the world over and many are discovering that owning an ancient coin need not be hopelessly expensive. European metal detectorists are finding coins in record numbers of every culture that made them. While the silver and gold ones are sold directly to dealers many of the coppers, which are found in the hundreds of thousands every year, are individually too difficult and/or damaged to restore. These are therefore often sold in their as-found state for as little as a dollar or two each. Any would-be archaeologist then has the chance to restore, attribute and value their ancient coin and in the process have a lot of fun learning about ancient history.

Denominations
Roman coins came in many different denominations. The weight and metal type of each coin determined how much purchasing power each coin had. Eventually, coin designs would to a certain extent explicitly state the value of the coin but it is uncertain whether these official values were honored by merchants and the public in general. The absolute base unit in Roman coinage is the Uncia, a small copper coin the size of a small button which was never struck in large quantities and is today very rare. 16 Unciae are equivalent to an As which is the first commercially functional coin. In turn, 16 Asses make up the famous Denarius, a silver, U.S.-dime sized coin which circulated for hundreds of years and influenced coinage in just about every successive Western culture up into modern times. Although a fascinating subject, its disappointing to learn that we lack a good understanding of what the actual value of Roman coins were. Necessary food staples were often heavily subsidized by the government to ensure their accessibility. The emperor and his officials understood that a hungry citizenry was a grave liability. What records survive, therefore, tend to point out these set prices but the going rate for other luxuries is largely speculative. For what its worth, a rough sketch of salaries would have a gold Aureus or Solidus as a months pay for an ordinary soldier. And a Denarius or two could be earned in a day by a skilled laborer. In turn, a family meal consisting of bread, olive oil, wine and perhaps some meat would cost a Denarius or one of its equivalents. For early imperial coinage the relative values are as follows: 1 Aureus = 2 Quinarii = 25 Denarii = 100 Sestertii = 200 Dupondii = 400 Asses = 800 Quadrans = 6,400 Unciae Considering the expense in labor and materials that was borne in the production of the small-change Quadrans and Uncia its not hard to see why these denominations existed more as a theoretical currency keystone than as real coins.

iv
The first crack in the Roman economical machine appeared under the reign of Nero who cut back the purity of the Denarius from 98% fineness (essentially as pure as could possibly have been refined on a large scale basis back then) to 93%. The debasement did not link up with an official decrease in the nominal value of the coin itself so that the extra 5% silver was clear and free profit for the emperor. However, it took virtually no time for the public at large to see that the old Denarius was intrinsically worth more than the new one. This created an immediate hoarding of the old silver coins which could now be melted and then sold as scrap. In fact, finding today a pre-reform Denarius is considerably more difficult and expensive than Neros new Denarii. From then on each new emperor lowered the fineness of the Denarii a percent or two so that by the time of Gordian III, the last emperor to issue significant quantities of Denarii, a Denarius was actually no more than about 35% silver by weight. Another unintended effect was that as the silver coins became cheaper the copper ones became more expensive. After all, each Denarius was now being made by more and more copper to fill in for the missing silver. What was happening was that a 3 gram silver coin was 2 grams copper but the whole coin was still valued at several multiples more than the Sestertii, Dupondii and Asses which weighed between 10-30 grams a piece. Therefore, rather than the government risk striking copper coins which would only wind up being melted it chose to not strike them much in the first place. Gold on the other hand was considered sacred. As much as it may have pained each emperor to part with his dwindling supplies of its most precious metal no soldier would risk his life unless it was for real gold. Not until the situation had grown into a series of deep crises in the middle of the third century that emperors decided to tinker with the next best thing: their weight. The Aureus which had traditionally weighed between 7-8 grams each went as far down as just over 2 grams under the reign of Gallienus. How the paymasters kept a straight face on pay day is anyones guess and its quite possible that the scam was masqueraded as salary increases by paying two or three of these Aurei while, of course, the total outlay of metal was still below the traditional amount. As the fineness in silver was steadily lowered, and the weight of the Aureus became erratic, new denominations were introduced to further blur the governments cost-cutting schemes and attempts to curb rampant inflation. The silver Antoninianus was introduced around the year 215 under Caracalla at a nominal value of two Denarii and, for gold, the Binio was introduced a few years later as a double Aureus. Since gold coins were never a major part of everyday commerce the Binio was a nonstarter but the Antoninianus drove the Denarius into extinction within 30 years of its introduction. And it, too, would suffer severe debasement and reduction in weight. By the mid-250s the Ant reached the critical low point in the silver-copper alloy, about 18%, where it no longer resembled a silvery coin even when freshly minted. Debasing this coin further served no practical purpose because it was blatantly obvious it was no longer silver. A decision was therefore made to stop making silver coins altogether and simply apply a silver wash to the Ants as a last processing step of the coin blanks. When new, these coins looked much better than the previous 18% silver Ants. However, shortly after entering circulation the silver coating wore off across the high points of the coin to reveal the copper beneath. Many such coins continued to circulate long after the silvering was fully gone and yet they were still officially considered silver coins! By the early 290s the Roman economy was in a state of near-collapse as the old currency value schedules were maintained relative to a silver coinage that existed only as a dim memory. The emperor Diocletian set into motion a series of monetary reforms meant to rectify the situation. The Antoninianus was suspended and new denominations introduced including a new Denarius of high silver content termed Argenteus (but officially worth 2.5 Denarii each) and the Follis which had a negligible amount of silver but was as hefty as an old As. The Aureus would be reborn under more predictable weights as well and the whole coinage system was overhauled from top to bottom in the hopes of stabilizing the economy. Some of the denominations caught on and some, specifically the Argenteus, would see a quick demise due to the chronic lack of silver. What little silver was initially breathed into the Follis was pulled and the weight, too, dwindled swiftly from a high of about 10g until it was a small copper coin of about 2-3g each within a few years time. This reduced Follis enters the fourth century as the new de facto standard copper coin to serve the same general purpose as the Denarius of two centuries before (if not the actual buying power). Since it is unclear what the Romans of the time called it todays numismatists give it the generic term of a class three bronze or AE3 for short (AE is the abbreviation for Aeratus, Latin for copper).

