My most recent purchase straddles both the Ancient and early Medieval periods (or we could say late Antiquity instead of early medieval, but lord knows I’ve argued enough about the pitfalls of periodization on this site). The coin itself is a copper As of Galba, with a ‘LIBERTAS PVBLICA’ reverse. The obverse shows Galba with the imperial title, and the imagery of Libertas holding the pileus on the reverse was clearly meant to portray that Galba freed Rome from the tyranny of Nero. Early Medieval - Ostrogoths Anonymous (6th Century) AE 42 Nummi, 26.66 mm x 9.95 grams Obv.: IMP SER SVLP GALBA CAES AVG TR P, laureate head of Galba right, XLII carved upwards to right of bust Rev.: LIBERTAS PVBLICA, Libertas standing left holding pileus and scepter, SC in field Ref.: MEC I-69, SRCV 2134 under-type Note: Countermarked on an As of Galba minted in Rome, Aug.-Sept. 68 A.D. What is striking about this coin though, and what makes it a product of the ‘medieval’ period, is the countermark. This countermark is the number ‘XLII’ chiseled into the flan to the side of the emperor’s face. Grierson acknowledged some 150 of these counter marked coins were known when Medieval European Coinage vol. I was published in 1986; most on asses and and some dupondii (which share a similar size and were likely indistinguishable from one another when the countermark was made). In addition, a smaller number of sestertii have been found with the countermark of LXXXIII. I haven’t been able to find any updated numbers for these coins since MEC I was published, so I do not know if my example was known to Grierson or not. Nearly all of these coins have the countermark on the obverse, and all avoid damaging the emperor’s face. The 42 Nummi next to a Justinian 40 Nummi Dating the coins to the medieval period is partly due to hoard evidence, and partly due to the current theory for the countermark. Two specimens have been found in a hoard in Italy which also contained nummi as late as Justinian’s reign. Grierson has suggested that the role these coins played was to act as fractional change for the silver siliqua when it was valued at 250 nummi. While not perfectly 1/6 of 250, a bronze coin valued at 42 nummi gets close, and coupled with the sestertii valued at 83 nummi (1/3 siliqua), it seems someone was making do with what was at hand in order to make small change. Who was using these coins as change has also been debated. The vast majority of these counter marked pieces come from the Flavian period; it is clear these were not coins which had been in circulation for centuries and then counter marked, but were likely found in the 5th or 6th century in a hoard, and then brought back into service as makeshift change. Grierson seems to suggest that this was an official countermark to provide small change, but using centuries old Roman coins seems like an unsustainable source to me. I suspect it might be something more along the lines of Condor tokens or Hard Times tokens: individuals or small merchants found the hoard, then proceeded to use the money as small change. I have no evidence of this whatsoever, but this is my own speculation. Cplakidas, . "Map of the Gothic War." World History Encyclopedia. Last modified April 26, 2012. https://www.worldhistory.org/image/563/map-of-the-gothic-war/. Where the counter marking took place has also been debated, as some of the countermarks had a long running L under the II in a style found on Vandal coinage, and that the Vandals issues a 42 nummi piece. This caused K.F. Morrison to speculate a Vandal origin in her 1983 study, and that the coins were brought into Italy during the Gothic Wars. However, many more have the leg of the ‘L’ descending below the line as in my example, and Grierson pointed to the larger numbers of these coins found in Italy than in Northern Africa; thus suggested an Ostrogothic origin. I am inclined to follow the latter theory.
"I suspect it might be something more along the lines of Condor tokens or Hard Times tokens: individuals or small merchants found the hoard, then proceeded to use the money as small change. I have no evidence of this whatsoever, but this is my own speculation..." ............................. Do you think it could be somehow related to the Justinian Plague?
if they were marked as late as the 540s, then I would suspect the Gothic wars would probably have more to do with their use rather than the plague alone
Domitian, Roman Empire (later revalued in the Ostrogothic Kingdom of Italy) AE As / 42 nummi Obv: CAESAR AVG F DOMITIAN COS II, laureate head left, countermark XLII (42) in left field Rev: VICTORIA AVGVST, Victory advancing right, standing on prow, holding wreath and palm branch, S-C across fields Mint: Rome Date: 73-74 AD (struck); 498-526 AD (revalued) Ref: RIC 677
I just realized that I never posted the second coin I got: Early Medieval - Ostrogoths Anonymous (6th Century) AE 42 Nummi, 28.74 mm x 10.25 grams Obv.: IMP CAES VESPASIAN AVG COS III, laureate head of Vespasian right, XLII carved upward to right of bust Rev.: S C, eagle standing facing on globe, head right with wings spread Ref.: MEC I-71, SRCV 2362variety under-type Note: Countermarked on an As of Vespasian minted in Rome, 71 A.D.
