Byzantium and Rome

[jlueke]

In most cases Byzantine coinage starts in 491 from the reign of Anastasius. Partly this is because the reformed the bronze coinage into the folles sytem and it's fractions that most people think of as distinctly Byzantine. Wroth picked this cut of in 1908 and Grierson and later Sear both kept the same date thus establishing 491AD as the norm. But since there was never any Byzantine Empire in name (it was called Rome by the inhabitants, Arabs, Persians, and Turks alike). Do you think a distinction makes sense? If yes when?

[Scottishmoney]

I wish we could just go back and ask them, but they aren't talkin. So how about we just...

 

Flip a coin to decide

[Drusus]

I would say the fall of Rome in the west would be a logical time, The east stood alone as the sole empire.

[jlueke]

I would say the fall of Rome in the west would be a logical time, The east stood alone as the sole empire.

Which fall?

 

If you go with 476AD, then do you count the coins of Arcadius as Byzantine even though the Western Empire in name still produced his coins under the invaders? Rome was still a part of the Empire until 800AD with a few years gap.

[jlueke]

I wish we could just go back and ask them, but they aren't talkin. So how about we just...

 

Flip a coin to decide

 

Are you flipping a 4th century solidus, a 5th century folles, a hexagram, or perhaps one of those concave coins?

[Scottishmoney]

A gold scyphate, that oughtta be interesting

[jlueke]

A gold scyphate, that oughtta be interesting

It's both

 

[Drusus]

yes, 476 A.D. would be good even though the west had fallen well before IMO...Romulus Augustulus was a child and a puppet with no power. Julius Nepos would be, IMO, the last but to be honest, Anthemius was probably the last real able emperor....maybe even Valentinian III. When Odoacer became king of Italy...the western empire was well dead leaving Zeno as the only true emperor in the East, regarless of what might happen after, the western empire was dead. While the eastern empire was still largely latin, maybe one might say that the Byzantine era began when it went Greek around 600, but I dont think that was so significant.

[jlueke]

While the eastern empire was still largely latin, maybe one might say that the Byzantine era began when it went Greek around 600, but I dont think that was so significant.

 

I agree with you. I think when the Empire switched to Greek in official language it was simply acknowledging a fact. Why not make the cut off to the time of Constantine? You had a new gold denomination, a new religion, a new capitol city, and the solidification of the view of the emperor as lord and master started under Diocletian.

[Scottishmoney]

The Holy Roman Empire was dissolved in 1806

[Obryzum]

I agree with you. I think when the Empire switched to Greek in official language it was simply acknowledging a fact. Why not make the cut off to the time of Constantine? You had a new gold denomination, a new religion, a new capitol city, and the solidification of the view of the emperor as lord and master started under Diocletian.

 

 

I agree, but I think the most important factor of the ones you listed is the founding of the new capitol. To me the story of Byzantium is the story of Constantinople until its fall to the Turks. For that reason my Byzantine coin collection mounted on my wall starts with Constantine. From a numismatic standpoint I can understand why most people choose Anastasius, but for me numismatics is just one dimensation of my love for the history of the City.

[Drusus]

I wouldnt date it to Constantine myself simply because the empire under Constantine was unified (if tumultuous) and was in a better and more secure position than it had been for some time...it wasnt the first time in Roman history that the empire was split east to west...Gallienus (west) and his father Valerian (east) had split duties before the unfortunate event that saw Valerians fall and others after him did the same well before constantine....And the empire had gone through serious changes in structure even with the change during Maximinus to the soldier emperor during the crisis, the change to Christian, and the formal split....the west was still cohesive (if volatile when it came to leadership) and still decisively Roman in both east and west....

 

Though I can see why, if your interest is in Constantinople, that you would start your collection of Byzantium with the founder and namesake....

[LeonB]

The Holy Roman Empire was dissolved in 1806

As much as I like the Holy Roman Empire, it's a misnomer: it really had nothing in common with the actual Roman Empire other than its name...

[roaddevil]

true leon they only share a name ( the latter empire having holy inserted in the name )

[geordie582]

I asked this question many moons ago - without a definitive reply. Anyone have an idea?

Why syphate?? Who on earth would make the minting of coins that much harder without a very good reason?

Etching dies was hard enough without having to do it on the curve

[Victor]

Etching dies was hard enough without having to do it on the curve

 

Some people believe that the obverse and reverse of these coins were struck separately to give them their unique shape. If that was how it was done, the actual engraved surface of the die struck the second time was flat, only the edges would have been slightly curved. Other people also have theories about how these coins could have been produced with just one strike. For example, a bottom die might be slightly rounded, while the top die might be slightly concave. There would only have to be a little curve, and if the proper force was applied, the coin got a cup shape.

 

There have been numerous theories about why these coins are cup shaped, including, but not limited to, reduction of wear, to make stacking easier, a guard against counterfeiting, and some religious purpose like carrying holy water. In actuality, the cup shape is probably only a by-product of the minting process and has no other meaning than a technological one.

[geordie582]

Thanks for those thoughts, Victor. More or less what I have thought, but without certainty. It's strange there are no written records of the process. Plenty of daily minutia seems to be recorded, none of the minting process!