Professional Documents
Culture Documents
39015010553603
Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike / http://www.hathitrust.org/access_use#cc-by-nc-sa-4.0
BY
KARL PINK
NUMISMATIC STUDIES
No. 7 -:
New York
1952
NEW YORK
PRINTED IN GERMANY
AT J.J.AUGUSTIN, GLOCKSTADT
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Introduction 5
Abbreviations 6
A. Ancient Authors 7
B. Inscriptions 8
C. Laws 8
B. The Catalogue 16
9. Group from 49 to 41 39
III. Conclusions
1. Technical Operations 56
a. Management by Quaestors 58
List of Moneyers 75
INTRODUCTION
Whenever I have been concerned with the coins of the Roman Republic, I have always
found this thought forcing itself on my attentions: With all the wealth of material at our
disposal, surely it must be possible to discover more about the inner organization of Roman
coinage and particularly about the triumviri monetales. Ever since the days of the Renais-
sance these coins have attracted the attention of collectors and students repeatedly. But
it was rather the cultural and historical questions which attracted them, especially what
relationship the coinage had to the history of Rome at home and abroad and what historical
figures might be found among the names of the moneyers. This method of approach is
popular even today. Eckhel was content to deal with the moneyers in a couple of pages
(DN, V, 61-65). Mommsen in his Geschichte des romischen Miinzwesens was the first - the
only one, we might say - to treat the constitutional aspect of Republican coinage at any
length. He began, it is true, with the few passages of literature and inscriptions at his
disposal and used coins only secondarily. But, for all that, his new arrangement of the
material constituted a great advance. All later works depend on Mommsen; Lenormant
openly declared that he was following him, and Babelon followed Lenormant. The same is
true of the British Museum Catalogue by Grueber. In the field of dating Republican coins,
great changes have taken place since the second half of the last century; but the constitu-
tional questions have either been as good as sidetracked or else solved in the main along the
lines of Mommsen.
In the following study I have attempted to gain an insight into the inner structure of the
Republican coinage by a fresh treatment of the coin evidence similar to that I have already
applied to the third century of the Empire. What is to be said on this point will be found
in Section II, which deals with the coins. Preceding them, the literary sources are treated
in Section I. The conclusions based on these two are given in Section III. If my premises
are correct, new facts emerge relative to the handling of the coinage under the Roman
ABBREVIATIONS
1885.
Bf II Bahrfeldt, NZ 1900.
BMC Coins of the Roman Republic in the British Museum (Grueber). London, 1910.
Kubitschek "Studien zu Mttnzen der rom. Republik" Sbr. Ak. Wiss. Wien 1911.
RIC Mattingly, Coins of the Roman Empire in the British Museum I. London 1923.
SBf Samwer- Bahrfeldt, Geschichte des dlteren rom. Miinzwesens. Wien 1883.
Sundwall "Untersuchungen zu den attischen Miinzen des neueren Stils." Verh.d. finn. Akd. Wiss.
2. Other Abbreviations.
The three metals have the customary forms AV, AR, AE, to which I have added PM for precious
metal, i.e. for AV and AR together. DAE signifies an issue, which consists of the denarius and denomi-
D serr means the denarius with the notched edge (serratus). Obv. and rev. are obvious. Im = marks
Further abbreviations, which are only used occasionally, will be found in the introduction to the
A. Ancient Authors
We have very few passages in ancient writers, in which there is talk of moneyers.
Constituti sunt eodem tempore et quattuorviri qui curam viarum agerent, et triumviri
monetales aeris, argenti, auri flatores, et triumviri capitales, qui carceris custodiam
haberent ... Capta deinde Sardinia, mox Sicilia, item Hispania, deindeNarbonensi
provincia...
Minores magistratus partiti iuris plures in plura sunto. militiae, quibus iussi erunt,
3. Dio LIV, 26, 6: Ol 8 8y) etxoo-iv outoi v8ps<; Ix tuv li; xal etxoaiv etoiv, ol t Tpeu; 01
tou; toO 6avarou Slxai; Tcpo^TeTayix^voi xal ol Sxepoi xpeit; <ri to tou vo[n<;[zaTO<; x6(x^.a
ettI Ttov 8ixacT7)pltov T<3v it; tou? Ixaxov SvSpai; xX-qpoujiivtov aTco8sixvriji.evot.
Treviros vites censeo; audi capitales esse; mallem auro aere argento essent.
Vettienum mihi amicum, ut scribis, ita puto esse. Cum eo, quod dbroTOfjico;; ad me
scripserat de nummis curandis, Bufxtxcoxepov eram iocatus: id tu, si ille aliter accepit
ac debuit, lenies. MONETALI autem ascripsi, quod ille ad me PRO COS; sed quoniam
The evidence of these passages is scanty enough. Nos. 1-4 concern the office of viginti
(or vigintisex) viri in general. No. 1 is discussed below (p. 54). From No. 4 we do learn a
fact, confirmed by the coins, that Caesar raised the number of moneyers from three to
four. No. 6 will claim our attention later (p. 54!.), as it names a moneyer who struck no coins.
I exclude No. 7 from the passages relating to moneyers, for I follow the view of Drumann-
Triumviri Monetales
Groebe (V. 531) that it concerns a triumvirate a.d.a. The exact rendering of the text in
question will fit the leader of a colony, but not a moneyer. The moneyer is responsible only
B. Inscriptions
No less scanty is the evidence from the inscriptions, numerous though they are.
Strasburger, in his article, "Triumviri" in RE, lists sixty-three in Latin: to these we may
add XI. 5171, XIV. 3609 and Dessau 8979.1 The inscription, XIV. 4245, quoted by Groag
in the Arch. epigr. Mitt. 19, is doubtful. There is also the elogium XXXIII, CIL I.2 200.
Greek inscriptions number six, two of which are quoted by Magie in the article in RE cited
above. From all these inscriptions we only learn something about the title and the curstts
honorum. The usual title is IIIVIR AAAFF or IIIVIR Monetalis AAAFF. It occurs about
fifty times. Twice (XIV. 3592 and 3593) the AAAFF is missing. Exceptionally, there
appears IIIVIR AD MONETAM (II, 4609), XXVIR MONETAUS (XIV. 3609) and
IIIVIR MONETARVM (Dessau 8979). The following inscriptions are imperfect: In III, 87
and XIV. 1414810, IIIVIR AVR ARG FLANDO, AERE and FERrVNDO has been
omitted; in VIII. 23831 and XIV. 4240, one A has dropped out (AAFF); in VI. 1455-6,
on the other hand, both inscriptions of the same man, a third F has been mistakenly added
(AAAFFF). All these are simply errors on the part of the stone-mason or his model, and it
In about half the inscriptions the cursus honorum is found in the descending order, with
the vigintivirate mentioned near the end. In the remaining half, the cursus honorum is
found in the ascending order from the lower offices to the higher. The order is occasionally
disturbed, as in XIV. 3609. The elogium gives Q IIIVIR AAAFF AED CVR etc. - that is to
say, Pulcher is called first quaestor and then moneyer. Whether this has any constitutional
conclusions from isolated instances. Perhaps the inscriptions might yield more information,
if we submitted their peculiarities to a close scrutiny and comparison. Groag, for example,
by using the inscriptions from Vespasian to Severus, which show a cursus honorum including
the vigintivirate, has shown that all patricians of the vigintivirate held only the office of
Inasmuch as almost all these inscriptions come from the Empire (they extend into the
middle of the third century) their value for the Republic is limited. But they do show that
the office was still in existence down to that date. See also below, p. 66.
C. Laws
No laws concerning the moneyers are preserved, if such laws were ever issued. I will
quote those laws which refer to the coinage, that is to say, to the activity of the moneyers.
1 This inscription is quoted in its context by Strasberger; Dessau 1155 is now CIL VI. 32412.
2 That a lower office was sometimes actually held after a higher is shown by Mommsen StR. I.
537 and note 1. But these are only rare exceptions, even if the sources are above reproach.
We do not have the text of any, but Pliny gives us the contents of three. He writes (N. H.
XXXIII. 13): "Postea Hannibale urgente, Q. Fabio Maximo dictatore asses unciales facti
... Mox lege Papiria semiunciarii asses facti ... Is qui nunc victoriatus appellatur lege
Clodia percussus est." All the dates in Chapter XXXIII are confused and different periods
are mixed up with one another. Recent research by Mattingly and others has brought this
out clearly. Hence, it is now established that the so-called Lex Flaminia or Fabia - that is,
the uncial standard and the retariffing of the denarius at 16 Asses - belong to the age of
the Gracchi. The Lex Papiria is placed with some certainty at 89 B.C.; I have widened its
scope by means of new observations (p. 32). Thus, the "mox" in Pliny, otherwise
unintelligible, becomes understandable. The date of the Lex Clodia, which perhaps did
The coin evidence which is pertinent to our research is found fairly complete in
Mommsen's MW, Babelon and the BMC. Indispensable, however, are the three supplements
of Bahrfeldt, who has tracked down and faithfully tested almost every piece. Corrections
by Bahrfeldt are not always expressly mentioned here, but they are often tacitly adopted.
Therefore in checking my material, comparison must be made with Bahrfeldt who has also
Of course the attempt has long since been made to provide a chronological order for
the great mass of Republican coinage in addition to the alphabetical arrangement by fa-
milies which is so convenient, but so completely unscientific. To this end, various ap-
proaches have been tried - studies of persons, dates fixed by historical characters or by
laws of known date, results of metrology (weights, denominations), finds, style, develop-
ment of types.2
Identifications. The approach by the study of persons is the oldest and goes back to
Fulvio Orsini.3 It has been a fascinating game - identifying persons mentioned in history
with the names on the Republican coins - fascinating, but dangerous. There is nothing to
tell us whether likeness of name justifies identification, especially if we consider how little
variety prevails in the Roman names of the Republic. One has only to study the list of
"gentes" in MW 864ff. to see how often a whole series of members of the same families,
especially of the great ones, occurs on coins, - to say nothing of the literary sources - the
Aurelii, Caecilii, Calpurnii, Cornelii, Furii, Julii, Junii, Licinii, Marcii, Plautii, Pomponii,
Porcii, Servilii, Valerii. This method of study, which Kirchner (ZfN, 1898, 74ff.), Sundwall
and Head have also applied to the Athenian Tetradrachms of the New Style, is still popular
and has been especially exploited by Mommsen, Babelon and the BMC. A comparison of
the statements of the last three cited authors shows how vague all these attributions are.
In my catalogue, the dates of Babelon and the BMC can be readily compared for each
moneyer, inasmuch as I have placed them in each case at the beginning. Often, it is true,
such identifications are well supported; often fixed dates do exist which are subsequently
questioned. To take one example, Sydenham has quite recently criticized the date of Piso-
Caepio, which used to be considered basic, and I think that he is right (seep. 29). The laws
in question give equally scanty results, as they can usually only be dated approximately.
1 I have omitted many single issues of no special importance, e.g. the As of Metellus (BMC I
79 = Bf III 100); the Triens with S V. (BMC I 109 = Bf III 123); the Uncia with LH \fi (BMC II
588 = Bf I, 140); the As of CN PISO FRVGI (BMC II 592 = Bf II 271.); the As with CS AE. (BMC I
107. BMC I 154 (CCAAP) = Bf III 116) is a counterfeit. Issues, which in the BMC are separated, are
11
Metrological Data. The case is, if anything, worse with the data supplied by metrology.
Generally speaking it is admitted that in the case of al marco coinage, that is to say, when
a given number of coins has to be produced out of a given weight of metal, without regard
to the weight of the individual coin, the single specimen can only be used with the greatest
caution. Such a system was in general use in antiquity. There are also divergent theories4
about the determination of the average weight. Furthermore, the number of surviving
specimens is often very small and their preservation poor. No wonder, then, that, with the
foundations so shaky, the view of experts differ widely. Theories begin at once to diverge
over the determination of the standards of the "Aes Grave". Semi-Libral, triental and
quadrantal standards are contested. To realize this, one has only to consult the authorities
The most reasonable view seems to be that the gradual decline in weight happened de
facto, as is natural in the development of coinage and that this gradual decline was sub-
sequently regularized by law. The only literary information that we have (in Pliny) con-
cerns the sextantal, uncial and semiuncial standards, which has to be interpreted first of
all. Today, the sextantal standard is generally considered to have begun with the denarius
at the end of the third century; the uncial standard comes in during the age of the Gracchi;
Hence it is impossible to be too careful in the use of standards for the determination
of chronology. Bahrfeldt himself, who lays such stress on weights, writes (SBf, p. 89): "Bei
wicht der einzelnen Miinzen hat, ist es daher bei diesen Miinzen auch oft unmoglich an-
zugeben, welchem Fufi das einzelne Stuck angehort. Durchschnittsgewichte sind dafur
meist ohne Bedeutung und konnen nur in wenigen Fallen herangezogen werden."
At this point I will treat a difficulty which Bahrfeldt has discovered in the so-called
"heavy" and "light" series of Aes. Again and again, in dealing with individual moneyers,
he refers to this unexplained peculiarity. He has recorded the following series (all in Bf III):
p. 139 P. Licin Nerva 2 Series Quadrantes: a) 7.13 (As 28.5), b) about 3.0
p. 142 P. Maenius Ant 2 Series Quadrantes: a) about 7.0 (As 28), b) 3.5
14-13, unc-semiunc.
4 Cp. the very worthwhile article of Regling on "Metrology" in SWM and Giesecke IN. 182.
note 3.
5 The triens, for example, in BMC I, 152, is lighter than the quadrans. The works of these authors
12
Triumviri Monetales
Here, too, belongs L. Pompon. Molo (p. 158) with two series from As to Sextans -
the heavy 36-26, the light 17-14 - that is to say, sextantal to uncial. But inasmuch as there
are only five specimens in the light series against 151 in the main series, which is the heavy
one, the so-called "light" series may be regarded as mistakes in weight and, as such,
neglibible. Perhaps, I should also quote M. Cipius M. F. (p. 110) with a new reverse, and
Light and heavy series are generally related to one another, it will be seen, in the
proportion of 1 to 2 or a little more. But it must be observed that between these limits,
every intermediate stage occurs so that the division into two series becomes doubtful.
These differences also occur in other series e.g. hP, (SBf 121), where the As weighs from
52.51 to 27.35, and Bahrfeldt has not assumed two series here (cp. Catalogue, no. 13).
With its stereotyped portraits, there is no certainty to be had from differences of style of
the Aes.
In the series just quoted from Bahrfeldt, it will at once strike the reader that the
quadrans is almost without exception cited. This denomination, as our Catalogue will
show, was certainly the commonest of all, occurring in almost every series of Aes, and often
by itself. When the output was so large and protracted, it is no wonder that weights should
vary. Therefore it is most reasonable to abandon the theory of two distinct series. Bahrfeldt
himself could not discover any reasonable explanation in support of his hypothesis.
A parallel to these series of Aes is supplied by the so-called heavy and light denarii
of the first period, were the distinction is just as weakly founded. Samwer-Bahrfeldt has
used them to establish the chronological order of the earliest group of denarii with symbol
(see below, Group I). Mattingly (JRS, 1929, 31) rightly observes: "When we turn to the
coins, we find it hard to trace any clear line between sextantal and uncial bronze and
between heavy and light denarii. To judge from them, there was no sudden change of
standard either in silver or in bronze, but a gradual decline - which need not have been
prescribed by any law. Within groups of coins in both metals, very closely related in style,
we find serious variations in weight. To make weight a main criterion and to class all the
heavy denarii as early, all the light ones as late, would make havoc of any arrangement.
In finds, too, there is no clear distinction between sextantal and uncial bronze and heavy
and light denarii." But all these observations go back only to weights, which are certainly
very relative. So Mattingly rightly continues: "From the coins we have inferred a change
from a denarius of four to one of three and a half scruples and have associated the reduction
more or less closely with the change from sextantal to uncial standard in bronze.'' And again
he remarks, on p. 33: "Both in silver and in bronze there was a steady decline in weight
towards a three and half scruple and an uncial standard for denarius and As respectively:
but this was dictated by stress of necessity - not by any law." Mommsen (MW, 384) in his
day had already made the same observation (Cp. p. 296, on the reduction to one eighty-
fourth of a pound, as established by weights): "Nach den jetzt vorliegenden, wenig zahl-
reichen Wagungen, laBt sich nicht mit volliger Sicherheit entscheiden, ob sie (die Reduk-
tion) gesetzlich, oder, wie wahrscheinhcher, allmahlich stattfand, und welches die Sorten
Therefore I have not taken into consideration the distinction between the heavy and
13
Finds. There is no need to waste words on the importance of finds, but we should take
to heart what Regling says (SWM 416) about their use. As a genera] rule, finds can be dated
by their so-called "key" coins - pieces capable of receiving an exact date. But the reverse
process, the dating of coins by finds, is far more difficult and demands very great caution.
The relative sequence can usually only be established, when a sufficient number of hoards
is available, and then the argumentum ex silentio plays its part. Mattingly, for example,
in his article on the "Serrati" (NChr. 1924) has pointed out the incorrect use made of finds
in the BMC and has redated many of the finds. Sydenham in NChr. 1940 has also made some
comments that deserve full attention, and he has set a good example in his table of finds
for the age of Piso-Caepio. A new list for all finds of Republican coins should be drawn up
with it as a model. It must further be noted that finds have often been falsified (cp. for
example, BMC I. 395n. I) or even invented. Bahrfeldt has given many pertinent examples
in his Addenda and in his Gold Coinage. For the Greek field Gaebler has recorded a series
of interesting examples in his valuable articles on Macedonian coin forgeries in the Sitzungs-
berichie der preu/3. Akademie der Wissenschaften. The argument ex silentio can also be cor-
rected occasionally by later finds, e.g., the find of Cajazzo supplies the hitherto missing
gold of P. Clodius and C. Vibius Varus (BMC. I. 555). On the whole question, see Mat-
tingly (RC. 42 f.) with his supplementary list of hoards published in the meantime.
