Nexus VST 3.20.3 Crack + Serial Key Free Download 2021

Call toll-free, 1-800-52 7-1592, for the address of your nearest dealer, Vl/O— has two serial ports; two 8-bit parallel output and two 8-bit parallel. 2) Photo copies of GST Registration Certificate, Provident Fund 283899)/ ICICI Bank (Code-ICIC0003679) on or after 04/06/2021 up to. Key Observation Point and Viewpoint Locations. APM BIO-2: All earth-moving equipment will be free of mud and vegetative material before. Nexus VST 3.20.3 Crack + Serial Key Free Download 2021

: Nexus VST 3.20.3 Crack + Serial Key Free Download 2021

CCleaner Pro 5.47.6716 Product key - Free Activators
IDimager Photo Supreme Crack + Serial Key Free 2021
Nexus VST 3.20.3 Crack + Serial Key Free Download 2021

Compare Packages Between Distributions

Comparing package versions between two distributions
Often times it is useful to be able to compare the versions of different packages between two distributions. This can let us know which distribution is more up to date, or if a feature has been introduced into one distribution but not Nexus VST 3.20.3 Crack + Serial Key Free Download 2021 other.

This page enables us to quickly perform a side-by-side comparison of the packages available in two different distributions, or in two different versions of the same distribution. In this way we can not only compare two competing projects, but also track the progress of distributions as they adopt newer versions of software.

Please select two distributions and then a specific version of each distribution to compare.

  • Complete summaries of the Gentoo Linux and Xubuntu projects are available.

  • Note: In case where multiple versions of a package are shipped with a distribution, only the default version appears in the table. For indication about the GNOME version, please check the "nautilus" and "gnome-shell" packages. The apache web server is listed as "httpd" and the Linux kernel is listed as "linux". The KDE desktop is represented by the "kde-workspace" and "plasma-desktop" packages and the Xfce desktop by the "xfdesktop" package.

  • A complete package list for further comparison is available.
  • PackageGentoo Linux unstable Xubuntu 21.10 impish
    abiword (3.0.5)3.0.5--
    alsa-lib (
    ati-driver (20.45)----
    bash (5.1.8)5.15.1
    bind (9.16.23)9.16.22--
    chromium (96.0.4664.45)97.0.4692.8--
    cups (2.3.3)2.3.3p22.3.3
    dhcp (4.4.2-P1)--4.4.1
    e2fsprogs (1.46.4)
    firefox (94.0.2)
    freetype (2.11.0)
    gcc (11.2.0)11.2.0--
    gimp (2.10.28)
    glibc (2.34)2.342.34
    gnome-shell (41.1)41.1--
    gnucash (4.8)4.8--
    gnumeric (1.12.50)1.12.50--
    grub (2.06)2.062.04
    gtk (4.4.1)
    httpd (2.4.51)2.4.51--
    inkscape (1.1.1)1.1--
    k3b (21.08.3)21.08.3--
    kmod (29)2928
    krita (4.4.8)4.4.8--
    libreoffice (7.2.2)
    linux (5.15.3)
    PackageGentoo Linux unstable Xubuntu 21.10 impish

    Huawei Internet Service Show More.

    テレビ視聴 icon
    テレビ視聴 APK
    本アプリケーションは「Pocket WiFi 501HW/502HW」,「PocketWiFi 303HW/304HW」専用のテレビ視聴アプリケーションです。テレビ視聴するためには、「Pocket WiFi501HW/502HW」,「Pocket WiFi303HW/304HW」と下記対応機種をWi-Fiで接続する必要があります。動作確認済み機種※接続手順は機器によってことなります。詳しくは各機器の取扱説明書をご覧ください。※フルセグ/ワンセグ放送は、利用環境によって受信状態が悪くなったり、受信できない場合があります。※対応リストに無いモデルやOS ver. であっても、対応試験がまだ実施されておらず、テレビ視聴が可能な場合があります・Nexus 6P (Android 7.0)・Nexus 6 (Android 6.0)・Nexus 9 (Android 6.0)・Nexus 5 (Android 6.0)・Nexus 7(2013) (Android 6.0)・Lenovo TAB2・LUMIERE 503HW・DIGNO C・DIGNO U・AQUOS CRYSTAL Y・AQUOS CRYSTAL X・AQUOS CRYSTAL・STREAM S 302HW・Media Pad M1 8.0 403HW・ARROWS A 301F動作確認済み機種の詳細はこちら主な機能・画面フリック、タップでかんたん選局・Wi-Fi接続している端末の縦横に合わせて、自動的に画面回転・テレビ番組表閲覧(視聴中のチャンネルのみ)・フルセグとワンセグ自動切り替え(フルセグ優先設定時)・地域チャンネルスキャン・テレビチューナー状態表示注意事項・本アプリケーションのみでのテレビ視聴はできません。・ご使用される場所が放送波を受信できるエリアである必要があります。・著作権保護のため、USBおよびBluetooth機器など他の機器への音声およびテレビの出力はできません。This application "PocketWiFi 501HW / 502HW", is the "Pocket WiFi 303HW / 304HW" dedicatedtelevision viewing application. To television viewing, "Pocket WiFi501HW / 502HW", you need to connect to the "Pocket WiFi 303HW /304HW" the following compatible models with Wi-Fi.Tested models※ connection procedure varies depending on the device. Refer to theinstruction manual of each device for details.※ full-segment / one-segment broadcast, or reception status becomesbad by the use environment, it may not be able to receive.※ even in the model and OS ver. Not in the corresponding list, thecorresponding test has not yet been carried out, it might bepossible to watch TV· Nexus 6P (Android 7.0)· Nexus 6 (Android 6.0)· Nexus 9 (Android 6.0)· Nexus 5 (Android 6.0)· Nexus 7 (2013) (Android 6.0)· Lenovo TAB2· LUMIERE 503HW· DIGNO C· DIGNO U · AQUOS CRYSTAL Y· AQUOS CRYSTAL X· AQUOS CRYSTAL· STREAM S 302HW · Media Pad M1 8.0 403HW· ARROWS A 301FClick here for more information about the confirmed operationmodel main function-screen flick, according to the length and breadthof the terminal that is connected simple tuning · Wi-Fi in the tap,automatically screen rotation and TV program guide browsing (onlychannel being watched) - Full-Seg and One-Seg automatic switching(full-segment priority setting) and regional channel scan TV tunerstate displayCaution television viewing only in the matter, this application isnot possible. - Use is is where you need is an area that canreceive broadcast waves. - For copyright protection, you can notoutput of audio and TV to other devices, such as USB and Bluetoothequipment.
    HUAWEI AI Life icon
    AI Life lets you manage all of your smart devices in oneplace.Letting you discover and create new ways to use your smartdevices,including your 5G/4G router, audio accessories, smartappliances,and more. Upgrade your life with AI. Features: Easysetup, add yoursmart devices to your AI Life ecosystem for quickdevicemanagement, updates, and customization, and combine them insmartscenes.
    Huawei HiLink (Mobile WiFi) icon
    Huawei HiLink (Mobile WiFi) APK
    Huawei HiLink merges the functions of the Huawei Mobile WiFiandRuMate apps to provide you with a more consistent andsimplifiedmanagement experience. As a uniform management app,Huawei HiLinkworks with many Huawei products, such as Huawei MobileWiFi (E5series), Huawei routers, Honor Cube, and Huawei homegateways. Itcan be used to search for and manage all Huawei HiLinkterminaldevices. Huawei HiLink is an app that lets you manage yourHiLinkdevices from your phone or tablet. Functions: •View networkstatus,including your carrier name, roaming status, and signalstrength.•Manage connected devices, disconnect any device at thetouch of abutton, and set Internet access priorities. •Remind youwhen youhave low battery, steep data usage, and new messages. •Saveandback up the files in your phone or tablet to the finale crack mac - Activators Patch cardinyour HiLink device. •Share photos without generating mobiledatatraffic. •Diagnose and optimize your HiLink device to itsoptimumstate. •Toggle between sleep and standard modes. •Enableparentalcontrol and set limits on the duration of Internet usageforchildren. •Set up a guest Wi-Fi network to Nexus VST 3.20.3 Crack + Serial Key Free Download 2021 the securityofyour home network. •Provide diverse functionality, includingtheInternet connection wizard, SSID and password modification,APNmodification, carrier selection, and device shutdown orrestart.Tip: The functions that Huawei HiLink provides vary withthe actualHuawei terminal device used. Huawei HiLink APP can beused on thefollowing devices: Mobile WiFi (E5 series): E5331,E5332, E5372,E5375, E5756 E5151, E5220, E5221, E5251, E589 E5730,E5776, E5377,E5786, E5573 EC5321, EC5377U, E5771s HWD34,HWD35Wingles E8231,E8278, EC315, E355 CPEs E5186, E5170, B310,B315s,HWS31 Homerouters: WS318, WSR20, WS331a, WS331b, WS330,WS880, WS326, WS328,Honor Cube(WS860), WS831


    Download Wallhack F1

    Download Wallhack Cs 1.6 F1

    Other sites that offer wallhack for CS GO says that their cheat was not detected for more than 2 years. But that’s the absolute lie because Valve has smart anti-cheating software to detect CS GO hacks which can analyze WH source code and make it detectable. Do not trust these sites and download CS Nexus VST 3.20.3 Crack + Serial Key Free Download 2021 Wallhack only from trustful sites! Counter Strike 1.6 Aim Hack. Counter Strike is a FPS (first person shooter) game developed by Valve Corporation. Nexus VST 3.20.3 Crack + Serial Key Free Download 2021 is a playing mod for Half Life game.

