Proto-contorniates? more

PETER KOS PROTO-CONTORNIATES? _ Estratto dalla _ RIVISTA ITALIANA DI NUMISMATICA E SCIENZE VOL. XCV -1993 PETER KOS PROTO-CONTORNIATES? As I am well aware, the present paper will raise rather than answer manifold questions associated with this often neglected and rather obscure topic. Hopefully, however, it will encourage further studies of the pheno- menon of the hammering of rims of imperial bronze coins. A. Alfoldi has produced an excellent study on contorniate medal- lions ('). In his study he also briefly mentioned regular issues of sestertii, dupondii and asses of imperial rulers of the first, second and early third centuries with hammered or otherwise raised rims. He suggested that the rims of imperial aes coins were hammered so that such products would give the impression of being medallions (2). According to him, the rims of older imperial bronze coins (PI. 1, 1) and of earlier medallions (PI. 1, 2) were 1 Fig. 1 - Caracalla, S, Rome, RIC 481b, 25.75 g., T, LJ 6971. (1) A. Alfoldi, Die Kontorniaten, Budapest 1943. Revised edition by A.u.E. Alfoldi, Die Kontomiat-Medaillons, Berlin-New York 1990. (2) A.u. E. Alfoldi, op. cit., p. 10. 432 Peter Kos Fig. 2 - Constans, AEMed, Rome, RIC-, Gn, (ad 10), 22.26 gr., 1, LJ 6972. hammered in the fourth century in the imperial City and were meant to be offered to friends and relatives as a New Year gifts ('). From this custom the production of similar specimens originated in the imperial mint of Ro- me under Constantius II when the first contorniate medallions were execu- ted^). Contrary to A. Alfoldi's assumption that imperial coins with hamme- red rims were distributed as New Year gifts and his strong belief that such specimens were definitely not used as playing counters (5), Maria Alfoldi, on the other hand, suggested instead that the rims on the old imperial aes coins were raised by hammering in order to protect the face of these coins which were used as playing counters (6). Concerning the purpose of hamme- red coins she shared the earlier views of Gnecchi, Rostovtzeff and Cesano, but she did not try to determine when the hammering of these coins occu- red. Earlier, J. Toynbee, who did not directly discuss imperial hammered bronze coins, also objected to A. Alfoldi's theory and argued that the role of the contorniates was that of game-counters (') which could also apply in- directly to the imperial bronze coins with hammered rims. The idea that imperial bronze coins with hammered rims were used as playing counters originated with Petronius (8). He, however, only briefly mentioned the use of gold and silver coins and not counters made from (3) A.u. E. Alfoldi, op. cit., p. 9. (4) A.u. E. Alfoldi, op. cit. p. 10. (5) A.u. E. Alfoldi, op. cit. p. 10. (6) M.R. Alfoldi, Antike Numismatik, Mainz 1978, p. 214. So already F. v. Sch- roettek, Worterbuch der Munzkunde, Berlin-Leipzig 1930, p. 393. (7) M.C. Toynbee, Roman Medallions, New York 1986, p. 235. (8) Petr., Sat. 33. Proto-contomiates? 433 other materials, wishing by this means to emphasize the eccentricities of Trimalchio. His novel the Satyricon therefore in no way confirms the regu- lar use of coins for various games, and no other literary sources mention such a use for coins (9). The purpose of hammering the rims of imperial and provincial bronze coins remains, therefore, uncertain and the various suggestions I have just presented are dubious. Many questions still ned to be answered properly, such as, how were coins with hammered rims used, when and where were imperial bronze coins hammered and, finally, can we actually regard these specimens as predecessors of the contomiate medallions (i.e. proto-contor- niates) as A. Alfoldi and some other scholars believed (10). The cataloguing of coins with hammered rims has been very much ne- glected since an article devoted to this topic was published by Lorenzina Cesano in 1905 (")• A survey of catalogues of finds of Roman coins, publi- shed in recent years in Europe (12), does not reveal many finds of imperial or provincial bronze coins with hammered rims assuming, however, that a coin with a hammered rim would correctly be recognized as a pseudo-mone- tary object and taken into account as such by the compiler of the corpus. The major catalogues of numismatic collections also do not document any such specimens (13). Single examples exist unpublished in various collec- tions C4) but only in Italy do there seem to be specimens found in more si- (9) See also A. Rieciii;, Romiscbe Kinder-und Gesellschaftsspiele (Schriften des Limes- museum Aalen Nr. 34), Aalen 1984, p. 18-20. (10) See, for instance, M. Bernhart, Handbuch zur Miinzkunde der romischen Kaiser- zeit, Halle 1926, p. 29. R. Gobi., Antike Numismatik, Miinchen 1978, p. 31. Compare also A.u. E. Alfoldi, op. cit., p. 9 with earlier literature. (11) L. Cesano, A proposito di un contomiato nel Museo di Parenzo, "Arch. Triest." 