Last updated 2nd August 2024: Online ordering is currently unavailable due to technical issues. As we resolve the issues resulting from this, we are also experiencing some delays to publication. We are working hard to restore services as soon as possible and apologise for the inconvenience. For further updates please visit our website https://www.cambridge.org/news-and-insights/technical-incident
We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 24 September 2012
If any ancient historian—either Greek or Roman—made any systematic comment on the principles observed in the choice of coin types in the classical world his account has not come down to us. Aristotle, indeed, in his Politics, made a theoretical reference to coin types when he wrote ὁ γὰρ χαρακτὴρ ἐτέθη τοῦ ποσοῦ σημεῖον. This reference, though it is of characteristic Aristotelian brevity, in reality goes beyond the theory and implies the almost invariable principles of choice everywhere. For, as scholars have often noted and now generally agree, when Aristotle defined the addition of a type to a coin as a means of indicating its value, he was saying not that the type showed how great the value of the coin is, but that its very presence gives an assurance that the proper value of the coin—whatever that value might be—can be safely assumed. As G. F. Hill pointed out, and as will be seen later, ‘the importance of this apparently subtle distinction lies in its bearing on the significance of types.’
1 i, 1257a, ad fin.
2 Cf. G. F. Hill, Handbook of Greek and Roman Coins 67, n. 2, as against (e.g.) J. G. Milne, Greek Coinage 1.
3 ibid.
4 Cf. Lenormant, F., La monnaie dans l'antiquité II, 3 ffGoogle Scholar.
5 Numismatic Journal 1837, 97 ff.
6 Monatsbericht d. Kön. preuss. Akad. d. Wissensch zu Berlin 1869; transl. by B. V. Head, Num. Chron. 1870, 91 ff.
7 lvi.
8 As on 314.
9 36.
10 43.
11 47 f., 60 ff.
12 id. 94 ff.
13 o.c. 169.
14 Hill, o.c. 180 ff.; G. Macdonald in Proc-verb. et Mèm. du Congr. Internat. de Num. … Bruxelles 1910, 281 ff.
15 Oresme, de Moneta, ed. Johnson, ch. VI.
16 Cf. E. S. G. Robinson, JHS 1951, 156 ff; W. L. Brown, Num. Chron. 1950, 177 ff.; C. M. Kraay, Num. Chron. 1956, 43 ff.
17 Cf. S. P. Noe, Num. Notes and Mon. 78, and in Hesperia, Suppl. VIII; C. H. V. Sutherland, AJP 1943, 129 ff., Num. Chron. 1942, 1 ff., Museum Notes III, 15 ff.
18 T. O. Mabbott, Num. Review 1945, 5 ff.; Ovid, , Fasti I, 229 ffGoogle Scholar.
19 See H. Mattingly, Journ. Warburg Inst. 1937, 197 ff.
20 Mattingly, H.-Robinson, E. S. G., Proc. Brit. Acad. XVIII, I ffGoogle Scholar.
21 A. Alföldi, Essays in Rom. Coinage pres. to Harold Mattingly, 63 ff.
22 Cf. Macdonald, Coin Types 185.
23 An unpublished study by Mr. Torrey James Luce, of Princeton, has shown, for example, how strikingly Apollo obverses reflect the dominance of Marians in politics from 93 to 82 B.C. and, by their temporary absences, reflect also the interruptions, mainly Sullan, to which the Marians were subjected. I am grateful to Mr. Luce for the opportunity of seeing his paper.
24 C. M. Kraay, Num. Chron. 1954, 18 ff.
25 C. H. V. Sutherland, Coinage in Rom. Imp. Policy ch. 1.
26 Cf. H. Mattingly, Harvard Theol. Rev. 1937, 103 ff.
27 E. A. Sydenham, Rom. Republ. Coinage, nos. 912 ff., 921, 1008 ff.
28 See E. Babelon, Descr. hist. et. chron. des monn. de la Républ. rom.; H. A. Grueber, Coins of the Rom. Republ. in the Brit. Mus.; and E. A. Sydenham, o.c.
28 See H. Mattingly, Coins of the Rom. Emp. in the Brit. Mus.; M. Grant, From Imperium to Auctoritas and Roman Imperial Money; C. H. V. Sutherland, Coinage in Rom. Imp. Policy and in Num. Review 1944, 5 ff., and AJP 1947, 47 ff.
30 ‘Numismatics and History,’ in Essays in Rom Coinage pres. to Harold Mattingly 13 ff., esp. 14–6.
31 Num. Chron. 1951, Proceedings 13 ff.
32 Such fluctuation in the range of types is not, of course, to be confused (as it was confused by Frank, Tenney, Econ. Survey of Anc. Rome v, 32Google Scholar) with fluctuation in the volume of coinage.
33 C. H. V. Sutherland, Num. Chron. 1945, 58ff.
34 C. M. Kraay, Num. Chron. 1952, 78 ff.
35 M. Grant, Roman Anniversary Issues, passim.
36 A. Momigliano, Claudius: the Emperor and his Achievement 1–19.
37 C. H. V. Sutherland, Coinage in Rom. Imperial Policy 127, 135.
38 Num. Chron. 1920, 177 ff. and esp. 183.
39 Mattingly, H.-Sydenham, E. A., Rom. Imp. Coinage II, 6 fGoogle Scholar.
40 See most recently R. A. G. Carson in Essays in Rom. Coinage pres. to Harold Mattingly 226 ff.
41 Cf. C. H. V. Sutherland, AJP 1947, 60.
42 Statius, , Silvae III, 3, 103–5Google Scholar.
43 Cf. J. M. C. Toynbee, Arch.Journ. 1942, 33 ff.
44 C. H. V. Sutherland, Essays in Rom. Coinage pres. to Harold Mattingly 174 ff.
45 The Athenian Agora II, Coins (by Margaret Thompson).
46 Corinth VI, Coins (by K. M. Edwards), and A. R. Bellinger, Catalogue of the Coins found at Corinth 1925.
47 Sardis XI, Coins (by H. W. Bell).
48 Antioch-on-the-Orontes IV, Coins (by D. B. Waage).
49 Dura-Europos VI, Coins (by A. R. Bellinger).
50 Mattingly, H.-Sydenham, E. A., Rom. Imp. Coinage I, 145Google Scholar; n, 52 f., 58.
51 See J. M. C. Toynbee in Essays in Rom. Coinage pres. to Harold Mattingly 205 ff.
52 Cf. F. Lenormant, o.c. III, 211 f., for collected references.
53 See most recently M. Grant in Essays in Rom. Coinage pres. to Harold Mattingly 96 ff.
54 Cf. C. M. Kraay, Schweiz. Münzblätter 1952, 49 ff.
55 E.Ritterlmg, Annalen des Vereins für Nassauische Altertumskunde und Geschichtsforschung 1904 and 1912; C.F.C. Hawkes and M.R.Hull, Camulodunum (Soc. Ant. Res. Rep. 19) 1, 142 ff.
56 Further light on this matter should come from the forthcoming studies of Mr. D. W. MacDowall on the coinage of Nero.
57 As by Jones, o.c., 15.
58 Num. Chron. 1951, Proceedings 18.
59 Coinage in Rom. Imp. Policy 184.
