Aspects of Coin Circulation in Roman Dacia

7/27/2019 Aspects of Coin Circulation in Roman Dacia

1/29


2/29

COLLECTIONMONETA82

ROMANCOINSOUTSIDETHEEMPIREWays and Phases, Contexts and Functions

Proceedings of the ESF/SCH Exploratory Workshop

Radziwi Palace, Nieborw (Poland)

3-6 September 2005

MONETA, WETTEREN 2008

INSTITUTE OF ARCHAEOLOGY,UNIVERSITY OF WARSAW


3/29

2

Front cover: Grossbodungen bog-deposit (Germany); photo by: J. Liptk , with kind

permission of the Landesamt fr Denkmalpflege und Archologie Sachsen-Anhalt

Landesmuseum fr Vorgeschichte Halle

Back cover: Borochichi hoard (Ukraine); photo by A. Ring , with kind permission

of the State Archaeological Museum Warsaw

Scientific editors

Aleksander Bursche (Warszawa)

Renata Cioek (Warszawa)

Reinhard Wolters (Tbingen)

Translations

Authors and

Nicholas Sekunda (contribution of Mariusz Mielczarek)

Language editors

Kathrin Johrden German (Tbingen)

Anna Kinecka English (Wrocaw)

Technical editor

Anna Zapolska (Warszawa)

Cover design

Joanna ero (Warszawa)

Published with the support of:

European Science Foundation

Deutscher Akademischer Austauschdienst (DAAD Ostpartnerschaften)

Ministerstwo Nauki i Szkolnictwa Wyszego

Instytut Archeologii Uniwersytetu Warszawskiego

Groupement de Recherche Europen Trouvailles montaires

ISBN

Dpt lgal Moneta 2008

MONETA, Hoenderstraat 22, 9230 Wetteren, Belgium, Fax (32) 93 69 59 25

www.cultura - net.com/moneta

9789077297490


4/29

269

Aspects of coin circulation in Roman Dacia1

Cristian Gzdac

The numismatic monographic publications of the last decade focusing on coincirculation and coin finds from Roman Dacia2, central and southwestern parts of present dayRomania may it possible identify certain patterns of coin circulation on the territory of theformer Roman province.

As is known, Dacia became a Roman province during the reign of Trajan, was underthe Roman administration until the second half of the 3rd century AD, and was partially re-conquered by Constantine I (Map 1; map 2). These changes in status make the pattern of coincirculation in the province potentially of interest for frontier studies in general. The aim ofthis study was to analyse potential differences in monetary circulation in different areas of the

province of Dacia, especially in the towns and forts of Dacia Superior and Porolissensis, and

in settlements near the Danube of Dacia Malvensis. In order to distinguish specific patterns ofcoin circulation in Dacia a comparative analysis was made of the material from Dacia andfrom adjacent provinces. In addition, the numismatic evidence was used also to offer anindividual perspective on some historical developments such as the establishment and theabandonment of the province of Dacia by the Roman administration; domestic and externaldisturbances.

The hoardsSome observations can be made about the non-recovered hoards in the provinces on

the Lower Danube. As Bruun demonstrated, the owner of a hoard might keep only coins

mainly of high value, avoiding those with a lower value3

. In this respect, a fine example isoffered by hoards from Dacia ending with issues from Trebonianus Gallus to Aurelian, whichstill contain denarii. Altogether, the hoards found in Dacia as well as in the surrounding areasuggest that the denarii disappeared gradually after the middle of the 3rd century AD. Thehoards ending before the middle of the 3rd century contain mainly single metal coins: gold,silver or bronze, and only in a few cases the hoards have mixed composition. After the middleof the 3rd century hoards contain mostly mixed denominations of denarii and antoniniani 4.

Two contrasting patterns of denomination hoarding can be distinguished in the groupof hoards from Dacia ending with coins of Gordian III Philip I:

a) the civilian hoards which contain a larger quantity of denarii than antoniniani (with

the percentage varying from 62,8% to 83,8%);b) the military hoards5 which have a substantial quantity of antoniniani, varying from47,6% to hoards consisting entirely of antoniniani6.

This difference may be explained by the way the coins entered the hoards. Thecivilian hoards indicate that the denarius was still regarded as coinage with a higher

1 This article was improved upon after a stay at the University of Frankfurt made possible by a fellowship fromthe Gerda Henkel Foundation. I also take this opportunity to thank Professor Aleksander Bursche for hisinvitation to include this study in the present volume.

2 Suciu V. 2000; Gzdac C. 2002a; Gzdac C., Coci S. 2004; Gzdac C. 2006; Gzdac C., Isac D. 2007.3 Bruun C. 1978, p. 114123.4

Gzdac C. 2002a, p. 77; Gzdac C. 2003, p. 187188.5 By "military" hoards I meant those found inside auxiliary forts or very close to them.6 Gzdac C. 2003, p. 188.


