the numismatic iconography of justinian ii (685-695, 705-711 a.d.) / by james d. breckenridge

7/28/2019 The numismatic iconography of Justinian II (685-695, 705-711 A.D.) / by James D. Breckenridge

1/124

graphy

. D.

R E C E NR I D G

NNU M SMAT CSO C E T

Crea

tiveCommonsAttribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike

/http://www.hathitrust.org/access_

use#cc-by-nc-sa-4.0


2/124

E S R V E D B Y

NNU M SMAT CSO C E T

G R MAN

N .G U C ST AD T

Crea



use#cc-by-nc-sa-4.0


3/124

eprince.

u nt

Crea



use#cc-by-nc-sa-4.0


4/124


5/124

T S AN D M O NO G R A H S

Crea



use#cc-by-nc-sa-4.0


6/124

T S AN D M O NO G R A H S

eatiseson sub ectsrelating

y medalsanddecorations.

N CO M M T T E

E L L I NG R Ch ai rma n

U TTR E Y R .

O TT

STA F

S S R d i to r

L S O N A ss oc ia te d it or

Crea



use#cc-by-nc-sa-4.0


7/124

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . .

N . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . .

U ST N AN I .... .... .... .... .... .... ... .

M E R O R .... .... .... .... .... .... .... ...

I ST... .... .... .... .... .... .... .... .... ...

S . . . .. . . . .. . . . .. . . .. . . . .. . . .. . . . .. . . .. . . . .

A ND T H E MO S E M R E F O R M . .. .. .. .. .. .. ..

O G O F TH E CO I NSO F U ST N AN I .... ...

F U ST N AN I sN W CO I NT P E S... ....

Crea



use#cc-by-nc-sa-4.0


8/124


9/124

itsometimesseemsthatthevalueofnumis-

toricalstudiesissomethingmoreoftenack-

ted nonetheless eac hyearf indsmorethorough

aticmaterialbyscholarsin thatfield

selvesaremoreaptthanformerlytosee

historianscanbeof usetothemin their

owsofnoother singleproblem however

saremore closelyinterrelated andin

ssuchadegreeof interpretationofmaterial

of theother thantheoneundere amination

ublicationinthisseries astudyofthis sort

arafieldfromthenormalconcernsofpurely

thewriterisdeeplyappreciativeofthecon-

ublicationCommitteeoftheAmerican

hefocalpointofthe presentstudywas

ermsovertwodecadesagoby rofessor

o gede rance thewriterowesagreatdebt

guidancethroughhiswritings histeaching

courseof thepreparationofthisstudy.

erepresentedina preliminarywayin ro-

aratthe c oledesH autes tudesin1951

moresummaryaccountwasgivenatthe

antineSeventhCenturyheldatD umbarton

iginallyinthe formofadoctoraldis-

ectionf irstof rofessorA . M. riend r. and

tWeit mann towhosegeneroushelpand

slargelyowed. rofessor rnst it inger

thefindings withtheresultthatthe pre-

farsounderthan itwouldotherwisehave

aulA . UnderwoodandGlanv illeDowneyhave

ndcriticaladvice ashaveMessrs.Cyril

Crea



use#cc-by-nc-sa-4.0


10/124

a o ur d as a n d h o r Se v e n ko i n v ar i ou s w ay s . n

toformforpublication theadvice sug-

of rofessorA lfredR . B ellingerhavebeenin-

nc uratorshavebeenmosthelpfuline -

rinstitutionsand makingavailabletheir

writermust acknowledgeparticularindebted-

MlesandMrs. A . A . B oyc e andtoM. ean

tdesM dailles B iblioth q ueNationale. Study

nfarmorearduouswithoutthe cherished

y antinandthesk illedassistanc eof its

rmolov .

gementscanonlypartiallyindicatethefull

tothe manyfriendsandscholars allof

hepursuitofthis problem anattemptis

ficcontributionsatrelevantpointsinthe foot-

samosaicofcontributionsfrommany

erbal publishedandsuggested allofwhic hgo

hesis but asinthec reationofamosaic

tyforthefinalresult isnotwiththe contribu-

ae butwiththepersonwho putsthem

rmingacoherentwhole. orthefaultsand

nthete twhic hfollows thewritermust

Crea



use#cc-by-nc-sa-4.0


11/124

N

hef irstB y antineemperortoplacetheimageof

alc oinage. Whenhetook thisstep fur-

otonebuttwo uitedifferentrepresentationsof

ofChrist.Theprecedentthuscreatedwas

however andthe Christ-imagedisappeared

tinec oinageforac enturyandahalf whilethe

ornbythe c onoc lastic Controversy then

theR estorationofthe magesinthemiddle

neof ustinian I ' stwoc ointypesofChrist

olinebythedie-c uttersofMic hael I I , and

ototypeofoneoftheChrist representations

mperialB y antinecoinsfromtheninth

nwellknown andtheimportanceof

mageofChristasac oin-typeofandby itself onanumis-

eneralcirculation.ThefigureofChrist hadappeared

leady however to udgebytheuni uesolidusofMarc ian

nterianCollection illustratedbyGeorgeMac donald

gi n a nd D e v e l op m en t G l a s go w 1 9 0 5 p p . 2 3 5 & l . X ,

rsontheobverseanimageofMarcian inarmor three-

orreversetypethe figuresofemperorandempress

ehindandbetweenthem plac ingahandoneac hof

rs e le ge nd i s F E L I C T N U B T I S .

ehasbeenelucidated loc.cit. alongthefollowing

hiscoinassumesthe placetakeninR omanicono-

uba He specif ic ally replac esthef igureofTheodosius

n ce l eb r at i ng t h e ma r ri a ge o f V a l e nt i ni a n I a n d u d o i a

pearsonthelaterc oin datedc a. 450 bec ausethe

only thebridehavingtakenirrevocablevowsof

shemarriedonlytocontinuetheimperialsuccession.

oin insofarascanbe determinedgivenitsworn

dedskull longfac e beard andc ross-nimbusfamiliar

rtofothermedia.

on whichmusthavebeenstruc k invery limited uan-

nf luenc eonB y antinec oin-types orontheimperial

ristappearshereforaspecificsymbolicreason

ction.H eperformsinamore generali edwayfor

rfortheChristiani edimperialc ult.

Crea



use#cc-by-nc-sa-4.0


12/124

phyof ustinian I

novationisgenerally rec ogni ed butithasbeen

themeaningplacedinhis actionatthe

c entyears inc reasedattentionhasbeengiven

suesbyagroupofsc holarswhosespec ialc onc ernis

developedbytheiconophilesoftheeighth

hile theinterestshownbytheseiconophilesin

eof theChristimageisofgreatimportanc etoan

developedimagetheory muchlessis

c kground politic al theological orwhat-

o f u s ti n ia n I ' s o wn a c ti o ns i n o th e r wo r ds

sevaluationofseventh-centurypractice

ngeighth-andninth-centuryattitudes

itisconsiderablymoredifficulttoapply

centuryevaluationtotheseventhcentury

nderstandingofwhatwasdeveloping

dpracticesofreligious artintheseventh

markedlyinrecentyears notleastasa

onedresearc hes. Untilnow however no

onthesub ec twasA ndr Grabar s ' empereurdans

a r is 1 9 6 . Ce r ta i n of G r ab a r s i d ea s we r e de v el o pe d w i th

. uc as oc hinaseriesofarticles Z urTheologie

e n e d ik t in i sc he M o na t ss c hr i ft X I X , 1 9 7 p p . 7 5 3 8 7

p p. 2 4 7 1 68 7 5 2 8 1 -8 a nd 4 7 -5 2 a n d m os t im po rt an t

h ri s tu s bi l d- a i se r bi l d i b id . X X I , 1 9 9 p p . 8 5 1 0 5.

dalreadybeguntopublishinGermany GerhardB .

rtant O riginandSignif ic anc eof theB y antine c ono-

M e di a ev a l St u di e s I , 1 9 40 p p . 12 7 -4 9 a n d s i nc e T h e

ntheGreek athersandtheB y antine c onoc lastic

b a rt o n O a ks a p er s V I I , 1 9 5 , p p . 1- 4 . S ti l l mo r e re c en t ly

perby rnst it inger TheCultof the magesin

sm D u m ba rt on O a ks a pe rs V I I I 1 95 4 p p. 8 1 5 o

128 ontheimportanc e aswellastheweaknesses of

a n d a d ne r s c o nt r ib u ti o ns . M os t r ec e nt o f a ll i s G r ab a r s

n t i n d o ss i er a r ch o l og i u e a r is 1 9 57 w hi c h ov e rl a ps a n d

c omposition partsof it inger swork .

t i n ge r u s t ci t ed w i th h i s O n S o m e c on s o f th e

in ateC lassic alandMediaevalStudiesinH onorofAlbert

r i nc e to n 1 9 5 5 p p . 1 2 - 15 0 a n d G ra b ar s ' i c on o cl a sm e .

cholarlyinterestinthepre- conoclasticperiodwas

antiumintheSeventhCentury heldatDumbarton

atwhichpartsof thepresentworkwerereadinabridged

Crea



use#cc-by-nc-sa-4.0


13/124

ostudythec oinsof ustinian inathorough

standpoint withaviewtoapplyingour

nandlaterperiods andtheirpossiblerela-

cimage-theory.

gewasapivotalone notonlyfortheB y an-

allofwhatweknowas urope. Theveryscar-

hichwemust reconstructapictureofthe

usthowcriticalitspositionwas. Wearewell

eeraof ustiniantheGreat aperiodinthe

erceivethebeginningsofthe evolutionof

oitsmediaevalform. B utwearefarlessau

hsubse uentdecade.With thecomingof

f irstofanewseriesofbattlesw iththeresurgent

ofallovertheB y antine mpire through

nmenandevents butlittleof theinstitu-

em life.W hen inanotherhundredyears

adsucceededinbeatingofftheMoslemon-

einstolift. Thestageisthesame butallelse

dialogue thewholef rameofreferenc ehas

penovernight intheeighthcentury.A

beendevotedto thestudyofthesenew

noperationunderthe saurians andallof

owmuchofthemodificationofthestruc-

placeinthec enturybefore eo I I , theyears

ianinvasionofSyriaaround61 andthef inal

ckonConstantinoplein717A.D .Thenew

hethemes integratingcivilandmilitary

wagrarianlaws ad ustingc onceptionsofprop-

strogorsky U berdievermeintlicheReformt tigkeit

a nt in is ch e Z e it sc hr if t h er ea ft er B Z ) X X X , 1 92 9 3 0 p p.

