REVUE BELGE
DE NUMISMATIQUE
ET DE SIGILLOGRAPHIE
BELGISCH TIJDSCHRIFT VOOR NUMISMATIEK EN ZEGELKUNDE
PUBLIÉE UITGEGEVEN SOUS LE HAUT PATRONAGE ONDER DE HOGE BESCHERMING DE S. M. LE ROI VAN Z. M. DE KONING
PAR LA DOOR HET SOCIÉTÉ ROYALE KONINKLIJK BELGISCH DE NUMISMATIQUE DE BELGIQUE GENOOTSCHAP VOOR NUMISMATIEK
CUV - 2008
BRUXELLES BRUSSEL HENRI POTTIER (*) - Ingrid SCHULZE - WOLFGANG SCHULZE (**)
PSEUDO-BYZANTINE COINAGE IN SYRIA UNDER ARAB RULE (638 -c. 670) CLASSIFICATION AND DATING
(Pl. III-X)
Part 1. TypoIogy and metrologicaI anaIysis
1. Introduction The aim of the present study is to establish a rational chronological order and a possible dating of the various types, classes and series of Pseudo-Byzantine coinage. The term Pseudo-Byzantine covers ail the imitations of Byzantine folles minted in Syria after the Arab conquest and before the first reform of the Arab authority introduced Arab mint marks on the folles. In other words, the term Pseudo-Byzantine covers ail the imitations that have no Arabie inscriptions or any Greek reference to the Arab mints. These imitations are characterised by generally blun dered inscriptions, pseudo-mintmarks, officinae and dates probably with out meaning. The iconography of the obverse imitates Byzantine types, however the Syrian engravers were not necessarily using as a model the contemporary type produced by the imperial mints, but one of the type that was circulating at that time in Syria, eventually obverse and reverse from different models (e.g. the rare type with Phocas and Leontia). In other words they were not producing forgeries but local currency in the Byzantine style. They include:
Fig. 1 and 2 Class 1 - Prototype and imitation
(*) Henri POTTIER, e-mail: [email protected]. (**) Ingrid and Wolfgang SCHULZE, e-mail: [email protected].
RBN, 154, 2008, p. 87-155. 88 HENRI POTTIER - INGRID SCHULZE - WOLFGANG SCHULZE
Class 1 0 bverse with three figures LI Imitations of Cyprus folles (Heraelius, Heraelius Constantine and Martina in ehlamys), generally dated regnal year XUII, offieina r Ua with pseudo-mintmark KYIIP (and its blundered forms) Ub with pseudo-mintmark CON (and its blundered forms) Ue with pseudo-mintmark THEUP (and its blundered forms) L1d eombined forms between a, b, e and others 1.2 Imitations of Constantinopolitan folles, regnal years 30-31, with Heraelius in military dress
Fig. 3 and 4 Class II - Prototype and imitation
Class II Obverse with two figures 11.1 Heraclius and Heraclius Constantine in ehlamys Small module imitations of Constantinopolitan folles, regnal years 3 ta 6 (') II.2 Heraclius in military dress and Heraelius Constantine in ehlamys Small module imitations of Constantinople folles, regnal years 20 ta 30 or Neapolis folles, regnal years 25-26 II.2a Rev. M II.2b Rev. m II.3 Phoeas and Leontia
Fig. 5 and 6 Class III - Prototype and imitation
(1) H. POTTIER, Le monnayage de la Syrie sous l'occupation perse (610-630) (Cahier, Ernest Babelon, 9), Paris, 2004, Type A.t. PSEUDO-BYZANTINE COINAGE IN SYRIA UNDER ARAB RULE 89
Class III Obverse with bust IlL1 Imitations of Constans II Constantinopolitan folles, regnal years 3 and 11 IIUa with obverse inscription einper-conste IIUb without inscription IILlc bust between star and crescent III.2 dated year XX e)
Fig. 7 and 8 Class IV - Prototype and imitation
Class IV Obverse with standing emperor Imitations of Constans II Constantinopolitan folles Group a Rev. M Group b Rev. m Group c AITOIE: Cl (lighter module)
2. Tentative classification procedure applied to Cyprus folles iIni tations (Class 1) 2.1 As a starting point, we tried to determine the parameters by which a chronological order of the various series of the Class 1 could be estab lished. The choice of this Class 1 for starting the study results from the evidence, that this class was a first issue of a Syrian mint after the Arab conquest. Indeed, except for two specimens out of more than 250, there is no trace of a copy of any characteristic of Constans II coins. On the contrary, these characteristics are observed on the classes III and IV, i.e. traces of the inscriptions from Constans II coins, Obv.: EN TOUTO NIKA, INPER-CONST, Rev.: ANA NEOS, O
(2) S.J. MANSFIELD, A Byzantine Irregular Issue oî « Year 20", in N'Circ, April 1992, p. 81 f. (3) A. ODDY, The Chrisiian Coinage o{ Early Muslim 5yria?, in ARAM, 15, 2003, p. 185-196. (4) H. POTTIER, op. cii. ln. 1]. 90 HENRI POTTIER - INGRID SCHULZE - WOLFGANG SCHULZE
Metrology: weight, (5) diameter, die axis, shape of the coin (eut, ellip tic, circular, polygonal), shape of the border (circular, elliptic). Stylistic characteristics (see fig. 9): übverse characteristics crosses between heads head: shape of the head face-crown-hair-beard globus cruciger: above a line, ..., long cross fibula: normal, vertical, horizontal, without chlamys: various designs of the folds figure (date?) in the obverse right field Reverse characteristics: monogram or cross above M Also to he discussed: overstrikes, barbarous imitations, empress crown of Martina.
tt€~ Ü:':',Wtn -.' B}u~~
'.' "1.- 9 ~I ri...~ L L. r l\
1 \ ,
Fig. 91 Stylistic characteristics 2.2 In a second step, in order to reduce the number of parameters, we checked whether there is sorne correlation between the various parame ters or whether sorne parameters are meaningless, particularly those re ferring to the stylistic characteristics. The various series were then classified according a proposed chronological order, considering the data
(5) In the metrological deveIopments we refer ta the" weight » of the folles, but the values mentioned result from the measurement of their mass expressed in gram (weight shouId in theory be expressed in Newton). PSEUDO-BYZANTINE COINAGE IN SYRIA UNDER ARAB RULE 91 given by metrology, possible overstrikes, die links or similarities with other Pseudo-Byzantine series. 2.3 Categories of pseudo-mintmarks (a) KYIlP and blundered forms al KYIlP aIl KPI a2l KYO[.] a2 HKIlP a12 oKVc a22 KYZ a3 KYIlP (allletters retro.) a13 KYIlPI a23 KYP (inverted) a4 KIlP a14 KYH a24 KrV[ ]0 a5 oKYP a15 o IlKP (K retro.) a25 OVKP a6 KAP a16 KAlI a26 [ ]YKr a7 ClIP a17 KIlO a27 VIlPc a8 CYK (K retro.) a18 [..K] (K retro.) a28 o/CIlV (C retro.) a9 KYIl a19 KYNP a29 KVIlPo alO onvr (r retro.) a20 KYPO a30 oxrr (b) CON and blundered forms bl CON b8 (.)ON b15 CON (N retro.) b2 CONN b9 CON (C retro.) b16 oCO (inverted) b3 oCO blO CONB b17 C(retro.)OCO b4 oCCO b11 CON\O b18 CHa (C retro.) b5 OKON b12 CNO (allletters retro.) b19 CN b6 oC (C retro.) b13 UOC (C retro.) b20 COr?] (C retro.) b7 UON (N retro.) b14 OCN (N retro.) b2l BO[..] (c) THEUP and blundered fonns cl THEUP c5 ECP c9 TErO[K]Y c2 HEUP c6 EIlP clO EYIlO c3 EUVPo c7 HEU c11 suru c4 THP c8 NEU... c12 OECP (d) Combined forms between a, b, c and others dl HIlT d7 [CO]TK d13 VVK (K retro.) d2 U... d8 CAO (C retro.) d14 eEC d3 CVN (N retro.) d9 CUO d15 KEa d4 rCHO dlO OU. d16 N (retro) YK d5 OhO d11 [OS]? d6 EK[N] d12 UCU 3. Genuine Cyprus folles and imitations 3.1 We shaIl consider as genuine Cyprus folles coins meeting the foIlow ing criteria: Reverse: monogram 1 (see fig. 9) above the M officina r KYIlP mintmark, generaIly without exergual line dates: figures 17 to 19 carefully designed Obverse: Martina wears an empress crown The shape of the coin is generally defined by four arcs of a circie. Other coins not meeting these criteria will be cIassified as imitations of Cyprus folles. 92 HENRI POTTIER - INGRID SCHULZE - WOLFGANG SCHULZE
3.2 In contrast to the Syrian imitations minted during the Persian occu pation, the dates, officinae figures and mintmarks of the Cyprus imita tions appear to be meaningIess. However, we used the pseudo-mintmarks as criteria for classification. For exampIe, a coin similar to the genuine (' Cyprus » production of the year X/UIII shonld be classified as type: 17-ra1 Even if they are without meaning in the definition of the location of the mint, they could indeed bring sorne indications about the periods of production (see MetroIogy 7.2).
4. Characteristics of the various types
Number of specimens per date Date 6 9 12 13? 1Ij, 15 16 17 18 19 20 23 Kyrp 1 2 4 96 9 1 CON 1 1 1 1 5 6 22 1 8 1 THEUP 1 10 15 1
Number of specimens per officina Officina A B r I!> € Crescent KYIIP 4 4 112 1 2 CON 11 4 31 4 2 THEUP 11 17 1
Comments: The KYTIP and CON types have very similar characteristics: a major ity of year 17 and officina I'. However the CON type has a Iarger num ber of dates and more specimens dated 20 than the KYIIP type. The THEUP type differs from KYTIP type by a larger number of date 14 (37% compared to 0%) and of officina B (38% compared to 3%).
5. Die links (see catalogue 1)
5.1 Die links between types One link is recorded between KYTIP, CON and d-types. Obv. die no. 5 is linked to rev. dies KYTIP no. 8 to Il, to rev. die CON no. 7, and to rev. die type d no. 6. This confirms the result of the metrological analysis suggesting a same mint place for the three types. One link is aIso recorded between KYTIP and THEUP. Obv. die no. 65 is Iinked to rev. dies KYTIP no. 75 and to rev. die THEUP no. 1. The same mint place is confirmed even if the metrology shows sorne small differences between these two types. 5.2 Specimens struck with the same obv. and varions rev. dies, e.g. 4 specimens KYIIP obv. die no. 5 struck with rev. dies no. 8 to Il, with a range of weight from 3.84g to 7.33g, PSEUDO-BYZANTINE COINAGE IN SYRIA UNDER ARAB RULE 93
3 specimens KYIIP obv. die no. 21 struck with rev. dies no. 28 to 30, 2 specimens KYIIP obv. die no. 3 struck with rev. dies no. 4 to 6. 5.3 Specimens struck with the same obv. and rev. dies, e.g. 6 specimens KYIIP obv. die no. 9 with rev. die no. 16, with a range of weight from 3.94g to 5.77g, 3 specimens CON obv. die no. 132 with rev. die no. 27, with a range of weight from 3.79g to 5.06g, 4 specimens THEUP obv. die no. 65 with rev. die no. 1, with a range of weight from 3.34g to 6.62g.
6. Overstrikes 6.1 The latest overstruck coins are from Heraclius years 6 to 14, which does not give any indication for defining the period of production of the imitations; these copy the Cyprus coins of Heraclius dated regnal year 17. However it should be underlined that there is no undertype of Con stans II.
6.2 On the other hand a Constans II INPER-CONST coin (year 3 = 643-644) is overstruck on a Cyprus imitation (") confirming our early dat ing of Class 1. Furthermore there are two Constans II folles dated years 15 and 16 (655-657) struck on Cyprus imitations Class 1.
7. Metrology
Cyprus imitations jgenuine folles weight distrihution .. .. 30 --,. ....- ._..... ---'. ------r~· _ ······_· .._·.... --4- Genuine 25 r-. -+:i- THEUP imitation 1/ 1"1\ -{..,- KYPR imitation » 20 " -,if'- CON imitation = / \ .p:: ...... , "e- 15 1/ \ " r-e- J::" / \ / .~ 10 / \ / / 1)< '" 5 ~ / 17'r--- x: ." ".l- r-,V -, ..\ / ...' .;:; / -, 0 - - -. 2,5 3 3,5 4 4,5 5 5,5 6 6,5 7 7,5 8 8,5 weight (g)
graph 1
(6) RE. VLAM1S, Coin Boards of Cypriot Coins Found in Cyprus and Elsewhere, in Cyprus Numismalic Society, The Numismalic Report, 11, 1980, p. 85. 94 HENRI POTTIER - INGRID SCHULZE - WOLFGANG SCHULZE
7.1 Genuine Cyprus folles The average weight calculated on the basis of 50 specimens is x = 5.74g, with 95% confidence limits: ± 0.24g. The ± 0.24g defines the 95% confidence interval of the average weight. This standard is close to the Constantinopolitan standard for the years 17 to 19 (626-629): 5.89g, corresponding to 54 folles per pound. 7.2 Imitations The statistical distribution of the weights of 120 examined imitations of type a (KYIIP) gives an average value x = 4.81 ± 0.20g. The differ ence of weight between the imitations and genuine Cyprus coins is one gramme (20%) and has to be considered as significant. 4.73 ± 0.24g is the average weight of 52 imitations type b (CON), 4.99 ± 0.40g is the average weight of 26 imitations type c (THEUP). These two values are close to the average of the 120 imitations type a (KYIIP), which indeed is included inside the limits of confidence of these last two values. However the limited number of specimens of the types b and c suggests us to postpone any conclusion. If aIl the four types (including I.1d) are produced by the same mint during the same period, we should be allowed to calculate the average weight of aIl the types together, that becomes x = 4.83 ± O.15g. 7.3 Cut coins The origins of these coins are previous imperial coins (e.g. from Justin II to Heraclius) that were hammered in order to reduce their thickness and to increase their surface. Then they were eut to reach the lower weight standard and finally struck. It can explain why generally slight traces of undertypes can be found on eut coins - in contrast to the con temporary imperial coins. As a result of this process the upper border of the eut coins has the shape of a semicircle with a diameter larger than the diameter of the imperial coins used as materia1. 7.4 Comparison with Constantinopolitan folles Since the contemporary genuine Byzantine coins were not circulating in Syria during the Persian occupation, this can explain why the Syrian imitations issued during the war were not following the contemporary imperial standards, but different standards, close to those applied just before the war. On the contrary, during the first decades of the Arab conquest, the contemporary genuine Byzantine coins continue to circu late in Syria. In such conditions, it seems logical to consider that the production of imitations should follow standards similar or close to the imperial standards. The large quantity of imperial folles circulating in Syria (resulting from the trade or, less likely, from the supply of imperial coins by Byzantine authorities to the Arabs) during the first years of Constans II reign should have reinforced this constraint. It seems then that the analysis of the variation between 630 and 660 of the imperial Imperial and Pseudo-Byzantine folles Follis weight 1year 11
;---1 __ Constantinople -;~-3- Neapolis - 10 en Cyprus genuine l'l'" c:: -,>- Cyprus imitation tl 9 ~ o -l!r2 figures dl -+-1 bust ~ 8 -1- emper. standing r-- ~ >-l - bust y. XIX imlt. Z l'l .J:l 7 o bJl o ." Z "~ ;> 6 ~ "bJlco 1- " ~~!-i~ Z "~ <, en 5 ~ ~'.• :.:-,,_.. ;!',--Y ~ ~ ;> c:: 4 Z tl : : : : : : l'l :>:l ~ $ s 8 0 t 3 • \ ~ ~ :>:l 2 c:: 628 629 630 631 632 633 634 635 636 637 638 639 640 641 642 643 644 645 646 647 648 649 650 651 652 653 654 655 656 657 658 659 660 661 662 663 664 665 r l'l date
graph 2 '"Cl 96 HENRI POTTIER - INGRID SCHULZE - WOLFGANG SCHULZE standards could be helpful for understanding the evolution of the stan dards of the Pseudo-Byzantine coinage (see graph 2). During a short period (regnal years 20-21), Heraclius tried to return to the standards applied before the war, with a follis of 1O.50g. But between the regnal years 22 to 31 (632-641) the average weight of the imperial folles was progressively reduced to half of the previons value, Le. to 5.3Sg in 632-640 and to 4.9Sg in 640-641. This value 5.3Sg, given by Mor risson, C) is an average based on a limited number of coins (44) spread on 9 years. Based on a larger number of specimens it seems that the average weight calculated per year evolutes from 5.70g in 632-633 to 5.20g in 639. It should be mentioned that in Neapolis during the years 634-636 the folles average weight is about 5.40g; the Neapolis production was then in accordance with the Constantinopolitan standard 5.3Sg. During the Heraclian regnal years 30-31 (640-641), the average weight of the imperial folles is 4.9Sg. During the first regnal years of Constans II (641-66S) the weight of the follis continues to be reduced from 4.S0g to about 3g. We see that between 620 and 660 we have a continuous decrease of the standard weight of the imperial follis. Considering that the evolution of the various imitations should follow similar trends, we will first analyse how the Cyprus imitations match with this scheme.
8. Dating S.l Two specimens bear a countermark, (') used probably between 636 and 640 at the end of the reign of Heraclius; it means that the imitations started to be minted in Syria before 640. S.2 The period of production of Cyprus imitations cannot be attributed to the Persian occupation (610-630). Indeed, the average weight of the folles issued in Syria under Persian rule is twice the average weight of the Cyprus imitations. The same argument can be applied during the reg nal years 20 to 22 (630-632), when the largest folles (1O.54g) were issued in Constantinople. In contrast to this, during the last years of the period 632-641 the standards of Constantinople are close to those of the Cyprus imitations. The standards difference between the Cyprus imitations and the imperial production during the years 637 to 642 varies from 10 to 2%, what is practically not perceptible by the users when we consider that the difference between two specimens from the same production can reach more than 20%.
