New Remarks on the Flow of Byzantine Coins in Avaria and Walachia During the Second Half of the Seventh Century

Total Page:16

File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb

New Remarks on the Flow of Byzantine Coins in Avaria and Walachia During the Second Half of the Seventh Century NEW REMARKS ON THE FLOW OF BYZANTINE COINS IN AVARIA AND WALACHIA DURING THE SECOND HALF OF THE SEVENTH CENTURY Péter Somogyi History of research In Avar archaeology, associating minting dates of coins found in burial assemblages with the ruling years of the issuing emperors was for a long time an established practice. Such a rough dating of coins found in burial assemblages led to the conclusion that the fl ow of Byzantine gold coins in Avaria was uninterrupted until ca. 680 (the date of the most recent coins of Byzantine origin found in burial assemblages, which is in fact to be placed at some point between 674 and 681), aft er which it died out abruptly. A historical interpretation was quickly found to fi t the model: direct links between Constantinople and Avaria were interrupted by the Bulgar conquest of the Balkans in 680/1. Th is interpretation was shortly aft erwards abandoned in favor of the idea that the absence of Byzantine coins dated aft er 681 has much more to do with the decline of Byzantine coinage beginning with the reign of Constantine IV.1 As early as the 1970s, István Bóna has dealt with the catalogue and precise identifi cation of the Byzantine coins found in Avaria.2 He noticed that the last gold coins struck for Heraclius that have been found in burial assemblages were those issued between 616 and 625, while the earliest coins struck for Constans II and found in Avaria are those of 654–659. He interpreted this phenomenon as indicating that follow- ing the failed siege of Constantinople in 626, the Avars stopped receiv- ing stipends from Constantinople. By contrast, the presence of gold and silver coins of Constans II and Constantine IV, all dated aft er 650, was to be explained by means of the migration of the Onogur Bulgars. 1 For the history of research, see Somogyi 1997, 7–9 and Winter 2000, 46–47. See also Bálint 2004a, 52. 2 Bóna 2002, 477; Bóna 2003, 294. 84 péter somogyi In contrast to other opinions,3 Bóna did not believe it possible that the Avars could have been again paid stipends and gift s aft er 650. His major argument was that the gold coins of Constans II and Constantine IV appear in those burial assemblages, which, on the basis of the associated grave goods, he had attributed to the Bulgar newcomers. Previously set- tlers of the Black Sea area, the Onogur Bulgars had been paid betwen 626 and 670 large amounts of Byzantine gold, which they carried with them into Avaria when fl eeing the invading Khazars. Since in Avaria, no other coins have been in circulation since 626, the coins found in the Bulgar graves must have been brought from the homeland north of the Black Sea.4 Th is interpretation forces one to accept a single, mediated fl ow of Byz- antine gold and silver coins, but provides an apparently easy explanation for the lack of any coins minted aft er 681. As in 1970, Bóna interpreted this negative evidence as indicating economic and monetary troubles in the Byzantine Empire.5 Th is was the state of research when in 1992 I began a new study of the Byzantine coins found in assemblages dated to the Avar period. My investigations were directly linked to Bóna’s work, if only because I had from him the entire gazeteer that he had not managed to publish, together with DOC-based attributions for every coin. Th is, however, did not at all imply that I also inherited his interpretation of the fl ow of Byzantine coins into Avaria. My conclusions at that time were based primarily on coins known to have been found in Avaria, as knowing that another extensive investigation was in preparation, I had left aside all stray finds from Austria.6 In hindsight, that turned out to be a poor choice. But the idea that I deliberately limited my approach to the material must equally be rejected. On the other hand, it is true that I refused to incorporate the seventh- and eighth-century coins of unknown or uncertain origin, which are now in the numismatic collection of the Hungarian National Museum in Budapest. But I did not ignore their existence, for there are several references to them in my book’s appendices, which spell out the reasons for my decision to leave them out of the fi nal gazeteer.7 I dealt in 3 Somogyi 1997, 119 with n. 29 and 127 with n. 117 summarizes the earlier positions on this issue. 4 Bóna 1993, 531 and 536. 5 Bóna 1993, 536. Th is position has been refuted by Somogyi 1997, 120 with n. 30. 6 Somogyi 1997, 20 with n. 23. In the meantime, the Austrian fi nds have been pub- lished and discussed by Winter 2000. 7 Somogyi 1997, 112 with n. 9; 113–114, 115 with n. 17; 119 and 128 with n. 22. .