5/29

270

intrinsic value than the silver radiate. The different content of military hoards may be linkedwith the mode of payment of stipendium and donativa to the soldiers. It is significant that inthe hoards like those from Pons Aluti and Slveni II both findspots were auxiliary forts even the coins issued under Caracalla and Elagabalus consist of antoniniani only 7. Thissuggests that soldiers pay was made mainly in antoniniani. In addition, the civilian hoards,

indicate that the owners knew the real value of the coinage and tried to hoard the higher valuecoin, e.g. denarii instead of antoniniani.In some cases, the chronological patterns reveal connections between hoard burial and

non-recovery and historical events. In order to identify aspects relevant for Roman Dacia, theprovince it is worth examining this province in a broader geographical context, i.e. that ofother Roman provinces of the Middle8 and Lower Danube. For the area of the Middle andLower Danube, the largest groups of non-recovered hoards correspond with the period whenthese provinces were subject to external or internal difficulties (Maps).

The period of Marcomannic wars: the hoard finds concentrate in the areas ofCarnuntum Vindobona; the central part of Dacia; the north and east region of Moesia

Inferior. Furthermore, the geographical distribution of hoard finds from Dacia ending withAntoninus Pius coins suggests that Barbarian attack was on the centraleastern part of Daciaduring the reign of this emperor as confirmed by classical authors 9 (Map 3). The period fromSeptimius Severus to Maximinus I Thrax was characterised by a relative calm in the area ofthe Middle and Lower Danube, reflected also by the small number of hoards found in placesfar one from another (Map 4; map 5). Then, the period of the Carpian wars in the middle ofthe 3rd century AD is marked by a greater concentration of hoard finds in the provinces ofDacia and Moesia Inferior only. The hoards end with coins of Gordian III and Philip I (Map6). A major invasion of the Goths in AD 250/251 in the province of Moesia Inferior is alsomarked by a greater concentration of hoard finds in this province. At the same time, in Dacia,the number of hoards ending with coins from Trajan Decius is extremely low (Map 7).

It is known from ancient literary sources, e.g., Historia Augusta, that during the reignof Valerianus I and Gallienus, Pannonia and Moesia Inferior were the most turbulent

provinces on the Lower Danube10. The former was disturbed by Sarmatian attacks as well asby internal conflict between usurpers Ingenuus and Regalianus. The mapping of the hoardsending with coins issued in this period is in concord with the literary sources (Map 8).

After the great victory of Claudius II against the Goths, the period AD 268284 wasone of relative calm in the region of the Lower Danube. Therefore, the number of hoardsending in this period is scarce (Map 9).

Basing on the geographical distribution of the hoards it is possible to indicate whichroads were the most unsafe ones in the provinces of the Lower Danube (Map 10):

A) in Pannonia Superior: Carnuntum Scarbantia PoetovioB) in Pannonia Inferior: Aquincum Intercissa

7 Gzdac C. 2003, loc. cit.8 The division of the Danube area used here is based on a document issued by IHP UNESCO, 1999, which

divides the Danube into three segments, the upper Danube from the source to the castle ofDevin/Bratislava, where the river Morava flows into the Danube, the central Danube from Devin to theIron Gate on the border of Serbia and Romania, and the lower Danube downstream of the Iron Gate tothe Danube Delta. Document: The Danube River Channel Training. Description of RegulationMeasures and Flood Control on the Danube River, at: http://portal.unesco.org/es/files/27248/11151131883Danube_River_Channel_Training.pdf/Danube+River+Channel+Training.pdf.

9 SHA, Vita Pii, 5, 4; Aelius Aristide, XXVI, 7: the wars () started by the madness of Dacians; Polyainos,

VI: following the numerous wars, which were prepared with your father [Antoninus Pius]: () theDacians were defeated.10 SHA, Triginta Tyranni, 9; 10, 1; Eutropius IX, 8, 2; Aurelius Victor, 33, 2.


6/29

271

C) in Moesia Superior: Viminacium Horreum Margum NaissusD) in Moesia Inferior: 1. Oescus Melta Philippolis; 2. Montana Melta

MarcianopolisE) in Dacia: 1. Sucidava Arutela; 2. Drobeta Ulpia Traiana Sarmizegetusa

through the Vulcan Pass

One can easily notice that the unsafe roads correspond in fact with the main roads ineach of the provinces mentioned above. Considering that roads are a frequent place ofdiscovery of hoTtards another possible reason for the burying and subsequent non-recovery ofhoards may have been the actions of thieves. There is evidence in epigraphic sources fromDacia that travellers were killed by thieves, interfecti a latronibus, in the area of the town ofDrobeta, near the Danube11, on the road Drobeta Ulpia Traiana Sarmizegetusa, where mostof the hoards buried on the roads in the province of Dacia have been recovered. Moreover, thegeographical location of the hoards indicates that by the middle of the 3rd century AD for the

province of Dacia the unsafe area was its central region, whereas after this period southernpart of the province, Dacia Malvensis, became the most troubled (Maps).

a) Coin circulation in Dacia basing on single coin finds.b) The general pattern of coin circulation in DaciaBasing on numismatic material from the published Dacian sites a general graph of

isolated coin finds/year for the province of Dacia was developed (fig. 1) 12. It is possible todistinguish four main sequences of the monetary circulation in Dacia:

1 the period from Trajan to Antoninus Pius with a constant coefficient of coin finds;2 the period AD 161192 which sees a decrease in the number of coin finds;3 the period AD 193253 marked by a major increase in coin finds which peaks under

Philip I;4 the period AD 253337 with the lowest coefficient of coin finds (Fig.1).