(7) C. MORRISSON, Calalogue des monnaies byzantines de la Bibliothèque nationale, vol. 1, Paris, 1970, p. 260. (8) W. SCHULZE, Countermarks {rom bejore Ihe Arab Conquesl, in W. SCHULZE, T. GOODWIN, Counlermarking in Sevenlh Century Syria, in ONSN, 183, 2005, Class 2. PSEUDO-BYZANTINE COINAGE IN SYRIA UNDER ARAB RULE 97
Note: The statistical dispersion of the weight of the specimens could give the impression that the mint did not apply strict standards of pro duction. This interpretation is not correct; the control of the production was probably applied to samples including a large number of folles, e.g. 60 coins corresponding to one pound in the case of the Class 1. As a result, the average weight calculated on the basis of these 60 coins presents a dispersion dramatically reduced (about 8 times less) compared to the dispersion of the distribution of the specimens. (9) E.g. the stand ard deviation of the weight for the specimens of Class 1 is 1.12g, but the standard deviation of the average weight of 60 specimens supposed to be used for the control is reduced to 0.15g, i.e. only 3% of the average weight 4.86g. 8.3 Since the folles which employ pseudo-mintmarks, dates and officinae without meaning are clearly not issued by an imperial mint, it seems log ical to consider that the mint(s) activity started after the Arab invasion of Syria or better when Syria was largely occupied. The very large pro duction issued during a limited period lets us assume that the mint(s) started to produce very early, i.e. probably in 638. 8.4 We consider that the majority of these imitations was produced during a short period before 643; indeed, as already mentioned, on more than 250 specimens recorded, we have identified only 2 coins presenting sorne similarities with the reverses of the coins issued during the regnal year 3 of Constans II (643-644). AIl the other imitations do not present any trace of reference to Constans II folles (uncial m or typical inscrip tions such as ANA NEüS, ü (9) H. POTTIER, Analyse d'un trésor de monnaies en bronze enfoui au vr" siècle en Syrie byzantine, Bruxelles, 1983, p. 58-63. 98 HENRI POTTIER - INGRID SCHULZE - WOLFGANG SCHULZE the imperial folles production: when a new type of obverse is introduced at the same time as a reduction of weight standard, sorne obverse dies from the previous type continue being used for producing folles according to the new standards. For example, in Cyzicus, the obverse die with Heraclius' bust was still used after the regnal year 3, when the two figures type was introduced. Without any better explanation, a possible meaning that could be given ta the figures II and U written on the right side of the obverse of two rare specimens is the date counted from the beginning of the mint activity, i.e. respectively 639 and 642. 8.8 The idea that the period of production could include three phases characterised by three levels of stylistic deterioration needs ta be verified by checking whether these three series correspond ta different metrologi cal standards. Ta allow the statistical analysis, we selected four stylistic parameters (i.e. head-crown-beard, globus cruciger, fibula and chlamys), each variant of these parameters is quoted by a number increasing with the level of deterioration of the variant when compared ta the genuine mode!. We calI style deterioration index (sdi) of a specimen the sum of the four values given to the four parameters of the specimen. The calcu lation made with the KYIIP type imitations gives (sdi) values from 5 to 27. We plot on a graph for each specimen its weight versus its stylistic deterioration index (see graph 3). Cyprus imitations Type !.la 9 .. 8 .. 7 ...... • ...... ~".,., ...... = .. "A"I~9 e .. .~ 4 •* .. ;;: .. '$ .. 3 ...... 2 1 0 0 2 4 • 8 10 12 14 1. 18 20 22 24 2. 28 30 stylistic deterioration index graph 3 PSEUDO-BYZANTINE GOINAGE IN SYRIA UNDER ARAB RULE 99 The statistical analysis of this graph does not support the idea of three phases. Indeed this graph giving the weight distribution versus the level of stylistic deterioration applied to the KYIIP type, shows clearly no cor relation, i.e. that the weight distribution is similar for different stylistic deterioration levels; in other words: the weight is totally independent from the stylistic deterioration level. The calculation of the correlation coefficient (r) gives r = 0.1, very close to 0, meaning that the weight and the stylistic deterioration level are uncorrelated (a perfect linear correla tion should give r = ± 1). A calculation made with the only specimens with low stylistic deterio ration (sdi = 8 and 9) confirms this conclusion; indeed it gives practically the same results as those calculated with the whole of the specimens: i.e. same average (4.92g compared to 4.84g) and same dispersion (0.92g com pared to l.OOg). The same analysis made on each of the other types CON and THEUP, as weil as on ail the types together gives the same results (see graph 4). Cyprus imitations (ail types) 9 s ~ . ,. ~ 7 ,. ~ ,. ~ ,. 6 .. ! .. '" ~ ...... 0 .. : ...... ~ .. .. e • 1 * i ; .. *J .. $ ...... • ...... A * .. .. 2 o o 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 W TI M 26 28 30 stylistic deterioration index graph 4 A similar analysis shows that the weight distribution is also totally independent from the shape of the coins (elliptic, circular or eut), This conclusion was predictable, indeed we recorded sorne specimens minted with the same die and that are either eut coins or circular coins. 8.9 Last but not least, even the hypothesis of a small modification of the standards during the production of the Cyprus imitations must be rejected. The statistical distribution of ail the series together does not 100 HENRI POTTIER - INGRID SCHULZE - WOLFGANG SCHULZE indicate any double peak and above ail, presents a standard deviation identical to those presented by the series minted by the same die(s) men tioned in 5.3, which have been minted during a very short period. Indeed the specimens of each of these series are distributed on a range from 3.50g to 6.50g, which as weil includes 95% of the 200 specimens. 8.10 Based on the arguments developed in 8.7, the period of production attributed to Class 1.2 should start after 640 and continues simultaneous ly to Class I.1 until 643. 9. First conclusions In contrast to a first impression that the production could be anarchie, as the variation of style suggests, we see that the production follows standards that are close to the imperial Byzantine standards. Furthermore our statement that the evolution of the standards from 638 to 660 should follow the same rule is supported by the fact that when the Byzantine standards progressively decrease from ± 5g to ± 3g, then the Pseudo-Byzantine coins are decreasing from 4.86g for the first type, i.e. the Cyprus imitations, to about 3g for the last type, i.e. the standing emperor type. The average weight and its 95% limit of con fidence of ail the series are given in the table 1. Based on this first approach, it appears that the other characteristics, inscriptions, shape or stylistic distinctive features can be used for describ ing the various specimens but cannot be used as parameters for the chro nology. As a conclusion, the elements that will allow us to determine the chronological order will be the model imitated, giving the post quem limit, and the die links (see graph 5 and Pl. 2, 3 and 8), completed by the use of the only parameter, i.e. the weight standards decreasing with time in parallel with the imperial standards. 10. Class II 10.1 In the analysis of the coinage in Syria under Persian rule a group of « small module» folles imitating the coinage of Heraclius and Hera clius-Constantine in chlamys is identified. eO) They were considered as not being issued during the Persian occupation for metrological reasons: The coins could probably be assigned to the period after 636 and included among the pre-Arab-Byzantine issues, together with small module imitations of the Cyprus mint. (10) H. POTTIER, op. cit. [no 1], p. 119, § 12.2. Small module folles. PSEUDO-BYZANTINE COINAGE IN SYRIA UNDER ARAB RULE 101 ~~ ~ ! '•." ..,;..... ' !••.';i ;""',' -of) graph 5 102 HENRI POTTIER - INGRID SCHULZE - WOLFGANG SCHULZE Table 1: Average weight and 95% limits of confidence of the Classes 1 - IV Classes numher average weight Class 1 Obverse with three figures 264 4.76 ± 0.14 !.l Imitations of CypIUS folles 211 4.83 ± 0.15 !.la with pseudo-mintmark KYIIP 120 4.81 + 0.20 !.lh with pseudo-mintmark CON 52 4.73 ± 0.24 !.le with pseudo-mintmark THEUP 26 4.99 ± 0.40 !.ld combined forms between a, b, c and others 13 4.91 1.2 Imitations of folles year 30-31, Heraclius in military dress 5 4.92 1.3 Not identified 48 4.42 ± 0.28 Class II Obverse with two figures 34 4.37 ± 0.34 I!.l Heraclius and HeracIius-Constantine in chlamys 8 4.57 Small module imitation of folles, regnal years 3 to 6 Il.2 Heraclius in military dress, Heraclius-Const. in chlamys Small module imitations of folles, regnal years 20 to 30 23 4.22 ± 0.39 11.2a Rev. M 18 4.34 + 0.40 Il.2b Rev. fi 5 3.80 Il.3 Phocas and Leontia 3 5.07 Class III Obverse with bust 77 III.! Imitations of Constans Il bust, folles regnal year 3 48 3.97 + 0.28 Il!.la with obverse inscription «( inper-const. 16 4.17 ± 0.60 Il!.lb without inscription 12 3.90 Il!.le bust between crescentand star 20 3.85 + 0.40 1II.2 dated year XX 29 3.08 ± 0.26 ClassIV Obverse with standing emperor 1015 c. 3.08 + 0.10 Group a Rev.M 33 3.38 ± 0.32 Group b Rev. m (group e excluded) 856 3.09 + 0.06 Group e AlT01€ 126 2.94 ± 0.16 PSEUDO-BYZANTINE COINAGE IN SYRIA UNDER ARAB RULE 103 The average weight of the «small module» group (Class ILl), i.e. 4.57g is close but not identical to the average weight of the imitations of Cyprus, i.e. 4.86 ± 0.15g. Other similarities are to be mentioned: the pseudo-mintmarks of the « small module» group also include blundered CON and KYIIP types. These similarities reinforce the opinion that the «small modules» as weil as the Cyprus imitations were issued in Syria, probably by the same mint, but probably not exactly during the same period. The «small module» first series (Class 11.1) presents a rev. die link with one of the imitations of Heraclius in military dress holding long cross and Heraclius-Cnnstantine in chlamys holding globus cruciger (Class II.2). This second series includes sorne reverses imitating the folles of the regnal years 2, 3 and 5 of Constans II and have an average weight of 4.22 ± 0.39g close to the «small module» series Class 11.1 (see catalogue 2). These two series are to be considered together and were probably minted between 642 and 646. 10.2 In his paper « The Daiing of a Series of Early Arab-Bqzaniine Coin age», Goodwin (") mentions the die links between the two cut coins no. 4 and 9, the no. 4 being an imitation of the three standing figures folles with Heraclius beardeà, the second an imitation of Heraclius in military dress holding long cross and Heraclius-Constantine in chlamys holding globus cruciger, both reverses are from the same die imitating the Cyprus folles reverse: pseudo-mintmark KYPO, officina I', year XUIII. These data are in accordance with our proposals if we consider that these coins were struck in 642 or a little bit later. 10.3 For the sake of the file, we record in catalogue 2 under Class II a series called «Mules (?) - Two figures in chlamys, rev m », including four specimens that we must consider either as derived from imitations (see § 8.6) or as resulting from an accidental production (see § 8.7). For these reasons we don't give a class number to this series. At the present time, due to the limited number of specimens, sorne corroded, and the disper sion of their weights, the average weight 3.26g does not allow to use it as a valid parameter for the dating of this series. 10.4 The two figures type is the smallest class of the Pseudo-Byzantine coinage. Within this Class II, the imitations of the Phocas and Leontia coins are limited to three specimens. (11) T. GOODWIN, The Dating of a Series of Early Arab-Byzantine Coinage, in ONSN, 181, 2004, p. 5-9. 104 HENRI POTTIER - INGRID SCHULZE - WOLFGANG SCHULZE 11. Glass III 11.1 The first series (Class IIU) includes the imitations of the Constans II folles dated year 3, having on the obverse a facing bust, beardless, and a globus cruciger in his right hand. In a first step, we considered sepa rately the specimens with (Class IIUa) and without (Class IIUb) the in scription «inper-const ». However the metrological analysis shows that they were struck according to the same standards, Le. 4.17 ± 0.60g compared to 3.90g. 11.2 Class IIL1c includes specimens also having on the obverse a facing bust, but of a very crude style, between a crescent and a star followed by S (sometimes retrograde, sometimes «lazy »), crescent and star being eventually inverted. The origin of the crescent and star, followed by S could speculatively be explained as the last stage of a blundering of the inscription from inper-const to const, then cos, already observed on the Class IIL1, and finally C becoming a crescent, 0 a dot or a star and S sometimes a lazy S. Here the very crude style suggests that this series should be dated later, but the average weight 3.85g again is, considering the large disper sion, very close to the value 3.97g given by the series Class IIL1. 11.3 In aIl these series of Class IIL1 we have at least two coins struck with either the same obverse die (nos. 11, 19, 28, 29 and 36) or the same obverse and reverse dies (no. 4). In aIl the cases we see that the differ ence of weight between two specimens struck with the same die(s), prob ably in a same short period of time, can reach 1, 2 or 3g, i.e. more than 50 % of the average weight of the folles. It confirms that the differences from 0.03g to 0.19g between the average weights of these series a, band c, and the average of the whole Class IIL1 are meaningless as far as the dating is concerned. 11.4 Links are recorded between Classes II.2, IIL1 and IV (imitating the standing emperor Constans II follis). (12) (see Plate 8) We consider that the coins of Class IIL1 were minted between 645 and 647. 11.5 For the sake of the file, similarly to § 10.3, we also introduce in catalogue 2, Class III a series of the bust type, but with m as mark of value, in contrast to aIl the classes III la, lb or 1c, which have M as mark of value. This series is called «Mules (?) - Obv. with bust, Rev. m », which includes two imitations of the type « inper const » and three imita tions of « bust (apparently) without inscription >). On one of these three specimens the bust is doser to the upper part of the «standing emperor » (12) The link between Classes III and IV was first published by T. GOODWIN, Imita lions of the Folles of Constans II (ONS Occasioual Paper, 28), April 1993, nos. 1 and 3. PSEUDO-BYZANTINE GOINAGE IN SYRIA UNDER ARAB RULE 105 than to the usual prototype. Here again the average weight 3.31g of such an heterogeneous series cannot be used as parameter for its dating; the standard deviation of the weights is extremely high: 1.72g; indeed the lightest specimen weights 1.64g and the heaviest 6.55g! 11.6 Class III.2 includes the specimens having on the obverse a facing bust, but with a reverse dated year twenty (XIX), bearing the pseudo mintmark CN0 in retrograde letters and as «officina J> either A or more rarely 6.. Mansfield (13) has published an analysis of 24 specimens. Two types of obverses exist, one with a beardless bust and the other, more common, with a bearded bust. At least one reverse die link is mentioned between these two types. If the model of the obverse with a bearded bust could be the Constans follis issue of year eleven, the reverse does not correspond to this issue. lt should be observed that this series has sorne similarities with the specimens of Class III.1a with the beardless bust: same «officina J> A and 6., and similar pseudo-mintmarks generally blundered forms of CON. However in this case the difference between the weight standard of Class III.2 compared to Class III.1 reaches 30% and must be considered as meaningful. If we consider again the average weight of this series (3.0Sg) as a cri terion to be used for defining the chronology, this series should be dated in the first years of the period 658-663, when the imperial standards were also reduced to 3.25g. A possible meaning of the date XX could be, as suggested by Oddy, (14) year 20 of the minting activity, i.e. about 660. 12. Class IV 12.1 Class IV includes ail the imitations of Constans II folles charac terized on the obverse by the standing emperor with the inscription EN TOUTO NIKA. This is the most numerous series and was probably issued during the longest period. 12.2 The statistical analysis developed hereafter leads to the following conclusions: in contrast to the previous classes, Class IV includes speci mens successively minted according to two different standards. lt should be mentioned that the standing emperor imperial folles too were sucees sively minted according to different standards. 12.3 When starting the analysis, we first considered Class IV as divided in three groups of different average weights: (13) S.J. MANSFIELD, art. cit. [n.2]. (14) A. ODDY, art. cit. [no 3], p. 186. 