the coinage of trebizond under isaac ii (a.d. 1185-95) : with a note on an unfinished byzantine die...

8/20/2019 The coinage of Trebizond under Isaac II (A.D. 1185-95) : with a note on an unfinished Byzantine die / Simon Bendall

1/9

THE AMERICAN NUMISMATIC SOCIETY

MUSEUM NOTES

24

THE AMERICAN NUMISMATIC

SOCIETY

NEW YORK

979

This content downloaded from 83.85.134.3 on Wed, 03 Feb 2016 18:00:34 UTCAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions


2/9


3/9

THE COINAGE OF TREBIZOND

UNDER ISAAC

II

(A.D.

1185-95).

WITH A

NOTE

ON AN UNFINISHED BYZANTINE DIE1

(Plate

44)

Simon

Bendall

In

the

Numismatic

Chronicle

or

1977,

the

author

published

series

of

thirteen ronze

coin

types

struck

n

Trebizond

n

the late eleventh

and

early

twelfth enturies.2 Most of the

types

are

anonymous,

l-

though

hreeor four

bear the name

of

Alexius.

The

author

postulated

that

the

first

ight

or

nine issues

were

struck between ca.

1081

and

1091

when

he

city

was under

mperial ontrol,

while ssues

ten to

twelve

date to

the

period

1091/2

o

1098

when

he Duke of

Trebizond,

Theodore

Gabras,

had made

himself

ndependent

f the central

government.

It

may

be

considered

urprising

hat a

city

on

the

very

edge

of

the

empire,

having only

tenuous connections

by

land and sea

with

Con-

stantinople,

hould

have

produced

such a

prolific,

lbeit

today

scarce,

coinage.

However there

can be

no

doubt of the

existence

f

this

mint;

provenance,

verstrikes

nd

internal

ontent f

he

coinage

ll

confirm

t.

The

purpose

of

this

article

s

to

put

forward

wo coins as issues

of

the

mintof

Trebizond

for

he

reign

of Isaac

II.

The

history

of Trebizond afterthe

reign

of Alexius I is ratherob-

scure.3

By

1119,

ConstantineGabras was

Duke of

Chaldia

following

1

The

research

n the

oinage

fTrebizonds authored

y

Simon

endall.The

note

n the

unfinished

yzantine

ie s coauthored

y

Simon endall nd David

Sellwood.

2

S.

Bendall,

TheMint f

Trebizond

nder

lexius and the

Gabrades,

C

1977,

p.

126-36,

ls.

6-7.

3

W.

Miller,

rebizond

the

ast

Greek

mpireChicago,

969);

A.

A. M.

Bryer,

A

Byzantineamily:

he

Gabrades,

. 979-c.

653,

he

University

f

Birmingham

Historicalournal2 1970), p.164-87. .A.M.Bryer,. FassoulakisndD. M.

Nicol,

A

Byzantine

amily:

he

Gabrades,

n Additional

ote,

yzantinoslavica

36

(1975),

p.

38-45.

213



4/9

214 SimonBendall

a successful

areer

s a

general

under

Alexius I.

The

distance

between

Trebizond

and

Constantinople

eems often

to have led

the

governors

of the

province

o assume more

ndependence

han

was allowed

by

the

Byzantine

emperors.

Constantine

Gabras

was no

exception

and

in

1139/40

John

II was driven to

set out

on an

expedition

against

his

unruly overnor.

The

expedition

was a

failure,

owever,

nd

Constantine

Gabras

seem?

to

have

remained

ndependent lthough

we do not know

forhow ong;thedate ofhis death is also uncertain.By the mid-1 60s

Chaldia

was

again

part

of

the

empire

and

Nicephorus

Palaeologus

its

new Duke.

It

appears

that the

province

remainedunder the control

of

the

emperor

ntil the

establishment f the

Empire

of

Trebizond

by

Alexius

Comnenus

n

1204.

Much of the

material

on

which

the article

concerning

he

coinage

of

Trebizond under Alexius

I

and the Gabrades was

based came from

large

collection

f

coins

formed

many years

go

in

Trebizondwhich he

author had the

good

fortune o examine. Most of

the

coins,

some

hundreds,were of the Empire of Trebizond;about fortywere of the

aforementioned

lexian

period,

while

three

coins,

which

fit

nto neither

category,

re the

subject

of this short article

and described

below:

(Type 1)

Obv

:

[

MP

0V

in

upper

field

Virgin,

nimbate,wearing

unic

and

maphorion,

eated

upon

thronewith

back;

holds

beardless,

nimbatehead

of

Christ

on breast.