Fig. 1. A graph of coin finds/year for the province of Dacia (after Gzdac 2002a, p. 431).

The gradual decrease for the period AD 161180 and AD 180192 in this area hasbeen explained by some authors in terms of a putative reduction in the coin supply during theMarcomannic wars13. However, given that during the same period other provinces show thesame pattern, this may have been a time of a reduction in coin production for reasons otherthan Marcomannic wars.

11

Russu I. I. 1977, p. 71, 118.12 Gzdac C. 2002a, p. 86.13 Ardevan R. 1993, p. 111113; Gudea N. 1994, p. 77.

3935,1 36,7

23,6

12,2

36

47,953,3

88,2

48

11,8

21,5

5,7 3,6

18,9

0

30

60

90

120

98

117

117

138

138

161

161

180

180

192

193

218

218

238

238

244

244

249

249

253

253

268

268

275

275

284

284

305

306

337

Finds/

Year


7/29

272

In the period AD 193218, the coefficient rises again and is characterised by a greatnumber of finds of denarii. The increase in silver coins and scarcity of bronze finds from this

period seem to be a general pattern for most areas of the Roman Empire. A possibleexplanation could be the process of gradual debasement of the silver coinage 14.

The period AD 218238 shows an increase in the coin finds coefficient. This period ischaracterised by an increase in both silver coins and provincial issues. The next two reigns,Gordian III and Philip I, have the highest coefficient/year of the entire period of study (Fig.1). In the reign of Gordian III this situation can be explained by finds of a large number ofantoniniani, but in the period of Philip I the main reason was the minting of a new monetaryseries PROVINCIA DACIA. The coefficient of finds/year for the reign of Philip I is almosttwice as high as it was in the preceding period.

The last period of Roman administration in Dacia AD 253275 is represented by avery low value of finds/year. The coinfinds coefficient shows a further decline during the

postRoman period, AD 275305. Coins dating from after the abandonment of the province

are rarely found in sites of the former province. This situation is not surprising as Dacia in thisperiod was a territory on the periphery of a coinage-based tax system of the Roman world.Roman goods continued to be brought to the region but the lack of a well-defined Romanstructure of society and economy meant that the intensity was lower than under the Romanadministration15.

Although in the period AD 306337 Dacia officially was an abandoned territory themonetary index records an increase in value (Fig. 1). This upward trend may be explained interms of a partial re-conquest of the southern territory of Dacia and by the abundance of

bronze coins produced by a large number of mints16.

Regional patterns of coin circulation in Dacia

For the province of Dacia the site finds revealed differences in the pattern of monetarycirculation in sites located in the northern and central part of the province, in Dacia Apulensisand Porolissensis, as compared to sites found in the southern part of the province or on the left

bank of the Danube, in Dacia Malvensis (Fig. 2). By AD 249253 the percentage offinds/year is much higher for sites in the interior of the province. This peculiar situation may

be due to the location in Dacia Apulensis and Porolissensis of the majority of towns (6 out of9) and by the greater concentration of military bases, including the two legions. A close valueof the index for the two areas is recorded for the period AD 218238 and AD 238244. Thereason for this is due to the higher percentage of provincial coins issued in this period foundon the sites on the left bank of the Danube. This situation indicates that these issues enteredthe province of Dacia by way of the settlements along the Danube. The percentage value ofcoin finds/year registers a different pattern for the two regions of Dacia during the final periodof Roman administration and the postprovincial period. Starting from the AD 253268 the

percentage of coin finds/year in southern sites becomes higher than that in northern sites. Forthe ensuing period the percentage recorded for southern sites shows a strong upward trend forAD 268275, followed by a gradual decrease until the reign of Constantine I; while the

14 For the discussion about the reduction of weight and fineness of denarius between Nero and Septimius Severussee: Crawford M. 1978, p. 152158; Mac Dowall D. W. 1979, p. 143; Carson R. 1967, p. 226; CarsonR. 1990, p. 61.

15

For the intensity of Roman good finds in the centre and at the periphery, and hinterland of the Roman empire,see Hedeager L. 1978, p. 191216; Hedeager L. 1987, p. 125140.16 King C. E. 1976, p. 80.


8/29

273

percentage for the northern sites shows a steady decrease and is at a very low value. Thehigher value recorded in southern sites for the period AD 268275 can be tentativelyexplained by high traffic in the area of the Danube crossing, especially at Drobeta andSucidava, caused by the abandonment of the province and the foundation of new provinces,Dacia Ripensis and Dacia Mediteranensis, south of the river. The proximity of the Empire

engendered a much higher percentage of coin finds in the southern area for the postprovincial period than for those found in the northern sites. The pattern is more apparent forthe issues of Constantine I when there is an increase of the coin finds in the territory of theformer province of Dacia. We may claim that this increase is due almost entirely to the findsfrom the southern sites. In some cases even a local pattern of coin discovery may be observed.