Mommsen (MW) made full use of hoards and the BMC even in greater degree - subject,
however, to the qualification observed above. Bahrfeldt refers quite often to finds, especial-
ly in his Romische Goldmiinzenprdgung. In my Catalogue I have not checked the finds, for
this would exceed the limits of this essay. However, for a final arrangement, a new exami-
Types and Style. The development of the types supplies a good guide for the relative
chronology. It can be followed in BMC I LXXXIV or in one of the works cited at the
beginning. First comes the stereotyped representation of the head of Bellona6 and of the
Dioscuri; then come the deities in chariots, which Mattingly assigns to the age of the
Gracchi; then follow historical reminiscences referring to the moneyers; finally references
to contemporary events which give only a terminus a quo, for the immediate use of a type
after an event can hardly be proved. A much more dangerous attempt is the interpretation
made from distinctions of style, for a large subjective element comes into play here. Long
practice, a certain intuition and a very sober judgement are essential. De Salis, the real
authority behind the BMC, often let himself be led too far by his sense of style. And this
The older school, Mommsen, in particular, assigns only the first coinage of the Aes
down to the Second Punic War to mints outside Rome (MW 37if). We find the names of
mints on some of these Aes and on the victoriates. Apart from this, Roman coins, not
produced in Rome, are confined to the coinage of the generals. The idea of attributing a
large number of denarii, with moneyer's names, to local mints in Italy derives from De
(RC 145) points out, are not found in the purely Roman series. How unconvincing these
distinctions of style are, may be seen from a glance at the Plates in the BMC. Generally
Instead of the Head of Roma. I agree with Mattingly and Robinson. Proceedings of Brit. Ac.
XVIII. 2Qff.
14
speaking the coarser work is transferred to the provinces. To realize the fallibility of this
argument, simply compare the Roman issues of 1o2-92 B.C. on PI. XXIX with the sup-
posedly rougher Italian issues of the same period on PI. XCIII. This one example will
prove sufficient.
Serious constitutional difficulties also come into consideration. The office of moneyer
was a city office in common with the rest of the cursus honorum, with the exception of the
provincial quaestors of later institution. But these quaestors were financial assistants of
the military general. That their special function was necessarily first of all of a distinct
administration from military administration (cp. below p. 58). On the other hand, it is
quite inconceivable that moneyers appointed as the Roman ones and performing their
functions should wander about the countryside working now in this mint and now in that.
Even the BMC (II. 143) observes: "These local moneyers seem to have been chosen from
the same class as those employed in Rome, for the types of their coins show that most of
them were members of the most celebrated Roman families. In some cases they may have
been moneyers who held office at the mint in the Capitol." The mint of Rome was sufficient
for the civil requirements in Italy even during the major part of the Empire, inasmuch as
communications were good and easy. However, the generals enjoyed the right to strike
coins for the purposes of war. Hence, I do not accept local issues of denarii in Italy at the
Because of the above considerations I have been obliged to create a new arrangement,
which of course has not forced us to go into every detail. In this matter I have been guided
by the principles which I set down in my "Aufbau der romischen Miinzpragung in der
Kaiserzeit" (NZ 1933-1936). I believe this new system has proved its worth in other works
too, for example, in Elmer's "Miinzpragung der gallischen Kaiser" (Bonner Jahrbiicher,
194o) and in Delbrueck's Die Miinzbildnisse von Maximinus bis Carinus (1944). It has
received recognition from Le Gentilhomme (RN 1942, p. 5) and from Mattingly, who
assured me by letter, that he is now using my system in his continuation of the catalogue
of Coins in the British Museum. The principal idea is quite simple. Every official coinage
must be rigorously arranged and controlled, otherwise the financial administration will
collapse. History gives us enough examples of this. These principles must have prevailed at
Rome all the more, for at Rome especially there was prevalent a most precise and an exact
organization which suited the psychology of a peasant nation. Moreover, this order is
capable of being discovered in the coins at our disposal, if we arrange systematically and
investigate the great masses of common pieces. All exceptional and special issues, on the
other hand, must be put to one side and be added subsequently after the main structure
is complete. This method has yielded good results for the imperial issues of 192-253 A.D.
With Republican coins conditions are of course different. Here we are without dated pieces
and the key-coins, which are determined by COS, TRIB POT and other indications of date.
Hence I was obliged to search for other aids. The chief idea has been that everything which
proceeds from the highest financial authority, i.e. from the quaestor, is strictly speaking
a directive for the coinage. To the quaestor belongs above all the fixing of the standard,
especially for the Aes, as far as we know and the kinds of denominations which are issued
from time to time, as well as the choice of marks of value and marks of control. The rise
15
and decline of denominations rest upon ordinances of this nature. They vary from the
complete issue of every subdivision to that of single denominations and vice versa. Often
the next group continues the order of denominations and then changes gradually.
A system must be hidden in all these arrangements; they cannot proceed in blind
confusion. It may be added that, in view of that obstinate adherence to plans once made,
which is proper to the Roman character, any new reform was retained in its exact form,
for a time at least. For example, the issues marked with X form a closed series, as well as
Two principles that I have established have proved most helpful: first, that of the
supplementary issues, like the supplementary denarii that I have already traced under the
Empire; second, that of the role of the leading moneyer. The special issues, recognizable
by a special formula, are always to be separated from the regular. These principles to-
gether give us an adequate degree of certainty for a relative chronology and especially for
the structure of the monetary system. There are also minor observations which in a sec-
ondary fashion contribute to an inderstanding of the Republican coinage - fixed dates for
known officers, usually in the special coinages, the introduction of particular types, the
Important, also, is the sequence of the metals as they make their appearance in the
development of Roman coinage. Aes was issued first in contrast to the Greek monetary
domain. After a short interval of about twenty years came the Romano-Campanian silver
and then the national denarius (cp. p. 5o). Gold is always a money of necessity, as with the
Greek Republics. The more the Republican principle is threatened, the more frequent do
the issues of gold become. Sulla, Pompey, and finally Caesar's rich output of gold give
evidence of the trend. The IIIviri RPC in their turn struck gold irregularly in their capacity
All these principles of arrangement are given in the introduction to each group and
also often for the individual moneyers. They can be examined there. In order to establish
these principles, I was obliged to begin by arranging the fullest, i.e., the latest groups and
to work back from them to the earlier and simpler ones. In this paper, however, the natural
had been reached in the study of later groups have been applied to the earlier ones.
On this basis, I believe I have succeeded in establishing a new and firmer order. I
would emphasize, however, that this order is in no way final. The finds must be approached
systematically as well as the other criteria, which have been mentioned above, in order to
establish an exact system. But in my opinion the main features, the general arrangement
and especially the sequence of issues are certain. Within the groups themselves individual
moneyers or colleges of triumviri may be moved or exchanged, but the groups themselves
B. The Catalogue
The Catalogue contains ten groups, the first of which is presented only in summary
form, inasmuch as it makes no contribution to our research. The single colleges of triumviri
are numbered not only within the groups but also consecutively. The special issues are
cited under the number of the regular series to which they belong. The year given in BMC
stands at the beginning of each issue. Where BMC gives a period, e.g. 217-197 B.C., for the
sake of simplicity I give the initial date only, e.g. 217. Then, after a diagonal (/), there
comes the date given by Babelon. In Group 10 only, the date after the diagonal is the date
found in the RIC. Next comes the name of the moneyer, as it appears on the coin; but
variations of name are only occasionally cited. The gentile name is added in brackets in
cases where it is not already obvious. Next follows a very short description of the piece,
with the date on the obverse which is important to us,7 then the reverse type, followed by
the details of the reverse. Then come the denominations. Denominations, which have not
yet been found but which may be assumed, have been placed in square brackets. I have
introduced such presumptive pieces most successfully into my Aufbau. Of course sound
reasons must exist for this. Very often the postulated coin has subsequently come to light.
Uncertain denominations carry a question mark. After the introduction of issue marks
in Group 5, and because of the increase in the number of reverse types, I have substituted
the issue marks for details on types. Later, when the marks are lacking, I have used a dash.
What precedes the dash belongs to the obverse, what follows, to the reverse. The regular
coinage is arranged in accordance with the colleges of triumviri (sometimes named after
their series). The individual issues are recorded only in the special coinages. The output
moneyers of a college are marked M1, M2, and M8. Epigraphical variants or minor changes
in name are not generally noted. For these variations the BMC Introduction I, pp. cii ff.
may be consulted.
I have refrained deliberately from an exact chronology for which the supplementary
research of which I have spoken would be necessary; even then, much would remain
hypothetical. For my purpose such exactness is not necessary. In the chapter about the
introduction of the moneyers (III A) I have placed the beginning of the coinage of denarii
in the last third of the Second Punic War. It ends in 7 B.C., as may be seen from Group 10.
Fixed dates for particular coinages seldom occur, except in special issues. I give at this
point a general survey of the relative chronology. The details can be found in the Group
listings. Group 1 consists of the anonymous denarii and the denarii with symbols. Then fol-
lows Group 2, with the first names - first, with one name abbreviated, then with the first
name in full, secondly, with two names, and finally with three (I-II, 210-168 B.C.). The
special denominations quinarius, victoriate and As stop in Group 3. The bronze are at first
very scarce, but they gradually become more plentiful (168-119 B.C.). Group 4 begins
The Catalogue
17
with the foundation of Narbo in 118 B.C. and ends with the Lex Clodia of ca. 104 B.C.
The new denarius symbol is characteristic of this group. Group 5, with the issue marks,
extends from ca. 104 B.C. to the Lex Papiria of 89 B.C. Group 6 comes next and extends
to ca. 81 B.C. Group 7 is dated very roughly at 80-70 B.C. There is a regular issue and a
special issue which runs parallel. The beginning of Group 8 is dated approximately at
70 B.C. by means of the special issue of the aediles, Galba and Plaetorius; it extends to
ca. 50 B.C. Groups 9 and 10 can be closely dated: Group 9 at 49-41 B.C., Group 10 at
20-7 B.C.
A small group without symbols precedes this group. It is unimportant for our pur-
poses. Samwer-Bahrfeldt makes it contemporary with ours. But our group itself can be
The symbols have been regarded, probably correctly, as badges of the coining officials.
Such symbols had already been customary in Greece. They are found in the sixth and fifth
centuries in Abdera, in the fourth and third at Corinth. Best known of all are the badges
of the moneyers of Athens from 229 B.C. These appear together with the names of the mon-
eyers. This parallelism is not surprising because of the Athenian influence upon the first
Even in this group it should be possible to establish colleges of triumviri, but the
groundwork has not yet been established. Samwer-Bahrfeldt have dealt with these earliest
issues and have divided them, on grounds of metrology, into three sections - heavy silver
and sextantal Aes, light silver and sextantal Aes, light silver and uncial Aes. But these
divisions, as I have already shown (p. 11 f.) are quite uncertain. What may be gathered from
their arguments is that silver was at first issued in mass, just because it was new. The first
section contains eight issues of gold and silver and nineteen of denarii and bronze, i.e.
twenty-seven issues of nine colleges of triumviri or, perhaps, eight colleges of triumviri,
with one issue of gold and silver and two of denarii and bronze, and one pure silver series.
Pure issues of bronze appear only in sections 2 and 3. They comprise thirty-nine issues,
thirteen colleges of triumviri - four in silver, three in denarii and bronze, five in bronze and
one mixed. There are also many special issues, of which I have taken no account. There
are also other combinations which might be considered. In the issue with the wheel, we
meet for the first time the serratus, but it is an isolated phenomenon, alternating with the
In complete agreement with the Athenian model (p. 51), the names of the moneyers
first appear as monograms, then are abbreviated and finally are written out in full. This
observation gives us then a principle of arrangement for the group. Of course the devel-
opment does not proceed with mathematical exactness. First one or more letters were set
down as if by way of experiment; then a name, usually the cognomen; afterwards the ab-
breviated praenomen was added. At the end of the group we find three names. Even in the
7a This group ends perhaps with the cessation of the victoriate, 168 B. C, cf. NChr, 1932, 73.
18
Triumviri Monetales
later groups, there are relapses towards the first system; but, generally speaking, the rise
from simple to more complex can be clearly traced. It goes without saying that the denarius
because of its small size continues to prefer the shorter forms. In this group separate col-
leges of triumviri can already be clearly distinguished, e.g., no. 3 with 3 quinarii, no. 6 with
3 victoriates, no. 8 with Diana in biga no. 10 and no. 17 with Victory in biga and the last
college of triumviri with three names and the cognomen in each case on the obverse. In the
composition of the other colleges the rules, which were mentioned at the beginning, are of
value. In the sub-groups I and II, every denarii and bronze series is followed by a supple-
mentary series in bronze, for the use of bronze is still predominant. In the third sub-group
with more than one name in the legend, each denarius series alternates at first with a
bronze series; towards the end only denarii and bronze series are issued and continue in
this fashion into the next group. Therefore, for nos. 1-15 a change of coinage must be
assumed for each year (p. 61, no. 29) inasmuch as the division into heavy and light denarii has
been neglected for the silver coinage (p. 13). The denarii which Bahrfeldt designated heavy
are marked with an asterisk. Now and then victoriates and quinarii also appear while the
denominations of bronze seem to go down to the uncial. But the extent of any particular
issue is hard to determine in the present state of the coin evidence. The common phenome-
non of supplementary denominations, which continues into the third century of the Empire
finds here its first obvious expression in a supplementary denarii series (no. 5) and an issue
of denarii and quinarii of Tampilus. The Dioscuri are depicted on the reverse type for the
most part, but soon the biga appears, first driven by Diana as the national goddess, then
by Victory. Thus three sub-groups exist: (1) with monograms, (2) with single names,
{3) with two or three names. The distribution of the moneyers into the separate colleges,
is in no way definitive, as was noticed in the beginning. I have often collected into one
eries issues with the same moneyer's name, which other writers have separated. Besides,
I. With monograms. There is always a denarii and bronze series with one in bronze
every two years. A supplementary college of IIIviri for denarii and a supplement-
ary issue of denarii and quinarii occurs for the first time.
1. In accordance with earlier practice, monogram plus symbol, Q and A/O in the
Aes are interpreted as names of cities. In the denarii and bronze series the
2. In the denarii and bronze we find the first attempt to add a praenomen and a
its denarii and quinarii with the monogram on its side twice out of three times.
Bahrfeldt had already noticed this connection (III p. 77). There is a third
The Catalogue
*9
(3)
a. 240/-
M (unknown) X
Diosc
ROMA
D Q [As]-Sx
240/234
A/? (Aurel) X
Diosc
ROMA
D Q As-Sx
(196) 240/217*
CW(O)9 (Terentia) X
Diosc
ROMA
D Q As-Unc
(4)
b. 196/217
ROMA
As-Sx
196/-
T (Petronia?)
ROMA
As-Unc
172/-
ROMA
As-Qd
(5)
c. 240/224
A. (Aelia) X
Diosc
ROMA
Suppl.D 217/217
GR (Sempron) X
Diosc
ROMA
Diosc
ROMA
3. Here too a single letter has been added to the monogram. One college of trium-
viri with denarii and victoriates is obvious. There is also a supplementary issue
of Tampilus with denarii and quinarii. Diana in the biga appears for the first
time.
Diosc
Diosc
Diosc
Diana, Biga
196/217 (Baebia)
ROMA
ROMA
ROMA
ROMA
ROMA
20
Triumviri Monetales
(12)
Diosc
ROMA
196/179 SX Q(uinctil)
Diosc
ROMA
Diosc
ROMA
(13)
172/189 AC ft (Caecil)
ROMA
ROMA
ROMA
As-Sx
As-Sx
As-Sx
(14)
a. 196/179* CN CA (Calpurn)
Diosc
ROMA
196/179 L COIL
Diosc
ROMA
217/217 Q L C (Lutatia)
Diosc
ROMA
(15)
b. 196/209 M TITINI
172/217 L MAMILI"
172/159 Q MARI
ROMA
ROMA
ROMA
As-Unc
As-Unc
As-Unc
3. Beginning of the pure series of denarii and bronze. At first with the con-
Victory in biga; finally three names with cognomen on obverse; inc. first
(16)
Diosc
ROMA
D As-Unc
Diosc
ROMA
D As-Sx
The Catalogue
21
ascending order is correct is proved by the fact that the last issue, with the Semis-Uncia
series complete, is linked to the initial series of the fourth group, which then grows gradually
thinner in diminishing order. Evidently at the beginning of our group there were still
enough bronze available, so that all needs could at first be met by the most important de-
nomination, the quadrans. Then the ever increasing lack of bronze produced a larger issue.
The extent of the Aes coinage is indeed very uncertain, as may be seen from Bahr-
feldt's exact observations and Corrigenda. The present state of our material, which generally
speaking is very scanty, justifies our arrangement. But if finds should contribute new
material, changes must be made even in the case given. In regard to the separate colleges
of triumviri, we do find with the exception of the last series that the leading moneyer also
strikes bronze, while his two colleagues have denarii only. To this group belong all the
remaining denarii with X, for this sign is replaced by K in the next group. For this reason
The revaluation of the denarii at sixteen Asses also takes place at this period. It has
been placed by recent students in the age of the Gracchi, by Sydenham in the days of the
Elder, by Mattingly, with more probability in the time of the Younger (cp. also no. 29 n. 20,
below, on the "Appeal" scene). The new designation of value, XVI, appears on two series;
then, if my arrangement is accepted, gives place again for a short time to the old and is
Order still prevails in the determination of the denominations and marks of value.
In this we still recognize the strictly official control of the quaestor. However, in the choice
of types much looseness begins to appear. This has already been stated in BMC I. 126,
infra:" At this time so many changes were taking place, not only in the types, but
also in the moneyers' names and their positions, and even in the mark of value." In this
respect the moneyers were given a free hand, which appears from their choice of mint
symbols, which are not always family badges, but may have direct reference to the moneyers
themselves. At first this change concerns only the reverse, on which the Dioscuri are more
and more pushed aside by deities in chariots and finally disappear. Twice reverses of the
Romano-Campanian Age are repeated, namely, the Oath-Scene and the she-wolf and
twins. Towards the end of this group we meet with an appeal scene and a monument. For
the first time one moneyer strikes two types; later, there are as many as ten or more. The
obverse also under goes a change, but only as a first attempt, for the head of Bellona still
ranked as a sacred symbol. First the head was turned to the left; then, only once, replaced
by a head of Sol. Other innovations were the placing of the name of ROMA on the obverse
and of the mark of value on the reverse. The revolution extended even to the unchanging
bronze. Under the triumvirate of Domitius, Silanus and Curtius, No. 30, with the attributes
of the deities, whose heads appear on the obverse, were used as the type of the reverse.
