"Barbarous" Coinage of the Fourth Century

    The term ‘barbarous coinage’ refers to imitative coins which are often crude in style. There are several theories about the origins of these coins but the easiest and possibly best explanation is that they were minted because of a shortage of official coinage.  This easy explanation surely does not answer every question though, like why fourth century imitations do not turn up as often (in comparison to rest of the Empire) in what is now Spain, even though the  diocese of Hispaniae did not have a mint. So there are no easy answers or maybe there are some aspects of this that historians are missing. Firmicus Maternus, who lived in the fourth century, even said that an alignment of the stars and planets influenced forgery. Maternus was probably wrong, though!
 

Mars allots 20 months to Mercury. When Mercury accepts these months he rouses certain dangers from things written, or he inflicts loss from forgeries. But often he will have enemies destroyed in various ways. If Mercury and Venus are in conjunction, in square aspect, or in opposition, they indicate the crimes of forgery and counterfeiting, especially if Mercury is found in the house or terms of Saturn.          Ancient Astrology: Theory and Practice 35:6.

  I have used various terms to describe these coins, but I believe that there are distinctions. "Unofficial" is a good blanket term for any coin that was not struck officially-- then there are counterfeits and imitations. Counterfeits were made to fool people and circulate as official coinage. Some of these coins do indeed look official and would pass casual inspection. In fact, it seems most likely that some of these counterfeiters worked in the mint, as evidenced by this announcement from Constantine in A.D. 321--

"Since some imperial minters are secretly and criminally engaged in the coinage of counterfeit (adulterinus) money, all shall know that the necessity is incumbent on them of seeking out such men, that they be tracked down and delivered to the courts, so that they may forwith betray the accomplices of their deeds through torture and thereupon be sentenced to suitable punishments."  Theodosian Code 21:2

We have learnt that many metalworkers (flaturarii) are purging the maiorina coin (maiorina pecunia) no less criminally than frequently by separating off the silver the bronze. Therefore, if anyone is caught in this operation from now on let him know that he is to suffer capital punishment, and indeed those who own the house or land that they are to be punished by the confiscation of property to the largitiones: Our Clemency is naturally to be informed of the names. Theodosian Code 21:6

     Some of these coins probably came from “well organized work-shops.”6  It appears that mint workers may have been able to "borrow" official reverse dies and use them in their workshops. The obverse dies( with the imperial portrait) were kept locked up when not in use. 7So some of these coins look very good in style and that is why I would call them counterfeits versus imitations-- as there seems to be intent to deceive. On the other hand, imitations would not have really fooled anyone because the style was often crude.These crude imitations would not have had to come from well-organized workshops, but could have been minted nearly anywhere...including a farm-- "if money should be secretly stamped and coined on a farm or at a house..." (Theodosian Code 21:4) Generally, imitations of coins from the first period, like the VLPP, were very close in size and usually about 4/5 of the weight. Sometimes these imitations were even silvered, just like the official issues. As time went on, the imitations became reduced in size and become very small. These small imitations are called minimissimi. It is not known for sure what any of these imitations(normal or reduced size) traded for, but a few hoards comprised of almost all imitations suggest that these coins were not worth as much as official coinage. 8

    The fourth century was a time of great change in the Roman Empire. Many Germanic people were living in Roman territory. The Roman Empire needed the influx of people for labor, to farm the land and protect the borders from other Germanic people. During the reign of Constantius I, “the whole nation of the Carpi was transferred”(Aurelius Victor, De Caesaribus 39: 28) to Roman land. So some of these barbarous tribes actually lived in the Roman Empire, with many more near the borders or limes. The Romans called them foederati. The foederati  were allies of Rome, but not citizens. Circa 332, Constantine was victorious over the Goths and he converted them “from a lawless animal existence to one of reason and law. In this way the Goths learnt at last to serve Rome.”(Eusebius, Life of Constantine book IV, 5) so along the borders, the population was probably actually more ‘barbarian’ than Roman. These Roman borders were very porous, and there was a lot of movement back and forth, especially in the Middle Danube.

     Could Germans (living in Roman territory or near the limes) have minted some of these coins? Could these coins have been a form of notgeld (emergency coinage) or monnaie de nécessiteé? The area of the near the limes most likely to have seen these coins used would have been the Middle Danube ( now modern day SW Slovakia, S Moravia and lower Austria north of the Danube). This area was under "strong Roman influence as a result of its proximity to the Roman Empire."9 So,  yes...of course they could have minted these imitatives,since they were more than capable and had for many years been using Roman money. Tacitus (who wrote Germania in the first century A.D.) said that the Germanic tribes, “value gold and silver for their use in commerce, and are wont to distinguish and prefer certain of our coins. They like old-fashioned coins because they have been long familiar with them-- especially those which have notched edges and are stamped with representations of two-horse chariots.” (Tacitus Germania Book 5)  Tacitus also said that Germans only used coins as currency on the frontiers, while in the interior coins were treated as bullion. (Tacitus Annals 12:30)  The Germans are known to have made copies of denarii, aurei, siliquae and solidi, so it seems quite likely that they would have also minted imitations in bronze . 10There is also a clear picture of Germans using Roman products in the Middle Danube region. There are Roman imports of all kinds and not just luxury items (see fig. 1 below)-- in other areas of Barbaricum luxury goods usually only turn up in graves. Roman tableware is found and there is a widespread distribution of Roman pottery (some of which may have been only for export to the Germans, as it does not appear inside Roman territory) which demonstrates that Roman influence extended to all levels of Germanic society in the Middle Danube area (see fig. 2 below). There have even been buildings excavated that were built in the Roman style (hypocaust heating and one with a bath house) but apparently used by Germans. In the fourth century, Roman traders would have re-introduced coinage into this area. "Roman coins were not confined to transactions with Romans, but were used in exchanges between Germans as well, whereas in regions more distant from the frontier Roman coins were regarded as bullion rather than currency."11 There is also a high proportion of bronze to gold and silver (just like in Pannonia) which suggests everyday usage and the large number of coins that are found represents casual loss versus intentional hoarding.12

Many of these imitations are found along the limes, especially in the Danube and Balkans regions and it is reasonable to assume that wherever large amounts of imitations turn up, it is probably the vicinity that they were also minted.

both of the above figures are from Pitts, Lynn F. “Relations Between Rome and the German ‘Kings’ on the Middle Danube in the First to Fourth Centuries A.D.” JRS  79 (1989) : 45- 58.