v
Even though during the fourth century the AE3 is king there are several other important denominations. After Diocletians reforms settle into a new swing over the following years, a new gold standard is introduced under Constantine I with the flagship Solidus, a successor to the old Aureus which is now made to unerring precision at 72 to a Roman pound of gold, or about 4.4g a piece. It is so successful that it was still being made 500 years later under Byzantine emperors easily outlasting the Denarius itself and, possibly, any other denomination to this age. While the relationship between bronze coins and their silver and gold cousins are poorly understood the relative values between silver and gold are as follows: 1 Solidus = 2 Semisses = 3 Tremisses = 24 Siliquae The Siliqua is the last major successor to the old Denarius. It is thinner and lighter at only 2-3g each and never approaches the popularity of the Denarius. Except for rare occasions it is the one denomination that is not survived by the fall of the Roman empire itself in 476. While the gold and silver remain stable into the fifth century and beyond the last days of the Western half of the Roman empire see the bronze coinage shrink quickly into a morass of teeny coppers known as AE4s. They survive in large quantities today but prove difficult to identify due to careless minting methods and heavily debased alloys which fared poorly in the soil upon their loss or burial. The following table lists the most important denominations with rare fractions and multiples being omitted.

Main Roman Imperial Coin Denominations

Denomination Aureus Binio Quinarius Solidus Metal Gold Gold Gold Gold Weight 7-8g 5.5-6g 2.5-4g 4.4g Value 25 Denarii 2 Aurei Aureus 24 Siliquae Solidus Solidus 9 Siliquae 4 Sestertii Circ. Dates c.200 BCE 305 CE 251-310 c.200 BCE 305 CE 310-c.963 Notes Weights fluctuate wildly mid-third century Weights fluctuate wildly mid-third century. Very rare The Solidus is reborn as Basil Is Histamenon Nomisma with same weight and purity until replaced in the 1040s by the Hyperpyron. th Rare prior to 6 century Scripulum is a measure of weight. Ancient name remains unknown. Extremely rare. Weights were never adhered to very strictly but typical Denarius in Augustan times was nd 3.8g dropping to 3.4g by 2 century and sometimes as low as 2g under the Severan dynasty. When first introduced in 211 BCE the Denarius was tariffed at 10 Asses and was retariffed to 16 Asses in 118 BCE. A denomination meant for use in the eastern provinces to mimic traditional silver coinage in the region but using Latin legends and imperial portraits. The name of this coin in antiquity is unknown. Present usage is named after Caracalla whose formal name was Antoninus and who first introduced this coin. The radiate bronze coins under Diocletian may be a separate denomination or simply a size-reduced Antoninianus. A severely debased Argenteus is minted in Trier from c.310-319. Note also that this coin is essentially the same as the light Miliarense. Rare