Rev.:

Legend illegible

Full-length

igure

f

emperorwearing

stemma,

diviti-

sion, collar-piecewith six jewels, jewelled loroswith

waist

ŒD and

sagion;

holds

in

r.

hand,

scepter

cruci-

ger,

n

1.,

anexikakia.

Manus Dei

in

upper

r. field.

a)

4.65

(Plate

44,

1)

b)

4.39

(Type

2)

Obu.:

[0KGRO]

H0I

around;

[

MP

0V

in

field

Full

lengthfigure

f

Virgin,

nimbate,orans,

standing

on

dais,

wearing

tunic and

maphorion;

nimbate

head

of Christon breast.

Rev.: As

type

1.

5.70

(Plate

44,

2)



5/9

Coinage of Trebizond 215

As can

be

seen

from he

illustrations,

hese

coins are struck n

poly-

gonal

flans,

having

between

eight

and

ten

sides. The

thickness

f the

flans,

between

1.0

and

1.2

mm,

s

considerably

reater

han

that of the

Constantinopolitan

rachea.

The latter

generally

ary

between

ca. 0.6

and

1.00

mm,

ften

n

the same

coinwhile he thickness

f

theTrebizond

coins

is more

regular.

The

weights

of

the two

types

are

considerably

heavier

than the

Constantinopolitan

oins recorded

by

Hendy4

the

heaviestby 1.2 gramsmore thanHendys heaviest. While three coins

are

not

perhaps

sufficient

umber n which

to

base

firm

onclusions,

their

verage weight

s

4.91

grams

against

an

average

of 3.47

grams

of

the

12

coins isted

by Hendy.

It seems

probable

lso that

the

new

coins

are

pure copper

and contain

no silver as do the

Constantinopolitan

issues.

Type

1 is an

exact

copy

of the

Constantinopolitan

racheabut

Type

2

has

a

completely

different

bverse

which seems to have been

copied

from

saac's

tetarteron.5

he

style

of both

types

s

very

precise,

with

many details finer han on the Constantinopolitanoins.

There

can

be

no

doubt that the

coins describedhere

were

struck

n

Trebizond.

Not

only

does the

provenance

point

to

this,

but also

the

polygonal

clipped

flans,

completely

unlike those

of the

metropolitan

mint,

are

indistinguishable

rom

he earlier

coins

of

Trebizond

Plate

44,

3)

although,

of

course,

the two

types

under

discussion

re

of

scy-

phate

form.

With

the mint

having

been established

s

Trebizond,

can there

be

any

doubt

that

Isaac

II

was

the issuer

of these coins?

Historically,

there s no problemn thisattributions at thattime the provincewas

under

the controlof

the central

government.

The

problem

would

be

to

assign

the

coins

to

any

other

period.

At

Constantinople

he alter-

natives

to Isaac II would be Latin

or

Bulgarian,

but these

do not

apply

at Trebizond.

It

is

unlikely

n

the extreme

hat

Alexius

II

would have

issued

the

types

of his

predecessor.

No

coins

are

known

of Alexius

Ill's

successor

Alexius Comnenus

1204-22)

although

f

they

do

exist

they

will

undoubtedly

bear

his name

for

t is most

unlikely

hat

the

4 M.F. Hendy, oinagendMoneynthe yzantinempire1081-1261Dum-

barton aksStudies

2

Washington,

.G.,

1969), .

419.

6

Hendy

above,

.

4),

pl.

21,

8-9.



6/9

216 SimonBendall

founder

f an

empire

would not have

advertised

himself.

There

are,

however,

wo

types

known

for

the next

emperor

Andronicus

(1222-

35).6

While

there

s a

certain

imilarity

n

style, specially

n the

obverses,

between

the coins

of

Isaac

and

of

Andronicus7

he form

of the

flans,

their

weights

nd thickness re

quite

dissimilar.

The

former

ook back

to

earlier

orms f the twelfth

entury

hile he atter re

based

upon

the

nearlycontemporaryatin coinage.

In

conclusion,

t

seems

clear from his

review hat

these two

types

n

the

name

of Isaac

II can

belong

to

no other

period

than

the

reign

of

Isaac

II

and

the mintof Trebizond.

