The Coinage of Trebizond Under Isaac II (A.D. 1185-95) : With A Note On An Unfinished Byzantine Die / Simon Bendall
The Coinage of Trebizond Under Isaac II (A.D. 1185-95) : With A Note On An Unfinished Byzantine Die / Simon Bendall
The Coinage of Trebizond Under Isaac II (A.D. 1185-95) : With A Note On An Unfinished Byzantine Die / Simon Bendall
AMERICAN
NUMISMATIC
MUSEUM
SOCIETY
NOTES
24
THE
AMERICAN
NUMISMATIC
NEW
SOCIETY
YORK
1979
This content downloaded from 83.85.134.3 on Wed, 03 Feb 2016 18:00:34 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
THE
UNDER
ISAAC
ON
AN
COINAGE
II
(A.D.
OF
TREBIZOND
1185-95).
UNFINISHED
WITH
BYZANTINE
A NOTE
DIE1
Simon Bendall
(Plate 44)
This content downloaded from 83.85.134.3 on Wed, 03 Feb 2016 18:02:21 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
214
Simon Bendall
This content downloaded from 83.85.134.3 on Wed, 03 Feb 2016 18:02:21 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
Coinage of Trebizond
215
As can be seen fromthe illustrations,these coins are struckon polygonal flans,having betweeneight and ten sides. The thicknessof the
flans,between1.0 and 1.2 mm,is considerablygreaterthan that of the
trachea. The lattergenerallyvary betweenca. 0.6
Constantinopolitan
and 1.00 mm,oftenon the same coinwhilethethicknessoftheTrebizond
coins is more regular. The weightsof the two types are considerably
heavier than the Constantinopolitancoins recorded by Hendy4- the
heaviest by 1.2 gramsmorethan Hendy's heaviest. While threecoins
numberon which to base firmconclusions,
are not perhapsa sufficient
theiraverage weightis 4.91 gramsagainst an average of 3.47 gramsof
the 12 coinslistedby Hendy. It seemsprobablealso that the new coins
are pure copper and contain no silver as do the Constantinopolitan
issues.
tracheabut Type 2
Type 1 is an exact copy of the Constantinopolitan
has a completelydifferentobverse which seems to have been copied
fromIsaac's tetarteron.5The style of both types is very precise,with
many details finerthan on the Constantinopolitancoins.
There can be no doubt that the coins describedhere were struckin
Trebizond. Not only does the provenancepoint to this, but also the
polygonal clipped flans, completelyunlike those of the metropolitan
mint,are indistinguishablefromthe earliercoins of Trebizond (Plate
44, 3) although,of course,the two types under discussionare of scyphate form.
With the mint having been establishedas Trebizond,can there be
any doubt that Isaac II was the issuer of these coins? Historically,
thereis no problemin this attributionas at that timethe provincewas
under the controlof the centralgovernment.The problemwould be
to assign the coins to any other period. At Constantinoplethe alternativesto Isaac II would be Latin or Bulgarian,but these do not apply
at Trebizond. It is unlikelyin the extremethat Alexius III would have
issued the types of his predecessor. No coins are known of Alexius
Ill's successorAlexius Comnenus(1204-22) althoughif they do exist
they will undoubtedlybear his name for it is most unlikelythat the
4 M. F. Hendy,Coinage
andMoneyin theByzantine
, Dum, 1081-1261
Empire
bartonOaksStudies12 (Washington,
D.G.,1969),p. 419.
6 Hendy(above,n. 4), pl. 21,8-9.
This content downloaded from 83.85.134.3 on Wed, 03 Feb 2016 18:02:21 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
216
BYZANTINE DIE
This content downloaded from 83.85.134.3 on Wed, 03 Feb 2016 18:02:21 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
Coinage of Trebizond
217
of the upper die, the one in questionhere,were requiredto obtain anything like a full coverage of the designsof both obverse and reverse.
Such a sequence would account forthe apparent double-striking
to be
seen on our coin, particularlyat the shin-bone,at the vertical axial
line over the heartpositionat the (viewer's)rightshoulderand, finally,
at two o'clock on the nimbus. Hence we should discountmuch of what
seems to be a verysketchyoutlineof the design. Instead, referenceto
the areas wherethereis no overlap of impressions,e.g. the two parallel
verticallines representing
the bottomof the cloak at the right,demonstratesa secureenoughtouch.
Nevertheless,when set against the much more sophisticatedfigures
on the other side of the coin, the discrepancyin artisticskill needs
explanation. How would the thick centralline on the Virgin'sface be
into an acceptable nose, mouth and chin? In fact, on a
transformed
finisheddie, muchof thisarea would requirefurtherexcavationto give
the sortof reliefcharacterizing
the faces of the two saints. So what we
have is merelyan intermediatestage beforethe chiefcraftsmangets
to work. We know that forsome of the earliermachinemade coinages
certainessentialpartsof the designwereinsertedon the die by a master
punch and that details were added afterward. A similarprocess may
have occurredforthe Byzantineseries. A hub was employedto ensure
that the major elementswere correctlypositionedvis--visthe curved
surfaceof the blank die. This would thenbe workedover withscorpers
and centerpunchesto obtain the sharp outlinesof the figure,the decorationson the dress,etc.
However,forthe die in question,only the outer dotted circleof this
second stage was completedand the embryonicdie was then thrust
beforeits time underthe striker'shammer.
This content downloaded from 83.85.134.3 on Wed, 03 Feb 2016 18:02:21 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
Plate
44
Coinage
^
of Trebizond
f-JSSE^SSb^
This content downloaded from 83.85.134.3 on Wed, 03 Feb 2016 18:02:21 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions