BEST OF
AEQVITI
Aes Formatum
Aes Rude
The Age of Gallienus
Alexander Tetradrachms
Ancient Coin Collecting 101
Ancient Coin Prices 101
Ancient Coin Dates
Ancient Coin Lesson Plans
Ancient Coins & Modern Fakes
Ancient Counterfeits
Ancient Glass
Ancient Metal Arrowheads
Ancient Oil Lamps
Ancient Pottery
Ancient Weapons
Ancient Wages and Prices
Ancient Weights and Scales
Anonymous Follis
Anonymous Class A Folles
Antioch Officinae
Aphlaston
Armenian Numismatics Page
Augustus - Facing Portrait
Brockage
Bronze Disease
Byzantine
Byzantine Denominations
A Cabinet of Greek Coins
Caesarean and Actian Eras
Campgates of Constantine
Carausius
A Case of Counterfeits
Byzantine Christian Themes
Clashed Dies
Codewords
Coins of Pontius Pilate
Conditions of Manufacture
Corinth Coins and Cults
Countermarked in Late Antiquity
Danubian Celts
Damnatio Coinage
Damnatio Memoriae
Denomination
Denarii of Otho
Diameter 101
Die Alignment 101
Dictionary of Roman Coins
Doug Smith's Ancient Coins
Draco
Edict on Prices
ERIC
ERIC - Rarity Tables
Etruscan Alphabet
The Evolving Ancient Coin Market
EQVITI
Fel Temp Reparatio
Fertility Pregnancy and Childbirth
Fibula
Flavian
Fourree
Friend or Foe
The Gallic Empire
Gallienus Zoo
Greek Alphabet
Greek Coins
Greek Dates
Greek Coin Denominations
Greek Mythology Link
Greek Numismatic Dictionary
Hellenistic Names & their Meanings
Hasmoneans
Hasmonean Dynasty
Helvetica's ID Help Page
The Hexastyle Temple of Caligula
Historia Numorum
Holy Land Antiquities
Horse Harnesses
Illustrated Ancient Coin Glossary
Important Collection Auctions
Islamic Rulers and Dynasties
Julian II: The Beard and the Bull
Julius Caesar - The Funeral Speech
Koson
Kushan Coins
Later Roman Coinage
Latin Plurals
Latin Pronunciation
Legend
Library of Ancient Coinage
Life in Ancient Rome
List of Kings of Judea
Medusa Coins
Maps of the Ancient World
Military Belts
Military Belts
Mint Marks
Monogram
Museum Collections Available Online
Nabataea
Nabataean Alphabet
Nabataean Numerals
The [Not] Cuirassed Elephant
Not in RIC
Numismatic Bulgarian
Numismatic Excellence Award
Numismatic French
Numismatic German
Numismatic Italian
Numismatic Spanish
Parthian Coins
Patina 101
Paleo-Hebrew Alphabet
Paleo-Hebrew Script Styles
People in the Bible Who Issued Coins
Imperial Mints of Philip the Arab
Phoenician Alphabet
Pi-Style Athens Tetradrachms
Pricing and Grading Roman Coins
Reading Judean Coins
Representations of Alexander the Great
Roman Coin Attribution 101
Roman Coin Legends and Inscriptions
Roman Keys
Roman Locks
Roman Militaria
Roman Military Belts
Roman Mints
Roman Names
romancoin.info
Rome and China
Sasanian
Satyrs and Nymphs
Scarabs
Serdi Celts
Serrated
Siglos
The Sign that Changed the World
Silver Content of Parthian Drachms
Star of Bethlehem Coins
Statuary Coins
Sylloge Nummorum Graecorum
Syracusian Folles
Taras Drachms with Owl Left
The Temple Tax
The Temple Tax Hoard
Test Cut
Travels of Paul
Tribute Penny
Tribute Penny Debate Continued (2015)
Tribute Penny Debate Revisited (2006)
Tyrian Shekels
Uncleaned Ancient Coins 101
Vabalathus
Venus Cloacina
What I Like About Ancient Coins
Who was Trajan Decius
Widow's Mite
XXI
By Tom Buijtendorp
January 8th 2007, CNG auctioned a silver hoard of 175 Roman denarii found in
Fig 1: detail of the hoard as shown in the CNG auction catalogue (2007)
The hoard
Monday January 8th 2007, the silver hoard was sold at the annual numismatic auction'Triton’ of the Classical Numismatic Group (CNG) in the Waldorf Astoria Hotel in
Joe Sermarini of Forum Ancient Coins acquired the coins from the CNG auction and sold about 1/3rd shortly after in New York. As a result, only the description of the remaining 101 coins is known. According to Sermarini, the coins sold in
The first analyses focuses on the weight distribution. Of the 101 coins in the sample, about half (56%) is Very Fine and close to a quarter (24%) is about Very Fine. The remaining part is Fine (16%) or about Fine (9%). There are no coins in the better condition Extremely Fine or
Fig 2: Example of an early coin of Tiberius in the Triton X hoard with a portrait close to that of Augustus and a plain style (group 1), sold by Forum Ancient Coins nr. SH21221.
Fig 3: Example of the youngest coin of Tiberius in the Triton X hoard with an older portrait and a more ornate style (group 6) compared to the early coin of fig 2 (for example the decorated legs of the chair), sold by Forum Ancient Coins nr. SH 20737
The wear per coin type offers some additional information. Although there still is some debate about the exact dating of the Tiberian coins, it is clear which types are the youngest and oldest. In his study published in 1983, Giard divided the denarii of Tiberius in six chronological groups.[i] The oldest types are dated very early in the reign of Tiberius because the portrait still strongly resembles the portrait of the predecessor Augustus, a smooth portrait transition known from later Roman emperors as well. Already at the end of the reign of Augustus (11-13 CE), some denarii for Tiberius where minted with his portrait, bare headed, no laureate yet, and the resemblance confirms the dating early in the reign of Tiberius. Over time, the portrait of Tiberius clearly got older what helps to attribute the oldest portrait to the latest years of his reign, including a wave like pattern of the wreath-ties. In addition, changes in the details of the seated female figure at the reverse support the chronology. The early coins show a'early plain style’ with the female seated in a simple chair on a podium, symbolized by a second line, the same configuration as the chair of the coins minted 11-13 CE (fig 2). The chairs of the youngest coins of Tiberius (group 6) are much more detailed (fig 3). Changes in the ornamentation of the chair, the presence of a footstool in some cases, the depiction of the spear or sceptre and the number of lines beneath the chair all helped to define the chronology.
A further analysis of the wear of the hoard coins can offer additional information. The time of circulation can be roughly estimated, knowing the hoard coins all have been buried and left circulation at the same moment. For this analysis, the youngest and oldest coins of the'seated female’ denarii of Tiberius offer an interesting source for comparison within the hoard. The weight of these coins was quite stable during his reign. So differences in weight reflect differences in wear. In the sample of 96 Tiberian coins, the average weight of the hoard coins in the condition Very Fine is 3.53 gram compared to only 3.38 gram for the coins in condition Fine. So condition for these coins is related to weight. In the sample of 96 Tiberian coins, there are 12 denarii of Tiberius of the early group 1 of Giard and 29 late denarii of group 5-6 of Giard 36-37 CE, all of the seated female type. The time difference is about two decades, or a little less depending on the length of the early and late stage. As expected, the wear of the younger coins on average is less then the wear of the early coins. Of the late type coins, 55% is in the condition Very Fine, about 1/3th more then the 42% for the early coins. And of the youngest group no coin has the condition Fine, the worse condition being Good Fine. Of the oldest Tiberian coins, 17% is in the condition Fine.
This is reflected in a lower average weight of the oldest Tiberian coins compared to the youngest Tiberian coins in the sample of the hoard. The average weight of the first group is 3.34 gram and for the second group 3.52 gram. It suggests the average weight dropped from 3.52 to 3.34 gram in about two decades of additional circulation, an average yearly wear of 0.26%. Interestingly this yearly weight loss compares quite well with known coin statistics. Data of coin wear in the 19th century give an impression of the average wear of silver coins in economies that resembled the ancient economy more then current coin circulation.[ii] The yearly weight loss of the English silver penny (5.23 gram) was 0.26% up to 1906/09 and 0.22% for the French franc (5.00 gram) up to 1884/88.