Fig. 2. A comparative graph of isolated finds from the north and south sites of Dacia(after Gzdac 2002a, p. 447).

Recent publication of numismatic material from Drobeta, separated into main findspots, the town territory and the fort17, makes possible further analyses of monetary circulationwithin the same site (Fig. 3). Until the period AD 253268, the fluctuation of indexes for thetown and the auxiliary fort is similar. At the same time, the percentage of the coefficient offinds/year for the auxiliary fort is higher or slightly higher than the one for the finds from thearea of the town of Drobeta, except during the reign of Philip I. After that, during the periodAD 253268 and AD 268275, the coefficient calculated for the auxiliary fort registers a

dramatic decrease in comparison to the coefficient for the town, which during the period AD253268 demonstrates a normal decrease, similar as in the case of the province of Dacia. Atthe same time, for the next period, AD 268275, both coefficients rise again, but the valuerecorded for the town is huge the highest for the entire period studied while the value forthe auxiliary fort of Drobeta is only median value. Also, the increase of the coefficient offinds/year for this period concerning the auxiliary fort may have been influenced by the sharpincrease in the town's index. As for the period following the abandonment of Dacia, the areaof the auxiliary fort again produces more coinfinds than the town of Drobeta. This situationcould be explained by arguing that the site of the auxiliary fort was reused by the local

population, presumably as a fortified place. The reuse of this fort under Constantine I as amilitary stronghold is marked by a huge increase in the number of coinfinds from this area as

17 Stng I. 1998, p. 144187.

9,58,8 8,7

5,3

2,9

8,29,4

11,3

20

10,6

2,21,4

0,6 0,2 0,3

3,32,5

4,2

1,8 1,2

4,7

11 11,2

13,5

7,4

3,4

14,5

3,12,2

15,4

0

5

10

15

20

25 %f/year

PERIOD

North sites

South sites


9/29

274

compared to the coin finds recovered in the area of the town dating from the same period. Thecase of Drobeta suggests that the auxiliary troop, if it continued to be garrisoned at the site,had a bad coin supply in the period which followed the reign of Philip I.

Fig. 3. A comparative graph of isolated finds from the fort and town of DROBETA(after Gzdac 2002a, p. 447).

Fig. 4. A comparative graph of coin finds from auxiliary forts in Dacia and Pannonia(after Gzdac 2002b, p. 756).

As has been recently demonstrated, the comparison between coin finds from auxiliaryforts in Dacia and from auxiliary forts in Pannonia indicates that until the AD 249253 theintensity of coin finds in Dacia was much higher in auxiliary forts in Dacia than in Pannonia18(Fig. 4). Starting with this period, the comparative graph for coinfinds from auxiliary forts in

these two provinces follows two opposite trends. The coefficient for Pannonia registers a huge18 Gzdac C. 2002b, p. 737756.

1,5 1,52,5

0,5 0,5 0,2

4

8,1

14,2 13,7

8,1

36,1

2,50,5

5,6

1,7 1,7 2,9 1,1 0,51,7

8,3 8,9

11,9

17,8

1,1

9,5

4,12,9

25

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40 % finds/period

PERIOD

town

auxiliary fort


10/29

275

increase and an ascending tendency for the period AD 249275 while for the auxiliary forts ofDacia the same coefficient records a dramatic decrease, especially for the period AD 253268.

It may be affirmed that if the auxiliary forts of Dacia had not been abandoned underthe reign of Gallienus then at least they were facing a serious problem of coin supply in this

period.

The coin series PROVINCIA DACIAA specific aspect of coin circulation is represented by the coin series PROVINCIA

DACIA. The first issue was struck in AD 246 during the reign of Philip I. Although a localcoinage, dated by a provincial year, this coinage was struck in accordance with the officialRoman bronze denominations: sestertius, dupondius, as (Plate I)19. Moreover, it followed thesame pattern of debasement as coins minted in Rome: the smaller denominations (dupondius,as) gradually disappeared (Fig. 5); the sestertius denomination followed the same tricky trendof keeping the size of its diameter accompanied by a major increase in weight (Figs. 6, 7)20.

The design style of this coinage on all its denominations is greatly similar to that of themonetary series P M S COL VIM issued at Viminacium (Moesia Superior) (Plate I). Thissuggests that actually the two types of coinage were issued by the same mint of Viminacium.

Fig. 5. Proportions of denominations for coin finds PROVINCIA DACIA in Roman Dacia(after AlfldyGzdac, Gzdac 20022003, p. 248, fig. 4).

In Dacia, this coinage is recorded at nearly all the Roman sites which continued to be

in existence until the reign of Philip I. Understandably enough, the largest sites and the mostwell-researched and published ones in Dacia produced the greatest quantity of coin finds ofthis monetary series (Map 11)21. Cataloguing these coins it can be noticed that the first twoyears of minting of this coinage apparently also were the most productive ones (Fig. 8). Afterthis, starting with the 3rd year of issue the coin series PROVINCIA DACIA registered astrong decline until the series was discontinued altogether in AD 25625722. In fact, for the

period after the reign of Philip I until Valerianus I it is the coinage from Viminacium whichstarts being recorded more frequently in Roman Dacia than the series PROVINCIA DACIA(Fig. 9).