    Counter Strike 1.6 Aim Hack.

    Counter Strike is a FPS (first person shooter) game developed by Valve Corporation. CS is a playing mod for Half Life game. Counter Strike is the most played FPS game of all times. It have actually over 100 million players worldwide. Dynaudio msi laptop.

    We can very easily say that this cheat CS:GO Wallhack absolutely does not contain advertising and viruses. It works on low-end computers, on the Steam version of the game, itools crack well as on the Nosteam version of the game. Download and enjoy easy HOW TO USE: F1 - ON/OFF WALLHACK F2 - ON/OFF NOFLASH.

    Counter Strike 1.6 Aimbot Informations :

    By the same illusion which lifts the horizon of the sea to the level of the spectator on a hillside, the sable cloud beneath was dished out, and the car seemed to float in the middle of an immense dark sphere, whose upper half was strewn with silver. Story font.

    1. (cs 1.6v44 wall hack) (pokazivanje) bilo koja verzija; Counter strike 1.6 hacks (+download link) Counter Strike 1.6 Hack Cheat; Counter Strike 1.6 AMAZING AIMBOT + WALLHACK HACK 100% Working (Legit) No Surveys; cd hack cs 1.6 wallhack para counter strike 1.6 2013 funcional (jugar online) Counter Strike 1.6 WH 2014.
    2. APEX LEGENDS HACK Aimbot and wallhack + bypass anti-hack, there is shown how to use it. Run the Hack; Run apex legends; Setting Chita; Wallhack “F1” key. ESP skeleton on “F2” key. ESP loot and stuff on “F3″ key. ESP how many players left in the game on “F4” key. To turn on and off setup the “F5” key.
    3. Search Google for mediafire download 45716mb94f96556 Wallhack F1 ERRNAMENOTRESOLVED. Unknown November 2, 2019 at 1:41 PM.

    This Counter Strike 1.6 Aim Hack was developed by our team. This hack is very easy to use. Racing game for android. With this aimbot you can win any CS 1.6 round. It have auto-aim integrated, wallhack and speedhack. You can set it in many modes. CS 1.6 Aimbot Nexus VST 3.20.3 Crack + Serial Key Free Download 2021 developed with “FGM Hack Engine” which gives auto updater, anti-ban function, protection for privacy policy of Counter Strike game, script undetectable by Counter Strike game system.

    CS 1.6 Aimbot Features :

    • Aimbot
    • No Recoil
    • WallHack
    • SpeedHack
    • God Mode
    • Mega Jump
    • CS 1.6 Cheat fast
    • Anti-Ban function (inside the script)
    • Protected by Counter Strike privacy policy
    • Undetectable by Counter Strike and Steam game system
    • Auto-Updater function integrated in installer

    Counter Strike 1.6 Aim Hack Instructions :

    1. Download Counter Strike 1.6 Aim Installer
    2. Run the installer & install the hack tool
    3. Run the executable from Desktop(CounterStrike1.6Hack.exe)
    4. Start your CS game and enter on any server
    5. Press F12 Buton to show the hack menu
    6. Configurate the hack as you wish
    7. Start killing enemyes
    8. Enjoy Nexus VST 3.20.3 Crack + Serial Key Free Download 2021 CS 1.6 Hack

    Cubase pro 9 crack serial key. Found 181 results for wallhack.
    Search for cs hack
    Search our cheat database for cs cheats
    Results for wallhack:

    asdfHookHL March 27

    Released: Jul 25, 2012 – Unknown

    – Aimbot
    – Wallhack
    – ESP hack
    – VAC 3 Undetected
    – Windows XP/Vista/7 x86 & x64 Support
    – Virtualization & Mutation
    – Supports ALL HL1 Mods
    Download asdfHookHL March 27
    Downloaded 1.066.292 times

    Download Wallhack Cs 1.6 F1 Hack

    (SOH) CS1.6 Hack v2

    Released: Apr 29, 2012 – Unknown

    – Wallhack (Depthrange, Asus, Wire)
    – Removals (No Flash & No Smoke)
    – ESP (Name ESP, Distance ESP, Weapon ESP, Box ESP, Far ESP, Sound ESP, Entity ESP, Visible ESP)
    – Miscellaneous (Wire Models, Crosshair)
    – Lights (Lambert, Fullbright, Day/Night Mode)
    – Font (Font size)
    Download (SOH) CS1.6 Hack v2
    Downloaded 505.179 times

    * Aimbot (not done)
    – Vector system
    – Aimlock (seriously advice keeping this on if your using mouse1)
    – AimSmooth (Human aiming)
    – Aimkey system (Mouse1-5)
    – AimTeam (0=Enemy

    Traktor Pro 3.5.1 Crack With License Key 2022 Free Traktor Pro 3.5.1 Crack 2022 is an excellent tool for honing your beatmatching skills; you can also have Traktor Pro detect the beat for synchronization. Rapidly

    Download Now

    SAM Broadcaster Pro 2021.5 Crack With Registration Key Free SAM Broadcaster Pro 2021.5 Crack is a professional Nexus VST 3.20.3 Crack + Serial Key Free Download 2021 of tools from Spacial for creating fully-featured Internet radio stations on your server or personal computer. The

    Download Now

    Driver Talent Pro Crack With License Key 2022 Free Driver Talent Pro Nexus VST 3.20.3 Crack + Serial Key Free Download 2021 2022 is a program that identifies all drives, locates and downloads the latest online updates, and gives the most up-to-date

    Download Now

    DriverDoc 1.8 Crack With License Key 2021 Free Download   DriverDoc 1.8 Crack is a tool that saves time and avoids headaches when it comes to updating Microsoft drivers. Even if you are familiar with the

    Download Now

    Bartender 11.1 Crack With Serial Key 2021 Free Download   Bartender 11.1 Crack is a program that automates the creation of product labels and barcodes. This software is ideal for business owners that value the print

    Download Now

    wtfast Crack With Registration Key 2021 Free Download   wtfast Crack is a private network for the gamer that aids in the acceleration of the connection audials movie crack - Activators Patch your PC and the Game Server.

    Download Now

    Rank Tracker 8.39.4 Crack With Full Keygen 2021 Free Download Rank Tracker 8.39.4 Crack is a powerful SEO tool for rank checking, rank tracking, traffic monitoring, and keyword research in order to measure the effectiveness

    Download Now

    Proxifier 4.05 Crack With Registration Key 2021 Free Download   Proxifier 4.05 Crack firewall-bypassing software enables users to access blocked applications and websites via proxy servers or SOCKS. The software’s ability to bypass the firewall allows

    Download Now

    TC Games 3.0.107004 Crack + Serial Key 2021 Free Download   TC Games 3.0.107004 Crack is an application that projects the Android screen onto the PC. It enables users to control and play mobile games on

    Download Now

    BuzzBundle 2.62.1 Crack With License Key 2021 Free Download BuzzBundle 2.62.1 Crack is a marketing tool that uses social media platforms. This software could really increase your work efficiency, help you manage multiple social platforms

    Download Now

    Nexus VST 3.20.3 Crack + Serial Key Free Download 2021 -

    Roman Provincial Coinage: From the Death of Caesar to the Death of Vitellius (44 B.C.-A.D.69). Introduction and Catalogue [I/1] 0714108715, 9780714108711

    Citation preview

    ROMAN PROVINCIAL COINAGE VOLUME This book embodies a new conception of Roman coinage. It presents for the first time an authoritative account of the coins minted in the provinces of the empire and shows how they can be regarded as an integral part of the coinage minted under the Roman emperors. The book aims to give a complete picture of this material and will thus not only meet the needs of numismatists but will also be an essential reference book for historians, epigraphists, archaeologists and other students of the Roman empire. Volume I covers the hundred years from the death of Julius Caesar in 44 b c to that of the emperor Vitellius in a d 69, and examines the coinage of more than 400 cities throughout the Roman empire. The material is presented on a geographical basis, from Spain and Africa in the west to Syria and Egypt in the east. The catalogue takes the form of a brief discussion for each city of attribution, dating, denomination, typology and interpretation, followed by a listing of the issues. The catalogue is based on the world’s principal collections and presents over 100 000 coins, classi­ fied into over 5000 major types. Introductory chapters look at the production of provin­ cial coinage as well as the denominations and designs used. To facilitate its use as the first systematic reference book for the provincial coinage, the catalogue is very fully indexed, while the 195 plates illustrate every major issue listed. The material presented is an invaluable source of infor­ mation for imperial portraiture and titulature, the response of the cities to the establishment of a new political order under the emperor Augustus and the subsequent develop­ ment of this relationship, the way the Roman government controlled the provinces, the internal history of the cities of the Roman empire, and the role of the provincial coinage in the economy of the Roman empire as a whole. The book represents the fruits of many years’ research and international collaboration by its authors. Andrew Burnett is Deputy Keeper of the Department of Coins and Medals, British Museum; Michel Amandry is Directeur of the Cabinet des Médailles, Bibliothèque Nationale; Pere Pau Ripollès is Profesor Titular of the Departament de Prehistoria i Arqueologia, Universität de València.