    The stylistic differences on these coins makes more sense in the terms of a different culture. Some of the VLPP’s for example, bear little resemblance to the familiar figure of two victories holding a shield over an altar. To a Germanic engraver, this imagery would not have been quite so familiar, and so it became so highly abstract that one may have difficulty recognizing the original model. Maybe the engraver knew that the people that would use these coins would not know better or even care. Some examples seems to show that the engravers were copying previous barbarous issues instead of official versions of the VLPP-- as if they did not  care what the official coinage looked like. Sometimes the style is very good on these coins, but other times the style is so abstract that it is hard to tell what the engraver wanted to depict.  So even if these coins were not minted by ‘barbarians’, it seems plausible that the coins were meant to be used by the Germanic people and others.

    Why was the Siscian VLPP so widely copied? Constantine defeated Licinius in the 1st civil war in A.D. 317 and took over the territory of Siscia. He soon began striking the VLPP coinage; which was a reintroduction of a type Constantine struck after the defeat of Maxentius, though the earlier type was in billon. This new VLPP did have about 4% silver, versus the old IOVI coinage of about 2%; which Licinius continued to strike in his territory. So, almost overnight, people wanted Constantine's new and improved coinage. The mint of Siscia could not have struck coins fast enough. Sometimes you can even find IOVI coins overstruck with unofficial VLPP's, showing the immediate need for "good" coinage. It seems that Constantine's reuse of the "Eternal Prince" reverse was a shot at Licinius and his re-tarrifing was a further line in the sand. Constantine was basically saying that not only was Licinius a lesser Emperor, but his coinage was worthless. As widespread as unofficial VLPP's became, it seems that much of the Empire and surrounding areas agreed. Licinius eventually began striking his coinage at an even further reduced value (the reverse even said they were worth 12.5-- half of the regular nummus) and continued to lose support and his currency became almost worthless.
 

    There were multiple laws passed condemning counterfeiting. The fact that so many laws were passed possibly tells a lot about what was going on. One law would indicate a problem...multiple laws meant that there was a much bigger problem. Part of the problem was the inability of the Imperial government to stop counterfeiting and this stemmed from the fact that on a local level, little or nothing was or could be done to stop the problem. For instance, in a province, the local authority might not care at all if the people minted stop-gap currency to alleviate a shortage of official coinage., after all what kept the people happy made for a peaceful province. Even if the local official wanted to stop illegal minting,  he may not  have had the manpower and/or resources to stop it. The further away from the Emperor, and the reach of the Emperor, the less of a problem counterfeiting imitatives probably seemed to people. It seems likely, that for the most part, imitatives were tolerated.
 

Theodosian Code 9:21:2
Since some imperial minters are secretly and criminally engaged in the coinage of counterfeit money, all shall know that the necessity is incumbent on them of seeking out such men, that they may be tracked down and delivered to the courts, so that they may forthwith betray the accomplices of their deeds through torture and thereupon be sentenced to suitable punishments. (20 November 321)

9:21:3
If any person should mold a coin by false casting, We command that all his property shall be confiscated to the fisc and that he shall be punished with statutory severity, in order that such zeal for coining money may prevail only in Our mints. (6 July 326)

9:21:4
It was formerly established as law that, if money should be secretly stamped and coined on a farm or at a house without the knowledge of the owner, the fisc should vindicate to its own ownership the seat of the crime. Now it is our pleasure that a distinction shall be made, namely that if the owner dwells…at a very long distance from the said house or landholding, he shall sustain no loss. (4 May 326)

9:21:5
A reward is offered to the accusers of any persons who can be found to be counterfeiters of solidi or who are brought before the public authorities by anyone for this crime. Such criminals shall be delivered to the consuming flames immediately and without delay. (18 Feb 343)

9:21:6
We have learned that some metal casters purge the majorina criminally and frequently, by separating the silver from the bronze. If any person hereafter should be apprehended in this trickery, he shall know that he has committed a capital crime. Also those persons who furnish the use of houses and lands to counterfeiters must be punished by the delivery of their property to the imperial largesses. Of course, Our Clemency must be informed of the names of such persons. (12 Feb 349)

9:21:9
Those persons guilty of making false money, who are commonly called counterfeiters, are held liable to the criminal charge of high treason. (27 June 389)

---

Assorted unofficial 4th century bronze coinage
note that the majority of coins are from Western mints, except for VLPP from Siscia; which were very highly copied. Scroll down for Siscian VLPP.