Recommended publications
  • The Pantheon (Temple of All the Gods)
    The Pantheon (temple of all the gods) is a former Roman temple and since the year 609 a Catholic church in Rome, Italy, on the site of an earlier temple commissioned by Marcus Agrippa during the reign of Augustus (27 BC – 14 AD). It was rebuilt by the emperor Hadrian and probably dedicated 126 AD. Its date of construction is uncertain, because Hadrian chose not to inscribe the new temple but rather to retain the inscription of Agrippa's older temple, which had burned down. The building is cylindrical with a portico of large granite Corinthian columns (eight in the first rank and two groups of four behind) under a pediment. A rectangular vestibule links the porch to the rotunda, which is under a coffered concrete dome, with a central opening (oculus) to the sky. Almost two thousand years after it was built, the Pantheon's dome is still the world's largest unreinforced concrete dome. The height to the oculus and the diameter of the interior circle are the same, 142 feet. It is one of the best-preserved of all Ancient Roman buildings, in large part because it has been in continuous use throughout its history and, since the 7th century, the Pantheon has been in use as a church dedicated to "St. Mary and the Martyrs" but informally known as "Santa Maria Rotonda". The square in front of the Pantheon is called Piazza della Rotonda. The Pantheon is a state property, managed by Italy's Ministry of Cultural Heritage and Activities and Tourism. In 2013, it was visited by over 6 million people.
    [Show full text]
  • Walter E. Kaegi ——————————
    oi.uchicago.edu/oi/AR/03-04/03-04_AR_TOC.html INDIVIDUAL RESEARCH Walter E. Kaegi Walter E. Kaegi continued to investigate, expand, and polish the embryo of his book manu- script The Dynamics of Muslim Invasions and Byzantine Resistance in North Africa. His book Heraclius Emperor of Byzantium, which Cambridge University Press published in 2003, contin- ues to sell well, his editor informs him. He published the following papers: “The Earliest Muslim Penetrations of Anatolia,” in Byzantine State and Society in Memory of Nikos Oikonomides, ed- ited by A. Avramea, A. Laiou, E. Chrysos (Athens, 2003), pp. 269–82; and “Les défaites de Byzance en Orient” and “Expansion musulmane. La conquête de l’Ouest” [French translations of “Religious Elements in Muslim Conquests” and “North Africa”] in Le Monde de la Bible (No. 154, November 2003): 14–19, 36–41. Kaegi also published some book reviews: “Review of Byzantium and the Arabs in the Sixth Century, Volume 2, Part 1,” by Irfan Shahid, in Journal of the American Oriental Society 123 (2003): 461–62; “Review of A Cumulative Bibliography of Medieval and Early Modern Military History and Technology, by K. DeVries,” for De Re Militari (2004): http://www.deremilitari.org/RESOURCES/REVIEWS/devries_cb.htm; and “Review of Armies of the Caliphs, by H. Kennedy, in International History Review 16 (2004): 105–07. Regarding publications now at press, Kaegi completed two articles that will appear in Byzantinische Forschungen 28 (2004): “The Interrelationship of Seventh-Century Muslim Raids into Anatolia with the Struggle for North Africa” and “Byzantine Studies Present and Future.” He also completed the following paper, “The Early Muslim Raids into Anatolia and Byzantine Reactions under Emperor Constans II,” which was accepted and will appear in the proceedings of the University of Erfurt (Germany) International Workshop on “The Encounter of Oriental Christianity with Islam in the 7th and 8th Centuries,” under the editorship of Emmanouela Grypeou.