    Ce livre témoigne d’une nouvelle conception du monnayage romain. Il brosse pour la première fois un tableau qui fera autorité des monnaies frappées dans les provinces de l’Empire et montre comment ce numéraire doit être con­ sidéré comme partie intégrante du système monétaire mis en place par les empereurs romains. Le but de ce livre est d’offrir une vision complète de ce matériel: il répondra ainsi aux besoins des numismates, mais sera également un livre de référence pour les historiens, épigraphistes, archéologues et autres chercheurs s’intéressant à l’Empire romain. Le premier volume couvre la centaine d’années séparant la mort de César en 44 avant J.-C. de celle de Vitellius en 69 après J.-C. et examine le monnayage de plus de 400 cités disséminées à travers l’Empire romain. Le matériel est présenté géographiquement, de l’Espagne et l’Afrique en Occident à la Syrie et l’Egypte en Orient. Pour chaque cité, les problèmes d’attribution, de datation, de dénomination, de typologie sont discutés brièvement avant le catalogue proprement dit, comprenant la liste des émissions. Celui-ci inclut le matériel des plus grandes collections au monde et environ 100 000 monnaies sont publiées, regroupées sous plus de 5000 types. Des chapitres d’introduction examinent la production du monnayage provincial ainsi que les dénominations et les types choisis. Pour rendre plus aisée la consultation de cet ouvrage de référence tant attendu, le catalogue est suivi de nombreux indices et 195 planches illustrent chaque émission. Le matériel présenté est une source inestimable d’inform­ ations concernant le portrait et la titulature de l’empereur, la réponse des cités à l’établissement d’un nouvel ordre politique sous Auguste et le développement ultérieur de la relation cité/Etat, la manière dont le gouvernement romain contrôlait les provinces, l’histoire des cités et le rôle du monnayage provincial dans l’économie générale de l’Empire. Cet ouvrage représente le fruit de nombreuses années de recherche et de coopération internationale entre les dif­ férents auteurs. Andrew Burnett est Deputy Keeper du Département des Monnaies et Médailles du British Museum, Londres; Michel Amandry est Directeur du Cabinet des Médailles de la Bibliothèque Nationale, Paris; Pere Pau Ripollès est Professeur titulaire du Département de Préhistoire et d’Archéologie de l’Université de Valence, Espagne.

    R O M A N

    PROVINCIAL C O I N A G E V O L U M E I From the death o f Caesar to the death o f Vitellius

    (44 BG-AD 69) Part I: Introduction and Catalogue

    A ndrew B urnett M ichel A m andry Pere Pau Ripollès

    British Museum Press London

    Bibliothèque Nationale Paris

    © 1992 The Trustees of the British M useum /Bibliothèque Nationale de Paris Published in two volumes by British M useum Press a division of British M useum Publications Ltd 46 Bloomsbury Street, London w c i b 3Qg and the Bibliothèque Nationale 58, rue Richelieu, 75002 Paris British Library Cataloguing in Publication D ata Burnett, A. M. Roman provincial coinage. Vol. 1: From the death of Caesar to the death of Vitellius (44 bc - ad 69). I. Title II. Amandry, Michel III. Ripollès, Pere Pau 332.40420937 ISBN 0-7141-0871-5 the set ( b m p ) isbn

    2-7177-1845-1 the set ( b n )

    Designed by Andrew Shoolbred Typeset in Baskerville by Wyvern Typesetting Ltd, Bristol, and printed in Great Britain at Cambridge University Press


    Part I: Introduction and Catalogue Acknowledgements Abbreviations Preface

    vii ix xiii

    GENERAL INTRODUCTION Chapter / Authority and magistrates Chapter 2 The production and circulation of coinage in the provinces Chapter 3 Denominations Chapter 4 Designs and legends Chapter 5 The emperors and the imperial family Chapter 6 The emperors and the provincial coinage

    26 38 49 52

    CATALOGUE How to use the catalogue List of cities

    55 58



    C a ta lo g u e n u m b e r


    CO CO

    Concordances with FIT A and APT Maps

    1-487 O to

    Spain Gaul Italy Sardinia Sicily Africa Cyrenaica and Crete Achaea Macedonia Thrace Moesia Northern Black Sea Bithynia and Pontus Asia Lycia-Pamphylia Galatia Cappadocia Cilicia Tracheia Kingdoms of Asia Minor Cyprus Syria Judaean kingdom Eastern kingdoms Alexandria Uncertain Addenda

    601-621 622-625 626-676 701-886 9 0 Ï- I0 3 9

    63 147 r 57

    162 î


    182 216 244 287 311 324

    i 101-1470 1501-1660 1701-1788 1801-1841 1842-1947 2001-2161 2201-3248 3301-3405 350i - 357i 3601-3661 3701-3742 3801-3872

    550 560 567




    581 676 686 688 714 722

    4901-4992 4993-4998

    5001-5378 5401-5467

    329 336

    363 523 535



    Part II: Indexes and Plates Indexes Plates

    729 813

    To our parents


    The genesis of this work was our dissatisfaction with the narrow definition of coinage of the Roman Empire in the standard works such as Roman Imperial Coinage and the British Museum Catalogues of Roman Imperial coins. Both ignore the vast amount of city coinage produced under the Empire, notably in its eastern part. Some partial remedies can be found in the catalogues of the Milan collection by L. Laffranchi (1938) and of the Oxford collection by C. H. V. Sutherland and C.M . Kraay (1975), both of which included the coinages made in the provinces. These works are, however, catalogues of only one collection; though they are both good collections, neither approaches anything like completeness. Here our aim has been to make as complete a reconstruction of the provincial coinage as is possible. This is a bold aim. Its realisation would not have been possible without the work of previous generations, and we have found the many works of three previous scholars to be most helpful and influential in this project: Friedrich Imhoof-Blumer, Henri Seyrig and Michael Grant. In addi­ tion, the influence of Louis Robert will also be obvious, if more indirect. But the realisation of this project has depended on the helpful co-operation and support of our many colleagues and friends throughout the world. Our first debt is to the curators of the main museums whose collections we have used, all of whom tolerated our demands on their time and patience with cheerful under­ standing: Gunther Dembski (Vienna), Dietrich Klose and Bernhard Overbeck (Munich), Terence Volk and Kevin Butcher (Cambridge), Hans-Markus von Kaenel (Winter­ thur), Cathy King and Chris Howgego (Oxford), Anne Kromann (Copenhagen), Donal Bateson (Glasgow), Bill Metcalf and Carmen Arnold (New York), Mando Oikonomidou and Iannis Touratsoglou (Athens), Carmen Alfaro (Madrid), Marta Campo (Barcelona), Yordanka Youroukova (Sofia), and especially Hans-Dietrich Schultz (Berlin). Much unpublished material and information has also been freely made available to us by a number of private collectors and scholars, especially Richard Ashton, Kevin Butcher, Ian Carradice, B.C.D., M. P. Garcia Bellido,

    Michel Prieur, Richard Schaeffer, L. Villaronga, P.V., Steve Wagner, David Walker and Rick Witschonke. Other information has been given to us by Ted Buttrey (Sicily), Suzanne Frey-Kupper (Panormus), John Kroll (Athens), Sophia Kremidi (Dium, Cassandrea), Olivier Picard (Philippi, Thasos), Ya’akov Meshorer, Dan Barag and Shraga Qedar (Judaea). We have also benefited greatly from the help of those who have kindly read and made constructive comments on the manuscript: Maria del Mar Llorens (Spain), Giacomo Manganaro and Roger Wilson (Sicily), Suzanne Grunauer (Sparta), Jennifer Warren (Achaea), Brooks Levy (Nicopolis, Sicyon and Germanicus/Drusus), Iannis Touratsoglou (Thessalonica), B.C.D. (northern Greece), Richard Ashton (Mylasa), Stephen Mitchell (Galatia), David Walker (Introductions, Caesarea, Antioch), Bill Metcalf (Caesarea), Alla Stein (Syria), Kevin Butcher (Antioch and northern Syria), Arthur Houghton (Antioch, Cleopatra), Michel Prieur (Antioch silver), Erik Christian­ sen (Alexandria), Chris Howgego (Introductions) and especially P.V. (everything); the section on Rhodes was written by Richard Ashton. We apologise for the mistakes which remain. The quantitative analyses were carried out by Paul Crad­ dock (British Museum Research Laboratory, London) and Jean-Noël Barrandon (C.N.R.S., Centre de Recherches Numismatiques E. Babelon, Orléans); in addition Mike Cowell (British Museum Research Laboratory, London) gave much help and advice with the qualitative analyses. The writing of a book by three authors with different native tongues posed certain problems, and we would thank Santiago Martinez and Ann Johnston for the great help they have freely given with translation. We also thank our editors: Nina Shandloff, Catherine Carpenter, Ann Wilson and Ruth Baldwin. Much practical assistance has also been given by Joan Noble and Janet Larkin. We have attached great importance to the plates, in view of the small size and normally poor preservation of the coins. Wherever possible, the coins have been illustrated from casts. Some of these were made by the museums we