Semissis Tremissis 1- Scripulum Denarius

Gold Gold Gold Silver

2.25g 1.5g 1.7g 2.5-4g

310-c.867 c.380-c.867 310-c.380 211 BCE 244 CE

Cistophoric Tetradrachms Antoninianus

Silver

10-12g

3 Denarii

27 BCE 138 CE 215-285

Silver

3-5g

2 Denarii

Argenteus

Silver

3-4g

2- Denarii

c.290-c.310

Quinarius

Silver

1.3g-

211 BCE

vi
Siliqua Silver 2g 1.5-3g Denarius th 1/24 Solidus c.230 CE 310 c.650 Weights were erratic but steadily diminished over time from around 3g early th on to less than 2g by the 5 century. Although sporadically minted during Byzantine times it had been phased out of general production by the 460s. The Miliarense comes in three separate weight categories of uncertain value relative to the Siliqua or Solidus except as raw bullion weight. The light Miliarense of approximately 3.5g, a regular ~4.5g coin and the heavy miliarense of ~5.2g It is possible that the Sestertius continued to be struck in extremely limited quantities until Diocletians reform in or around the year 285. However, after the Severan dynasty the Sestertius became increasingly scarce and underweight, occasionally falling to under 10g. Prior to 23 BCE the Sestertius existed as a rare denomination in silver. Its value however had always been fixed to a quarter of a Denarius. The Sestertius and the Dupondius are typically struck from Orichalcum, a brassy alloy. Using the convention of radiate crowns for double value, the double Sestertius is an exotic denomination begun under Trajan Decius. Some rare pieces have been noted weighing upwards of 44g but typical weights hover around 25g. The last double Sestertii were apparently minted during the reign of Aurelian at a rather emaciated weight of ~17g. From the year 64 forward emperors on the Dupondius are depicted with a radiate crown. This visual aid eases the distinction between it and the larger Sestertius and the smaller As. Empresses do not get a similar distinction until the 220s when a bust resting on a crescent was introduced, a feature which was never thoroughly consistent in use. It is often impossible to tell for certain whether a coin is a heavier than usual As or a light Dupondius on those coins that normally lack a radiate crown. Rare and often struck anonymously. Last issues were used in the outer provinces. Julian II introduces a large silvered bronze coin of ~8.5g, quite possibly a rebirth of the Follis. It is continued by Jovian and struck in very limited quantities by Valens & Valentinian I before disappearing. Large copper medals and so-called contorniates are minted sporadically from the early 300s and well into the 500s. They were

Miliarense

Silver

3.5g5.2g

~2 Siliquae

310-c.717

Sestertius

Bronze/ Brass

22-30g

Denarius 2 Dupondii

23 BCE c.275

Double Sestertius

Bronze

25-40g

2 Sestertii

251-274

Dupondius

Bronze/ Brass

11-15g

Sestertius

23 BCE c.260

As

Copper/ Bronze Bronze Bronze Bronze

10-12g

Dupondius As Semis ?

c.280 BCE c.275 c.210 BCE c.180 CE c.210 BCE c.180 CE 360s

Semis Quadrans AE1

2-3g 2.5-4g >25mm

vii
rare in their own time, struck for ceremonial purposes, as presentation pieces or other special occasions and unlikely to have entered circulation as money. The typical AE2 weighs 4-5g and is sometimes called a Centenionalis though the term is far from universally accepted. th AE2s from the 5 century are exceedingly rare but, strangely, seem to have had a little revival under Leo I and his wife Verina in the 450s. The greater part of extant ancient Roman coins fall under this category. Perhaps hundreds of millions were struck during the fourth century and seem to have served as the general-purpose coin in commerce of the day. They typically weigh about 3g each and were largely phased out of production by the last decade of this century but erratic production continued until Anastasius reform in 498. The AE4 is to the fifth century what the AE3 was to the fifth. They are found today in large quantities but careless production processes, poor alloys and small size conspire against easy identification. This class of bronze is proposed to differentiate them from the larger AE4s th struck in the first half of the 4 century which were initially conceived as posthumous coins struck in honor of deified emperors and empresses and then as the very large issue in celebration of the refounding of Byzantium as Constantinople. The first mainstream AE4s appeared late in the 340s but were abandoned within a decade until 379 when the emperor Gratian authorized the minting of a small coin of about 12mm diameter. This smaller module would quickly eclipse the AE3 in popularity and is apparently the main engine of small commerce for the entire fifth century with larger bronzes becoming practically nonexistent during this period. Its weight hovered around 0.9-1.14g and by the early 400s settles into a diameter range of about 10mm.