    [Show full text]
  • Byzantine Foreign Policy During the Reign of Constans II
    University of Central Florida STARS Electronic Theses and Dissertations, 2004-2019 2014 Byzantine Foreign Policy During the Reign of Constans II Joseph Morris University of Central Florida Part of the History Commons Find similar works at: https://stars.library.ucf.edu/etd University of Central Florida Libraries http://library.ucf.edu This Masters Thesis (Open Access) is brought to you for free and open access by STARS. It has been accepted for inclusion in Electronic Theses and Dissertations, 2004-2019 by an authorized administrator of STARS. For more information, please contact [email protected]. STARS Citation Morris, Joseph, "Byzantine Foreign Policy During the Reign of Constans II" (2014). Electronic Theses and Dissertations, 2004-2019. 4578. https://stars.library.ucf.edu/etd/4578 BYZANTINE FOREIGN POLICY DURING THE REIGN OF CONSTANS II by JOSEPH THOMAS MORRIS IV B.A. Florida State University, 2006 A thesis submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Arts in the Department of History in the College of Arts and Humanities at the University of Central Florida Orlando, Florida Fall Term 2014 ABSTRACT This thesis examines the foreign policy of Constans II as the first Byzantine Emperor to rule after the initial Arab conquests in Syria-Palestine. His reign, 641-668, was the first reign of a Byzantine Emperor where the entire reign was subject to Arab raids and invasions. Constans II also had to contend with the Slavs in Thessalonica and Greece and the Lombards in Italy. To complicate matters more, Constans II was forced to cope with the religious division between the eastern and western churches due to Monothelitism in the East.
    [Show full text]
  • Κύρια Ιδιότητα Heraclian Dynasty
    IΔΡΥΜA ΜΕΙΖΟΝΟΣ ΕΛΛΗΝΙΣΜΟΥ Συγγραφή : Dale de Lee Benjamin (1/7/2008) Για παραπομπή : Dale de Lee Benjamin , "Heraclian dynasty (610-711)", 2008, Εγκυκλοπαίδεια Μείζονος Ελληνισμού, Κωνσταντινούπολη URL: <http://www.ehw.gr/l.aspx?id=10923> Heraclian dynasty (610-711) Περίληψη : The Heraclian dynasty lasted from the coronation of Herakleios in 610 until the death of Justinian II in 711. The Heraclian century was one of the most turbulent in Byzantine history, and few of the family members died peacefully or of natural causes. Still, the emperors of the dynasty were able to successfully govern the empire through wars with the Sassanids, the rise and conquest of the Arabs, a faltering economy and disruptive theological controversies. They succeeded in reaching a new settlement with political realities, and in securing succession from one generation to the next. Κύρια Ιδιότητα emperors (610-711) 1. Revolt and Accession of Herakleios (610 – 641) Herakleios1 was the son of the eponymous exarch of Carthage. While Herakleios the elder seems to have had no designs on the throne himself, he did instigate the rebellion with his son in 608. However, only his son seems to have gone on the expedition to Constantinople to overthrow the unpopular usurper Phokas, who had murdered the Emperor Maurice and his family. Herakleios had the support of both the Greens and the church hierarchy in his overthrow of Phokas, but his reign was by no means a peaceful one. Herakleios’reign was one of spectacular defeat, success, and still spectacular defeat again. Herakleios is a particularly difficult emperor to analyze. He was pivotal, yet sources are sometimes contradictory and not always clear.
