visigothic metrology / [philip grierson]

8/12/2019 Visigothic metrology / [Philip Grierson]

1/16

THE

NUMISMATIC

CHRONICLE

AND

JOURNAL

OF THE

ROYAL NUMISMATIC SOCIETY

Edited

by

E. S.

G.

ROBINSON

C.B.E.

M.A.

.B.A.

.S.A.

JOHN WALKER

M.A.

/LITT.

.S.A.

Keeper

f

CoinsBritish useum

and

C. H. V. SUTHERLAND

M.A.

LITT.

Deputy eeper

f

Coins

Ashmoleanuseum

SIXTH

SERIES

VolumeXIII

LONDON

THE

ROYAL

NUMISMATIC

SOCIETY

1953

This content downloaded from 83.85.130.64 on Mon, 30 Jun 2014 13:47:31 PMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions


2/16


3/16

VISIGOTHIC

METROLOGY

The

chapter

on

metrology

s

the

only

section

in

George

C.

Miles's

splendid

monograph,

The

Coinage

of

the

Visigoths

of

Spain from

Leovigild

to Achila

II,1

to

which

the

critic can take

exception.

The

procedures

used

in

obtaining

he

figures,

nd the

forms

n which

these

are

presented,

raise

important

questions

of numismatic

method

transcending

heir

mmediate

application

to the

coinage

of

the

Visi-

goths. I have alluded briefly o the matter in my review2of Dr.

Miles's

book,

but it

seems

desirable

to

discuss

t

at

greater

ength

nd

to

show how

a

different

resentation

an

provide

the

numismatist

nd

the

historian

with

nformation

f

great

importance.

The evidence

regarding

he

weights

of

the

coins is set

out

by

Dr.

Miles

n

a

series

of

tables

(pp. 156-64)

giving,

under

rulers

nd

mints,

the number

of

specimens

for

which

weights

re

available,

the

highest

and

lowest

weights

ecorded,

nd

the

average

weights

or he

separate

mints. Two graphshave beenplottedshowing heaverages,reignby

reign,

forall

the

mints

combined,

and,

for

comparison,

he

averages

for the

mint of

Toledo,

the

Visigothic

capital.

The first f

these

graphs,

that

for

he

total

coinage

of each ruler

as

far as it is

known,

s the

more

nteresting

f

the

two. It starts

with

the

"mintless"

series of

Leovigild

at

a

figure

f

1-299

gm.,

rises

n

his

later

coinage

to 1-382

gm.,

and

under

his

successor Reccared

(586-

601)

attains

an

average

of

1*471

g.,

not far

below the

theoretical

weight

of the

tremissis,

which

is

put

at 1-516

gm.3 Something

approaching

this

figure

s maintainedunderReccared's four succes-

sors,

but

under

Swinthila

621-31)

there

s a

falling

off o

1-411

gm.,

and

under

Tulga

(639-42)

the

average

has

declined to

1-313

gm.

There

is

then a

striking

mprovement

nder

Chindaswinth

642-53),

and

the

average

remains

high

until

the

reign

of

gica

alone

(682-

c.

698),

during

which

it

is still

1-448

gm.

In

the

short

oint

reign

of

Egica

and

Wittiza

(c.

698-702)

the

figure

allsto 1-368

gm.

and under

Wittiza

alone

(702-c.

710)

still

further

o

1-250

gm.

Finally,

unex-

1

Hispanic

Numismatic

eries,

No. II

(New

York:

American

umismatic

Society,

952).

2

Below,

.

183.

8

Miles,

.

154.

This

figure

ollows

he

raditional

stimate

f

he

weight

f

the

Roman

pound

s

327-456

m.

This content downloaded from 83.85.130.64 on Fri, 27 Jun 2014 18:09:52 PMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions


4/16

VISIGOTHIC

METROLOGY

75

pectedly,

under the

two

last

Visigothic

kings,

Roderic

(c. 710-11)

and

Achila II (c. 710-14), the respectable

average

weightsof 1-440gm.

and

1-423

gm.

are

again

achieved,

although,

as

Dr.