106 HENRI POTTIER - INGRID SCHULZE - WOLFGANG SCHULZE Class IV Obverse with standing emperor 1015 Group a Rev.M 33 3.38 + 0.32 Group b Rev. fi 856 3.09 + 0.06 Group c AITOI€ 126 2.94 ± 0.16 Graph 6 illustrates the frequency of weight of the major group b, dis tributed in 19 cells of 0.250g size. The graph clearly presents two differ ent peaks of equal magnitude, located in the cells 3.250g and 2.825g. We demonstrate that this curve can be considered as resulting from the addi tion of two different series. We supposed that each series is not far to be distributed according to a Gaussian curve. The two frequency peaks reaching the same level, each series should approximately include the same number of specimens. Class IV group b standing emperor - Rev. m weight distribution 100 +-+----4--1-+--'--1-+--"\,-1--+----4--1----'------4--1-+-1--1------4---; [j 80 +------4--1--+--+------4---1--+-\,------1--+---+------+- ~ "~ § 60T 1------;--,------,--,lé--;-,--,--r----,----\-,------,---,--,--;---,---' -5 '"~ 40 +--+---+--j+-+---'---+--+---+-+--+,--+\-----+--I--+---+-+--+----+---i 20 +--+---+--J--I--+--+--+---+-+--+-+--+----t-----'l~+--+---+-+----+----+--I 1,13 1625 2,13 2,63 3,13 3,63 4,13 4,63 5,13 5,63 6,13 weight (g) graph 6 The lowest difference between the observed frequency curve and the curve resulting from the addition of the two Gaussian curves was obtained by giving the following characteristics to the two series: average values: xi = 3.625g and x2 = 2.625g and similar standard deviation cr = 0.57g, giving ± 0.05g as 95% limit of confidence of the averages. PSEUDO-BYZANTINE COINAGE IN SYRIA UNDER ARAB RULE 107 The Chi-square test (15) evaluating the difference between the observed frequencies and the model chosen indicates that this hypothesis cannot be rej ected. (l') 12.4 We have seen that the large majority of the specimens bears as its mark of value the uncial m, only about 2% bears an M. We see now that its average weight 3.38g ± 0.32g is not far from the 3.625g of the series 1. 12.5 Sorne specimens of the so called AlTülE types (17) recorded under the group c present an average weight: 2.94 ± 0.16g not far but distinct from 2.625 ± 0.05g of the series 2. It should be mentioned that this group c includes the lightest of ail the standing emperor imitations and needs a more refined analysis. 12.6 Group c (AlTülE) includes various sub-groups characterised on the reverse by the inscriptions ending by the letters A/X at the left side of m, also those with the inscriptions A/ Furthermore these differences between weight standards are uot the result of a uniform weight reduction or increase of ail the specimeus of (15) Ch. CARCASSONNE, Méthodes statistiques en numismatique, Louvain-la-Neuve, 1987, p. 102. (16) Chi-square test was made on a trimmed distribution limited ta 15 cells in arder to eliminate 2% outliers. The test gives a Chi-square of 23.4; for a degree of freedom 14 there is a probability p = 5% ta have samples presenting a Chi-square larger than 23.4. At this P = 5% level the hypothesis tested cannat be rejected. The average weight of the two series together is x =Y2 (2.625 ± 3.625) = 3.125g equal to the average value of the trimmed distribution of the weights measured). (17) A. Onnv, art. cil. [n.3]. 108 HENRI POTTIER - INGRID SCHULZE - WOLFGANG SCHULZE one sub-group compared to another, but due to a different proportion of lighter specimens among the various sub-groups. A first explanation could be given to these two observations: Let us assume that there are two periods of minting: the first period according to a standard around 3.6g corresponding to the series 1 norm and a second period according to a standard around 2.6g corresponding to the series 2 norm. If we also suppose that the various sub-groups were minted during different phases, we must assume that these phases have sorne overlaps explaining the die-links. On this basis, the 3/X and A/c'P/A sub-groups should be minted during a phase primarily included in the first period and briefly during the early second period. The A/X and «others » were minted briefly during the first period and mostly during the second period (see graph 7). l'jfflP graph 7 It clearly appears that the letters of the reverse inscriptions are not the valid criteria to be used for defining the light series. In faet the level of weight reduction depends on the proportion of lighter specimens within each sub-group. We also tried to use another criterion, considering other sub-groups with the letter on the left field of the obverse and the die linked sub-groups, but this tentative was also unsuccessfuL It appears that the only valid criterion able to define the lightest speci mens is ... the weight itselî. But the problem is to define the limit between the heavy and light series, taking into consideration the large statistical dispersion of the weights. A last hope was that the different standards were obtained by using different technology: Le. different thickness of the coins. PSEUDO-BYZANTINE COINAGE IN SYRIA UNDER ARAB RULE 109 We know that the thickness of a coin is proportional to the thickness index mjDd, Le. the weight m divided by the larger diameter D multi plied by the shorter diameter d of the coin (supposed to be elliptic). A last trial was made using the thickness index as criterion in order to see whether the limit between light and heavy specimens can be better defined. Unfortunately, this method too appeared to be incapable of dif ferentiating individually the specimens minted during the first or the sec ond periods. 12.7 Considering that the hypothesis of two different series forming the m group b should also be valid when applied to the three groups taken together, we tried to define two series characterised by two Gaus sian distributions, the sum of which should be close to the curve formed by the observed values. The two frequency peaks of the observed val ues are located in the same cells as in the previous case: 2.875g and 3.375g, but they are no more reaching the same level of frequency (see graph 8). Class IV standing emperor Series 1 and 2 140 -+- IV series 1 /\\ 120 -eo-: IV series 2 il/ I\;} \ IV series 1+2 100 liLA-~ 1\\ ~-){~" recorded values '"c 80 "'" "e- r L-z,~~ '" 60 V I\I/ -= ~~~ 40 li 1)/1\ 20 ~1 ~ ~,~ ~ 1 l/:"v .. "J-';r' h.- ,- 0 '.~; '.;' .. 1,375 1625 1,875 2,125 2,375 2,625 2,875 3,125 3,375 3,625 3,875 4,125 4,375 4,625 4,875 weight (g) graph 8 For this reason the numbers of specimens included in each of the two series are to be different. The lowest difference between the observed fre quency curve and the curve resulting from the addition of the two Gaus sian curves was obtained by giving the following characteristics to the two series: 110 HENRI POTTIER - INGRID SCHULZE - WOLFGANG SCHULZE Series 1 Percentage of specimens: 43 average value: xl = 3.625g standard deviation: cr ~ 0.57g giving ± 0.05g as 95% Iimit of confidence of the average Series 2 Percentage of specimens: 57 average value: x2 = 2.625g standard deviation: cr ~ 0.57g giving ± 0.05g as 95% Iimit of confidence of the average We checked the validity of our hypothesis by applying the Chi-square test to the complete Class IV including the groups a, band c. The result of the test is positive; it means that certainly this hypothesis cannot be rej ected. (18) 12.8 As a conclusion, we must admit the idea that the mint(s) pro duced folles during two different periods according to two different stand ards without modifying the types of iconography and of inscriptions. However we consider that the lightest specimens were produced during the period when the imperial standards too were reaching a minimum, i.e. 658-664. Moreover, the die links between the Classes III and IV suggest that the first period should start around 647. The first period 647-658 should then be characterized by a weight standard close to 3.6g applied for pro ducing the heaviest specimens of the group b as weil as the major part of the series 3/X and A/ (18) The Chi-square equals 12.5; for a degree of freedom 14 there is a probability p = 50% to have samples presenting a Chi-square larger than 12.5; the test gives a prob ability better thau the customary 5%. The same value of Chi-square is only obtained for a very narrow range of variation of the two parameters. On one hand the propor tion between the Iwo series allows a variation limited to 1%. i.e. (0.57-0.575) 1(0.43 0.425) and on the other hand, the location of the maximum frequency of the two series allowa variation limited to 2%. It should be mentioned that the average weight of the two series together is x = (0.57 x 2.625) ± (0.43 x 3.625) = 3.05g equal to the average value of the trimmed distribution of the Class IV measured values. PSEUDO-BYZANTINE COINAGE IN SYRIA UNDER ARAB RULE 111 Pseudo-Byzantine coinage as far as the weight, the dimensions and the shape of the coins are concerned. For example, the calculation made on two bilingual samples, one of 44 specimens of the standing emperor, the other of 99 specimens of the bust type, both produced by the mint of Emesa, gives exactly identical results: an average weight of 3.72g with a standard deviation lower than 18%. If the control of the production was made with 81 specimens corresponding to one pound, the standard deviation of the average weight should be less than 2%. This is the rea son why we consider as highly improbable that the production of late Pseudo-Byzantine coins could be attributed to sorne other(?) mints in operation after c. 670, employing a weight standard 30% lower and with a dispersion 50% higher than allowed by the new Arab rules. Table II: Proposed dating of the Pseudo-Byzantine coinage Classes n dates ClassI Obverse with three figures 264 638-43 U Imitations of Cyprns folles 211 638-43 Ua with pseudo-mintmark KYIIP 120 Uh with pseudo-mintmark CON 52 Ue with pseudo-mintmark THEUP 26 Ud combined forms between a, b, C and others 13 1.2 Imitations of folles year 30-31, Heraelius in military dress 5 640-43 1.3 Not identified 48 C1ass II Obverse with two figures 34 642-46 (47) lU Heraclius and Heraclius-Constantine in chlamys 8 Small module imitation of folles, regnal years 3 ta 6 11.2 Heraclius in military dress, Heraclius-Const. in chlamys Small module imitations of folles, regnal years 20 ta 30 23 Il.2a Rev. M 18 II.2b Rev. fi 5 II.3 Phocas and Leontia 3 Class III Obverse with bust 77 IIU Imitations of Constans II bust, folles regnal year 3 48 645-47 IIUa with obverse inscription {( inper-const Il 16 III.1b without inscription 12 IIUe bust between crescentand star 20 111.2 dated year XX 29 658-60 Class IV Obverse with standing emperor 1015 647-late 60s IV series 1 (heavy module) 43% 647-58 IV series 2 (Iight module) 57% 658-late 60s 112 HENRI POTTIER - INGRID SCHULZE - WOLFGANG SCHULZE 13. General reflections hased on hoard analysis and metrology 13.1 According to the chronology of Table II, the deposit date of the «Hama hoard ') described by Phillips and Goodwin (19) shonld be 658 or early during the period 658-64, due to the fact that the hoard includes a large quantity (62) of Pseudo-Byzantine coins Class IV series 1 (heavy module) and two specimens only of Class IV series 2 (light module). This dating corresponds with the opinion of the authors «soon after 657,) based on the dates of the regular Byzantine coins. 13.2 In the same paper, a table gives the «Excavation Finds of Seuenth Century Copper Coins », where it appears clearly that the imperial Con stans II folles were circulating in Syria in very large quantity until 647/ 648, were present in smaller quantity in sorne few places until 655-56, with sorne rare specimens recorded until 664. We draw a graph (see graph 9) comparing the frequency index ('0) of Constans II imperial folles found in the excavations to the frequency index of the Pseudo-Byzantine coins resulting from our classification of the specimens from the collec tions. The graph illustrates clearly that the level of production of the Sy rian mint(s) varied according to the need that resulted from the shortage of imperial coins. graph 9 (19) M. PHILLIPS, T. GOODWIN, A Sevenlh-Cenlury Syrian Hoard of Byzantine and Imitative Copper Coins, in NC, 157, 1997, p. 61-87, pl. 20-22 (Hamâ hoard). (20) H. POTTIER, op. cil. [no 9], p. 26. Frequency index IF = ni / 1:; : :E ni /:E 1:;, where n, is the number of specimens recorded during the time "tï, attributed ta the phase i, ~ ni is the total number of specimens recorded during the period :E 1:; covering ail the phases. PSEUDO-BYZANTINE COINAGE IN SYRIA UNDER ARAB RULE 113 Due to sorne distortions affecting the picture of the coin circulation given by the frequencies of the coins coming from excavations as weIl as collections, we cannot consider these data as a formai confirmation of the dating of the classes we have proposed. However we can consider as confirmed the chronological order given to the classes even if sorne uncer tainty could affect the individual periods attributed to these classes. 13.3 We already mentioned on the one hand the die links between the various classes of Pseudo-Byzantine folles and on the other hand the sim ilarities of the weight standard of the various series forming the classes I, II and III.1. These characteristics should allow us to consider as possible the hypothesis that only one mint produced at least until 647. If it is the case, the most probable mint place should be Emesa, playing again the same role as during the Persian occupation. However the statistical dis persion observed for the weight of sorne series could hide the existence of several mints working according to the same standards; this is the case e.g. for the Class lII.2 coins dated XX. Part 2. Conclusions placed in their historie and numismatic context Dealing with Pseudo-Byzantine coinage is a very young numismatic discipline. In his basic work, written in 1956, Walker touched only mar ginally on this part of the monetary history in seventh-century Syria. (H) Even in the second half of the 2üt h century the Pseudo-Byzantine coins often were not recognized as such and were indiscriminately catalogued beside the prototypes, the (, genuine » Byzantine coins. As pars pro ioio and as a perfect example we can mention the 2nd volume of the Dum barton Oaks catalogue, where the Cyprus folles from the years 17-19 of Heraclius' reign and clearimitations of these are mixed without any dis tinction, ('2) although the problem of the imitations (which were regarded as (, contemporary J,) was perceived throughout. ('3) To sort out the Pseudo-Byzantine coins is sometimes complicated because the (, genuine » Byzantine prototypes are often very carelessly (21) J. WALKER. A Catalogue of /he Arab-Byzantine and Post-Reform Umaiyad Coins. London, 1956 (A Catalogue of the Muhammadan Coins in the British Museum, Volume II), aithough A.S. KIRKBRIDE, Coins of Ihe Byzantine-Arab Transition Period, in Quar terly of /he Deparlment of Antiquities in Palestine, 13, 1947-1948, nos. 22-63 had publis hed a series before. 16 years later Metealf (D.M. METcALF, Some Byzantine and Arab Byzantine Coins from Palaestina Prima, in INJ, II, 3-4, 1964, p. 32-46), nos. 60-76 has brought to iight sorne more specimens. (22) Ph. GRIERSON, Catalogue of the Byzantine Coins in the Dumbarton Oaks Collection and in the Whittemore Collection, Vol. 2, Washington, 1968 (= DOC 2), p.330{331 nos. 184a 1-4, Plate XVII. (23) DOC 2, p. 41. 62 f. 114 HENRI POTTIER - INGRID SCHULZE - WOLFGANG SCHULZE struck or overstruck on older coins and have unclear features. For this reason they are easily mistaken for their imitations and vice versa. ('4) For a long time, sometimes even still today, the Pseudo-Byzantine coins were peripheral for numismatists researching Islamic or Byzantine coins. In 1981 Hahn presented the imitations of the Syrian-Palestine region in a broader framework, but without giving a typology or a dat ing, as a phenomenon of transition from Byzantine to foreign money. (25) Simultaneously Hahn calls for a more intensive occupation with this field of numismatics, ('6) which happened up to the present only to a modest extend. In the so-called ,< short chronology» of Bates, (") which was answered by «long chronologies » of Morrisson (") and Qedar, ('9) the dat ing of the Pseudo-Byzantine coins was not the main subject of research. ('0) Goodwin was the first in 1993, (31) who wrote a path-break ing article about the subject classifying the Pseudo-Byzantine coins by style and who 2002 in the Syl/oge of Islamic Coins in the Ashmolean (24) For this reason the use of oIder descriptions of hoards is sometimes problemati cal, cf. M. PHILLIPS - T. GOODWIN, art. cit. ln. 19], p. 84/85, Notes. (25) W. HAHN, Moneta Imperii Bqzantini, Vol. 3, Wien, 1981 (= MIB 3), p. 108-110, 140/141. (26) M lB 3, p. 109. (27) M.L. BATES, The 'Arah-Byzantine' Bronze Coinage of Syria: An Innovation hy 'Abd al-Malik, in A Colloquium in Memory of George Carpenter Miles (1904-1975), New York, 1976, p. 16-27; ID., History, Geography and Numismatics in the First Centunj of Istamic Coinage, in SNR, 65, 1986, p. 231-263; ID., Byzantine Coinage and Ils Imita tions, Arab-Coinage and Ils Imitations: Arab-Byzantine Coinage, in ARAM, 6, 1994, p.391-403. (28) C. MORRISSON, Le monnayage omeyyade et Thistoire administrative et économique de ta Syrie, in P. CANIVET and J.