19 Martin F. 1992, p. 79; AlfldyGzdac A., Gzdac C. 20022003, p. 247249.20

AlfldyGzdac A., Gzdac C. 20022003, p. 248249.21 AlfldyGzdac A., Gzdac C. 20022003, p. 249.22 AlfldyGzdac A., Gzdac C. 20022003, p. 250.


11/29

276

Fig. 6. Fluctuation of the average diameter for the coinage PROVINCIA DACIA(after AlfldyGzdac, Gzdac 20022003, p. 249, fig. 5).

Fig. 7. Fluctuation in the average weight for the coinage PROVINCIA DACIA(after AlfldyGzdac, Gzdac 20022003, p. 249, fig. 6)23.

Fig. 8. Finds of PROVINCIA DACIA coins in Roman Dacia(after AlfldyGzdac, Gzdac 20022003, p. 250, fig. 7).

23

The absence of values for years 6th and 11th of issue is caused by absence of finds of relevant coins at Romansites and the state of publication of single samples in the catalogue by Ferenc Martin, see Martin F.1992, p. 101, 106.

162

126

25

6

18

1 111

2 2 0

0

30

60

90

120

150

180

AN. I 246-247 AN. II 247-248 AN. III 248-249 AN. IIII 249-250

AN. V 250-251AN. VI 251-252 AN. VII 252-253

AN. VIII 253-254

AN. IX 254-255AN. X 255-256 AN. XI 256-257

No.pieces

Year of issue


12/29

277

Fig. 9. A comparative graph of % for coinages PROVINCIA DACIA and P M S COL VIM(Viminacium), single coin finds, at Roman sites on the Middle and Lower Danube

(after AlfldyGzdac, Gzdac, 20022003, p. 254, fig. 13).The cataloguing of coin finds PROVINCIA DACIA reveals another interesting

aspect. Over 90% of the coin finds of this type minted after the reign of Philip I occurred atsites located in the southern region of Dacia (e.g. Dierna, Drobeta) 24. If we agree that thesecoins were mainly used for and by the army25 at Porolissum 64% of the coins PROVINCIADACIA were discovered within the fort26 then it seems that by/during the reign ofValerianus I the troops either had left the province or the new coin hardly made it to this area.

At the same time, a comparative analysis of the distribution of the finds ofPROVINCIA DACIA and P M S COL VIM coins indicates two different phenomena.While the coins minted at Viminacium were intended to cover the shortage of bronze coin

supply from Rome in the provinces of Pannonia, Moesia Superior and Dacia, thePROVINCIA DACIA series seems to have been struck with only the province of Dacia inmind (Fig. 9)27. Most probably, this coinage it was supposed to cover the needs of the militaryfor bronze coin. The minting of the PROVINCIA DACIA series proved a temporary andinefficient solution since right after the reign of Philip I it met with competition from itstwin series of P M S COL VIM.

Plated silver coins a monetary policy?Recent analyses of numismatic material from different sites in Dacia have revealed

many instances of the presence of ancient imitations and copies: hybrids, barbarous, plated,

and cast coins28

. In the case of gold issues, no finds of such coinage have been recorded forDacia. This is a general pattern for the Roman Empire that next to being severely punished bythe law gold coinage was not used regularly in daily transactions, unlike silver coinage. Themost common ancient imitations are plated silver denominations. In case of coin finds fromthe Roman town of Ulpia Traiana Sarmizegetusa the plated denarii represent 17,3% of theaggregate number of denarii found at this site with 7,1% of the antoniniani finds also plated29.

24 Alfldy G. 2002; AlfldyGzdac A., Gzdac C. 2008 (forthcoming).25 Another indirectly argument on this line may be offered by Callu who has considered that after AD 250 the

mint from Dacia has moved to Viminacium, which, according to the same author had a quasimilitarystatute, Callu J. P. 1969, p. 18, 111.

26 AlfldyGzdac A., Gzdac C. 20022003, p. 251, fig. 9.27

AlfldyGzdac A., Gzdac C. 20022003, p. 253256; fig. 13; pls. 13.28 Gzdac C. 2002a, p. 9495; Gzdac C., AlfldyGzdac A. 2001, p. 137154.29 Gzdac C., AlfldyGzdac A. 2001, p. 140.

39,6

10,45

2,3 3,8 04,8 4,7

0,3 0 0 0 0 0 0

9,211,9

3,3

34,8

44,3

0,4

57,253

1,4

33,3

100

0 0 0 00

20

40

60

80

100

244-249249-253 253-268244-249249-253 253-268244-249249-253 253-268244-249 249-253253-268244-249 249-253253-268

%

"PROVINCIA DACIA"

"P M S COL VIM"


13/29

278

At Drobeta, 29,1% of the denarii are plated. It has to be noted that all the plateddenarii were recovered from the area of auxiliary forts where they represent 63,6% of finds ofthis denomination30. Let me point out here that due to the state of research and publication ofother urban sites of Roman Dacia (e.g. Apulum, Napoca, Tibiscum, Dierna) it is not possibleto gain a clearer view of the presence of plated coins at these sites31.