London	Constantine I circa A.D. 321 18x19mm  3.1gm CONSTA-NTINVS AVG; helmeted and cuirassed bust right. BEATA TRAN-QVILITAS, globe set on altar inscribed VOT/IS/XX; above, two stars; ✶ in left field. In ex. PLON Cf. RIC VII London 222 note the two stars at top instead of three and star in left field
	Constantine I Circa A.D. 319 17mm 2.1gm VICTORIAE LAETAE PRINC PERP London
	Constantine I circa A.D. 318- 319 18mm     3.3g IMP CONSTANTINVS MAX AVG; laureate helmeted and cuirassed bust right. VICTORIAE LAETAE PRINC PERP; two Victories stg., facing one another, together holding shield/ wreath inscribed VOT PR on decorated altar. In ex. PLN cf. RIC VII London 154
	Constantine I Circa A.D. 318- 319 17x18mm    2.9gm CONSTA-NTINVS AVG; laureate helmet and cuirassed bust right. VICTORIAE LAETAE PRINC PERP; two Victories stg., facing one another, together holding shield inscribed VOT PR on altar inscribed with a diamond shape. In ex. PLN cf. RIC VII London 161
Lyons	Constantine I A.D. 322- 323 17x18mm    2.7g CONSTANT-INVS AVG; laureate and cuirassed bust right. BEATA TRA-NQVILITAS; globe set on altar inscribed VOT/IS/XX; above, three stars; across fields C-R. in ex. PLG• RIC VII Lyons --
	Constantine I GLORIA EXERCITVS 15mm    1.3gm Unofficial issue Lyons Constantine I or maybe a Caesar
	Constantine II Circa A.D. 324- 325 14mm    1.4gm CONSTANTINVS IVN NOC; laureate and cuirassed bust left. PROVID-EN CAES; campgate with two turrets and star between. In ex. • PLG •
	VRBS ROMA/ Constantinopolis Circa A.D. 330-331 16mm    1.9g Obv. VRBIS ROMA; Roma, helmeted bust left, wearing imperial cloak. Rev. Victory stg. on prow, holding long scepter in r. hand, and resting l. hand on shield, seen from side. In ex. PLG Cf. RIC VII Lyons 241, 242 Ex 1989 Nether Compton (Dorset) Hoard
	Constantine II A.D. 330-331 16mm    1.5g CONSTANTINVS IVNOB C; laureate and cuirassed bust right. GLOR-IA EXERC-ITVS; Two soldiers helmeted, stg. facing one another, reversed spear in outer hands, inner hands on shields resting on the ground; between them two standards. In ex. •PLG cf. RIC VII Lyons 244 Ex 1989 Nether Compton (Dorset) Hoard
	Constantius II Circa A.D. 350 13mm   1.4gm D N CONSTANTIVS P F AV; pearl diademed, draped & cuirassed. FEL TEMP [REPARATIO]; Soldier spearing fallen horseman. In ex. CPL[G]
	Constantius II A.D. 348- 350 21mm     5.0g DN CONSTAN-TIVS P F AVG; pearl-diademed, draped & cuirassed bust right. FEL TEMP REPARATIO; Emperor in military dress stg. l., holding phoenix on globe and standard with [Chi-Rho]; in stern sits Victory, steering ship. In ex. SLG cf. RIC VIII Lyons 69 Freckenham Hoard of 1948
	Constans A.D. 342- 343 13mm    1.1gm CONSTANS P F AVG; rosette- diademed, draped and cuirassed bust right. VICTORIA AVGVSTORV; Victory walking to left, holding wreath and palm. In ex. SLG cf. RIC VIII Lyons 37
	Decentius A.D. 350-3 23x24mm    3.8gm DN DECENTIVS P AVG; rosette-diademed, draped, cuirassed bust right. [FELICI]TAS PVBLICE; Emperor standing left holding Victory on globe in right hand and labarum. In ex. RPLG Decentius was never Augustus….Compare with RIC VIII Lyons 112 for Magnentius
Trier	Constantine I Circa A.D. 318 16mm    2.6gm IMP CONSTAN-TINVS [AVG]; high crested helmet, cuir., spear across r. shoulder, shield on left arm VICTORIAE LAETAE PRINC P; two Victories stg., facing one another, together holding shield inscribed VOT PR on altar. In ex. STR
	Constantine I BEATA TRANQVILLITAS Circa A.D. 322 16x18mm 2.8gm
	Constantine I A.D. 322-323 18mm    3.2gm CONSTAN- TINVS AVG, laureate, wearing trabea, holding eagle-tipped sceptre in right hand BEATA TRAN-QVILLITAS, globe set on altar inscribed VO/TIS/XX; above, three stars. In ex. PTR•  Cf. RIC VII Trier 342 very good style
	Constantine I A.D. 322 18x19mm    2.6gm CONSTAN-TINVS AVG; laureate, wearing trabea, holding eagle-tipped sceptre in right hand BEATA TRAN-QVILLITAS; globe set on altar inscribed VOT/IS/XX; above, three stars.  in ex. PTR•  Cf. RIC VII Trier 342
	Constantine I Circa A.D. 319 17x18mm 2.6gm unofficial issue of a VICTORIAE LAETAE PRINC PERP Cf. RIC VII Trier 208A very good style for this unofficial issue
	Constantine I A.D. 318- 319 17mm   2.3gm IMP CONSTAN-TINVS A[VG]; high-crested helmet, cuirassed, spear over right shoulder. VICTORIAE LAETAE PRINC PERP; two Victories stg., facing one another, together holding shield inscribed VOT PR on altar. In ex. PTR Cf. RIC VII Trier 208A
	Constantine I Circa A.D. 318 17mm   3.6gm IMP CONSTANT-[INVS AVG]; high-crested helmet, cuirassed, spear over right shoulder. VICTORIAE LAET P P; two Victories stg., facing one another, together holding shield inscribed TOV PR on altar with cross. In ex. STR
	Constantine I Circa A.D. 332-3 15x16mm   2.0g CONSTAN-TINVS AVG; rosette-diadem, draped and cuirassed bust. GLOR-IA EXERC-ITVS; Two soldiers helmeted, stg. facing one another, reversed spear in outer hands, inner hands on shields resting on the ground; between them two standards. in ex. TR • P RIC VII Trier ---
	Circa A.D. 335 16mm    2.2g Obv. ?????? bust of Constantinopolis left. Rev. Victory stg. on prow, holding long scepter in r. hand, and resting l. hand on shield; wreath in left field. Cf. Trier 554 Ex 1989 Nether Compton (Dorset) Hoard
	Crispus A.D. 321 18x19mm 3.2gm IVL CRISPVS NOB CAES, laureate, cuirassed, spear pointing forward, shield on left arm BEATA TRAN-QVILLITAS, Globe set on altar insc. VOT/IS/XX; above three stars. In exergue • STR • Cf. RIC VII Trier 308
	Constantine II Circa A.D. 326 15x16mm    1.7gm ANEPIGRAPHIC; laureate, draped and cuirassed bust right. CONSTAN/TINVS/CAESAR; legend in three lines; star above; P [?] on fourth line. Cf. RIC VII Trier 489
	Constantine II A.D. 321 16mm   2.1gm CONSTANTINVS IVN NOB C; laureate, draped, with victory on globe in right hand, mappa in left hand BEATA TRANQVILLITAS; globe set on altar inscribed VOT/IS/XX; above, three stars. In ex. PTR Cf. RIC VII Trier 312
	Constantine II A.D. 320-1 19mm     2.9gm CONSTANTI-NVS IVN NC, Laureate, draped, Victory on globe in right hand, mappa in left hand. VIRTVS-EXERCIT, Trophy standing on ground, captive seated on either side; T-F in fields. In exergue PTR •
	Constantine II Circa A.D. 333- 334 16x17mm   2.3gm CONSTANTINVS IVN NOB C; laureate and cuirassed bust right. GLOR-IA EXERC-ITVS; Two soldiers helmeted, stg. facing one another, reversed spear in outer hands, inner hands on shields resting on the ground; between them one standard inscribed with X. in ex. PTR besides the style issues, Trier did not issue this type with an X on standard and the mintmark PTR was not used for this issue. Also in an NGC slab as an official issue.
	Constantine II Circa A.D. 340 13x14mm   1.5gm [FL IVL] CONSINNITVS AVG; laureate and cuirassed bust right. [VIRTVS] IVGG NN; Virtus standing holding spear and resting hand on shield. In ex. TRP
	Constantius II Circa A.D. 332- 333 19mm    2.0g FL IVL CONSTANTIVS NOB C; laureate and cuirassed bust right. REV: Victory stg. on prow, holding long scepter in r. hand, and resting l. hand on shield. in ex.  TR•P This coin is an unrecorded combination of dies, commonly referred to as a mule. Obverse is likely Trier 540 and the reverse is a Constantinopolis Trier 543. It is likely that this coin, though in very good style, is unofficial.
	Constantius II Before April 340 14x15mm 1.4gm FL IVL CONSTANTIVS AVG, laureate and cuirassed bust right. VIRTVS AVGG NN, Soldier standing holding spear and resting hand on shield. In ex. PTR
	Constans Circa A.D. 348-350 20x21mm     4.3g DN CONSTA-NS P F AVG; pearl diademed, draped & cuirassed bust right. FEL TEMP REPARATIO; Emperor in military dress stg. l., holding victory on globe and standard with Chi-Rho on banner; in stern sits Victory, steering ship. In ex. TRS Cf. RIC VIII Trier 219
	Constans A.D. 347- 348 15mm    1.2gm CONSTANS PF AVG; Diademed and cuirassed bust right. VICTORIA DD AVGG Q NN; Two victories, holding wreaths upward, facing each other; Leaf between; In ex. TRS in exergue. Cf RIC VIII Trier 185   die match with coin below
	Constans A.D. 347- 348 14x15mm    1.1gm CONSTANS PF AVG; Diademed and cuirassed bust right. VICTORIA DD AVGG Q NN; Two victories, holding wreaths upward, facing each other; Leaf between; In ex. TRS in exergue. Cf RIC VIII Trier 185 die match with coin above