-P. REy-COQUAIS (eds.), La Syrie de Byzance à l'lslam vu'-vm" Siecles. Actes du Colloque international Lyon - Maison de l'Orient Méditerra néen Paris - Institut du Monde Arabe, 11-15 septembre 1990 (Publications de l'1nstitut français de Damas, 137), Damas, 1992, p. 309-317. (29) Sh. QEDAR, Coppel' Coinage of Syria in the Seventh and Eighth Century A.D., in INJ, 10, 1988-1989, p. 27-39. (30) For compilations of the actual state of discussions cf. W.L. TREADWELL, The Chronology of the Pre-reform Copper Coinage of Early Islamic Syria, Supplement to ONSN, 162, 2000; A. ODDY, Whithel' Arab-Byzantine numismatics? A review of fifty years' research, in Byzantine and Modern Greek Studies, 28, 2004, p.121-152 and Cl. Foss, Fixed Points in the Coinage of Seventh Century Syria, in ONSN, 181, 2004, p. 2-5. For more detaiIed descriptions and questions, partly from coin hoards, see T. GOODWIN, Imitative 7th Century Byzantine Folles with a Single Figure in Military Dress, in N'Circ, May 1993, p. 112-113; ID., A Hoard of Imitative Byzanline Folles, in NCirc, October 1994, p. 357-360; ID., 7th Century Arab Imitations of Byzantine Folles, in NCirc, November 1995, p. 336 f.; ID., art. cit. ln. 11], p. 5-9; ID., Arab-Byzantine Coinage (Stud ies in the Khalili Collection Vol. IV), London, 2005; ID., A New Type of Seventh Centu ry Syrian Pseudo-Byzantine Coin, in ONSN, 187, 2006, p.46 f.; S. ALBUM, T. GOOD WIN, Sylloge of Istamic Coins in the Ashmolean, Vol. 1, The Pre-Reform Coinage of the Early Islamic Perioâ, Oxford, 2002 (= SICA) and M. PHILLIPS - T. GOODWIN, art. cit. ln. 19]. (31) T. GOODWIN, art. cit. ln. 12]. PSEUDO-BYZANTINE COINAGE IN SYRIA UNDER ARAB RULE 115 sketched a first rough classification by types A-l, (32) which later was sup plemented by type K. (") Up to the present, most numismatists have agreed that the Pseudo Byzantine coinage started in the time shortly after 658. An earlier begin ning was considered at most occasionally - and theoretically. (34) Only recently, an earlier date for a part of them was taken into consideration. (35) We now have a first chronology and typology based on the analysis of nearly 1400 items, which will off'er concrete starting points for further research of the here formed classes I-IV. Our results are summarized again as follows: Table III: Pseudo-Byzantine coinage between 638 and c.670 Class/Year 638 638 639 639 640 640 641 641 642 642 643 643 644 644 645 645 646 646 647 647 648 648 649 649 650 650 651 651 652 652 653 653 654 664 655 655 656 656 657 657 658 658 659 659 660 660 661 661 662 662 663 663 664 664 665 665 666 666 667 667 668 668 669 669 670 670 (32) SICA 1, p. 78-80. For the group of the so-called AITOI€ coius cf. A. ODDY, art. cil., [no 3]. (33) T. GOODWIN, art. cii., 2006 [n.30]. (34) Exemplary: SICA 1, 105/106. Summarizing: A. ODDY, art. cil. ln. 30] proposing «late 630s or early 640s» for our Class LI. (35) T. GOODWIN, art. cit. ln. li] for the «cut coin imitations» of the Cypriot three figure type. 116 HENRI POTTIER - INGRID SCHULZE - WOLFGANG SCHULZE The Table III shows at the first glance that we are starting from the idea of a continnous production of Pseudo-Byzantine coinage between 638 and the end of the 660s. The periods not secured by metrological data are marked in grey. We now will discuss whether our results can be confirmed by the his torie and numismatic context and whether they are plausible. The period we are analysing marks the first decades of Arab rule after the decisive battle at the river Yarmuk in 636. Already sorne years before 636 the population and especially the Byzantine soldiers stationed in Syria had suffered of a tremendous lack of cash. (36) After the Persian war the economie resources of Byzantium were exhausted (37) and an additional supply of coins from Constantinople to Syria was not possible. Since the beginning of the Arab attacks in 633 up to 636 the Byzantine troops were forced to revalue the few circulating coins by countermarking them with the Heraclian monogram. (38) When after the battle of Yarmuk Heraclius withdrew ail Byzantine troops to the Taurus Mountains the customary supply of gold and copper coins from Constantinople ceased completely. Heidemann has observed from the contemporary hoards: « The influx of new coins was restricted after 636. It seems that Syria had to rely mainly on the existing stock of gold coins left from the time before the Arab conquest.» (30) The same observation was made by Phillips and Goodwin for the copper coins: «Coins of Heraclius up to the regnal year 26 (635/36) are also common enough in Syria, but very few coppers were struck at ail for the years 27-29. Folles of type 6 (issued 639-41), which can be recognized even if the date is illegible, are certainly found in Syria - there were four at Antioch. » ('0) What could happen in this situation, when the currency for daily trade was menaced? We will compare the behaviour of the authorities to face the lack of currency after the Arab conquest and during the Persian (36) W.E. KAEGI, Byzantium and the Early Islamic Conquesl, Cambridge, 1992, p. 38 39; J. HALDON, Das Bqzantinische Reich: Gesehiehte und Kultur ânes Jahrtausends, Düsseldorf-Zürich, 2002, p. 100. (37) Financing the campaign against the Persians had already been partly achieved by melting clown church silver and bronze statues. (38) W. SCHULZE, 1. SCHULZE, W. LEIMENSTOLL, Heraclian eounlermarks on Byzan tine copper coins in seventh-century Syria, in Byzantine and Modern Greek Studies, 30, 2006, p. 1-27. For other countermarks from the years before and during the Arab conquest cf. W. SCHULZE, art. cit. ln. 8], Classes 2-6. (39) St. HElDEMANN, The Meryer of Tum Curreney Zones in Early Islam. The Byzan tine and Sasanian Impact on the Circulation in Former Byzantine Syria and Northem Mesopotamia, in Iran, 36, 1998, p. 96. (40) M. PHILLIPS-T. GOODWIN, arl. cit. [no 19], p. 76. For Antioch see D.B. WAAGÉ, Antioeh-on-the Drontes I V, Part 2, Greek, Roman, Byzantine and Crusaders' Coins, Prin ceton, 1952, no. 2218. PSEUDO-BYZANTINE COINAGE IN SYRIA UNDER ARAB RULE 117 occupation, (41) giving a better understanding of the creation and evolu tion of the Pseudo-Byzantine coinage. Under Persian rule as weil as during the first decades of Arab rule the administration of Syria remained in the hands of the old Byzantine authorities. Just after the Persian conquest, they certainly called on the workers still living in Syria, from the nearest mint in operation before the war, i.e. Antioch. These engravers and workers first produced the same coins as they did previously: Phocas Antiochene folles. ('2) Later on sorne unskilled workers reinforced the mint and produced various coins (43) of lower quality. After the Arab conquest, the local authorities probably also asked the workers who had recently operated in the temporary mints located in or close to Syria, i.e. in Neapolis (documented from 634-636), Emesa (under Persian rule until 630 (44) and Cyprus (documented from 626-629). Indeed, according to the metrological analysis, during the five first years of activity, three types of Pseudo-Byzantine folles were produced with different iconographies: they just were similar to the obverse type used in the three mentioned mints: three figures as in Cyprus, two figures in chlamys as in Emesa and two figures with Heraclius in military dress as in Neapolis. Sorne series were produced in considerably larger quantities than those of the Persian period. They include coins of very crude style indicating that supplementary unskilled workers were needed for reaching such level of production. During the Persian occupation the Syrian folles must have been accepted both on account of their iconography which was similar to the coins circulating in Syria and of the specifie Syrian weight standards which remained close to the standards applied in Antioch under Phocas. These standards differed from the contemporary imperial standard because the normal course of circulation of goods and currencies to Syria was disrupted during the Persian occupation. The Pseudo-Byzantine folles were similarly accepted by the population due to their iconography imitating imperial coins already circulating in Syria and to their weight standards that were close to the contemporary imperial standards. Indeed, in contrast to the situation under Persian rule, here the contemporary imperial coins were still circulating and con stituted the larger part of currency during sorne periods. For the same (41) For the development of the coinage in Syria under Perslan rule see H. POTTIER, op. cil. [n. 1J. (42) The mint of Antioch was closed in 610. (43) Tt is interesting to note that in this series too we find imitations of Heraclian three fignre folles - cf. e.g. Gorny & Mosch, Munich, auctiou 134 (October 2004), no. 3230. (44) H. POTTIER, op. cil. ln. 1]. 118 HENRI POTTIER - INGRID SCHULZE - WOLFGANG SCHULZE reason, after the first series imitating previous imperial coins, the Iollow ing series imitated contemporary imperial coinage. As aIready mentioned above this freedom given to the Byzantine authorities can be explained by the fact that the Arabs did not try to take their place, at least during the first decades after the conquest. 14. Class 1.1 - The imitations of Cyprus folles 14.1 The prototypes As we have seen above, the Class LI imitations of the Heraclian three figure coins form the greatest bulk of the whole series beside the Class IV imitations of Constans II folles. This means that the coins with the ico nography of the Heraclian three figure coins - among them the Cyprus folles of the years 17-19 (45) - must have circulated in Syria at least after the Byzantine reconquest. AIready in 1968 Grierson stated: « ••• there are innumerable casual imitations which reproduced the main type with minor variations - inverted or blundered mint-marks or dates... different 'officina' letters... and so on. » (46) Paul Pavlou (47) discussed the fact that the official Cyprus folles were scarcely found in Cyprus. His result is confirmed by the coin hoards (48) and stray finds (49) from Cyprus which include a lot of Byzantine coins but practically no « Cypriot» folles. We only know of two specimens, found during the excavations at Salamis. (50) Furthermore sorne speci mens in Cypriot private collections are said to be stray finds from the (45) DOC 2 nos. 184, 185, Pl. XVII (including sorne imitations): C. MORRISSON, op. cil. [n.7], p. 291, pl. XLVI (presumably including sorne imitations tao and with erro neous dates 616{7-618{9 instead of 626{7-628{9); MIB 3 no. 198, Plate 15. (46) DOC 2, p. 232. (47) P. PAVLOU, Was there ever a Mint in Cyprus?, unpublished paper delivered at the 1993 BM{ONS study day. (48) Cf. e.g. J.L. WARREN, On Sorne Coins of Constans II and His Sons, discovered in the Istand of Cyprus, in NC, n.s., l , 1861, p.42-55 and W. WROTH, Imperiat Byzantine Coins in the British Museum, 2 vols., London, 1908 (reprint Chicago 1966) - Cyprus find; A. WESTHOLM, A Hoard of Bronze Coins of Constans II, in NNÂ, 1940, p. 135 147 - Soli hoard; A.H.S. MEGAW, A Seventh Century Byzantine Hoard, in RDAC, 1938-1939, Nicosia, 1951, p. 210 f. - Seventh century Byzantine hoard; A.I. DIKIGO ROPOULOS, A Byzantine Hoard from Kharcha, Cyprus, in NC, s. 6, 16, 1956, p. 255-265 - Kharcha hoard; W. SCHULZE, art. cit. [n.8], p. 33 - Pana Kyrenia hoard. (49) Cf. e.g. D.H. Cox, Coins from the Excavations at Curium, 1932-1953 (ANSNNM, 145), New York, 1959 - Finds from Curium; I. Nrcor.xou, Paphos II, The Coins from the House of Dionysos, Nicosia, 1990 - Finds from Paphos; D.M. MET CALF, Byzantine, Islamic and Crusader Coins from Saranda Colones, Paphos, in NC, 163, 2003, p. 205-226 - Finds from Paphos{Saranda Colones. (50) O. CALLOT, Salamine de Chypre XVL, Les monnaies, Paris, 2004 - Finds from Salamis, nos. 684, 684bis: the coin listed in D.H. Cox, op. cit. [n.49J - Finds from Curium - no. 716 is without any doubt an imitation. PSEUDO-BYZANTINE COINAGE IN SYRIA UNDER ARAB RULE 119 island. In contrast to this Syrian hoards dated c. 636 (51) include a larger total number of these items but with similar percentage in proportion to the volume of the hoards. For this reason we must be cautious comparing the finds in Cyprus and Syria: With regard to the different areas of these regions, proportionally no more specimens of Cyprus folles were found in Syria than in Cyprus. In the numismatic literature it is agreed that the Cyprus coins were produced in a military mint to support the Heraclian army fighting at that time against the Persians. (52) Instead of considering the activity of the Cyprus mint as devoted to the supply of coins for the Byzantine army, the question may arise: Is this isolated minting to be brought into connection with the famous Per sian general Sharbaraz, (53) whose army of sorne 10.000 men (54) after the failed siege of Constantinople was stationed in Syria between 627 and 629 - that is, exactly the period of minting the Cyprus folles? We don't know that for the time being. A broader discussion of these questions not being relevant for the present article will be reserved for another study. 14.2 The imitations The Class 1.1 imitations are mainly derived from the Heraclian Cyprus folles, imitating the KYIIP mintmark, the officina r and in the first tine the year 17. The imitations were struck in Syria between 638 and 643. (55) (51) Cf. e.g. D.B. WAAGÉ, op. cit. [n.40], nos. 2228, 2231; G.E. BATES, A Byzantine Hoard from Coelesyria, in ANSMN, 14, 1968, p.67-109 - Coelesyria hoard; W.E. METCALF, A Heraelian Hoard from Syria, in ANSMN, 20, 1975, p. 109-137 Heraclian hoard from Syria. (52) Cl. Foss, art. cit. [n.30], p. 3; T. GOODWIN, art. cit. [no 11J, p.5, who suggests « ... that whilst the first coins may have been struck in Cyprus, the army quickly mo ved on ta the mainland with its minting equipment and supply of coinage, but retained the Cypriot mint mark »; A. ODDY, art. cit. [no 30], p. 127 with a question mark. Alrea dy M.F. HENDY, On the Administrative Basis of the Byzantine Coinage C. 400-c. 900 and the Reforms of Heraelius, in University of Birmingham Historical Journal, 12 (2), 1970, p. 149 and ID., Studies in lhe Byzantine Monelary Economy C. 300-1450, Cambridge, 1985, p. 416 has argued that the production of copper folles in Cyprus was due ta mili tary needs. W. HAHN, Minling Aclivity in the Diocese of Oriens under Heraelius, in NCirc, July-August 1977, p. 307; MIB 3, 110 and M.F. HENDY, op. cit. 1985, p.416 argue that the mint was situated in Constantia (Salamis near Famagusta). (53) A. STRATOS, Byzance au VII' sièele, Genève, 1976, p. 165 H.; W.E. KAEGI, Hera clius - Emperor of Byzantium, Cambridge, 2003, p. 148 H. (54) A. STRATOS, op. cii. [no 53]: 50.000. (55) This result is not far from T. GOODWIN, art. cit. [no 11], who, restricted ta the «eut coin imitations» of the Cypriot three figure folles, has proposed 632-mid 640s. As we have seen above, the (l cut coins» fall into the same series as the rest of the Class 1.1 imitations. A. ODDY, art. cit. [no 30J, dating the Class I.1 imitations ta the late 630s or early 640s, suggested that the whole series may be Byzantine military issues. 120 HENRI POTTIER - INGRID SCHULZE - WOLFGANG SCHULZE The great number of the Class 1.1 imitations still found today (we know of many more imitations than «genuine» coins) speaks for an enor mous lack of cash at that time. The quality of the derivated types covers a broad span: There are imitations which are scarcely to be distinguished from the originals. Others have a clumsy and often blundered style. (56) We can assume that the coins were produced in a great hurry, perhaps at different places, which haven't been located yet. Nevertheless Emesa (Hims) could possibly be considered as the main mint place due to its role during the Persian war and its main role as mint later on. It seems that the production of the Class 1.1 imitations stopped around 643, almost exactly at the time when coins from Constantinople arrived again in Syria (cf. cha pter 17). 15. Class 1.2 - The imitations of Heraclian three figure folles years 30-31 The Class 1.2 imitations, dated 640-643, form a rather small group of only 5 specimens. We can assume that sorne of the originals ('7) were cir culating in Syria, and because of their similarities to the weil known Cyprus imitations the die engraver(s) used them as prototypes. 16. Class II - The «small module» imitations of Heraclian two figure folles This small group, dated 642-646, is copied from two types of Heraclian folles of the years 3-6 (Heraclius in chlamys) and 20-31 (Heraclius in mili tary dress), (") which were weil known in Syria. (59) The folles of the years 3-6 were already intensively imitated during the period of Persian rule (610-630). ('0) The prototypes have a much larger diameter than the copies made under Arab rule. For this reason we are speaking of «small module » imitations. As noticed above, these small module imitations cannot be produced during the time of Persian rule, because the imitations of that period, sorne of them copying the same prototypes, are much closer to the pro totypes having a larger diameter and a much higher average weight. Pot tier (") already has supposed that they are to be assigned to the period after 636, what now has been proved. For metrological reasons they (56) We cannat exclnde that a very limited nnmber of the examined Class I.1 imita tions are from a later period. Bnt withont any donbt the overwhelming bnlk of the Class I.1 imitations is from the time 638-643. (57) DOC 2, Class 6; MIB 3, nos. 166{167. (58) DOC 2, Classes 2 and 5; MIB 3, nos. 159, 160, 164, 165. (59) Cf. e.g. M. PHILLIPS - T. GOODWIN, arl. cil. ln. 19], p.62, 78, 83{84; W. SCHULZE - 1. SCHULZE - W. LEIMENSTOLL arl. cil. [n.38], p.8-12. (60) H. POTTIER, op. cil. [no 1]. (61) Ibid., p. 85, 86, 119. PSEUDO-BYZANTINE COINAGE IN SYRIA UNDER ARAB RULE 121 should have been struck 642-646 (647). Furthermore our dating is con firmed by a die link between the Classes 1 and II. (62) The simnltaneous production of variaus classes of imitations shows that sorne freedom was given by the authorities ta the die cutters as long as the iconography was close ta sorne Byzantine coins in circulation. 17. The intermediate stage - The supply of copper coins from Constantinople During the early years of Constans' II reign great quantities of copper coins struck in Constantinople reached Syria. The bulk of these folles was from the period 641-648. Thereafter the deliveries diminished - there was no coin production in Constantinople between 648 and 651/52 - and seems ta stop altogether araund 658. (63) We don't know how the Constans II folles reached Syria. By money changers, merchants or surviving Byzantine institutions? (64) By land across the frontier in the Taurus Mountains, by sea directly from Con stantinople or by sea via Cyprus? (65) Furthermore: Was there a regularly (e. g. yearly) delivery of the imperial mint? By whom, on which way and where the coins were distributed and introduced into the daily trade? A possibility is the simple suggestion that the Byzantine folles were introduced ta Syria by trade. The Syrian merchants could have asked their Byzantine customers for payment (or parts of their payments) by copper coins instead of gold due ta the lack of folles in Syria. Sorne numismatists seem ta prefer the idea that the supply of copper coins from Constantinople ta Syria was an economie or a political meas ure of the Byzantine authorities. (66) We cannat reject these possibilities wholesale. But sorne doubts may be allowed. On the one hand we have no written sources speaking of such a measure. On the other hand, regarding the varied types of Constans II folles found in Syrian hoards (") we cannat observe a clear system in the coin supply, never mind a coin production in Constantinople exclusively for an export ta Syria. The coins from such a production should be characterized by a large number of similar dies, dates or officinae, and that is not the case. It seems clear however that the bulk of the copper coins imported ta Syria was struck during the early reign of Constans II, from the years (62) T. GOODWIN, art. cit. ln. 11), p. 6, coins 4 and 9. (63) M. PHILLIPS - T. GOODWIN, art. cit. ln. 19], p. 78, Table 2; Cl. Foss, The Coin- age of the Firsl Cenlurg of Islam, in JRA, 20, 2003, p. 754. (64) St. HEIDEMANN, arl. cil. ln. 39], p. 98. (65) M. PHILLIPS - T. GOODWIN, arl. cil. ln. 19], p.80. (66) St. HEIDEMANN, arl. cil. [n.39], p.97: M. PHILLIPS - T. GOODWIN, arl. cit. ln. 19], p. 80-83. (67) M. PHILLIPS - T. GOODWIN, art. cil. ln. 19], p. 84 (Appendix 1). 