s ky S u r le s o ri g in e s de l a o i a gr a ir e b y a n ti n e B y -

p p . 16 9 8 0 a g o od s u mm a ry w i th b i bl i og r ap h y to d a te i s

rintheCambridge c onomic History , Cambridge 1941

cently O strogorskyhasarriveddefinitelyataH eraclian

f theB ookof theThemes: Surladatedelac om-

mesetsurl po uedelac onstitutiondespremiers

ur e B y a nt io n X X I I I , 1 9 5 , p p . 1 6 6. Ac co rd in g to

NomosGeorgikos wasprobablypublishedunder ustinian

Crea



use#cc-by-nc-sa-4.0


14/124

phyof ustinian I

ew realitiesofaravagedcountryside

tails largeandsmall ofB y antinelifec an

aybehypothesi ed tohavehadtheirorigins

edtheadventofH eraclius.

sition itisclearfromour evidence was

trulerof theH eraclianDynasty ustinian

interruptedandfollowedastheywerebyperiods

dthewayforthenew strongman eothe

espitetheirdifficultiesthelastperiodbefore the

y antinegovernmenten oyedsuf f icientstabil-

y withciviladministrationandpolicy

tices.

tof theperiod wef indasituationdirec tly

cribedwithregardtoits politicalhistory.The

hemanewattitudetowardthe Christian

anattitudewhic hwec all c onoc lasm. They lef t

hec harac terofB y antineart religious

rynatureof the c onoc lastic movementerased

cewhichwouldtelluswhatcamebeforeit

cethe conoclasticattitudeitselfderived.

hhaspushedtheoriginsof the saurian

c entury sowec anseenowthat c onoc lasm

weedfromuntilledsoil. R atherisit true

preparingitselffor decadesinthemindsof

uttheboundariesof the mpire andwhat

initstheoryandinitsprac tice inthe

ury wasofthegreatestimportancein

oppositeviewpoint conoclasm.

rtin thisperiod ustpriortothe cono-

t inasmuchasitformedthebasisfor the

hodo partyagainstthe mage-B reakers

e amplesnecessaryfortheformulationof

n-theory notonlythat butsurviv inge amples

tevidentlyprovidedthe pointofdeparture

hichfloweredalmostimmediatelyuponthe

ages intheninthc entury .

art historianbythisperiodimmediately

saurianD ynasty asmaybeseenfromthe

Crea



use#cc-by-nc-sa-4.0


15/124

certaininginthefirstplacewhatmonuments

andsecondlywhatthosemonumentscan

erandtendenciesoftheartsofthat time. t

fe tremelybroadsc ope c onsideredfromthe

caldistributionalone.Thiswasperhaps

wemayconsiderthe artoftheMediter-

esentedafundamental thoughnaturallynot

inallthelandsof theB y antine mpire

ule wasstillfelt itsartistichegemony

onsraisedaboutthecharacterofthisart can

torilywhenalltheartsof theperiod toward

ntury havebeenstudiedandcomparedin

etrick at ustthispoint oferasingthe

mpire leav ingusonly f ragmentsof itsrim.

noplewasun uestionablythemostactive

sof the astern mpire itsinf luencec ould

ltheperipheralareas withwhichitwasin

ppreciatingtheimportanceofthisessential

echangesandevolutionsofsuchprovincial

d changeswhicharerarelytheresultofi n-

utrathershoweverysignofbeingdependent

source.

vincialareaswherewe may intime be

tdatatoclarifythis aspectoftheproblem.

tc ul a rl y i n R o m e t h e o p es w e re f r e u e nt l y ac t iv e

onanddecoration asthetatteredpalimpsest

rsw itness oneof themostac tive opesin

I I , andtheartproduc edduringhisbrief

wththatof ustinian I , shouldprov idevalu-

yinference ofwhatinfluenceswerereaching

tthattime.

tc le O n S o m e c on s .. . , c i t ed a b ov e n . , d e m on s tr a te s

anartupontheConstantinopolitaninastrong way

w i t h re f er e nc e t o th e p er i od o f o p e o h n V I I 7 0 5 7 0 7

nfluenceshadhithertobeenthoughtto havebeen

artatitsmostautonomous.

thisperiodthebasic studyby it inger R mische

7 . b is u r M it t e de s 8 . a h rh u nd e rt s M u ni c h n . d. 1 9 6 .

Crea



use#cc-by-nc-sa-4.0


16/124

phyof ustinian I

ec iallyatThessalonika therewouldappearto

activityinthearts buthereproblemsof

entgreaterdifficultiesindrawingprecise

omparison. Thesameistrueof gypt in

nowledge foralthoughitis generallyagreed

b ecttorecurrentwavesofinfluencefrom

gypt sc on uestbytheMoslems thelackof

y withinevenacenturyforthe mostpart

arisone tremelydifficult. etitis probable

htheseproblemsofCopticchronologywill

ustsuchcorrelationsbetweenCopticmonu-

ddatedworksoutside gypt.

tstellusenoughaboutrelationsbetweenthe

andtheU mayyadc aliphs aswellasbetween

humblelevels forustobefullyawareof the

dartinitsmore formativestagesuponthe

hichitsupplemented.Thehappydiscoveries

nrecentyears aswellasthegenerally re-

mic studies givegreathopethatourknow ledge

asSassanianartw illbevastly increasedasmore

mesavailable.

dy atthepresentstageof ourknowledge

mbracewithprofitallthesescatteredfields

viewofthe natureofthecentralproblems

iousart themostpressingneedistoestablish

heart actuallyproducedintheimperial

periodwhic hc onc ernsus thesurviv ing

Thessalonikainandaboutthetimeof ustinian I ,

e T h e L o n g Si e ge o f T he s sa l on i ka : t s D a t e a nd

X L V I I I , 1 95 5 p p. 1 16 2 2 w it h bi bl io gr ap hy o n u st o ne

ecorationofthechurchofS.D emetrios.

rt againtheworkof it ingerisfundamental:

c Sc u lp t ur e A r ch a eo l og i a X X X V I I , 1 9 7 p p . 1 81 f f.

arTorpisengageduponstudiesofCoptic artwhich itis

etterabsoluteandrelativechronology. naddition

beingrecoveredanddocumentedbythe rinceton-

theMonasteryofSt.Catherine MountSinai.

edmuc htoourknowledgeof theinterrelationsofB y antine

materialassembledin ' ic onoc lasme esp. Chapter V ,

naddition wemaylook forwardtoac ontributionbyO leg

al i s I I , 1 9 5 8 .

Crea



use#cc-by-nc-sa-4.0


17/124

giblee c eptions ise c lusivelythatof the

asonthatthefollowingstudyis undertaken

itsob ec tiveistheestablishmentof thefollow-

or scoinage:

ticissueswerestruckunderhisreign

datwhatdates

gormeaningsthesecoinswerein-

ence

mayhavebeenforissuing them.

inthelightof thisinformation toc larifysome

f fic ial thatistosay bystateandec c lesiasti-

religiousimages andparticularlytheirusein

itistobehopedthatsomethingmaybe

onte tofthereligious artofthetime

festsitselfthroughboth styleandcontent

eoutlookof theage. romthismaterial itmay

rchwillhaveone moretoolwithwhichto

orproblemsof thehistoryofB y antineart.

position itisnec essarytoprov ideabrief

nc ipaleventsof ustinian I ' sreign in-

tohaveabearingupon hisnumismatic

ustinian I , whosefullnamewas lav ius

sitiongivenheregoesintomoredetail thanwouldother-

hbecausemuchofthefollowinghasa bearingupon

andbecausenoneoftheavailablemodernstudies

eire aminationoftheperiodtofurnish anabsolutely

onologyofevents. thasbeennec essarytoree -

andtomakeafewnewinterpretationsoftheirinforma-

yalltheproblemsraisedaboutthese uenceof ustin-

i na g e.

sourceisthe ChronographyofTheophanes

815A . D. :TheophanisChronographia ed. C . deB oor

i s c o n te m po r ar y t h e a t ri a rc h Ni c ep h or u s w h o he l d th e

m806to815 wroteasomewhatlessdetailedaccount

fMauric e 582 602 tohisownday:Nicephori

opolitaniO pusc ulaHistorica ed. C . deB oor eip ig

esmaybesupplementedbythatofMichaelthe

obite atriarc hofA ntioc hfrom1166until1199 and

ationnotavailableinthehistories ustcited:

Sy r ie n e d . . - B . C ha b ot a r is 1 8 99 1 9 24 .

orians whosharedmanyofthesamesources

aterB y antineandSyrianc hronic lers f romwhom

Crea



use#cc-by-nc-sa-4.0


18/124

phyof ustinian I

ponthedeathofhisfatherConstantine V ,

merof685A . D . hewasthensi teenyears

atthattimeinsounderc onditionthanhad

ec ades Constantine V hadbeatenof f the

ultoftheMoslempowerinthe protracted

etween67 and677 andreassertedthe

o faithattheSi thO ec umenicalCounc il

681.ThisCouncilcondemnedtheMonothe-

eacc eptingthetwo ersonsofChrist preached

thepersonalityofChrist thisheresy

edbytheprec edingemperor Constans I ,

man ope Honorius whomtheCounc il

aheretic . O fConstantine V svariousac tions

re theonlyonewhichwaslessthanaresound-

ignof679against theB ulgars whohad

ewinformatione ceptfromanoccasionalindirect

e uentblunder usuallymistaking ustinian I for

n o r I . a r m or e n ea r ly c on t em p or a ry t o t he e v en t s

aforementionedisthe iber ontific alis ed. .

1886 whichsuppliesinformationoneventstak ingplacein

scompletelyreliablein itsaccountsofwhatwastran-

ndelsewhereinthe ast.Materialupononeepisode

sec ondreignisfoundinA gnellus biographyofA rc hbishop

writtenintheninthc entury : iber ontific alis c c lesiae

der- gger inMonumentaGermaniaeHistoriae Sc riptores

u m et t a li c ar u m sa e c. V I - X , H a n n o ve r 1 8 7 8 p p . 6 7 7 1 .

e tof thec hurc hc ounc ilheldunder ustinian I :

umConc iliorumnovaetamplissimac ollec tio X , c ols.

dernstudyof ustinian I isfoundinthe essay

e m pe r eu r a u ne c ou p , i n C h o se s e t ge n s de B y a n ce

7 2 1 1 w hi c h al s o e i s ts i n a p ri v at e ly - pr i nt e d n g li s h

owsliterallyandratheruncriticallytheaccounts

horus. O nlyslightlymoreromantic i edisadrama

co s ' E m p e r eu r a u me c o u p : C h ro n i u e b y a n t i ne e n

1929 ambitiousandelaborateenoughtota anytheater

eeStadium.

edac c ountof thereignsof ustinian whichfollows

sarenotindicatede ceptwherea uestionofinterpre-

mentbetweensourc es arises.

a n I , n a me d H e r a cl i us i s m en t io n ed i n a S a cr e d

nt in e V t o o pe B e n ed ic t I , u ot ed i n th e i be r o nt . ,

whichhasnotbeenpreservedinthepapalarchives pre-

the year684.Nofurthermentionofthis brother

edbefore ustinian I assumedtheimperium.