	Licinius II A.D. 321 18x19mm   2.8gm LICINIVS IVN NOB C; radiate, draped, and cuirassed bust right. BEATA TRAN-QVILLITANS; globe set on altar inscribed VOT/IS/XX; above, three stars. In ex. TR Cf. RIC VII Trier 311
	Magnentius A.D. 350-3 21x23mm     3.1g D N MAGNENTIVS P F AVG; rosette-diademed, draped, cuirassed bust right. FELICITAS REIPVBLICE; Emperor standing left holding Victory on globe in right hand and labarum, A in right field. In ex. TRS
	Magnentius Circa A.D. 350-3 20x23mm 5.2g [IMP CAE MAGNENTIVS AVG] bare-headed, draped and cuirassed bust right; A behind. [FELICITAS REIPVBLICE] Emperor standing left holding Victory on globe in right hand and labarum, A in right field. In ex. TRS cf. RIC VIII Trier 264 unofficial issue
	Magnentius Circa A.D. 350-3 18x20mm    3.1g DN MAGNEN-TIVS PF AVG; bare-headed, draped and cuirassed bust right; A behind bust. VICTORIAE DD NN AVG ET CAE; two Victories holding wreath inscribed with VOT V MVLT X supported by column. In ex. [TR]P Trier
	Magnentius A.D. 350-3 20x21mm    4.0gm D N MAGNENTIVS P F AV[G]; bare-headed, draped & cuirassed bust right, A behind bust. SALVS DD NN AVG ET CAES; large Chi-Rho flanked by N-W In ex. TRP Cf. RIC VIII Trier 320
	Magnentius 19x21mm    3.9gm  VICTORIA AVG LIB ROMANOR; Victory stg. right; Libertas, holding transverse scepter in l. hand, stg. L. They support between them a plain shaft carrying a trophy. In ex. TR   This is a copy of a very rare type- VICTORIA AVG LIB ROMANOR. The mintmark TR means it was copying a Trier coin, but RIC does not even list this type in bronze from Trier, but it does have it in gold. Perhaps an official example is out there that this coin copied. There are bronzes with this reverse from Rome.
Arles	Constantine I Circa A.D. 319 19x21mm     4.0g IMP CONSTA TINVS ??? AVG; laureate helmet and cuirassed bust right. IOVI CONSERVATORI AVG; eagle standing on wave line, left wing pointing downward, carrying Jupiter, standing left, thunderbolt in right hand, sceptre across left shoulder. In ex. TRAO this is a type not struck officially for Constantine, see RIC VII Arles 196 for the Licinius prototype
	Constantine I Circa A.D. 325 21mm   2.7gm CONSTANTINVS AVG VIRTVS AVGG   campgate overstruck on IOVI CONSERVATORI issued by Licinius. One of the Caesars on the obverse.
	Constantine I A.D. 322 17x18mm   3,1gm CONSTANTINVS AVG; laureate head right. CAESARVM NOSTRORV surrounding wreath enclosing VOT X. In ex. T ✶in crescent AR
	Constantine I Circa A.D. 325-6 17x18mm    2.0gm CONSTAN-TINVS AVG; Laureate head right. PROVIDEN-TIAE AVGG; camp gate, four turrets, open doors, star above. In ex. TA crescent RL Cf. RIC VII Arles 291
	Constantine I Circa A.D. 325-6 18mm    2.3g
	Constantine I A.D. 327 18x19mm    2.0gm CONSTAN-TINVS AVG; laureate head right. VIRTV-S AVGG; gateway with wide open doors, four turrets, star above. S/F in fields. in ex. ARLS cf. RIC VII Arles 313
	Crispus A.D. 321 18mm   3.0gm PL IVL CRISIVS NOB C; laureate, draped and cuirassed bust right. D N CONSTANTINI MAX AVG surrounding laurel wreath enclosing VOT XX In ex. P ✶ in crescent A Arles imitation
	Constantine II Campgate from Arles 18mm 3.2gm
	Constantine II circa A.D. 330 16mm      2.4gm CONSTANTINVS IVN NOB C [lots of gibberish]; laureate and cuirassed bust right. GLORIA EXERCITVS [ends with gibberish]; Two soldiers helmeted, stg. facing one another, reversed spear in outer hands, inner hands on shields resting on the ground. In ex. PCONST [almost] Arles copy
	Julian II A.D. 360-363 24x25mm    6.1gm D N FL C IVLI-ANVS P F AVG; pearl-diademed, draped, & cuirassed bust right. SECVRITAS REIPVB; Bull, head facing, standing right; above, two stars; at right, eagle standing on wreath, holding another wreath in beak. In ex. SCONST copying RIC VIII Arles 318
Rome	Diocletian circa A.D. 294 17x18mm 2.4g DIOCLETIANVS AVG; laureate head right. VIRTVS MILITVM; four tetrarchs sacrificing over tripod before gate in six turreted enclosure. cf. RIC VI Rome 27a
Aquileia	Constantius II A.D. 337- 341 15mm   1.3gm CONSTANT- TIVS P F AVG; diademed, draped and cuirassed bust right. GLOR-IA EXERC-ITVS; Two soldiers helmeted, stg. facing one another, reversed spear in outer hands, inner hands on shields resting on the ground; between them one standard inscribed with Chi-Rho. In ex. AQP Cf. RIC VIII Aquileia
Ticinum	Constantine I A.D. 318-319 19mm   2.7gm IMP CONSTANTINNN MAX AVG, helmeted, laureate, cuirassed [VICTORIAE LAETAE PRINC PERP]; two Victories stg., facing one another, together holding wreath inscribed VOT PR on altar inscribed with a cross. in ex. •TIT• cf. RIC VII Ticinum 86
	Constantine I A.D. 318-319 17mm   2.8gm IMP CONSTANTINNN MAX AVG, laureate helmet and cuirassed bust right. [VICTORIAE LAETAE PRINC PERP]; two Victories stg., facing one another, together holding wreath inscribed VOT PR on altar inscribed with a cross. in ex. •TIT• cf. RIC VII Ticinum 86
	Constantine I A.D. 319- 320 16x17mm    2.3gm CONSTA-NTINVS; Helmeted and cuirassed bust right. VIRTV- ?????; Standard inscribed VOT/XX with captive seated on ground on either side. in ex. T [?] cf. RIC VII Ticinum 114 lots of silvering
	Unofficial Constantinian VOT XX Likely copying Ticinum 18mm    2.3g
	Crispus A.D. 319 18mm     2.4gm CRISPVS NOB CAES; Laureate, cuirassed, spear pointing forward, shield on left arm. VICTORIAE LAETAE PRINC PERP; two Victories stg., facing one another, together holding shield inscribed VOT PR on altar. In ex. TT
	Crispus A.D. 320- 321 17x19mm   2.4gm VOT V cf. RIC VII Ticinum 150
	Constantine II A.D. 326 18x19mm   2.6gm CONSTANTINVS IVN NOB C; Laureate, draped and cuirassed bust left. PROVIDEN-TIAE CAESS; camp gate with two turrets and star between them. In ex. T crescent T
	Constantius II A.D. 326 19mm    2.5gm FL IVL CONSTANTIVS NOB C; Laureate, draped and cuirassed bust left. PROVIDEN-TIAE CAESS; camp gate with two turrets and star between them. In ex. P crescent T cf. RIC VII Ticinum 201
Siscia	Constantine I A.D. 321-4 18x19mm    2.8g CONSTANTINVS AVG [retrograde]; Laureate head left. DN CONSTANTINI MAX AV surrounding laurel wreath enclosing VOT XX. in ex. ASIS sunburst cf. RIC VII Siscia 180
	Crispus unofficial copy VIRTVS EXERCIT Siscia
	Crispus A.D. 320 18x19mm   2.8g [IVL CRISPVS NOB CAES]; Laureate, cuirassed, spear pointing forward, shield on left arm. [VIRTVS EXERCIT]; Standard inscribed VOT/X with captive seated on ground on either side, in left field S, in right field F in ex. SIS cf. RIC VII Siscia 118
	Licinius I 19mm    3.0gm   IOVI CONSERVATORI Cf. RIC VII Siscia 8
	Licinius II circa A.D. 319- 320 18mm      3.0g [LICINIVS IVN NOB C]; laureate, draped and cuirassed bust right. [VICTORIAE LAETAE PRINC PERP]; two Victories stg., facing one another, together holding shield inscribed VOT PR on altar. In ex.  ASIS✶
Sirmium	Constantine I Circa A.D. 324- 325 18mm 2.1gm CONSTAN- TINVS AVG; laureate head right. ALMANNI-A DEVICT; Victory standing right, on bound captive with head turned to the left, holding laurel branch and trophy. In ex. SIRM very interesting because the ALAMANNIA DEVICTA type was never officially issued for Constantine I
Thessalonica	Constantine I 16x17mm   2.4gm Copying Thessalonica?
Nicomedia	Constantinopolis  Commemorative Circa A.D. 330- 335 16mm      2.7gm  CONSTANT [???]; laureate, helmeted, wearing imperial mantle, holding scepter. Rev. Victory stg. on prow, holding long scepter in r. hand, and resting l. hand on shield. in ex. • SMNB •    Nicomedia
Antioch	Constantine I posthumous issue     Overstruck with unofficial FEL TEMP of Constantius II Antioch mint  Circa A.D. 348   15mm   1.4gm Ex-Collection of Ralph Van Deman Magoffin, eminent American Classical scholar and archaeologist, 1874-1942.
Alexandria	Maximinus II Circa A.D. 312 22x24mm    3.9gm IOVI CONSERVATORI Alexandria mint     overstruck         I think this coin is most likely a modern creation, same as the one below
	Licinius I Circa A.D. 315- 316 20x21mm    3.3gm IOVI CONSERVATORI cf. RIC VII Alexandria 18        I think this coin is most likely a modern creation, same as the one above