122 HENRI POTTIER - INGRID SCHULZE - WOLFGANG SCHULZE 641-648. (68) These coins may not have reached Syria immediately, but with sorne delay. In summary it may be said that the observed coin supply from Con stantinople to Syria may have been developed by trade. On the other hand we have to bear in mind that for Byzantium Syria was a conquered land, out of its authority during the time in question. It seems quite prob able that the Byzantine authorities tried to control the money exchange either directly or by steering the trade as instrument for political use. But let us now turn towards another interesting question: what was the reason for the Byzantine government to export or to allow the export of copper coins to Syria? Heidemann supposes that Constantinople Il must have received in the end gold coins in return, in order to balance this trade. » (") This is logi cal looked at from an economie point of view. Phillips and Goodwin pro pose another idea, which seems not implausible: they argue that the prime motive for the Byzantines was not commercial but political. CO) They are pointing out that the folles of Constans II had a lot of new «revolutionary »- features. Especially the inscription en touto nika (by this sign may you conquer) is striking. The fact that such coins were cir culating in Syria conquered by the Arabs a few years before is most prob ably to be understood as political propaganda - expressed in modern words: advertising for a Christian empire. At that time Byzantium regarded the loss of Syria evidently not as definitive but only as temporary, and already during the reign of Con stans II the first attempts were made to reconquer the lost territories. From the Byzantine point of view it seems quite plausible to support the Christian population of Syria and at the same time to make propaganda. On the other hand we have to ask the question: why did the Arab rulers tolerate the circulation of Byzantine coins with Christian propa ganda? Foss thinks that this fact and this message were considered harm less. (71) This seems consistent, and we can take this idea further: At that time the Arabs were not interested in religious conflicts. As already mentioned, after the conquest of Syria the Arabs didn't change existing administrative structures. Sorne authors are speaking in this context of an «invisible » conquest. «Seen through later Muslim eyes the Arab victories were the victory and vindication of a new faith, the inevitable triumph of true religion, which could only be explained as an act of God. » But ... 1< archaeological data tell a somewhat different (68) DOC 2. Classes 1-4; cf. M. PHILLlPS - T. GOODWIN. art. cil. [no 19]. p. 78 (Table 2) and p. 84 (Appendix 1). (69) St. HEIDEMANN. arl. cil. ln. 39]. p. 98. (70) M. PHILLlPS - T. GOODWIN. arl. cii. [no 19]. p. 81-82. (71) Cl. Foss, arl. cil. [n. 63], p. 754. PSEUDO-BYZANTINE COINAGE IN SYRIA UNDER ARAB RULE 123 tale» (72): During and after the conquest there was no destruction of cities or agricultural land. The communal, social and religious life contin ued as before. New churches, monasteries and synagogues for Christians, Zoroastrians or Jews were built (The first urban mosque was erected after 690! (73)). (74) What had changed was the ruling class. A new Arab elite arase, which was depending on the Greek bureaucrats and institutions. Furthermore official documents were written in Greek up to the time of 'Abd al-Malik (685-705); the old taxation system continued. (75) The society ruled over was not transformed immediately. The Arabs allowed the conquered pop ulation « to remain in whatever faith they wished.» ('6) This ail means, that there was neither an «Arabization» after the conquest, and as we have seen, nor an «Islamisation ». The ruling elite made no attempt to convert the population. ('7) The reason for the Arab conquest was not a religious one, but the con sequence of the necessity to «exp and and survive ». ('8) During the first decades of Arab rule in Syria Islam was still being developed. Not before the reign of the caliph 'Uthman (644-656) was the Koran canonized, which does not mean that it was known to everyone at that time. And not before the end of the first Arab civil war (656-661) did the three main forms of Islam (Sunnism, Shi'ism and Kharijism) come into being - not in an instant, but slowly during a longer time. (") And not until (72) D. BROWN, A New Introduction to lstam, Malden, 2004, p. 7; Cl. Foss, Syria in Transition, A.D. 550-750: An Archaeotogical Approach, in DOP, 51, 1997, p. 264 ff. (73) There is no secured archaeological evidence for an earlier dating - cf. J. JOHNS, The 'House of the Prophet' and the Concept of the Mosque, in J. JOHNS (ed.), Bayt at-Maqdis - Jerusalem and Early Islam (Oxford Studies of Islamic Art, IX.2), Oxford, 1999, p.62 and ID., Archaeology and the History of Early Islam: The First Seventy Years, in JESHO, 46, 4, 2003, p. 416. (74) Later on « unclean » pigs were slaughtered, and drinking of wine continued as before - D. BROWN, op. cit. [no 72], p. 7. (75) For a similar development in Northern Mesopotamia cf. Ch.F. ROBINSON, Em pire and Elites after the Muslim Conquest, The Transformation of Northern Mesopotamia, Cambridge, 2000. (76) J. JOHNS, art. cit. ln. 73], 2003, p. 423. (77) A. STRATOS, op. cil. [n.53], p.334: (, Dans les Traités entre les Arabes et les villes il n'est pas question de conversion à l'Islam... Ils reconnaissaient aux populations le droit de pratiquer leur religion, de garder leurs coutumes et leur garantissaient la vie et leurs biens. En échange, les habitants payaient un impôt de capitation et une taxe foncière 1). (78) It would go too far here to discuss this conclusion en detail. For more informa tion see e.g. the very useful works of Fr. McGRAw DONNER, The Early lslamic Conquests, Princeton, 1981; G.R. HAWTING, The First Dynasty of Islam. The Umayyad Caliphate AD 661-750, Abingdon, 2000, 2nd ed. or H. KENNEDY, The Prophet and the Age of the Caliphates - The lslamic Near East from the Sixth to the Eleoentli Cen/ury, 2n d ed., Harlow, 2004. (79) G.R. HAWTING, op. cit. ln. 78], p.3; for the archaeological evidence cf. J. JOHNS, art. cit. [n.73]. 124 HENRI POTTIER - INGRID SCHULZE - WOLFGANG SCHULZE the Umayyad rule was the idea of the Sunna, the words and deeds of Muhammad as transmitted by bis companions and later generations, more and more discussed. In summary, in the early years after the conquest the Arabs as ruling elite were not interested in changing the old social and religious struc tures in Syria. For this reason we can assume that they tolerated too the support and the circulation of Byzantine copper coins, even if they trans ported inscriptions and symbols with Christian propaganda. From the examination of coin hoards we know that the influx of cop per coins from Constantinople to Syria ceased at the end of the 650s. (80) The watershed seems to be the year 658, when the coin supply was entirely terminated. What was the reason for this occurrence? We don't know it. We only observe the facto Ali we can do is to discuss theoretic possibilities. The first and most simple explanation could be that the Byzantine authorities were no longer interested in supporting the former Byzantine population in Syria because Constans II had given up the hope to recon quer the territories lost to the Arabs. In the decade before 658 he was in permanent conflict with Mu'âwiya, the Umayyad governor of Syria. 647 and 650/51 the first Arab invasions of Asia Minor happened. Constans II was forced to enter into negotiations with Mu'àwiya and to accept a truce; in 652 Constans II began paying tribute to the Arabs. After having set up the first Arab fleet in history, Mu'âwiya led attacks against Cyprus (649, 654) and Rhodes (653). (81) In the decisive «battle of the tnasts » (655) the Arabs defeated the Byzantines under the leadership of Constans II. But the tables turned soon after. Following the murder of the caliph 'Uthman (656) Mu'âwiya was involved in the first [itna, the civil war, which lasted until 661, when he was victorious and became the first Umayyad caliph after 'Alî was murdered by Kharijites. It is interesting to hear that Constans II didn't profit from the Arab civil war. He made no attempt to reconquer Syria. On the contrary: his political interests had turned in other directions. In 658, the year desig- (80) L. ILISCH, Die wnayyadischen und 'obbâsidisclien Kupfermünzen von Hims Versuch einer Chronologie, in Münsiersche Numismalische Zeilung, IO-3, 1980, p.23; M. PHILLlPS - T. GOODWIN, art. cil. ln. 19], p. 77-83: St. HEIDEMANN, arl. cil. [n.391, p. 98; St. ALBUM, A Checklisl of Islamic Coins, Santa Rosa 1998, 2n d ed., p. 19; SICA 1, p. 81, I05 - ail with good reasons against M. MACKENSEN, Resafa l, Eine befesligle spâianiike Anlage vor den Sladlmauern von Resafa, Mainz, 1984, p.29 n. 98 (proposing 660{665) and C. MORRISSON, art. cil. ln. 28], p. 312 (proposing 670). (81) Mu'âwiya used the opportunity to take the remaining pieces of the Colossus of Rhodes and to ship it back to Syria to be sold as scrap meta!. Are sorne Pseudo Byzantine coins of Classes III and IV (see below) made from the remainders of one of the seven wonders of the ancient world? PSEUDO-BYZANTINE COINAGE IN SYRIA UNDER ARAB RULE 125 nated above as «watershed », Constans II achieved success against the Slaves in the Balkan and soon thereafter he granted a peace treaty to Mu'âwiya, who was obliged to «pay the Byzantines a daily tribute of 1000 gold dinars, one horse and one slave.» ('2) From this time on Constans never again made any political or military efforts in the East. ln Constantinople he was engaged in religious and dynastie problems. In 661, the year when Mu'âwiya became caliph and chose Damascus as seat of government, Constans II left Constantinople for Italy. After a series of campaigns against the Lombards, he moved the capital of the Byzantine Empire to Syracuse in Sicily shortly before he was murdered there in 668. (83) To aIl appearances after 658 the Byzantine government had given up the idea of recapturing the lost territories in the East. Possibly for this reason trade with Syria including coin supply was no longer in the focus of interest. Apart from this we have to bear in mind that since 648 Mu'âwiya had started to build up a fleet; in the following years Byzantium lost its supremacy in the Mediterranean. This could not happen without conse quences for trade. We observe that after 648 the flow of folles from Con stantinople to Syria diminished - in coincidence with the increasing aggressive sea power of the Arabs - which may have led to a drastically reduced trade and bring about the end of coin supply around 658. But there could be another reason: from the so-called Maronite Chronicle, written c, 664 (84) we hear that Mu'âwiya around 660 «minted goId and silver, but it was not accepted, because it had no cross on it. » (85) If Mu'âwiya struck its own money, this might be another - possibly cumu lative - explanation for the absence of Byzantine coins in Syria after 658. The question, whether there were gold or silver coins of Mu'âwiya has drawn much - sometimes abstruse - discussion in the numismatic liter ature. In an essential article Miles published in 1967 four imitations of Heraclian gold solidi from which the familiar Christian cross had been (82) RG. HOYLAND, Seeitiq Islam as Olhers saw il (Studies in Late Antiquity aud Early Islam, 13), Princeton, 1997, p. 217. (83) For details al this period 01 Constans' Il reigu see e.g. G. OSTROGORSKY, Byzan linische Geschichle 324-1453, München, 1965, p. 89-92; R JENKINs, Byzantium. The Im perial Centuries 610-1071, New York, 1993, p.40-42; J. HALDON, Byzanlium in the Sevenlh Century, Cambridge, 1990, p.59-63; R-J. LILlE, Byzanz - Das zmeiie Rom, Berlin, 2003, p. 103-105. (84) A. PALMER, The Sevenlh Century in the West-Syrian Chronicles, Liverpool, 1993, p. 29; RG. HOYLAND, op. cil. [no 82], p. 135. (85) A. PALMER, op. cil. [no 84], p. 32; RG. HOYLAND, op. cil. [no 82], p. 136. 126 HENRI POTTIER - INGRID SCHULZE - WOLFGANG SCHULZE removed. (86) Whilst Miles dates these imitations shortly before 691 or 692, (87) W. Metcalf argues for « the decade or so after 670. » (88) Morrisson was the first to bring the four derivative gold coins into con nection with the coins mentioned by the Maronite Chronicle: « On peut donc émettre prudemment l'hypothèse qu'une première tentative de mon nayage sinon «islamisé » du moins «déchristianisé », répresenté par ces dinars aux croix tronquées aurait eu lieu une trentaine d'années avant celles d'Abd al-Malik. La rareté des exemplaires conservés s'expliquerait par son charactère limité dans le temps 1). (") The reaction of Bates followed immediately. Endeavouring to support his «short chronology 1), (go) which is no longer accepted by modern numismatists, he insists on his older point of view that the Arab-Byzan tine gold dinars - and the imitations too - are to be dated into the 690s. (91) In this context he casts a doubt on an early dating of the Maronite Chronicle with sorne hypotheses, which in the end are against all modern scientific results. (92) Denying any administrative efforts - in cluding minting of coins - Bates writes: «Mu'âwiya is not known to have undertaken any important administrative reforms during his tenure as governor or as caliph. It is improbable that he would have introduced any minting where there was none before ... ». (93) This argument was refuted in a profound article by Foss, (94) who listed the historie facts and gave additional evidence to Morrisson's identification. To bring the discussion to an end: modern historians and numismatists now see the possibility that Mu'âwiya made a short-lived attempt to introduce new gold coins. ("') (86) G.C. MILES, The Earliest Arab Gold Coinage, in ANSMN, 13, 1967, p.207-21O, Class A 2-4. A fifth specimen, an imitation of a solidns of Phocas, was later identified hy Marcns Phillips as a forgery. (87) G.C. MILES, urt. cit. [no 86], p. 229. (88) Miles' Class A 3 coin was puhlished again hy W.E. METCALF, Three Seoenth-Cen lury Byzantine Gold Hourds, in ANSMN, 25, 1980, p. 96, 101 - Daphne hoard 2.66. (89) C. MORRlSSON, art. cil. [no 28], p. 312. (90) M.L. BATES, art. cil. (1976) [no 27]; ID., arl. cil. (1986) [no 27]; ID., art. cit. (1994) [n.27]. (91) M.L. BATES, Commentaire sur [étude de Cécile Morrisson. Le monnayage omeyyade et l'histoire administrative et économique de la Syrie, in P. CANIVET and J.-P. REy-COQUAIS (eds.), La Syrie de Byzance à l'Islam VII'-VIII' siècles. Acles du Col loque inlernational Lyon - Maison de l'Orienl Méàilerranéen - Paris Inslitul du Monàe Arabe, 11-15 septembre 1990 (Puhlications de l'Institut français de Damas, 137), Damas, 1992, p. 319-320. (92) A. PALMER, op. cil. [no 84J, p. 29; R.G. HOYLAND, op. cil. [no 82], p. 35 with fur ther references. (93) M.L. BATES, art. cit. [n. 91], p. 319. (94) Cl. Foss, A Syrian Coinage of Mu'awiya?, in RN, 158, 2002, p. 353-365, partly criticised hy J. JOHNS, art. cit. (2003) [no 73]. (95) Cf. e.g. the discussions in R.G. HOYLAND, op. cit. [no 82], p. 138 and fn. 73; SI CA l, p. 91; J. JOHNS, art. cii. (2003) [no 73], p. 418-424; M. PHILLIPS, Currency in Se- PSEUDO-BYZANTINE COINAGE IN SYRIA UNDER ARAB RULE 127 As for the silver coinage we have to notice that for the first twenty years of Arab rule the old Sasanian minting of silver dirhams in the East continned. They were struck in the name and with the image of Khusran II or Yazdgard III and bear the usual legends in Pahlevi. They were only distinguished as «Arab-Sasanian » dirhams by the addition of the Arabie words bism a/liih. «Ali this changed under Mu'âwiya. Beginning in AH 42 (662/663), coins started to bear the name of the governor... or less com monly, the Caliph, with his title of Commander of the Faithful.» (") Sorne rare silver dirhams (dated frozen year 43 = 54/55 AH = 673/674 AD) bear the name of Mu'âwiya, (97) We can start from the idea that during his reign the minting of silver dirhams was continued only with sorne slight modifications and to an established standard. ("8) From contemporary silver hoards we know that Sasanian and Arab Sasanian coins were brought to Damascus in greater quantities as tax income or booty from the former Sasanian territories after Damascus was established as capital (661). (99) Foss presumes that these coins «appar ently entered into circulation in the time of Mu'âwiya.