Crea



use#cc-by-nc-sa-4.0


19/124

kans andwhomhewasunabletodislodge

s.

nian I ' snewreignweredesignedto con-

engtheningthepositionof the mpire both

alliesandenemiesabroad.Tomake

etenetsofstric tO rthodo y heheldasynod

onf irmtheA ctsof theSi thCounc il. n688

c eforthisSynodissc atteredand inpart c onfused

ndrawnaboutitwhichhavea bearingupon ustinian

nc eptionofhisimperialfunc tionw ithregardtoec clesiastic al

togo intotheproblem:

sfirst mangledbyTheophanes where under

or pp. 61 2 , confusionwasc reatedbyanuncertainty

laterQ uinise teCounc il c f . below n. 14 , and

nes losingsightofthedistinctionbetweenthis

heSynodismentionedinthe ib. ont. , p. 68

onon srec eiptof ustinian ssac raregardinghisSynod

A c tsof theSi thCounc il andthesac raitself ispre-

Ma n si o p . ci t . X I , c ol s . 7 7 8 a t t he h e ad o f o ne t e t

Counc il theonewhic hithadc onveyed.

b y . G r r es J u s ti n ia n I u nd d a s r m i sc h e a p st -

I , 1 9 08 p p. 4 2 5 4 t h at u st in ia n I w a s ab ro ga ti ng t he

atriarchalauthoritytopublishtheactsofan

usthiswasthe firstmoveinaconcertedcaesaropa-

ngemperortobring theSeeofR omeunderthe

authority.Thisseemsratheran overstatementof

unts themostimportantbeingthelackofevidence

blicationwasconsideredtheparticularprerogative

rities tothecontrary theinitiativeineachofthe

takenbythereigningemperor fromConstantine

anycaseconsideredtobeinfringinguponclerical

eemperorhelde -of f ic io infac t therankofdeacon

nthesameway itwasc ustomaryfortheemperor

orcirculatingthecompletedactsof thecouncils.

foundreasontoob ec ttoc ertainof ustinian I ' s

c ationthathispromulgationof thete tsof theSi th

asinanywaydisapproved.

ingtheSynodseemstobe moresimple.Thereis

meofthe ActsoftheSi thCouncilwhichwasthe

acehadstrayedfromits placeinthepalace

dintheoff ic esof thec hanc ellery . C f . Mansi op. c it.

96 . Whenthevolumewaslocatedandreturned itwasdeemed

checkedineverywayforauthenticityandaccuracy

apsbecause astheemperorintimatesinhissacra

dbeencirculated presumablybyrecalcitrant

eoriginalvolumewasmissingfromits rightfulplace.

mayhavearisen furthermore bec ause early in

Theodore whohadbeendeposedbyConstantine V

Crea



use#cc-by-nc-sa-4.0


20/124

o no g ra p hy o f u s ti n ia n I

ampaignagainsttheB ulgarsandSlavsin

cceededinrelievingtheirpressureon the

ally aboutthesametime hec oncludedanew

onevenmorefavorabletermsthanthose

rtheroutof677 histroopshadbeenonthe

ernborders afactwhichmayhaveinfluenced

erpeac e andhisablestgeneral eontius

meniaandtherestof thesub-Caucasus which

into theMoslemorbit.

thisstringofsucc esseswasbrokenwhenthe

eB y antinesofv iolatingthetermsof thetreaty

he irstA rmenia anddefeated ustinian I ' s

stopolis.Whatevertheostensiblecauseof

tsresultwasclear:Armeniasurrenderedto

he mpirelostvaluableprestigethroughout

wever theemperorc ontinuedtoc onc ernhim-

swell.H eheldachurchcouncilona more

synodof686 inthesameTrullanH allof the

Si thCounc ilitselfhadmet sinc eneither

if thCounc ilof55 haddealtw ithmatters

e thisnewc ounc ilof ustinian I ' s meet-

sintendedtobesimplyacontinuationof theproceed-

eSi thCounc il forhisMonotheletev iews hadre-

totheSee ofConstantinople.AlthoughTheodore

rcircumspectionduringthissecondtermofoffice

desirableto takethisdramaticwayofdemon-

ullO rthodo tenets aswellasthatofhisemperor.

sdatesthenewtreatywiththeMoslemsat thebegin-

s r e ig n M o sl e m so u rc es d a te i t t o A. H . 6 9 / 68 9 A . D . :

A b d al - Ma l ik b . Ma r wa n T h e n cy c lo p ed i a of s l am

de n 1 9 54 p p . 76 7 . n v i ew o f t he u n re l ia b il i ty o f Th e op h -

cularpoint theMoslemchronologyseemspreferable.

forananalysisof thevariousimputedc ausesof the

ntinerelations. Whatevertheostensiblecause itwould

eaktookplacesimplybecausetheMoslemswere

umeactivehostilitiesoncemore andsowerepre-

ablyade uateprovocationservetheirpurpose.

inise teCouncilhasoccasionedmoredifficultythan

becauseofthevariousconflictingmethodsofkeeping

oradisc ussionof theproblem c f . H efele- ec lerc ,

I I " p p. 5 60 1 . . B . B u r y H i s t or y of t he a te r R o ma n

Crea



use#cc-by-nc-sa-4.0


21/124

gitselfsolelywithbringingupto datethis

tc ametobeknown therefore asthe

tissuedonehundredandtwoc anonsdealing

andc lerical inwhichtheauthorityof theChurc h

estated.

unfortunately byacouncilofclergy

asterndioc eses sothatwhenevera uestion

epracticesobservedinthe asternchurches

nions suchastheArmenianorthe R oman

ionwasinfavorof thefamiliarone.

ma orimportancewithregardtothe

althoughit wasthe atriarchofArmenia

eredhislandto theMoslemsthefollowing

nwithConstantinopleoverthesemattersmight

cedhisdecision butwhenitcameto offend-

ousmatterswereatstake.Theprincipalpoints

ticallevelweretherecognitionof85 Apos-

omeac know ledgedonly50 andtheasser-

ebishopsofConstantinoplewiththoseof

owhichseniorityofestablishmentdidnotentitle

tice theCouncilprohibitedfastingonSatur-

m itpermittedthelowerordersof theclergyto

dyinthatcondition apracticedisapproved

eHolySee thec ommandtoabstainf rom

strangledanimalsinfringeduponcertain

df inally adec reethatChristshouldberepre-

nd on 1 88 9 p p. 2 6 7 n ot e , p oi nt ed o ut t he c on fu si on i n

177 citedabove n.11 , wherethechroniclerhad

properlypreservedintheActsof theCouncil Mansi

1-1oo6 , butfailedtoplaceitintheproperera soTheoph-

706A . D. fortheCounc il. Heknewthatthismust

unc ilhadtakenplac eduring ustinian sf irstreign so

eCouncilat theverybeginningofthatreign

pportunitytoconfusetheCouncilwiththeSynod

ethelatterpart oftheMonotheleteControversy.The

o kp l ac e a s e cl e rc s h ow s d u ri n g n d ic t io V , t h at i s

A . D . b u t e c le r c , o p . ci t . I I " , p . 5 61 h i ms e lf

dictioV in692.

Counc il c f . Mansi op. cit. X I , c ols. 921-1oo6 theyare

e - e c le r c , o p .c i t. I I 1 p p . 56 2 7 5 . O u r ow n d is c us s io n

Crea



use#cc-by-nc-sa-4.0


22/124

g ra p hy o f u s ti n ia n I

ratherthanasa amb c ondemnedoneof the

symbolicearlyChristianimagerywhichhad

heWest.

ertainthatthe framersofthesecanonswere

tof theirof fenseintheeyesofRome " thetone

pressionthatthe asternbishopsfelt

nc olleagues inthosetroubledyears were

ewpointswhereunfortunatepoliticalcir-

rbarianinvasions hadcompelledtemporary

correctprocedure.

andmotivationsoftheframersofthe

thefactremainsthattheActsoftheCouncil

signedbytheemperor aswellasby the

ple A le andria erusalem andA ntioc h

notherbishopsand representativesof

reforwardedtoRome. There opeSergius

wasanaffronttohisdignity aswellasan

ndstatus notonlyrefusedtosign theActs

oninanychurchunderhis urisdiction.The

nformonths withactiondelayedbythe

ommunic ationstopassf rom asttoWestand

heemperorresortedtothee pedient suc cess-

ans I in65 , ofk idnappingthe ope. O n

tendedinalow-comedydebaclefortheimperial

andwasstrengthenedratherthanotherwise.

ofurtherc hanc eforreprisalagainstthe ope

soverthrownbyacoupledbyhis erstwhile

Theunpopularityengenderedby ustinian sde-

theCaliphateandthe apacyhadnot

wherebrutalministerscarriedoutapolicy

toweakenthetraditionalpowerofthenobility

. G r r es o p .c i t. s e es t h es e C an o ns a s w el l a s al m os t

n I did asadirectattempttoimposetheimperial

A sremarkedabove n. 11 itis uestionablewhether

thisguisetoeitherantagonistat thetime.

uestofA rmenia eontiushadbeenmadegeneralof

hehadbeenunderarrestforthreeyearswhic htakes

battleofSebastopolis andsuggeststhathemight

disaster.

Crea



use#cc-by-nc-sa-4.0


23/124

bflockedtothestandardof revolt and

omewhile ustinian I wasdisf iguredw ithslit

kenofdeposition andthene iledtoChersonin

eeyears until698 andtheonlyma orevent

rycampaignwhichresultedinhisdownfall.

onofMoslemterritoryledtothe fallof

eontiusdispatc hedapowerfulnavaland

srecapture.Althoughthise peditionhad

ndevenreoccupiedthecity theMoslemsin

ents f rightenedof f theB y antinef leet and

ofCarthagein698.

awareofitsdisgrace decideditsonly

entwastorebelagainstits emperor the

radmirals A psimar newemperorunderthe

andsailedforConstantinople. Theretheymetw ith

rthage eontiuswasdeposed mutilated

a n d e i l e d t o a mo n as t er y . Ti b er i us I I p r ov e d no t

underhisrulethe mpirewasableatleast

ee pandingMoslempower.

theCrimea ustinian I hadbeenforc edto

eauthoritiestherediscoveredthathewas

one. Hetookrefugew iththe haganof the

emostpowerfulof theH unnishtribesof thestep-

hagan ssister-german whomhenamed

, informedoftheseevents bribedthe hagan

ustinian I ; forewarnedbyhisloyalw ife

ondtime gatheredaboatloadofsupporters

iac rosstheB lac kSea.