In this triumvirate the leading moneyer distinguished himself from M2 and M3 by striking
alone. Here also for the first time a substitute has been appointed in the college of trium-
viri, no. 27, which issued a second series. His predecessor had disappeared either for natural
or political reasons. Later such an occurrence happens frequently. Finally the first special
coinage of a quaestor with EX SC13 belongs to this group. The stirring times are reflected
in the coinage, and the gradual dissolution of Republican forms can be traced in it.
22
Some colleges of triumviri clearly emerge, for example, no. 23, with ROMA and the
cognomen of the obverse and the first quadrigae - a simultaneous support for the order
denarii and bronze plus denarii. Then there are the two series with XVI, nos. 27A and 28
and the preceding one, no. 27, with two of the moneyers of no. 27A. Finally in no. 30, all
(20)
I.
Diosc
ROMA
D Qd
i5o/214CPLVTI(Plaut) X
Diosc
ROMA
D Qd
Diosc
ROMA
DQd
ennia)
(21)
2.
150/149 C CATO
(Porcia)
Vict, Biga
ROMA
D Qd
150/209 P PAETVS
Diosc
ROMA
(Aelia ?)
150/164 CNLVCRTRIO X
Diosc
ROMA
(22)
3-
(Veturia)
Oath-Scene
ROMA
D Qd
172/174 M 1VNI
Diosc
ROMA
172/214 FLAVS
Vict, Biga
ROMA
(23)
(Decimia)
102/135 CN CORNEL )
L F SISENA
102/135 AMN.IQFSER15
The Catalogue
23
III
(26)
(27)
(27A)
(28)
(29)
With Semis, Triens and Quadrans. Two colleges of triumviri with XVI, the first
QFTAMPIL
IV.
(Valeria)
Val. Flaccus
D Sm [Tr] Qd
I)
as above
Spurilius as
above
(Atilia)
150/136 CTITINI
(Aufidia)
150/136 LIVI
ROMA
ROMA
NOM17
ROMA
ROMA
ROMA
ROMA
ROMA
D Sm Tr Qd19
Appeal Scene20 D
XVI Diosc
90/94/WAQVIL X L,unaBiga
(Porcia)
Semis - Uncia. At first both denarii and bronze series and denarii series, then
1. For the first time, all three moneyers appear on one coin and, on the bronze,
there are new and varying reverses, without ROMA. M1 strikes alone, M2and
24
Triumviri Monetales
MSILA:Q Unc
CVRTI CN
SILA (Junia)
2. Three denarii and bronze series which form the point of contact with the
following group.
Sx [Unc]
(Manlia)
The decisive criteria of arrangement are the following. The new sign, X, is regularly
used except in the first college of triumviri. At first because of the contact with Group 3,
the denominations are still plentiful, but the As continues to be missing. Gradually the
denominations become scarcer. In the beginning we find, as at the end of Group 3, there
are always three denarii and bronze series with two pure series of supplementary denarii,
and then appear one denarius and bronze plus two denarii. The first sub-group goes
from Semis downwards, the second from Triens, the third from Quadrans, but the present
state of our material always has to be taken into consideration. In this group, too, the
Quadrans is also regular. The occasional special coinage of the Dodrans and Bes is sur-
prising. On the reverse we meet the old type of the Dioscuri for the last time; otherwise,
deities in chariots are common, whilst new reverses become increasingly plentiful. The
leading moneyer often has Jupiter in a quadriga. Towards the end of this group the legend
ROMA is occasionally missing from the denarius; in the next group it disappears entirely.
On the other hand, the first issue marks are foreshadowed in the issue of C. Serveilius,
no. 37. There are three obvious colleges of triumviri, nos. 37, 39 and 40. A supplementary
issue to no. 37 is indicated by the dodrans and bes, which can hardly be detached from
No. 37 although they are peculiar. Here again, one moneyer must have dropped out.
The initial coinage of 1, UC and CN DOM is important. I follow the views of Kubit-
schek (Studien, 57ff.), who first discussed the question and of Mattingly (NChr. 1924, p. 45),
who associated the issue of this denarius with the foundation of Narbo.21" Mattingly sees in
the two names the HVIRI COl, DED. The only record we have is that they were censors
together in 92 B.C. But censors have nothing to do with coinage. But there is no objection
21a For other issues of denarii for the foundation of colonies see RC. 32.
The Catalogue
25
to supposing with Kubitschek that they had already held an office together,22 especially
an extraordinary office like that of the IIVIRI COL DED. All that we know is that Licinius
was entrusted with the dedication of the colony. But generally speaking there were two
or three Commissioners, and Cn. Domitius was about the same age as Licinius. Licinius
was born in 14o B.C., was TRIB PLEB in 1o7, and Domitius was TRIB PLEB in 1o4.
Hence there is no objection to their having been colleagues in this post. The old date
92 B.C., has been rejected decisively by Mattingly (RC 43). The whole earlier development
also makes this date improbable. Mattingly believes that the moneyers who use X were
quaestors, yet the sign Q is missing. In any case the denarii were supplementary and form
a kind of special coinage, as there are only two men involved. The transition is clear. First
comes a college of triumviri with the old mark X followed by supplementary denarii with
X. This mark now became regular, as Kubitschek, [loc. cit.) has admirably noted. It arose
from the need of avoiding in matters of bookkeeping the ambiguous X and in distinguishing
between XVI as a number and as six denarii. This new mark was brought about by the
evaluation of the denarius at sixteen asses, which, according to Mattingly occurs in the
time of the Gracchi, more probably in the time of the younger Gracchus. Our order also
confirms the opinion of Kubitschek that XVI and X have a close connection.22*
If we follow the above reasoning, the initial date of Group 4 may be fixed at 118 B.C.
Its final date will be obtained from the beginning of the next group, which is marked by
Here we meet the first "serrati" (cp. Mattingly, NChr. 1924) with names of moneyers
(for the occasional appearance of few anonymous "serrati," with wheel as a badge, see
BMC 11. 215). If the view that they were struck for external trade is correct, the assumption
that our denarii were struck for Narbo gains fresh support.
Transition, special coinage for the foundation of the colony of Narbo, therefore only
denarii, and those "serrati". The triumviri of the mint still use X, the supplementary
(Public)
22 Cp. Plautius and Plancius, 54 B. C. (p. 37), who were together TRIB PLEB in 56 B. C. and
12a X appears sporadically in Group 5 on some of the denarii of Albinus, just as X reappears
on a few denarii of Piso (Group 6), after marks of denomination had ceased to be used. Probably, they
are not to be taken as marks of the denarius, but as symbols, such as were fashionable at the time (cp.
no. 49 and Bf. III. 1oo). We meet all these marks of value in the coinage of the rebels in theMarsic
War, often with old reverse (she-wolf and twins, Oath-scene) in a deliberately archaising style
(Kubitschek, Studien, 63) Cp. also the denarii of Lentulus Cur with X, ascribed to Spain (BMC II.
359). On the general use of H for denarius in the Empire, see Kubitschek, 55 ff.
26
Triumviri Monetales
I. From Semis downwards. This links up with the last college of triumviri in Group 3.
AVGVRINI
2. The leading moneyer has a complete issue, the other two supplement one
(Caecil) Qd [Sx]
B. Sm, Tr, Qd
DO)
(Licin)
3. Obvious college of triumviri, each with two obverse types: (1) Head of
Bellona, (2) head of Apollo. The head of Bellona always has a cross as a
supplementary issue.
Q F (Caecil) Tr Qd
Horseback
24 According to Bf. I. 26 there is a second series with Triens and Quadrans but with C NVM.
ss Also in Group 5, Malleolus sometimes has name and badge, sometimes badge only. Cp. Mamilius.
in Group 2.
26 Bahrfeldt, III. 100, agrees in taking the As out of this group. The Uncia is doubtful (BF.
I. 62).
The Catalogue
27
08)
Suppl. issue
124/109 C CASSI
124/134 /W ACILI
(BA/BVS)
99/134 L OPEIMI
124/106 P CALP
X ROMA
tory in Quadr
ROMA
ROMA
D Dodr Bes28
D Sm Qd
D Sm Qd
D Sm Od29
<39)
<4o)
II.
(4i)
X Vict, Quadr
X Venus, Biga
To this group as a whole are attributed two colleges of triumviri with supplement-
ary denarii
or Q M: C F:
L R (Fabia,
Roscia, Marcia)
M CA.:
Q M. (Fulvia,
Calid, Caec.)
(Maenia)
B. With denarius and bronze series plus 2 denarii series, Tr, Qd.
<42)
(43)
ROMA
ROMA
ROMA
CAISAR
(Antest)
(Marcia)
(Marcia)
99/112 T DEIDI X M
ROMA
ROMA
on the reverse.
Equestrian
statue
Duel
28
Triumviri Monetales
ROMA
FLACCI
Special coinage. First appearance of the head of Mars occurs on coins of Lutatius
and Rustius.
CERCO
(Cornel) ROMA
The beginning and end of this group can be surely fixed. The As is again struck. Here
we find the last bronze of the Uncial standard (supposing the weights to be correct), since
the Lex Papiria of 89 B.C. introduced the semi-uncial standard. Our group then extends
to the beginning of 89 B.C. Its beginning is determined by the reintroduction of the is-
sues of Quinarii. As Pliny (33.3.13) reports, the Victoriate was again introduced by the
Lex Clodia, but was now equal to the Quinarii (Maecianus, distrib. 45 Hultsch, Metr. script.
rell., p. 66). Perhaps the reissue of the As was also prescribed by the law in a manner similar
to the Lex Papiria which also contained additional regulations. The date of the Lex Clodia
is uncertain. Probably the Clodius is the same person as the CI. Pulcher, to whom the
"elogium" of 92 B.C. refers (p. 8), who was AED CVR in 99 B.C. and praetor in 95. A
denarius of 106-104 B.C. is ascribed to him (No. 46b). If this is right, the date of the Lex
Clodia is fixed at 104-102 B.C. (Kubitschek, 38, cp RE, Suppl. VII. 383). This date is con-
firmed by the coinage, for the first Quinarii of Egnatuleius have no symbols, and symbols
were not introduced until after 100 B.C. The Q on this half-piece is read by many as
Quinaritts, but Kubitschek has given good reasons for believing this interpretation im-
probable (Stud. 39). The coinage of Fundanius is most instructive. He has the Q on denarii
and on inscriptions. If two meanings had been possible, they would have caused confusion.
The half-piece was generally marked as a Victoriate, equals Quinarius, by its reverse type
of Victory, as well as by its size and weight. I invariably interpret Q as Quaestor (so too
IN 271 and no. 5) and class all Quinarii of our group as special coinages. It is, perhaps,
not improbable that this new denomination, as a special issue, was at first struck by the
quaestors. The regular Quinarii of the next group no longer bear the mark Q.
32 Unique.
The Catalogue
29
The mark of value, X appears only sporadically and occurs once in the next group,
which is closely connected with ours; X too appears sporadically on a few denarii of
Albinus. It must be supposed that these signs were no longer considered marks of value.
Especially on the family coins of Piso Frugi (Nos. 55. 69) x is only a survival. For C. Piso,
X and XVI appear side by side, and evidently had the same meaning. The numbers of
Mettius (No. 82) are also archaizing. In general, there is a definite falling away fromthe
earlier strict ordering that was observed in the make-up of the denarius. For, apart from
anything else, the legend ROMA on the denarii and the head of Bellona grow steadily rarer
and are used quite arbitrarily. It is obvious that the moneyers were allowed more license
over the external forms of the denarius (so too in Group 4, above). Hence the reverse types
also become more and more varied; the obverses also display all manner of heads, gods and
In exchange, a new system of control was introduced, which kept on developing and
was chiefly used for heavy coinages. Inasmuch as these innovations certainly emanated
from the highest financial official, that is to say, from the quaestor, they supply us with a
sound guide in regard to the arrangement. The first marks of issue to be used are the
symbols, which had already been placed on the coins in the early period as badges of the
moneyers. Next come letters which had already appeared on the Romano-Campanian
(No. 37) may be taken as precursors of these letters, may be left undecided. Finally numbers
are extensively used. All the marks are often used in combination.
All these details give us a principle of arrangement. In the first place, I put the
supplementary issues, the last of which together with marks of issue must be arranged
inside the regular coinage. There are two divisions. The first contain four colleges of
triumviri with supplementary denarii after an old model without marks of issue. Only in
the last college of triumviri do we find a modest beginning of symbols. The transition from
X to star is of great interest for the development. The second division includes the issues
of the quaestors. The earlier ones are still without marks of issue. The later are introduced
shows eight varied symbols. Traditionally, 100 B.C. used to be taken as a fixed date (BMC I.
170) for this coinage, but Sydenham (in NChr. 1941,164 ff.) has now shown good reasons for
questioning this date. He now places these denarii in 96/95 B.C.32a I must admit that I do
not know on what grounds his assertion is based that the coinage of Silanus and Piso is
safely to be dated to 90 B.C. The bronze of both moneyers, especially of Piso, already has
the semi-uncial standard, and therefore must have been issued after the Lex Papiria and
not earlier than 89 B.C. But for our general picture this is of no great importance. According
to our suggested dating the quinarii of Egnatuleius must have been struck about 100 B.C.
The arrangements of Group 4, i. e., denarii and bronze series plus two denarii series,
except that bronze now becomes scantier and declines, are continued in the regular coinage,
which may begin ca. 95 B.C., if we follow the dating of Piso-Caepio, as it already shows
30
Triumviri Monetales
From this point I have stopped describing the reverse types inasmuch as they are
now so very changeable. I do, however, quote the marks of issue, SB equals "symbol,"
L equals "letter," (gr. equals "Greek"), N equals "number". If the marks of issue appear
on both obverse and reverse, I write obv. and rev. Corr. Sb. means the obverse and reverse
I. Supplementary issues.
A. Suppl. D, still without IM. Four colleges of triumviri. In the two first only the
(Claudia)84
FWILI
MOLO
(Minuc)
4. M1 and M2 have two types each. All three have head of Apollo once. First
symbols: X has become a star (Bf III, 100); so, too, X is used as a symbol.
Perhaps the head of Apollo with a star is derived from the model of M.
Metellus (Series 37). The same archaizing factor is found for Piso-Frugi
(series 55).
(Poblicia) ROMA
2. Sb (Star), Warrior, D
Mars ROMA
2. ROMA, Bust of
Diana. 3 Horsemen
C M A. L of Apollo
33 Babelon I. 359 separates this moneyer from the one who issues the Qu. But he certainly struck
later as quaestor.
34 For the date, see NChr. 1924. 36. n. 3. and 1941. 169.
35 In BMC II. 308. there is also AE with family badge (hammer); but contrast Bf. 159. It is sug-
gested that the issue was struck for the foundation of Eporedia, RC. 33.
The Catalogue
31
(MaUia Claudia)
102/111 C EGAT\LE\ C F Q
Only 8 SB.
CAEPIO (Servil)37
101/101TCLOVI Obv:L
Vict, Triga D
Vict, Trophy,
ROMA, Q
AD FRV EMV
EX SC
l)
D Qu
11
(50)
(51)
(52)
(53)
Regular coinage, as at the end of Group 4, with denarius and bronze plus two
denarii. As IM, symbols still appear at first, but later there are only the L, still
2.
Sometimes L.
ROMA
ROMA
sometimes
D As Sm [Tr]
Qd
D89
Dserr As Sm Qd
Dserr
90/94LTHORIVSBALBVSRev: h
GAL
Obv+Rev: L
Dserr
38 According to BM. I. LXXI, a special coinage for the corn-law of M Livius Drusus. But, on the
analogy of earlier colleges of triumviri (series 39, 40), we should prefer to find three names (cp. Eckhel
S8 According to Bf. III. 122 the Uncia does not belong here.
32
Triumviri Monetales
(54)
91/99 M K RENNI
Obv, Rev: L
D[As]SmQd
Unc
Rev:X-M
The initial date is supplied by the hex Papiria of 89 B.C. For this law and its contents,
see the note on the "argentum publicum" (p. 58). It is expressly mentioned on the anony-
mous bronze and on the rare sestertius. From this law there stem the following reforms:
1. Introduction of the semi-uncial standard. 2. Issue of sestertii. 3. Coinage out of the "ar-
part, also work anonymously. Actually we have occasionally met such colleges before.
But now they are prescribed by law and continue into the next group. The disturbances of
the period are shown: 1. By the numerous supplementary issues, with their various special
formulae, and also with such descriptions of office as AED CVR and PTEB, and PRAETOR,
the last two of which appear only here. 2. By a rich coinage of denarii. For example the
list of finds in BMC III. 14 gives from the Find of Fiesole, 125 for Silanus, 211 for Piso
Frugi, 439 for Q. Titius, 5o for Vibius Pansa; from the Find of M. Codruzzo, 67 for Silanus,
323 for Vibius Pansa, 253 for T. Sabinus, 3o8 for Cn. Lentulus, 167 for the anonymous
coins that follow Bursio, 194 for the anonymous coins that follow "Garg." "Oguln."
"Vergil." (194 of these in Carbonaria I). Moreover the numerous marks of issue, among
which numbers too now occur and preponderate, especially in Group 7, are evidence of
heavy striking. Often now the same moneyer uses a number of types. Under the influence
of the Lex Papiria, the coinage of bronze rises to an abundant issue, then falls to the bare
As and finally disappears from Rome until the days of Augustus. It is remarkable that
some Asses also have marks of issue. Marks of issue, on the other hand, are missing in some
issues of denarii. The determination of the denominations of bronze is here again very
difficult and uncertain. For an isolated appearance of X, see the introduction to Group 5.
A peculiarity of the group is the number of special colleges of triumviri (five of them)
which are closely attached to the normal issues,393 often strike with the same types and
occasionally exchange the third moneyer. Two continue anonymously with the same types
and show an issue more plentiful than the normal. This provides immediately certain links
The order is based on the following observations. At first three denarii and bronze
series are issued just as in Group 5, i.e., As, Semis and Quadrans. An occasional appearance
of the Triens is not yet quite certain, but possible. In the second section, only the leading
moneyer strikes the As, or it is added supplementarily. Towards the close it, too, disappears.
The serrati, which are common in the next group, begin to appear.