•) ('00) We must cast sorne doubts, whether the silver coins were part of the currency sys tem of Syria at that time, because we have no mixed hoards with gold and copper coins. Apart from this it would have been an enormous break in the Syrian currency system, which was traditionally built only on gold and copper. Nevertheless we can state that silver was available in Syria at that time, and the idea that Mu'àwiya made a short-living attempt to introduce silver coins in Syria too (101) seems not implausible. ('02) Summarizing we can note good reasons to follow the Maronite Chronicle and to assume that Mu'âwiya in the early 660s tried to intro duce a money reform, which failed because it was not accepted by the public. ('0') The introduction of a new currency could have been another venlh-Cenlury Syria as Hislorical Source, in Byzantine and Modern Greek Siudies, 28, 2004, p. 16. (96) Cl. Foss, arl. cit. ln. 94J, p. 360. (97) J. WALKER, A Catalogue o( Arab-Sassanian Coins, London, 1941 (A Catalogue of the Muhammadan Coins in the British Museum, Volume 1), p.86, 87; H. GAUBE, Arabosassanidische Numismatik, Braunschweig, 1973, Pl. 5, 57, 58; SICA l, nos. 245, 246.269. (98) Cl. Foss, art. cit. ln. 94], p. 360. (99) St. HElDEMANN, art. cil. ln. 39], p. 95, 99-107. (100) Cl. Foss, art. cit. ln. 94], p. 358. (101) Ibid., p. 362. (102) In this connection Foss proposed ta assign sorne of the « Arab-Byzantine 1) cop per coins with bilingual inscriptions and mintmarks to the reign of Mu'âwiya: Cl. Foss, art. cil. ln. 94], p. 360-364. But was it during the same period meant hy the author of the Maronite Chronicle? The crucial question of an exact dating is still not solved. (103) SICA l, p. 91 fn. 57: «The reason for their not being accepted was presumably that merchants regarded them as forgeries, rather than for any religions reasons (as might be interfered from the Chronicle).•) 128 HENRI POTTIER - INGRID SCHULZE - WOLFGANG SCHULZE reason why the copper supply from Constantinople dried up at this time. ('04) 18. Glass 111.1 - The imitations of Constans II folles - bust type The Class IILl imitations (dated 645-647) were struck during the period, when greater quantities of (' genuine l) folles from Constantinople reached Syria. How is this phenomenon ta be explained? We only can offer sorne theoretical solutions: The simplest answer would be that the supply from Constantinople was not sufficient ta fil! the need of coins in the daily trade or simply was not ensured. Another possibility starts from the idea that even a larger quantity of new coins needs a longer time (years?) ta reach the required flow, during which the production of Pseudo-Byzantine coins was still continuing in a reduced quantity. Furthermore the absence of guarantee about the vol ume of folles coming from Constantinople could have obliged the Arab Syrian authorities ta ensure a continuous but limited production of cop per coins. Finally: If the distribution of Byzantine coins was limited ta certain places (e.g. trade centres) there could have been requirements for petty money in other, rural areas. AlI these aspects - individual or cumulative - were possibly the rea son for producing the Class IILl imitations, the dating of which (645-647) coincides with the main phase of the influx of Byzantine folles in Syria before 648. Class IIL1 is a comparably small group of 48 examined coins. The pro totypes are the «bust » folles of Constans II year 3. ('05) This type of imi tation was struck only for a short time and possibly for a limited region, because the prototypes were circulating in lesser quantities than later on the «standing emperor» type of Constans II (our Class IV). ('06) Die links between our Classes II, IIL1 and IV may point ta the fact that the Class IIL1 imitations were replaced already araund 647 by the first imitations of the (' standing emperor » type. ('07) (104) Possibly an arrangement was made in tbe peace treaty between Mu'âwiya and Constans II from 658{659. But unfortunately tbe written sources don't give any details. (105) DOC 2, Class 1 (Heraclonas): M lB 3, no. 166. (106) This is confirmed by the Hamâ hoard: From a total of 161 Constans II folles are only 18 of the" bust» prototype = 11.18 %. Cf. M. PHILLIPS - T. GOODWIN, art. cit. ln. 19], p. 62. (107) ln the Forschungsstelle für fslamische Numismatik - Orientalisches Seminar der Universitât Tübingen there is a small hoard of Pseudo-Byzantine coins showing die links between the Classes IIU and fV. PSEUDO-BYZANTINE COINAGE IN SYRIA UNDER ARAB RULE 129 19. Class 111.2 - The imitations of Constans II folles - (' year 20,) The prototype for this small group of 29 coins, first published by Mansfield, (10') could be the (, bust» folles of Constans II years 3 (109) and 11. ("0) Bnt the reverses with a blundered mintmark beneath the M and the clear regnal year XX have strong similarities to the reverses of Hera clian folles of the year 20 ('") of his reign. Possibly the die cutter has copied from two different prototypes, a weil known phenomenon in the Pseudo-Byzantine series. Sometimes a random coin was copied, and a mixing of different prototypes was not unusual. To consider XX as being a meaningful date is questionable. (112) Nevertheless we can assume from the uniform style of these coins that they were struck in a distinctive mint place, which was probably situated in Lebanon or Northern Syria. (113) We have dated this series into the period 658-c.660; this means they were produced at the same time as the Class IV series 2 (see below chapter 20.3). 20. Class IV - The imitations of Constans II folles - standing emperor type 20.1 General remarks The Class IV imitations as a whole form the evidently greatest and most diversified group of Pseudo-Byzantine coins. We examined about 1000 specimens, ('14) and there would have been no problem to include much more of them. The prototypes are the «standing emperor ') folles of Constans II. (115) As mentioned above, this coin type was imported from Constantinople to Syria up to 658 in great quantities, and for this reason we are not surprised that it became dominant too in the imitation senes. This type of imitation shows a broad variety in style and technique of production. We know of quite good copies near to the prototypes; but the majority of the imitations are free adaptations of Byzantine folles, more or less carefully struck, sometimes very crude with or without inscriptions. The legends are blundered, sometimes beyond recognition, (108) S.J. MANSFIELD, art. cit. [n.2J. (109) DOC 2, Class 1 (Heraclonas); MIB 3, no. 166. (110) MIE 3, no. 169. (111) DOC 2, Class 5; MIE 3, nos. 164, 165. (112) A. ODDV, art. cil. [n.3], p. 186 has seen the possihility ta read XX as «20 years after the Arah conquest, thus about 660? » (113) The bulk of the examined coins was purchased in Beirut; cf. S.J. MANSFIELD, arl. cit. [no 2], p. 8I. (114) Only 1% of the whole group shows on the reverse a majuscule M instead of the usual minuscule ffi. (115) DOC 2, Classes 1-7; MIE 3, nos. 163-165, 167, 168, 170-173. 130 HENRI POTTIER - INGRID SCHULZE - WOLFGANG SCHULZE and usually meaningless. As we have already seen for the earlier phase of imitation, now again the weight standard followed the actual Byzantine one. This confirms the assumption that the imitations were products made under official control, or at least approved by the authorities. The administration of Syria was still in the hands of the former Byzantine civil servants. We can not exclude that local municipal authorities or simply money changers were responsible for the coin production. Nevertheless it is surprising that such a broad and differentiated mint ing was organized in a region without any official mint since decades. Who eut the dies? Which technique was used for striking? Who were the craftsmen? We don't know. But the coins themselves tell us that they were made in a very simple way: The flans are rarely round, but usually irregular. The coins were struck on any metal that was at hand. There are triangular, quadrangular or semicircular coins. We even can find coins struck in thin sheet metal, which was folded before the production. Also old coins, broken or halved parts of old coins, simply any metal was used for minting. Because of the great quantity of coins handed down and the numerous differences in fabric and style we can assume that there were several regional or local « mints », This ail leads to the conclusion that the need of small change was excessive at that time. Every imitation was accepted in the daily trade, if the coin just showed vague similarities to the weil known prototypes. Only the average weight must have been correct. And this was the case as shown above. 20.2 Class IV serres 1 - The imitations of the standing emperor type before 657[58 For metrological reasons we have dated the Class IV series 1 647-657. This period of time coincides with the time when folles from Constantino ple were imported to Syria. But: As we have seen ab ove, around 647[48 the deliveries from Constantinople diminished drastically. Between 648 and 651[52 there was no coin production in Constantinople and later on the import of Byzantine coins never reached the quantity of the time 641-648 and obviously was finished around 658. After ail it seems plausible that around 647[48 a new production of imitations started in Syria to fill the unsatisfied demand for minor coin, which was no longer compensated by the import of Byzantine money. 20.3 Class IV series 2 - The imitations of the standing emperor type after 657[58 During the time after 657[58 the production of the imitations of the standing emperor type continued. Syria must have suffered from an PSEUDO-BYZANTINE COINAGE IN SYRIA UNDER ARAB RULE 131 incessant serious lack of cash for a longer tirne. As we have seen, the supply of small change from Constantinople had ceased. The central gov ernment needed a lot of money to pay the tribute to Constans II, and to finance the continuing civil war against 'Ali and the Kharijites. (116) The situation may have been made more critical by sorne severe earthquakes, which happened 659/60 in Palestine. (117) About the same time Mu'âwiya failed with his attempt to introduce a new currency. It is strange to see that this coin type bearing the Christian propa ganda en touto nika remained the most popular prototype later on in the second half of the seventh century, when the so called Umayyad Imperial Image coins, the first «Arabie» coins were struck. And even the (1 stand ing caliph ,} coinage, introduced by 'Abd al-Malik (685-705) in the early 690s, still echoes this prototype on the obverse. For metrological reasons we have dated this group 658-c.670 corre sponding to the low Byzantine weight standard during this period. But so far we are dealing only with a terminus post quem. The terminus ante quem seems to be another one. There are a few quite rare imitations copying prototypes of Constantine IV (668-685), and Goodwin concluded for this reason that the Pseudo-Byzantine series (lI') came to an end in 668 or probably not long after this date at the earliest. ('19) On the other hand he proposes that the minting of the Pseudo-Byzantine coins lasted up to c. 680. (120) It may weil be that the Pseudo-Byzantine coins were widespread and together with the circulating Constans II coins so familiar to the merchants and to the public, that a change in the weight corres ponding to the new Constantine IV standard was not necessary. Apart from this, only a few Constantine IV folles came into circulation in Syria. (121) The fact that the Class IV coins (if they were still minted after 668) do not follow the new standard of Constantine IV could also be due to the introduction of the Umayyad Imperial Image coinage with the new purely Arab standard. In individual cases it may have been possible that there was sorne overlapping ('22) in the striking of Pseudo-Byzantine and Umayyad Impe rial Image coinage, which started probably sometime in the reign of (116) For the history of the Kharijites see Cl. Foss, The Kharijiles and Tlieir Coinage: A Reply, in ONSN, 171,2002, p. 25-28. (117) Reported by the Maronile Chronicle; cf. A. PALMER, op. cil. [n.84J, p. XLIX and R.G. HOYLAND, op. cil. [no 82], p. 136-138. (118) Because of the Arabie (or Pahlavi?) inscriptions of these coins we did not consider and classify them as Pseudo-Byzantine issues. (119) SICA 1, p. 105 and fn. 99, Pl. 37 no. 530; T. GOODW1N, op. cil. (2005) [n.30], p. 18: Harly 670s >J, p. 38 no. 11 Type 1. (120) SICA 1, p. 81. (121) Not a single coin of Constantine IV was listed during the Antioch excavations; cf. D.B. WAAGÉ, op. cil. [no 40]. (122) SICA 1, p. 81, Pl. 36 no. 520. 132 HENRI POTTIER - INGRID SCHULZE - WOLFGANG SCHULZE Mu'àwiya (661-680). ('23) The Pseudo-Byzantine coins, and especially the Class IV coins, were issued in great quantities over a long period and were in any case still circulating at the end of the seventh century. ('24) Perhaps 2-3 % of the Pseudo-Byzantine coins Classes III and IV are countermarked with monograms, geometric designs, animal shapes or Arabie words like tayyib (good) or lillûb. (for God). Such countermarks were also applied to older Byzantine coins or the later so called Umayyad Imperial Image coins. In a broad study Goodwin has recently come to the result that the majority of these countermarks was applied in Syria during the period 660 to 680 and mainly used to validate coins for circulation in a particular region or town. ('25) . 21. The iInitations of Constans II folles - AITOI€ group During recent years more and more attempts were made to identify coherent groups from the enormous bulk of Class IV imitations. ('2") A clear distinctive series has been discovered by üddy, ('27) who called it for convenience (' AITüIE group », These coins, showing the usual crowned imperial figure with long cross and globus cruciger on the obverse, are mostly struck on untypical large and round flans. The obverse legend shows the more or less blundered «word » AITüI€, which is possibly only a compilation of letters and seems meaningless. Beside the minuscule m the reverses show distinctive and die linked combinations of letters like AIX, 3/X, A/ (123) Because Dl the absence Dl Umayyad Imperial Image coins in tbe jund Qin nasrïn Ilisch has proposed the possibility that the striking Dl Pseudo-Byzantine coins continued in this region up to tbe standing calipb coinage, thus in the early 690s, quoted alter SICA 1, p. 81, 105. (124) Cl. Foss, art. cil. ln. 30], p. 3. (125) T. GOODWIN, Countermarks from after the Arab Conquest, in W. SCHULZE, W. GOODWIN, Countermarking in Seuenth Century Syria (Supplement to ONSN, 183), 2005, p.49. (126) T. GOODWIN, art. cit. (1993) ln. 30] - standing emperor in military dress, ma juscule M on reverse; A. ODDY, Imitations of Constans II Fottes of Class 1 or 4 Struck in Syria, in NCirc, May 1995, p. 142 f. - elazy S coins ", S placed horizontally under the minuscule fi on reverse; Ch. P. KARUKSTIS, A Nole on the Localization of Pseudo Byzanline Coinage in Syria, in NCirc, August 2000, p. 158 - die links to A. ODDY, art. cil. 1995; T. GOODWIN, art. eit. (1995) [n.30]; ID., Pseudo-Byzantine Coinage from Seuenth Century Syria, in The Celator, 14 no. 9, September 2000, p. 16-27 - «lazy B coins », B placed horizontally above the minuscule m on reverse. (127) A. ODDY, art. cil. [n.3]. (128) Ibid., p. 189. PSEUDO-BYZANTINE COINAGE IN SYRIA UNDER ARAB RULE 133 dated the (, AITûI€ group» within the Class IV partly into the series 1 (647-658) and partly into the series 2 (658-664). But as mentioned above, the terminus ante quem may be sorne years later. Oddy's dating is roughly corresponding to our result; but it is relying on two hypotheses: the con tinuity of a minting in Hims and the terminus post quem for the minting of the first (, Arabie» coins of Hims, the sa called Umayyad Imperial Image coins, which Oddy calls Proto-Umayyad coins. Both are to be con firmed. Apart from this an overlapping of bath series seems possible (cf. above Class IV.I and 2). 22. Further research What we have done is ta give an overview about the classification and dating of the Pseudo-Byzantine coinage in Syria between 638 and c. 670 - for the first time on a scientific basis. Our fundamental idea that the weight standard of the Pseudo-Byzantine coins followed the changing standards of Byzantium seems ta be confirmed. Furthermore the historie facts support our results. Nevertheless it is only a first rough overview - a first step on a longer way ta give answers ta a lot of still open questions. The different classes and sub-groups are to be refined aud examined in detai1. For example: The Class IV imitations (standing emperor type) are extremely different in their appearance. It should be possible ta find many more sub-groups. On a greater base of material one could start a specified die study to obtain - if possible - stylistic sequences. Are there stylistic declines within the different classes from good to bad copies? Will it be possible to get a more detailed dating and sorne information about the mint pla ces? The knowledge of more die links could help in this connection. Still, as ever, it is very important to look for hoards with Pseudo Byzantine coins, stray Iinds from controlled excavations or coins having a traceable finding place. Such information should always be published and could help ta take the next steps on the way ta solve sorne more problems of the Pseudo-Byzantine coinage in seventh century Syria under Arab rule. 23. Acknowledgements A lot of friends have contributed ta our work by giving us information from their collections and/or wise advice. These are (in alphabetical arder): Jean-Pierre Blicq, Peter Donald, Clive Foss, Tony Goodwin, Stefan Heidemann, Reinhard Hüther, Lutz Ilisch, Wolfgang Leimenstoll, Roger Lemaire, Steve Mansfield, Michael Metcalf, Cécile Morrisson, Andrew Oddy, Marcus Phillips and Cordula Schulze. We are grateful for their generous and important help. 134 HENRI POTTIER - INGRID SCHULZE - WOLFGANG SCHULZE 24. Abbreviations, 1egends and references used in the catalogues Abhreviations blund blundered mngr monogram circ circular mtmk mintmark cresc crescent obv obverse ctmk countermark oct octagonal diam diameter off officina ellip elliptic overstr overstruck emp empress poly polygonal gl.cr. globus cruciger ref reference hepta heptagonal reet rectangular HC Heraclius Constantine ret retrograde Her. Heraclius rev reverse hexa hexagonal r.h. right hand inv inverted spec specimen l.h. left hand sq square mk mark Legends x yes 0 no + cross in field bold figures linked dies References AB Barher Institute of Fine Arts, Birmingham BN C. MORRISSON, Catalogue des monnaies byzantines de la Bibliotheque nationale, vol. 1, Paris, 1970 CM Fitzwilliam Museum, Cambridge DO Dumbarton Oaks Collection, Washington D.C. G04 T. GOODWIN, The Dating of a Series of Early Arab-Byzantine Coinage, in ONSN, 181,2004, p. 5-9 G93 T. GOODWIN, Imitative 7u• Century Byzantine Folles with a Single Figure in Military Dress, in