Barbarian Gold solidus, and a question

[Tejas]

Here is another interesting solidus from my collection. The flan is a bit crinkly, but the coin is much better in hand.

Obv.: DN ZEN PERP AVG

Rev.: VICTORI A AVCCCS

In exergue: CONOB

Weight: 4.26g

Lacam Byzance, pl. CVII-B this coin

According to Grierson the coin was minted by the Vandals on Sardinia (according to the Dürr catalog)

Edited January 20 by Tejas

[Rand]

Why not. A very interesting coin - it clearly stays apart from (relatively speaking) commoner Zeno coins from The Mare Nostrum Hoard. 
While the possibilty of Vandals in Africa minting gold coins has been discarded, it is possible they minted on Sardinia. S in officina position would make sense. I wander that the star on the reverse top could mean - moved from the lateral parts of the flan? I have never seen this on any other coins. ZEN instead of ZENO may indicate a remote location as well.

There could be a historical context as well, with rather obscure records of Theoderic, during the Ostrogothic war, chasing Vandals away from Sicily and Sardinia?

I was tempted to idenfity gold coins that could be minted by Vandals in Africa, and could not find any evidence to support this. Known to me Anastasian gold coins found in North Africa are from Constantinople.

[Tejas]

On 1/19/2024 at 6:06 PM, Rand said:

I think the coins from the series shown by @Prieure de Sionwere minted in Gaul under Visigoths (Arle or Toulouse), and they are unlikely to be official (ie. Constantinople - I hope @Tejas and @Hrefn agree that coins minted in Italy under Odovacer cannot be called official). 

1. These coins have a cross near the helmet - never used in Constantinople. Better seen on this coin: https://www.acsearch.info/search.html?id=10706200

2. Their style is similar to the coins from the early Anastasius period (a couple of my examples).

Roma Numismatics Limited. Auction 28. 05/07/2023

 

Roma Numismatics Limited. Auction 25. 22/09/2022

3. The Anastasius coins continue in a gradually evolving series, widely considered Visigothic (my another example).

Numismatik Lanz München. Auction 162. 06/06/2016

 

Please note these series under Anastasius were produced with at least six officinae letters, including multiple officinae letters for the 491-492 series (six if count V separate from A). Most officinae letters for 491-492 coins are known from a single dies, which may indicate a brief period of intensive production when Visigoths joined Therodorics in Italy and possibly turned the fortune of the war. 

 

 

 

I would like to come back to this group of solidi with this particular style, because I bought the coin below in the recent Roma auction. Especially the Anastasius solidus above seems to be stylistically related. I don't know where to place these coins. In my view, they don't fit the Visigothic series, i.e. were not minted at places like Toulouse. Similarly, I don't think they were produced in Italy. My guess is that these coins were produced in Gaul, either by remnants of Roman rule (Syagrius?) or by the Burgundians, but neither attribution is convincing. Another possibility is that these coins represent the "missing" Vandalic gold series, meaning that they were minted in Carthage or Sardinia.

Edited March 23 by Tejas

[Rand]

This is a nice coin @Tejas. I watched the auction, but they did not have Anastasian solidi in the "Migration period" section. 
I am of the same opinion that these Zeno solidi are of the same series as the Anastasian solidi above and linked to the Theoderics war with Odovacer. The Mare Nostrum Hoard produced a few nice examples, including yours, and was likely compiled soon after the war.
I also think they were not minted in Toulouse. Because of their good style, fabric, and abundance in The Mare Nostrum Hoard, they were more likely to be minted closer to Italy in a city with minting traditions. The series must be extensive, given the many used dies and pseudo-officinae letters. I have not tried die analyses for the Zeno solidi, but the current projections for Anastasius are 29 obverse dies (8 known dies) and 110 reverse dies (10 known dies)! I am sure the number will be corrected downwards as more coins emerge, but this was undoubtedly a considerable issue.

The issue includes Anastasius solidi, which rules out Syagrius, who was dead before 491 and makes other Roman enclaves unlikely candidates.

Where could it be? There are different Anastasian solidi, which later evolved in the lettered Burgunidian issues. Lyon is a likely mint if Gundobad and Godigisel jointly minted solidi and tremisses from their spoils of this war. It is not impossible that Godigisel minted their own coins in Geneva, as there are two different styles of Burgundian solidi and tremisses from the same period. Below are my two PERP early solidi attributable to Burgundians.

Roma Numismatics Limited. Auction 27. 22/03/2023

Roma Numismatics Limited. Auction 12. 29/09/2016

Arle could be a candidate mint for the Zeno-Anastasius solidi discussed above. This would explain their good style. My current impression (speculation only) is that coins were minted in Arle for the needs of the war by the Visigoths, and the minting was moved further to Toulouse with coins of inferior style (my example for comparison).

Mike Vosper. 2017.