The Catalogue
33
on sestertius: ELP
CENSO(RI)
2. All three strike Qu: no issue marks on denarius, but on the As for M1.
II. M1 and M2 strike the As: There is a supplementary coinage with Quinarii and
or lat. L
Suppl. AE
Rev: L D
L, or N, or VNI
Rev: LPDAP As Sm Tr Qd
34
Triumviri Monetales
Titurius as above A PV D
89/89 P SERVEILI - P D
M.F.RVLLI
III. The leading moneyer alone continues to strike the As; at the end only Denarii
are issued.
91/104 LCAESI D
85/82 CLICINIVSLFMACER D
N in combination
SABVLA
2b. Anonymous special coinage with the types already known and with suppl.
As.
3. Obvious college of triumviri. The leading moneyer has As with issue marks.
This is the last of the Asses. Again, on anonymous special coingae with the
in all combinations
4. Obvious college of triumviri. First, all strike together, then each alone.
CREPVSI: C LIMETAN
11 According to Bf. III. 126 there is also a unique coin, not described, but from its weight an
S(orQu?).
41 Here again a unique specimen as Qu: According to Bf. III. 122 it is only a small denarius.
The Catalogue
35
(orCRT) (Criton)
GAL
SALIN (Jul)
CRASSIPES
In the last group we found five special colleges of triumviri which were closely at-
tached to the normal coinage. In this group such colleges become the rule. There is one
special group with six series in each of which a normal issue corresponds to a special issue.
The single issues too seem to run parallel to each other, as the example of Marius (cp. p.62,
iteratio) shows. The bronze coinage is now lacking, and with it we lost an important prin-
ciple of arrangement. The plentiful issues of serrati in the series of both kinds is surprising.
Here we place the supplementary denarii of M. Volteius which were issued according to
Mommsen (RM. 620, n. 451), for the five principal games. Only the last issue for the games
of Apollo has a special formula; but it is very weak numerically, as its rare appearance in
44 Balbus, a member of the Marian party, was defeated and killed by Sulla's legate, L. Philippus,
in 82 B. C. (Liv. Ep. 86). Since he struck in Rome, his coinage must have been issued a year earlier,
for the office of praetor had long been, de facto, biennial, so that the first year was spent in Rome and
second in the province. From Sulla on (81 B. C.) it was so de jure as well. If Balbus struck as governor
of Sardinia, we must expect PRO PR.; for that formula is old, dating back at least to the SC DE
BACCHAN (StR. II. 1aof.); in rare cases, however, "praetor" stands for PRO PR. (StR. II, 240, 5),
but it must not be read so on coins. A coinage in Sardinia is on the whole out of the question. To
explain the special issue, Cavedoni (cp. BMC. I, 345, n.) used the information in Val. Max. VII. 6. 4.,
that owing to the dearth of money, temple furniture of the precious metals was melted down. In any
Taken by itself, the fact that a praetor was entrusted with the coinage is surprising. It is the only
case of which we know. The competence of the praetor was almost exclusively legal. Even when re-
presenting the consul in his absence he seems, according to Mommsen (StR. II. 236), to have had no
control over the "Aerarium". It was not till after the battle of Actium that Augustus appointed
"praefecti aerar. Saturni." who were taken from among the praetorii (StR. II, 558), and in 23 B. C.
he decided on two "praetores aerarii" (op. cit., II. 202), who lasted till Claudius, A. D. 44. In our case
we must find the occasion in the exceptionally troubled times then prevailing in Rome.
45 This is read as "de senatus sententia," much the same, then, as "ex sen. consulto" (StR. II.
996, RE. Suppl. VI. 801). Picks' view (in Bf. III. 162) that the formula refers to the reverse type
is improbable, for the formula appears also on the As, where it can have no reference to the type,
a prow.
3*
36
Triumviri Monetales
SC Type 2 Dserr
Type 2 Obv: N D
Special Suppl. Denarii with reverses which refer to the five principal games.
SCDT*7
without Q SC
74/74 P LEhT P F L N Q SC D
47 Read by Mommsen, MW. 620, n. 451, as "S C de thesauro": a contribution to the games of
Apollo was made from the public chest. If this is so, we should have an issue, covered partly by the
senate, partly by private funds. This is hard to believe. I can find no evidence that "thesaurus" can
The Catalogue
37
In this group we meet for the first time the designation of office, IIIVTR, at first,
IIIV, then always in full. It is carried by the leading moneyer. In the next group the title
is used longer. The connection with the group is supplied by the marks of issue, which
appear here for the last time*8 in two colleges of triumviri, the second of which again issues
serrati. In the next college these serrati are struck for the last time. The next six colleges
Perhaps considerations of style might help in forming groups but care must be taken in
using style. Bf II. 78 has remarked that large and small heads appear often side by side
in the same issues without any possible explanation. Perhaps two diecutters with different
conceptions of their task may have been at work. The head to the left now becomes the
more common.
The contemporary types begin in this period with direct [reference to events of con-
temporary history. The first example is that of Scaurus and Hypsaeus in 58 B.C. Certain
dates are still lacking in the regular coinage. At best the denarii of Faustus Sulla may be
dated 64-62 B.C. On the other hand, for the special coinages, we do have such dates for
Galba and Plaetorius 70-69 B.C., for Scaurus and Hypsaeus 58, for Plautius and Plancius
54. All these men strike as curule aediles, the second and third pairs at the same time. One
is inclined then to make the same assumption for the first pair which Mommsen (MW 621 f.)
has actually assigned to 69. In StR II 588, no. 2, Mommsen sees in Plaetorius the colleague
of C. Flaminius (arguing from Cicero, Pro Cluentio, 45, 126) and takes the year 67 B.C.
as a probable date; but it is certainly not proved that this Plaetorius is identical with our
M. Plaetorius M. F. Cestianus.
The special coinage of Faustus Sulla is usually connected with his quaestorship in
54 B.C. This is not necessarily correct. Babelon (II. 513) has him strike with Messalla.
Both were quaestors in 53 B.C. but in I. 422 Babelon adheres to the tradition whichgives
54 as Sulla's date. In the case of Messalla, it is uncertain whether the consulship of his
father, mentioned on the Denarius, fell in 61 or 53 B.C.; a Messalla was consul in both of
these years.
The order that results is as follows: First come the two colleges of triumviri with issue
marks, then, continuing them, the third with serrati; then come six colleges in uncertain
sequence; the group is rounded off by the special coinages in chronological order. The
period into which the group must be fitted would therefore have for its beginning the
coinages of the two aediles, Galba and Plaetorius, ca. 70 B.C. (the last appearance of issue
marks suits this date very well), for its end, the Denarius of Plautius and Plancius, perhaps
also of Messalla, 54-53 B.C. Since the next group probably begins in 49 B.C., our time limits
will be 70 and 50. In Nos. 71 and 72, M2 and M3 strike together, in No. 72 each also strikes
38
Triumviri Monetales
(Calpurn)
(Calpurn)
(71) 72/54 A/V AQVIL AWF/WN III VIR - Rev: SICIL Dserr
Obv. of Lepidus D
Rev. of Libo
63/64 CSER5ILCF D
58/60 QCASSIVS D
54/64 SERSVP D
53/58 L VINICI D
51/60 C MEMMI CF D
M Sicinius also signs as IIIVIR, in a special issue shared with the praetor Coponius. According
t o BMC. II. 468. note 1, it belongs to the East. In any event it is an irregular coinage.
The Catalogue
39
Fixes Dates
54/54 (Faustus, SC D
Cornelia)
We now come into the light of recorded history. Quite a number of fixed dates are
available. In the regular coinage the number of moneyers increases to four. This is reported
by Suetonius (Caesar 41) but without mention of the year. Also, Dio (41.4.4.) tells how
Caesar in 44 B.C. was granted the right to place his portrait upon the coinage.83Since the
first college of triumviri actually shows the portrait of Caesar, the extension of the college
of triumviri, like that of the triumviri capitales, is rightly placed in the same year.54 There
are five moneyers in all, who now produce the portrait of Caesar. Two of them, Buca and
Chilo, expressly designate themselves quattuorviri. Our previous research has shown that
it is only the leading moneyer who bears the title of office. These two then must belong to
different colleges. Four of these moneyers give indications that may serve as dates. Mettius
51 In varying form.
52 In various combinations.
53 Grant, From Imperium io Auctoritas, Cambridge, 1946. 15L, gives a new and wrong inter-
pretation of the passage in Dio. Dio says 7iaTepa-re ocut>v xrfi rcarptSos e7Ki)v6fxaaav xal el? toc vo(xtafxara
ivEx<4paav. Grant proposes to apply TOXTpatoo, to xapaT-rw. 'Ovo(xdc^co, like all verbs of appellation, takes
two accusatives. The first is the external accusative, the second is predicative, showing what or to
what a man is designated. "Father of the Country" is here such a predicative accusative and cannot
either in grammar or in sense, be applied to xap^Tto. With this verb we must supply Aut6v as reffering to
-/apaxTYjp (type), the substantive form of x<*P<*rca>. Grant appeals to earlier portraits of Caesar on
Bithynian coins; but that has no significance, for in the Greek East the use of the portrait had been
common since the age of the Diadochi, and to that East Bithynia belongs. In any case this dating
cannot affect our chronology, for the college is securely fixed by the facts that it records.
54 Lenormant, III. 167, and Babelon. I. XXXVI, following him, believe that the end of 45 B. C.
is possible.
40
Triumviri Monetales
has DICT IIII, Buca DIC PERPETVO, Macer and Maridianus PARENS PATRIAE. All
these indications converge on the year 44 B.C. In spite then of various discrepancies, which
Ganter has recorded in ZfN, 1895, 182ff., it is unquestionable that this college worked in
44 B.C. Moreover, Macer has another type which shows Antony in mourning and which
must be later than the Ides of March.55 An extension of his activity as moneyer over two
years, such as Ganter proposes, is out of the question, in view of all the facts which have
been considered.56 Chilo continues to strike with the portrait of Caesar in another series,
now undated. He expressly designates himself IIIIVIR PRI FL. It is the only occurrence
of this formula, but it is a vital one. His college issues denarii only, supplementary denarii,
which I still assign to 44 B.C. Here then two colleges are active in the same year (cp. p. 64).
A second fixed point is given by the college of Varus, Mussidius, Regulus and Clodius.
To some extent in the regular coinage, but particularly in the special issues, this college
has one issue with the portraits of the IIIviri R.P.C. I place them therefore after the treaty
of Bononia (November, 43 B.C.), i.e., in 42 B.C. Their special coinage bears the old formula,
A P (here, perhaps, to be read as "auro publico"), with F ("feriundo") added. From now
Even more indications of date are given by the special coingae. For 49 B.C. Nerius,
the quaestor urbanus, is fixed by the consuls. The coinage of Caesar in aurei, denarii and
quinarii with UI (the fifty-second year of his age) is very probably of 49 B.C. (BMC. I,
505, n. I.). The second gold coinage of Caesar with DICT ITER is placed in 47 B.C. Hirtius
in 46 B.C. and Plancus in 45 are quite certain. Here, for the first time, we meet the prae-
jectus urbi on coins. Caesar, as dictator, 46-45 B.C., appointed from six to eight such
prefects two of them for the aerarium in place of quaestors, as there was a scarcity of
regular officers at the time (STR. I. 668. n. 2, following Dio, cp. STR II, 729). Apart from
Hirtius and Plancus, we have other such praefecti as Cestius and Norbanus, whom I include
in the same group and date in 45 B.C. The year 44 B.C. brings the gold coinage of Caesar with
COS V DICT IIII. We have yet one more praefectus urbi, who had earlier been functioning
as moneyer Livineius Regulus. Octavian probably appointed him to his office, before he
left Rome56". That he was at the same time a moneyer quite a young man need not
surprise us. Young men were expressly chosen by magistrates to represent them, just
because no special qualifications were required (Cp. StR, I. 671, especially n. 3). Regulus
55 Lenormant, III. 172, has the strange idea, that Antony was mourning for his brother.
5,a The question whether a PRAEF VRBI was possible at this time must be faced. Mommsen
(MW. 741, no. 6) thinks that Regulus, "Praef urbi," may have been the father of our moneyer. But
this is inconceivable, for on other coins with "Praef. urbi" there is no moneyer's name. He must, then,
have held the office himself. Now, we know from Tacitus, ANN. 6. II (StR. I. 663 note 3) that the
Augustan "praefectus urbi" developed out of the old office; Caesar, as we have seen above, paved the
way. Octavian himself is said to have been in charge of the city under Caesar (Gardth, 48; another
view in Drumann-Groebe. III. 66). For 34 B. C, too, Dio reports that Octavian appoints prefects of
the city (Dio 49. 42, StR. I. 668. n. 4). Maecenas in 36 to 31 B. C. held a similar office (Gardth 766,
RE Maecenas), and, soon afterwards, 26 or 25 B. C, the imperial "praefectura urbis" developed out of
it. As Octavian left Rome for the East in 42 B. C, such an appointment would be in every way pos-
sible. Perhaps that is why Regulus copied the reverse types of Caesar's two "praefecti" Cestius and
Norbanus. Mommsen: loc. cit. 668 n. 4. points out that "the III viri (R. p.c.) had a completely free
The Catalogue
4i
on his own types has the sella curulis (as Cestius and Norbanus had), with one or two fasces,
such as belong to the praefectus urbi (StR, I. 672); but on those of his father, who was
Apart from this the points which determine our arrangement are the following.
Quinarii and sestertii are re-introducedfirst issued only by the leading moneyer, then
by the whole college. In the last of these colleges, in 44 B.C., Maridianus strikes the denarius
only, as if to prepare the way for the pure denarii coinage which follows. As regards coinage
in gold, Caesar himself struck almost regularly. Under the IIIviri R.P.C., coinage was
issued primarily by the regular moneyers at Rome, then by each potentate in his own
provinces. The last college is defective and shows only the portrait of Octavian. The tension
between the three leaders had grown acute. The leading moneyer, Gracchus, still designates
himself IIIIVIR, but we know of no colleague of his, except Vitulus. The two others did
not strike, probably because each potentate by now was issuing aurei and denarii in his
own domains. In their place we find the special issues of the first two moneyers. These last
quattuorviri describe themselves as quaestores designati, but may nevertheless have been
regular moneyers at the same time; the magistrates designate generally continued to rank
as private citizens (StR. I. 59o). Hence the special coinage is expressly marked S C.
BMC. I. 592 thinks that the title of Octavian, DIVI F, gives us an indication of date, as
he was only so entitled on the coins after 37 B.C. But BMC. II. 4 observes that Octavian's
name was DIVI F according to Caesar's testament in 44 B.C. Likewise CAH.X. 22 makes
January 1, 42 B.C., the beginning of the title. No reason can be seen then why this title
should not appear earlier on coins. Otherwise there would be an inexplicable gap between
42 and 37 B.C., and an isolated return of the moneyers to gold coinage is improbable.
With 41 B.C. the regular senatorial coinage comes to an end for the time being. Each
IHvir R.P.C. now strikes for himselfOctavian in Gaul, Antony in the East, Lepidus in
Africa. One difficulty in the system of dating here proposed occurs with Vibius Pansa.
He was, we are told, trib. pi. as early as 51 B.C., but his activity as moneyer in view of his
sestertii must be dated later. Whether there is an irregularity here in the cursus honorum
or whether our Pansa is not the same person as the other cannot at present be decided.
The leading moneyer at first still describes himself by his title on part of the denarii
types.57 Only Buca places the description on his quinarii. With the introduction of gold the
practice disappears almost completely: APF points to a special coinage out of the state
chest. The addition of AAAFF now appears for the first time on a group of denarii of
Maridianus, but seems only to be used as an ornament in the reverse type. Remarkable is
the re-occurrence of issue marks, just once, in the denarii series of Mettius. It gives an
impression of being an archaism, like X and X earlier. The moneyers usually employ all
three names the gentile name and the cognomen being written out in full.
It would be possible in this group to assign an issue to each year after 48 B.C., and a
special issue to almost every year.573 For 49 B.C., if our chronology is correct, we can only
assume a special coinage. If this is so, this is the first group which consists of annual issues.
The second group, as we shall see, is the final coinage by the regular moneyers under
57 The number of types is marked by the exponent number; D2 equals two types of denarius.
42
Triumviri Monetales
From 48 B.C. on there is regular coinage every year. With this occurs, generally
I. 48-44 B.C. Revival of quinarii and sestertii. The leading moneyer continues to
describe himself as such, but not on all types. Increase of the moneyers to four.
A. Only the leading moneyer has quinarii and sestertii; M2and M3 strike together,
1. 48 B.C.
49/43 CVIBIVSCFCNPANSA D S
(Postumia)
Suppl. D. together.
Albinus
2. 47 B.C.
Special
1. 46 B.C.
Special
Cordius as above SC D
A HIRTIVS - PR AV
2. 45 B.C.
sestertius1)
45/49 CCONSIDIVS58 D Qu S
PAETVS
Special
Carisius as above SC D
The Catalogue
43
Type2:PR-SC AV
of the portrait of Caesar. Indications of date on the denarii. One single re-ap-
pearance of issue marks. AAAFF appears for the first time, as an addition to
I. i. 44 B. C.
MARIDIANVS
Special
2. Suppl. D.
cations of date.
D-: IIIIVIR D
4i/44f PACCOLEIVSLARISCOLVS D
1. 43 B.C.
41/43 MARRIVSSECVNDVS AV D
2. 42 B.C. Each moneyer strikes one series with historical types, and one with
portraits of the IIIviri R.P.C. The last three have also a special suppl.
coinage in gold.
39/43f L(LIVINEIVS)REGVLVS AV D
38/43 P CLODIVS M F AV D
Special issue. Each has three types. Revival of the "arg. pub" issues.