NCirc, May 1993, p. 112-113 G94 T. GOODWIN, A Hoard of Imitative Byzantine Folles, in NCirc, October 1994, p.357-360 HP Collection H. Pottier (Belgium) JPB Collection J. P. Blicq (Belgium) Khal T. GOODWIN, Arab-Byzantine Coinage (Studies in the Khalili Collection Vol. IV), London, 2005 K-O Sammlung K6hler-Osbahr, Vol. V/2, Duisburg, 1999 L Collection W. Leimenstoll (Germany) MorSM Collection S. Mansfield (UK) MIE W. HAHN, Moneta Imperii Byzantini, Vol. 3, Wien, 1981 MP Collection M. Phillips (UK) PGC M. PHILLIPS, T. GOODWIN, A Seventh-Century Syrian Hoard of Byzantine and Imitative Copper Coins, in NC, 157, 1997, p. 61-87, Pl. 20-22 (Hama hoard) RH Collection R. Hüther (Germany) PSEUDO-BYZANTINE COINAGE IN SYRIA UNDER ARAB RULE 135 S Collection I. and W. Schulze (Germany) SICA Sylloge of lslamie Coins in the Ashmolean, Vol. 1. The Pre-Reform Coinage of the Early lslamie Perioâ, Oxford, 2002 SyP H. POTTIER, Le monnayage de la Syrie sous l'occupation perse (610-630) (Ca hiers Ernest Babelon, 9), Paris, 2004, p. 139 AA1 TG Collection T. Goodwin (UK) Trade Online offers by eBay or VCoins UK Private collection (UK) US coll. Private coilection (USA) Key to coins illustrated The main characteristics of the coins illustrated are described as fol lows: The imperial Byzantine folles which are not recorded in the catalogues are defined by their date, mintmark, officina, diameter, weight, MIB reference and source. Figures 1. Heraclius, follis year 18, mintmark KYIIP, officina I', 22.5-21.0mm, 5.45g, MIE 3, 198a (Coll. S) 2. [Ua - 52 - 61] 3. Heraclius, follis year 22, mintmark CON, officina A, 29.4-25.1mm, 3.55g, MIE 3, 164b (Coll. HP) 4. [II.2a - 6 - 12] 5. Constans II, follis year 11, officina r, 25.4-24.2mm, 3.16g, MIE 3, 169 (Coll. HP) 6. [IIUa - 11 - 12] 7. Constans II, follis year 6, officina B, 24.1-20.6mm, 4.62g, cf. MIE 3, 167b (Coll. S) 8. Class IV, 23.6-22.0 mm, 3.86g (Coll. S) 136 HENRI POTTIER - INGRID SCHULZE - WOLFGANG SCHULZE CATALOGUE 1 Coin RevType Dies Weight Diam Axis Coin Ohv ref date off mint mngr obv rev g mm 0 shape + date mark no. no. ? CLA88 1- ODVERSE WITH THREE FIGURE8 Type I.la - psendo-mintmark KYIIP HPI 17 r al 1 1 7,08 29118 180 eut a a 899 17 r al 1 2 5,34 30/20 180 eut a a HP2 17 r al 2 3 4,59 27/19 200 eut a a HP3 17 r al 3 4 4,93 27/19 170 eut a a 897 17 r al 3 5 5,28 27120 180 ellip a a PGC68 17 r al 3 6 4,16 26/19 0 eut a a HP4 17 r al 4 7 4,58 28/18 170 eut a a HP5 17 r al 5 8 3,84 29/19 190 eut a a HP6 17 r al 5 9 7,33 30/22 170 ellip a a HP9 17 A a2 5 10 5,31 28122 180 ellip a a DOl84al 17 r al 5 II 4,68 27/21 180 ellip a a HP7 17 r al 6 12 5,92 25/21 200 eut a a HP8 17 A al 6 13 5,04 26/22 180 ellip a a PGC70 17 r al 7 14 4,63 25/22 180 eut a a SIO 17 r al 8 15 5,51 26119 180 eut a a 8Il 17 r al 9 16 4,69 26/19 180 eut a a 864 17 r al 9 16 5,77 26119 180 eut a a SI2 17 r al 9 16 4,69 26/21 180 eut a a SI3 17 r al 9 16 3,94 27/21 180 eut a a SI4 17 r al 9 16 4,86 27/20 180 eut a a SI5 17 r al 9 16 5,50 27/17 180 eut a a SI6 17 r al 10 17 3,32 27/19 180 ellip a a 844 16 r al II 18 5,78 25/21 180 eut a a 845 17 r al 12 19 4,49 25/20 180 eut a a S46 17 r al 13 20 4,22 26119 180 eut a a 847 17 r al 14 21 5,57 60119 180 eut a a 848 17 r al 15 22 4,36 23119 180 eut a a S49 17 r al 16 23 4,03 26118 180 eut a a S50 17 r al 17 24 3,96 25/22 180 eut a a 851 17 r al 18 25 2,06 19117 180 hexa a a S8 17 C al? 19 26 5,79 26/21 180 eut a a S32 17 r al 20 27 5,Il 25/20 180 ellip a a 833 17 r al 21 28 8,31 25124 180 hoxa a a Trade 12 B ? 21 29 a a U8 coll. 17 r al 21 30 eut a a PSEUDO-BYZANTINE GOINAGE IN SYRIA UNDER ARAB RULE 137 Remarks Coin Stylistic parameters ref head globus fibula chlamys crown cruciger beard HPI 2 3 1 899 2 3 1 HP2 7 5 1 HP3 2 3 2 1 897 2 3 2 1 PGC68 2 3 2 1 HP4 1 1 2 1 HP5 2 3 2 1 HP6 2 3 2 1 HP9 2 3 2 1 D0184al 2 3 2 1 HP7 2 3 2 2 HP8 2 3 2 2 dateinverted PGC70 2 3 2 6 810 2 3 2 4 81l 2 3 2 1 864 2 3 2 1 812 2 3 2 1 unknown ctmk on rev 813 2 3 2 1 814 2 3 2 1 815 2 3 2 1 816 2 3 2 2 844 9 5 4 4 845 9 5 4 4 846 3 4 2 4 847 9 4 4 4 848 9 3 2 4 849 2 3 2 4 850 2 3 2 8 851 3 3 2 2 88 2 3 2 2 Martina empress crown 832 2 3 2 ? Martina empress crown 833 1 3 2 4 Martina empress crown Trade 1 3 2 4 revinverted Martina empress crown U8 coll. 1 3 2 4 138 HENRI POTTIER - INGRID SCHULZE - WOLFGANG SCHULZE Coin RevType Dies Weight Diam Axis Coin Obv ref date off mint mngr obv rev g mm 0 shape + date mark no. no. ? U8 coll. 17 r al B- 22 31 eut 0 0 852 17 C al? 23 32 5,53 30/20 170 eut 0 0 817 17 r al R 24 33 4,39 26/21 180 ellip 0 0 818 17 r al B 25 34 3,66 25/22 180 ellip 0 0 L0307122 17 r al 26 35 4,72 29/19 360 eut 0 0 858 17 r al 27 36 6,50 28/19 180 eut 0 0 81CA505 17 r al 28 37 4,41 25/17 0 K-O 187 17 r al 29 38 4,71 27,3/20 ellip 0 0 K-O 189 17 r? al 30 30 6,09 27,2 circ 0 0 859 17 r al? 31 40 4,29 27/15 350 eut 0 0 G94.5 17 r al? 32 41 5,40 26/17 0 eut 0 0 G04.3 17 r al? 33 42 5,33 23/16 180 ellip 0 0 820 17? r al 34 43 4,87 28120 180 eut 0 0 HP14 17 r a3 35 44 3,12 20/18 180 eut 0 0 D0184a3 17 r a3 36 45 3,95 24 180 eut + 0 86 17? r a3 37 46 4,53 24/16 170 eut + 0 89 17? r a3 37 46 4,90 25/18 180 eut + 0 HPIO 17 r a4 38 47 7,99 26 170 circ 0 0 853 17 r? c6 38 48 6,16 27 290 circ 0 0 L0307124 17 r a4? 39 49 3,63 22120 180 ellip 0 0 831 17 r aS 40 50 3,27 21/15 0 eut 0 0 Khal p33,2 17 r a5 41 51 6,13 25/18 180 0 D0l84a2 17 r a7 42 52 5,03 29/18 0 eut 0 0 819 17 r a9 43 53 4,84 27/19 180 eut 0 0 823 17? r ail 44 54 4,92 29/15 200 eut 0 0 835 17 r al3 45 55 4,76 32/21 0 eut 0 0 836 17 r a13 46 56 4,62 31/22 180 eut 0 0 G94.7 17? r a18? 47 57 5,30 26/16 180 eut 0 0 G94.2 17 r al9 48 58 4,21 24/15 180 eut 0 0 ~ G04.5 094.3 17 r a19 50 59 5,60 25/17 180 eut 0 0 G04.2 17 r a21 B-inv 51 60 5,32 21/21 180 circ 0 0 860 17? r (04) 52 61 4,99 26/18 180 eut 0 0 867 17 r 53 62 4,38 31/22 200 ellip 0 0 81CA506 17 r ? 54 63 4,70 24/20 100 0 L0306100 17 r ? 55 64 3,35 24/19 180 eut 0 0 DOl84a4 17 r ? 56 65 4,48 23/18 180 eut 0 0 L0307123 17 r ? 57 66 4,61 27/19 360 eut 0 0 857 17 r ? 58 67 3,25 26/18 90 eut 0 0 PSEUDO-BYZANTINE COINAGE IN SYRIA UNDER ARAB RULE 139 Remarks Coin Stylistic parameters ref head globus fibula ehlamys crown cruciger beard Martina empress crown VS coll. 1 1 2 4 Martina empress crown S52 7 3 2 2 SI7 1 3 4 2 SI8 1 3 2 2 elliptic border ofdols L0307122 3 3 4 57 elliptic border ofdols S58 10 4 4 2 SICA 505 2 3 4 4 K-O 187 17 3 1 7 K-O 189 47 1 2 7 S59 3 3 4 9 G94.5 2 3 1 7 G04.3 3 3 1 1 elliptic border ofdols S20 4 7 4 2 overstruck HPI4 7 17 17 2 D0184a3 overstr on Her.follis S6 5 3 4 6 elliptic border ofdols elliptic border ofdols S9 5 3 4 6 HPIO 7 3 4 5 S53 7 3 4 6 L0307124 1 3 2 7 Martina empress crown S31 1 2 1 2 Khal p33,2 1 3 1 7 overstruek on Phoeas follis NIKO D0184a2 7 1 2 2 SI9 2 3 4 7 S23 4 3 2 6 S35 5 1 4 3 S36 5 1 4 47 G94.7 7 5 7 3 Martina empress crown G94.2 1 27 17 =G04.5 overstruek on Phoeas follis NIKO G94.3 1 3 27 17 G04.2 2 1 2 7 V upside down S60 1 3 2 3 elliptic border ofdols S67 7 1 2 4 SICA 506 6 3 4 4 L0306100 7 5 4 8 DOl84a4 4 5 2 7 L0307123 10 7 7 7 S57 5 4 4 7 140 HENRI POTTIER - INGRID SCHULZE - WOLFGANG SCHULZE Coin RevType Dies Weight Diam Axis Coin Obv ref date off mint mngr obv rev g mm 0 shape + date mark no. no. ? 865 17 r ? 59 68 3,07 23/18 170 ellip 0 0 094.1 17 r ? 60 69 4,90 29115 0 eut 0 0 861 17 B ? 61 70 3,74 24117 360 eut 0 0 862 17 B? 61 70 3,66 27118 360 eut 0 0 866 16 r a18? 62 71 5,04 28/22 60 ellip 0 0 HP10a 18 r al o/r 63 72 4,51 26121 170 eut 0 0 094.9 18 r al 64 73 4,20 25118 180 eut 0 0 094.8 18 r 020 64 74 5,52 24116 0 eut 0 0 ~G04,4 rev die ~ 004.9 8144 20 B a14 65 75 6,62 25122 0 0 834 ? A a12 66 76 4,61 29/19 150 eut 0 0 821 ? r al 67 77 4,42 28/17 180 eut 0 0 854 ? r a16 68 78 6,44 30/18 180 eut 0 0 856 ? r a4 69 79 5,02 25/15 180 eut 0 0 094,4 ? r ? 70 80 5,00 29/18 220 ellip 0 0 HP11 ? rret ? 71 81 5,43 21119 180 hepta 0 0 HP12 ? Eret ? 72 82 4,23 16124 170 cut 0 0 855 ? E a17 73 83 6,86 23/15 180 eut 0 0 HP13 ? r al? 74 84 4,46 23/16 0 eut 0 0 L0307125 ? r ? 75 85 5,07 25/20 360 ellip 0 0 094.6 ? r ? 76 86 4,40 26115 0 cut 0 0 L0410814 ? rret ? 77 87 3,32 24121 180 ellip 0 0 863 ? a19 78 88 5,77 29116 170 eut 0 0 Trade 79 89 4,90 0 Trade ? Fret 025 80 90 0 BN5 17 r al + 81 91 4,10 0 0 BN4 17 r al b1uud 82 92 4,91 0 0 BN8 18 r al 83 93 3,72 0 0 BN6 18 r al b1uud 84 94 4,47 0 0 8M22 17 r 031 85 95 3,70 180 0 0 8M21 17 r 030 86 96 3,97 180 0 0 8M20 17 r al 87 97 4,56 200 0 0 8M 19 17 r al 88 98 4,95 180 0 0 8M 18 17 r al 89 99 5,26 30 ellip 0 0 8M 17 17 r al 89 99 5,66 30 ellip 0 0 094.10 17? ? ? 90 100 5,20 24/17 40 eut 0 0 JPB 2,2 17 r al 91 101 4,08 25116 180 eut 0 0 JPB 2,5 17? r al? h 92 102 6,24 22 180 circ 0 0 PSEUDO-BYZANTINE COINAGE IN SYRIA UNDER ARAB RULE 141 Remarks Coin 8tylistic parameters ref head globos fibula ehlamys crown cruciger beard rev blundered letters 865 ? ? ?? elliplie border of dols 094.1 3 1 ?? elliptic border of dols 861 10 3 2 7 elliptic border of dots 862 10 3 2 7 866 5 3 4 7 HP10a 1 1 4 2 094.9 3 3 4? 1 094.8 3 3 4? 1 ~G04.4 8144 5 5 4 4 Martina empress crown 834 12 3 4 9 821 4 5? 3 ? elliplie border of dols 854 7 ? 2 ? elliptic border of dols 856 7 ? ?? 094.4 7 5 1 7 HPll 4 3 4 ? overstroek on Her. follis year 3-6 HP12 5 3 4 2 855 1 3 2 ? dale inverted right-left HP13 5 1 4 2 rev inverted right-left L0307125 5 3 2 2 elliptie border of dots 094.6 2 ??? L0410814 8 8 4 8 ctmk class 2 on obv 863 1 ? ?? elliptic border of dots Trade Trade BN5 BN4 BN8 BN6 8M22 8M21 8M20 8M 19 8M 18 8M 17 094.10 2 3 2 5? Martina empress crown JPB 2,2 1 6 1 1 Martina empress crown JPB 2,5 1 1 1 ? 142 HENRI POTTIER - INGRID SCHULZE - WOLFGANG SCHULZE Coin Rev Type Dies Weight Diam Axis Coin Obv ref date off mint mngr obv rev g mm 0 shape + date mark no. no. ? JPB 2,6 17? f? a32 93 103 6,17 26/19 0 eut 0 0 JPB 3,6 17 r al B- 94 104 5,00 31/22 180 eut 0 0 JPB 3,8 17 r al + 95 105 6,21 31/20 200 eut 0 0 JPB 5,8 17 r al + 96 106 4,36 24120 180 circ 0 0 UKpl 15 r a28+ 97 107 3,68 26/22 circ + 0 MP 1 15 r a28+ 97 107 4,44 22/21 circ + 0 Rev. with "abnormal" date HPI5 17? r a3 98 108 6,21 24120 0 ellip + 0 PGC71 ? r ? 99 109 3,05 26/18 180 eut 0 0 Rv inverted l-r 094.7 17? r al? 100 110 3,30 26/16 180 cut 0 0 G94.10 17? ?? lOI 111 5,20 23/17 45 eut 0 0 094.21 17? ? ? 102 112 4,50 26/16 180 eut 0 0 G04.6 17? r ? 103 113 3,52 27/15 0 cut 0 0 85 17? r? a8 104 114 4,11 25/19 180 eut + 0 822 18 r? alO 105 115 2,92 28/21 15 ellip 0 0 Type 1.lb - pseudo-mintmark CON HP27 9 r bl 106 1 5,81 29/27 220 circ 0 0 HP28 12 r bl 107 2 4,49 27/19 190 eut + z 841 15 B bl 108 3 4,57 28/16 0 eut 0 0 L0503023 16 A bl 109 4 4,89 26/21 180 ellip 0 0 HP30 16 r bl 110 5 5,31 23/17 190 eut 0 0 HP31 16 r bl 111 6 3,64 25/17 160 eut 0 0 842 16? bl 5 7 4,49 26/20 0 ellip 0 0 HP43 17 r bl 112 8 3,90 27/19 180 cut 0 0 HP37 17 r bl 113 9 4,41 29/22 170 eut 0 0 L0411844 17 r bl 114 10 4,52 24120 180 ellip 0 0 TGl2 17 r bl 115 11 5,14 ellip + 0 840 17 ? bl 116 12 4,23 24/20 180 eut 0 0 HP33 17 E bl 117 13 4,48 25/21 170 eut 0 0 Trade 17 E bl 118 13 L0507224 19 E bl 119 14 4,80 18/27 PSEUDO-BYZANTINE COINAGE IN SYRIA UNDER ARAB RULE 143 Remarks Coin Stylistic parameters ref head globus fibula ehlamys crown cruciger beard JPB 2,6 ? ??? Martina empress crown JPB 3,6 3 1 1 ? JPB 3,8 2 3 1 5 JPB 5,8 2 5 4 ? UKpl 13 5 4 5? aboveM .+. MP 1 14 7 4 5? übv inverted, Rev. o/I1lh/t- M -Liu/pit HPI5 3 4 2 above M: xHHA Rev. ANN - N ex N ret PGC71 10 5 4 2 G94.7 ? ? 5 ? G94.10 2 5 1 ? G94.21 Rev XIhIII 10 M AlNIN ret. G04.6 2 3 2 Rev xluIIIh M AlNIN ret 85 2 3 4 2 Rev inverted xlIeh/lI M AlHlH/ü 822 4 5 2 ? HP27 1 1 4 I? HP28 10 5 3 I? obv: gl.er: Martina in r.h. and 841 2 3 2 2 Her and He in l.h. elliptie border ofdots L0503023 3 4 4 2 overstruck HP30 2 4 3 6 HP31 2 4 3 6 842 2 3 2 1 HP43 7 3 4 2 HP37 2 4 3 2 L0411844 4 3? 1 8 ANNoaboveM TG12 7 4 8 + in right field 840 8? 3 4 4 HP33 7 5 4 I? Trade L0507224 ? 2 ? 144 HENRI POTTIER - INGRID SCHULZE - WOLFGANG SCHULZE Coin RevType Dies Weight Diam Axis Coin Obv ref date off mint mngr obv rev g mm 0 shape + date mark no. no. ? HP35 17? r b3 120 15 3,55 25/19 190 eut 0 0 HP38 17 A b4 121 16 4,18 25/18 0 cut 0 0 HP39 17 A b4 122 17 5,22 25/19 0 eut 0 0 HP32 17 r b5 123 18 4,09 25/21 170 ellip 0 0 HP34 17 Fret b6 124 19 4,59 28120 270 eut 0 0 81 17 Fret b6 124 19 4,70 24120 30 eut 0 0 8118 17 r bl3 125 20 7,64 29/23 ellip 87 17 A b8 126 21 6,65 20/19 180 circ 0 0 HP42 17 E? ? 127 22 3,38 25/17 180 eut 0 0 HP29 15? ? 128 23 5,18 26/19 0 eut 0 0 HP40 ? A ? 129 24 4,33 28/17 0 eut 0 0 HP36 17 r ? 130 25 6,18 28/17 180 cut 0 0 824 20 cresc b9 131 26 4,05 21/18 180 ellip 0 0 825 20 cresc b9 131 26 4,48 22/19 180 ellip 0 0 837 20 r blO 132 27 5,06 25/19 180 ellip 0 .+ 838 20 r blO? 132 27 3,79 22/19 210 eut 0 .+ 839 20 r blO 132 27 4,66 25/20 300 eut 0 .+ UKp4 20 r blO 132 27 4,95 TG!4 20 r blO 132 27 4,70 Trade 23 r bl4 132 28 Trade 15 r bl5 133 29 094.20 ?A? 134 30 4,80 8M 20 r bl 135 31 5,47 8M 17 Brel bl 136 32 3,84 8M 17 A bl 137 33 2,97 UKp3 ? rv bl4 ? 138 34 5,20 circ 0 0 UKp5 17? A? b8 139 35 4,31 ellip 0 0 UKp7 15 r bl5 140 36 5,17 cut 0 0 TG! 16 A? b21 141 37 5,78 eut 0 0 TG2 ? B bl 142 38 4,56 circ 0 0 TG4 6 ? bl 143 39 5,36 circ + TG5 17 r bl 144 40 4,50 circ 0 0 TG? 15 rret bl6 145 41 4,62 circ TG8 ? r b3 146 42 4,62 ellip T09 ? r b20 147 43 4,17 hexa TG!1 ? rret bl8 148 44 3,76 octo TG!3 17 Brel bl 149 45 4,68 ellip + TG!5 ? A bl 150 46 4,15 ellip TG!6 ? r bl3 151 47 5,00 ellip TG!7 16 r bl 152 48 7,12 cut PSEUDO-BYZANTINE COINAGE IN SYRIA UNDER ARAB RULE 145 Remarks Coin Stylistic parameters ref head globus fibula ehlamys crown cruciger beard barbarous HP35 9 5 4 3 HP38 5 3 4 2 HP39 5 3 4 2 HP32 7 5 4 I? rough HP34 10 5 3 I? 81 10 5 3 I? 8118 87 4 2 4 2 HP42 7 5 4 2 elliptie border ofdots HP29 7 5 4 1 overstruck HP40 I? 5 4 2 overstruck HP36 I? 3 1 2 824 9 8 4 9 825 9 8 4 9 He fibula on right side 837 2 3 4 4 date -fXIXI~ 838 2 3 4 4 839 2 3 4 4 UKp4 TGI4 date X/lIIIX Trade Trade 094.20 8M 8M 8M UKp3 7 5 4 8 date on left side UKp5 4 8 4 9 UKp7 3 5 3 5 TG! 5 1 4 9 TG2 4 5 4 8? TG4 4 1 4 8? TG5 ? ? ? ? TG7 3 5 3 8? TG8 7 5 4 4 TG9 5 5 4 8? TG! 1 2 3 4 9 TG! 3 14 3 3 8? TG! 5 1 1 4 9 TG! 6 ? ? ?? TG! 7 3 ? ? 9 146 HENRI POTTIER - INGRID SCHULZE - WOLFGANG SCHULZE Coin RevType Dies Weight Diam Axis Coin Obv ref date off mint mngr obv rev g mm 0 shape + date mark no. no. ? Type I.le - pseudo-mintmark THEVP HP16 14 B c4 65 1 6,62 27/24 260 ellip 0 0 L0306066 14 B e4 65 1 4,72 25/24 180 ellip 0 0 MIBX43 14 B c4 65 1 K-O 186 14 B c4 65 1 3,34 24,8 ellip 0 0 HP17 14 rret b1 153 2 4,02 25/19 180 eut 0 0 Ml 14 B c4 154 3 5,58 200 M2 14 B c4 155 4 5,55 180 M3 14 B c4 156 5 5,30 180 M4 14 B c4 157 6 4,03 190 HP18 17 r cl 158 8 4,77 23/16 180 eut 0 0 HP19 17 r c2 159 9 6,81 24122 180 eut + u MIBX44 17 r c2 159 9 TG20 17? r c2 159? 9 7,41 circ HP22 20 r c3 160 10 5,27 28118 190 eut 0 0 HP21 17 Fret ? 161 11 3,63 2117180 180 eut + 0 HP20 17 B c5 161 12 3,91 23117 180 eut + 0 843 17 r c5? 162 13 3,75 24/16 30 eut 0 0 84 17 r c6 163 14 6,00 29120 360 eut 0 0 M(Tes)1 17 B e5 164 15 5,63 140 + 0 M(Tes)2 17 B c12 165 16 3,61 180 0 0 M5 17 r c7 166 17 6,48 180 M6 17 r c8 167 18 5,61 190 M7 ? E cl 168 19 5,26 160 HP19' 17 r cl? 169 20 4,83 JPB 2,3 17 r c5 170 21 4,73 24119 140 eut + 0 JPB 2,4 17 r c2 171 22 [9,17] 24123 170 circ 0 0 TG19 ? net c9 172 23 4,21 circ TG18 12? r ciO 173 24 4,40 ellip TG21 14 net c11 174 25 4,55 Type Ud - other pseudo-mintmarks HP41 13 net d3 175 1 5,75 30/20 170 eut 0 0 HP23 20 Cret dl 176 2 6,23 25 190 circ 0 II HP24 + ? 176 3 5,22 26118 20 eut 0 II HP25 ? r? d2 177 4 7,21 29/17 180 eut 0 0 HP26 ? ? ? 178 5 4,73 27116 190 eut 0 0 PSEUDO-BYZANTINE CarNAGE IN SYRIA UNDER ARAB RULE 147 Remarks Coin 8tylistic parameters ref head globus fibula ehlarnys crown cruciger beard HP16 7 5 4 4 ~MIBX43 L0306066 7 5 4 4 MIBX43 K-O 186 7 5 4 4 HPI7 10 4 3 2 MI M2 M3 M4 HP18 6 5 4 4 HP19 4 1 4 5 MIB X44 TG20 date inverted right-left HP22 4 Martina empress crown HP21 1 3 2 1 HP20 1 3 2 1 Martina without gl.er. 843 2 3 4 8 elliptic border ofdots 84 2 3 2 4? M(Tes)1 M(Tes)2 M5 M6 M7 HP19' JPB 2,3 1 3 1 1? outlier JPB 2,4 1 7 4 8 TG19 3 1 4 8 TG18 TG21 10 8 HP41 5 4 4 2 date inverted right-left HP23 4 5 1 2 HP24 4 5 1 2 overstruek on Her. follis year 3-6 HP25 5 5 4 2 elliptic border ofdots overstruek on Her. follis year 6-14 HP26 148 HENRI POTTIER - INGRID SCHULZE - WOLFGANG SCHULZE Coin RevType Dies Weight Diam Axis Coin Obv ref date off mint mngr obv rev g mm 0 shape + date mark no. no. ? 82 ? r? dlO 5 6 4,18 24/21 350 eUip 0 0 83 ? net dIl 180 7 3,50 25/20 10 eUip 0 0 826 ? dl2 181 8 4,31 25/19 0 eUip 0 0 827 ? dl2 181 8 2,72 19/17 180 circ 0 0 TG3 ?? dl2 181 8 4,00 eUip 830 12? Fret ? 182 9 4,79 25/15 180 eut 0 0 MP2 20 A dl4 183 10 3,64 eut UKp6 17 r dl5 184 II 4,62 reet Type 1.2 - 3 figures, Her. in military dress 8143 18 r al5 185 1 5,45 25/18 360 eut 0 0 G94.Il 18 r al? 185 2 5,32 25/16 40 ~ 004.10 004.Il 18 A 022 185 3 5,18 24/17 0 8109 16 r a9 186 4 4,36 22/16 U8 coll 16 r a9 186 4 UKp3 13? A bl9 Chr 187 5 4,53 reet 0 0 Type 1.3- 3 figures Dot identified Coin Weight Coin Weight ref g ref g TG6 2,95 879 3,55 TGlO 5,36 880' 4,72 868 5,03 881" 5,20 869 5,40 882 3,71 870 5,19 883 5,67 871 4,72 884 4,61 872 3,80 885 5,20 873 3,07 886 8,55 874 5,81 887 5,15 875 4,29 888 4,03 876 4,16 889 6,35 878 4,38 890 5,78 * overstruck on Heraclius follis ** overstruck onM.-Tiberius follis PSEUDO-BYZANTINE COINAGE IN SYRIA UNDER ARAB RULE 149 Remarks Coin Stylistic par meters ref head globus fibula ehlamys crown cruciger beard 82 2 3 2 \ 83 2 5 3 2 elliptie border ofdots 826 Il 5 5 8 827 Il 5 5 8 TG3 ? 830 7 7 2 2 MP2 3 3 2 4 UKp6 3 5 2 8 elliptie border ofdots 8\43 4 5 ?? revwithHer. mngr G94.11 ~ G04.