[Tejas]

I think your theory is quite plausible. I agree that these coins were minted in a town, which benefited from Roman civilization and which was not far from Italy. Arles is possible, so is Lyon and perhaps less likely Geneva. The campaign of 490, when the Burgundian kings Gundobad and Godegisl attacked and plundered Liguria may have led to an inflow of gold into that region. If the series was produced in conjunction with this campaign, this would rule out Arles and make Lyon (or Geneva) more likely as place of origin of these coins. In 494 the Burgundians kings received large randsoms for 6000 prisoners, which they had taken in Italy, but the coins cannot really be the result of these payments, as Zeno had died in 491.

The Burgundian theory has the added advantage that it closes a (possible) gap in the series. There are certain imitative solidi in the name of Valentinian III, which are typically attributed to the Burgundians under Gundowech/Gundioc (see my example below) and then there is a gap until minting resumes with coins in the name of Anastasius and Justin I, which were all minted after 500.

[Rand]

I have tried to gather any literature sources and archaeological facts about the Theoderic's Italian wars. There is very little information, and publications, when cited, lead to the same sources.

It is generally accepted that Visigoths joined Theoderic, which could have been in 489 (as in Wiemer's book on Theoderich) or the summer of 490 after Odoacer defeated Theodoric at Faenza. In so doing, the Visigoths helped force Odovacer to retreat to Addar River, where he was defeated in August 490. We do not know how many Visigoths were dispatched or whether Alaric II led them personally. 

We know Gothic kingship did not stop Ostrogoths from joining Atilla to fight the Visigoths. Visigothic support to Teoderic is thus unlikely to be a charitable demonstration of kinship and more likely a paid-for arrangement, possibly by desperate Theodoric after being defeated by Odovacer. Considerable payments were expected, potentially with territorial gains (of which we know little).

My speculations: As Burgundians were advancing to Liguria between 10/489 and summer 490, it would make sense for Visighoths to secure Arle, the reachest city in the region and the capital of the Gallic province under Theoderic after 511. The campaign needed considerable resources and payments before advancing to Italy. This could be the time of minting coins with Zeno's name. The coins in the name of Zeno and Anastasius are from the same series but have some stylistic 'step up' differences. In contrast, Anastasian coins progress through a very close style (with some die links) from ANASTAS-IVS PERP to ANASTAS-IVS PP to ANASTA-SIVS PP. I think there could have been a small gap between them, with minting possibly restarted after payments were received following the 490 defeat of Odovacer. Visigoths's presence in Italy was still needed during the siege of Ravenna till 493. It is possible that after this, Arle was returned to Theoderic, and further minting was relocated to Toulouse and later, in 507, to Narbonne (for the principal mints).

There were three and possibly four Western series during 04/491-08/492 (ANASTAS[I]VS PERP) potentially corresponding to the different mints under Visigoths (coins related to your Zeno solidus), Burgundians (e.g., my top two coins above), and rare Italian style solidi (with features of earlier and later solidi from Rome, Milan or Ravenna, which makes them hard to place). Only Burgundians produced PERP tremisses, which started the Victoria Palm Wreath series and later transitioned into the typical Burgundian series.

I agree about the gaps with Burgundian coins. Even for the Anastasian series, I cannot trace their continuity throughout. 

Below is another coin, which might be Burgundian.

VAuctions. London Coin Galleries Auction 3. 10/11/2016

[Tejas]

I have a solidus in the name of Anastasius, which I think is Burgundian, minted 516- 518 under Sigismund. The main reason for my attribution is the style of the Victoria on the reverse. I think it is related to Sigismund's solidi minted in the name of Justin I with the prominent letter S (possibly for Sigismund). 

The strangly lying S on the obverse may also be intended to indicated Sigismund's name, but that is pure speculation. In any case the the un-barred As and the whole appearance is clearly western and I'm relatively happy with this attribution.

 

[Rand]

Nice coins. Burgunsian coins are so hard to get. I remember your exceptional Sigismund's tremissis.

Given that these Justinus's solidi were in the Gourdon hoard with no other documented find spots (to my knowledge), their attribution to Sigismund is very likely.
I am more careful attributing various Anastasian coins with S in different positions to Sigismund. Otherwise, his short reign during the Anastasius period (516-518) became very busy with heterogeneous coins, which contrasts with few under his father and brother.
The solidi below are also often attributed to Burgundians, but I think they were post-511 solidi of Theoderic minted in Arle and had corresponding tremisses (A3 by Tomasini). The reasoning is rather complicated and largely speculative, but they do share 'officina' letters (A, E, I) and must have been produced in large numbers.

Fritz Rudolf Künker GmbH & Co. KG. Auction 304. 19/03/2018.

 

Gorny & Mosch Giessener Münzhandlung. Auction 228. 09/03/2015

 

These may or may not be part of the same series.

Classical Numismatic Group, Inc. Triton XXIV. 19/01/2021. Coins from my collections.

Please note the similarity of the hand execution on these solidi and your Justinus solidus.

 

Edited March 24 by Rand