Miles

observes,

they

are

based

on

too few

specimens

to be

regarded

as

necessarily

representative.

Such

figures

y

themselves

can

only

be of

value to

the

economic

historian

f

he can

be assured

that

the

fineness

f

the coins

is

con-

stant.

On

this

matter,

Dr.

Miles

can

give

no

precise

information.

"To

judge by appearances,

the

gold

of the earlier

rulers

s

very

fine

during Egica's rule marked debasement begins, and thereafter he

proportion

f silver

ncreases

greatly.

During

the

joint

rule

of

Egica

and

Wittiza

the

majority

of the coins

are

of

pale

gold'

or

electrum,

and

many actually

have

the

appearance

more

of silver

than

of

gold."

He adds:

"The

appearance

of the coins

that

I have

been

able

to

examine shows no

evidence

of a decline

in fineness

during

the

reign

of

Tulga

when

the

remarkable decrease

in

weight

standard

takes

place."

The chief riticisms o be made ofDr. Miles' workare that, n the

tables of

weights

and

averages,

the

listing

of

the

highest

nd

lowest

recorded

weights

s

superfluous,

ince such

weights

are

by

definition

exceptional,

and the

averages

are

misleading

because

of

their

am-

biguity.

An

equally

serious

fault s

the

omission

of

any

figures,

ow-

ever

approximate,

for

the

fineness f

the

coins.

I

A decline in the average weight of a coin series, involving the

striking

f

a

greater

number

of

coins

to

a

given

weight

of

metal,

may

be

due

to one

or

more

causes

(i)

to

an

open

and

admitted

change

in

the

weight

standard

employed

(ii)

to a

ruler

ordering

he

mints

to

reduce

the

weight

of the

coins,

without

any

public

avowal

of

the

fact

4

(iii)

to

inefficient

dministrative

control

of

the

mints,

allowing

mintofficials

o

act as

under

(ii),

but

to

their

own

profit

nd

not

to that

of the

ruler.

4

In

practice

reduction

n

fineness

s

more

usual,

since

t

is

less

easily

detected.



5/16

76

PHILIP

GRIERSON

A fourth

possibility

s a mixture of

(iii)

and

(i).

Inefficient

entral

control has sometimes allowed a local mint to

adopt

a different

weight

standard. This

has

usually

meant

either the reversion

o

a

standard to which

people

have

been habituated

n

the

past

and

which

they

still

employ

n

their

private

accounts,

or the

adoption,

for easons

of commercial

convenience,

of

the standard

of some

neighbouring

community.

It is

important

to

keep

these several

possibilities

n

mind,

since

their

auses are

almost

nevitably

different.

n the first

ase,

they

are

mainlyeconomic. The usual explanationsof a changeof standardare

eitheran

attempt

to

compensate

for

a

rise or fall

in the value of

the

metal

used for

coinage,

or a

desire to

facilitate

commercial trans-

actions with

another

countryby

the

adoption

of

a

standard

widely

employed

elsewhere. In the

second

case,

the

cause

belongs

to

the

realm of

public

finance the

desire of a ruler to

secure

a short-term

advantage

to

his

exchequer

by

paying

his debts

in

debased

in

this

case

light-weight

coin.5

In the

third

case,

the cause is

primarily

political, though political weakness may well have economic and

financial

weakness

lying

behind

it.

If we examine

Dr. Miles's

figures,

nd

particularly

his

graph

of the

average

weights

of

the

coins under each

ruler,

the

unsatisfactory

nature

of his

presentation

of the

material is

apparent.

Perhaps

the

best

example

of

this is

given by

the

graph

of the

average

weights

of

the coins

of

the

620's and

630's.

when

a sudden and marked

decline

took

place.