AE2

Bronze

2225mm

2x AE3 (?)

350-c.390

AE3

Bronze

1622mm

c.300-430

AE4

Bronze

<16mm

c.317-498

AE5 (proposed)

Bronze

<12mm

c.380-498

viii

Coins of Other Ancient Cultures

In learning about Roman coins it is helpful to be able to distinguish them from other ancient coins. A short guide is presented outlining the major differences between these.

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

Roman imperatorial coins immediately precede the imperial period. This rather brief numismatic period extends from shortly before the death of Julius Caesar until Octavian is given his title of Augustus; less than 20 years in all. Numismatically, this period blends characteristics of the Roman republican period before and the coming imperial age. Among these are the first examples of living persons being featured on coins. The imperatorial period issues some gold and copper coinage but are of excessive rarity today. The Roman economy during this time is nearly monopolized by the silver Denarius.

ix

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

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

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

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

The Greek and then Roman empires most formidable enemies were the Persians with whom they constantly quarreled. They left behind a significant body of numismatic material that began shortly after the Greeks themselves invented coinage and evolved over time into the modern Islamic currency. Coins issued in antiquity will look quite exotic to Western eyes from the inscrutable inscriptions to the designs. Portraits feature equally exotic headgear and dress.

The Celts were not one people. They were a diverse number of tribes inhabiting all European regions not under direct Roman control. They include Spanish, British, Germanic and near-eastern nations of semi-nomadic makeup and lumped together under the Roman pejorative Barbarian. The extent of their coinage was limited insofar as their economies were more primitive. However, trade was an important element of their various civilizations and many found the convenience of coinage. The style used on Celtic coins is hard to reign in given how dissimilar the various tribes were. Most uniquely distinguishable is their abstracted portraiture and rendition of animals, particularly horses.

xi

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

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

As the Roman influence vanished and the Byzantine influence waned these tribes now began to slowly disassociate themselves from the old empire and instead issued coins honoring their own kings. In the vacuum that was left the inhabitants of Western Europe gained stronger identities and new cultures were born giving way to the medieval period. Coin craftsmanship will for the next 1,000 years be far below the standards of the Greeks and Romans and acquire a look and feel unique and easy to identify. However, a thorough knowledge of European medieval coinage is intricate th and difficult to master. It will not be until the 16 century when Arabic numeral dating on coins and the eventual introduction of machine-stamped coins that the modern age of currency is born.

xii

Meanwhile the Byzantines carry on the political legacy of the Romans by continuing the now ancient imperial tradition. Spanning a full millennium the Byzantine currency undergoes many changes over the years. The ending section of this book introduces the Byzantine age while the coins are still fully indistinguishable from their Italian counterparts. In fact, at this stage the mints in Constantinopolis and Rome still closely coordinate their coin production to give every appearance of a seamless monetary system and, by extension, a solidly unified empire. The book closes with the reign of Anastasius who is a pivotal figure in reforming coinage in a new direction that breaks with the past. Numismatic historians prefer to pin this date as the start of the Byzantine period.