1906, p. 371-381. (12) The catalogues FMRO (Fundmiinzen der romischen Zeit in Osterreich), FMRD (Fundmiinzen der romischen Zeit in Deutschland), FMRLux (Fundmiinzen der romischen Zeit in Luxembourg), FMRU (Fundmiinzen der romischen Zeit in Ungarn) and FMRSI (Fundmiinzen der romischen Zeit in Slowenien) were taken into consideration. (13) The British Museum Catalogues and TNRB (Thesaurus Nummorum Romanorum and Byzantinorum) were considered as well as P.R. Frankf. - I. Paar, Die antiken Miinzen der Sammlung Heynen, Koln 1976; R. Postel, Katalog der antiken Miinzen in der Hamburger Kunsthalle, Hamburg 1976; J.-M. Doyen, Musee de I'Ardenne. Catalogue des monnaies anti- ques de Pertinax a la rejorme monetaire de Diocletien, Charleville-Mezieres 1985; B.E. Levy-P. Bastien, Roman Coins in the Princeton University Library I: Republic to Commodus, Wetteren 1985; N. Vismara-R. Martini, Le monete nel Museo Civico di Legnano, Milano 1988. (14) The present author is aware only of one specimen of lulia Domna in the numi- smatic collection of the Landesmuseum Joanneum in Graz and one specimen of Caracalla in the Coin Cabinet of the Narodni muzej in Ljubljana. 434 Peter Kos gnificant quantities in the numismatic collections ("). In Verona, for instan- ce, fourteen imperial bronze coins from Augustus to Philip I and three bronze medallions with hammered rims are preserved in the Numismatic Collection (16). However, more accurate statistics of the representation of bronze coins with hammered rims in relation to the number of coins from various sites and areas in Italy cannot be undertaken since no project of systematic cataloguing of coin finds in Italy has yet taken place. A brief survey of the available evidence has therefore revealed only the fact that finds of such specimens are extremely rare and that they are rare even on sites where counters for various games from different mate- rials have been found in considerable quantities (17). Therefore, in my opi- nion, the evidence at our disposal does not support the theory that bronze coins with hammered rims were being used as game-counters. The assumption that the accentuated rim would protect the surface of coins from wear is also improbable, since specimens which must have been considerably worn before their rim was hammered are documented as well Fig. 3 - Hadrian, As, Rome, RIC?, 9.88 gr., i, LJ 6973. Only A. Alfoldi has argued that the hammering of the imperial bronze coins must have occurred in the fourth century (19). It is doubtful, however, if such a suggestion is really plausible. Various studies of the monetary cir- culation in different areas of the Empire indicate that bronze coins of the (15) L. Cesano, op. cit., (n. 11). (16) I owe this information to Franziska Schmidt who is preparing the publication of this numismatic collection. (17) I had the opportunity to study the entire evidence for the sites of Emona, Ce- leia, Poetovio and Flavia Solva. (18) See, for instance, L. Cesano, op. cit., (n. 11), p. 375, fig. 3. (19) See n. 3 above. (PI. 1, 3)(18). 3 Proto-contomiates? 435 first and the second centuries were no longer circulating during the second half of the third century. The bronze coins of the first half of the third century, too, no longer circulated during the last decades of the century. There is no indication that imperial bronze coins would still be in circula- tion during the first decades of the fourth century when even antoniniani are only rarely found in the hoards of the first decade of the fourth cen- tury (20). It can hardly be imagined that coins of the first, second and third centuries would have been collected during the first half of the fourth cen- tury and their rims subsequently hammered in the official mint of Rome. The idea seems to be absolutely bizarre. The evidence of two hammered bronze coins of the provincial mint of Viminacium in the province of Moesia Superior which were recently acqui- red by the Coin Cabinet of the National Museum in Ljubljana further con- tradicts some of A. Alfoldi's assumptions regarding the chronological and geographical occurrence of the hammering of first, second and third cen- tury bronze imperial and provincial coins. The first specimen is a sestertius of Gordian III of the normal type of this mint struck during the second year of the local era(21). It weights 17.13 gr. (PI. 1, 4) The second specimen was struck for Trebonianus Gallus during the thirteenth local year and wei- Fig. 4 - Gordian III, AE, Viminacium, Pick 76, 17.13 g., -\ LJ 6974. (20) It has been argued that the mint of Rome used old aes coins to debase the anto- ninianus around 265 (J.N. Barrandon, C Brenot, M. Christol, S. Melky, De la devalua- tion de I'antoninianus a la disparition du sesterce: essai de modelisation d'un phenomene mone- taire, "PACT" 1981, p. 381-390). If true this would reduce their chances of survival into the 4th century or even after the 270s significantly. I owe this citation to the kindness of C. King (Oxford). (21) B. Pick, Die antiken Miinzen Nordgriechenlands, Bd. 1. Die antiken Miinzen von Dacien und Moesien, Berlin 1898, No. 76. 