    [Show full text]
  • Heraclius Emperor of Byzantium
    HERACLIUS EMPEROR OF BYZANTIUM WALTER E. KAEGI PUBLISHED BY THE PRESS SYNDICATE OF THE UNIVERSITY OF CAMBRIDGE The Pitt Building, Trumpington Street, Cambridge CB21RP, United Kingdom CAMBRIDGE UNIVERSITY PRESS The Edinburgh Building, Cambridge cb2 2ru,UK 40 West 20th Street, New York, NY 10011-4211, USA 477 Williamstown Road, Port Melbourne, VIC 3207, Australia Ruiz de Alarcon´ 13, 28014 Madrid, Spain Dock House, The Waterfront, Cape Town 8001, South Africa http://www.cambridge.org C Walter E. Kaegi 2003 This book is in copyright. Subject to statutory exception and to the provisions ofrelevant collective licensing agreements, no reproduction ofany part may take place without the written permission ofCambridge University Press. First published 2003 Printed in the United Kingdom at the University Press, Cambridge Typeface Adobe Garamond 11/12.5 pt. System LATEX 2ε [TB] A catalogue record for this book is available from the British Library Library of Congress Cataloguing in Publication data Kaegi, Walter Emil. Heraclius: emperor ofByzantium / Walter E. Kaegi. p. cm. Includes bibliographical references and index. isbn 0 521 81459 6 1. Heraclius, Emperor ofthe East, ca. 575–641. 2. Byzantine Empire–History–Heraclius, 610–641. 3. Emperors–Byzantine Empire–Biography. I. Title. DF574 .K34 2002 949.5 013 092 –dc21 [B] 2002023370 isbn 0 521 81459 6 hardback Contents List of maps page vi List of figures vii Acknowledgments viii List of abbreviations x Introduction 1 1 Armenia and Africa: the formative years 19 2 Internal and external challenges
    [Show full text]
  • The Early Muslim Raids Into Anatolia and Byzantine Reactions Under Emperor Constans Ii1
    muslim raids into anatolia and byzantine reactions 73 THE EARLY MUSLIM RAIDS INTO ANATOLIA AND BYZANTINE REACTIONS UNDER EMPEROR CONSTANS II1 Walter E. Kaegi The most crucial imperial reign for Byzantine-Muslim encounters in the seventh century, other than that of Heraclius himself, is that of his grandson, the enigmatic Constans II (641-668). Yet his military and diplomatic activities in Anatolia between 641 and 663 and in the central and western Mediterranean between 663 and his assas- sination in 668 in Syracuse, Sicily have presented something of a riddle and have puzzled many historians. I may not be able to solve all aspects of the riddle but I shall try to reexamine problems that relate to his efforts to check or reverse the Early Islamic Conquests in the east, with special attention to Anatolia. First I shall try to look at the larger historical context for these momentous Muslim- Christian encounters. Historians face a lot of challenges. Many today object to paying attention to leaders at the top, that is, they criticize the notion or value of studying ‘great men,’ or even lesser leaders such as Constans II, whom no one regards as a great man. So for some even inves- tigating such an emperor is faulty and unworthy of labor. There is another problem. The paucity of primary sources in Latin, Greek, and Arabic presents a major challenge to all historians and has dis- couraged research on the seventh century in Italy and elsewhere. To understand Constans II we must understand the empire’s challenges 1 I wish to thank Dr.
    [Show full text]
  • BYZANTINE ROYAL ANCESTRY Emperors, 578-1453
    GRANHOLM GENEALOGY BYZANTINE ROYAL ANCESTRY Emperors, 578-1453 1 INTRODUCTION During the first half of the first century Byzantium and specifically Constantinople was the most influentional and riches capital in the world. Great buildings, such as Hagia Sophia were built during these times. Despite the distances, contacts with the Scandinavians took place, in some cases cooperation against common enemies. Vikings traded with them and served in the Emperors’ Court. Sweden’s King Karl XII took refuge there for four years after the defeat in the war against Peter the Great of Russia in Poltava. Our 6th great grandfather, “ Cornelius von Loos” was with him and made drawings of many of the famous buildings in that region. The Byzantine lineages to us are shown starting fr o m different ancestors. There are many royals to whom we have a direct ancestral relationship and others who are distant cousins. These give an interesting picture of the history from those times. Wars took place among others with the Persians, which are also described in the book about our Persian Royal Ancestry. Additional text for many persons is highlighted in the following lists. This story begins with Emperor Tiberius II, (47th great grandfather) born in 520 and ends with the death of Emperor Constantine XI (15th cousin, 17 times removed) in battle in 1453. His death marked the final end of the Roman Empire, which had continued in the East for just under one thousand years after the fall of the Western Roman Empire. No relations to us, the initial Emperor of the Byzantine was Justin I , born a peasant and a swineherd by initial occupation, reigned 518 to 527.