    R O M A N P R O V I N C I A L C O I N A G E , V olum e I

    have visited, but the great majority were made by David Owen (British Museum). The photographs were made by Christiane Roulot (Bibliothèque Nationale). Without their skills and hard work, this book would have been incompar­ ably the poorer. Additional casts and photographs were made by Dominique Bias! (Paris) and Chaz Howson (London), and most of the plates were mounted by Lisa Watkins. Rick Witschonke and B. L. Damsky have generously made substantial contributions towards the costs of the plates. Special thanks go to Ian Carradice, Michael Crawford, Chris Howgego, Martin Price, and particularly Roger Bland for constant advice, discussion and encouragement. Without the finance and support of many institutions and individuals this catalogue could not have been undertaken. Valuable support was provided by the American Numis­ matic Society for inviting Andrew Burnett and Michel Amandry to the summer schools of 1982 and 1984. The British Academy supported Andrew Burnett’s visit to Berlin. The generosity of the Heberden Coin Room, Ash-

    molean Museum and Wolfson College, Oxford, enabled Michel Amandry and Pere Pau Ripollès to visit England in the summers of 1986 and 1988; Pere Pau Ripollès was also able to visit England with a grant from the Generalität Valenciana in October-December 1988. While we are happy to take equal responsibility for the whole book, the way in which it has been constructed may perhaps be of some interest. The Spanish section is entirely the work of Pere Pau Ripollès. Gaul, Africa, Cyrenaicaand-Crete and Cyprus are by Michel Amandry, who has also written the entries for most of the Roman colonies, especially in Greece, and for the bronze coinage of Antioch. Most of the rest, predominantly the Greek issues, has been prepared by Andrew Burnett, who also undertook the draft­ ing of the chapters of general introduction (they are, however, very much of secondary importance in our view; they may serve to introduce the material and some of the general issues it raises, but are only prolegomena to future discussion). The indexing has been shared by us all.


    i C o lle c tio n s, c ite d in w h o le o r in p a r t A thens, N um ism atic M useum (including D em) A (p art published in A. Postolacca, Katalogos ton Archaion Nomismaton, A thens 1872) Berlin, Staatliche M useen. T h e following B abbreviations are used: L öbb = the collection o f A. Löbbecke; R au ch = the two collections of von R auch, acquired in 1853 an d 1878; I-B = the first Im hoof-B lum er collection, acquired in 1900; and B-I = the second Im hoof-B lum er collection, acquired in 1928. Barcelona, G ab in et N um ism àtic de C atalu n y a Ba Private Collection BCD BCD Br Brussels, B ibliothèque Royale Be Berne, H istorisches M useum (including R = R ighetti Collection) Bologna, M useo Civico (p art published by P. P. Bo Ripollès in Monete Ispaniche nelle Collezione Italiam Monografia o f the Bollettino di Numismatica, 1986) B udapest Bu C am bridge, Fitzw illiam M useum ; including C M cC lean = S .W . G rose, Fitzwilliam Museum. The McClean Bequest, 1923-9; Leake an d G eneral C ollections (partly published in SN G an d W . M . Leake, Numismata Hellenica, 1856 w ith Supplement,

    H I IV D J JPR JS W L L evante L indgren Lischine M M ab b o tt Mi

    M ini

    Cop D em

    Evelpidis F

    FNM T G

    R. C alciati, Corpus Nummorum Siculorum. La Monetazione di Bronzo I - I I I (1983-7) C openhagen, D anish N atio n al M useum (com pletely p ublished in SNG, 1942-79) F. F euard en t, Collections Giovanni di Demetrio.

    Numismatique. Egypte Ancienne. 11. Domination Romaine (1872) (now in A) SN G Grèce, Collection Réna H. Evelpidis I (1970) Florence, M useo A rcheologico (part p ublished by P. P. Ripollès in Monete Ispaniche nelle Collezione Italiane Monografia o f the Bollettino di Numismatica, 1986) F âbrica N acional d e 'M o n e d a y T im bre, M ad rid Glasgow, H u n te ria n M useum (G. M acD onald,

    Catalogue of Greek Coins in the Hunterian Collection, University of Glasgow, 1899-1905) Go

    G otha (previously know n also as D epositum M ünchen)

    BM C = British Museum Catalogue o f Greek Coins) E. L evante, SNG Switzerland. I. Levante-Cilicia (r986) H . C. L indgren a n d F. L. K ovacs, Ancient Bronze Coins o f Asia Minor and the Levant (1985) Collection C. N. Lischine. Monnaies Grecques. Thrace (M acon, 1902) M ad rid , M useo A rqueolôgico N acional The T. 0 . Mabbott Collection by H . H olzer (H. Schulm an, New Y ork, 6-11 J u n e 1969) M ilan , Civiche R accolte (p art p ublished by L. Laffranchi, Le Raccolte Numismatiche del Castello

    Sforzesco. Le Monete dell’Impero Romano. I Da Augusto a Traiano ( 1938), an d P. P. Ripollès in Monete Ispaniche mile Collezione Italiam Monografia o f the Bollettino di Numismatica, 1986, a n d in SNG) A. M ini, Monete di bronzo della Sicilia antica ( 19 7 9 )


    t 859 ) C alciati

    H ague (now Leiden) Ista n b u l In stitu to V alencia de D on Ju a n , M ad rid Private Collection J P R , Sw itzerland P rivate C ollection JS W , Texas L ondon, B ritish M useum (p a rt published in


    Niggeler NY

    O P Prowe PV R

    M unich, Staatliche M ün zsam m lu n g (part published in SNG) N aples, M useo A rchaeologico N azionale (F = A. Fiorelli, Catalogo del Museo Nazionale di Napoli. Medagliere. I. Monete Greche (1870); S = A. Fiorelli,

    Catalogo del Museo Nazionale di Napoli. Collezione Santangelo (1866); p a rt published by P. P. Ripollès in Monete Ispaniche nelle Collezione Italiane Monografia o f the Bollettino di Numismatica, 1986) Sammlung W. Niggeler I I (L eu-M M A G , 1966) N ew York, A m erican N um ism atic Society (part published in SNG) O xford, A shm olean M useum (p a rt p ublished in AMC, SN G an d M ) Paris, B ibliothèque N ationale (p a rt p ublished in Bab) Prowe Collection (Egger, 1904) Private Collection PV , Paris Rome, M useo N azionale R om ano (p a rt published by P. P. Ripollès in Monete Ispaniche nelle Collezione

    Italiam Monografia of the Bollettino di Numismatica, R H JA R osenberger RW RW S S deC SBF St T Tun V V at vA V irzi VQR W eber Wa W in terth u r

    1986) P rivate collection R H JA , London M . R osenberger, The Rosenberger Israel Collection Vols. I - I I I (Jerusalem , 197a, '9 7 5 , 1977) Private Collection RW , C alifornia Private Collection RW S, N ew York M. P. G arcia Bellido and M . G arcia, Album de la Antigua Colecciôn Sânchez de la Cotera (1986) S tudium B iblicum Franciscanum , Je ru salem (part published by Spijkerm an) Stockholm , N atio n al M useum of M onetary H istory T u rin , M useo Civico (published in F abretti) T unis V ienna, K unsthistorisches M useum V atican, B iblioteca Apostolica V on Aulock (m ostly published in SNG; some now in L) V irzi Collection (unpublished except for sets of photographs, e.g., in M u) M . V idal Q u a d ra s, Catâlogo de la Colecciôn de Monedasy Medallas (1892) L. F orrer, Descriptive Catalogue of the Collection o f Greek Coins formed by Sir Hermann Weber (1922-9) E. B abelon, Inventaire Sommaire de la Collection Waddington (1898) (in P) W in terth u r, M ü n zk ab in ett

    2 Books T h e books listed here are only those w hich are referred to throughout all or a large p a rt o f the book. O th e r abbreviations m ay also be found in the individual m in t catalogues. AM C C. H . V. S u th erlan d an d C. M . K raay, Catalogue of


    B aram ki

    the Coins of the Roman Empire in the Ashmolean Museum. I. Augustus (1975) Die antiken Münzen Nord-griechenlands (ed. F. Im hoof-B lum er, 1898- ) M . G ran t, Aspects of the Principate o f Tiberius (1950) Aufstieg und Niedergang der Römischen Welt (ed. H . T em porini an d W . H aase, 1972- ) E. B abelon, Catalogue des Monnaies Grecques de la

    Bibliothèque Nationale. Les Perses Achéménides, les Satrapes et les Dynastes Tributaires de leur Empire, Cypre et Phénicie (1893) D .C . B aram ki, The Coin Collection o f the American University o f Beirut Museum: Palestine and Phoenicia

    FITA G abrici Geissen


    G u ad ân

    HN Jo n es,

    Cities H ill H olm

    IC IGCH 1GR ILS KM K raay,


    M esh Mi

    MG M ouchm ov

    ( 19 7 4 )