A

NOTE ON

AN

UNFINISHED

BYZANTINE

DIE

The method of

production

of

dies can often

be inferred

rom

an

inspection

of the coins which

were struck

by

them.

It

is

however

veryunusual to come acrossa specimen manating rom substantially

incomplete

ie.8

The

trachy

dealt

with here s

in

the

collection

f the

American

Num-

ismatic

Society.

The issue

is

an

electrum

spron

trachy

Var.

B)9

of

Isaac

II

struck t

the mintof

Constantinople.

The

scyphate

type

of

flan,

o characteristic

f

Byzantine

coinage

of

this

period,

musthave

given

the

die

engravers

many

problems,

ot east

that of

cutting

he

appropriatedesigns

on a

curved

surface.

Here

the

figure

f the

Virgin,

which has

only

a tentative

outline,

appears,

as

usual, on the convexface;

the latter

of course

had been

impressed y

the convex

die. It has

recently

een

argued10

hat

two skew

mpressions

6

D.

M. Metcalfnd

.

T.

Roper,

A Hoard

f

Copper

rachea

fAndronicus

ofTrebizond

1222-1235),

Circ

3

June

975),

p.

237-38,

nd

A.

Veglery

nd

A.

Millas,

Copper

oins f Andronicus

,

Comnenus

idon

1222-1235),

Circ

85

(Nov.

1977), p.

487-88.

7

Compare

he

bverses

f

Plate

44,

nos.1

and

4.

8

Previouslynly

he

most

minor

missions

n dieswere

nown

o

the

uthors,

such

s the oin

f

Andronicus

I and Michael

X

where

he

pellets

utlining

he

obverse

nscription

ere

ot

onnected

BMCByz.

,

p.

629,

no.

36).

9 Hendyabove, .4),pl.20,7-8.

10

S.

Bendall

nd

D.

Sellwood,

TheMethod f

Striking

cyphate

oins

Using

Two

Obverse

ies,

NC

1978,

p.

93-104.



7/9

Coinage of Trebizond 217

of

the

upper

die,

the

one

in

question

here,

were

required

o

obtain

any-

thing

ike

a

full

coverage

of

the

designs

of

both

obverse

and reverse.

Such

a

sequence

would account for

the

apparent

double-striking

o

be

seen

on our

coin,

particularly

t

the

shin-bone,

t

the vertical

axial

line

over

the

heart

position

t the

viewer's)right

houlder

nd,

finally,

at

two o'clock on the nimbus. Hence

we

should discountmuch

of what

seems

to

be a

very

sketchy

utlineof the

design.

Instead,

reference

o

the areas where here s no overlapof mpressions,.g. thetwoparallel

vertical

ines

representing

he bottomof the cloak

at the

right,

emon-

strates

secure

enough

ouch.

Nevertheless,

when set

against

the much more

sophisticated

igures

on

the other side of the

coin,

the

discrepancy

n

artistic skill needs

explanation.

How

would

the thick

central

ine on

the

Virgin's

face

be

transformed

nto an

acceptable

nose,

mouth and

chin?

In

fact,

on

a

finished

ie,

much of this

area

would

require

further

xcavation

to

give

the sort of relief

haracterizing

he faces

of the two

saints.

So what we

have is merely n intermediatetage before he chiefcraftsman ets

to

work. We know that for

ome

of the earliermachinemade

coinages

certain ssential

parts

of the

design

were nserted n the

die

by

a master

punch

and

that details were added afterward.

A

similar

process

may

have

occurred or he

Byzantine

eries.

A hub

was

employed

o ensure

that the

major

elementswere

correctly ositioned

vis-à-vis

he

curved

surface f the blank die. This would then be worked ver

with

scorpers

and

center

punches

to obtain

the

sharp

outlines

of

the

figure,

he de-

corations n the

dress,

etc.

However,for he die in question,onlythe outer dotted circle of this

second

stage

was

completed

and

the

embryonic

die was then

thrust

before ts time under

the

striker's

ammer.



8/9


9/9

Plate

44

Coinage

of

Trebizond

^

f

Ä-JSSE^SSb^

Unfinished

Byzantine

Die

This content downloaded from 83 85 134 3 on Wed 03 Feb 2016 18:02:21 UTC

the coinage of trebizond under isaac ii (a.d. 1185-95) : with a note on an unfinished byzantine die...

Documents