After

he

highfigure

f 1-460

gm.

under

Sisebut

(612-21),

they

sank

to 1-411

gm.

under

Swinthila

(621-31),

1-343

gm.

under

Sisenand

(631-6),

1-367

gm.

under Chintila

(636-9),

and

finally

1-313

gm.

under

Tulga

(639-42).

Not

till the

reign

of

Chindaswinth

was

there a return

to the old level

of

weight,

1-439

gm.

during

his

early

years

when

he

reigned

lone

(642-9),

1-506

gm.

n

his

ater

years

when

his son

Recceswinth

was associated

with

him

(649-53).

These

figures

uggest

that

at this

period

the

monarchy,

nd with

it

probably

the

whole

economy

of

he

country,

were

n

seriousfinancial

difficulties.

hey

would be

quite

compatible

with a

temporary

educ-

5

From he

debtor's

oint

f

view,

which

may

also

to some

xtent

e the

ruler's

oint

of

view,

debasement as the

advantage

f

ightening

he

real

burden

f

debt,

but

this

s a

refinement

hat

probably scaped

heattention

of

medieval

overeigns.



6/16

VISIGOTHIC

METROLOGY

77

ton

of the

standard

of

the

tremissis,

not

necessarily

to that of the

20- or

21-siliqua

solidus,withtremissesof c. 1-3

gm.,

which was in

use

in the Frankish

kingdom

and

which

had been

temporarily

m-

ployed

n the

Visigothic

ingdom uring

art

of he

reign

f

Leovigild,

but to

something

ess

than the

full

24-siliqua

standard

of

Swinthila's

predecessors.

Even

if

such

a

formal

reduction

n

the

weight

of the

tremissis

werenot

involved,

he

figures

mply ystematic

depreciation

of the

coinage

explicable only

by

considerations

f the most

general

character.

A number of possible explanations of this sort could be found

without

serious

difficulty.

The

conversion

of the

Visigoths

from

Arianism

o

Catholicism,

ompleted

under

Sisebut,

and

the

dominant

position

attained

by

the

Catholic

hierarchy

n the

630's,

might

have

led

to

the

mpoverishment

f

the

monarchy hrough

ts lavish

gifts

o

the

Church,

s well as

to

the withdrawalof

arge

quantities

of bullion

from

circulation

n the form of

church ornaments

and

plate.

The

savage

persecution

of the

Jews,

naugurated

by

Sisebut

and carried

on by his successors,must almost certainlyhave had amongst its

consequences

the

concealment

of hoards of bullion

and their

smug-

gling

abroad. On

the other

hand,

the

improvement

n the

currency

under

Chindaswinth

would

have been

made

possible

by

the

vast con-

fiscations

of

property

which

accompanied

this

monarch's ruthless

attack on

the

aristocracy,

nd

perhaps

would have

been

helped

by

the

flight

of

wealth

from

Byzantine

North

Africa,

already

menaced

during

the

640's

by

the

advance

of

the

Arabs.

There

are

clearly

plenty

of

general

considerations

which

could

explain

the

currency

debasement of the thirties

provided

that such considerationsare

really

required.

It is this

ast

point

that Dr.

Miles's

statistics

do not

make

clear.

A

more

revealing

presentation

of

the

material would

have

been

given

by

the

frequency-table.

What

this

nvolves s

well

known:

the

arranging

f a scale

of

weights,

t intervals

of,

ay,

0-05

gm.,

from

he

minimum

o the

maximum

found

n the

series,

nd then the

recording

of

the

number of

specimens

found

n

each

weight-group.

From

the

figures hus arrivedat, a frequency urve can be drawn whichin a

uniform

oin serieswill

be found

to rise

slowly

to

a certain

point,

and

then

fall

off

harply.

The

summit

of

the curve

gives

a

weight

a

little

6

See

below,

.

81.