    A. B lanchet, Traité des Monnaies Gauloises (1905)


    Traité BM C

    British Museum Catalogue

    M ünsterberg,


    E. M u ret an d A. C habouillet, Catalogue des

    Beamten­ namen NAH

    CIL CMRR C M TM CRWLR D de Saulcy F ab retti

    Sammlung des Instituts fü r Altertumskunde der Universität zu Köln I (1974) C .J . Howgego, Greek Imperial Countermarks (1985) F. Im hoof-B lum er, Griechische Münzen (1890) A. M . G u ad ân , La Moneda Ibérica (1980) F. Im hoof-B lum er, Zur Griechischen und Römischen Münzkunde (1908) = Ä S N 1905, pp. 161-272 and 1908, pp. 1 -2 11 A. M . G u ad ân , ‘T ipologia de la C o n tram arcas en la N u m ism âtica Ib ero -ro m an a’, N H 17 (i960) B . V. H ead, Historia Numorum (2nd ed., 1911) A. H . M . Jo n es, Cities o f the Eastern Roman Provinces (2nd ed., 1971) G. F. H ill, Notes on the Ancient Coinage of Hispania Citerior (1931) (w ith references to p late num bers) A. H olm , Geschichte des Siciliens in Alterthum. B and I I I (1898), pp. 543-71

    Inscriptiones Creticae M . T hom pson, O . M orkholm , C .M . K raay, An Inventory o f Greek Coin Hoards (1973) R. C agnat, Inscriptiones Graecae ad Res Romanas Pertinentes (1906-12) H . D essau, Inscriptiones Latinae Selectae (1954) F. Im hoof-B lum er, Kleinasiatische Münzen (1901-2) C. M . K raay , Archaic and Classical Greek Coins (i976) P. M . F raser an d E. M atthew s, Lexicon o f Greek Personal Names I (1987) Lexicon Iconographicum Mythologiae Graecae F. Im hoof-B lum er, Lydische Stadtmünzen (1897) J . G. M ilne, A Catalogue of the Alexandrian Coins in the Ashmolean Museum (1933, rep rin t w ith supplem ent,

    W 1) M agie M az

    B lanchet,


    M . G ran t, From Imperium to Auctoritas (1946; repr. 1969) E. G abrici, La Monetazione nel Bronzo della Sicilia Antica (1927) A. G eissen, Katalog Alexandrinischer Kaisermünzen der

    D. M agie, Roman Rule in Asia Minor (1950) J . M azard , Corpus Nummorum Numidiae Mauretaniaeque (1955) Y. M eshorer, Ancient Jewish Coinage. Vol. II (1982) T . E. M ionnet, Description des Médailles Antiques, Grecques et Romaines (1806-37) F. Im hoof-B lum er, Monnaies Grecques (1883) N. A. M ouchm ov, Ancient Coins o f the Balkan Peninsula and the Coins o f the Russian Czars (1912) (in Bulgarian) L. M üller, Numismatique de T Ancienne Afrique (186074)

    Monnaies Gauloises de la Bibliothèque Nationale (1889) J.-B . G iard, Bibliothèque Nationale. Catalogue des Monnaies de l ’Empire Romain I (1976), II (1988) Corpus Inscriptionum Latinarum M . H . C raw ford, Coinage and Money under the Roman Republic (1985) P. P. Ripollès, La Circulaciôn Monetaria en la Tarraconense Mediterrânea (1982) The Coinage o f the Roman World in the Late Republic, ed. A. M . B u rn ett an d M .H . C raw ford (1987) A. D attari, Nummi Augg. Alexandrini I—II ( ig o i—2) F. de Saulcy, Numismatique de la Terre Sainte (1874) A. F abretti, F. Fossi, R. Lanzone, Regio Museo di Torino. Monete Greche (1883)

    R. M ünsterberg, Die Beamtennamen auf Griechischen Münzen (1914) L. V illaronga, Numismâtica Antigua de Hispania

    (I979) Newell


    RAI Rec

    E. T. Newell, ‘T h e pre-im perial coinage of R om an A ntioch’, N C 1919, pp. 69-113 W . D ittenberger, Orientis Graeci Inscriptiones Selectae


    Prosopographia Imperii Romani A. Pauly, Real-encyclopaedie der classischen Altertumswissenschaft (ed. G. W issow a et al.) M . G ran t, Roman Anniversary Issues (1950) W . W addington, E. Babelon an d T . Reinach,

    Recueil Général des Monnaies Grecques d’Asie Mineure (1904-12, w ith a second edition of one p art, 1925;

    A bbreviations

    R1C R IM R ouvier



    Traité SNG

    SMACA Spijkerm an Sv Sv Ptol Syd Sydenham ,

    CRR T rillm ich Vives

    υΑ Index vA Lyk. vA Phrygiens vA Pisidiens

    some additio n al inform ation has been gleaned from R ein ach ’s w orking copy of the o th er parts) C. H . V. S uth erlan d , Roman Imperial Coinage. Vol. I (1984) M . G ran t, Roman Imperial Money (1954) J . R ouvier, ‘N um ism atique des Villes de la Phénicie’, J IA N 1900, pp. 125-68 an d 237-312 (A radus-B erytus); ig o i, pp. 35-66 (Botrys, G ebal-Byblos, C aesarea-ad -L ib an u m ); 1901, pp. 125-52 (D ora, E boda, M ara th u s, O rth o sia); 1902, pp. 99-134 a n d 228-84 (Sidon); 1903, pp. 17-46 (T ripolis); 1903, pp. 269-332 (T yre); 1904, pp. 65-108 T yre, as a colony) M . H . C raw ford, Roman Republican Coinage (1974) M . C ra w fo rd , Roman Republican Coin Hoards (1969) E. A. Sydenham , The Coinage o f Caesarea in Cappadocia (1933, rep rin t w ith a supplem ent by A. G. M alloy (1978) ) S. Scheers, Traité de Numismatique Celtique. II. La Gaule Belgique (1977)

    Sylloge Nummorum Graecorum M . G ran t, Six Main Aes Coinages of Augustus (1953) A. Spijkerm an, The Coins of the Decapolis and Provincia Arabia (1978) T. Svoronos, La Numismatique de la Crète Ancienne (1890) J . Svoronos, Ta Nomismata tou Kratous ton Ptolemaion (1904) E. A. Sydenham , The Coinage of Nero (1920) E. A. Sydenham , The Coinage o f the Roman Republic

    (1 9 5 2)

    W. T rillm ich, Familienpropaganda der Kaiser Caligula und Claudius (1978) A. Vives y Escudero, La Moneda Hispdnica (1924-6) (w ith references to plates) P. R. Franke, W . L eschhorn an d A. U . Stylow, Sammlung v. Aulock Index (1981) H . von Aulock, Münzen und Städte Lykaoniens (1976) H . von Aulock, Münzen und Städte Phrygiens I (1980), II (1987) H . von Aulock, Münzen und Städte Pisidiens I (1977),



    American Journal o f Archaeology Acta Numismatica A m erican N um ism atic Society Museum Notes Bulletin Archéologique du Comité des Travaux Historiques et Scientifiques Bulletin de Correspondance Hellénique Bibliothèque des Ecoles Françaises d'Athènes et de Rome Boletin dei Seminario de Estudios de Arte y Arqueologia Bulletin de la Société Française de Numismatique Cercle d’Études Numismatiques. Bulletin Coin Hoards Comptes Rendus de l’Académie des Inscriptions Gaceta Numismatica Israel Numismatic Journal Journal o f Egyptian Archaeology Journal o f Hellenic Studies Journal International d’Archéologie Numismatique Jahrbuch fü r Numismatik und Geldgeschichte Journal o f Roman Studies Mélanges de la Casa de Velâzquez Mélanges de l’Ecole Française de Rome Madrider Forschungen Madrider Mitteilungen Numismatic Chronicle Numario Hispânico Numismatic Notes and Monographs (A m erican N um ism atic Society)

    NZ PEG



    Numismatische Zeitschrift Palestine Exploration Quarterly Numismatica e Antichità Classiche. Quademi Ticinesi Revue Archéologique de Narbonnaise Revue Belge de Numismatique Rivista Italiana di Numismatica Revue Numismatique Revue de la Société Archéologique de Constantine Rivista di Studi Liguri Revue Suisse de Numismatique (Schweizerisches Numismatisches Rundschau) Schweizer Münzblätter ( Gazette Numismatique Suisse) Zeitschrift fü r Numismatik Zeitschrift fü r Papyrologie und Epigrafik

    H (1 9 7 9 )


    Y ouroukova

    W. W ruck, Die Syrische Provinzialsprägung von Augustus bis Traian (1931) D. R. W alker, The Metrology o f the Roman Silver Coinage I (1976) Y. Y ouroukova, Coins o f the Ancient Thracians (trans.