Helena
Circa A.D. 324
16x17mm   2.7gm
FL HELENA AVGVSTA; diademed & draped bust right, hair in elaborate coiffure.
SARMATIA DEVICTA ; Victory advancing r., holding trophy, palm branch, spurning captive std. on ground to right.
 
This unofficial issue pairs an obverse with a reverse that was never meant to be together, as this type was never officially struck for Helena

---

    The VLPP helmet of Constantine (called a ridge helmet) was also used later by Germanic kings. The above picture of the Ostrogothic king Theodahad (534-536 A.D.) illustrates the same helmet as the VLPP type. There is no plume or cheek flaps, but the type is still recognizable, especially the stars to the right and left of the cross-bar. The VLPP ridge helmet was a precursor to the most common type helmet in Europe in the sixth and seventh century-- called a spangenhelm. As late as the seventh century, a helmet was used in place of a crown in the coronation of Egbert, a King of Kent who ruled from 664 to 673.14
 
 

official bust types
D6-Laureate, helmeted, cuirassed
H11 - High-crested helmet, cuirassed, spear across right shoulder
H12 - High-crested helmet, cuirassed, spear across right shoulder, shield on left arm

page on official Siscia VLPP's

    The coins below are all examples of barbarous VLPP's mainly in the style of the Siscia mint. Siscia was in the diocese of Pannonia. Imitations of Siscian coinage are the most commonly found examples; but barbarous imitations from all the mints exist. These coins often come from the Danube region. All of the coins below are struck, just like the official coins. The sizes are close to the official coinage, but on average tend to be about a millimeter smaller. The average weight of the imitatives is about .2 grams smaller than the official coinage. The coins below were all tested for metal content and the percentage of silver (usually around 2%) indicates that many were most likely made from the previously de-monetized issues, but sometimes other sources were used, for example coin 8 only has copper and lead. The chart below shows the percentage of copper, silver, tin and lead found in each coin.  I have arranged the first 22 coins from least to most barbarous. The least barbarous could pass for an official issue and may have been intended to deceive, but the last coins would not have fooled anyone. Here is a link to a page on metallurgy of official Constantinian coins for comparison with these imitations.
 