7/16

78

PHILIP

GEIERSON

below

that

to

which the coins were

being

struck.

Theoretically,

o

determine his

weight

ccurately,

the formula f the curve should be

calculated

by

a

statistician,

ut in

practice

the

numismatist s

usually

content

with

the

more

primitive

procedure

of

taking

the

average

of

the

highest

weight-group

nd

adding

a

small

figure

o

allow

forwear

and

tear

in

circulation.

Except

where the

shape

of the curve

is

abnormal,

as for

example

where the

proportion

of

low

weights

is

unusually

large,

this

gives

a

fairly

close

approximation

to the true

result.

The method s mainlyusefulfor scertaining hetheoreticalweight

of

a

coin series

where

this

s not

known,

since it

eliminates

he influ-

ence

of

isolated and

irrelevant

high

and

low

weights,

reduces

to

its

true

proportions

he

preponderance

f

ow

weights

which

makes strict

averaging

give

too

low a

result,

nd

sometimes

brings

o

light

the

fact

that

the

group

under

nvestigation

has been

struck o

more than

one

weight-pattern.

When it has been

tested

in

the

case of

coins

whose

theoretical

weight

s

known to us from

documentary

vidence,

t

has

been foundto be remarkably ccurate in its results.7

In

the

case of

the

coinage

of

the

Visigoths,

where

the

theoretical

weight

of

the

tremissis s

already

known,

or can

at

least be

estimated

with

considerable

onfidence,

he

uses to

which a

frequency-table

an

be

put

are two

in

number.

We

can

hope

to

ascertain

from t

whether

the same

weight

standard

was

always

followed,

or

whether

on

occa-

sions

some

other

standard

was

resorted

to,

and

we can

examine

the

spread

of

the coin

weights

ver

different

eight-groups

n

order o

see

how

far

the official

rescriptions

egarding

he

coinage

were

effective

7

The clearest

escription

fthe

method,

s

applied

o

coinage,

s

given y

G. F.

Hill,

The

Frequency

Table

Num.

Chron

,

5th

er.,

v

1924),

p.

76-85.

As Hill

employed

he

method,

he

weight

ntervals ere

electedmore r

ess t

random,

ut

M.

Paul

Naster,

n

his

tudy

f

hefind

f

Athenian

etradrachms

at Tell el

Maskhouta

Revue

elge

e

numismatique

xciv

(1948),

pp.

10-11),

shows

hat

more

ccurate esult

s

obtained

y

choosing

hem

fter

pre-

liminary

tudy

f

how

the

weights

re

grouped.

n

this

way

one avoids

the

possibility

f

breaking

p

a

strongly

arked

weight

group

etween wo dif-

ferent

ntervals,

hich

may

occur f

the

ntervalsre

selected

t random. n

myfrequency

table

f

Visigothic

oins

elow have had

to

gnore

his

efine-

ment,ince he dealgrouping ouldnotbethe amefor achruler nd had

to use

a uniform

ystem

hroughout

or

urposes

f

comparison.

n

any

case,

the

able

s

not

ntended

or

scertaining

he

heoretical

eight

f

he

remissis,

and

an examination

f

he

weights

give

will

how he

very

mall

ature f

he

improvement

hat

his

efinement

ould

make

possible.



8/16

VISIGOTHIC

METROLOGY

79

in the

actual

working

of the

mints. Where

we find

a

considerable

proportion f coins being struckmarkedlybelow weight,we can go

back to

the

individual

weights

themselves

to

discover

how

far

this

practice

was

general,

or whether

t

was confined o

individual

mints.

The

frequency-table

hat

follows s

based

on

the

material

in Dr.

'Miles's

book,

and takes

into

account the

weights

of over

1,600

coins.

Damaged

coins,

nd a few

whose

weights

eemed

uncertain,

have

been

excluded.8

This

accounts

for some

slight

divergences

between

his

totals

and

those

given

here.