(as above)
44
Triumviri Monetales
In the twilight of the sinking Republic a closed group with names of moneyers is
revealed for the last time. Then they disappear from the coins forever. This group throws
valuable light on the transition to the Principate, for although the regular magistrates are
still at work, both the development of this series and its form show the dominating in-
fluence of the "Princeps." During the travail of the Empire, while the IIIviri R.P.C.
wrestled for power, the coinage was revolutionary, although, it is true, still based on the
old right of a general to strike in time of war. Each triumvir issues precious metal in his
own domain, frequently on a large scale. The coinage of bronze on the other hand remains
indeed a revolutionary measure and hence is sporadic. Gradually the flood ebbs and
Augustus sets about building the new order. The coinage of the capital, among other
things, needed attention, for as a result of the long cessation of issue of bronze, there had
been no regular coinage for sixty years, and there was a serious shortage. Augustus acted
constitutionally through the moneyers. The cursus honorum had already been re-organized,
probably in 27 B.C., as part of the general reform (StR. I. 544). From what Dio (54.8) says
about the year 20 B.C., Mommsen concludes that (when he took over the administration
of the Italian roads) Augustus instituted curatores viarum (StR. II. 1034, no. 2; 1045 and
1077. In connection with this Mommsen places the abolition of the Ilviri EXTRA VRBEM
PVRGANDIS and of theIIIIviriCAPVAMCVMAS.59 This then is the date for the origin
of the new vigintivirate to which the moneyers belong. It is natural, then, to connect with
Thus we reach the year 20 B.C. as a starting point, which was determined by Momm-
sen, RM. 742 and Bab. I. XXXVI by a different route. For the end of this group we cannot
go beyond 3 B.C., inasmuch as Augustus on February 5, 2 B.C. received the title of pater
patriae, which he bears regularly on his coins ever afterwards. It is completely absent in
our group. Altogether there are fifteen colleges of triumviri, of which two strike side by side
Sanquinius, L,iciniusandMariusin precious metal, and Sanquinius with Licinius and Gracchus
in bronze. This is the familiar case where the third man is exchanged for the supplementary
coinage. We have now two principles to govern our arrangement. In the first place the short
period between 20 B.C. and 3 B.C., into which fourteen series have to be fitted, points to an
annual coinage in common with Group 9. In the second place it is evident that precious
58B I have published an exhaustive article on this group in NZ. 1946, ii3ff., where details omitted
M On the interpretation of this passage in Dio, 54.26. and the objections raised by Cichorius, see
my paper, quoted above. p. 121. no. 37. There is an unfortunate misprint. The third line from the
bottom should read "... dafi sich ... die IHIviri capit. (nicht Illviri) nur bis 29 v. verfolgen lassen ..."
The Catalogue
45
metal and bronze were issued alternately. There are also a number of fixed dates which
will help us. The whole group has as a terminus post quem, the year 23 B.C., in which year
Augustus took over the tribunician power for life. This power is mentioned regularly on the
bronze, but only a small special issue which was struck in common by the first three
moneyers, is without it. However, I have omitted it here because its composition is so
doubtful.60 It would contribute nothing to our general treatment. A second terminus post
quem is provided by the P(ontifex) M(aximus) on the two issues with the As only, for
Augustus carried this title only after March 6, 12 B.C. For the coinage of precious metal
the triumvirate of Mescinius, Vinicius and Antistius Vetus, no. 91 is fixed at 16 B.C. by
means of the dates TR. POT. VII. VIII. Other such termini are 19 B.C., in which year the
standards were returned by the Parthians for the college of IIIviri, no. 88, and 17 B.C., the
year of the Secular Games, for series no. 90. The end of the precious metal coinage is marked
by the opening of the mint of L/ugdunum, which then strikes continuously. As Augustus
was in Gaul in 16-13 B.C. and pieces do exist with IMPX (15-13 B.C.), I consider it
probable that the emperor made arrangements for the new issue of precious metal in
The relative order can be determined by internal factors. After such a long break in
coinage, the heavier coinages naturally come first. First there are in bronze two colleges of
triumviri with sestertius, dupondius and bronze, then two with sestertius and dupondius
and, with them, two with As alone, which are supplementary issues. The first college of
supplementary Asses, no. 95, first issues its own festival coinage, with head to the left and
Victoria Fortuna behind the head. A detailed discussion of this issue, especially their
false description as triumphal Asses and the wrong interpretation of the gemma Augustea,
will be found in my article which has been cited above. Now this festival issue must precede
the ordinary one. The head to left was quite unusual at this time and continues for a long
time as a festival obverse. Then there follow two normal issues which copy the head left.
An internal order can be reached also for the quadrans which is so popular a denomination
and appears here in a closed series of four issues. First comes the plentiful coinage (nos. 97
and 98) with three distinct reverse types. This is followed by the simpler one with four
moneyers in each case. Here we can establish the series, Betilienus, Naevius, Blandus and
Catullus, no. 79, in which each moneyer strikes separately and has IIIviri added to his
name. This happened because at first only three moneyers were at work, then one fell out
and a substitute replaced him. In the last series, however, all four moneyers are mentioned
together, but the title of IIIvir is mechanically repeated. For precious metals, too, some
knowledge can be gained of the internal order. The title of office is always given for two
colleges of IIIviri. These are the first two colleges which coin extensively and can be dated,
as we have noted, as later than 19 and 17 B.C. respectively. The next two colleges strike
on a smaller scale, as may be seen from the list in Bf. Goldm. 141 f. These place their titles
on only a part of their coins. The last, scanty series of Cossutius and his colleagues no longer
carries the titles. Indeed this was the end of precious metal coinage in Rome under Augustus.
From these results we can proceed with confidence to the arrangement of our Group.
An important question has yet to be answered: Was the whole coinage senatorial or
not? Willers, p. 57f., and Bf., Goldm. 38f., following him, as also BMC. I. LXVIII, are
46
Triumviri Monetales
inclined to assume a division of coinage, precious metal imperial, and bronze senatorial.
This view, however, depended upon the false assumption that Augustus had been striking
in Rome at an earlier date from ca. 29 B.C. onwards. That this was not the case is proved
in RIC.XV. All these coinages of precious metal are foreign and belong to the East. At the
same time coinage continues in Spain and after 13 B.C. exclusively at I/ugdunum. Augustus
in his coinage declines to imitate the example of Caesar, who struck in Rome and created
a very bad impression thereby. The citation of name and office of the moneyers on both
groups of metal in our period, together with the agreement in time, point to a single
authority, i.e., of the senate, in accordance with the concept of the old Republic.
It was equally erroneous to find in the emphasis on SC a special contrast between the
senatorial coinage and the imperial. But there is a vast difference between our S.C. and the
formulae hitherto used under the Republic. In the earlier cases, the formulae were appended
to the type and denoted a special commission which was customarily conferred by a
senatus consultum. Our S.C, however, forms the main reverse type and is copied by Eastern
bronze, which comes from Ephesus and Pergamum according to RIC.CXIX and covers the
period from 28 to later than 20 B.C. This bronze consists of sestertius, dupondius, As and
semis and many of the coins show on the reverse a large CA in a thick laurel wreath.This
style with a thick wreath around a central type or legend, is not uncommon in the Greek
sphere of coinage and in this case may be derived from the cistophori, which Antony and
Augustus reissued. CA has been explained Commune Asiae. Consensu Augusti (as permissu
or indulgentia Aug.) breaks down on the ground that consensus according to the TU, is
used only of a number of persons. Grant (F.I.T.A. 108) now proposes Caesaris auctoritate.
But this cannot be accepted. The use of auctoritas as a title for the coinage is improbable
at this time. It does not occur on coins. The auctore principe to which Grant appeals means
at the instance of the Princeps (StR. III. 899).61 CA then designates the authority who coins.
This type was now taken over at Rome, but the laurel wreath was assigned to the obverse,
as the reverse was reserved for the legend of the moneyers. In place of CA, the new striking
Coinage year by year. At first bronze alternates with precious metal. Towards the
end there are two issues of precious metal; then the precious metal coinage migrates to
Lugdunum; then there are two supplementary issues of the As. Finally the popular
quadrans is struck in four colleges of IIIviri. The names no longer show any ligature. Where
1. 20 B.C. This college of IIIviri has also a joint issue with head of Numa on
(87)
S Dp As
S Dp As
S Dp As
61 For a full development of my argument, see my review of Grant's book in NZ, 1947.
63 In this group, the lower number gives Mattingly's dates, as suggested in RIC.
The Catalogue
47
<88)
2.19 B. C.
AVD
AVD
AVD
3. 18 B.C.
15/22
C ASINIVS C F GALLVS
C CASSIVS C F CELER
C GALLIVS C F
LVPERCVS
- IIIVIR AAAFF SC
- IIIVIR AAAFF SC
- IIIVIR AAAFF SC
S Dp As
S Dp As
S Dp As
4. 17 B.C. Double series, first precious metal, then bronze with the M3 changed.
(9o)
(91)
(92)
A. 12/17 M SANQVINIVS Q F
P LICINIVS STOLO
C MARIVS C F TRO6'
Licinius as above
Tl SEMPRONIVS
GRACCVS
C VINICIVS L F
C ANTISTIVS VETVS
IIIVIR -
-IIIVIR
-IIIVIR
- IIIVIR AAAFF SC
- IIIVIR AAAFF SC
- IIIVIR AAAFF SC
AVD
[AV]64 D
AVD
SDp
SDp
SDp
- IIIVIR sometimes AV D
IIIVIR sometimes AV D
6.15 B.C.
11 21 Q AELIVS L F LAMIA66
C MARCICFCENSORINVS
T QVINCTIVS TFCRISPINVS
SVLPICIANVS
- IIIVIR AAAFF SC S Dp
- IIIVIR AAAFF SC S Dp
<93)
(94)
II. Two series with precious metal, two with Suppl. Asses
1. 14 B.S.
C SVLPICIVS PLATORINVS
C ANTISTIVS REGINVS
IIIVIR sometimes AV D
IIIVIR sometimes AV D
-IIIVIR sometimes AV D
Triumviri Monetales
M MAECILIVS TVLLVS
M SALVIVS OTHO
4. 11 B.C.
- IIIVIR AAAFF SC As
- IIIVIR AAAFF SC As
- IIIVIR AAAFF SC As
- IIIVIR AAAFF SC As
- IIIVIR AAAFF SC As
- IIIVIR AAAFF SC As
Four issues of quadrans, the two first with all three names on one side of the coin,
the third with each name separate and a supplementary moneyer, the fourth
with two names on obverse, two on reverse, in all possible combinations. The
title IIIVIR continues, but, de facto there are four moneyers at work.
1. 10 B.C.
10/9
2. 9 B.C.
13/8
3. 8 B.C.
4/4
7 B.C.
3/5
- IIIVIR AAAFF SC
P BETILIENVS BASSVS
C NAEVIVS CAPELLA
C RVBELLIVS BLANDVS
L VALERIVS CATVLLVS
MESSALLA: SISENNA
IIIVIR AAAFF
IIIVIR AAAFF
IIIVIR AAAFF
IIIVIR AAAFF
IIIVIR - AAAFF SC
Qd
Qd
Qd
Qd
Qd
Qd
III. CONCLUSIONS
Research in the last decade has yielded fresh and more reliable information in the
field of Roman Republican coinage.1 Above all we have learned better how to appreciate
Greek influence on Roman issues. The influence is even found on the Aes Grave. Only
gradually have we come to the realization that the formal perfection of the cast money of
Rome and even more clearly in many series of provincial Aes, bears definite testimony
against any kind of primitive essay and points to Greek technique. SBf, with his judgment
based on the form of the prow, the regular reverse of these coins, has arrived at the middle
of the fourth century as a terminus a quo, and quotes a passage (p. 33) from Lenormant,2
which proves the development in mint technique. Willers (p. 28) also has made the observa-
tion that the Roman Aes Grave stands on the level of Greek art of the late fourth century
B.C. and bases his opinion on the judgment of distinguished archaeologists. Altheim {Rom
und Hellenismus, y7t.) describes the period: "Mit Beginn des 3. Jh. treten die gemeinitali-
schen Erscheinungen auf, archaologische, sprachliche und geldliche Koine." (Cp. ^lso
Today, the date for the beginning of Roman coinage has been brought down to a period
later than the traditional one and places it at c. 3oo B.C. I still believe that Mattingly's
view is the most probable that the Romans at the close of the Samnite wars with the
ensuing conquest of middle Italy proceeded to issue Aes Grave as crude coinage and
brought in Greek die-sinkers or moulders from South Italy for assistance in this work.
The second phase is the so-called Roman-Campanian silver, the beginning of which is
quite correctly placed at the end of the war with Pyrrhus. The dissension among the Greeks
of South Italy brought destruction just as it had done to Greece in the days of Philip II.
The Romans became the masters of Italy and a great power after the defeat of Pyrrhus at
Beneventum in 275 B.C. and the occupation of Tarentum and Rhegium in 27o. Hence
he Romans were compelled to strike money for use abroad and to strike on an Italian
standard and pattern. There were circulating at that time in Italy, Sicily and also in Acar-
nania, standard coins with a weight of 7.5 (Phoenician standardCp. Giesecke, DMzbl.
1934. 183). Giesecke follows D'Ailly (In 177) in the assumption that the Romans had
their first coins struck at Greek mints. Hands (Italo-Greek Coins, 1912, 64) and Mattingly
(NChr. loc.cit. 2o1) believe that travelling Greek die-sinkers performed the work just as
the artists who signed their names in Sicily in the fourth century. Not only the types but
1 Cp. my survey in an article on "Neue Forschungen und Wege in der rtimischen Numismatik,"
BONN. JB. Heft 14o-141, II, and with further references to the literature, Mattingly-Robinson, NChr.
1938. iff.
2 Ch. Lenormant - J. de Witte, Elite des mon. ceramograph., 1838, I, Introd. XX: "Et en effet,
qu' on examine avec attention les as en apparence les plus grossiers, on y trouvera toutes les qualites
qui appartiennent essentiellement aux monnaies de la grande epoche, et a l'art le plus avanceV' Details
-1
50
Triumviri Monetales
the legends as well betray their Greek model. The ethnic first appears in the genitive
plural. Moreover, the use of Greek letters as issue marks goes back to Greek models,
Who are now the mint-officials in Rome who issue bronze and silver? The right of
coinage is that which is included in the control of coinage by the state. It is the right to
make all arrangements, necessary for the organization and administration of the coinage
(SWM. s. v.). Hence it is the exclusive right of the State and is naturally exercised in the
first place by the supreme magistrates in Rome that is to say, by the magistrates cum
imperio (Cos., Proc, Propr., Diet.). Thus MW, 364ff. says: "Denn darin besteht ja eben
die hochste Amtsgewalt, daB ihr Inhaber innerhalb der durch die Gemeindeordnung ge-
zogenen Schranken alle Rechte des Gemeindewesens insofern ausiibt, als dieselben nicht
Spezialbeamten iibertragen sind." As these supreme officials are never mentioned on coins
Mommsen infers that the original treatment of the coinage suggests the early removal of
constitutional norms. The fact that the supreme imperium was constitutionally restricted
within the city implies quite clearly that a similar restriction was applied to finance and
accountancy, and that in practice, the superior magistrate had no influence on the admini-
stration of finance. Hence Mommsen concludes that the coinage in Rome had been taken
away from the regular magistrates and entrusted to special officers long before the appear-
ance of the names of moneyers. The handling of finance and accounts had been from ancient
times a function of the quaestors, who, after 447 B.C. were elected in the Comitia Tributa and
appear as magistrates. They administer the aerarium P. R. (Saturni), in which among other
things the public money was stored (StR. II. 544 f.). They alone held the keys to the treasury.
Hence it is natural to suppose that the control over the new money was given to the quaes-
tors. At this point no comparisons can be drawn between Roman and Greek (monetary)
administration, for we know practically nothing about the management of Greek coinage
at this period. It is only when we come to the moneyers themselves that we can use such
parallels. Of course the quaestors appointed their own subordinates to supervise the
production of coins. After the end of the war with Pyrrhus, although the conquered states
were forbidden to coin, still silver was at first produced, even in local Italian mints. But the
financial difficulties of the Second Punic War forced a greater concentration of coinage in
Rome3 which implied greater activity and stronger control. In the year 216 B.C., lavy
(XXIII. 21) reports that propter penuriam argenti the viri mensarii were reintroduced,4 this
time as a Board of Three which continued until 210 B.C. (RE. Triumviri, 519). Mommsen,
considers them for the most part Commissioners of Supply, but does state that they were
also employed as assistants at the Treasury. They were certainly concerned with the supply
of money in Rome (StR. 642. no. 1, according to Livy). In 210 B.C. all available gold,
silver and bronze money, i.e., all the coinage together with bullion, was delivered to them
(Matt. Rob., Proceed. Br. Acad., Vol. XVIII, 15). I consider them the precursors of the
moneyers. If the moneyers had already been in existence, these tasks would naturally
The third phase of Roman Republican coinage is now reached. This is the issue of the
denarius and its parts. Since the revolutionary researches of Mattingly and Robinson and
3 B. M. C. XXXVI and Lenorm. II, 236 and .249; Hill, Handbook, 132.
4 In a critical period, as early as 351 B. C, there were "quinqueviri mens." (StR. II. 640).
Appointment of Moneyers
5i
the many subsequent refinements,5 there can be no doubt that this universal Roman cur-
rency began not earlier then the period about the Second Punic War. An exact date will
probably never be established, but the period is enough. In addition to the arguments of
the above authors, I wish to work out the parallels with Athens, parallels which confirm
the new date.6 Under the rule of Macedon, there was practically no coinage struck at Athens.
In 229 B.C. Athens recovered her independence and began at once a new issue of coins, the
so-called New Style tetradrachms, which retained the old types with head of Athena and
the Owl, but differed considerably from the old types in form. Some administrative details
have been preserved about this coinage which extends to the time of Augustus. Sundwall7
in particular has made good use of these coin issues. On these tetradrachms two or three
moneyers appear. The first have the form of monograms with a symbol attached. Then
each name is written out but in an abbreviated form. In the next period there are three
names which are written out in full. Symbols are always present.8 Near the end of this
series two names appear again. The chronological sequence has not been settled. As in the
Roman series the attempt has been made, especially by Sundwall and Head, to identify
these names with the names of known contemporaries. What office, now, did these men
hold? Examination has shown that two names change each year and one about every
month. Scholars have assumed that the first two moneyers held their office as a liturgy
and the third moneyer simply as a charge (epimeleia) from the Areopagus, which during
the Persian War and now, after the deliverance by Demetrius Poliorcetes developed some
financial activity (Sundwall, 49.7o. no. 3; Boeckh, Staatshaush. ii. 38*. no. 237). Sund-
wall (5o, 15) further remarks that into this mint commission of the areopagus, which is
placed in 18o B.C., it was particularly such people as had already held the liturgy that
entered as M1 and M2 (49, 7o). M3 was the real control agent. The first two moneyers were
often young men in their twenties. Iteratio of office was possible, although generally speak-
ing it was forbidden (Hermann, Altert., 1. 1o5). M1 was the leading moneyer and chose the
symbol (5o. 17). Although the moneyers were appointed annually, coins were not struck
every year.10
At this point a series of parallels with the denarius coinage are found. The administra-
tion is bestowed upon three annual moneyers who change yearly and one of whom is the
leading moneyer. These arrangements, especially the number of moneyers, three, correspond
entirely to the Roman administration and to the model of the earlier colleges of the trium-
viri, as will be shown in the next chapter. The triumviri mensarii, who immediately precede
the moneyers, may have also had influence. Directly on the Athenian model, the Roman
moneyers sign at first with symbol and monogram. Gradually, the names come to be writ-
ten out, at first only in a mutilated form, then complete. And in Rome, too, coinage was
5 Cp., for example, Milne in his review of Mattingly and Robinson's paper in JRS. 1934 and
6 A general reference to Athens is to be found Babelon, Tr. I 846 and BMC. I. LXIV.
7 Untersuchungen zu den att. Miinzen neueren Stils, Verhandlungsschriften der finn. Ak. d. W.
8 Symbols and initial letters had already appeared at Corinth (and Aegina) by 4oo B. C.
'The Areopagus, like the "aed. cur." also had the supervision of weights and measures (Boeckh.