of704 thelittlepartywinteredatthe

af tere perienc ingviolentstormsatsea and

ulgars whowereonlytoohappytocon-

inian I ' sc ampaigntow inbac khisthrone. t

of705 however thatthisbarbarianhost

ofConstantinople. Theinhabitantsofthe

eB oor p. 74 rec ordsthec aptureof thec ityunder

. , but ustinian sac tsof revengeunderthefollowing

4-5. Sinc ethelatteryearistermedthef irstof ustinian

Crea



use#cc-by-nc-sa-4.0


24/124


rsandcatc alls andmighthavestayedsafe

ramparts hadnot ustinianbeenableto

rposternneartheB lachernaegate occupy

andrallyhisownsupporters.Thefickle

sApsimaratthismoment and ustinian

ronewithouthavinghadtoresortto the

allowingtheB ulgararmyinsidethewallsof

ratedinthe H ippodrome towhichboth

eposed eontiusweredragged. usti-

the athisma presidedovertherac esw ithone

hisprostratefoes whilethemobchanted

theaspandthebasilisk thelionandthe

dunderfoot play ingonthenamesof

hentheraceswereover ustiniansent

gontobebeheaded. Hisvengeancefella lso

cus whohadconsec ratedtheusurpers he

to R o m e a s a li v in g w it n es s o f u s ti n ia n I ' s

waswroughtinthearmyand thecivilser-

pportedtheusurpersweree ec uted.

theemperordispatchedanarmadato

bac khisw ifeTheodora. Thisf leetcametogrief in

msforwhichthe B lackSeaisfamous

he hagansentamessagetohisbrother- in-

younothavesenttwoorthreeshipstofetchyour

dsomanymen Didyoue pec ttohaveto

earnthatasonisborntoyou sendandget

astthemotherand childweresafelybrought

hemusthaveassumedthecrownbeforethebeginningof

er thee ec utionofhisvengeanc eagainstthosehe

andtheceremonialrewardingofhisB ulgarallies

sumedsometime perhapsasmuchasseveral

, i n t he G r ee k v er s io n . Th i s is t h e su b e ct o f c ou r se o f t he

arrior intheA rc hbishop s alace R avenna c f .

menti tavolistorichideimosaic idiRavennaV , R ome

& l .B .

havethoughtso.The haganhadnotprovenhimself

sinthepast norwashetodosointhefuture. The

u o te d i n Th e op h . p . 7 5 a n d in M i ch a el S y ru s e d .

Crea



use#cc-by-nc-sa-4.0


25/124

stinianc rownedthemboth andruled ointly

owasnamedTiberiusinfurtherimitationof

n , theGreat.

ntchangesinthe leadershipoftheother

sc usandRome aswell. Abdel-Malikdied

gnofe ceptionalbrilliance tobesucceeded

rmoreferventpartisanofA rabisation. nthe

a bl e st o f t he G r ee k o p es o h n V I I , w a s

me. twasw iththis opethat ustinian I

ertheA c tsof theQ uinise teCounc il w ith

dedpapal signature.Theblinded a-

oubtedlyaneffectivemessenger buthe

etropolitanbishopsbearingthosesi

ushadrefusedtosign thirteenyearsearlier.

ohavebeen farlessoverbearingthistime

arieswerebishops notsoldiersasbefore

nwhich ustiniancouchedhisdemands

treme.H eurgedtheelderlypontiffto con-

Actsmightbecommunicated thissynod

canonswhichseemedworthyofapproval

wereunsatisfac tory . nstead ohnreturned

eemperor sayingthathecouldfind no

yethestillneglectedtosign Thus when

thewholebusinesshadtobe takenupall

sor Constantine.

esc ompleted ustinian I hadafallingout

he hanof theB ulgars andin708heledan

lac kSeac oasttoA nc hialus. Hisarmywas

andthesurvivorsreturnedtoConstantinople

yeartheMoslems onthemoveoncemore

dingcenterofTyana wellnorthofthe

areliefe peditionwasslaughtered and

romthistimeon MoslemraidsonB y an-

erandbolder smallpartiesofmarauders

phorus lootingandburningastheywent.

however thatoursourc eforthisepisodeiswhollyone-

o nl y i n th e i b . o n t. , p p . 8 5 -6 a n d no t i n an y

Crea



use#cc-by-nc-sa-4.0


26/124


ed inpreparationforthefull-scaleinvasion

ghtyearslater.

Constantinoplerec eivedthec eremonial

e Constantine whowashonoredw ithgreat

andhisson asourR omansourcesrelate.

eQ uinise teCouncilwereagaindiscussed

ponbutthe factremainsthatwehaveno

of692signedbyanyRoman ope.

tyreturnedhome whentheylearned

theyhad sorecentlyconferredwasdead

eriuswhohad metthemontheroadto

eredattheveryaltarofthe Churchofthe

ustinian sunremittingvengefulnesshadbe-

heob ec thadbeenhishomeofe ile

e peditionstotheCrimea designed ac -

topunishtheChersonitesfortheir attempt

Apsimar furnishedinsteadarebelarmada

himself . nef fect itwasthesamestoryas

preventedfromaccomplishingtheir

c eof the ha ars foundthemselvesobliged

astheonlypossiblewayof savingthem-

ortheirfailure.

eared butc ouldnotbec ertain thathislast

grief committedthetacticalerrorofleaving

ldarmy toscoutinthedirectionof

ay therebelf leetwasabletosei ethec apitalin

weresubverted and ustinian I felleasily

forinstante ec ution.

bertyof reducingTheophanes rec ordedfoure pedi-

ree: respectively pp. 77 81and44-8 sinc eTheoph.

entaspectsofoneandthesamee pedition. tmay

emaynot havebeenthesolemotiveforthese

inv iewofthec ontinualinterferenc eof the ha ars

ntsinand aroundCherson.

ontemporaryeventsinA rmeniaand a ic a c f . V .

s de s a ct e s du a t ri a rc a t , i p p . 12 7 8 w i th e t e nd e d

ustinian I hadgoodreasontofeartroublef romthat

theknowledgethatthechiefofthe rebelswasan

adedhimthattheywouldmovefirstin thatdi-

gConstantinopleitself.

Crea



use#cc-by-nc-sa-4.0


27/124

theArmenian hilippicusB ardanes as-

proclaimedtheMonotheletefaithreinstated

earingof this tookgreatalarm buthisfears

danes reignwasshort andMonotheletism

sionofpettyrulers whofollowedtothe

e scenefortheassumptionofpowerby

gr e at s a ur i an i n M ar c h of 7 1 7 A. D . w he n t he M os l em s

ge toConstantinople forthesecondtime

tisanotherhistory .

Crea



use#cc-by-nc-sa-4.0


28/124

U ST N AN I

aticevidenceforthearthistorianwill

period andfromcountrytocountry.B y

thefollowingstatementmaybeconsidered

ac oinsandtheirsucc essors theB y antine

eriods:Thesecoinsrepresentasignificant

raphy neverentirelyneglectedbythe

o bringmessagestothegeneralpublic

ereof thec oinagetendstoref lec t then

erialpolicyastheymaybesusceptibleof

rialiconography andinanycase are

nographythantostylisticcharacter.The

over partookofsomeofthesacredcharacter

traitsof theemperor. Thusthecoinagein-

entionsoftheimperialauthority toa

ccordingtothedistanceoftheissuing

authority andtheactualpowerthere

s i n th e c as e o f th e i ss u es o f u s ti n ia n I a r a di c al

tureof thetypesrepresented wecan

cantshiftin imperialpolicyitselfhad

en w illbetodesc ribethetypesofc oinsissued

rdescriptions webaseourworkbothonthe

eneralc ataloguesof theB y antinec oinage

ge aspresentedonc oins retaineditssacredc harac -

yof reverenceevenaftertheRestorationof the mages

eO rthodo ic onophiles isdemonstratedbythe

ec umenic alCouncilof869 Mansi op. c it. X V I ,

a dn er in D . O . a pe rs V I I , p . 2 n .1 56 .

ie r D e s c r ip t io n g n r a le d e s mo n na i es b y a n ti n es I ,

9 26 and 2 5 l .X X X V I I a nd X X X V I I I ; W . W r ot h

e Co i ns i n t he B r i t i sh M u se u m h e re a ft e r B M C I , o n do n

5a nd 5 4- 7 l .X X X V I I I , X L ; a nd . To ls to i M on na ie s

ss ia n V I I I , S t . e te rs bu rg 1 9 14 p p . 8 2 7 0 an d 89 0 6

Crea



use#cc-by-nc-sa-4.0


29/124

9

peciali edworksonthisimmediatesetof

c oinageof ustinian I , asthatofanyother

od wefindthattheprincipaldetermining

tingspecif ic ally tothec oinageof ustinian arethe

nQ uintino D ellemonetedell imperatoreGius-

1 8 45 a n d A. R . B e l li n ge r T h e Go l d Co i na g e of u s ti n ia n

gy I I , u ne 1 950 p p. o I I .

graph whichseemstohaveesc apedthenotic eof the

bove hasbeenlargelysupersededbytheirwork

posalconsiderablygreater uantitiesofspecimens

nclusions. tdoeshaveatleast anacademicinter-

valiantattempttosurveytheproblemsof thebron e

authorgathereda largenumberofpieces forthe

venance andalthoughmanymustnowbereattributed

udy ashasbeenshownbytheworkofR ic otti rina

otinthenatureofac atalogue butgivesac learidea

asthestylistic distinctionwithwhichthecoinage

ustbecredited. Thesameauthorhasreturnedtoarelated

ec entartic le CoinsandB y antine mperial olic y

1 95 6 p p. 7 0 8 1 .

ourownstudy althoughspecificallyconcerned

stinian I butw iththoseofhisperiodasawhole is

a f fr a nc h i L a n u m i sm at i ca d i e o n i o I . S t ud i o su

ione talo-B i antina Numismatic aeSc ien eA f f ini

V , 1 9 8 p p. 7 - 4 i b id . V , 1 9 9 p p. 7 1 5 9 1 -2 . R e -

say erugia 1940. af f ranc hi althoughnotaspec ialist

wasablebytheapplic ationof techni uesofstylistic

phicandpaleographicmethodologytomakeaset of

nsofmintsforthe taliancoinageofthisperiod

esucceededinidentifyingforthefirsttime thecoins

ei es p r ev i ou s ly a t tr i bu t ed t o e o I I b y me a ns o f a mo n o-

bron es whichmonogram inc ludinganunmistaka-

ra in t o e o nt i us r a th e r th a n to e o i d en t if i ed o n h is c o in s

simplee planationhasbeenfoundfortheidentif ic ation

hisc oinsas L eo inthefactthatthelatterwasthe

dathiscoronation theformerhisoriginalgiven

becametheemperorTiberius B ardanes hilippic us

of thepartsof thedoublename L eo eontius

chroniclerstooverlookhis officialname andretain

ng-standingconfusionofstrugglingnumismatists:

T h e My s te r y of e o nt i us I , N u mi s ma t ic C h ro n ic l e V I : 1 4

mportantstudybyDiegoR ic otti rina L amone-

e p oc a b i a n ti n a N u mi s ma t ic a X V I , 1 9 50 p p . 26 6 o &

ichfurtherc larifiesthesituationasregardsSic ilianmintsof this

erelatedproblems asweshallindicateinournotesbelow.