Where

the

weights

of fewer

han

twenty

specimens reknown,no attempthas beenmade to suggestwhere he

summit

f the

frequency

urve would

come,

since

t

would

be

largely

a

matter

of

chance.

Dr.

Miles's

averages

for each

reign

have been

tabulated

for

purposes

of

comparison.9

An

examination

of

this

table

allows one

to make

a number

of

generalizations

egarding

he

metrology

f

Visigothic

coins.

(i)

From

the

introduction

f

the

"facing

bust"

types

by Leovigild

to the

reign

of

Egica,

there was

no

change

in

weight

tandard.

Over

the whole period between 584 and c. 698, the tremissiswas con-

sistently

truck

216 to the

Roman

pound,

with

a theoretical

weight

of

1*516

gm.

In

no

reign

n

this

period

does

the

average weight

of the

largest group

of

specimens

fall below

1-480

gm.,10

nd

in

three

reigns

it

reaches

1-488

gm.

This

uniformity,

nd

the smallness

of

the dif-

ference

etween

hese

weights

nd

the theoretical

weight

f

1-516

gm,,

are

a

striking

estimony

o

the

accuracy

of the

frequency-table

s

a method

for

ascertaining

the

weight-standard

of

a uniform

coin

series.

Indeed,

a full tatistical

nalysis

of the

groups

would

probably

show that some mints often struck above rather than below the

theoretical

weight,

n

aberration

possible only

because

of

the base-

ness

of

the

gold.

8

Dr.

Miles's

weights

ome

from

many

ifferent

ources,

nd

some

fthem

are

only

pproximate

those

f the

Carles

Tolr

ollection,

or

xample,

re

only

given

o

the

nearest

-05

gm.

or are

open

to

question,

einggiven

differently

y

different

cholars

who

have described

he coins

sometimes

even

given

ifferentlyy

the

ame cholar

n two

different

laces.

But

these

divergences

re

not

o numerous

s

to

affecthe

general

ine

of

the

curves.

9 I havereduced hem rom our o three lacesofdecimals,mce his s

quite

ufficient

or

ur

purposes.

10

n the

ase

ofSwinthila

he

ummit

f

he

urve

ll butfallsm the

weight-

group

1-41-1-45,

nstead

of

that

1-46-1-50.

n

his

reign

he

coinage

was

beginning

o

be

less

efficiently

ontrolledhan

t

was

by

his

predecessors.



9/16

CO

O

O

M 8

*

w

s

o*

EH

J

'S

'S

fe

b

od

O1

*5

S,gg

od

I"

I5I

^

.

.sssgsssss^ssgs&sss; ;

~-

o;S, ^ S

.

.co-^-^^^^^cc-^coco^tio^-T^co^cj'"*''* eo

,fsj-

si

III

82IS3sS33

:3S3$ISii :gss

s

^f

---

-----

S

9-

HO

O

S

-CO

CO M

(M

co

-30

t*

O u3

' '

M

CO

p

-S

' '

'

r-(

i-i

?

..

O

r- D

(M

7

?

"**?

^

S

:

o

50

2

whnhn

^

^

^

"**

Q

i5?

O

H

r

^ oS

'-|ccB

.ls;'s;=: "HL

oj

?2| mu

1J ^2?2s?s25s?pS|

l-slHl

8

WPS^^ollSHHPi^HSHtM^

lillillflllp-^lill S|sgS

WPS^^ollSHHPi^HSHtM^

*

H



10/16

VISIGOTHIC

METROLOGY

81

(ii)

Leovigils

two

"

profile-bust"

series,

those

with as

well

as

those without mint names, were struck to a different tandard,

clearly

that

representedby

the tremissis of

1-326

gm.,

or

the

21-

siliqua

solidus,

whichwas

widely

used

in

the former

oman

provinces

in

the

west.

This

fact

s not

remarked

on

by

Dr.