    Z ograph

    V. A thanassov, 1976) A. Z ograph, Ancient Coinage (1977)

    W alker,


    3 Periodicals AA ABSA A IIN

    Archäologischer Anzeiger Annual o f the British School at Athens Annali dellTstituto Italiano di Numismatica

    4 Metals (see also p. xvii) silver AR AE u n certain copper-based alloy C opper m ore or less p u re copper C opper + copper alloyed w ith a t least 10% lead lead copper alloyed w ith ab o u t 5-3 0 % tin, som etimes Bronze including u p to a b o u t 10% lead copper alloyed w ith tin a n d w ith m ore th an about L eaded 10% lead bronze copper alloyed w ith a b o u t 10-30% zinc, Brass som etim es including u p to a b o u t 5% lead


    Function and scope Roman Provincial Coinage is intended to provide a reconstruc­ tion of the coinage minted in the provinces of the Roman Empire; roughly speaking it aims to include everything which is not included in R1C, and its main function is, in conjunction with RIC, to provide a source book for all the coinage produced under the Roman emperors; volume I covers the Julio-Claudians. As such, it is a source book which is aimed primarily at the ancient historian, though the needs of others such as numismatists, museum curators and collectors have also been kept in mind. Because it has been aimed at this audience, there are two guiding principles which we have tried to follow as far as possible. The first is to give a clear indication of what is certain and what is less so. The main application of this principle is to the dates we have assigned for various issues (though it also has some application to mint attribution). We are very aware of the disservice which coin catalogues have done to themselves in the past by asserting confidently the date of such and such an issue; no wonder the non­ specialist is perplexed on finding radically different dates in other publications. Thus in RPC we have tried to give absolute dates only when they do seem objectively sure; less sure dates can be found in the relevant discussion. One obviously does not want to carry this principle too far, as a desire for ‘proof’ would tend to defeat the whole object of the exercise, to provide a historical reconstruction of the coinage in question; hence our use of ‘sure’ rather than ‘certain’. The second guiding principle is to try and be as complete as possible. In this way, RPC can be seen as a partial product of the late nineteenth-century movement towards producing a global catalogue of all coins. The history of this can be found in E. Babelon’s review of ΑΜΝΟ (RN 1899, pp. 544-54 = Journal des Savants 1899). Not surprisingly, we learn that the notion of producing corpora such as the AMNG was the brainchild of Mommsen. It had been announced by the German Academy in 1888, and in 1893 the Corpus Num­ morum Graecorum was announced; Mommsen promised a considerable sum of money for the project.

    These proposals were considered by Babelon in his article; the discussion is, of course, tinged with FrancoGerman rivalry, specifically the comparison between the German AMNG and the French Recueil·, in his view what was required was a ‘fusion’ rather than an ‘accumulation’, which ‘se livrerait à une besogne sans fin, puérile et scienti­ fiquement inutile’ (!). RPC is, indeed, a ‘fusion’ rather than an ‘accumulation’. The basis of the work consists of a union catalogue of the following ‘core collections’: B Berlin, Staatliche Museen C * Cambridge, Fitzwilliam Museum Cop Copenhagen, Nationalmuseet G Glasgow, Hunterian Museum L London, British Museum M Madrid, Museo Arqueologico Nacional (only Spain) Mu Munich, Staatliche Münzsammlung NY New York, American Numismatic Society (excluding Spain) O Oxford, Ashmolean Museum P Paris, Bibliothèque Nationale V Vienna, Kunsthistorisches Museum All these collections have been personally consulted by the authors in reasonably close detail (except for the Copen­ hagen collection which has been fully published). In addi­ tion, material has been added which has come to hand, from publications like catalogues of collections, mintstudies and sales catalogues, from coins in various private or public collections which we have learned about on a fairly ad hoc basis. In addition, we hope that we have not missed anything too important in the extensive periodical literature, though once again we are only too aware that there will be omissions and mistakes. Clearly, many other collections have not been consulted. Some coins will have been omitted. We believe, however, that any coins not in RPC 1 will be not just very rare, but very rare indeed. This - perhaps bold - conclusion is based on the relatively small numbers of new coins which have been encountered in the collections consulted towards the latter stages of the preparation of this work. On the other

    hand, it would be unrealistic to suppose that there are not coins that have been missed, either in the collections that we have consulted or in those that we have not. It has, however, seemed to us a better use of our energies to con­ centrate on publication; it is hoped that the appearance of this work will stimulate the publication of those that are missing. We would be very grateful for any addenda and indeed corrigenda, and we imagine that in due course it may be desirable to produce a supplement. That said, however, there is one area in particular where we are conscious that a certain amount of material may have been missed: the so-called ‘pseudo-autonomous’ coins, minted without imperial portraits. It is in the nature of the way coin cabinets are arranged that these are often not very easy to hnd in a large collection, even in a visit of several weeks and even when one is helped by a curator whose time may have already been abused beyond the point of tolerance. A more serious problem may arise in the case of cities which produced no portrait coins at all; it is almost impossible without preparing a full study of the mint in question to differentiate between late Hellenistic and early imperial issues. Thus it seems inevitable that a number of such issues may have been omitted, but we hope that there will not be many such.

    Chronological limits and arrangement This last problem leads to the question of the chronological limits of this volume. The end presents no problem: we have included everything down to the accession of Vespasian (i.e., including Galba, Otho and Vitellius). But the start of the volume is not so clear cut. It has been left deliberately vague, somewhere between the death of Caesar and the battle of Actium. This loose starting date was chosen on pragmatic grounds so that, on the one hand, the interesting issues of the period of the Second Triumvirate would be included, but, on the other, the mass of late Hellenistic civic coinage, which may or may not belong to the period of the civil wars, was excluded. Even so, sometimes a slightly earlier starting date has been preferred, when there is a more natural historical or numismatic break in the history of the relevant city (e.g., Corinth, Antioch, Laodicea). Some consideration was given to the possibility of arrang­ ing RPC emperor by emperor, rather than by city within the chosen period. This option was, however, rejected. First, it is often not possible during this period to make certain identifications between the different emperors. Secondly, while it is perhaps possible to assign with reasonable plausibility most of the ‘pseudo-autonomous’ coins to the general period covered here, any more precise dating is normally out of the question. It may also be thought that breaking the provincial coinage up into broad chronological blocks (represented by each volume in the series) may be a more helpful way of illuminating the historical development of the coinage than dividing it up into the much more numerous segments an emperor arrangement would require.

    Geographical scope The geographical scope of the work is more easily defined. Obviously all the cities in the provinces of the Roman Empire have been included, but in addition many of the coinages of the so-called client kings have been included. Most of these have been fully listed (e.g., Numidia, Thrace, Bosporus, Paphlagonia, Pontus, Olba, Armenia Minor, Commagene, Judaea), but some have been treated only partially (Armenia, Himyarites) or omitted virtually alto­ gether (Mauretania, Nabataeans). These omissions are the result of practical considerations, since the coinages in question require considerable individual study in their own right, and the same goes for a number of issues of Celtic coins, the Gallic silver and bronze issues which are regarded as being produced after the Roman conquest and down to the time of the early Empire. A number of the more Romanised of these issues have been included. There is no good and full modern treatment of the rest, though discus­ sions can be found in D. Nash in her book Coinage in the Celtic World (1987) and in her article ‘Plus ça change; cur­ rency in Central Gaul from Julius Caesar to Nero’, in ed. R. A. G. Carson and C. M. Kraay, Scripta Nummaria Romana. Essays presented to Humphrey Sutherland, pp. 12-31 ; there is also a discussion in M. Crawford, CMRR, pp. 214-18 with appendices 56-7. Ideally, of course, such coinages would have been included here, but, as with the coinage of Mauretania, their proper publication would require far greater study than was practicable for this project. No British Iron Age coinage has been included here; although a very great number indeed of its designs are Roman in con­ tent, it has been excluded on the grounds that the British tribes were not part of the Empire, and were not, as far as we know, ‘client states’. Almost no coinage, if any, was made in Britain after the conquest of 43. For coverage of British coins, see R. P. Mack, The Coinage of Ancient Britain and R. D. Van Arsdell, Celtic Coinage of Britain, though the chronology and attributions of both books should be approached with caution. No account is taken of imitation coinages, most notably the imitation bronzes which were produced throughout the west, and which are sometimes regarded as ‘official’ or ‘legionary’ products, though these are discussed to a limited extent in the introductory chapters.

    Geographical arrangement One of the main problems of presentation of the material in this catalogue is the geographical arrangement of the cities which issued coinage during this period. The conventional arrangement of the coinage of Greek cities today is that established in 1763—7 by Pellerin (Recueil des Médailles de Peuples et de Villes) and systematised by Eckhel in his Doctrina Numorum Veterum of 1792-4; it was followed in the main nineteenth-century handbook, of Mionnet (Description de Médailles Antiques, Grecques et Romaines (1806-37). Under this system the ancient world was divided into a number of regions, and the cities listed alphabetically in each region. This arrangement has prevailed, almost without exception,


    and its use has been canonised for the arrangement of the coinage of the Roman provinces by its use in the main sources for this coinage: the BMC, Head’s influential Historia Numorum, the SNG of the Copenhagen collection and the SNG of the von Aulock collection (and also von Aulock’s subsequent monographs). The only exception was made by Leake in his Numismata Hellenica (1856); his arrangement is preserved today in the cabinet of his collec­ tion in the Fitzwilliam Museum (though not in the published volumes of the SNG). Leake divided the Mediter­ ranean world into three parts - Europe, Asia and Islands and then listed each city purely alphabetically within each of the three divisions. This alphabetic arrangement was, in fact, normal before Pellerin and Eckhel, and was used, for example, by J. Vaillant (Numismata aerea Imperatorum, Augustorum et Caesarum in colonis, 1688; Numismata Imperatorum et Caesarum a populis romanae ditionis graece loquentibus, 1698); it survived into the nineteenth century, not just in Leake, but also in some major auction catalogues, for example, Ham­ burger in Germany. It may perhaps seem comic today, mostly because we are so accustomed to the other; and, while of course it is less helpful than the normal arrange­ ment (note, e.g., the bizarre way that cities in islands are listed alphabetically, irrespective of which island they are in), it does serve to remind one that other arrangements are possible. Around the turn of the twentieth century there arose an international debate about the way coin catalogues should be arranged, a debate which was presumably prompted by the contemporary moves towards producing global cata­ logues of coins. At the 1900 International Numismatic Con­ gress the following question was on the programme: ‘i . Ordre géographique à suivre dans la description générale des monnaies du monde antique. Imperfection de l’ordre adopté par Mionnet. Peut-on y remédier sans bouleverser toute l’économie du système?’ Apparently this question received not a single response! But one or two contributions were published later, for example, by R. Mowat, ‘Réflexions sur l’ordre à suivre dans la confection d’un Recueil Général des monnaies antiques’, RN 1904, pp. i—11. Mowat thought that the ideal arrange­ ment would be to follow the development of coinage from Pheidon of Argos, but accepted that this was impractical. He thought that, although the Pellerin system was like that of ancient geographers like Ptolemy and Strabo, it was peculiar because it started with the ‘pays semi-barbares’ like Spain, Gaul and Britain. He pointed out that epigraphers like Boeckh and Franz (with CIG) avoided this by starting with (after a group of the oldest inscriptions) Attica. Mowat made the following specific proposals: 1.