Crea



use#cc-by-nc-sa-4.0


30/124

ographyof ustinian I

egoldissues andmostspecificallyamong

fractionalgold butthec oinsinsilverand

velysimplesub-typestothesolidi althoughinthe

fgreaterlibertyin creatingvarianttypes

w iththenormaldif ferentiationsdemandedbythe

ominationalindications. orthepurposes

nlythetypesof thesolidineedbedescribed nor

e preciseepigraphyofthelegends orthe

presentedamongtheknownspecimens. or

thecataloguescitedaboveprovideinforma-

onofac orpus. af f ranc hi sessay ustc ited

e epigraphyofthecoinlegendsofthese

A NU S E A V B u s t of u st in ia n I , f a ci ng b ea rd le ss

imenwherehehasalightbeardandthe

) ; hewearsthec rownwith globus

semicircularornamentsurmountedbya

lamys thelatterfastenedattheright

lfibula inhisright handheholdsthe

A A V G U C r os s p ot e nt o n t hr e e st e ps b e ne a th

fficinalettersappearattheend ofthe

, .

o lidusf romtheA. M. riend r. Collec tion now in

usuallycataloguedtogetherwiththoseofourType

lingerhaspointedout belongstoadistinc tseries both

rtraitureand ofthedifferentobverseinscription

techangesindies. x amplesinc ludeB MC I ,

5 a nd 6 C on st an ti no pl e mi nt ; p . 3 7 2 C ar th ag e a nd p . 3 6

oCarthagebutnowattributedtoSardinia c f . below

o p. c it . V I I I , p . 8 7 1 & 1 6 a n d p. 8 4 , 4 1 C ar th ag e ;

s ma t ic a e Sc i en e A f fi n i V , 1 9 9 p . 8 l . , f i g s . 1- 2

d p .1 1 l . V , f i g s . 1- 2 R o m e .

D , for D ominus suggeststhatthistype

beforethedeathofConstantine V ; ustinian I was

usin680. B utinthisc aseweshoulde pec tthere-

hepluralwithreferencetothe Augusti whichit

b y d at e d e a m p l es t h e b e ar d le s s b r o n e c f. b e lo w

Crea



use#cc-by-nc-sa-4.0


31/124

2

ccurinthefractionalgold and

counterpartwithbeardlesspor-

A NU S E A V B u s t of u st in ia n I , f a ci ng c os tu me d

eardandmustache.

A A V G U C r os s p ot e nt o n t hr e e st e ps w i th m i nt a n d

b o ve . L A T , 2

nstantinopleminthastheimperial

ve whilethatf rom taly isdistin-

essportrait conventionalfrom

nominationsareindicatedbychanges

thereverse:on thesemisthecross

rtainlyatleastinpart af ter685. tisprobablybestto

tialissue ofthenewemperor carriedonlonger

thers.

ed b y a f fr a nc h i l o c. c i t. p . 1 1 l . V , f i gs . 1 7- 1 8 R o m e .

sodrawnourattentiontotheseriesofbron ec oinswith

meofwhichappeartohaveinscriptionsbeginning

althoughothersdecidedlydonot. O nec onsistentgroup

essportrait inbothfollesandhalf - folles hastheword

verse andisgenerallysomewhatheav ierthanotherbron e

of thesamedenominations. f aswehavesuggested

arlyyearsof ustinian I ' sf irstreignweredevotedto

monythroughouttheempireandabroad thisseries

nningofhisreignin adirectway.Noconclusions

drawn however untilfarmoreresearchhasbeen

andthedatede amplesfullycollated. ublished

t er o p. ci t. I , p . 26 2 1 T ol st oi o p. ci t. V I I I , p . 85 ,

8 a nd R . R a tt o S al e Ca ta lo gu e u ga no 1 9 0 N o. 1 69 6.

3 0 1 1 2 4 7 I o Constantinople ; p . 3 7 3 6 Carthage ;

th ag e- Sa rd in ia ; p . 4 1 5 1 R o me ; p p. 4 2- , 5 6 9 S ou th

o o p. ci t. V I I I , p p .8 5 4 0 - 12 1 4 1 5 1 7 2 6 p . 84 , 4 o

f ra nc hi l oc . ci t. p . 8 l . , f i g s. 4 C on st an ti no pl e ; p . o

R a venna ; p .11 l. V , 4 R ome ; p .12 l. X , 1 4 Syracuse ;

l . V I I I , 1 4 S . t al y , a t th is t im e ra th er t ha n

t r i na N u mi s ma t ic a X V I , 1 9 50 p p . 41 - 2 1 2 4 - o

. c it. pp. 12 3 & passim makesmuc hof thebeardless

mwiththoseontheW esternfractionalgoldtotoy

perorwasbeardlessthroughouthisentirefirstreign.

oldprovidesnoevidenceforthe imperialportraiture

olidi wereprobablyissuedoverafar shorterper-

Crea



use#cc-by-nc-sa-4.0


32/124

aphyof ustinian I

s P L A T , ) ; o n t he t r ie n s i t ha s

wb a rr e d fo o t P L A T , 4 .

T S R E X R E G N AN T U M B u st o f Ch ri st f ac in g w it h

nonimbus . H airandbeardf lowing wears

righthandinact ofbenedictioninfront

ospelsinf rontof leftbreast B ookmustbe

althoughthisisnotvisible infield

A NU S S R U C H R I S T T he e mp er or s ta nd in g fa c-

rsthec rownwithc ross andlong ewelled

os inhisrighthand heholdsthec ross

lef thand themappa. B eneath CO NO P .

ereoccupiesthereverseof the

ythe presenceofthemint-mark

thefac tthatonthetriens theonly

ertainlyknowntodate thecross

the plainbaseseenonthe reverse

L A T , 6 .

M C I , p . 3 3 , 1 9 2 1 C on st an ti no pl e ; p . 3 8 7 4 4

4 2 5 4 R o me ; p p. 4 - 5 6 1 -7 S . t al y ; T ol st oi o p. ci t.

7 4 2 4 4 6- 59 p p. 8 49 -5 0 6 7 - 71 a ff ra nc hi l oc .c it . p . 8

7 8 C on st an ti no pl e ; p .1 0 l . I I , 7 - 10 R a ve nn a ; p .1 1

o me ; p . 1 , l . X , 1 9 2 0 S yr ac us e ; a nd R i co tt i r in a l oc .

S yr ac us e .

3 4 2 5 C on st an ti no pl e ; T o l st oi o p. c it . V I I I ,

, p . 3 5 u nn um be re d C on st an ti no pl e ; p . 3 9 4 5 6

9 4 7 S ic il y ; T ol st oi o p. ci t. V I I I , p p. 85 2 7 7 8- 92 a f-

l . , 2 5 6 C on st an ti no pl e ; p .1 0 l . I I , 2 5 8 R a ve nn a ;

2 1- 0 S yr ac us e ; a nd R i co tt i r in a l o c. ci t. p p. 42 3 , 1 7 1 52 .

n e s in cl ud e th e ye ar s , I , I I , V ? ) , V I I , a nd

tedfrom685 theyearofac c ession ratherthanfrom

A ugustusin68o:cf . R ic otti rina loc . cit. p. 58

l g er R e g e s te n d er a i se r ur k un d en d e s O s t r m i sc h en

o 1 92 4 p . 28 n . 2 6 .

3 1 2 1 1 1 7 C on st an ti no pl e ; p . 3 6 1 C ar th ag e- Sa rd in ia ;

I , pp.84o- , 27 3 4 affranchi loc.cit. p.8 l. , 5 6 Con-

C I , p . 3 3 , 2 2 3 t r em i ss i s of C on s ta n ti n op l e ;

I , p.844 n.1 asemistakenfromSabatier op.cit. I ,

Crea



use#cc-by-nc-sa-4.0


33/124

- 2

R E X R E G NA NT U M B u st o fC hr is t fa ci ng s am e

butfacialtypeisdif ferent triangularshape

erow ofcurls whilethebeardis

A NU S M U L T U S A N B u s t of t h e em p er o r f a ci n g

globusc ruc iger and ewelledc ostume

d thec rosspotentonthreesteps inhis

A X , andsurmountedbyadouble-barred

ro ss . L A T , 7 .

howtheconventionalchangesin

heemperor srighthand. Henc e

sed theemperorisstillindicated

P L A T , 8 .

X V I I , 4 a p pa r en t ly d r aw n fr o m an a c tu a l pi e ce o n w hi c h

sacrosspotent onglobusbase butthelackof

urceinSabatiermakesitimpossibletosubstantiate

herwiseuni uec oin , andpp. 847-8 60- , all

f fr a nc hi l o c. c i t. p . 8 l . , 1 9 2 0 t r em i ss i s of C o ns t an t i-

. 3 4 2 6 7 C on st an ti no pl e ; T o ls to i o p .c it . V I I I ,

Sicilianbron esdatedtothe firstreignare

emperortypesimilarto thatofthereverseofthis

p . 4 0 4 8 5 0 a nd a ff ra nc hi l oc .c it . p . 1 , l . X , 2 5 6 .

hand onlyvariantsofstanding-emperortypeswhich

esestablishedbyH eracliusandConstans I . or

ic otti rina op. c it.

3 2 1 8 C on st an ti nop le ; p . 4 1 5 R o me ; p . 4 , 6 0 S.

o p. ci t. V I I I , p p .8 41 3 , 5 9 a ff ra nc hi l oc .c it . p . 9 l . I ,

o pl e ; a n d R i c ot t i r i na l o c. c i t. p . 5 7 n . 1 a t tr i bu t in g a

dinSanQ uintino op. c it. totheSardinianmint.

sthepossibilityof aSyracusansub-typeofthis

mperorinloroscostume butwithnormalstepped-cross

171. f thispiecehasbeenac c uratelydesc ribed this

tionshiptoourType I I asourType V -B doesto

uestionhingesonwhetherornot theemperorisactually

ype I I . nasmuc hasR ic otti rinawasunable

theillustrationinhissourc e asalesc atalogue we

thatthisismoreprobablya Syracusane ample

dition.

ow pp. 26f.

I , p . 3 4 2 4 C on st an ti no pl e ; p . 4 2 5 5 g iv en

p ob ab ly S ou th t al ia n ; p . 4 5 7 4 S . t al y ; T ol st oi

Crea



use#cc-by-nc-sa-4.0


34/124

aphyof ustinian I

R E X R E G NA NT U M B u st o fC hr is t fa ci ng e a ct -

ANU S T T B E R I U S P A U B u st of u st ini an I ,

bustofTiberius beardless onright both

wnsw ith globusc ruciger div itision and

swithhisrighthand acrosspotenton

thec enterof thef ield. L A T , 9.

showtheconventionalalterations

ythetwoAugusti confirmingthat

se o f t he c oi n P L A T , o .

ofType V savethatthec o-emperorshold

A X andsurmountedbya patriarc hal

e o f Ty p e I I .

w iththeproperepigraphic c hangestoac -

ce o f t wo A u gu s ti . L A T , I .

p . 8 44 4 5 c a ll e d a se m is b u t th e b as e o f th e cr o ss h e ld b y t he

pieceis almostcertainlyatremissisofwiderthan

48 9 6 4 6 a nd a ff ra nc hi l oc . ci t. p . 9 l . I , 4 9- 50

theabovearetremisses butinthepartof theWhittemore

mbartonO aksf romthe oggMuseumofA rt are

andfromtheConstantinoplemint.