10 Head 379: "It is not, however, to be supposed that coins were minted with undeviating re-
52
Triumviri Monetales
not struck every year. And yet in spite of all these agreements, the national and political
identity of the two peoples is faithfully preserved even in the choice of types, there the
The date also points to the influence of Athens. The renewal of national coinage in
Athens pointed to a similar coinage in Rome. Now this is just the time when in addition
to the old cultural relations which have been already mentioned, a political rapprochement
between Rome and Athens took place. After the defeat of Teuta, the Romans in 228 B.C.
sent embassies to all the larger Greek cities, for the first time to Corinth and Athens. Many
scholars who follow Tacitus (Ann. II. 53) believe a foedus aequum was concluded at this
time in Athens. I suppose that the Romans on this occasion came to know the new coinage
and its organization. All this tends to confirm the introduction of the denarius during
MENSARII were precursors of the moneyersis accepted, the date 210 is obtained as a
terminus a quo.
The first appointment of the IIIviri Monetales coincided with this new series of denarii.
At the most it might be questioned whether the first anonymous denarii were issued under
the moneyers or by the financial authorities who preceded them. But only conjectures exist
at this point and the matter has no great importance because of the slight extent of this
coinage. Mommsen placed the first appearance of names of moneyers in 216 B.C., but
steadily maintained that the office was not yet permanent. Even earlier Barthelemy
(RN. 1847. 354) had expressed the probability that the moneyers were introduced at the
time of the gold coinage, which he placed in 207 B.C. Samwer-Bahrfeldt, p. 167, think
that the office was possibly introduced at the very beginning of the denarius coinage, which
he still places at 268 B. C.A11 these estimates, which are also found in more recent works,
point either to the Second Punic War, or to the contemporary appearance of the college
of triumviri and the denarius coinage. A more precise statement of the problem has often
been missing. Above all Mommsen's views that the triumvirate became a permanent office
only in the first century B.C., has lived on. We shall discuss this in the next chapter.
Inasmuch as the IIlviri Monetales formed a regular part of the XXvirate, it will be of
advantage to begin by a consideration of that body.11 Indeed we do not know much about
it.12 The oldest college seems to be the X stlit. ivd., the beginning of which is placed (StR.
II. 6o5) in the age which saw the formation of the plebs. The law of 449 B.C. mentioned
this college as already existing. These decemvirs are recorded on inscriptions more fre-
quently than the other officers (cp. n. 12). Inasmuch as they are missing in the list of offices
in the lex Bantina and Repetundarutn, Mommsen assumes that they were appointed
originally by the praetor and only elected by the Comitia in the age of the Gracchi. Next
to them in age come the IHIviri CAP. CVM., who as PRAEF. IVR DIC. probably go back
to the year 318 B.C., but can only be claimed as magistrates at a later date because of their
absence in the above laws. The third college is the college of the IIIviri Capitales, the intro-
duction of which is mentioned by Livy, EP. 11 in ca. 29o B.C. They were probably ap-
pointed in the first instance by the praetor. By a lex Papiria, which Festus cites and which
is dated after 242 B.C., popular election was extended to this office too. (StR. II. 595).
The Second Punic War has already been established as the probable date for the first
appearance of the moneyers, in part by the development of the coinage and in part by the
parallel with Athens. As has been observed above, it was an office for young men of noble
families. Groag's observations about the second century of the Empire agree with this
(p. 8). In common with the other offices in the XXvirate, it ranked as a step to the sena-
torial career. These questions have now to be answered, how appointment took place and
whether the office was permanent from the beginning. If an analogy is sought with the
other colleges of the XXvirate, it is found that the moneyers are most similar to the IIIviri
Capitales. In both cases there are three men: Caesar increased both colleges to four;
Augustus reduced them again to three. The Capitales, like the Xviri stl. ivd., are believed
to have been nominated originally by the praetor, since they were indeed his assistants.13
Hence it might be conjectured that the MONETALES were first nominated by the
quaestor, since they were his assistants. Against this interpretation it must be stated that
the quaestor, a minor magistrate, sine imperio, was not qualified to nominate assistants from
the greater houses. In fact nobody has supported this view. As second possibility would
be that the Monetales, like the IIIviri A.D.A., were appointed by the Comitia as the need
arose. Mommsen (StR. IT. 641) shares this view, for he describes the moneyers as not a
permanent office until the Social War (op. cit 6o1). But very serious doubts come up. In the
11 ThelIIviri viis in urbe and thelIviri viis extra urbem purg. are,inMommsen's view,much later,
perhaps of the time ofCaesar (StR.II.603). Our first certain information about the composition of the
XXVI virate is of Augustan date. (StR. I. 544. n. 2). The college is only mentioned by Festus, Dio
and on four inscription s (StR. II. 593 n. 2.). For the other passages, see StR. II. 593 n. 5.
13 Cp. StR. 221 ff. The election was at first introduced for the quaestor. For the later offices it
first place the appointment of IIIviri A.D.A. was surely quite exceptional and uncommon.
It could be foreseen and the Comitia could be summoned to elect the men in accordance
with the statutory terms. Also, it was necessary each time to stipulate exactly the juris-
diction and field of the commissioners. With the coinage it was quite different, although
for a long time it had been regulated according to the requirements, as has been shown
above (p. 51). But these requirements, often present on a large scale, were very pressing.
It would have been quite against the spirit of Roman administration to institute upon each
occasion an election of coinage officials. Once they had made up their minds to entrust this
business to a special group of officialsand the evolution of the coinage suggests this
coursearrangements for a permanent authority must have been made at once. The
only possibility left is the third one that the moneyers from the beginning were elected
each year in the Comitia, as we concluded in the last chapter from the parallel with
Athens. Perhaps there is a kernel of truth in the report of Pomponius (DIG.I. 2.2.30 see
p. 7) about the creation of the individual magistracies. Mommsen has rejected this passage
as wrong and useless (MW. 367 n. 5 and StR. II. 695 n. 2.). But it would be most plau-
sible that after the moneyers were instituted as a permanent magistracy, election to the
three already existing colleges should also be prescribed by the Lex Papiria. The date of
this law (after 242 B.C.) ties in very neatly, and it does agree for the most part with the
chronology of Pomponius, who places the XXvirate between 242 and 227. However,
this determination of date must not be taken too exactly, as our experience with Pliny,
However, the objection has been raised that the colleges of triumviri of which we have
knowledge were not sufficient for coinage every year. Recourse has been had to the hypo-
thesis of a term of two years. But this has to be rejected both on evidence of the coinage
and on constitutional grounds. The opinion that for many years only one or two moneyers
were appointed must be completely rejected.14 Although in collegiate offices each col-
league acts separately with the exception of the IIIviri A.D.A. (MW. 457), yet the
colleagues always act at the same time as a college. But, if we assume that only one
or two of the IIIviri Monetales struck, while the others performed no noticeable activity
and therefore were not mentioned, all that we have gained is the assurance that there
were moneyers who did not strike. We shall come back to this shortly. As the office
of moneyer was built upon entirely different principles, there would be no reason for their
isolated action. In fact there must have been whole triumvirates which never struck. For
the period from 41-20 B.C. in our arrangement or in any case, for a number of years between
the last issues of the IIIviri R.P.C. and the new coinage of Augustus, there was no coinage
of any kind in Rome. But no one would maintain that there were no moneyers during this
interval. According to Mommsen himself, the office had long been permanent. Furthermore
Cicero mentions a moneyer who never struck. Cicero (Ep. ad Att. X, II) had a dispute with
a certain Vettienus, whom he describes as MONETALTS. But no coins of his exist.15 Hill
15 In a second passage, Ad. Att. XV. 13.5., our Vettienus is again mentioned as monetalis, and
we read: "... tricatur scilicet ut monetalis," (cp. p. 7) Professor Mras has been kind enough to give
me the following note on the passage (he also refers to Ad. Att. XIV. 19.4) "Tricae - impedimenta,
tricatur - qui quidquid velit non aperte declarat." Cp. Lucilius, Frag. 413 Marx: "Lucius Cotta senex,
crassi pater huius ... magnus fuit trico nummarius, solvere nulli lentus," and Nonius, p. 22, 30. Marx.
55
(Handbook, 132) takes this view in saying: "An appointment does not seem necessarily
to have entailed the issue of coins."16 But this does not mean that such moneyers performed
money (cp. RE, aerarium), and issued and controlled the coins already in existence as
required. In a number of cases we have surprisingly rich coinages (cp. L. Piso, no. 55,
L. Roscius, no. 63, C. Piso, no. 69), which were perhaps not distributed in one year. When
enough coinage was available a new coinage was not started. Mommsen concludes from
Cicero (De legibus, 3.3.6) that the XXviri were also employed as extraordinary assistants
(StR. II. 593). A parallel to this interpretation is found in the IIIviri monetales of the
Empire, who appear on inscriptions down to the middle of the third century A.D., but
nothing is known about their work. Opinions with regard to their later employment differ
widely (cp. Continued Existence, below). On the supposition that they must have developed
some activity, all kinds of hypotheses have been set up, but it may well be that only the
empty title was left as a first step in the career of office. In a similar manner, Mommsen
assumes (StR. III. 6o9) that theIILTviri CAP. CVM. lasted to Augustus but without official
acticity.
Mommsen raised a second objection against an election every year: inasmuch as the
two nearly contemporary laws, the Lex Bantina and the Lex repetundarum (in their lists
of offices) do not mention the IIIviri Monetales any more than they mention the Xviri
stl. ivd. and the llIIviri CAP. CVM. In his commentary on the laws (CII.. I. 22 441 f.)
Mommsen has gone fully into the matter and in support of his view suggests that the office
of moneyer was not yet permanent. But the argumentum ex silentio11 is always dangerous
and just as various conjectures are given in Mommsen's commentary why this official is
mentioned in these statutes and that one omitted, hypotheses could be constructed to
account for our case. Mommsen himself was obliged to state that the IIIviri A.D.A. were
annual officials in the age of the Gracchi and separated them from the familiar IIIviri
COI/.DED. This view has already, with good reason, been opposed by RE, triumviri 515.
Since no other tradition exists about the complete cursus honorum in the Republic18 except
these two laws from the age of the Gracchi, no certain account can be given. At the most
it may be concluded that the cursus honorum, which we know from the Empire, did not
exist at that time, but not that the offices which were not mentioned in the laws, were not
permanent.
"Tricones morosi et ad reddendum duri." That gives us the meaning of Ad. Att. XV. 13.5: Vettienus
was painfully exact in his accounts and slow to advance money, as is to be expected of a moneyer. Hill,
133, note 1, (who only deals with the first passage) follows Barthdlemy, RN. 1847, 358, in taking
Cicero's words as a joke. Cicero wants, so to speak, to assign Vettienus the meanest place in the ma-
gistracy. But this interpretation is forced for even the first passage and it is conclusively refuted by
the second. That Cicero should twice have made this supposedly joking comparison and then added
"tricatur ut monetalis" will not convince anybody. Moreover, the college of moneyers must have been
highly regarded in the XXvirate. According to Groag (p. 8) it was the most distinguished under the
Empire.
17 Similarly Mommsen himself writes to the same effect (StR. II. 6o3, n. 3.): "... und Ciceros
Schweigen von den Wegemeistern beweist nicht, daB sie damals nicht vorhanden waren ..." Mommsen
in general attaches an exaggerated importance to these two laws in dating the offices of the XXvirate
Cp. above.
We are almost completely uninformed concerning the organization of the public mints
during the Roman Republic. Conjectures of all sorts have, of course, been set forth, but
they lack a firm foundation. In connection with this topic a distinction must be made
i. Technical Operations
Since there is no direct information, only a few facts can be collected from parallels
with Greek coinage, the Roman Empire, and the general principles of Roman administra-
tion. Many hypotheses have been brought forward about coin technique in Greece, but
there is no certainty. Lenormant in his third volume (Book HI, ch. III, I, Les magistrats
monetaires chez les Grecs') has brought together a number of these theories, but most
of them are doubtful. One fact, however, appears to be certain in part at least the mint
was let out to private individuals. This results at once from the well known monetary
treaty between Mytilene and Phocaea (IG. XII. 2. 1.) where the mint is let out annually
to a lessee, who is responsible for the alloy of the metal. Hence the preparation of the coin
ingots19 at least was a private matter. This is in complete agreement with ancient custom.
In Rome they were fond of letting out official business and undertakings on lease. The
Mommsen also (StR. II. 639 n. 1) makes a similar assumption, even if his inferences from
CH,. VI. 9953 are not valid.20 The Handbuch d. Altertk.2 (V. 2. 280) states that the pro-
duction of coins was leased to a private company. Certainly this refers to the supply of
metal,21 the preparation of the ingots and possibly the flans. Mattingly, R.C. 28 also shares
this opinion and believes that the contracts were as usual concluded by the Censors. Whe-
ther private enterprisers did the striking is questionable. Some information about the
mint does exist from the age of Trajan.22 At that time the casting ofingots was farmed out,23
18 By "coin ingot" is meant the thin cast sheet, out of which the flans, the discs for coins still
50 Wc read there: "P Monetius Soc I Philogenes vascularius. Now a vascularius is primarily a
workman who makes vessels of precious metal. Hence the socii of a vascularius cannot be adduced for
our purposes. The name might lead us to consider activity at the mint, but this conclusion is forced.
"As further evidence we can cite the contrast with ARG. PVB. which we treat below.
23 About lessees of the mint we have the following inscriptions: 1. CIL. VI. 8455, where a "man-
where a "manceps aerariac monetae" occurs, 3. CIL. VI. 791, which names the five "conductores
flaturae argentar. monetae Caesaris" (there is a "flaturarius auri et argenti monetae" in CIL. VI. 8456).
By "manceps" one must understand the enterpriser, representing the company of farmers (RE.
"manceps;" Mommsen. ZfN. 1887. 28. no. 7). From inscriptions 1 and 3 it may be seen that it is the
casting of the silver that comes first into question. But, as there was no cast coinage in Rome later
than the third century B. C, when the "Aes Grave" stopsin silver there was never any cast coinage
57
but the actual coinage was handled by freedmen and slaves. The technical direction was
under the optio et exactor as well as the master of the mint and standards, who himself was
under the procurator monetae, an equestrian official. The supreme authority was the
minister of finance who was called a rationibus. In view of these facts, it is probable that
similar conditions prevailed under the Republic, namely, that the supply and preparation
of metal was handled by private business, but that the coinage itself was struck by public
servants under the direction of the moneyers, who themselves were under the jurisdiction
of the quaestor.
speaking of Caesar's excesses writes: "Eadem licentia spreto patrio more magistratus in
pluris annos ordinavit ... Praeterea monetae publicisque vectigalibus peculiares servos
praeposuit!" Eckhel (Dn.V.62.) supposed that Caesar handed over to his slaves the super-
vision of coined money, i.e. of the aerarium. Eckhel wrote: "non monetae signandae cus-
todiam, sed monetae publice signatae." But it is known that Caesar in 46-45 B.C. appoin-
ted from six to eight praefecti urbi, two of them for the aerarium, in place of the quaestors
(StR. I. 668. no. 2). The vectigalia, however, were under the supervision of the censors
(StR. H. 434). In spite of what Suetonius says about the licentia Caesaris, no one will be-
lieve that Caesar replaced these officials by his own slaves. Barthelemy (RN. 1847, p. 357)
assumes that Caesar used his own in place of public slaves for work at the mint. But
against this interpretation stand the verb praeposuit, and the connection with vectigalia.
Peculiares does not necessarily mean his own, but can signify special. The passage is obscure,
but at least it seems to show that slaves were employed at the mint.
Struck coins passed into the aerarium Saturni under the control of the quaestors. It
was stored there until the time came to issue it (RE. Aerarium).
Besides the normal coinage, there were special issues as we shall see below. At times
the metal for special issues was not obtained from the market especially when none was
availablebut from the State Treasury (perhaps from aerarium sanctius). This is ex-
pressly stated on a series of coins which were struck from 9o B.C. onwards. It it the so-
called argent-um publicum. The following formulae were used: on silver, P EX S C, EX A PV,
ARG.PVB., A PV, PV, PA, P; on bronze, LPDAP; also on the rare sestertius: EI.P.24 To
these may be added the examples of APF in Group 9. What does argentum publicum mean?
In contrast to argentum privatum, it is the money or metal which belongs to the State.25
Since it was chiefly silver that had to be procured for the coinage, it is this metal that
at all. (Hirschfeld. VB.2 185 needs correction here)-it can only be a question of the casting of the
coin ingots, which, however, were made for all three metals. The same assumption may reasonably
be applied to the five "off. aerar". We cannot, unfortunately, determine the date of these inscriptions.
Mommsen, loc. cit., is inclined to place them in the third century. But the number of five "off aerar."
suggests the second century, rather, as the coinage of AE became increasingly slighter in the third.
In the present state of our knowledge, it is true, we only know of six "officinae" for AR from the age
of Balbinus and Pupienus (cp. NZ. 1935. 24 and Mattingly - Sydenham, Roman Imperial Coins, IV.