	Size/weight	Copper	Silver	Tin	Lead
	Coin #1 19x18mm     3.1gm   The style is very good and the legends are almost correct. This coin is what I would classify as a counterfeit	80.62	2.60	4.46	12.31
	Coin #2 17mm    2.6gm could have possibly passed as real	89.60	2.42	2.93	5.04
	Coin #3 18x17mm    2.5gm  very similar to a coin found near Carnuntum could have possibly passed as real	95.27	1.70	0.82	2.21
	Coin #4 16mm   2.3 gm  very similar to a coin found near Carnuntum obverse die match with coin 3. They may been engraved by the same person could have possibly passed as real	91.83	2.86	1.48	3.83
	Coin #5 18mm      3.1gm	79.39	2.87	6.32	11.43
	Coin #6 17mm    2.2gm	90.34	2.79	2.90	3.97
	Coin #7 18mm 3.7gm	86.83	2.60	3.82	6.75
	Coin #8 19x18mm    2.6gm	91.60	---	---	8.40
	Coin #9 17mm 2gm	89.92	2.69	2.91	4.48
	Coin #10 17mm    2.4gm	89.03	3.60	3.18	4.19
	Coin #11 18mm 2.9gm	86.84	3.60	4.94	4.62
	Coin #12 20x19mm     2.7gm	90.99	2.48	4.11	2.41
	Coin #13 15mm     2.4gm	86.72	3.02	5.84	4.41
	Coin #14 16mm      3gm	86.60	0.39	4.23	8.78
	Coin #15 18mm     2.5gm   looks like an 8 on the shield.  note the similarity to coin 16.	89.97	1.96	5.43	2.65
	Coin #16 18mm     2.6gm  looks like an 8 on the shield.  note the similarity to coin 15	89.50	1.18	4.80	4.52
	Coin #17 18mm 2.6gm	94.24	2.02	1.50	2.24
	Coin #18 19x18mm     3.0gm	89.83	1.74	1.62	6.81
	Coin #19 16mm     2.8gm	93.54	2.22	3.02	1.22
	Coin #20 17mm        2.4gm	88.61	2.12	3.02	6.24
	Coin #21 17mm 2.2gm  die match with #22, #30, #62,  #94	92.89	1.51	3.20	2.39
	Coin #22 16mm 2.6gm  die match with #21, #30, #62,  #94	88.88	2.19	3.73	5.20

Assorted Siscia VLPP imitations

despite a few die matches, most of the unofficial VLPP coins on this page are from different dies (though a few look like they were engraved by the same person); which demonstrates the massive amount of these coins that were minted-- perhaps more than official mintage.

Coin #23 17x18mm    1.9gm	Coin #24 16x17mm   2.1gm	Coin #25 17mm   3.2gm horseman on shield	Coin #26 16x17mm   2.6gm                            horseman on shield	Coin #27 17x18mm   3.4gm

Coin #28 19mm    2.8gm	Coin #29 17mm    2.5gm	Coin #30 16x17mm    2.1gm die match with #21 & #22	Coin #31 17x18mm    2.7gm	Coin #32 19x21mm    3.1gm

Coin #33 18x19mm    2.4gm	Coin #34 18mm    2.7gm	Coin #35 16x17mm    3.5gm	Coin #36 16x19mm    2.8gm irregular flan, good style	Coin #37 18mm    3.3gm

Coin #38 17mm    2.1gm uniface	Coin #39 17x18mm    2.9gm	Coin #40 18mm    2.9gm	Coin #41 17x18mm    2.4gm some silvering	Coin #42 17mm    2.6gm

Coin #43 18mm    2.5gm T on shield	Coin #44 19mm    3.9gm	Coin #45 19mm    2.8gm	Coin #46 18mm    3.0gm cross on altar	Coin #47 18x19mm    2.2gm

Coin #48 17mm    3.0gm silvered	Coin #49 17mm    2.1gm	Coin #50 16x17mm    2.1gm	Coin #51 18mm    3.1gm	Coin #52 18x19mm    3.5gm

Coin #53 16x18mm    2.0gm	Coin #54 17mm    2.5gm similar to coin #23	Coin #55 16mm    2.4gm	Coin #56 16mm    1.9gm	Coin #57 16mm    2.1gm

Coin #58 18x19mm    2.1gm	Coin #59 17mm    2.6gm	Coin #60 17x18mm    2.9gm	Coin #61 16x17mm    2.0gm	Coin #62 16x17mm    2.1gm die match with #21, #22, #30, #94

Coin #63 17x18mm    3.9gm	Coin #64 17mm    2.8gm	Coin #65 16x17mm    2.4gm obverse die match with #3 & #4	Coin #66 17x18mm    2.6gm reverse match with #15 & #16	Coin #67 19mm    3.9gm very crude

Coin #68 17x19mm    2.0gm	Coin #69 17mm    3.1gm	Coin #70 18mm    3.2gm	Coin #71 17x18mm    2.1gm	Coin #72 17x18mm    3.0gm

Coin #73 17x18mm    3.0gm	Coin #74 15mm    2.0gm	Coin #75 17mm    2.2gm	Coin #76 15x16mm    1.9gm	Coin #77 17mm    2.8gm

Coin #78 17x18mm    2.1gm	Coin #79 16mm    2.4gm	Coin #80 17mm    2.4gm	Coin #81 16mm    3.2gm	Coin #82 17mm    2.7gm

Coin #83 17x19mm    3.1gm	Coin #84 17x18mm    2.1gm	Coin #85 18x19mm    3.0gm	Coin #86 17mm    2.3gm reverse die match with #15 #16 #66 obverse die match with  #16 #66	Coin #87 17x18mm    2.3gm

Coin #88 16mm    2.1gm	Coin #89 15x16mm    2.2gm	Coin #90 20mm    3.9gm	Coin #91 16x19mm    2.8gm	Coin #92 17x18mm    2.4gm

Coin #93 15x17mm    2.1gm	Coin #94 17mm    1.9gm die match with #21, #22, #30, #62	Coin #95 17x20mm    3.3gm	Coin #96 17x19mm     2.7gm	Coin #97 16x17mm    2.9gm

Coin #98 19x21mm    3.1gm	Coin #99 16x17mm    2.0gm	Coin #100 17mm    2.1gm	Coin #101 17x18mm    2.3gm	Coin #102 17x18mm    2.6gm

Coin #103 17mm    2.3gm	Coin #104 17mm    2.8gm	Coin #105 16mm    1.9gm	Coin #106 17x18mm    2.6gm	Coin #107 19mm    3.1gm