. 3 5 2 8 C on st an ti no pl e ; a nd T ol st oi o p. c it . V I I I ,

i na l o c. c it . p . 4 6 1 7 2 S y ra cu s e , a s w el l a s an u n -

erbron esofvariousdenominationsatD umbarton

5 4 1 2 C on st an ti no pl e ; T ol st oi o p. ci t. V I I I , p .8 92 1 2

p . 9 l . I , 5 6 C on st an ti no pl e .

M C I , pp . 5 4 5 6 C on st an ti no pl e ; p. 5 6 I

; T o ls to i o p . ci t. V I I I , p p . 89 4 4 I o a ff ra nc hi l oc -

, 4 5 6 s e mi s o f Co n st a nt i no p le ; a p i ec e of 1 / 4- s ol i du s we i gh t

ampleintheShawCollec tionatDumbartonO aks.

. 5 5 7 C on st an ti no pl e ; T ol st oi o p. c it . V I I I , p . 89 5 1 2.

kconcurrentlywiththistypeare foundunder

below.

5 7 1 2 S . t al y ; T ol st oi V I I I , p . 89 , ; a ff ra nc hi l oc .c it .

5 6 R a v e n na er r on e ou s ly i d en t if i ed i n t he t e t a s a c oi n o f

andR ic otti rina loc . c it. p. 57 n. 1 thereattribution

ogue No. 1709 toSardinia. A notherof theseSardinian

llectionatDumbartonO aks.

Crea



use#cc-by-nc-sa-4.0


35/124

2 5

fthis typeareknownonlyfrom

ingissuesof / . . solidus whiletheob-

onventionalreversesonConstan-

happearstohavebeenthe normal

at t h at m i nt P L A T , 1 2 .

theB y antinemintsisfairlywell

s af f ranc hi sac hievementtoarriveatanew

lysisofthemintsof talyfortheperiod

nof eo I I , onthebasisofmorec omplete

ce loc alc ollec tions etc . thanhadbeenavail-

A tvarianc ewithWroth then af f ranc hi

n taly:atR avenna atR ome somewhere

nSicily . TheSic ilianmintof thisperiodc anbe

arkstohavebeenlocatedatSyracuse that

wasinc losetouc hwiththemintof the om-

tum mayhavebeenlocatedatNaples.

erecerc udyof theSic ilianc oinagehassupple-

af f ranc hi sf indingsabouttheseriesand

oinsof thisperiod " buthehasalsobeenableto

sof aparticulartypeastheproductof a

nia probablyatCagliari intheterritoryof

a. Thef irstissuesof thisnewmint whichhave

kCarthaginianone appearedduring

streign whenCarthagewasalreadythreatenedby

L A T , I ) .

onstothepreviousarrangementsofthe

anobtainthe followingpictureofthenumis-

m is i s p ub l is h ed b y a f fr a nc h i l o c . ci t . p . 1 2 l . V I I I ,

onlyagroupof1/2-solidusweightgoldpiec esareknown

inianmint c f . R ic otti rina loc . c it. p. 57 n. 1

i t. V I I I , p . 8 9 4 I , a n d R a t t o S a le s C at a lo g ue N o .

nowatDumbartonO aks isanothere ample.

own.

, p p. 3 5 - 6 8 1 o C on st an ti no pl e ; T ol st oi o p. ci t. V I I I ,

a f fr a nc h i l oc . ci t . p . 9 l . I , 5 7 -8 C on s ta n ti n op l e ;

7 - 8 R o m e e r r on e ou s ly i d en t if i ed i n t he t e t ; a n d R i c ot t i

46 1 7 S yr ac us e .

s of X X n u mm i a T o l s to i o p . ci t . V I I I , p . 8 57 .

1 asdetailedinthenotesabove.

Crea



use#cc-by-nc-sa-4.0


36/124

aphyof ustinian I

eignsof ustinian I , ac c ordingtothe

E : Typ e A , I , I I , V .

A .

A , I , I I , and V -B .

V - B .

A , I I , V , V -B .

p e , I I , V - B .

.

entwhichwehavefollowedinnumbering

ssuesof ustinian I is w ithafewe c eptions

nalorderusedinpreviousnumismaticstudies

etfac ts. tmaybewell atthispointinour

ontheotherhand thisarrangementises-

Thesearethe pointsonwhichitis based:

rliest struck bothbecauseitstypesare

ousnumismaticissues andbecauseit

beardlessboyhood. Type forthesame

atelyafter.

, ontheotherhand areplainlylate they

ndreign when ustinian sinfantsonTiberius

s. O n theotherhand theywouldappear

eorlesssimultaneously Type V atCon-

V -B elsewhereintheWest w iththebron e

servingatthec apital. ThisleavesonlyTypes I

edintheirrelativec hronologic alpositions wemay

milarityofTypes I I and V which although

ptionofanabsolutechronologicalprecedence

pe I I m ak e s it c l ea r t ha t t he m or p ho l og y o f

e d ir ec ti on I I I I I V r at he r th an I I I I I V .

tstothesameconclusion:wehaveal-

yp e s I , I I a n d V , i t i s Ch r is t w ho o cc u pi e s

noc lasme pp. 16 7 goestoc onsiderablelengthtorefutethe

op. c it. V I I I , pp. 842- , thatallourc oinsofTypes

hatisthosewiththec urly -beardedChrist- image wereofWestern

encethatonlythe smallerproportionofcoinsof

esternmints whilethebulkareof definitely

c f . af f ranc hi op. c it. esp. pp. 7 15.

Crea



use#cc-by-nc-sa-4.0


37/124

2 7

whiletheemperorisonthereverses. This

ecedentedintheimperialnumismaticicono-

sno parallelinearlierissuesof eitherChris-

theobverse thesideofgreatesthonor had

heimperialimageofhighest rank.This

bytheemperorto Christismostclearly

ype I , wheretheinc lusionof themint-markseals

geofposition. ThedesignofTypes I I and V

nc ludeamint-markand infac t themint-

nthesecoins. The uestionarisesasto

efirst:wasthemint-markomittedbecause

it orwasadesignchosenwhichleft no

)

factthattheemperororemperorsstillocc upythe

and V c anbedeterminedbyc omparingthe

hthebaseofthe crosspotentheldbythe

ec oin sdenomination. This however isan

lyonlywhenavarietyof goldpiecesisat

nsaree aminedoneatatime hencealess

c onoc lastic c oins too wheretheimageof

type thereisevenlessof anobviousindica-

oror theChrist-imageoccupiestheobverse

esbegins itisto beseenthatChristalways

whichmoreorlessby definitionisconsidered

riptionof thesecoinsof ustinian I , ' ic onoc lasme

e followshisownprec edentf rom ' empereur pp. 19 20

reverseamistakec ommon forthatmatter to

ec oins. udgingby inc onsistenc iesw ithin ' ic ono-

p . 1 6 C h ri s t on r e ve r s p . 1 7 C h ri s t on a v er s

on revers etc . theauthorismerelyunawareof the

dsymbolicdistinctionbetweenobverseandreverse

haspointedout thisistrueof theentiresc yphateseries

netypestruckbyR omanus V , whichappearstobea

doesnotoc c upythediebyhimself :B MC I ,

Crea



use#cc-by-nc-sa-4.0


38/124

M E R O R

hatthec oinsof ustinian I showafar

dartisticproficiencythanthoseofhis

anobservationwhichhasbeenechoedby

ldplacethebeginningof thec hangew iththelast

. A farmoreplastic c onceptionof theportrait-

ec tionof thec onventionali edtypeswhic hhad

seventhcentury infavorofe tremelydeli-

perydetails delineationofeyes etc . whichre-

onvincingrealismofimagery alltheseare

nthe Constantinoplemint.Thisnewstyle

ghthef irstreignof ustinian andthatof

hedistinctionin stylewhichmadethemisat-

rulersoconspicuouswhendisplayed

re s c he m at i e d t yp e s of e o I I a n d ev e n wi t h

thesecondreignandbeyond afull

ngdatearoundor before685.

sapparentinterestinthe ualityof the

sultimatec ause isastrongsenseofportraiture

these coins especiallythesolidi.W hatthe

edrealismofthecoinimagesmayhavebeen

teracompletee aminationofallthetypes

rtraitiscommontothreeof ourfivecoin

hedivitisionandchlamys crowned and

erof theglobuscruciger isseenonTypes

A T , - 2 , w h er e u st in ia n I a p pe ar s al on e a nd a ga in

- B P L A T , 9 1 1 , w h er e he s ha re s ho no rs w it h

whoiscostumedidentically.

Wrothusedtheterms mantleandrobe for

s andremarked thathereforthef irsttimehe

n . .

edattheDumbartonO aksSymposium 1957.

3 0 n. 2.

Crea



use#cc-by-nc-sa-4.0


39/124

9

nemperoraswearingthisformof non-

essed however thatinitsgenerallinesthe

donearlier issues asfarbackasH eraclius.

f fac t thatac arefule aminationof thec oin

real introductionofthiscivilcostume

mentthedevelopmentofB y antinec oin

ange.Therestrictionofthemesonthe

thefourthandthesi thcenturies which

described broughtabout bythetimeof

an asituationwhereinthevarietyofcoin

tremelylimitedindeed.Thesolidiborea

stportraitof theemperor atypewhic hhad

tu s I i n t he f o ur t h ce n tu r y P L A T I , 1 6 ;

armor wearingahelmet c arryingaspear

andbearingadecoratedshieldbeforehisleft

ueshadprofileportraits asdidthesilver

wasonthelast-namedmetalthattheonlyrec ent

ected underA nastasius whenanew

asestablished baseduponthefollisof 40

hdenominationofbron ecoinwasidentified

on thereverse denotingthevaluein

.

r5 8 9 however ustinian introduc ed

l-faceportraitsoftheemperor stillwearing

thac rowninsteadofahelmet andholdingin

c ru ci g er P L A T I , 1 7 . T h is w en t i nt o

houghthefrac tionalgold onwhichitwas

talbust tendedtocontinuetorepresent

efore.

ystemofdatingwasintroducedatthesametime

lngustobesoprec iseaboutthee ac ttimeof

hichthereverseswerenumberedaccordingto

ear. Thismakesitpossibletodatethebron e

ndofmanyofhissucc essors rightdownto

. 1 5 9.

I V , etc.