2. 165). In no event can we infer, with Mommsen, that the AE coinage too was let out on lease. To do
24 The earlier variants of these formulas are listed in BMC. I. 282. no. 1.
M Argentum from Plautus on, at the latest, has the general meaning of money, as TLL shows.
The same is true of the Greek, APr YPION: Babelon, Traite, I. 386, no. 3, and especially the passage
from Suidas. s. v., ApYup67]Xov: ta-riov 5ti reiv v6'.iKTfxa 4Ct' ev aXx<5 sit' hi apyupy ifrr' iv wjaGt
58
Triumviri Monetales
is especially emphasized. Hence ARG.PVB. denotes the metal which was stored in the
aerarium P.R. If by way of exception, that was to be coined, there had to be some
compelling reasons, and the granting of a special license. The reasons in this instance may
have been the dire needs created by the Marsic War. The collecting of material for coinage
has become difficult, inasmuch as insurgents, who were striking coinage themselves,
hindered transport. The special license would have taken the form of a senatus consultum,
as we see from the addition to the denarii of Lentulus (No. 57 A). By means of such a
senatus consultum, the org. -pub. was first released for use. Then a whole series follows with
this description but without the S. C.26 Here presumably instead of the emergency pres-
The Lex Papiria actually appeared at this time. We learn from Pliny that this law
introduced the semiuncial standard (33.13.36: cp. p. 9 leges). It is not known when this law
was passed (RE. XXIV. 2399), but its date can be determined from the circumstances.
On the bronze stands LPDAP, which may be read as lege Papiria de aere or better de argento
publico (since the law applied to money in general). These bronze coins do follow the semi-
uncial standard. Hence Pliny's information is correct. Now the tribune of the people for
89 B.C., C. Papirius Carbo, introduced the lex Plautia Papiria. The conclusion has, there-
fore, been justifiably drawn that our law also derives from this tribune. Further, the sester-
tii which are indeed rare and were struck only by the moneyers bear the formula ELP,
which is expanded to e lege Papiria. Hence it has been suggested that this provision was also
contained in the law. It is also natural to suppose that general permission to withdraw
metal from the arg. pub. to meet the emergency formed a part of the law. In conclusion
it may be stated that the supplementary coinages were issued at this period by a special
triumvirate, the regular moneyers coining with their own types a special issue with the new
formula. The third moneyer is often supplementary and the special issue anonymous but
bears the same types as the main series. Therefore, it is believed that a clause relating to
this was included in the law. The effect of this law, in general, does not extend beyond
this group. In Group 9, the formula APF is found only once, i.e., argento (or, as many
Accordingly, the lex Papiria contained four provisions: the reduction of the standard
of bronze to half an ounce; the re-issue of the sestertius; the permission to withdraw metal
from the aerarium for emergency issues; and finally, the introduction of emergency colleges
of triumviri.
2. Administrative Supervision
a. Management by Quaestors
It has already been stated above (p. 50) that, as was to be expected, the authorities
who had charge of the coinage were from the beginning the highest financial officers, the
quaestors. Although the quaestors were magistrates sine imperio their position had,
intentionally, been made fairly independent, since there was a general wish to restrict the
power of the supreme magistrates especially in financial matters. (Cp. above, RWM. 265).
With this formula there is never any mention of the office of quaestor, only once is the unusual
59
Mommsen maintains (loc. cit. 363) "dafi die Bestimmung der Miinzmetalle, die Feststellung
ihres Verhaltnisses zu einander, sogar die Miinzsorten, iiberhaupt also Wahrung und Tei-
lung der Miinze nach romischen Staatsrecht nicht anders geordnet oder verandert werden
only pertain to more serious cases. In view of the existing development, it does appear that
the normal coinage as it was determined by the community was left to the quaestor. Major
explicitly of three (cp. above p. 9), but there were certainly others. Smaller innovations,
consultant. Such were the so-called special issues, treated below, p. 69. For the execution
of such decrees the quaestor was, in the first place, responsible. As a matter of fact, the
first special coinage, no. 31, has Q EX S C. The execution of the senatus consultum is often
given to other officials, the aed. cur. or pleb, the praef. urbi, from the time of Caesar, once
even to a praetor, or simply to a moneyer, who then places the S C on his issues (cp. p.64f).
There are other special issues, with plain Q or praef. urbi, once with aed. cur., but without
S.C. We might conclude from this that, in emergency, such a special issue might even be
made without a senatus consultum. But that is improbable. For, even if we assume that the
supreme financial authorities, the quaestor or his substitute, the praef. aerarii, enjoyed
such complete powers and there are serious constitutional objections to this the idea
would have to be rejected out of hand in its application to the aed. cur. It is more probable,
then, that the plain citation of office was enough to indicate a senatus consultum.
All these considerations have led me, in arranging my material, to adopt as my first
principle, the denominations because they were decided on by the supreme financial
authority. The fixing of standards should, of course, be a valuable guide, but complete
confusion reigns in this field since apart from the semiuncial standard, we have no exact
information about their dates. For all details, see section on metrology, p. 11 above.
Parallel to the denominations runs the decision as to what metals are to be used; in both
cases matters were regulated according to the needs. A short summary of the results that
we obtained in drawing up our Catalogue of the coins will illustrate the point well.
Group I has a great deal of silver in all denominations, denarius, victoriatus, quinarius,
sestertius, since it is a new issue. The sestertius, however, is very rare, and, in the first
period, is almost always anonymous. In bronze also we have the complete series from the
As to the Uncia. At first, precious metal and bronze are issued by the same moneyers,
beside pure issues of silver. Whenever there was a shortage of bronze a series of pure bronze
was issued. The next Group carries on this supplementary bronze and supplementary silver
also occurs. Later, the series of silver and bronze are separated. The smaller denominations
of silver do not seem to have been wanted and gradually disappear. Towards the close,
denarius and bronze series are again issued with all the denominations of bronze. The third
Group introduces a new system. Since there was, for the moment, no lack of bronze, only
the leading moneyer strikes the quadrans, the chief bronze denomination until the Empire
(p. 12). Step by step, the bronze denominations are strengthened, first the Semis, then the
Triens and Sextans with the Uncia. The last college of triumviri has the old order again
denarius and bronze with all denominations. This continues, at first, into the fourth Group.
Then the denominations decline to the same degree to which they have increased in the
6o
Triumviri Monetales
third Group. But there are three distinct phases. They first grow weaker from the Semis
downwards, then from the Triens and, at last, from the Quadrans. Again we find the ar-
rangement denarius and bronze series plus denarii series. In the fifth Group we recognize
the effects of the Lex Clodia which re-introduced the quinarius. There is, therefore, a heavy
output for the most part in special issues. The As, also is struck after a long intermission.
Perhaps, this provision was also included in the lex analogously. In view of the scantiness
of our material, it is hard to say, how far the other denominations of bronze were struck.
At first, they were probably complete, but they soon became defective, and, in the very
next Group, the sixth, the bronze ceases until Augustus. Here, for the last time, the old
order denarius and bronze is found down to the quadrans; then, only the leading moneyer
strikes the As, and finally the As, too, disappears. Finds indicate, on the other hand, that
the coinage of the denarius was very heavy. In this Group are seen the full effects of
the Lex Papiria which ordered a new standard and the re-issue of the sestertius, together
with other arrangements (see above, p. 58). In the seventh and eighth Groups only the
denarius is struck. In the ninth Group the regular issue of gold begins, though it had long
been used de facto by military chiefs. Now, however, it seems to have been regulated by
law. In silver a fresh attempt is made to issue quinarii and sestertii. These three innova-
tions obviously go back in their origin to the initiative of Caesar. Whether they were
regulated by law and, if so, how, is unknown. In Group ten, Augustus returns once more
to the old orderone college of triumviri strikes precious metals, the other bronze.
This is the last revival of the old form. As a conclusion, that indestructible denomination
of the Republic, the quadrans, is struck in two series, and then, the new form of the imperial
coinage begins.
It was, of course, the quaestor also who determined the marks of value in our period
for silver they are, at first, X, V, and HS. After the revaluation of the denarius, XVI ap-
pears and is later abbreviated to X (cp. Groups 3 and 4). Even these disappear later, and
the increasingly heavy output of silver demands a sharper system of control. The insti-
tution of this system is again incumbent upon the quaestors, and for some time was
achieved by means of issue marks (Group 5 ff). Finally, the quaestor had to fix the amount
Number. As has been shown above in discussing the appointment of the moneyers and
constitutional development of the office, the number "three" must be reckoned certain
from the first. It corresponds exactly by analogy to similar offices. Their jurisdiction was
independent (StR. II. 592), although also ancillary to the quaestor. The only question is
whether all three functioned together, as Strasburger assumes for theIIIviriA.D. and Col.
DED. (RE., Triumn. 515) or whether, as with the capitales, "ein Zusammenwirken nicht
erforderlich war" (loc. cit. 519).27 On the coins, each name usually appears separate, but,
from Group 3 onwards, they also appear together. The same phenomenon is found recur-
61
ring in Group 1o, the period that is historically the clearest where the quadrans follows
now one system, now the other. Other combinations, also, occur. In all, we find the following
forms: each moneyer alone; all three moneyers together; all three together and also each
alone; three together and one alone with the other two together; two together and all three
together; two together and each alone; two together and one alone. Hence it is apparent
that it was left to the discretion of moneyers how they should sign. But, as the Catalogue
of coins shows, all three always strike. It may be supposed that, sometimes, each took over
and controlled a part of the money to be minted, but that, at other times, two acted to-
gether and the third alone, or all three together, and so on, with all the various arrangements
just detailed. It is obvious that the distribution of work in this respect was left to the
The Leading Moneyer. Although all three moneyers had the same responsibilities and
functions, one of them was the leading moneyer, as at Athens where the first moneyer had
the choice of the symbol (Sundwall, 5o, 17). For this, we have the following proofs: in
Groups 3-5, he alone issues bronze; in Group 3, 3o, he alone strikes silver by himself, the
other two strike together; in Group 4 he usually has the reverse type of Jupiter in a chariot;
in Group 5 he alone continues to use the legend ROMA; in Group 6 he alone strikes the
sestertius and, later the As; most important are Groups 8 and 9, where he alone bears the
title of office Nos. 71, 72 and 78, where, on each occasion, the M1 strikes alone, while the
M2 and M3 strike together are very enlightening. Full proof is given by No. 83, where h.
Substitutes. It was, of course, possible that, in the course of the year of office, a
moneyer might drop out, in consequence of illness, death or political reasons. In such cases,
a substitute was co-opted. We have the following examples. In no. 27, A Flaminius is
replaced by Atilius in the second series, with XVI; in no. 37 for the new issue of the de-
narius and dodrans one moneyer is replaced; perhaps it was the M1, who has struck the
exceptional denominations before, who dropped out. In the special supplementary issues
nos. 57 A and 58 A, the third moneyer is co-opted, as in No. 27, to replace a loss. The same
Duration of Office. For almost all offices, in Rome as in Athens, duration was annual.
But, in our case, we must expressly repeat that coinage was not struck every year.29 An
extension of office to two years, such as many scholars assume, is unconstitutional and
finds no support from the coins. Whether iteratio of a moneyer was possible is another
1o8), still clear evidence exists for the Athenian moneyers in such formulae as TO AET and
TO TPI (Sundwall, 5o, 16). For Rome, StR. I. 522. states that, for the lower officers, "die
Iteration zu alien Zeiten eine Ausnahme war." In StR. I. 475. notes 2 and 3, dealing
28 There seem to be some exceptional cases, which must be referred to exceptional circumstances;
1* Cp. above p. 54. There is some indication of an occasional continuous annual striking. It is
clear that from the very beginning, with the establishment of the moneyer's office, there was, of
necessity, coinage each year, as may be seen in Groups 2. Further in Group 7 (Nos. 63-68) and
Groups 9 and 1o (see the introduction to these groups). For the other groups, or portions thereof,
it is not possible to determine to what extent there was continuity of striking. Likewise, in general,
we cannot say whether the special issues served to fill gaps between the regular issues.
62
Triumviri Monetales
especially with the XXvirate, a number of inscriptions are quoted, but there is no case of a
moneyer. However, we cannot deny the possibility of reappointment. Judging from our
Catalogue of coins, we should only assume it for Marius (nos. 65 and 66), who first appears
in the regular coinage and then in the special coinage that runs parallel to it.
We have now to answer the question, whether two colleges of triumviri ever functioned
in the same year. First, we have nos. 1-15, denarius and bronze series always alternating
with one in bronze. The regularity and the mechanical sequence suggest that the variation
covered more than one year, that is to say, that one college of triumviri issued denarius
and bronze in one year, the next college bronze in the following year. For the beginning of
our period this is not surprising, as people were still accustomed to use bronze and the
demand for it was, therefore, great, whereas silver was still unfamiliar. Only in the case
of Suppl. denarius no. 5 can there be any doubt. For that age, when the office of moneyer
had just been introduced, it is better to suppose a yearly output. The same is true of the
six series, normal and special, alternating (nos. 63-68); their close connection suggests
that they follow one another year by year. Only for Marius must reappointment be admit-
ted. With the late Suppl. Asses, nos. 95-96, a separate yearly issue is patent. It is not so
with the following numbers. In no. 27 there occurs a second series with mark of value XVI,
in which M3 is replaced. It is natural to assume here that the second issue followed in the
same year, after orders for the new mark of value had been published only the third man
dropped out in the interval. We find the same phenomenon in nos. 90 and 90 A. For nos. 82
and 83, also, I have assumed that both colleges of triumviri functioned in the same year.
In view of the conditions of that troubled year, 44 B.C. this is not improbable. If this is not
accepted, then, the chronology must be changed. Special coinages, of course, are hard to
control but I believe that nos. 57 A and 60 A were not issued in the same year as the
normal coinage, for in 57 A one of the two moneyers dropped out, and L. Tur us stepped
into his place; yet we find him later in a special college of triumviri. In 60 A two moneyers,
of colleges separated in time, are included in a new special college of triumviri. Nos. 32
and 58 A, on the other hand, might well belong to the year of the normal coinage.
Titles of Office. The explanation of the title, AAAFF, is given in Mommsen, MW. 366.
notes 2 and 3. It would be superfluous to bother about mistakes in the inscriptions asking
why an A is left out or an F put in (cp. p. 8 above). These are simply errors. The first
occurrence of the title known is in the elogium of Pulcher, 92 B.C. (see p. 8). The first
appearance on coins is on the denarius of I/mginus, c. 70 B.C. Mommsen and others after
him have inferred from his coins that a permanent office arose only at that time. But this
cannot be correct. As long as the coinage lay in the hands of the moneyer, everyone knew
that the signature on the coin was that of the moneyer. Special coinages by other officials
only appear quite sporadically, towards the close of the second century B.C. The first is
that of the quaestor, Torquatus, about the time of the Younger Gracchus. Gradually,
however, these special coinages become more plentiful, particularly in the 70's of the first
century B.C. It was now necessary briefly to connect by a mark the moneyer with his
office. He was simply described as IIIVIR; the coins indicated what kind of triumvir he
was. It was sufficient too to provide only the leading moneyer with this title of office,
as everyone knew that it was a college of three. So, too, with the IIIviri Capitales, we find
that they had been long in existence, before they appeared under their official title (StR. n.
63
595). It may be maintained, then, that it was at about the time of the Social War, or,
rather, a little later, c. 7o B.C., that the designation of the moneyer became common on
coins, but that this does not imply anything regarding the permanency of office. The ad-
dition of AAAFF is only found in the last Group, 1o; on coins of Cossutius Maridianus,
44 B.C., it is a mere ornament of the reverse. The title may frequently be found in the
literature. After Augustus, the title disappears from coins, for there were no longer any
Functions. After the quaestor had fixed the quantity of metal to be coined and the
denominations, it was the business of the moneyer to carry out and supervise these direc-
tions. They had to control the technical work, check the correct production of dies and
attest the issues by their signature; to determine the number of pieces to be struck and to
deliver the money to the aerarium. It was also their task to carry out the sytem of control
by means of the issue marks introduced in Group 5. Whenever money was issued from the
store, they were responsible for its proper handling; that was their only function in the
years in which no coinage took place. They were likewise charged with the task of with-
drawing coinage that was called in. As far as signature goes, we have seen that, following
the Athenian model, at first they used only symbols. Such symbols had been in use
in Greece from ancient times and represented the arms of the mint authorities (BMC. I.
LXXXV). This is so in Abdera (sixth to fifth centuries) in Corinth (fourth to third) and,
as has been shown above, as true, after 229 B.C. in Athens. Head, LX, remarks: "Generally
they are the personal signets of the magistrates under whose authority the coins were
issued." Soon afterwards came the names, at first, only single letters or letters in liga-
ture. Gradually, there are written out the names more fully and finally all three names are
inscribed. But ligatures continue for a long time and single names occur until the end of the
Republic. The signatures certainly illustrate the development of the Republican coinage
The moneyers also gained an ever-increasing influence over the choice of types. The
first types, that continued stereotyped so long, the head of Bellona and the Dioscuri, were
certainly prescribed by the supreme authority, the quaestor. But soon the stirring times,
influenced by Greek culture, forced their way through to expression. Tampilus, no. 6, shows
a second reverse, Diana in biga, and drivers of quadrigae become ever commoner. Mattingly
places them in the age of the Gracchi. In Group 3 (cp. the Introduction to it) we meet the
first of the historical reverses. At first, they apply generally to Romethe oath-scene and
the she-wolf and twins, for example (nos. 22, 24), but later they are drawn from the his-
tories of the families (nos. 29, 31). In Group 4, we meet for the first time a new obverse
beside the head of Bellona, the head of Apollo (no. 37). From Group 5 on both sides of the
coin become more and more varied. They are related to the family history of the moneyers,
and it is impossible, therefore, to doubt that the moneyers had a free hand in the selection.