Coin #108 15x16mm    2.6gm wolf and twins on shield	Coin #109 18x19mm    2.6gm horseman on shield	Coin #110 17mm    3.3gm cross (?) on altar	Coin #111 15x17mm    2.4gm	Coin #112 19mm    3.5gm

Coin #113 16mm    2.1gm	Coin #114 16x17mm    2.4gm	Coin #115 18x19mm    3.1gm	Coin #116 18mm    2.7gm	Coin #117 17mm    2.2gm

Coin #118 17x18mm    2.5gm	Coin #119 17mm    2.8gm	Coin #120 16x17mm    2.0gm	Coin #121 17x18mm    2.0gm	Coin #122 17x18mm    2.3gm

Coin #123 18mm    2.2gm	Coin #124 16mm    1.9gm	Coin #125 17mm    2.6gm	Coin #126 16x17mm    2.3gm	Coin #127 16x17mm    2.4gm

Coin #128 17mm    2.9gm	Coin #129 16x17mm    2.1g	Coin #130 17x18mm    3.1g	Coin #131 19x20mm    2.6g	Coin #132 19mm    2.9g

Coin #133 15x16mm    1.6g	Coin #134 17x18mm    2.9g	Coin #135 17mm    2.3g	Coin #136 18mm    2.4g compare with #3, 4, 65, 75, 78, 117, 119, 125, 129	Coin #137 17mm    2.1g

Coin #138 17x18mm    2.5g	Coin #139 21mm    4.0g overstruck on Licinius IOVI	Coin #140 18mm    2.8g	Coin #141 21x22mm    3.0g overstruck on Licinius IOVI	Coin #142 18x19mm    3.5g

Coin #143 16mm    1.6g	Coin #144 18mm     2.9g	Coin #145 17mm     2.5g	Coin #146 21mm     2.6g overstruck on Licinius IOVI	Coin #147 16mm     2.8g

Coin #148 16mm     2.8g	Coin #149 17mm     3.5g	Coin #150 18mm     2.6g	Coin #151 17x18mm     2.9g	Coin #152 17x18mm     2.1g looks like soldiers on reverse

Coin #153 15x16mm     1.8g die match with #26	Coin #154 17mm     2.3g die match with #26	Coin #155 16x18mm     3.6g	Coin #156 15x16mm     1.7g	Coin #157 17mm     1.8g

Coin #158 18mm     2.3g	Coin #159 18mm     2.9g	Coin #160 17mm     2.2g

---

Die Matches

Die matches are generally not very commonly found when looking at Roman Imperial coins, however for unofficial coinage they are much more frequently found by collectors. The main reason that they are more easily found, is that given their nature, the styles vary so greatly, that die matches tend to stick out. They are more apparent than official coinage matches, which most certainly could have as many die matches floating around, but since official coinage styles look so similar, matches are only found when careful attention is paid to the coins.

 

               Unofficial die matches are also actually not very useful to the numismatist. Die matches of official coinage are used to answer questions concerning chronology or mint organization, but the very nature of unofficial coinage means that these questions cannot be answered. Unofficial coinage was minted in so many different areas by different people that the coins defy any ordering or cataloguing. At best, speculation can be made about some coins looking similar and perhaps being engraved by the same person. As far as chronology for unofficial coins, one cannot speculate any further than they were struck circa official issues. There is no conceivable way to classify them as they were struck without any order.

 

 

Ultimately unofficial die matches are only a novelty…so enjoy the example below!

   

Obverse and reverse die match

 

---

Other pages with unofficial VLPP coinage

Suggested reading (arranged chronologically)

Andreas Alföldi, “Materialen zur Klassifizierung der gleichzeitigen Nachahmungen von römischen Münzen aus Ungarn und den Nachbärlandern.” Numizmatikai közlöny 25 (1926) : 37- 48, plates 1-6.
The author looked at 232 examples of imitations, many of which were Siscia VLPP imitations.

Arthur E. Robinson, “False and Imitation Roman Coins,” The Journal of Antiquarian Association of the British Isles 2, no. 3 (December 1931) : 97- 112; vol. 2, no. 4 (March 1932) : 171- 184; vol. 3, no. 1 (June 1932) : 3- 28.
The author looked at the holdings of museums in Great Britain and wrote about the imitations he found.

P. V. Hill, “Barbarous Imitations of Fourth-Century Roman Coins,” The Numismatic Chronicle 10 (1950) : 233- 270.
This work is compromised by the author's belief that some barbarous coins were struck as late as the fifth century.

Philip Grierson, “The Roman Law of Counterfeiting.” Essays in Roman Coinage Presented to Harold Mattingly. Oxford University Press (1956) : 240- 261.

J. P. C. Kent, “Barbarous Copies of Roman Coins: Their Significance for the British Historian and Archaeologist.” Limes-Studien 14 (1957) : 61- 68.
Kent argued that imitations were struck contemporary with the prototypes. By now, Hill agreed that barbs were not struck in the 5th century.

A. Ravetz, “Neutron Activation Analysis of Silver in Some Late Roman Copper Coins.” Archaeometry 6 (1963): 46- 55.
The author analyzed a few imitations of the Fel Temp galley type.

L. H. Cope and H. N. Billingham, “The Composition of 35 Roman Bronze Coins of the Period A.D. 284- 363.”  Historical Metallurgy 1 (1967) : 1- 6.
Three Fel Temp galley imitatives were analyzed

Katalin Biró-Sey, “Contemporary Roman Counterfeit Coins in the Niklovits Collection.” Folia Archaeologica 28 (1977) : 91- 101.
This article talks about 24 imitations from a large Hungarian collection, as well as imitations from the Transdanubia region in general.

J. P. Callu and J. P. Garnier, “Minimi constantiniens trouvés à Reims, Appendice II: Corpus des imitations.” Numismatica e Antichità Classiche 6 (1977) : 330- 315.
This is a corpus of documented finds of imitations issued after A.D. 330, including a map.

C. E. King, “The Alloy Content of Folles and Imitations from the Woodeaton Hoard.” PACT 1 (1977) : 86- 100.

_________ “The Woodeaton (Oxfordshire) Hoard and the Problem of Constantinian Imitations, A.D. 330-41.” NC 18 (1978) : 38- 65.

Duval, Noël and Vladislav Popovic, eds. "Sirmium VIII. Études de Numismatique Danubienne: Trésors, Lingots, Imitations. Monnaies de Fouilles IV au XII Siècle." Rome: Ecole francaise de Rome, 1978.
A lot of information on imitatives, however there is one completely wrong statement-- "It should also be noted that all these specimens are cast, as everywhere else in the Roman empire." (pg 143). This is incorrect as many copies were struck, in fact, the coins illustrated appear to have been struck.

