[gothic-l] Re: Solidi

Mon Jan 14 09:56:39 UTC 2002

--- In gothic-l at y..., "troels_brandt" <trbrandt at p...> wrote:
> Dirk,
>
> As I from the beginning stated: Now we are in an area, where I know
> you are the expert. I have no knowledge about the facts, but I read
> the sources you refer to when available to me.
>
> I agree that the interpretations of Fagerlie are untenable and want
> (as already mentioned Thursday) to keep the interpretations out of
> the discussion for the moment, but this does not consequentially
make
> her registrations of the solidi wrong (she specificly refers to
> identical dies).
>
> First you told us, that all the solidi in Scandinavia were
Byzantine
> and you referred to Fagerlie as source yourself. You also told that
> the mint stamp was easy to decide from the coins. I mentioned the
age
> of the source (30 years).

Troels,

that is true, Ulf Hagberg wrote a short article in which he refered
to Fagerlie, stating that 'the only Ostrogothic coin found in
Scandinavia was a very worn quarter-siliqua of Theoderic'. I shall
try to double-check this article in the days ahead, but that was the
note that I took from it. This would indeed imply that mints like
Rome and Ravenna and perhaps Pavia are not represented among the
Scandinavian solidi from 488AD onwards.

>
> Later you referred to a website stating that all golden Byzantine
> solidi were from the mint of Constantinople, and you confirmed
this,
> when I asked to be sure.

that is not entirely correct. There were many mints in the Byzantine
empire, with Constantinople, Rome, Alexandria and Carthage among the
most important. Others included Thessaloniki, Antioch, Jerusamlem,
Syracus etc. But by far most of the coins were struck at
Constantinopel.

You emphasized that coins under Theodoric
> also were made at Italian mints in the names of Anastasius and
> Justin, but in the same letter you stated that the coins in
> Scandinavia did not come from Italy (MSG 5485 - and earlier 5326).
>

That is correct. Italian issues in the names of Anastasius and Justin
were made by Theoderic and are Ostrogothic.

> Friday Tore provided us with the conclusions of Fagerlie. There I
> read her stating that an increasing number of the solidi in
> Scandinavia were from the Italian mints moving from Leo I to Justin
> until the stream of gold totally ceased under Justinian.

That is right and I am surprised by it because it seems to contradict
my reading of the Hagberg article. However, these conclusions are
rather difficult to interpret. She writes "Under Anastasius, for the
first time, western issues almost equal eastern issues and the
identities among western issues continue to be common. The Italian
issues of the ostrogoths were the most immediate source of the solidi
at this timje and were supplemented by other western imitations and
official eastern issues in circulation in the West?"

I absolutely don't understand why she poses this as a question,
because her catalogue of these coin finds should provide a definite
answer. Unless, she is not refereing to the Scandinavian solidi in
this case, but to solidi circulation in general at the time.

Also, she states that these Scandinavian solidi circulated only on a
few islands like Gotland, Oeland and Bornholm, but not in Scandinavia
proper, adding that this is very surprising. Hagberg's statement may
have thus refered to Scandinavia proper excluding the bulk of the
solidi. Strange, but that might be the answer. As I said, I am very
interest in this and shall try to clarify this and let you know what
I find.

Dirk

>
> Then you brought up another source critisizing the interpretations
of
> Fagerlie - but you did only mention a single change of the basical
> facts.
>
> Where did I go wrong? Are your facts wrong, or do you "only" change
> your source?
>
> Troels
>
>
>
>
> --- In gothic-l at y..., "faltin2001" <dirk at s...> wrote:
> > --- In gothic-l at y..., Tore Gannholm <tore.gannholm at s...> wrote:
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >Troels,
> > > >
> > > >the following link takes you to a map of the Byzantine/East
Roman
> > > >mints.
> > > >
> > > >http://americanhistory.si.edu/csr/nnc/byzant/imapmint.htm
> > > >
> > > >The map states a timeframe from 498 to 1453. However, the main
> > mints
> > > >were the same in the period 450 to 500. Of course, Carthage
was
> > ruled
> > > >by the Vandals at that time and the Italian mints were under
> > > >Ostrogothic control from 488 or so. Also, the mints of Sirmium
in
> > > >Pannonia is omitted on the map. But it was a very minor mint
and
> > > >operative only from about 504 after closing at the end of the
4th
> > > >century. Also, missing are most of the western mints of greater
> > > >significance, like Arles and Lyon, but especially Milan.
Trier,
> > which
> > > >was a major mint in the 4th century seized operations in the
> early
> > > >5th century. Also missing are all the Frankish and Visigothic
> mints
> > > >like Toulouse, Bordeaux, Cologne, Marseille etc.
> > > >
> > > >I think it it fair to say that the vast majority of gold coins
> > minted
> > > >in the 5th century would have been produced by Constantinopel,
> > > >Ravenna, Rome and Milan. Of these Milan and Ravenna would have
> been
> > > >the northern-most.
> > > >
> > > >cheers,
> > > >Dirk
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> > > Dirk,
> > >
> > > I have no Fagerlies book and I have posted the conslusions on
> > >
> >
>
http://w1.855.telia.com/~u85528681/Fagerlie/fagerlieconclus/default.ht
> > m
> > >
> > > 9 pages.
> > >
> > > I think these 9 pages can bring some order into our debate.
> > >
> > > Tore
> >
> >
> >
> > Tore,
> >
> > Fagerlie's book which appeared in the 1960s is unfortunately
based
> on
> > outdated historical and archaeological sources, which not only
> > influenced, but even drove her interpretations. She linked
sporadic
> > finds to contacts for which there is no evidence and which are
not
> > likely. For example, seeking to link a Leontius coin of Antioch
to
> > the Ostrogoths is highly contrived and not believable. If you
read
> > modern literature on this field you will find that these
> > interpretations are no longer accepted. The leading expert on
> > Ostrogothic (and late Roman) coinage M. Metlich stated that
> > Fagerlie's interpretations are untenable. Her book should not be
> used
> > to bring order to this discussion, unfortunately.
> >
> > Dirk
> >

------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ---------------------~-->
FREE COLLEGE MONEY
CLICK HERE to search
600,000 scholarships!
http://us.click.yahoo.com/vf6MrB/4m7CAA/ySSFAA/wWMplB/TM
---------------------------------------------------------------------~->

You are a member of the Gothic-L list.  To unsubscribe, send a blank email to <gothic-l-unsubscribe at egroups.com>.

Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/