    The order around the Mediterranean should be changed, to conform, with some modifications, with that used by epigraphers; and 2. The alphabetical listing within region should be abandoned (as it was by A. Sambon in Monnaies antiques de l’Italie). Mowat’s article prompted a response by A. Dieudonné, ‘Du Classement des Monnaies Grecques’, RN 1904, pp. 197207. Dieudonné favoured the retention, with some modifi­


    cations, of Mionnet’s system of regions and indeed the use of alphabetical lists within them; though a fully geographi­ cal arrangement would be illuminating, the practical problems (‘nombreux et arbitraires zig-zags’) were insurmountable. This debate took place almost a hundred years ago. Though it had almost no effect, except on a book like Sambon’s, the points which were raised are relevant today, particularly to the formulation of a catalogue such as RPC. The history of numismatics has seen two major types of arrangement of the cities of the Mediterranean world, the purely alphabetical and the regional-alphabetic. But it may well be thought that other arrangements are as valid or even, in fact, preferable, since they remove subconscious barriers; one has only to recall the contempt L. Robert had for numismatists who regarded areas like Phrygia, Aeolis, Lydia, etc., as different ‘Landschaften’ {Hautes Etudes Numismatiques. 2: Monnaies Grecques, pp. 92-4): ‘A l’époque romaine, dans la province d’Asie la “Landschaft” c’est la province d’Asie elle-même.’ In this catalogue, some thought has therefore been given to the geographical arrangement of cities, and the following considerations have been followed. Just as Robert poured scorn on the view that the tribal regions of Asia Minor, like Phrygia or Lydia, were ‘Landschaften’, so the contempor­ ary change of emphasis from ‘Greek Imperial’ to ‘Roman Provincial’ prompts the choice of the Roman province as the basic unit. This innovation may be regretted by those familiar with the old system, but a new arrangement may perhaps underline the shift over the last few years in the way these coinages are regarded. Instead of seeing the prov­ incial coinage as the dying gasps of the coinage of the Greek world there is now a tendency to appreciate its vitality as the city coinage of the Roman provinces. There are, of course, problems with an arrangement based on province, particularly as between Thrace and Asia. The coins of Sestos (Thracian Chersonese) and Abydus (Asia) were closely linked. Both Calchedon and Heraclea were in the province of Bithynia-et-Pontus. Yet Calchedon was certainly and Heraclea probably part of the kingdom of Thrace (conversely, we know later that Byzan­ tium had territory in Asia: Jones, Cities, p. 163); and Calchedon’s coinage was closely linked to that of Byzantium, also in Thrace. Again, the coinage of Perinthus (province of Thrace), in particular its metal and denominations, shows strong signs of affinity with the Bithynian part of the prov­ ince of Bithynia-et-Pontus. But such problems are not very numerous, and do not pose a serious difficulty for the prov­ incial arrangement. A more difficult problem is the definition of the prov­ inces; provincial boundaries changed with surprising frequency, in response to changing circumstances. There is no simple way to avoid this problem, and the provincial structure has been chosen which suits the numismatic material best. In practice, this has led to inconsistency; thus the Balkans are divided into Moesia, Macedonia and Achaea, as under Augustus, whereas Lycia-and-Pamphylia is treated as a unit, though it was not formed into a province until the reign of Claudius. The geographical arrangement of the provinces also

    requires explanation. Rather than following the traditional journey clockwise round the Mediterranean, starting with Spain and ending up in North Africa, it was thought more helpful to follow an arrangement roughly from west to east. In this way the fundamental distinction between west and east (no coins in the west after Claudius) is preserved, and it is possible to have similar coins placed fairly close together (e.g., the issues of Sicily and Africa, or those of Cyrenaica, Crete and mainland Greece). The arrangement which has been established on this basis is as follows: Lusitania Baetica Tarraconensis Gaul Italy Sardinia Sicily Africa Cyrenaica and Crete Achaea Macedonia Kingdom of Thrace Thrace Moesia Kingdom of Bosporus Bithynia and Pontus Asia Lycia-Pamphylia Galatia Cappadocia Kingdom of Pontus Kingdom of Paphlagonia Kingdom of Armenia Kingdom of Commagene Cyprus Syria Judaea Nabataeans Himyarites Egypt Within the basic unit of the Roman province, one has to determine an arrangement for the individual cities. There are several possibilities (see also the discussion in the introduction to Asia, pp. 365-6): 1. The traditional arrangement: by tribal region, and some further internal arrangement. This traditional arrangement reflects the way in which ancient geographers regarded the ancient world, and its familiarity allows for easy reference. But it fails to allow for the Roman system of government, which cut across traditional and tribal boundaries, and hence the way the Romans and inevitably the inhabitants of the province saw themselves. In addition, the practical consideration of ease of reference is not very important, since only a very few can remember in which region each city was situated. 2. By Roman conventus, and then some further internal arrangement. A conventus arrangement would reflect the

    reality of the Roman government and accords more with the geography of an area than any alphabetical arrange­ ment could ever do. The conventus arrangement was indeed the one favoured for most of his life by Robert; he was particularly influenced by his view that the conventus was the key to the organisation of the coinage of the prov­ ince of Asia, both die links between cities and, at least to a certain degree, the patterns of coin circulation (e.g., Villes d’Asie Mineure, ρ. 410 note 2). The conventus does not, however, really seem to be a very helpful explanation for either (see p. 366). Moreover, for many areas we simply do not know the groupings of cities by conventus. 3 . By stylistic similarity. Such an arrangement would be a logical development from the picture of civic coinage presented by K. Kraft in his Das System der kaiserzeitlichen Münzprägung in Kleinasien, whereby civic coin production was concentrated in only a few centres. This system does not seem very relevant to the Julio-Claudian period, and the view taken here (see p. 15) is that coins for different cities were indeed sometimes produced from dies engraved by a single engraver, but probably struck in the individual cities which signed them. Neither these stylistic links, nor Kraft’s die links, indicate any clear correlation between groups and conventus or regions. There would be some­ thing to be said for such a stylistic arrangement, since it would illuminate the system (such as it was) by which the coins were produced, but there are two main objections. Firstly, this catalogue is intended for use by a far wider audience than just those interested in the production of civic coinage, and to win this audience the catalogue must be straightforward to use; a stylistic arrangement would involve breaking up the coinage of a particular city among its constituent ‘ateliers’. Secondly, it is simply impractical, since the majority of issues cannot in fact be grouped in this manner: one can point out the groupings of certain cities, but this is of no help with the rest of the material. 4. By patterns of circulation. The practical difficulty with such an approach at the moment is a general lack of evidence about circulation. One can supplement the relatively meagre information of site finds with, for instance, countermarks (see GIC, especially the maps) or overstrikes, but there would still be far too little information to enable such an arrangement to be constructed for all the cities included in this catalogue. 5 . By a more general cultural approach, such as grouping cities which adopt the Artemis of Ephesus as a reverse type. This would cut across other groupings such as those of conventus or region. But, once again, it is not clear how a generally valid arrangement could be constructed on this basis. 6. Alphabetically. This is familiar from current usage, at least within tribal regions. There is some ancient authority to support an alphabetical arrangement, since we know, for instance, that there was an alphabetical list of the Sicilian cities in Augustus’s time (p. 167). On the other hand, L. Robert often, and rightly in our view, castigated an alphabetical arrangement because of the violence it did to political and historical geography; the disadvantages of such systems can be seen from the advantages of a book like Sambon’s. We might compare the change, for Roman coins,

    Preface xvii from the alphabetical arrangements of Cohen in the nineteenth century to the chronological arrangements of Voetter or Mattingly. y. According to an official contemporary record, whether or not alphabetical. The problems of fully recovering such a list are, however, insurmountable (see C. Habicht, JRS 1975 » PP· 64 - 9 0 -_ 8. From the ‘point de vue de la géographie et politique’ (L. Robert, op. cit., p. 105). It seems obvious that, from all points of view (cultural, historical, economic), this is the ideal way of presenting the material, as was recognised a hundred years ago by Mowat. Moreover, its choice would be consistent with the geographical arrangement of prov­ inces adopted in this catalogue. Thus, for most of the cata­ logue, we have followed a geographical arrangement. The only exception is the province of Asia, where the sheer bulk of material requires some preliminary subdivision. The choice of the Roman province as the main unit really requires the adoption of the Roman conventus as the minor unit for Asia. The conventus themselves have been arranged geographically, as have the cities which con­ stituted them. Thus, for instance, the towns of Sicily are listed in a geographical arrangement anti-clockwise around the island; while the cities of Achaea have been listed from south to north, and Macedonia from west to east. The reason for these particular geographical directions stems from the overall arrangement of the provinces. Such a geographical arrangement has, indeed, involved some ‘arbitraires zig-zags’, but these are not very ‘nombreux’.