Miles,

and indeed

is

completely

concealed

by

his

method of

averaging

all the

coins of

Leovigild

together,

ut

is

brought

out

clearly

by

the

frequency-table.

It

is commented on

at some

length

by

Wilhelm

Reinhart

in his

article,

Die

Mnzen

des

westgotischen

eiches

von

Toledo

u

where

he

shows that the reduced weight is already apparent in the coinage

immediately rior

to

the

first

f

Leovigild's

reforms,

hat which

put

his

own

name

on the

coinage.

His

second

reform

hus

involved not

only

a

change

in the

design

of

the

coins but

also

a

change

of

weight-

standard,

and it seems

reasonable

to assume

that

the two were

related to each other. The

striking

lteration

n

design

would

prevent

the

new heavier tremisses

being

confused

with

their

lighter

pre-

decessors.12

Leovigild'sreturn o the oldweight-standards noteasy to explain.

It

may

be connected

with

a clause

in

the

Visigothic

egal

code,

which

provided

that no

person

hould

refuse

solidus

or

tremissis,

whatever

its

origin,

provided

that it was

of full

weight

and

not

a

forgery.13

f

strictly nterpreted,

his

would

compel,

or

rather

was

intended to

compel,

the

acceptance

of

Leovigild's

heavy

tremisses

n

a

par

with

imperial

ones,

despite

the

fact

that,

as

we shall

see

later,

they

were

seriously

debased.

(iii)

During

the

reign

of

Swinthila,

the

proportion

f

specimens

n

the

weight-groups

26-1 *30

gm.

and 1-36-1-40

gm.

is

exceptionally

large,

and

in

the

reigns

of

his

three

successors

this

frequency

s

ex-

tended

into

the

weight-group

-21-1-25

gm.

as

well.

It is

this

pre-

dominance

that accounts

for

he ower

average

weights

of

the

coinage

11

n

the

Deutsches

ahrbuch

r

Numismatik

iii-iv

1940-1),pp.

87-89;

cf. also

his "Nuevas

aportaciones

la

numismtica

isigoda",

Archivo

Espaol

de

Arqueologa

xviii

1945),

p.

232-3.

12

n

this,

s in other

spects

f

Leovigild's

olicy,

t

s worth

oting

ow

he

was

mitatingyzantium

nd

asserting

is

ndependence

f

tat

the

ame

ime.

His coinswere easingobeByzantinentheir eneralppearancetamoment

when

hey

were

everting

othe

Byzantine

eight

standard.

13

Lex

Visigothorum,

ii.

6,

5

inLeges

Visigothorum

ed.

K.

Zeumer

Hanover-

Leipzig,

902),

.

31

).

This

lause

s marked

ntiqua

n the

manuscripts,

hich

means

hat

t

goes

backto

the

ime

f

Leovigild

r

even

beyond,

fact

which

the

eparate

eferenceso

solidi

nd

tremisses

n

any

case

make

plain.

vi.

XIII

G



11/16

82

PHILIP

GRIERSON

of these

kings

o whichDr.

Miles has

called

attention. The

frequency-

table makes it clearthatno

change

n the

weight-standard

ook

place

at this

period,

and an

examination of the mint

averages given by

Dr.

Miles

(pp.

159-61)

and of the detailed

weights

of individual coins

shows that at

Toledo,

Seville,

and

Merida

they

remained

consistently

high,

and

that the decline

was due to

irregularities

n the smaller

provincial

mints,

particularly

those

of

north-eastern, astern,

and

south-eastern

Spain.

This

means

that

it

is to be attributedto

the

weakness

of the

crown,

allowing

the

exploitation

of the

mints

by

local officials, ot to manipulationof the central mints n the royal

interest.

Despite

the

low

averages,

there are

too

many

individual

specimens

weighing

more than

1-326

gm.

to

justify

he

supposition

that there

was

any

deliberate

return o the

standard of the

21

siliqua

solidus.