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

xiii

Identifying Roman Coins

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

At first that string of letters may seem daunting to interpret. While each letter appears recognizable it looks like one big, alien word. For all their inventiveness, the Romans seem to have ran out of steam after designing the letter Z and the idea of spacing between words never really caught on. Dots occasionally serve this function but normally the coin lettering will be all bunched up like in this photo. The Latin alphabet used in Roman times is somewhat shorter than the English one. There are no Js, Us or Ys. Instead, an I is used where a J would normally be found and, likewise, a V is the U or Y stand-in. All writing is always upper case. Knowing this, in the sample photo the string of letters encodes not only the name of the emperor, in this case Maximian which is readable starting the third letter in, but also several of his titles. Since there were many titles bestowed on emperors the only way to cram them into the available space was to abbreviate them. In this particular coin the first two letters are D and N which stand in Latin for Dominus Noster (Our Lord), then MAXIMIANO (a Latin form of the name Maximian), FELICISSIMO (roughly translating to most dutiful), then SEN (short for senior) and lastly AVG for Augustus, the most important imperial title. A literate Roman back then would understand this inscription to mean something like Our Lord Maximian, most dutiful senior Augustus. The reverse reads PROVIDENTIADEORVMQVIESAVGG. Breaking this up yields Providentia Deorvm Qvies Avgg which translates to By the providence of the Gods there is peace. This particular coin speaks therefore of the peaceful transition of power from the emperor, Maximian, to his appointed successor. Other coins will follow this basic principle and the connection to modern coins should be obvious thereby making the identification of each one easier. On the other hand, many ancient coins will prove more difficult to figure out because theyre worn, damaged or have legends that are too difficult to make out. Those features that are visible will have to suffice in correctly attributing the coin. It is unfortunately not unusual to find a coin that resists identification because there is simply too little to go on. However, even in these cases it should at least be possible to determine the approximate age and region of the coin.

xiv

How to Use This Book

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

1. The name of the ruler followed by title and reign dates. In the case of empresses dates given are for when they were born and died. 2. A short biography of the ruler. 3. Notes on the availability and general pricing of his or her coins.

xv
4. Known bust types for this ruler. The general order of description is to list first what, if anything is worn on the head and then continue to list the type of dress visible on the bust and, finally, whatever the effigy might be holding with his right hind followed by his left hand. In a few cases coin obverses will have a design rather than a portrait. A lettered listing will follow with known types. 5. Obverse legends known for the ruler, arranged alphabetically. 6. Reverse legends. 7. Description of known types. 8. Mint location. City name is given as known in antiquity. See elsewhere in introductory section for current name and location. 9. Metal type and denomination. AU is for gold, AR silver and AE is copper. 10. References to listings in other catalogs for the same catalog are provided where researched and/or available. Blank spaces in this field may mean either that the coin is unlisted or is listed in a work not researched by the author. 11. Photographs of the busts and types. Photographs are not to scale. 12. Catalog entries are provided in a numbered sequence that includes the most common known combinations of the busts, types and legends. In addition, mintmarks and the occasional note unique to this listing will be entered after the combination. A listing that reads, for example, B1, O1, R05, T20 simply means that a coin is known with bust number 1, obverse legend number one, reverse legend five and reverse type number 20. Leading zeroes are added where necessary in order to make the headings line up and sort correctly. The numbers reset for the next ruler. Where a coin has field markings in addition to the exergue a / will separate the field from the exergue. A coin therefore that has an A in one of its reverse fields and XXX in the exergue will be described as A / XXX. If a coin has field markings in both fields it might then read A / B / XXX. Where the arrangement may present confusion additional comments will be provided.

xvi

Mintmarks
For hundreds of years Rome kept a close eye on the output of its coins. As there were only a few mints operational at any one time, with Rome itself reserving the lions share of this output, quality control and accurate bookkeeping was a task that the mint officials could handle without resorting to the practice of placing marks on the coins themselves to know what was going on. However, near the latter half of the third century, the quality of the coins had suffered greatly under the stress of inflation and a centralized system made for an impractical way of distributing the (cheaper) currency being made. It was at this time that mintmarking really began to take hold and, within a few years, the process had become the most intricate and methodical the world would ever witness. Although silver and gold would eventually get some mint marks here and there it was the low value bronze denominations which received full attention in this area. Oddly, down to the very last days before the fall of Rome even the sorriest little copper would be duly impressed with the mark of its city of origin and, frequently, its officina as well. The big idea therefore was for the government to keep track of who was making what and how much of it. Specie in gold and silver had such tight controls that general accounting practices were generally sufficient to minimize corruption and fraud. Copper coinage on the other hand was being produced on a very massive scale. Each mint each year may have made hundreds of millions of coins and, not surprisingly, most were of the copper variety meant for general circulation. This scale of manufacture would not be repeated again until the industrial age so a system for all those coins coming into circulation was imperative. The treasurys primary need in accounting was to make sure the correct number of coins were being made to pay off the governments expenditures. Each mint was therefore bound to a number of rules that they were to follow both for accounting as well as to ensure a supply of coins that were as seamless in terms of look and feel from one mint to the next. Designs were therefore carefully coordinated between the various mints and for specific lengths of time. The painstaking practice of ensuring that every single coin looked essentially identical from one end of the empire to the other and a level of detail that dictated the precise, hyper-correct placement of individual letters and other design elements can be considered as part of the quintessentially Roman way of precision engineering. The very first mintmarks employed under the Roman imperial period usually consisted of cryptic symbols just meant to reveal the city of origin. This practice was far from widespread and given the normal variances from region to region it is now known without doubt that some coins were made in certain locations or at least general areas even without these mintmarks based on stylistic differences alone. But these differences were much too subtle for administrators to bother with. When the need presented itself the mint marking system was put into place and within a matter of a few years the practice was more or less standardized across hundreds of thousands of square miles. No sooner than explicit mint marks begin appearing that identify each city of origin than it becomes necessary to break it down further into individual series and, as noted above, often the officinae involved too. A typical late Roman bronze will often carry additional symbols that reveal separate production runs. Understanding this system is complex and their meanings are not always universally agreed upon. But generally speaking some conventions can be followed with enough consistency that they soon become familiar to the collector. The first step then is to identify the name and location of all these mints. The map on the following page identifies the main ones in operation during the fourth and fifth centuries.