V , 11 2 l. V , 4 5 e tc.

Crea



use#cc-by-nc-sa-4.0


40/124


heprac tic ec anbelinkeddirec tly toaNovellaof 1

whichorderedtheabandonmentof theoldc ustom

e anditsreplacementbytheuse ofthe

heregnalyearof thec urrentruler.

tinian continuedtodominateB y antine

e c eptionstobedisc ussedlater untilthe

emperor inhisearlierissues af teremploy ing

hoc as c ontinuedthefrontaltype showing

mentumthrownacrosstheshoulders

1 8 . S ta rt in g ab ou t 61 1 4 h ow ev er H e r ac li us b eg an t o

tcostume usingalmostthesameelements

r mo r i s vi s ib l e P L A T I , 1 9 . T h i s w e

nningofthemantle-and-robe ormoreproperly

e.

nfull onsomelatercoinsofH eraclius

lltothewearer sank les anditwas

succ essor Constans I . Constantine V , on

dthistype andwentallthewaybac k tothe

aryportraitwhichhadprevailedfromthe

tothatof ustinian , andwhichmayhave

ewarlikepreoccupationsofhistroubled

, 2 0 ; h e a ls o e mp l oy e d so m eo f t he f u ll - fa ce t y pe s

ustinian , ustasheissuedaseriesofbron e

eandweightonlyto thoseofthatemperor.

d i d on h i s fi r st c o in s t h en w as t o r ev i ve t h e

Constans I ; whenhesoughttoassoc iate

duringhissec ondreign heusedthesame

. 9 .

C or pu s iu ri s ci vi li s e d. R . S ch oe ll a nd W . r ol l v ol . I ,

ustinian datedhisc oinsbyregnalyears andhis

mostofhissuccessors someinterestinge amplesof

dictionyearshaverec entlybeenidentifiedby . Grier-

Mauric e hoc as andH eraclius Numismatic Chronic le

pp. 49 70 l. I I I V .

X I I I , 1 .

X I I I , 2- .

X I I I , 4 9 etc.

X I I I , o -12 e tc .

X X , 1 2 1 5 e tc.

l. X X X V I , 1 1 1 2 X X X V I I , 9 1 0 16 X X X V I I I , 8 e tc.

Crea



use#cc-by-nc-sa-4.0


41/124

I

atedtypetoconveythesense oftheco-

fatherandson.

tn ia n I ' s c o in T y pe s V an d V - B p re s en t a

nality thisis iconographicallyspeaking

heideaof co-rulersclaspingasymbolof

ndicatetheir ointimperiumwascommon

tothefifthcentury theplacingof

ses ontheotherhand wasafavorite

eraclians.Theparticularcompositionhere

nodoubt forType V , whereitwasnec es-

supportthecrosspotent asasymbol

ecoin svalue whenthetypewasc arried

Type V -B , andthecrosspotenthadthe

mpositionwiththetwoco-emperorswasre-

D ominus ustinianus erpetuusAugustus and

tinianusetTiberius erpetuiA ugusti arein

nandB y antinetraditionsofc oinlegends

tendedtorestricttothe barestessentialsof

re.

asidefromwhatevidencewehavefrom

mains wecangainconsiderableinforma-

eremonies. D espiteitslatedate inthetenth

ityandtraditionalismofgarmentssuc hasthese

booktrustworthywithregardto general

lity.

mys whenassembledas bersolthas

c learthatthiswasthegarmentofhighestdignity in

oneoftheprimarysymbolsofimperialpower.

any indeedonnearlyallthe greatciviland

antium butitwasthegarmentwhichwas

sshouldersathisc oronation atthesame

egarmentsmaybefoundthroughoutthete t butChap-

k , spec if icallyc onc ernedw iththeimperialc ostume sum-

cularlyconvenientfashion:Constantin orphyro-

vr e de s C r m on ie s ed . A. V o g t a ri s 1 9 5 4 0 h er ea ft er D e C er .

p p. 1 7. 5 9 .

l a ng e s d h i s t oi r e et d a r ch o l og i e by a n ti n es e t r ac t f ro m

e de s re li gi on s X X V I ) , a ri s 1 91 7 p p. 5 6 .

Crea



use#cc-by-nc-sa-4.0


42/124


utonhishead itwasworn too bythe

atafal ue.Theuseofthe chlamysassuch

estric tedtotheimperialfamily whiletheimperi-

purplec loth embroideredingold therewere

escribedmaterialsandcolorswhichwere

of courtdignitaries.Astherobesofmanda-

embroideredwithdragonsof different

otheB y antinedignitarywasadditionally

oloredtabulum whoseembroideredde-

usand theoccasionofwearing.

ese uatedinB y antinewritingswiththe

eltedtunic-likegarmentslightlyshorterthan

ghtbewornnotonlyunderthatc loak but

it ak ion astheoc casionre uired. This

overgarmentatthecoronationuntilthe

yswasplacedovertheimperialshoulders.

wehaveconsiderableinformationinour

crownsusedfor variousoccasions but

asprovenimpossibletorelate thisinforma-

eofthecoinsandothermaterialremains.

ustinian I onhiscoins apparentlya

urmountedinfrontby asemicircular

asmallcross appearstohaveoriginated

andisf irstc learlydisc ernableonthatruler s

I , 2 1 . H e r ac li us a nd h is s on s w h en s ho wn w or e a

onwhichthecentralornamentcomesdown

clet andwhichwasinusefrom atleastthe

A T I , 1 8 1 9 . T h e ty p e of c r ow n i nt r od u ce d b y

eotherhand remainedinuselongaf terthefallof

y. tistheonlytypeofc rownseenonthec oins

ereverdetailisf ineenoughtoensurethata

ownisbeingportrayed untilthereignof

me anewc rownseemstobeintroduc ed w ithno

simplec rosssurmountingthef ront P L A T

1 .

X X , 12 1 6.

X I I I , 4 8 9 etc.

Crea



use#cc-by-nc-sa-4.0


43/124

3

B o t h t h is a n d th e p re ce d in g t yp e a re s e en o n c oi n s of t h e

mperors butbythereignofMichael V the

asbecometheonlytype used.Asmention-

ndicatethatmorethanonecrownwas inuse

narc hs atleastinthetenthcentury butweare

otheticalopinionasto whichonemayhave

andhencetheonerepresentednumismatical-

ghthcenturies.

eruler shandasa symbolofworlddomina-

greatanti uity intheRomanworld. A lready

ublic itwasheldbythegoddessRoma are-

edintoChristiantimes. nthelater

ostf re uentlysurmountedbytheNike who

a m e da l li o n of C o ns t an t iu s I P L A T I I , 2 4 ,

roughthefirstcenturyofthe Christian

ngthattimethetendencytowardChristiani a-

swassuggested asonacoinof theephem-

in 50 wheretheglobusisshownsur-

omonogram. tdoesnotappearto have

wever untilthereignofTheodosius I P L A T

a t a t im e wh e n th e cr o ss - sc ep t re a l so m a ke s i ts f i rs t n um i s-

sameseries andwhenthec rossasasym-

ceinthe imperialcoinage asapparently

religiousart asawhole.Asregardsthe

ver itbecameanintegralelementoftheimpe-

henew issuesof ustinian andassuchit

u s ti n ia n I , a n o rm a l a t t ri b ut e o f th e B y a n -

teps whichisusedonthe reverseofthe

onglobusorw ithoutbase onthef rac tional

c analsobetrac edasatypetothec oinsofTheodo-

l. X L V , 20 21.

l d i i n I n s ig n ie n u nd T r ac ht d e r R m i sc h en a i se r

5 p p. 11 7 2 0 .

, l . , 1 e tc .

l . o 6 .

c riptionhistori uedesmonnaiesf rapp essousl E mpireromain

1 8 9 2 p . 2 2 : a s o l id u s in t h e V a t ic an M u se u m.

l . 5 1 , e t c.

2 6 et c.

Crea



use#cc-by-nc-sa-4.0


44/124


forthef irsttimeanewreversetypeisintroduc ed the

oy inprof iletotheleft holdingbeforehera

incrosswhoseoutlineisdecoratedwithsome-

A T I I , 2 5 . O n t h eb as is o f th e le ge nd V O T X X

hisissuemaybelinkedtothevic ennaliaofTheodo-

ec ombinationof imperialpersonagesinwhosename

bversesofTheodosius I , hisw ife udocia his

ncleH onoriustheWesternemperor andhis

tpossibletodateit uiteprec isely totheyear

liarimperialimageof Nikeplantinga

wasintroducedonthe coinageofthe

I forgoodreason:theoccasionalmost

onofpeace theprecedingyear aftera

gainsttheSassanianrulerB ahramV ,

religiouspersecutionsagainstChristian

N u mi s ma t i u e b y a n t i ne e t a rc h o l og i e de s l ie u s a in t s

it B u c a r es t 1 9 48 p p . 78 - 94 . r o lo w s t h es i s ha s c er t ai n

pointedoutbyGrabar ' ic onoc lasme p. 28 n. 2

o sofarasGrabarin re ectingtheconnection

Theodosius I sotheractiv itiesc onc erningtheTrue

ac oincidencefora ewelledc rosstoappearatGolgotha

gningmonarch atalmosttheidenticalmoment.

hypothesi ingapriorerec tionbyConstantine on

n butthiswouldnotdestroythevalidityof rolow s

Theodosius I .

thebasic pointmadeby rolow wetaketheliberty

ub ec tof thisparticularissue inordertoamplifya

erwhicharegenerallyoverlooked.

l . 5 4 2 7 .

butlong-overlooked artic leby . . W. deSalis The

i a s u d oc i a l a ci d ia a n d H o n or i a a n d of T h eo d o-

e o , S t r u ck i n t a ly N u m is m at i c Ch r on i cl e N . S . V I I ,

hsessayshouldhavesettledonc eandforalltimethe

s. udo iaonthec oinsof thereignofTheodosius I ,

hat thelatterstruckcoinsnotonlyin thename

a b u t in t h at o f h is d a ug h te r u d o i a I w h o ma r ri e d

ndstruc kcoinsintheWestas ic inia udo ia but

datConstantinoplebythesamenameasher grand-

i a , w i fe o f A rc ad i us .

entoldagain w ithfullc redittodeSalis brillianc e

o y c e E u d o i a u d oc i a u d o i a : D a t ed S o li d i

A meric anNumismatic Soc ietyMuseumNotesV I , 1954

ayhopethatthedistinc tionsbetweenthesethreeladies

in.