From Group 8 on begin the contemporary allusions and the coinage concludes with types
64
Triumviri Monetales
Since the moneyers shared in the special coinages, they must find their place here,
There are three ways in which they may arise: i. by supplementary coinage; 2. by special
metal begins to be in short supply. They may be recognized by the fact that they do not fit
into the normal sequence of coinages of a Group, as they usually have only one denomina-
tion. Often, that denomination is an unusual one. One variety of supplementary coinage
occurs as early as the second Group, where a series of bronze is added in each case to one of
denarius and bronze. True supplementary coinages take three forms: 1. An entirely new
college of triumviri strikes (as in nos. 5, 39, 4o, 46-49, 83, 95, 96). Twice, M1 and M2 are
taken over from the earlier college and only the third moneyer is replaced, clearly because
one had dropped out (27A, 58, 9oA); 2. The second form shows a single moneyer, striking
supplementarily. But which of the regular moneyers was in this way detached for the pur-
pose cannot be determined. (37, 57); 3. In the third variety, M3 has a second issue with new
reverse types and new denomination (no. 6). Many variations are found when a supplement-
ary issue takes place inside a college of triumviri. Such combinations have already been
noted above under the heading "Number of Moneyers." In no. 62 the three strike together,
then each strikes, by way of supplement, alone. In nos. 72 and 78 each strikes alone, then
two strike, supplementarily, together. In no. 61, again, there is collegiate striking, followed
by a supplementary series without name, but with the types of the three. In no. 34, M1
has a supplementary coinage, without his name certainly, but with the badge associated
with him. We have already discussed the question whether these supplementary coinages
2. Special Coinages. Where a formula or a title of office, other than that of the mo-
neyers, appears we must assume a special coinage. It is provided for, as a rule, by a senatus
consullum. The only exception, in my opinion, is for the coinage with org. pub. which were
prescribed by a lex. The commonest formula is (EX)S C which sometimes occurs alone,
sometimes in connection with the title of a magistrate. But the mention of the office of the
special commissioners is by itself sufficient. I have only noted two exceptions. In no. 32
the two special issues with the new number, H, bear no formula. Similarly, there is no
formula on four of the issues of Volteius (no. 68), only the fifth one has S C DT.
Here again there are three ways in which the special formulae may be used: 1. S C
alone; 2. title of official alone; 3. the two combined. Where S C occurs alone, we cannot
tell what office the special commissioner held. It might even be a moneyer in office, who
had to execute a special commission. Of the officials, it is naturally the quaestor that we
meet first and most frequently five times, as Q30 alone, twice as Q VRS1 and four times
with S. C. Next in order of time we find the aed. pleb. The aed. cur. with S C occurs four or
five times and once without S. C. It is not surprising to find these officers entrusted with
the task, since they held the cura annonae: the competences of the two classes of aedile
30 That Q always denotes "quaestor" has already been shown in the Introduction to Group 5
above.
65
were, of course, very similar. Towards the close, the praetor occurs once. This is very
remarkable and I have already discussed it in dealing with Balbus (no. 62). Finally, the
praef. urbi are mentioned five times, three times with S C (cp. Introduction to Group o.).32
3. Special supplementary coinages. There are whole colleges that issue supplementary
coinages with a special formula, as in nos. 57 A and 58 A, where M1 and M2 of the regular
college of triumviri work on with a new M3 and use the formula for argentum publicum.
So, too, in no. 60 A, we find a special supplementary college of triumviri, made up out of two
earlier colleges. In Group 7 the special colleges alternated with the regular one. Of the
triumviri in no. 85, three have a special coinage in gold with APF. In college 86, which is
imperfect, the two moneyers have a special series with S C, thus replacing the two missing
moneyers.
The question of how all these special coinages are related to the normal issues in point
of time does not admit of any single answer. In general, we can only assign such coinages to
particular Groups. But there are two possibilities for more exact dating. In the case of
special supplementary coinage, the series will in each case have to be placed close in point of
time to the regular coinage. Thus nos. 57 A, 60 A, 64, 66, 68 certainly belong to the years
following the normal coinage, to which they are related. For nos. 72, 85 and 86, it must be
assumed that the special supplementary coinage followed in the same year. The second
possibility lies in the fixing of special officials in their place in history. Thus we have dates
of 95 B.C. for Piso-Caepio (49) of 83-82 for Balbus (62), of 70-69 for Galba and Plaetorius
(77), of 58 for Scaurus and Hypsaeus, of 54 for Plautius and Plancus, of 53 B.C., in all
probability, for Faustus Sulla and Messalla, of 46 for Hirtius (80), of 45 for Plancius (81)
and probably for Cestius and Norbanus also and of 42 for Regulus, Clodius and Mussidius
(85). But not all these dates, it must be admitted, are certain.
The great variety of the special coinages proves that they were determined in accor-
dance with the demands of the hour, according to any such arrangements as were constitu-
tionally admissible.
32 For a "CVR X FL" (Cn. Lent. Marc.) cp. StR. II. 639 n. 3 and Barthelemy, RN, 1847, p. 363.
As we have already seen from the inscriptions (p. 8) the title of moneyer was still
used, as late as the third century A.D., with the addition of the full AAAFF. Diverse
guesses have been made about the functions of these moneyers. Mommsen, who introduced
a dyarchy into the coinage (StR. III. 1146) believed that the senate struck bronze, but
under imperial control (StR. II. 1028). He cites as evidence (MW. 745) the fact that Otho
and Pescennius Niger had no issues of bronze. In the case of Otho, who only reigned from
January 15th to April 17th, it is hard to say whether the lack of bronze really depends on
the senate. Scholars, who believe in a senatorial coinage of bronze under the Empire, adopt
this argument (e.g., RIC. I. CCXIX), but it is always a dubious proceeding to draw any
general conclusion from such isolated cases, which might have their explanation in the
disturbances in Rome. In the case of Pescennius Niger the matter is clear. In the provincial
mints of the East, which can be traced from Pescennius onwards he himself struck in
Antioch bronze is never struck, for the Emperor, as a general, struck only precious
metals. On the other hand, Mommsen, in contrast to Hirschfeld 183 (though he once shared
his view, MW. 745), admits that the moneyers had nothing to do with the imperial coinage.
As regards their share in the senatorial coinage, he writes (StR. 602): "Ob sie (dieMon.)
ten, ist unbekannt." Regling, however, (SWM., "S C") rejects the dyarchy on the coinage
and for very good reasons. He points out that the imperial officials, also, mention all the
metals in their title and that almost all the coins with S C bear the head of the Emperor.33
Since the moneyers, for their part, very often have the full title AAAFF on the inscriptions,
we must conclude that it is now a mere title. Such a development is not unusual in the
history of a title. Perhaps the whole XXvirate under the Empire was little more than a
33 Yet Regling (SWM., p. 706 "Triumvir etc.") still is inclined to rank the moneyers as super-
visors of the whole coinage. But this view must be rejected. Mommsen (StR. II. 1927, note 3) extricates
himself from this difficulty with the comment: "Die unverminderte Fortdauer des Titels beweist na-
The individual moneyers as given by Pink are designated with numerals and the
letters a,b,c, etc. BMC serial numbers are given with R for Rome, I for Italy and the volume
number for any others. For Babelon, volume and page numbers are used with variety num-
bers only when necessary. For all references to BMC and Babelon, ff. (and following)
may be assumed.
1a
R552
II 318
I 384
I 520
R594
I 245
2a
R538
I 60,44
R 540
I 57.38
R549
I 518
I 117
I 53,32*
I 127
I 238
R 288 u.
II 480
542
4a
R ad 593
II 161,1
R632
I 57.38
R793
I 57.38
1116
I 108
I 358
II 430.1
R 630
II 162,2
6a
R625
II 208
R532
I 258
R557
I 250
I 251,3
7a
R545
I 507
R635
I "5
68
Triumviri Monetales
Pink
17a
18a
19a
20a
21a
22a
23a
24a
25a
26a
27a
27A a
BMC
R 670
R834
I 434
R 623
R 660
R775
R679
R 700
R 711
I 464
I 454
R 850
I 461
R 877
R 929
I 550
R 867
R 848
I 494
I 508
I 509
R 926
I 468
I 502
I 449 u.
472
R885
R914
R 918
I 446
R935
R 879
R 910
Concordances
69
Pink
BMC
Babelon
38a
R 1019
102
R 1133
II
273
R968
II
286
39
I 479
II
189,17
40
I 474
283
41a
R 999
194
II
164
R988
I 54o
II
444
42a
R 1008
II
185
R 1137
275
R 1140
11
43a
R976
146
R 1129
11
377
R 1143
186
44a
I 532
11
187
I 53o
456
I 59o
us
45a
R995
194
70 Triumviri
MONETALES
Pink
BMC
Babelon
58Aa
R1591
I 486,14
R 2324
II 498,3
R 1672
II 45o
59 a
R 2476
I 506
I 585
I 281
R 2467
II 133
60 a
R2485
II 7
R 2770
II 259
R 3320
I 447
60A a
R 2600
II 8,6
R2483
I 507.12
R 2470
I 133.17
6ia-c
R 2606
I 532, II266 u.
529
R 2622
I 77 u. 226
62a-c
R 2634
II 195.25
1441.2
II 173,7
R2657
II195
R 2664
1441
R 2716
II173
62A a
R1613
II150
R 2730
1158
62Ba
R 2463
Concordances
Pink
BMC
Babelon
77a
R3947
II 460,5
R3923
I I 551
R3937
II 218
77Aa
R3516
II 473
R35I9
II 312
R 3820
II 256
R3830
I 376
R3841
II 323
R3876
I 120
R3916
II 324
R 3920
II 317
R 3909
I 424,63
R3927
II 514
R 39QI
II 134
78a
R 3999
II 136
R3973
II 545
R 3962
II 384
R3987
II 385,2
79a
R4018
II 283
R3989
I 552
R 4004
II 526
II 470,36
II 13,15
72 Triumviri Monetales
Pink
BMC
Babelon
Pink
BMC
Babelon
92a
R4613
I 112
96a
R4663
II 140
R4589
II 198
R 4667
II 257
R 4601
II 395
R4665
II 522
93a
R 4676
97
I 311
R4617
I 142
R4653
II 476
R 4660
I 149
98
R4574
I 358
94a
R 4671
I 430
99a
R 4707
I 257
R4674
I 431
R4709
II 251
R4579
II 412
R4711
II 404
95a
R 4699
II 154
R 4712
II 524
R 4682
II 159
100
R47I3
I 210
Concordances
73
BMC
Pink
BMC
Pink
BMC
Pink
BMC
Pink
1023
34b
1613
62Aa
2770
60b
3820
77Ac
1025
36b
1615
51c
2836
70b
3824
74c
1032
37d
1642
57Ac
2844
65a
3830
77Ad
1038
35c
1660
58c
2853
66a
3841
77Ae
1044
34d
1672
58Ac
2896
63a
3851
72a
1053
36a
1676
46c
2916
64a
3861
74b
1068
33a
1681
49g
2977
65b
3868
75c
Triumviri Monetales
BMC
Pink
BMC
Pink
BMC
Pink
BMC
Pink
4185
82d
4574
98
4712
99d
5o9
23c
4191
8if
4579
94c
4713
1oo
3id
4195
84c
5i8
4583
9oa
521
45f
4198
83a
4588
9oAa
522
29a
42o4
84d
4589
92b
116
5a
526
36c
42o6
83c
4592
9ob
117
3a
53o
44b
42o9
84a
4595
9oAb
127
3b
532
44a
4211
83d
46o1
92c
INDEX OF MONEYERS
This index follows the order of Index I of the third volume of the British Museum
CABVRIGEM 41
M ABVRI MF GEM 45
P ACCOLEIVS LARISCOLVS 83
MACILIVSMF 35
/W ACILI BALBVS 38
/W ACILIVS IIIVIR 76
Q AELIVS LAMIA 92
/W AEMILIO LEP 44
L AEMILIVS BVCA 82
S AFRA 16
A/ (Allius) 5
C At 12
A ALB S F etc 49
ALB1NVS BRVTI F 78
C ALU BALA 50
ANNlVSetc 97
L AfcS GRAG 43
CANTESTI 16
CANTISTVETVS 91
C ANTISTIVS REGINVS 93
C ANTIVS RESTIO 80
Q ANTO BALB PR ad 62
APRONIVSetc 100
W AQV1L 29
/W AQVIL /W F /W N 71
L AQVILIVS FLORVS 88
M ARRIVS SECVNDVS 84
C ASINIVS GALLVS 89
M ATILI SARAN 19
A/ (Aurelius) 8
N RVF 26
M AVF RVS 28
CAVG 31
A/? (Aurelius) 3
M AVRELI COTA 25
M AVRELI SCAVRI 32
A?? (Autronius) 1
L AXSIVS NASO 68
M BAEBITAMPIL 26
BAL (Balbus) 7
P BETILIENVS BASSVS 99
P BLAS 13
CN BLASIO CN F 50
BRVTVS 74
A CAE 13
CAEPIO:PISO 49
LCAESI 59
CALDVS 74
M CALID etc 40
CN CA 14
PCALP 38
L CANINIVS GALLVS 93
MCARBO 25
TCARISIVS 81
CCASSI ad 37
CCASSI:LSALIN ad 62
L CASSI CAEICIAN 54
LCASSIQF 48
QCASSIVS 75
C CASSIVS CELER 89
CCATO 21
MCSO 57
C CENSOR 55
LCENSORINetc 62
L CESTIVS:C NORBA PR 81
76
Triumviri Monetales
CN CORNEL L F SISENNA 23
L COSCO M F 32
L COSSVTI C F SABVLA 60
C COSSVTIVS MARIDIANVS 82
LCOT 52
P CRASSVS M F ad 77
Q CREPEREI ROCVS 65
PCREPVSIetc 62
T CRISPINVS SVLPICIANVS 92
L CRIT etc ad 62
LCVP 20
CCVRFTRIGE 31
Q CVRTetc 3
TDEiDI 44
CN DOM 18
CN DOM(E, I) 36
CN DOMI etc 30
Art) 2
M DVRMIVS 88
C EGNATIVS MAXSVMVS 67
C EGNATVLEI C F ad 49
C F:L R: Q M 39
T2
Q FABI LABEO 23
C FABI F C 58
N FABI PICTOR 50
M FABRINI 34
M FAN etc ad 62
M FAN C F 24
L FARSVLEI MENSOR 68
ifcr (Faustus) 77
FAVSTVS FELIX 74
L FLAMINIVS CHILO 83
LFLAMINICILO 27
FLAVS 22
CFONT 51
A/V FONTEI 53
/W FONTEI CF 59
P FONTEIVS CAPITO 72
CN FOVLV etc 40
M FOVRI L F PHILI 47
P FOVRIVS CRASSIPES ad 62
C FVNDAN ad 49
LFVRIBROCCHI 75
CGALBAEDCVR ad 77
C GALLIVS LVPERCVS 89
GAR etc 61
CN GELI 26
GR (Graccus?)
l_
M HERENNI
A HIRTIVS PR ad
C HOSIDI GETA
L HOSTILIVS SASERNA
LITI
L lyl
L IVLI
L IVLI BVRSIO
L IVLI L F CAESAR
M IVNI
C IVNI C F
A. (luvent.)
(luvent. Laterensis)
KALENIetc
QLC
Index of Moneyers
77
C MALL etc 49
C MALLE C F 32
C MAMIL LIMETAN 62
L MAMILI 15
A MANLI Q F SERG 23
Q MAR etc 39
Q MAR(I) 15
Q MARC LIBO 19
MARCELLINVS 83
CMARCICENSO 55
C MARCI CENSORIN 92
M MARCI M F 42
C MARIVS TRO 90
M (Matienus?) 6
Q MAX 37
Afc (Metellus) 6
L C MEMIES L F GAL ad 62
LMEMMI 45
C MEMMI C F 77
L MEMMI GAL 52
L MESCINIVS RVFVS 91
MESSAL F ad 77
MESSALLAetc 100
CMETE(L) 34
Q Afc "E 36
LMETELetc 49
M METELLVS Q F 37
M METTIVS 82
Q MINV RVF 20
LMINVCI 35
TI MINVCI AVGVRINI 33
MURENA 11
L MVSSIDIVS LONGVS 85
C NAE BALB 64
C NAEVIVS CAPELLA 99
L NAEVIVS SVRDINVS 87
NAT(TA) 10
NERIQVRB 78
P NERVA 36
C NORBANVS 60
C NORBANVS:L CESTIVS PR .. .. ad 81
C NVMITORI 33
C NVMONIVS VAALA 84
OGVL etc 61
OPEI 11
OPEIM 9
LOPEIMI 38
M OPEIMI 42
g (Paetus?) 7
P PAETVS 21
PALIKANVS 80
LPAPI 65
L PAPIVS CELSVS 79
PETILLIVS CAPITOLINVS 83
P PETRON TVRPILIAN 88
PHILIPPVS 76
L PHILIPPVS 44
Q PILIPVS 43
PISO ad 49
CN PISO 87
LPISO(FRVGI) 55
CN PISO FRV 87
C PISO L F FRVGI 69
M PISO M F FRVGI 70
LPLAETORILFQ ad 68
78
Triumviri Monetales
C RENI 25
L ROSCI FABATI 63
C RVBELLIVS BLANDVS 99
L RVBRI DOSSEN 56
LRVSTI ad 45
Q RVSTI 94
L RVTILI FLAG 48
49
62
P SABIN ad
L SALIN ad
M SALVIVS OTHO 95
M SANQVINIVS 90
SAR 10
PSATRIENVS 67
LSATVRN 51
L SAVF 17
(C)SAX 13
LSCIPASIAG 52
CSCR 16
LSEMPPITIO 19
T! SEMPRONIVS GRACCVS 90 A
L SENTI C F 57 A
P SEPVLLIVS MACER 82
SER SVLP 76
MSERGISILVSQ ad 45
CSERVEILI 37
CSERVEILCF 73
M SERVEILI C F 58
C SERVEILI M F 41
P SERVEILI M F RVLL 58 A
L SERVIVS RVFVS 84
Q SICINIVS 77
M SI LA etc 30
D SILANVS L F 57
SILIVS etc 97
ASPVRI 27
SVFENAS ad 77
P SVLA 10
C SVLPICI C F
C SVLPICIVS PLATORIN
(C) A or PL
TAMP
TAVRVS etc
CTERLVC
Q THERM M F ....
C THORIVS BALBVS
Q TITI
CTITINI
MTITINI
L TITVRI SABIN .. ..
TOD
L TORQVA Q
LTORQVAT
LTREBANI
MTVLLI
L TVR(SAB)
W (Valerius)
CVALCFFLAC
L VALERI FLACCI
L VALERIVS ACISCVLVS
L VALERIVS CATVLLVS
(QvMO)
MVARG