\0 G04.11 revinverted X/IU M o/llI 8\09 U8 coll date 0/11/0 UKp3 Coin Weight Coin Weight ref g ref g 89\ 4,48 8105 2,57 892 6,48 8106 5,45 893 4,21 8107 4,12 894 2,61 8108 4,40 895 4,62 8110 3,87 896 2,94 8111 4,13 898 2,78 8112 3,82 8100 4,43 8113 3,30 8101 4,39 8114 2,71 8102 3,96 8115 2,56 8103 5,82 8116 4,25 8104 3,35 8117 3,85 150 HENRI POTTIER - INGRID SCHULZE - WOLFGANG SCHULZE CATALOGUEZ Diam Coin Rev Type 1 1 Dies 1Weighl Axis 1 Coin 1Obverse 1 Reverse ref. date off mintmark mngr Obv Rev g mm o shape lM no. no. CLASS 11- ODVERSE WITH 1WO FIGURES Type n.l- 2 figures in cblamys, Rev. M SyPI 6 r 1 1 1 6,74 AlNIN/O M 1Jl SyPZ 8 A [.N]N 1 2 4,40 AlNIN/O M 6111 SyP3 9 A CON\O 1 3 4,56 25 350 circ AlNIN/O M 61111 SyP4 17 r VIlPc h 1 4 4,10 AlNIN/o M XlUI11 TG22 17 r VIlPc h 1 4 4,70 AlNIN/o M XlUI11 SI21 17 r VIlPc b 1 4 3,44 26 180 AlNIN/o M XlUI11 SyP5 20 [IlCHO 1 5 4,00 AlNIN/O M XIX TG23 20 net CU~ 1 6 4,60 V!XMXIX Type n.2a - 2 figures, Ber. in military dress, Rev. M S\20 17 r VIlPc h 2 4 4,00 24 180 AlNIN/o M XlUI11 HPI,I 17 r PPK rel 3 8 6,28 26/17 190 col XU11M [..] signabove M likeon Emesa Arab-Byz coins HPI,2 1 A EK[N] 4 9 3,61 21/18 140 sq AIN/AM [ J Khal p33,3 1 A EK[N] 4 9 4,51 SI41 1 A 1 4 10 3,56 23 170 AIU M[..]N HPI,3 1 E [CO]TK 5 II 4,56 21 310 sq K in right field AIN/A M AFA HPI,4 3 E 1 6 12 5,26 25121 140 sq AIN/O M I1I1 G04.9 18 r KYPO 7 1.74 3,75 24117 180 ellip Rev linkwithtypeI.1a 74 G94.27 201 1 CON 8 13 4,40 28/15 0 cot NIN/O M [ ]X (Nret) G94.28 2 1 9 14 6,00 SI39 1 El CON 10 15 3,42 20 320 N/V M O/KlC SI40 1 r Ocr01] li 16 4,61 23/19 160 ocl [Xl 1 M NIN (N'el) JPB4,4 18 r oKYIIPo 17 4,81 AIN/A M XlIUIlI JPB4,2 18 r oKYIIPo 17 4,58 AIN/A M XlIUI11 JPB4,3 1 1 [ ]star V 18 3,97 []M[] S137 17 cresc CON 12 19 [2,57] 20 180 pierced coin AIN/O M XlUIlI off cresc(down) S138 1 r NretYK 13 20 2,78 21119 100 f right to 2 fig AfNlNlü M Hec. mngr ret G93 13 20 3,70 TG41 14 21 4,26 26/20 Rev link witb Illib and IV Type II.2b - 2 figures, Ber. in military dress, Rev. m HPI,5 5 15 1 3,80 23/18 130 sq EXCretmLTmIII Rev similar to ClassIV AlTOIE HPI,6 1 CretAo 16 2 5,69 24/180 circ ANretAID AlAIN SICA 507 1 17 3 2,89 SA4 18 4 3,81 SAS 19 4 2,82 Mules (?) - Two figures in cblamys, Rev, m SAI 1 1 3,43 SA2 2 2 3,58 SAJ 3 3 3,21 SA6 4 4 2,80 Type II.3 - Phocas and Leontia (?) G94.29 1 J'ret 1 4,20 180 IOIN/OM[] G94.30 1 1 TEIIN ret 1 11~I 6,90 180 []MIll Trade 2 4,12 1 PSEUDO-BYZANTINE COINAGE IN SYRIA UNDER ARAB RULE 151 Diam Coin Rev Type 1 1 Dies Iweight Axis 1 Coin 1Ohverse 1Reverse reE date off mintmark mngr ûbv Rev g mm o shape lM no. no. CLASS ID - OBVERSE WITH BUST Class Hf.Ia ~ Type ioper const Type beardless (Mm XI6) SM6 KYZ1 1 1 4,40 260 NT-CON AIN/O M Pil HP2,1 A CON 2 2 3,00 24120 260 sq [..] - COhSt AlNIN/O M[ ]111 HP2,2 [] 3 3 3,02 18 200 sq [..l- COS AIN/A M NIE/O/S HPl,1O CNOK 4 4 3,38 23/19 100 ellip IhSt- ANAIKNret AIN/A M AliI>/A SI24 CNOK 4 4 5,48 25121 210 AIN/A M AliI>/A SI28 CO(N] 5 5 4,22 24/21 180 AlNINMXJ[U] SI29 CON 6 6 3,09 22 180 OIN/[V] M [IO]IU S135 A [. ]v [.] 7 7 4,48 26/16 200 [..]- [JEret [AIN ..] M UII1Io Trade r KPP 8 8 A[NN]O M X [. ] Type short beard (Mm XI7) CM 382-1999 9 9 5,08 SM7 r NOC 10 10 2,57 190 AB58 3 r 11 Il 4,40 sq IhPER - B [... ] AIN/A - NEOS -1I11 HPI,8 3 r [..Eret] 11 12 7,43 27/19 180 cut IhPER - BCOhSS II Il M AIHI[A] HPI,9 net 1 mngr 12 13 5,85 301I8 140 cut IhPE ret[ ] N[]M[]X HPI,7 1 1 13 14 3,91 241I7 0 cut St [ ] []AMA[] S136 E [..C] 14 15 3,56 22/17 190 []MAIE Trade 3 r CON 15 16 2,85 [NA] M IIII Class III.lb Bust witboutinscription S130 - [0 ]NrO 16 17 2,90 20/16 220 [..] M E/O S131 17 17 4,53 26/18 180 S132 18 17 4,74 25/20 20 S133 19 17 3,90 25/15 0 TG42 61 [ON]1 19 II 21 2,67 24/19 Revlinkwith II.21 andIV S133' r1 CNO 20 18 2,94 20/16 160 []M[]O JPB 21 19 4,66 0 SMI CNO 22 20 4,29 220 [] MHlO SM3 B 23 21 4,42 330 []M[] SM4 L NrO[] 21 22 3,87 30 AIN/O M N/ II SM5 1 [] 25 23 3,69 0 AIN/O M Il SM A [ ]N 26 24 4,13 130 MXfX Excerptfrom Class IV standing emperor S134 x 17 3,42 25/17 170 SXI7 II 21 3,79 22/15 180 1 x 1 1 1 Mules (?) M Obv. with bust, Rv. m Type inper const SA8 1 2,47 SAlO 2~I 3,64 Bustwithout (?) inscription SA7 3 3 1,64 SA9 4 4 2,56 SAil 5 5 6,55 G93a.22 6 6 3,00 Class III.le Star and crescent (MID X21) SM 1 B 27 251 4,42 3301 152 HENRI POTTIER - INGRID 5CHULZE - WOLFGANG 5CHULZE Coin Rev Type 1 1 Dies Iweight Diam Axis 1 Coio 1Ohverse 1Reverse ref date off mintmark mngr Obv Rev g mm o shape lM no. no. HP2,4 7? r [U] 28 26 4,47 23/18 180 eut Crescent-Star S AlNret M W [Hl TG93.18 ?A U 28 27 4,20 Crescent-Star S AIN M NfN HP2,5 ?? U 29 28 3,72 25/19 200 eut Star-Cresœnt S AlNret M [ ] N BN 13XOI A CON 29 29 4,07 Star-Cresœnt S AIN/A M AIX 5125 r .:(). 30 30 4,64 25/18 40 Star-CrescentS XN... M? TG35 ? .:n. 38 30 3,69 Star-CrescentS 5126 ? 3i 31 4,09 2519 30 Star-Cresœnt S A. M? 5127 ? 32 32 2,65 23/17 0 [ ]-5tar? 5 X? MAIN TG29 r ? 33 33 3,40 Star-Cresœnt S TG30 r .U. 34 34 2,89 Star-Cresœnt S TG31 15 U [.] 35 35 5,86 Crescent-[ Star5] [U.]MXIU TG32 15 r U [] 0 36 35 5,51 Star-[Crescent 5] [..] M XIU TG33 12? r ? 36 36 2,36 Star-[Crescent 5] TG34 r ? 37 37 3,45 Star-[Crescent] S TG37 r ? 39 38 3,20 Star-Crescent S AlNfNM [Il.] TG38 r? ? 40 39 4,36 Crescent-Star S [JMX[] TG39 15? r? ? 41 40 3,46 ] 5 AN M X1[UJ TG40 ? ?? 42 41 3,41 ] Sret X[ ] M AIN/O Nret RH 15? r ? 43 42 3,20 15 ? A:Nret M X1[U] Class mz Type XIX Mansfield class 1 20 A eND ret A a 2,70 280 NfNMXIX 20 A CND ret A a 2,30 180 NfNMXIX 20 A CNOret A b 2,29 180 NfNMXIX 20 A CNO ret A c 2,28 180 NfNMXIX 20 A CNOret A c 3,05 50 NfNMXIX JPB 20 A CNOret A ? 4,28 180 NfNMXIX Mansfield class 2 20 A eND ret B b 4,46 150 NfNMXIX 20 A CND ret B b 2,66 190 NfNMXIX 20 A eNO ret B d 3,65 200 NfNMXIX 20 A CNOret B d 3,34 90 NfNMXIX 20 A eNü ret B d 3,06 160 NfNMXIX 20 A CNOret B d 2,94 90 NfNMXIX 20 A CND ret B d 2,37 180 NfNMXIX 20 A CNOret B e 3,41 150 NfNMXIX 20 A CNOret B ? 3,34 200 NfNMXIX 20 CNü ret B 3,90 200 NfNMXIX 20 A CNO ret B d 2,22 160 NfNMXIX 20 A eNOret B e 2,78 180 NfNMXIX 20 A CNQ ret ? g 2,99 140 NfNMXIX 20 A eND ret C h 2,37 180 NfNMXIX 20 CNO ret C f 4,73 150 NfNMXIX 20 A eND ret ? ? 3,98 140 NfNMXIX 20 eND ret ? 2,38 180 NfNMXIX 5122 20 A CNO ret B b 2,95 180 NfNMXIX 5123 20 A CNOret B b 3,04 180 NfNMXIX TG25 20 A eNQ ret B b 2,92 NfNMXIX TG26 20 CNOret B 2,76 NfNMXIX TG27 20 A eNOret B br? 2,88 NfNMXIX TG28 20 A CNOret ? ? 3,31 NfNMXIX PSEUDO-BYZANTINE COINAGE IN SYRIA UNDER ARAB RULE 153 CATALOGUE 3 1no weight 1 no weight 1 DO weight 1 no weight 1 no weight 1 no weight 1 DO weight 1 no weight 1 CLASS IV - OBVERSE WITH STANDING EMPEROR ClassIV - groupa - Rev M 1 1,80 6 2,64 11 2,96 16 3,49 21 3,65 26 3,78 31 5,21 2 2,24 7 2,61 12 2,77 17 3,33 22 3,58 27 3,83 32 5,42 3 2,27 8 2,67 13 2,99 18 3,32 23 3,65 28 3,84 33 5,73 4 2,40 9 2,68 14 3,10 19 3,52 24 3,58 29 4,21 5 2,47 10 2,99 15 3,20 20 3,73 25 3,77 3D 4,21 ClassIV - groupb - Rev m HP IV 1 1,84 7 2,72 13 2,96 19 3,22 25 3,40 31 3,69 37 3,90 43 4,35 2 2,17 8 2,67 14 2,97 20 3,00 26 3,32 32 3,63 38 3,91 3 2,37 9 2,64 15 2,99 21 3,10 27 3,48 33 3,57 39 3,81 4 2,47 10 2,73 16 3,17 22 3,49 28 3,33 34 3,59 40 3,82 5 2,70 11 2,95 17 3,20 23 3,27 29 3,36 35 3,88 41 4,33 6 2,56 12 2,84 18 3,13 24 3,30 3D 3,58 36 4,10 42 4,45 BUcq IV 1 2,09 5 2,60 9 3,21 13 3,48 17 3,67 21 3,85 25 4,69 29 5,02 2 2,26 6 2,55 ID 3,05 14 3,28 18 3,68 22 4,08 26 4,35 3D 5,64 3 2,56 7 2,86 11 3,19 15 3,41 19 3,57 23 4,04 27 4,33 4 2,59 8 2,78 12 3,47 16 3,43 20 3,90 24 4,10 28 4,65 SIV 1 1,41 11 2,38 21 2,94 31 3,02 41 3,47 51 3,82 61 4,07 71 5,19 2 1,77 12 2,28 22 2,81 32 3,23 42 3,44 52 3,93 62 4,01 72 5,11 3 1,99 13 2,49 23 2,77 33 3,01 43 3,42 53 3,99 63 4,07 73 6,49 4 1,79 14 2,42 24 2,84 34 3,15 44 3,53 54 3,90 64 4,09 5 1,85 15 2,33 25 2,99 35 3,30 45 3,60 55 3,80 65 4,03 6 2,01 16 2,63 26 2,79 36 3,30 46 3,66 56 3,80 66 4,46 7 2,30 17 2,56 27 2,94 37 3,31 47 3,60 57 3,82 67 4,34 8 2,35 18 2,52 28 2,78 38 3,32 48 3,53 58 3,85 68 4,62 9 2,40 19 2,75 29 2,85 39 3,25 49 3,58 59 3,92 69 4,51 ID 2,30 20 2,76 30 3,06 40 3,39 50 3,60 60 4,05 70 5,25 MPTG97 1 2,41 9 2,53 17 2,93 25 3,22 33 3,68 41 3,68 49 4,08 57 5,18 2 2,38 10 2,80 18 2,92 26 3,46 34 3,67 42 3,63 50 4,00 58 5,05 3 2,29 11 2,80 19 3,18 27 3,39 35 3,54 43 3,55 51 4,08 4 2,45 12 2,77 20 3,22 28 3,27 36 3,66 44 3,67 52 4,26 5 2,45 13 2,91 21 3,05 29 3,49 37 3,53 45 3,71 53 4,29 6 2,35 14 2,82 22 3,12 3D 3,47 38 3,50 46 3,92 54 4,71 7 2,59 15 2,96 23 3,09 31 3,45 39 3,59 47 3,89 55 5,80 8 2,56 16 2,68 24 3,16 32 3,50 40 3,65 48 4,13 56 4,92 UKIV 1 1,84 5 2,12 9 2,70 13 2,96 17 3,11 21 3,74 25 5,50 2 1,84 6 2,34 10 2,67 14 2,86 18 3,00 22 3,98 3 2,18 7 2,48 11 2,59 15 3,11 19 3,39 23 4,16 4 2,09 8 2,61 12 2,76 16 3,12 20 3,72 24 4,73 154 HENRI POTTIER - INGRID SCHULZE - WOLFGANG SCHULZE no weight DO weight no weight no weight no weigbt no weight DO weight no weigbt SblIV 1 1,39 80 2,44 159 2,46 238 2,56 317 3,35 396 3,67 475 3,34 554 3,54 2 1,73 81 2,35 160 2,31 239 2,73 318 3,36 397 3,56 476 3,26 555 3,58 3 1,69 82 2,33 161 2,49 240 2,64 319 3,44 398 3,62 477 3,27 556 3,57 4 1,61 83 2,27 162 2,27 241 2,74 320 3,26 399 3,00 478 3,30 557 3,52 5 1,60 84 1,83 163 2,29 242 2,68 321 3,46 400 3,32 479 3,75 558 3,67 6 1,61 85 1,98 164 2,42 243 2,51 322 3,40 401 3,06 480 3,59 559 3,58 7 1,89 86 1,79 165 2,36 244 2,52 323 3,28 402 3,07 481 3,51 560 3,54 8 1,97 87 1,99 166 2,38 245 2,71 324 3,24 403 3,22 482 3,51 561 3,62 9 1,88 88 1,95 167 2,13 246 2,54 325 3,28 404 3,19 483 3,55 562 3,63 10 1,84 89 1,95 168 2,51 247 2,55 326 3,34 405 3,03 484 3,71 563 3,54 Il 1,85 90 1,80 169 2,61 248 2,64 327 3,36 406 3,14 485 3,56 564 3,91 12 1,76 91 2,01 170 2,63 249 2,60 328 3,46 407 3,00 486 3,54 565 3,75 13 1,79 92 2,12 171 2,55 250 2,53 329 3,35 408 3,06 487 3,54 566 3,99 14 2,20 93 2,11 172 2,63 251 2,50 330 3,40 409 3,32 488 3,45 567 3,83 15 2,23 94 2,1l 173 2,01 252 2,50 331 3,38 410 3,46 489 3,38 568 4,65 16 2,22 95 2,24 174 2,33 253 3,05 332 3,40 41l 3,30 490 3,34 569 4,58 17 2,21 96 2,22 175 2,25 254 3,20 333 3,29 412 3,36 491 3,45 570 4,85 18 2,19 97 2,15 176 2,35 255 3,17 334 3,42 413 3,38 492 3,47 571 4,69 19 2,21 98 2,02 177 2,32 256 3,05 335 3,44 414 3,46 493 3,40 572 4,99 20 2,1l 99 2,15 178 2,27 257 3,18 336 2,86 415 3,39 494 3,44 573 4,78 21 1,17 100 2,09 179 2,29 258 3,08 337 2,91 416 3,35 495 3,42 574 4,89 22 1,38 101 2,10 180 2,42 259 3,10 338 2,78 417 3,31 496 3,31 575 5,05 23 1,45 102 2,10 181 2,36 260 3,02 339 2,89 418 3,36 497 3,37 576 5,68 24 1,37 103 2,21 182 2,25 261 3,1l 340 2,77 419 3,35 498 3,31 577 5,76 25 1,62 104 2,19 183 2,37 262 3,06 341 2,79 420 3,35 499 3,30 578 6,56 26 1,60 105 2,05 184 2,36 263 3,03 342 2,91 421 3,47 500 3,45 579 3,84 27 l,57 106 2,15 185 2,34 264 3,09 343 2,95 422 3,44 501 3,37 580 3,87 28 l,57 107 2,06 186 2,55 265 3,09 344 2,86 423 3,40 502 3,41 581 3,89 29 1,61 108 2,01 187 2,55 266 3,1l 345 2,91 424 3,42 503 3,69 582 3,83 30 l,53 109 2,07 188 2,54 267 3,15 346 2,88 425 3,19 504 3,60 583 3,87 31 1,62 110 1,99 189 2,58 268 3,08 347 2,92 426 3,03 505 3,92 584 3,85 32 l,52 III 1,88 190 2,97 269 3,14 348 2,75 427 3,14 506 3,79 585 3,82 33 l,52 112 1,87 191 2,78 270 3,20 349 2,97 428 3,00 507 3,88 586 4,05 34 1,84 113 1,83 192 2,84 271 3,21 350 3,14 429 3,06 508 3,79 587 4,18 35 1,79 114 2,1l 193 2,83 272 3,10 351 3,20 430 3,06 509 3,86 588 4,09 36 1,84 ilS 2,08 194 2,94 273 2,67 352 3,24 431 3,12 510 3,91 589 4,02 37 1,76 116 2,14 195 2,83 274 2,52 353 3,10 432 3,24 Sil 3,76 590 4,12 38 1,93 117 2,10 196 2,76 275 2,90 354 3,06 433 3,01 512 3,98 591 4,05 39 1,81 118 2,22 197 2,96 276 2,99 355 3,24 434 3,15 513 3,94 592 4,16 40 1,87 119 2,20 198 2,81 277 2,92 356 3,02 435 3,04 514 4,18 593 4,04 41 1,78 120 2,04 199 2,99 278 2,81 357 3,18 436 3,23 515 4,18 594 4,06 42 1,91 121 2,16 200 2,89 279 2,84 358 3,16 437 3,40 516 4,07 595 4,45 43 1,97 122 2,06 201 2,99 280 2,97 359 3,08 438 3,34 517 4,05 596 4,33 44 1,75 123 2,21 202 2,82 281 2,88 360 3,12 439 3,33 518 4,30 597 4,31 45 1,93 124 2,01 203 2,91 282 2,84 361 3,23 440 3,42 519 4,27 598 4,27 46 1,92 125 2,08 204 2,85 283 2,88 362 2,96 441 3,33 520 4,33 599 4,27 47 1,45 126 2,20 205 2,97 284 2,85 363 2,86 442 3,52 521 4,29 600 4,40 48 1,37 127 2,26 206 2,88 285 2,95 364 2,92 443 3,53 522 4,45 601 4,31 49 1,41 128 2,46 207 3,02 286 2,86 365 2,89 444 3,54 523 4,33 602 4,43 50 l,57 129 2,36 208 3,08 287 2,78 366 2,92 445 3,62 524 4,58 603 4,58 51 1,60 130 2,27 209 3,15 288 2,83 367 2,92 446 3,67 525 3,66 604 4,59 52 l,53 l3l 2,40 210 2,72 289 2,85 368 2,94 447 3,74 526 3,63 605 4,65 PSEUDO-BYZANTINE GOINAGE IN SYRIA UNDER ARAB RULE 155 DO weight no weight DO weight no weight no weight no weight no weight no weight 53 l,52 132 2,42 2Il 2,72 290 2,83 369 2,84 448 3,59 527 3,70 606 5,04 54 l,50 133 2,29 212 2,72 291 2,99 370 2,99 449 3,51 528 3,60 607 5,03 55 1,90 134 2,68 213 2,67 292 2,90 371 2,94 450 3,50 529 3,62 608 3,86 56 1,97 135 2,59 214 2,72 293 2,97 372 2,76 451 3,55 530 3,62 609 3,99 57 1,75 136 2,55 215 2,61 294 2,85 373 2,95 452 3,51 531 3,58 610 3,87 58 1,92 137 2,57 216 2,61 295 2,91 374 3,01 453 3,72 532 3,53 6Il 3,79 59 1,91 138 2,58 217 2,64 296 2,95 375 3,16 454 3,56 533 3,57 612 3,78 60 1,93 139 2,61 218 2,66 297 2,92 376 3,07 455 3,89 534 3,57 613 4, Il 61 1,83 140 2,56 219 2,57 298 2,94 377 3,07 456 3,96 535 3,51 614 4,12 62 1,98 141 2,58 220 2,73 299 2,78 378 3,22 457 3,76 536 3,67 615 4,16 63 1,79 142 2,61 221 2,65 300 2,83 379 3,27 458 3,97 537 3,79 616 4,06 64 2,02 143 2,63 222 2,55 301 2,85 380 3,44 459 3,96 538 3,84 617 4,04 65 2,20 144 2,55 223 2,53 302 2,84 381 3,32 460 3,97 539 3,91 618 4,08 66 2,10 145 2,64 224 2,58 303 2,90 382 3,46 461 3,96 540 3,76 619 4,07 67 2,15 146 2,73 225 2,71 304 2,97 383 3,30 462 3,44 541 3,98 620 4,28 68 2,04 147 2,00 226 2,51 305 2,79 384 3,36 463 3,28 542 3,94 621 4,28 69 2,03 148 2,31 227 2,59 306 2,79 385 3,34 464 3,29 543 3,99 622 4,39 70 2,01 149 2,26 228 2,52 307 2,85 386 3,27 465 3,36 544 3,81 623 4,32 71 2,12 150 2,41 229 2,56 308 2,96 387 3,46 466 3,46 545 3,98 624 4,43 72 2,12 151 2,43 230 2,65 309 2,93 388 3,40 467 3,46 546 3,84 625 4,67 73 2,1I 152 2,29 231 2,72 310 2,91 389 3,28 468 3,40 547 3,94 626 4,59 74 2,23 153 2,27 232 2,64 31I 2,91 390 3,59 469 3,44 548 3,87 627 4,80 75 2,27 154 2,26 233 2,74 312 2,89 391 3,59 470 3,42 549 3,92 76 2,49 155 2,45 234 2,68 313 2,77 392 3,51 471 3,31 550 3,99 77 2,40 156 2,32 235 2,70 314 2,80 393 3,65 472 3,36 551 3,63 78 2,43 157 2,25 236 2,51 315 2,92 394 3,56 473 3,31 552 3,62 79 2,32 158 2,35 237 2,52 316 3,27 395 3,52 474 3,45 553 3,58 Class IV ~ Group c - AITOle from Collections:S, HP•.lPB, UK and MP-TG 97 AIXsub-grcup 1 1,39 8 2,07 15 2,33 22 2,71 29 2,51 36 2,92 43 3,22 50 4,40 2 l,55 9 2,23 16 2,30 23 2,65 30 2,73 37 2,75 44 3,20 SI 5,68 3 1,63 10 2,19 17 2,72 24 2,74 31 2,87 38 2,83 45 3,00 52 5,66 4 1,92 Il 2,14 18 2,61 25 2,58 32 2,77 39 2,91 46 3,48 53 3,78 5 1,94 12 2,06 19 2,50 26 2,54 33 2,85 40 2,77 47 3,53 6 2,16 13 2,19 20 2,52 27 2,51 34 2,85 41 3,22 48 3,50 7 2,23 14 2,33 21 2,49 28 2,67 35 3,00 42 3,24 49 3,61 EIX, AlcfJ/A and ether sub-groups 1 1,74 Il 2,47 21 2,56 31 2,82 41 3,00 SI 3,40 61 3,98 71 4,73 2 l,57 12 2,26 22 2,61 32 2,94 42 3,05 52 3,32 62 3,82 72 5,50 3 1,84 13 2,34 23 2,64 33 2,89 43 3,19 53 3,49 63 3,91 73 5,69 4 2,24 14 2,37 24 2,73 34 2,76 44 3,06 54 3,33 64 3,91 5 2,18 15 2,26 25 2,70 35 2,86 45 3,14 55 3,36 65 3,82 6 2,14 16 2,34 26 2,61 36 2,96 46 3,10 56 3,39 66 3,98 7 2,09 17 2,48 27 2,70 37 3,14 47 3,11 57 3,57 67 4,13 8 2,12 18 2,64 28 2,67 38 3,20 48 3,12 58 3,59 68 4,18 9 2,18 19 2,76 29 2,59 39 3,24 49 3,00 59 3,72 69 4,16 10 2,28 20 2,53 30 2,80 40 3,10 50 3,29 60 3,74 70 4,39 Revue belge de Numismatique, 2008 Pl. III Class I.1a 12 34 Class I.1b 56 Class I.1c 78 Class I.1d 910 Pseudo-Byzantine Coinage in Syria under Arab Rule The Classes I to III of Pseudo-Byzantine folles are described in the catalogues 1 and 2, reference to them being given by [class obverse die reverse die] numbers. The Class IV Pseudo-Byzantine folles are only characterised by their weight in the catalogue 3, therefore Class IV group, diameter, weight and source are mentioned in the present list. Plate III 1. [I.1a 11 18] 2. [I.1a 13 20] 3. [I.1a 25 34] 4. [I.1a 98 108] 5. [I.1b 124 19] 6. [I.1b 132 27] 7. [I.1c 158 8] 8. [I.1c 159 9] 9. [I.1d 176 2] 10. [I.1d 181 8] Revue belge de Numismatique, 2008 Pl. IV Class I.2 Class I.3 12 Die links within Class 1 345 67 Pseudo-Byzantine Coinage in Syria under Arab Rule Plate IV 1. [I.2 185 1] 2. [I.3 S71] 3. [I.1a 5 10] 4. [I.1d 5 6] 5. [I.1b 5 7] 6. [I.1a 65 75] 7. [I.1c 65 1] Revue belge de Numismatique, 2008 Pl. V Countermarks on Class I 12 Die links between Classes I and II 34 Pseudo-Byzantine Coinage in Syria under Arab Rule Plate V 1. [I.1a 78 88] 2. [I.1a 9 16] S13 3. [I.1a 64 74] 4. [II.2a 7 74] Revue belge de Numismatique, 2008 Pl. VI Class II.1 12 Class II.2a 34 Class II.2b 56 Class II.3 7 Pseudo-Byzantine Coinage in Syria under Arab Rule Plate VI 1. [II.1 1 4] 2. [II.1 1 6] 3. [II.2a 2 4] 4. [II.2a 10 15] 5. [II.2b 14 21] 6. [II.2b 15 22] 7. [II.3 1 - 1] Revue belge de Numismatique, 2008 Pl. VII Class III.1a 12 Class III.1b 3 Class III.1c 45 Class III.2 Class III - Mule (?) 67 Pseudo-Byzantine Coinage in Syria under Arab Rule Plate VII 1. [III.1a 5 5] 2. [III.1a 12 13] 3. [III.1b 18 17] 4. [III.1c 32 32] 5. [III.1c 28 26] 6. [III.2 B b] S123 7. [III Mule (?) 2 2] S A10 Revue belge de Numismatique, 2008 Pl. VIII Class IV group a 1 23 Class IV group b 45 67 Pseudo-Byzantine Coinage in Syria under Arab Rule Plate VIII 1. Class IV group a, 20.0mm, 3.49g (Coll. HP) 2. Class IV group a (blund.), 15.7-14.2mm, 1.53g (Coll. S) 3. Class IV group a (blund.), 15.8-15.6mm, 2.32g (Coll. S) 4. Class IV group b, 21.2-18.8mm, 2.96g (Coll. HP) 5. Class IV group b, 22.4-21.0mm, 3.59g (Coll. S) 6. Class IV group b, 21.7mm, 4.78g (Coll. S) 7. Class IV group b, 22.3-18.5mm, 2.36g (Coll. S) Revue belge de Numismatique, 2008 Pl. IX Class IV group b (cont.) 12 34 Class IV group c 56 78 Pseudo-Byzantine Coinage in Syria under Arab Rule Plate IX 1. Class IV group b, 23.5-16.7mm, 2.57g (Coll. S) 2. Class IV group b, 20.7-16.0mm, 2.01g (Coll. S) 3. Class IV group b, 23.1-17.0mm, 3.40g (Coll. S) 4. Class IV group b, 20.8-15.2mm, 1.61g (Coll. S) 5. Class IV group c, 20.8mm, 2.77g (Coll. S) 6. Class IV group c, 25.0-19.0mm, 5.69g (Coll. S) 7. Class IV group c, 22.4-19.6mm, 3.11g (Coll. S) 8. Class IV group c, 21.1-20.1mm, 2.65g (Coll. S) Revue belge de Numismatique, 2008 Pl. X Die links between Classes II, III and IV 1 Class II 2 Class III 3 Class III 4 Class IV 5 Class IV Pseudo-Byzantine Coinage in Syria under Arab Rule Plate X 1. [II.2a 14 21] 2. [III.1b 19 II 21] 3. [III.1b 19 17] 4. [IV group a x III 17] 5. [IV group a x II 21]