J. N. Barrandon and C. Brenot. “Analyse de monnaies de bronze (318- 340) par activation neutronique à l’aide d’une source isotopique de Californium 252.” Collection de l'Ecole française de Rome 37 (1978) : 123- 144.
Analyzed 12 imitations of imitative VLPP's, silver content ranged from .10- 2.5 %, with an average of 1.53%. No indication of which mints they imitated though.

George C. Boon, “Counterfeit Coins in Roman Britain,” Coins and the Archaeologist, London: Seaby (1988) : 102- 188.
A great overview of counterfeiting and imitative coinage in Britain.

Pierre Bastien,  "Imitations of Late Roman Bronze Coins, 318-363" American Numismatic Society Museum Notes  30 (1985): 144.
This is the standard work on 4th century imitations.

R. J. Brickstock,  "Copies of the FEL TEMP REPARATIO Coinage in Britain" British Archeaological Reports (1987).

Kevin Butcher, “The Maidenhatch Farm Hoard of Constantinian Copies” The Numismatic Chronicle 152 (1992): 160-174.
This hoard contained 193 coins from A.D. 330- 341.,and all but two were imitations

C. L. Duncan, Coin Circulation in the Danubian and Balkan Provinces of the Roman Empire A.D. 294-578. London: Royal Numismatic Society, 1993.
Interesting read, but concentrates on Pannonia and Dacia (no Middle Danube) and very little on imitatives besides a few references to minimissimi

C. E. King, "Roman Copies" Coin Finds and Coin Use in the Roman World. Berlin: Gebr. Mann Verlag (1996) : 237-263.
After Bastien, this is the most informative and useful work on imitatives.

Matthias Pfisterer and Heinz Winter, “Eine Sammlung barbarisierter spätrömischer Münzen aus Carnuntum,” Mitteilungen der Österreichischen Numismatische Gesellschaft volume 41, no.2 (2001) :27-41 and volume 41, no. 3 (2001) : 47- 61.
The authors wrote about  52 imitations found near Carnuntum, which included 37 VLPP imitations.

Bursche, Aleksander. “Circulation of Roman Coinage in Northern Europe in Late Antiquity.” Histoire & mesure XVII (2002).
"Barbarian counterfeits of denarii, aurei, siliquae and solidi were minted — in a very limited number at that — mostly on territory close to the limes." So they could have minted copies of LRB's--particularly VLPP's, also. The author talks about the function of Roman coins in German society, but ignores that Tacitus said Germans used coins as currency on the frontiers, versus bullion in the interior, stating that what Tacitus said was a classical topos (rhetorical invention) in reference to Germania with no mention of Annals.

Bursche, Aleksander. "Contacts between the Late Roman Empire and North-Central Europe."  The Antiquaries Journal 76 (1996): 31-50.

Moisil, Delia. “The Danube Limes and the Barbaricum (294-498 A.D.) A Study In Coin Circulation.” Histoire & mesure XVII (2002).
While not talking specifically about the Middle Danube, the author had this to say about imitations, "It is still difficult to establish if they should be assigned to barbarous people in the Danube area, to semi-official Roman mints or to individuals interested in getting some profit from this work."

Andrey Sergeev “Barbarian Coins on the Territory between the Balkans and Central Asia” State Historical Museum of Russia (2012)

1Boon, George C. “Counterfeit Coins in Roman Britain.”  Coins and the Archaeologist. London: Seaby (1980) : 102- 188.

2Pierre Bastien,  "Imitations of Late Roman Bronze Coins, 318-363" American Numismatic Society Museum Notes  30 (1985): 144.

3 George C. Boon, “Counterfeit Coins in Roman Britain,”  Coins and the Archaeologist, London: Seaby (1980) : 137.

4J. Barrandon & J. P. Callu & C. Brenot in their article, "The Analysis of Constantinian Coins (A.D. 313-40) By Non-Destructive Californium 252 Activation Analysis," Archaeometry 19 (1977): 173-186, found that examples of the VLPP imitative from Trier averaged less than 2% silver.

5I have heard that the phrase "make money hand over fist" referred to the minting practice of holding the die in your fist and striking with a hammer in your other hand. It is actually an old naval term referring to hauling ropes and meant making progress, but it works for this analogy.

6Pierre Bastien, "Imitations of Late Roman Bronze Coins, 318-363" American Numismatic Society Museum Notes  30 (1985): 144.

7 Ibid.,160.

8 A few  examples-- Kevin Butcher, “The Maidenhatch Farm Hoard of Constantinian Copies” The Numismatic Chronicle 152 (1992): 160-174. Andreas Alföldi, “Materialen zur Klassifizierung der gleichzeitigen Nachahmungen von römischen Münzen aus Ungarn und den Nachbärlandern.” Numizmatikai közlöny 25 (1926) : 37- 48, plates 1-6. Matthias Pfisterer and Heinz Winter, “Eine Sammlung barbarisierter spätrömischer Münzen aus Carnuntum,” Mitteilungen der Österreichischen Numismatische Gesellschaft volume 41, no.2 (2001) :27-41 and volume 41, no. 3 (2001) : 47- 61.

9Pitts, Lynn F. “Relations Between Rome and the German ‘Kings’ on the Middle Danube in the First to Fourth Centuries A.D.” JRS  79 (1989) : 55.

10 Bursche, Aleksander. “Circulation of Roman Coinage in Northern Europe in Late Antiquity.” Histoire & mesure XVII (2002). "Barbarian counterfeits of denarii, aurei, siliquae and solidi were minted — in a very limited number at that — mostly on territory close to the limes."

11Pitts, Lynn F. “Relations Between Rome and the German ‘Kings’ on the Middle Danube in the First to Fourth Centuries A.D.” JRS  79 (1989) : 57.

12Tabula Imperii Romani M33; J. Wielowiejski, "Die Kontakte Noricums und Pannoniens mit den Nordlichen Volkern im Lichte der romische Importe" in H. J. Dolle (ed.) Romer und Germanen in Mitteleuropa (1975) 69- 86.

13 Within the City of Rome no person shall wear either trousers or boots. But if any man after the issuance of this regulation of Our Clemency should obstinately persist in such contumacy, he shall be punished according as his legal status permits and expelled from our sacred City.”  Codex Theodosianus 14.10.3 June 6, 399.

14 Andreas Alföldi, “The Helmet of Constantine with the Christian Monogram.” The Journal of Roman Studies 22 (1932) : 16.