The amount of wear suggests a burial date much later then the minting date of the youngest coins of Tiberius who died in 37 CE. The average aimed weight of denarii of Tiberius was in the range of 3.7 gram.[iii] At an average weight decrease of 0.26% a year, it takes a coin of 3.7 gram about two decades to reach a weight of 3.52 gram. This would imply a burial date around 60 CE (37+20=57). Interestingly, Butcher and Ponting based on new analysis concluded that Nero at the latest in 61 CE started to add copper to the silver used for minting denarii, possibly linked to a transfer of the mint form Lyon to
Unfortunately, there are several uncertainties. The aimed weight, for example, is subject of debate. A few examples from the hoard itself of 3.9 gram show the weight was not 100% stable. And Duncan-Jones calculated for denarii in hoards of the 2nd century CE a lower average yearly wear of 0,06%. Given the uncertainties, it should be stressed that the wear does not proof the burial in the time of the Neronian reform. It only shows such a burial period is possible from the perspective of coin wear. In any case, the lack of Extremely Fine and Mint State coins in the hoard of 175 pieces indicates burial at the earliest during the reign of Claudius (41 – 54 CE) and possibly Nero (54-68 CE). The large share of denarii of Tiberius points in the same direction. According to the CNG catalogue only 7% of the denarii (12 coins) are from Augustus and the rest of Tiberius. Turner lists six other early imperial Roman silver hoard from
The Claudian or more probably Neronian burial date raises the question why denarii are missing of the other Julio-Claudian emperors, including Caligula (37-41 CE). Part of the answer is that these three emperors until the reform of Nero minted much less denarii then Augustus and Tiberius who apparently had saturated the supply of silver coins for a few decades. However, these emperors did mint some denarii and in a sample of 175 pieces one would expect at least some of them. The explanation is probably offered by Turner who suggested that during the first century EC the Romans selected just two types of denarii for the trade with
As a result, the Roman silver coins acted as tradable pieces of pure silver with the Roman portrait and reverse as quality mark. Turner suggests that two types where selected for the sake of simplicity.[x] This does make sense. A local imitation discussed below, illustrates that the local Indian people could not read the Roman letters and text, having their own very different script. So it was very practical that two high volume denarii where selected with a comparable obverse, and two distinctive reverses. As a result, the local people only needed to recognize 2 different coins. And the Romans could easily select them from the silver money supply in the Roman Empire, where the two types formed a major share of the silver coins available during the early
Fig. 4: Denarius of Augustus of the coin hoard. Weight 3.815 gram, maximum diameter 19.5 mm, die-axis 180o, , sold by Forum Ancient Coins nr. SH 2103.
This preselection also explains why the hoard contains only one type of denarius of Augustus. For the denarii of Tiberius the single type of the seated female is easy to explain because this was the only issue from the second year of Tiberius (15 CE) onwards. For Augustus the picture is different however as the Roman mint produced a broad range of denarii during his reign. The hoard only contains the denarius showing the young brothers Gaius and Lucius, adopted by Augustus in 17 BCE and for a long time his favoured heirs. They are standing in a toga virilis, holding a shield and two spears. Above them are the lituus and simpulum, the priestly implements as sign of their assumption of priestly duties (fig 4). There is a variant with the lituus and simpulum reversed. The minting of these coins started in 2 BCE as they mention the title pater patriae which Augustus accepted that year.[i] Lucius died in 2 CE and Gaius in 4 CE, leaving Tiberius as the new heir. It is possible that the minting stopped in 4 CE, although the large volume suggests that the coinage lasted longer. Mattingly assumes minting continued until 11 CE, an assumption followed by many others.[ii] The large volume minted is illustrated by the special find in Kalkriese (
After being issued, the'cohort’ of coins minted in a certain year still in circulation, decreases year after year. Some coins are lost, others are buried in a hoard and sometimes not recovered, and some coins are melted or used as part of jewellery. At the same time, new coins are minted year after year. As a result, the share of for example the Gaius and Lucius denarii diminished year after year. This is clearly shown in this hoard where they are outnumbered 13:1 by the younger denarii of Tiberius. And later on, the same process would step by step reduce the number of circulating Tiberian denarii in the same way. It seems denarii of later Roman emperors where much less easy accepted in
Fig 5: A local imitation of a denarius of Tiberius, on the obverse blundered reading of CAESAR DVI AVG F AVGVSTVS as TILLFSLRIVIAVCFAVGVSTVS. Reverse blundered reading of PONTIF MAXIM as ONIIF MANIM. Weight 3.008 gram, max diameter 18.2 mm, die-axis 180, sold by Forum Ancient Coins nr. SH20732.
Fig 6: A local imitation of a denarius of Tiberius, cast. Weight 3.235 gram, max diameter 19.9 mm, die-axis 45, sold by Forum Ancient Coins nr. SH21014.
Fig 7: A local imitation, struck. Weight 3.554 gram, max diameter 18.6 mm, die-axis 90, sold by Forum Ancient Coins nr. SH20307.
In any case, it is interesting that the Triton X hoard consisting of several imitations next to the denarii minted in the official Roman mint. Very interesting is the example with blundered texts, showing the imitators did not understand the original text (fig 5). The normal obverse text is CAESAR DVI AVG F AVGVSTVS. On this coin, this became a text like TILLFSLRIVIAVCFAVGVSTVS. The normal reverse text PONTIF MAXIM became ONIIF MANIM. This coin was cast (weight only 3.008 gram), using another coin as original to create the casting mould. This process may explain (part of) the errors. The first P may have been missing on this imitation as a result of using as example a Roman coin which may have been lacking this letter being worn and/or off centre. Other worn letters may have caused the other misreadings. Some other cast coins in the hoard appear to have been based directly on coins from the Roman mint as they show no such writing errors (fig 6). Some imitations where not cast but struck as another example from the hoard illustrates (fig 7).
Fig 8: silver denarius of Tiberius, brockage strike error and probably an eastern or Indian imitation given the low weight of 2.408 gram, sold by Forum Ancient Coins nr. RS16632.
