I recently received a very interesting and rare coin, the types of which seem quite localized and specific. It originates from Roman Pannonia. But before I get to the coin itself I would like to take a moment to give a couple comments on the area in question which might perhaps lend some understanding. Pannonia was settled by an Indo-European group by the same name and was something of a ‘backwater’ country and having few resources but of geographic importance. Numismatically the incursions of various Celtic peoples brought with them their artistic interpretations of coinage from other cultures, the primary types being (but not limited to) the Macedonians. As with many other cultures (Celtic and otherwise) very little is known about Pannonia until the Romans invaded and their histories were written, and in this case starting around the time of Augustus. Much could be written about why the Romans were in Pannonia in the first place (likely geography being the primary reason), but I think for our small numismatic discussion it can be focused down to the resource of precious metals. Although of lower quality than other close locales such as Dardania, the Roman mines in Pannonia produced silver and iron. These mines would be important to the vast machine which was Rome and served to provide the greater economy with much needed raw and finished materials. For this discussion the coin in question is as follows (the attribution of which is contested but of which I agree): Reign of Antoninus Pius, 138 - 161 AD AE Quadrans, Pannonian Mint 16mm, 2.76 grams Obverse: Radiate head of Sol right. Reverse: METAL PANNONI CIS in three lines. BMC Hadrian 1860 // Woytek 111-2 Although BMC attributes this type to the reign of Hadrian it may not be correct considering the data that has come to light since that work was produced. While BMC is close in dating these coins all seem to come from a very small time frame, roughly from Hadrian to Marcus Aurelius (in general being 117 to 180 AD). Most significant of the type is the similarity of the portraits to that of Antoninus Pius. But this is not an unknown circumstance. The enigmatic series of anonymous quadrantes of the same period assigned to Rome also bear the portraits of the Imperial personages but differer significantly by their declaration of S C, or Senatus Consulto (marking them as being minted in Rome, but possibly for use elsewhere, which is another discussion). Examples of Imperial portraiture on similar coins: But this type is quite clear in that the inscription tells us a great deal. "Metal Pannonia Cis" can be quite easily translated as “Metal (or Mine) of Pannonia. It is without doubt that these coins were minted in that region (but it is unknown exactly where that mint might have been). The real question might be, “Why were they minted?”. They are rare and only survive in very small numbers today. As such the overall mintage was likely limited to specific periods and or purposes. As is already known the quadrans was a denomination of which was in significant decline during this time period, its usefulness being nearly exhausted. It begs to ask, “Why were they minted if they were not in demand?”. Obviously there was a specific event or localized demand for the coinage. The argument that they were minted for a specific event might indeed be the answer, but we must also consider those coins issued in Rome which seem to be contemporary to those issued in Pannonia and other regions, specifically Dardania. Those issues in Rome might have been for a specific event or usage (our imaginations can run wild here, and any theory is as good as another). But these Pannonian issues are interesting. Could they have been issued for the same reason? Were they simply issued to provide small change to a poor and insignificant province of the empire? There is ample evidence to support that small denomination coinage was necessary in the provinces, from Iberia to these Eastern regions. Quandrantes of Rome, bearing imperial portraits: It would seem that these coins were issued specifically for local usage, but their commonality to those of Rome cannot be ignored and one wonders if there is some connection. The issues of Rome suggest that there is some association though they differ significantly in their fabric. Those issued in Rome were ‘generic’ in nature, featuring gods such as Jupiter, Minerva, Neptune, etc. but those issued in Pannonia are primarily Sol and Mars, with those issues of Trajan bearing his portrait the exception. It would seem that these rare and unusual coins will remain enigmatic in their usage and purpose.
I could see the strange reverse inscription as indicating these coins were made for a specific event, perhaps celebrating the opening of a local mine? Well, whatever the reason I think you acquired a fantastic coin.
I was watching that one when the reserve was not met. Congratulations on acquiring it, some day I would like one from the series.
Very interesting. My mind goes straight to a locally needed coinage, perhaps the mine workers or administrators when dealing with the locals? Very interesting and thanks for sharing! (I might be biased because I thought of modern mining scrip/tokens)
Thanks for the write up, very interesting. I had no knowledge that Pannonia even existed, looks a great little coin. Congrats.
Very cool! Congrats!! And thanks for sharing this ultra rare piece of history. I really enjoyed reading it and Saaaweeeet coin
Very very cool and interesting! The coin is rather utilitarian with its simple declarative reverse. I favor the "small change to for a poor and insignificant province" theory.
I assume this means the old theory of these being coins of the mines for use in the 'company store' has now been discarded? I have never owned one.
When a reserve is listed I usually assume the seller wants a ridiculous or unrealistic amount and just watch to see if it is lifted. As for me, my budget has gone to Byzantines lately.
My bid did not go past their reserve, but they offered it to me after the auction as a second chance offer. I normally dont even bother with reserved auctions.
There are some "coins of the mines" on my Quadrans page: http://augustuscoins.com/ed/quadrans/ about 1/4 the way down as category 4 (linked near the top). Here is one: Coin of the mines 17 mm. Head right. It closely resembles Antoninus Pius. METAL AVRELIANVS in wreath. RIC III, page 313, 1255 "uncertain" [ruler] but "R2" under Marcus Aurelius. The name of the mine suggests Marcus. He could be honoring his adoptive father with the portrait. BMC III --, but BMC IV page 687 has it not in the BM, but cited from a sale.
Without the markings of the Senate can we really be sure that these "Mine coins" were part of the official regular Roman monetary system? The design and the workmanship are obviously top notch, the celators were skilled professionals so they did serve an official purpose, but which? As they are connected more to particular places than emperors, it's perhaps likely that they were a local currency, to be used in the communities forming around the specific mines in Pannonia or Moesia. Their purpose might as such be similar to the Notgeld used locally in Germany and Austria after WW1.
No doubt that they were used locally, but considering the Imperial anonymous Quadrantes of the very same time period (which are also unexplained) one wonders if there was an event or specific reason why they were struck. What that reason might be I do not know, but it is interesting to wonder...
The quadrantes, even the anonymous ones are marked as official imperial coinage. The "Mine coins" are not, so were probably not part of the official imperial coinage. They probably did however serve a function at the local level, minted under direct Roman authority (so different from the provincials), but not tied to a specific event but rather the more prozaic economic reasons -- the need for currency in the local economy which was developing around the mines. As the mines where under direct imperial authority, it is possible that the administrators considered keeping these communities separated from the general economy or that these new but growing local economies had an exceeding need for currency that warranted these temporary emissions meant specifically for the local markets.