436 Peter Kos Fig. 5 - Trebonianus Gallus, AE, Viminacium, Pick 164, 12.27 g., -», LJ 6975. ghts 12.27 gr. (PI. 1, 5) (22). The coins were found in the general area of Vi- minacium (present-day Kostolac in Serbia). Both specimens were minted in the mint of the concilium provinciae of the province Moesia Superior (23). This mint was operating during the local years I to XVI as noted in the exergue of the reverses. It was opened under Gordian III and terminated its activity under Valerian and Gallienus Augusti. However, the exact chro- nological placement of the beginning of the local era has not yet been sati- sfactorily clarified. Along with bronze coins of various denominations which generally correspond to imperial sestertii, dupondii and asses the mint also produced some medallions for special occasions (z*). The coins of the mint of Viminacium were circulating in significant quantities mostly in the Balkan provinces of Moesia Superior, Moesia Inferior, Dalmatia and Pannonia Superior and only occasionally spread as far as the Baltic area(25). Coins of this mint, however, only sporadically penetrated to the area south and southwest of Emona and are only rarely found in Venetia and Rae- tia(26). These coins were extremely rare in Rome. This evidence, therefore, contradicts the idea of A. Alfoldi that all coins were hammered in the im- perial mint of Rome and rather indicates instead that the hammering must have occurred in the area of dense coin circulation, not necessarily in the mint itself. (22) Pick, op. cit. No. 164. (23) P. Kos, The Provincia Moesia Superior in Viminacium, "ZPE" 91, 1992, p. 209- 214. (24) P. Kos, Medallions of the mint of Viminacium, "Chiron" 22, 1992, p. 299-313. (25) See P. Kos, The Monetary Circulation in the Southeastern Alpine Region ca. 300 BC-AD 1000, Ljubljana 1986, p. 109 with earlier literature. (26) Kos, op. cit. (n. 25), 111. Proto-contorniates? 437 After the closure of the mint of Viminacium in 255, its products were, according to the evidence of contemporary hoards, certainly not circulating long into the second half of the third century. This evidence, therefore, further excludes the possibility that the rims of imperial and provincial bronze coins could have been hammered as late as the fourth century. Both Viminacium specimens could not have been hammered much later than the first decades of the second half of the third century and I believe that im- perial bronzes of the first, second or third centuries were also hammered during the period when these coins were still circulating, or in any case not significantly later than this period. On the other hand, obverse and reverse legends, among the most im- portant elements on Roman coins, were often deformed beyond legibility by hammering and such coins must evidently have lost most of their pay- ment capability. Not many plebs could afford such luxury if the hammered coin was still valid and this fact probably suggests that the hammering of coin rims took place only after their demonetisation. The question that still remains to be answered is why the rims of bronze coins were hammered. As argued above, I believe that the evidence scarcely supports the use of such specimens as game counters and the idea that such coins were intended to be presented as New Year gifts is too pe- culiar to be plausible. However, the scarce documentation at our disposal does not allow any further speculation regarding the question of the utiliza- tion of coins with hammered rims. The most important question for us mu- st thus remain, I am afraid, without a proper answer (27). It now seems that the specimens under discussion can hardly be trea- ted as 'proto-contorniates', i.e. as prototypes for the minting of contorniate medallions, and it is also unlikely that the practice of hammering the rims of coins would later lead to the minting of contorniate medallions. A more suitable and much more plausible term for this 'pseudo monetary' pheno- menon is, therefore, 'pseudo-contorniates' as was used long ago by Lorenzi- na Cesano (28). (27) According to information kindly supplied by P.R. Franke (Saarbrucken), a bron- ze coin of Mithradates with a hammered rim was found in an unpublished hoard from Ma- cedonia, thus confirming the presence of this phenomenon as early as the pre- Roman impe- rial period. (28) Cesano, op. cit. (n. 11), p. 378. 438 Peter Kos Consequently, I believe that only bronze coins with one subsequently cut groove on their edges could be treated as the predecessor of the contor- niates (PI. 1, 6)(29). Fig. 6 - Nero, AE, Nicaea, RPC 2057, 10.44 g., t, LJ 6976. (29) A. Burnett, M. Amandry and P. Pau Ripolles, Roman Provincial Coinage, Vol. I, London-Paris 1992 (= RPC), p. 348, on the contrary, believe that the groove occurred when the reverse legend was scraped off.