xvii

In addition to the above locations, several other cities hosted mint operations during brief periods. Sometimes an emperor on a war campaign chose to bring along these facilities to ensure a close eye on the soldiers payroll. A partial list of minor mints includes: Ambianum Amiens, France Barcino Barcelona, Spain Carnuntum near Vienna, Austria Colonia Agrippinensis Cologne, Germany Laodiceia ad Mare Laodikeia, Syria Ostia near Rome, Italy Palmyra near Tadmur, Syria Narbo Martius Narbonne, France Tarraco Tarragona, Spain Tripolis Tripolis, Turkey Viminacium Kostolac, Yugoslavia Now that weve taken a brief overview of their names and locations lets take a look at the mint marks themselves. The simplest type of mint mark just wants to identify its city of mintage and the first thing to remember is that it almost always will be located on the bottom of the reverse of the coin. This area, typically delineated by a line separating the design from the mintmark itself, is called the exergue. This bronze coin belonging to Constantius Gallus, a minor figure of the fourth century, was minted in Sirmium given the readable string ASIRM). The A and the dot would have provided an administrator extra information useful in pinning down who was responsible for making the coin and at what approximate time. One might consider how this level of detail has never to this day been found again and should give pause to wonder just how meticulous these people were! In the meantime and for the purpose of cracking the system let us remember that the mint city will be an abbreviation consisting of one to several letters and will usually be embedded with additional symbols. Learning how they abbreviated their city names is usually the first step in recognizing where a particular coin was made. Relatively few, unfortunately, are generous enough to spell out the first four letters of the city name like in this example! Barring the many exceptions that will be found, some forms of usage predominate: Alexandria: ALE Antioch: ANT or ANA

xviii
Arles: A, ARL, CONS (after being renamed Constantia in the fourth century. To distinguish from Constantinople the officina letter always precedes the CONS in Arles and always comes after the CONS for Constantinople issues) Aquileia: AQ Constantinople: CON or CONS Cyzicus: K, KYZ or MKV Heraclea: H, HT, HERACL or HERAC London: L, ML or LON Lugdunum (Lyons): LG or LVG Nicomedia: N, NIC, NIKO Rome: R or RF Sirmium: SIRM Siscia: SIS or SISC Thessalonica: TES or TS Ticinum: T Trier: TR Whenever possible, the above keys should be visually isolated from other symbols preceding or stuck on as suffixes. Another very popular convention used was to use the form SMxy where x would be the 1- to 3-letter city code followed by y, the officina. SM stood for Sacra Moneta (sacred mint). The officina is simply and literally the office or internal department in charge of minting the coins. The physical building that housed the machinery and staff for minting coins may have had up to a dozen or more simultaneously operating officinae. Sometimes each officina would be given the task of dedicating its output to a certain design or emperor but more typically they shared equally in the output. Each was therefore expected to stamp their coins with the signature of their crew; all, again, for the sake of full accounting. The officinae were identified by a numbering system whose nomenclature depended on their general location. Cities in the western half of the empire normally used an ordinal sequence where you would have the first, second, third and so on officinae. This being Latin, they would have used the words prima, seconda, tertia, qvarta, etc. They would then use the first letter of each ordinal along with the city code. For example, a coin from Rome could have a mintmark RP (Roma Prima) which would indicate that it came from the first officina. Just as often you could have the officina letter precede the city code so that a QA would indicate the fourth officina for Arles. A logistic problem occurs when we arrive at the fifth officina, qvinta in Latin, because there is obviously no way to distinguish between the Q for qvarta and qvinta. The Romans evidently didnt burn too many mental calories on this one and in these cases just grabbed the fifth Greek alphabet letter E. On the rather rare instances where a sixth or greater number officina was operating they resorted to using more Greek characters. The eastern mint cities tend to use letters from the Greek alphabet to accomplish the same task. The sequence begins A, B, , , E, S, Z, H, and I. They can go further for series that were very popular, for example a E would be the sum of letter values 4 and th 5 from the above sequence to arrive at the 9 officina. Normally however only the first four to five letters were used and, by the fifth century when fewer coins were being made, it was usual to have only A and B operating Matters become trickier when unrelated symbols get appended to these codes but the general form should be recognizable as the ancillary symbols change frequently from issue to issue while the relative position of the city code and officina do so less often. Where the collector comes across a coin with many letters and symbols jumbled together it might well be daunting to sort it all out but with increasing familiarity with the system it is only a matter of time before a casual glance will tell you all you need to know to identify each coin... provided, of course, that the mintmark is still visible.