Finds of plated coins are known also from the best researched and published auxiliaryforts in Roman Dacia: at Buciumi: 22,6% of the denarii are plated; at Romita, 11,5% ofdenarii and 1 out of 3 antoniniani are plated; at Iliua, 56,4% of denarii and 3 out of 9antoniniani are plated32, at Gherla, 47,3% of denarii and 2 out of 4 antoniniani are plated33.Unfortunately, the situation of Roman Dacian non-urban sites is similar to that of the urbansites the level of research of the former is extremely poor at the moment. Only two ruralsites are presented here, with the picture of plated coins found at these places. At Micsasaand Orlea, 28,4% and 37,7% of denarii are plated. At Orlea, also 2 out of 21 antoniniani are

plated. One may say that imitation denarii have a very high incidence in the countryside but itmust be emphasized that these two sites should be regarded as unusual rural sites. Micsasawas a welldeveloped pottery centre, while Orlea was an important place close to the Danubewith a bridge34 over the river, and was also in close neighbourhood of the quasiurbansettlement of Sucidava. Therefore, both sites may be considered as ones with a high intensityof monetary circulation. Until more information from other rural sites in Dacia becomesavailable it is difficult to say whether the incidence of imitation coinage at these two sitesrepresents a pattern for rural sites from this province in general or is their distinctivecharacteristic resulting from their specific position. It must be emphasized that even withinthe same site it is possible to observe certain local patterns. At Porolissum, 29,5% of denariiand 20% of antoniniani are plated, but some parts of the site produced a much greater quantitythan the average of the site as a whole35.

In the case of the customs house (statio portorii), 63% of the denarii finds are ancient

copies, mainly plated (23 plated and 6 billon denarii)36

. At the moment, the most plausibleexplanation37 for such a strong presence of imitation coins at statio portorii at Porolissumcould be the military presence there. The analysis of numismatic evidence from the auxiliaryfort from Porolissum indicates that out of the total number of denarii found at this site, 53%are copies (plated, billon, barbarous pieces)38. Close values obtained for the two parts of thesite of Porolissum, the customs house and the auxiliary fort, indicate that this large number ofcopies may have a common explanation: daily losses or discarded coins from the military

personnel39 on duty at statio portorii. At this stage of research, the general situation of isolatedcoin finds from Roman Dacia indicates that 23,6% of the denarii bearing the portraits of theemperors from Trajan to Maximinus I Thrax are plated.

30 Gzdac C., AlfldyGzdac A. 2001, p. 140.31 In the case of the Roman site of Apulum (two coloniae and a Roman legionary fort) the numismatic

monograph is in the works: Gzdac C., Suciu V. 2009 (forthcoming).32 Gzdac C., AlfldyGzdac A. 2001, p. 140.33 Gzdac C., Zgreanu R. 2009, (forthcoming).34 Tudor D 1971, p. 1719.35 Gzdac C. , AlfldyGzdac A. 2001, p. 141.36 Gudea N. 1996, p. 69.37 For other hypotheses on the high number of plated coins from station portorii at Porolissum, see Gzdac C.,

AlfldyGzdac A. 2001, p. 141.38

Gudea N. 1996, p. 70, n. 34.39 Basing on archaeological evidence it has been suggested that a vexilatio of cohors V Lingonum stationed atthe statio portorii, see Gudea N. 1996, 76.


14/29

279

An analysis of monetary circulation in the provinces adjacent to Dacia revealed thefollowing results40. Plated denarii depicting emperors from the period AD 98238 represent11,8% and 7,3% finds of this denomination recorded in Pannonia Superior and PannoniaInferior respectively. Due to the state of research and publication, plated antoniniani revealedsignificant results for this study only for the province of Pannonia Superior (Fig. 10)41. It can

be observed that almost a quarter of the isolated silver Roman single coin finds from RomanDacia are ancient copies of some kind of mistreated silver content. The majority of thesecopies were recovered at auxiliary forts which suggests that they were used for paying thetroops. If these copies were accepted, for a while in daily transactions or payments, they werevery rarely considered to be worth keeping. Apart from the hoards consisting entirely ofcopies42, which probably had a special destination, imitation coinage very rarely occurs inother hoards from the area of the Middle and Lower Danube. The outbreak of copying of theRoman coinage in Dacia may suggest that this province was amongst those which sufferedduring some period or periods from a shortage of official coin supply, mainly silver. As in thewestern frontier provinces, in Dacia, the largest number of false coins belongs to those piecesdepicting the emperors of the period AD 193238.

The higher percentage of plated silver denominations in Dacia as compared to bothprovinces of Pannonia could be a result of a larger number of auxiliary troops (Fig. 10). Thisaspect also indicates that the outbreaks of the 2nd and 3rd centuries of imitative coinage took

place further east than has been known until now43. It seems that this phenomenon was closelyassociated with the army.

Fig. 10. A comparative graph of % plated silver denominations (after Gzdac 2002a, p. 449).