Crea



use#cc-by-nc-sa-4.0


45/124

5

domain. nthepeacetreaty Theodosius I

erationoftheChristianfaithfrom the

torywasc elebratedasama ortriumphforthe

ith.

kenbythe crossonthiscointype

entfurnishestheclue.Only twoyears

T h eo d os i us I h a d se n t mo n ey t o e r us a le m t o

reat ewelledc rossonGolgotha onthesite

hisgreatornamentedc rossmusthavebeenthe

cedin thehandoftheNike onthecoinsof

orsucceedingrepresentationsofthecrossas

imperialvictory.

ucceedingrulers asthecrossmightor

ewellededges andastheNikewasturned

stransformedintoatrueAngel wearingmas-

negarments onthec oinsof ustin , f rom

A T I I , 2 6 . i na ll y o n th e co in s of T ib er iu s I ,

roppedentirely andthecrossonsteps

ersetypeofthesolidi asseenonthe first

. O n t h e o th e r ha n d a s r o lo w h as s h ow n o n

ustinian I ac tually revertstotheearliertype

kewhooriginallysupportedthevictorious

I I , o f co u rs e t h e em p er o r is w e ar i ng a d i ff e re n t

me c harac teri edbytheloros thebroad

etc . butthefullestGreekac countisinSoc rates H istoria

18 2 1 M ig ne . G . X V I I , co ls . 77 8 4 . T oo bt ai n a

of thepic ture c f . A . Christensen I ransousles

en 1 9 44 p p . 26 9 8 1 . . o l lw i t , O s t r m i sc h e l a st i k

it B erlin 1941 isanablegeneralsurveyof thearts

i t.

u s ti n t he i r st C am b ri d ge 1 9 50 p p . 41 8 2 6 .

noc lasme pp. 27 8 suggeststhataConstantinianprec edent

berius inestablishingthistype andthatthere

tinianmonumentinConstantinopleitselfwhich

sore ec ts rolow semphasisonthec ontinuityof

reverses feelingthatthiswasmuchmoreof an

p . 9 2 .

Crea



use#cc-by-nc-sa-4.0


46/124


welledscarfwhichwaswornwoundaboutthe

withitsendsfallingalmostto thefeet

7 . Contemporarydoc umentationonthisc ostumeis

eintheB y antinec eremonialcanbeascertained

leB ookofCeremonies andmostparti-

hechapteronthe imperialregalia. n

eloros mentionedwithreferencetoonlyone

day when af terthepreliminaryceremoniesin

nAkoubitoi theemperorputonthe loros

rown asitpleaseshim whiletak ingasceptre

eane ikakiainhisright. nthisc ostumehe

on theimperialrobingroomattheGreat

dthelorosin favorofthechlamysbefore

sceremonialsthere.Aftercommunion he

returntothe alace.Soimportantwasthis

onstantine orphyrogenitusleftamonghis

yonthesignific anceof thec ostume:B ook I ,

Whyitisthaton asterSundaytheemperor

nsulsandthepatric iansweartheloros. H ere

ssymboli ingboththedeathand the

heloros woundaboutthebody likeaw ind-

edwithgemsandembroideredwithgold the

svictoryoverdeathbymeansof thecross

oll w rappedinc lothandf illedw ithdust rec alls

brac edbytheB ookof ife.

however:immediatelyafterthisdescrip-

planation namely thatthec ostumeand

entially thoseof theancientc onsulsofRome

ricians then asareminderof thegloriesof

nbec amek ingsforayear andassumednot

ttheheavyresponsibilitiesoftheadministra-

ue obviously:eveninthetenthcenturyit

1 n . 15 .

e i sk e B o nn 1 82 9 p p . 6 7 9 . Cf . . B . B u r y T he C er e-

nine orphyrogennetos nglishHistoricalR ev iew

1907 p. 225:Thissection hasnospec ialmarksofConstantinian

torysentenceisunlikethegeneralstyle oftheD e

eft openwhetheritwascompiledbyConstantineor

olderwork .

Crea



use#cc-by-nc-sa-4.0


47/124

7

costume ofwhichtheloroswasthemost

wasthatof theRomanc onsuls. nthehistory

eB y antineemperors andinthehistory

mayliesomeoftheanswersweseek . etusf irst

onsistedatthe apogeeofitssplendor.

ntofthe monumentsrelatedtothe

thec onsulardiptychs hasrevealedmostof

ytoanunderstandingoftheconsularcos-

ntsofthedresswereas follows:theunder-

unicwith fullsleeves.O verthiswasworn

eevelesscolobium anothervarietyoftunic

eredtheconsularregaliain thecourseof

outermostwasthec onsulartoga which

otheimportanceof theoc casion eitherthe

aywear orthepurpletogawhichbears

whic hinitshighestgradeswasofgold em-

preciousstones.Thiscostumewascom-

oots orcalcei andtheinsigniaofoffice

p a an d t he s c ep t re P L A T V , 2 9 .

e withapurpletrabearatherthan the

wornbytheV iric onsulares themenofc on-

themselvesduringtheirtermofofficewore

antly thetriumphalc ostume w iththetunic

gold thec olobiumalsopurple andthe

lopedduringthehistoryof the mpireintothe

ratedw ithgoldrosettes. twas ohn ydus

thesi thc entury f irstappliedtheGreekword

armentshadtheirantec edentsinRomanR e-

theyhadvagueassociationswithstillearlier

y.Thebasicelementsofthecostume which

Triumphator werethetunicapalmata

picta thesewerethegarmentswornby

i e C o n su l ar d ip t yc he n u nd V e r w n d te D e n k m l e r B e r l i n 1 9 29 .

p. 4 4 .

p. 5 4 .

Saglio Dic tionnairedesanti uit sgrec uesetromainesV ,

a b y G. B l u m.

4 9: T og a b y . C ou rb y.

Crea



use#cc-by-nc-sa-4.0


48/124


pitolinus whobestowedv ic toryuponthe

mperorA ugustusmadethetogapic taapartof

orceremonialoccasions thetriumphaland

allylostwhateverdistinctionsmayhave

priortothistime andbythesec ondcenturyof

andpurposesidentic al atthesametime

orec eiveatriumphhadbecomethee c lusive

rs sothattherewasno suchthingasa

yothermemberofthestate.D uringthe

beaortogapic taassumeditsf inal narrow

t inrepresentationsoftheloros.

tothis triumphaliconographyofthe

herewasoneattributewhichwas not:the

eldinthe consul srighthandat thegames

nthef irstof anuary hisinaugurationday

thesignaltocommencetheperformance.

dontheconsulardiptychshavethe appear-

kethenapkinsforwhichtheywerenamed

themappawasgivenaddedfirmnessby the

nsidethecloth asdescribedbythe

B ookofCeremonies. Thistypeofmappa

akakia whenc etheparentageof theB y an-

.

themappawas andalwaysremainedso

oftheconsularofficeproperlyspeaking

producerof thespectacles isclearfrom

toCassiodorus itdatesf romthetimeof

yedthestartof thegamesbystayinglateat

uncheon.W henthecrowdinthe nearby

waitingsolong theemperorthrewhis

hedining-hall asasignalthattheproceed-

im. D espitethepatnessof thestory and

: T r iu mp h us b y R . G a g u at .

ct. T e t p . 54 .

mb e rg & S a g l io o p . ci t . V , p . 5 2 .

c t. T e t p p. 62 3 .

a r ia e I I , 5 1 e d . Th . M om ms e n M . G. H . a u ct o re s

B e r l i n 1 8 94 p . 1 06 . T he t o po g ra p hy o f t he a l at i ne i n r e-

einR omewouldnotmakethisfeatan impracticalone.

Crea



use#cc-by-nc-sa-4.0


49/124

9

dentshaveshowntowardit thereisno

ortheuseof thenapkin-mappaatthegames

o.

er underwentama oralterationinthecourse

changewhichsomecommentatorshavecon-

d oftheconsulateitself. What hadhap-

meof ustinian thec onsulatehadbe-

maldignity bestowingonitsbearer

ertaingames notablythoseofthefirstof

salsopriv ilegedtof reeslaves andtheright

cgiftsin honorofhisappointment but

omeanalmostintolerableburdenfor any

urdenofwhichtheemperorc ouldnotbutbefully

turythelastof thec onsulsretiredinRome

rcertainlapsesofappointment thenamingof

n541. Thisdidnotmean however thatthe

oe ist instead theremerelyceasedtobe

e.Atthe sametime thereremained

titlee -c onsul whichforc enturieshadbeen

erouslyuponmenwhohadneverheldthe

aswellasuponthosewhohad f rom541

mmonthanever.

sulateproperbecamepurelyanimperial

rorassumedmoreorlessautomaticallyupon

assuch itsdutieswereamalgamatedwiththe

mperialresponsibilities tosuc hane tent

became ustanothertitletobe citedina

nities withoutanydistinctionofitsfunc-

n wasthef irstemperortoc elebratethis

a gl io o p. c it . I I , p . 15 9 : M ap pa b y . o tt ie r.

The mperialA dministrativeSystemintheNinthCentury

2 5 6 .

gi o o p . c it . , p p . 14 6 6 8 1 : C o ns u l b y G . B l o c h . r e ei n g

s wasdoubtlessanothervestigeof theprerogativesof the

ofthe laterhistoryoftheconsularofficeandtitles

m p ir e w i th a r s u m o f p re v io u s sc h ol a rl y o pi n io n i s t ha t

x c onsul. O bservationssurl histoireduc onsulat l po ue

a nt io n X I X , 1 94 9 p p. 7 -5 8.

Crea



use#cc-by-nc-sa-4.0


50/124

aphyof ustinian I

66 " itwasatthistimethattheimperial

ntotheconsularregalia.

atthistimethattheconsularc ostumereappears

signif ic antly ustatthemomentthatthe

clusivelyanimperialoffice. tsfirstoccur-

y ea r o f u s ti n I ' s s u cc es s or T i be r iu s I

, 2 7 ; t h e ne t e mp er or M au ri ce T ib er iu s i ss ue d at

duringhisreign c onsular typesinbron-

n d go l d. h o ca s t oo m i nt e d bo t h so l id i a n d br o n e s

rthefirst timetheconsularsceptreappears

eadofbytheimperialRomaneagle P L A T

theimageof theemperorasc onsulforthe

eraclius onaseriesoverwhic htherehad

butwhichhasnowbeensatisfactorilyeluci-

esameemperorraisedhiseldestson H eraclius

rrankontheoccasionofhis owntriumphin

sfulc onclusionof the ersianWars thereaf ter

onsularof fic e althoughbothConstantine V

d ib u s u s ti n i mi n or i s V , e d . a r ts c h M . G . H . a u ct . a nt .

in 1 87 9 p p . 14 7- 56 .

4 , e d. a rt sc h l o c. ci t. p .1 5 .

follesduringtheinitialyearofhisreign allofTiber-

apiec es andmanyofhisotherbron ec oins wereof this

l . X I V , 5 6 l s. X V & X V I , p a s si m. T he re i s al so a n

artype whichincludesintheobverselegendthe

V I V A T E L I X : b id . , l .X I I I , 2 0.

V I I , 8 l . X V I I I , 2 & 4 a r e co

the numismatic iconography of justinian ii (685-695, 705-711 a.d.) / by james d. breckenridge

Documents