xix

Pricing and Grading

Almost every coin collector is interested, if not obsessed, with the worth of their coins. Despite the occasional, overlyserious numismatist admonishing the newer hobbyist in playing this down in favor of just learning and studying the coins the truth is that it is an integral part of the fun of collecting. The collector therefore desperately needs a pricing guide to know what to expect when adding or selling pieces from the collection. I cant do that. There are no shortage of pricing guides out there for ancient coins but the bitter truth is that theyre all laughably inaccurate and in the end up confusing more than giving real-world use. There are several reasons for this. Unlike the case with modern coins there are no population reports to indicate how rare or common each coin type is in an absolute sense. Over time, coins that were previously rare become less so thanks to new hoard discoveries and sometimes coins that are temporarily plentiful vanish from the marketplace. Then there is the issue of where you buy and sell coins. An exclusive dealer may list a given coin for several hundred dollars while another can offer the very same type for a $100 and you could spot the same on eBay for $50. It happens ALL the time. In light of this there is little point in taking the trouble to give even a rough price range for each coin catalogued. Depending on your personal level to stomach risk and how much research you want done on your behalf you will feel comfortable shopping in a venue where prices should be more or less stable for that tier. This ultimately will be the true learning grounds. However, this book at least notes general trends for each emperor and where possible further broken down by the major denominations. This should hopefully be enough to spur the collector to do a little comparative research to identify what is a bargain and what is clearly overpriced. Every coin book geared towards the collector will repeat the mantra about grading and conservation and I will be pedantic enough to repeat it here. It is an unwavering truism that conservation beats rarity in all but the most extreme cases. Unless you have come across a major rarity assume that the worth of your coin will very largely depend on its visual appeal. An ancient gold coin will in most cases look mint state or nearly so because it likely traded hands infrequently until it was lost. Bronzes on the other hand range from the abominable to strikingly well preserved (but should never look coppery like modern, untoned copper coins. This is an unequivocal indication of harsh cleaning!). Silver coins tend to be fairly well preserved but will show the most wear since many of them traded for many decades. A mint state coin will command a premium. The rule of thumb is that in coins beauty sells and rarity is only a secondary factor in determining value. Of course, this rule applies only in a general sense. A rare coin be it for type or ruler WILL be marketable assuming a decent state of preservation and the rarest types/rulers will stil be very sought even when poorly preserved. However, a poorly preserved rather common coin will find almost no interest among your fellow collectors. So what are the grading standards? Just as is the case with modern coins ancients are graded along much the same lines. One can even get an ancient coin slabbed just like a modern coin and will carry a grade using the American grading standard... a practice that finds quite little support among die-hard ancient coin enthusiasts. But this book does not concern itself with grades for the simple reason that nowadays grading ancient coins is largely irrelevant. Unlike the mail order catalogs of years gone by one typically buys a coin from a well-photographed coin today in a glossy color catalog, the internet or on site at a coin show. There is therefore little need for a grade as such since the visual confirmation of what you would be getting is infinitely more useful than the information conveyed by an assigned grade of questionable value. For what its worth, lets examine what the general consensus is regarding grading:

Rather than waste time with an euphemistic grades of AG, G or VG, the lowest rung of collectible ancient Roman coins are thankfully just described imperfect as they are. In most cases wear as such wont be the major issue with these coins

xx
but rather unsightly toning, die cracks and/or other structural problems, or a bad case of corrosion. Coins with any but a small part broken off are hardly ever worth anything on the market.