The numismatic evidence and historical eventsA comparative analysis of coin finds from Roman sites having dissimilar historical

backgrounds but with a good state of research and publication of the numismatic material mayhave shed new light on the major turning points in the history of Dacia. In case of our study,

40 Gzdac C. 2002a, p. 9495.41 For details on the state of research and publication of the numismatic material from sites from Pannonia

Inferior, Moesia Superior and Inferior, see Gzdac C. 2002a, p 511.42 This is the case of the 232 silver cast coins of the hoard found at Apulum, see Suciu V. 2000, p. 328; Gzdac

C. 2002a, p. 72.43 For the concentration of the outbreaks of the Roman coin copies in the 2nd and 3rd century AD in the westernfrontier provinces see King C. E. 1996, p. 246.


15/29

280

we refer to the time when the province was conquered by Rome and to the time of its

abandoning in the second half of the 3rd century AD. It is understandable that the presence of

a great number of troops and settlers, as was the case of Dacia, called for a substantial

injection of coinage to cover the need for payments and transactions. At the other end of the

scale, the withdrawal from the province of Roman army and administration led to a sharp

decrease in coin supply to that territory. Therefore, a comparative analysis of the betterpublished numismatic material from some sites in Dacia (Ulpia Traiana Sarmizegetusa,

Porolissum) and other similar sites from the area of the Upper, Middle and Lower Danube

(Ovilava, Carnuntum, Poetovio) using a comparative monetary coefficient revealed

interesting specific patterns44. In the case of the reign of Trajan and Hadrian, the value of this

comparative monetary coefficient is much higher for Dacian sites than for the other three sites

in different provinces (Fig. 11)45. Certainly it must be mentioned here that the highest values

in the case of the site Porolissum are under direct influence from the presence at this site of a

great number of plated coins. The same explanation applies to the value of the monetary

coefficient for coins depicting the issuers from the period AD 193218.

Fig. 11. The comparative monetary coefficient for the sites Porolissum, Ulpia Traiana

Sarmizegetusa, Carnuntum, Ovilava, Poetovio (after Gzdac 2006, p. 495).

Another distinct pattern reflected by a comparative analysis of these sites corresponds

to the reign of Philip I (AD 244249). The minting of the series PROVINCIA DACIA had

a strong regional impact on this province (Fig. 11). As mentioned above, the same graph isextremely relevant for the time of abandoning of Dacia by the Roman administration. The

dramatic decrease in the comparative monetary coefficient which dropped to extremely low

values for the periods AD 253275 indicates that Roman Dacia started to be faced with a poor

coin supply already starting from the period AD 253268. The same situation is also reflected

on the scale of the entire province by another comparative graph showing the percentage of

coin finds for the reign of Valerianus I Gallienus, and Gallienus alone, from Dacia and

Pannonia (Fig. 12).

44Gzdac C. 2006, p. 483495.

45The analysis was carried out on single coin finds from these sites. No hoards have been included.


16/29

281

Fig. 12. Comparative graph of % finds/year for the reign ofValerianus I Gallienus (AD. 253259) and Gallienus (AD 259268).

In conclusion, it may be affirmed that indeed, the moment of inception of the provinceof Dacia and its first years of existence are reflected by a strong injection with coin. The maincause was a major presence of the army and administration which determined a strongdevelopment of a monetary economy, at least in military and urban environments. Thereverse side of the coin is that the withdrawal of Roman administration from Dacia isreflected by the shortage in the supply of coinage to the study region in later periods.

Bibliography

ALFLDY G. 2002, Circulaia monedei PROVINCIA DACIA n Dacia, University of ClujNapoca, (BA thesis, manuscript).

ALFLDYGZDAC A., GZDAC C. 20022003, The coinage PROVINCIA DACIA acoinage for one province only (AD. 246257)?, Acta Musei Napocensis 39/I, p. 247258.

ALFLDYGZDAC A., GZDAC C. 2008 (forthcoming), The management of a monetarycrisis ? The P M S COL VIM and PROVINCIA DACIA coinages in the Roman monetary

policy of the 3rd

century AD, Numismatische Zeitschrift 116.

ARDEVAN R. 1993, Circulaia monetar n aezarea roman de la Gherla, Ephemeris Napocensis,vol. 3, p. 111113.

BRUUN C. 1978, Site finds and hoarding behaviour, [in:] Carson R., Kraay C. M. (eds.), Scriptanummaria Romana: essays presented to Humphrey Sutherland, Spink, London, p. 114123.

CALLU J. P. 1969,La politique montaire des empereurs romains de 238 311, Paris.

CARSON R. 1965, The Reform of Aurelian, Revue Numismatique 7, p. 225235.

CARSON R. 1990, Coins of the Roman Empire, LondonNew York.

CRAWFORD M. 1978,Ancient Devaluations: a general theory, Les dvaluations Rome. Epoquerpublicaine et impriale (Rome, 1315 novembre 1975 1 Gdansk 1921 octobre 1978),Collection de l'cole franaise de Rome 37, p. 147158.

GZDAC C. 2002a, Monetary circulation in Dacia and the provinces from the Middle and LowerDanube from Trajan to Constantine I (AD 106337), ClujNapoca.