Fig 9: silver imitative denarius from
The only other hoard with a large number of imitations is the Akenpalle hoard with 24 imitations of Augustus and 31 of Tiberius, a total of 55 coins or 4% of all hoard coins.[i] While all these imitations are struck, the sample of the Triton X hoard contains at least 11 cast imitations (11%). The cast examples are on average quite light: a sample of 11 cast coins shows an average weight of 3.26 gram compared to the aimed weight of 3.7 gram. However, the wear of the cast coins is also quite high with only 36% in the condition Very Fine. So the relatively low weight seems to reflect the relatively high wear. This suggests at least some of the cast coins have been produced earlier then the youngest coins of Tiberius which show a average higher weight. However, wear of the imitations may offer a distorted picture in case the moulds where produced from worn original coins. At the same time, an early start of the first imitations could explain that 36% is based on the oldest type compared to only 10% for the other 85 Tiberian denarii. The die-axis of the cast coins shows a random distribution (0, 45,90, 105, 180 and 225 degrees) with only a above average share (27%) for the 180 degree die-axis. This is also the pattern for all 101 coins in the sample with 26% share for the 180-degree die-axis.[ii] In line with the imitations in the Triton X hoard, Turner remarks that the other imitations from
There are no minting errors among the imitations although other examples show they did exist. For example Forum Ancient Coins sold an interesting example of a brockage strike error of a silver denarius of Tiberius which may have been produced in
The wear pattern in the hoard can offer some more information regarding the dating of the Tiberian denarii of group 3-4 of Giard. The average weight of the 53 coins in this group 3-4 is 3.52 gram, the same as the average for the 29 coins in the youngest group 5-6. This suggests that the coins of this type have been minted in the second half of the reign of Tiberius, close to the dating of the youngest Tiberian coins. In the past, it has been suggested that minting volume increased considerably after the monetary shortage in 33 CE, mentioned by Tacitus.[v]
Here again, the uncertainties in the data should be stressed, meaning it only offers a rough indication. Some other Roman silver hoards from
In conclusion, the Triton X hoard offers a lot of new information. In case one or more pieces have been acquired by public collections, it would be interesting to conduct some further research.[vi] Butcher and Ponting, for example, have suggested that imitative denarii of
Bibliography
- Ball, W, 2002:
- Berger, F., 1996: Kalkriese 1. Die römischen Fundmünzen.
- Butcher, K, and M. Ponting, 2005: The Roman denarius under Julio-Claudian emperors: mints, metallurgy and technology.
- Duncan-Jones, R.P., 1994: Money and government in the
- Giard, J-B, 1983: Le monnayage de l’atelier de Lyon, des origines au règne de Caligula (43 avant J.C. – 41 après J.C.). Numismatique Romaine XIV. Wetteren.
- Krishnamurthy, R, 1994: Late Roman Copper Coins from South India: Karur and
- Mattingly, H., 1923: Coins of the Roman Empire in the
- Sridhar, T.S., S. Suresh en N. Sundararajan, 2011: Roman coins in the government museum Chennai. With a detailed catalogue of the denarii hoard from Budinatham (Tamil Nadu). Chennai.
- Sutherland, C.H.V., 1984: The Roman imperial coinage,
- Turner, P.J., 1989: Roman coins from
- Walburg, R., 1996: The preserved part of the Matara coin hoard,
[i] Turner 1989, 39, 47 and table 3.
[ii] Sutherland 1984, 92 about the irregular system in the die-axes.
[iii] Turner 1989, 38-39.
[iv] Forum Ancient Coins nr. RS39137 and RS 38740, and CNG auction 60 (2002) nr. 1483; The imitations mention, by the way, suggest that in the first century CE, before the large scale minting of the younger denarii, some earlier denarii did enter India.
[vi] All 101 coins of the sample have been sold and dispersed along unknown collections.
[ii] Sutherland 1984, 88; Butcher and Ponting 2005, 165.
[iv] 0,312 = 0,0000005/100st = 0,00005%
[v] Turner 1989,47 and 124 table 3.
[vi] Turner 1989,10-11 and 16; Ball 2002, 127.
[vii] Turner 1989, 8 and 14 about the lack of detailed descriptions of many hoards.
[i] Giard 1983, 47-48 and 124-128.
[v] Turner 1989,3.
[vi] Turner 1989,39.
[vii] Turner 1989, 23-24.
[x] Turner 1989, 24.
[i] CNG Auction January 8th 2007
[ii] Mainly as part of the sold items of the'Tribute penny’, the hoard coins being the coins provenanced'ex Triton X, lot 1559’ : https://www.forumancientcoins.com/catalog/roman-and-greek-coins.asp?vpar=807&pos=0&sold=1; in addition a search on internet generated 7 more coins with the inventory numbers 20305, 20684, 20723, 21030, 21031, 27901 and 27910.