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

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

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

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

xxi

Bibliography
R. A. G. Carson and J. P. C. Kent. Late Roman Bronze Coinage. New York: Sanford J. Durst, 1989. Harold Mattingly and Edward A. Sydenham. The Roman Imperial Coinage Vol. I. London: Spink & Son, Ltd., 1923 C. H. V. Sutherland. The Roman Imperial Coinage Vol. 1. London: Spink and Son, 1984 Harold Mattingly and Edward A. Sydenham. The Roman Imperial Coinage Vol. II. London: Spink & Son, Ltd., 1926 Harold Mattingly and Edward A. Sydenham. The Roman Imperial Coinage Vol. III. London: Spink & Son, Ltd., 1930 Harold Mattingly, Edward A. Sydenham and C. H. V. Sutherland. The Roman Imperial Coinage Vol. IV pt. 1. London: Spink & Son, Ltd., 1936 Harold Mattingly, Edward A. Sydenham and C. H. V. Sutherland. The Roman Imperial Coinage Vol. IV pt. 2. London: Spink & Son, Ltd., 1938 Harold Mattingly, Edward A. Sydenham and C. H. V. Sutherland. The Roman Imperial Coinage Vol. IV pt. 2. London: Spink & Son, Ltd., 1949 Harold Mattingly, Edward A. Sydenham and Percy H. Webb. The Roman Imperial Coinage Vol. V pt. 1. London: Spink & Son, Ltd., 1927 Harold Mattingly, Edward A. Sydenham and Percy H. Webb. The Roman Imperial Coinage Vol. V pt. 2. London: Spink & Son, Ltd., 1933 C. H. V. Sutherland and R. A. G. Carson. The Roman Imperial Coinage Vol. VI. London: Spink & Son, Ltd., 1967 C. H. V. Sutherland and R. A. G. Carson. The Roman Imperial Coinage Vol. VII. London: Spink & Son, Ltd., 1966 J. P. C Kent. The Roman Imperial Coinage Vol. VIII. London: Spink & Son, Ltd., 1981 J. W. E. Pearce. The Roman Imperial Coinage Vol. IX. London: Spink & Son, Ltd., 1951 J. P. C Kent. The Roman Imperial Coinage Vol. X. London: Spink & Son, Ltd., 1994 David R. Sear. Byzantine Coins And Their Values. London: Seaby, Ltd., 1987

Reference Catalogs Cited

BMC Bastien BN C Calic Cr. Depeyrot Estiot Gnecchi Gbl LRBC MIB Ratto RIC S SB Shiel SNG Tantalus Wildwinds Vagi

British Museum Catalogue

Pierre Bastien

Le monnayage de l'atelier de Lyon : de la reuverture de l'atelier par Aurlien la mort de Carin Catalogue de la Bibliothque Nationale Henri Cohen Description Historique des Monnais Frappes sous LEmpire Romain Xavier Calic The Roman Avrei vols. I & II Michael CrawfordsRoman Republican Coinage Georges Depeyrot Les monnaies d'or de Diocltien Constantin I (284-337) Sylviane Estiot Ripostiglio della Venra: Nuovo Catalogo Illustrato Francesco Gnecchi Medaglioni Romani Robert Gbl Moneta Imperii Romani Late Roman Bronze Coinage W. Hahn Moneta Imperii Byzantini Rodolfo Ratto Monnaies Byzantines The Roman Imperial Coinage vols. I - X David Sear Roman Coins and Their Values David Sear Byzantine Coins and Their Values Norman Shiel The Episode of Carausius and Allectus: The Literary and Numismatic Evidence
British Academy Sylloge Nummorum Graecorum; various collections as noted The Tantalus Registry at http://www.tantaluscoins.com/index.php The Wildwinds database at http://wildwinds.com/coins/ric/i.html David Vagi Coinage and History of the Roman Empire Vol II

xxii