It

is

possible,

however,

hat in the

north-easternmints

Nar-

bonne,

Rodas

Gerona, Barcelona,

even

Saragossa)

there

may

have

been

some assimilation

o

the ower

weight-standard

n

vogue

amongst

the

Franks.

(iv) The reignofEgica and Wittiza (c. 698-702) shows a decline n

the

weight-standard,

nd in that

of

Wittiza

alone

(702-c.

710)

the

standard

completely

disappears

the curve

ceases to be the

typical

one

of a uniform

oin

series,

nd the

list of

weightsgives

us

no clue

at

all

as

to

what

system

was

being

used. This

leads us

on

to the

question

of the fineness f the

coins.

II

Tables

II and

III

give figures

or

the

fineness f all the

Visigothic"

regal"

coins,

and a

few of the

pseudo-imperial

eries,

n

my

collec-

tion. These

are

all that

have been

available to

me

for

systematic

examination,

for

under

present

conditionsmuseums are

ill-equipped

forthe determination

f

specific

gravities

and

are

naturally

not

pre-

pared

to

undertake

anything

n the

way

of

chemical

analysis

that

might

njure

the

coins. A

private

collectorhas a freer

hand,

both in

taking

the coins to a

laboratory

where

they

can

be

conveniently

studied

and

in

determining

ow

they

shall

be treated

when

they

are

there. Three importantpoints,however, could not verify rom he

material

n

my

own

collection,

nd

Dr.

Walker

has

been

kind

enough

to

supply

me

with

figures

or the

specific

gravities

of

the

relevant

coins

in the

British

Museum.



12/16


13/16

84

PHILIP GRIERSON

series which

mmediately

preceded

the first ssues

of

Leovigild

in his

own name. This series is not

represented

n

my

collection,but a

specimen

n the

BritishMuseum has

a

density

of

17-65,

nd a

fineness

therefore f

86-5,

or

about

21

carats.

Table

II

Densities

of

"Pseudo-Imperial"

Coins

Collection

Wt. n

Wt.

n

No.

Ruler

reference

air water

Density

Fineness

1

Pseudo

Imperial

8505 1-4522

1-3746

18-71

96

2

3467

1-4490

1-3722

18-86

97

(a)3 (b) 8102 1-2806 1-2135 19-09 98-5

4

3468 1-4442

1-3688

19-15

99

5

(c)

2553

1-3632

1-2890 18-62

95

6

(d)

7584 1-3984 1-3213

18-23

92-5

7

(e)

2555 1-2086

1-1406

17-77

88

8

(/)

1073

1-4299

1-3495

17-78

88

(a)

Analysis

ives

93-6

gold,

-4

ilver,

herest

opper.

(b) Reinhart,

nzen es

westgotischen

eiches

on

Toledo,

l.

9,

8.

(c)

Ibid.,

pl.

10,

16 var. Pierced.

Analysis

ives

92-9

gold,

6-8

ilver,

he

rest

opper.

(d)

Ibid.,

pl.

11,

11

var.

(e)

Ibid.,

pl.

9,

15 var.

Slightlylipped.

(/) Ibid.,pl. 10,13 this pecimen).

The

sudden

reduction to 18

carats

was

apparently

made

by

Leo-

vigild

when he

introduced

his

earliest

"

regal"

series,

hat

bearing

his

name

but not the

name of a mint

(Miles

1-8).

A

specimen

of this

series in the

British

Museum has

a

density

of

15-08,

and a fineness

therefore

f

67,

or

rather ver

16

carats.

This is

exceptionally

ow,

for

the

two

other coins of

Leovigild

for which

figures

re

available,

one

belonging

to his

"

second

series"

(with

profile

bust

and

mint-name)

and the otherto his

"

third series" (withfacingbusts), both have a

fineness

pproaching

18

carats. It seems

therefore

ikely

that the

British

Museum

figure

s an

individual

aberration,

nd that

18

carats

was

the fineness

which

Leovigild

ordered that

his

gold

coinage

should be.17

The

fineness

was

stabilized

at

18

carats

during

the

long

reign

of

Reccared,

the observed

figures

luctuating

etween

70 and

75-5. The

only

coin

in the list that

requires

comment s no.