    [Show full text]
  • Armenian Neighbours (600–1045)
    View metadata, citation and similar papers at core.ac.uk brought to you by CORE provided by St Andrews Research Repository CHAPTER 8 ARMENIAN NEIGHBOURS (600–1045) t. w. greenwood introduction Anyone wishing to unravel the history of the relationship between Byzan- tium and Armenia from late antiquity into the eleventh century has to confront a series of historical and historiographical challenges. The most immediate, and intractable, of these is one of definition: what does ‘Armenia’ mean? Although Armenia is used to express a territorial entity in contemporary texts, both Armenian and non-Armenian in origin, its precise meaning varies according to the date and the context in which it is used. Far from finding a single, stable definition of Armenia, one discovers multiple ‘Armenias’.1 Thus a seventh-century Armenian geographical com- pilation depicts ‘Great Armenia’ as comprising not only regions currently recognised as Armenian but also those with historic associations.2 Successive provinces of Armenia were imposed and superimposed by external powers, each with a particular scope. The kingdom of Armenia, re-established in 884, bore little relation to its Arsacid precursor and increasingly represented only the Bagratuni kingdom centred on Ani, excluding rival kingdoms in Vaspurakan, Siwnik‘ and elsewhere. Given the absence of stable territorial boundaries and in the light of significant Arab settlement in certain districts from the end of the eighth century, there have been attempts to construct Armenian identity in terms of a blend of confessional,
    [Show full text]
  • Chronological Overview
    Chronological Overview 284-305 Diocletian and the tetrarchy 565-591 Wars with Persia 306-337 Constantine I (sole ruler from 324) 566 + Slavs begin to infiltrate across Danube frontier; pressure 311 Edict of toleration issued by Galerius on frontier fortresses from Avars 312 Constantine's victory at the Milvian bridge 568+ Lombards driven westward from Danube, invade Italy 313 Edict of toleration issued by Constantine and Licinius 572 Lombards besiege Ravenna 325 Council of Nicaea and condemnation of Arianism (first 577 Major invasion of Balkans led by Avars ecumenical council) 584, 586 Avaro-Slav attacks on Thessalonica 330 Consecration of Constantinople 591-602 Gradual success in pushing Avars back across Danube 337 Baptism and death of Constantine I 602 Maurice overthrown, Phokas proclaimed emperor 361-363 Julian the Apostate leads pagan reaction and attempts to 603 War with Persia; situation in Balkans deteriorates limit the influence of Christianity 610 Phokas overthrown by Heraclius, son of exarch of Africa 364 Jovian dies: empire divided between Valentinian 1 (West) at Carthage and Valens (East) 611-620s Central and northern Balkans lost 378 Defeat and death of Valens at hands of Visigoths at battle 614-619 Persians occupy Syria, Palestine and Egypt of Adrianople 622 Mohammed leaves Mecca for Medina (the 'Hijra') 381 First Council of Constantinople (second ecumenical 622-627 Heraclius campaigns in east against Persians council): reaffirms rejection of Arianism; asserts right of 626 Combined Avaro-Slav and Persian siege of Constantinople
    [Show full text]
  • 292 21. Constans II
    21. Constans II (641-668). 21.4. Constantinople; 40 nummi. Officina å. D. O. 60d, MIB 162c. D. O. Class I (641-643). ñNTÕTO NIKA. 4.35 gms. 230. 806.02. Standing figure holding long cross and globus cruciger. m between A/N/A and N/ñ/O/S; regnal year preceded by officina letter below. Mule: Class 5 of Heraclius with Class 1 of Constans. Regnal year 1 (641/2). 21.5.* 21.1. 4.56 gms. 150. 512.95. Officina à. D. O. 59c, MIB 162a. 5.04 gms. 200. 251.88.1 D. O. Class 2 (642-643). ñNTÕTO NIKA. Standing figure holding long cross and globus cruciger. m; A/N/A above, O/ú/A to left and N/ñ/O/S to right; regnal year preceded by officina letter 21.2. below. Officina å. D. O. 59d, MIB 162a. Regnal year 2 (642/3). 5.86 gms. 210. 804.02. 21.6. Officina å. D. O. 61d, MIB 163a. 4.37 gms. 190. 2 Regnal year 2 (642/3). 1028.05. 21.3. Officina A. 21.7. D. O. 60a, MIB 162a. Officina ñ. 4.43 gms. 220. D. O. 61e, MIB 163a. 805.02. 4.76 gms. 180. 1302.07. 292 Class 2 bis (643-644). INPñR CONSt. Bust facing wearing crown with cross and chlamys and holding a globus cruciger. 21.11. M between A/N/A and II/I (regnal year 3; 643/4), Officina ñ. officina letter (à) beneath, NñO1 below. D. O. - , MIB 165. 4.18 gms. 190. 267.89.4 21.8.