17/29

282

GZDAC C. 2002b, Monetary circulation and the abandonment of the auxiliary forts from Dacia,[in:] Freeman P. et al. (eds.), Proceedings of the XVIIIth Roman Frontier Congress Amman,

Jordan. September 2000, British Archaeological Reports 1084 (II), Oxford, p. 737756.

GZDAC C. 2003, Patterns of monetary circulation in Dacia and the Lower Danube region fromTrajan to Constantine I, Apulum. Acta Musei Apulensis XL, p. 187208.

GZDAC C. 2006, The coinage and the Roman conquest of Dacia. A comparative study by sites:Ulpia Traiana Sarmizegetusa, Porolissum, Ovilava, Carnuntum, Poetovio, [in:] Teodor E. S.,entea O. (eds.),Dacia Augusti provincia, crearea provinciei. Actele simpozionului desfuratn 1314 octombrie 2006 la Muzeul Naional de Istorie a Romniei, Bucureti, editura Cetateade Scaun, Bucureti, p. 483495

GZDAC C., ALFLDYGZDAC A. 2001, The Roman law against counterfeiting betweentheory and practice: the case of Roman Dacia, Acta Musei Napocensis 38, p. 137154.

GZDAC C., COCI S. 2004, Ulpia Traiana Sarmizegetusa, Mega Publishing House, ClujNapoca.

GZDAC C., GUDEA N. 2006,Porolissum, ClujNapoca.

GZDAC C., ISAC D. 2007, The Roman auxiliary forts of SAMVM (Ceiu) and Gilu, ClujNapoca.

GZDAC C., SUCIU V. 2009 (forthcoming),Apulum, ClujNapoca.GZDAC C., ZGREANU R. 2009 (forthcoming), Reinterpreting the numismatic evidence. A

methodological case study: the auxiliary fort from Gherla (Cluj county, Romania) , Cercetride numismatic, vol. XIII.

GUDEA N. 1994,Dacia Porolissensis n timpul rzboaielor marcomanice, Acta Musei Porolissensis18, p. 6793.

GUDEA N. 1996,Porolissum. Un complex dacoroman la marginea de nord a Imperiului Roman. II.Vama roman. Monografie arheologic. Contribuii la cunoaterea sistemului vamal din

provinciile dacice, Muzeul Naional de Istorie a Transilvaniei, ClujNapoca.

HEDEAGER L. 1978, A Quantitative Analysis of Roman Imports in Europe North of the Limes (0400 A.D.), and the Question of RomanGermanic Exchange, [in:] Kristiansen K., PaludanMller C. (eds.),New Directions in Scandinavian Archaeology, Lyngby, Odense, p. 191216.

EDEAGER L. 1987,Empire, frontier and the barbarian hinterland: Rome and northern Europe fromAD 1400, [in:] Rowlands M. J., Larsen C. S., Kristiansen K. (eds.), Centre and periphery inthe ancient world, Cambridge, p. 125140.

KING C. E. 1976, The value of hoards and site finds in relation to monetary circulation in the latethird and early 4th centuries AD, Studien zur Fundmnzen der Antike, vol. 1, Ergebnisse desFMRDColloquiums vom 813 Februar 1976 in Frankfurt am Main und Bad Homburg v.d.H.

KING C. E. 1996,Roman copies, [in:] King C. E., Wigg D. W. (eds.), Coin finds and coin use in theRoman world: the thirteenth Oxford Symposium on Coinage and Monetary History, 25. 27.3.1993: a NATO advanced research workshop, Studien zur Fundmnzen der Antike, vol.10, Berlin, p. 237263.

Mac DOWALL D. W. 1979, The western Coinages of Nero, Numismatic Notes and Monographs,vol. 161, New York.

MARTIN F. 1992,Kolonialprgungen aus Moesia Superior und Dacia, Akadmiai Kiad, Budapest.

RUSSU I. I. 1977, Inscripiile Daciei Romane. Oltenia i Muntenia, vol. III/1, Editura AcademieiRomne, Bucureti.

STNG I. 1998, Viaa economic la Drobeta n secolele II VI p.Ch., Bibliotheca Thracologica,Bucureti, p. 144187.

SUCIU V. 2000, Quelques considrations sur les trsors montaires de la Dacie romaine , [in:]Ciugudean H., Moga V. (eds.),Army and Urban Development in the Danubian Provinces ofthe Roman Empire, Alba Iulia, p. 323332.

SUCIU V. 2002, Tezaure monetare din Dacia roman i postroman, ClujNapoca.TUDOR D. 1971,Podurile romane de la Dunrea de Jos, Editura Academiei, Bucureti, p. 1719.


18/29

283

Maps


19/29

284


20/29

285


21/29

286


22/29

287


23/29

288


24/29

289


25/29

290


26/29

291


27/29

292


28/29

293


29/29

Plate I

Denominations of PROVINCIA DACIA coinage: sestertius, dupondius, as.

Stylistic similarity: sestertius PROVINCIA DACIA, sestertius P M S COL VIM.

Documents

Aspects of Coin Circulation in Roman Dacia