9

(Miles

91,

1).

The

authenticity

f this

piece

has been

suspected

on various

grounds,

but

Dr. Miles, after

discussing

the matter at some

length

(pp.

222-3),

17

Hermenegild

pparently

everted o

the

full

mperial

tandard,

or

he

one

specimen

fhis

coinage

n

theBritishMuseum as a

density

f

19-08,

nd

a

fineness

hereforef 98-5.



14/16


15/16

86

PHILIP GRIERSON

came

with some

hesitation

o the

conclusion

hat

it

was

genuine.

The

fineness ettles the

question

beyond

a doubt. It is so out of

keeping

with that

ofthe other

oins of

Reccared that the

piece

mustbe

written

off

as

false,

though

it

is a

contemporary

counterfeit

nd not

a

modern

one.

It

is

difficult o make

any generalizationsregarding

he

quality

of

the

gold

under

Witteric

and

his

successors,

since

the

only figures

available

diverge

substantially

between

themselves,

nd it

may

well

be that

differentmints

departed

in

varying degrees

fromwhatever

prescriptionswere aid downby law. Only an examination,mintby

mint,

of the rich

material available in the

Museum

of the American

Numismatic

Society

would

clarify

the

matter.

Failing

it,

one

can

only

record a

general tendency

to

decline,

with

figures

or

fineness

fluctuating

etween

14

and 16

carats.

Under Chindaswinth nd

Recceswinth the mint

of

Toledo

appa-

rently

eturned o the

old fineness

f 18

carats

as

established

by

Leo-

vigild, though

the

figure

or

Recceswinth s not

wholly

reliable,

ince

the coin fromwhich t comes has been partially plugged. Elsewhere

the

fineness seems to have

reverted to about

16

carats,

with an

anomalous coin of Merida

of

only

13

carats.

Whether

this is

typical

of

the mint

we cannot

say.

Under

Wamba,

Erwig,

and

Egica,

the

normal

figure

s

about

14

carats,

with

a

tendency

to

fall,

reaching

1 1

carats

in

Toledo,

traditionally good

mint,

under

Egica. By

the

end of the

century,

under

Egica

and

Wittiza,

the

fineness

eases to

follow

any

recognizable

pattern,

ust

as the coin

weights

were be-

ginning

o

do.

While this

summary

does not

greatly

change

our

general picture

of

the evolution

of

Visigothic coinage

stability

under

Reccared,

irregular

decline

under

his

successors

n

the

firsthalf

of

the

seventh

century,temporary

mprovement

under

Chindaswinth and

Recce-

swinth,

then

renewed

decline

reaching complete

currency

haos

by

the end of

the

century

it

does

modify

t

in

one

importantrespect.

It

is

clear that

Visigothic

"

regal" ooinage

was

always

of

much

baser

metal

than

anyone

had

heretofore

upposed.

Far

from he

early

coins

being "very fine", they were only 18 carats or less. This initial

reduction

n

fineness,

arried

out

by

Leovigild,

must have been

the

resultof

definite irections n

his

part,

as were the

changes

n

weight

and

type

whichhe made. But it

is less clear

how

far

the

ater

changes



16/16

VISIGOTHIC METROLOGY

87

were

ordered

by

the central

government

r

were due to

irregularities

in the workingof the mints,as the variationsin the weightsof the

coins

between mint and

mint

undoubtedly

were. This

is

a

question

that could

only

be determined

by

the

analyses

of a

much

greater

number of

coins than have been available to

me forexamination.

Philip Griebson

visigothic metrology / [philip grierson]

Documents