    [Show full text]
  • CASTRATION.Pdf
    Зборник радова Византолошког института LIV, 2017 Zbornik radova Vizantološkog instituta LIV, 2017 UDC: 321.17/.18(495.02)„07/08“:343.25 https://doi.org/10.2298/ZRVI1754041K BOJANA KRSMANOVIĆ Institute for Byzantine Studies, SASA [email protected] CASTRATION AS A CONSEQUENCE OF THE STRENGTHENING OF THE DYNASTIC PRINCIPLE* The paper discusses examples of corporal mutilation that accompanied intra-dynas- tic conflicts or clashes with real or potential pretenders to the imperial throne. Castration was a known but rarely applied measure in the political conflicts of the th7 and 8th century. Hence the two consecutive cases of castration of all sons of the deposed emperor Michael I Rhangabe (813) and the assassinated emperor Leo V the Armenian (820) deviated from the previous Byzantine practice. The paper establishes that in these cases the choice of castration as the most effective means of ensuring the future political disqualification of the princes and their families was a result of the strengthening dynastic principle, which was particularly noticeable in the cases of the descendents of Constantine V from his third marriage. It also highlights that castration was never used on the deposed emperor autokratōr, but only on the bearers of imperial dignities (co-emperors) or simply princes with no imperial title. In exam- ples where castration was used to ensure political disqualification, it was not a sanction for an individual wrongdoing (in other words, castration was not a penalty prescribed for a specific transgression); if these cases were a matter of punishment at all, the penalty was meant to sanction the entire bloodline (γένος) rather than the (innocent) individual.
    [Show full text]
  • The Proclamation of Peace on the Coinage of Carthage Under Constans II David Woods
    The Proclamation of Peace on the Coinage of Carthage under Constans II David Woods Y THE REIGN of Constans II (641–668), the mint at Carthage was the second most important in the empire, Bstriking coins in gold, silver, and copper.1 Over the reign of Constans, it struck only one denomination of silver coin, a third siliqua, but struck this in four different types. Un- fortunately, none of these types bear dates, but their order of production can be determined from the changing styles of the portraits on the obverse, in particular the presence or length of the emperor’s beard. Furthermore, the approximate dates of these portrait types can also be determined by their use on dated gold and copper coins from Constantinople and else- where. The purpose of this paper is to propose a new inter- pretation of the reverse on the second of the four successive types of third siliqua struck at Carthage under Constans, that 1 In general see Philip Grierson, Catalogue of the Byzantine Coins in the Dumbarton Oaks Collection and in the Whittemore Collection II.2 Heraclius Constantine to Theodosius III (641–717) (Washington 1968: henceforth DOC ) 412–413, 468–484; Wolfgang Hahn, Moneta Imperii Byzantini III Von Heraclius bis Leo III. alleinregierung (610–720) (Vienna 1981: henceforth MIB ) 126–127, 134– 135, 142–145. I refer to the coins of Heraclius and his successors by their numbers under their names in the latter volume. For coins of the earlier periods I cite their numbers under the relevant emperors in Wolfgang Hahn and Michael Metlich, Money of the Incipient Byzantine Empire: Anastasius I– 2 Justinian I, 491–565 (Vienna 2013: henceforth MIBE ), and Money of the Incipient Byzantine Empire Continued: Justin II–Revolt of the Heraclii, 565–610 (Vienna 2009: henceforth MIBEC ).
    [Show full text]