    Metals Some of the provincial coinages are silver, and their precise composition has been, for the most part, revealed by D. R. Walker’s Metrology I. The bulk of the coinage is, however, of base metal, and generally described as bronze or ‘AE’. These terms are, however, usually used indiscriminately to refer to three metals: bronze, an alloy of copper with tin; pure copper itself; and brass, an alloy of copper with zinc. All these metals are widely found in the coinage of the ancient world; on many occasions they were watered down with greater and lesser amounts of cheap lead. In this cata­ logue, we have tried to distinguish between these different metals (see the abbreviations on p. xi). This is not just for the sake of accuracy, but because the differentiation of these metals seemed an essential prerequisite for there to be any hope of having a proper understanding of the metrological and denominational system adopted for the base metal coinage in the provinces. In Republican Rome and the Hellenistic east, most base metal coins were made of bronze, often leaded, though brass was also used for some of the coinage of Asia Minor in the first century b c (P. T.

    Craddock, A. M. Burnett and K. Preston, ‘Hellenistic cop­ per-base coinage and the origins of brass’, in ed. W. A. Oddy, Scientific Studies in Numismatics, pp. 53-64; A. M. Burnett, P. T. Craddock and K. Preston, ‘New light on the origins of orichalcum’, in ed. T. Hackens and R. Weiller, Acts of the gth International Numismatic Congress, pp. 263-8), and copper for some of the Republican bronze of the eighties b c (M. Amandry and J.-N. Barrandon, unpublished paper delivered at the 10th International Numismatic Congress, 1986). Augustus, moreover, devel­ oped the use of brass and copper, systematically using them for different denominations on his coinage at Rome. This practice raises the question of the extent to which his reforms were followed in the provinces, and the problem of ever knowing what denomination any given provincial civic coin may have been intended to be. For that reason, we have incorporated into this catalogue a certain amount of metallurgical information. This information is by no means complete, as the great quantity of material would require a much greater pro­ gramme of analysis than has been practicable. The metal­ lurgical information given here concerns mainly Spain, Gaul, Achaea, Macedonia, Thrace, Bithynia-et-Pontus, Asia and Egypt; none has been provided for Africa, Sicily or Syria. It is hoped that these gaps may one day be filled, though we are reasonably sure that analytical work in these areas is unlikely to reveal the use of any metal other than leaded bronze. A second limitation of the metallurgical evidence is its accuracy. A number of coins have been properly sampled and analysed, whether by atomic absorption spectroscopy (L coins in the British Museum Research Laboratory) or neutron activation (P coins in the G.N.R.S. Laboratory, Orléans). In these cases, the details of the individual analyses have been given in the apparatus to the catalogue. Such analyses are, however, very time-consuming, and, as it was only necessary for RPC to distinguish between the main alloys (copper, bronze and brass), a programme of qualitative analyses was carried out in the British Museum Laboratory. It has been possible to analyse several hundred coins in this way, using X-ray fluorescence spectroscopy; the major limitation of this survey is that the analyses were made on unprepared samples. There was no attempt to remove patina or corrosion. As a result, the analyses cannot be accurate reflections of the composition of the coins, though they are sufficient to allow the general category of alloy to be established. Where no analysis has been per­ formed, the description ‘AE’ has been retained. Otherwise the nature of the metal has been indicated for each cata­ logue entry, and, although it has been indicated in the catalogue which coins have been analysed, no percentages of the different constituents have been given, since these would be misleading and very open to misinterpretation.

    C H A P T E R



    AND M A G I S T R A T E S

    In the Hellenistic world, coinage seems to have been regarded as a royal prerogative. The evidence for this comes from the pseudo-Aristotelian Oeconomica, which includes decisions about the coinage among the responsibilities pro­ per to a king, as compared with those of a provincial gov­ ernor, a city or an individual (1345020). The implication of this passage is sometimes played down,1 but the notion that power over coinage, as over any matter, should be vested in the highest authority in a state seems unexceptional. Moreover, the letter sent by the Syrian king Antiochus V II (138-129 b c ) to his subject the Jewish prince Simon Mac­ cabees records an instance of a grant of coinage was made by one such king (I Maccabees 15.6: και έπέτρεψά σοι ποιήσαι κόμμα ί'διον νόμισμα τμ χώρα σου). After the breakdown of some of the Hellenistic kingdoms in the second and first centuries bc, authority over coinage seems to have reverted to the individual cities to which autonomy was granted; such cities sometimes produced their own coinage soon afterwards, as, for instance, at Seleucia in Syria. In the Roman Republic, the highest authority was the people, and one might infer that the right to produce coinage was conferred by the people on the tresviri monetales by virtue of their popular election (or, if they were appoin­ ted, by virtue of the authority of those who appointed them, itself derived from the people); similarly, changes to or reforms of the coinage were introduced by laws passed in the popular assembly. The actual control of the finances of the state, and hence the production of coinage, however, lay with the Senate. We have no information at all about the control of coinage in the provinces in the Republic, though it is a reasonable supposition that any decisions could be made by the Roman proconsul. This is not to say that he would be directly responsible for the production of the many hun­ dreds of small civic issues made throughout the Empire in this period, though one might perhaps point to the appearance of a proconsul’s name on the tiny bronze coinage of Atarneus (?),2 or its regular occurrence on the late Republican bronze coinage of the cities of Bithynia.3 The appearance of the proconsul’s name on the early reformed silver coinage of Syria (4124) is a sign that it was under his control, and the same might be concluded from the similar appearance of the proconsuls’ names on the cistophori of Asia.4 Similarly there would seem to be no i· T . R. M a rtin , Sovereignty and Coinage in Classical Greece, pp. 266-70 (stressin g the P ersian asp ect o f th e passage). 2. H . von F ritze, D ie A ntiken M ü n ze n M ysiens, p. 113 no. 350. 3 - P. K in n s in C R W L R , p. i n . 4- · K in n s, op. cit., p p . 109, h i .

    doubt that a proconsul could interfere in the production of any local issue, if he so wished; but, with coinage, as in so many other aspects of local administration, the Romans preferred to allow pre-existing systems to continue unless there was some specific reason for change. There are a few examples of such intervention,5 though these are, indeed, few and far between. During the long period of civil wars at the end of the Republic, the leader of virtually every faction produced coinage, and these may perhaps have been ‘simply illegal’,6 though, for all we know, the establishment of the Second Triumvirate may have conferred some legitimacy on the coin issues of the Triumvirs. With the establishment of the Empire by Augustus, however, authority came rapidly to reside in the person of the emperor,7 though not necessarily immediately. For instance, the view has been expressed that in 27 b c Augustus ‘handed b ack __the right of coinage, the mark of a sovereign, usurped in 43 ... The resumption of right of coinage in 19 formed part of constitutional settle­ ment of that year.’8 If this view is correct (and it is, of course, only inference) then the much debated letters SC, which appear on the reformed coinage of Rome c. 23/2 b c , would presumably have to refer to a theoretical right of the Senate over the coinage at this time. This is not the place to enter into the controversy of the meaning of these letters, whatever their exact sense,9 but in any case there is little doubt that power over the coinage was ultimately the emperor’s: whether by imperium or auctoritas is a sterile distinction. What was the situation in the provinces? Of course it is true that the emperor ‘could do what he liked in the prov­ inces he controlled’;10 this was as true in Maecenas’s time as it was in Dio’s (Dio 52.30.9), and the way the larger silver and bronze coinage were controlled (see pp. 6ff., 13fr.) illustrates the use of this power. There were different mechanisms of exercising such control. Augustus might give a directive or diorthoma to the Thessalians in the ‘senatorial’ province of Achaea to change to Roman units of reckoning (see p. 28); on the other hand, the reform of the bronze coinage of Antioch, in an ‘imperial’ province, can be interpreted as being carried out through the administrative means of a senatorial decree;11 the SC itself may have been 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11.

    C R W L R , p . iv. Μ . H . C raw fo rd , R R C , p. 604. E.g.j A. B u rn ett, Coinage in the Rom an W orld , p p . 17-18. Μ . H . C raw fo rd , C M R R , p. 257. See m o st recen tly A. W a llac e-H ad rill, J R S 1986, p p . 81-2. Μ . H . C raw fo rd , C M R R ., p. 261. Cf. W allace-H ad rill, op. cit., p. 81. O n e can en v isag e, p e rh a p s , th a t th e a c tu al reform w as ca rried th ro u g h by one o r m ore S C ’s; B u rn ett, op. cit., p . 19.



    initiated by the provincial legate who actually seems to have carried out the reform. These varying methods, used indiscriminately in both ‘senatorial’ and ‘imperial’ prov­ inces should not, nowadays, occasion any surprise. Different forms of immediate authority occur also on the civic coinages, which from time to time refer to various persons or bodies, permissions or requests. Three different levels of authority are implied by these. i . At the highest level we sometimes encounter the auth­ ority of the provincial governor or emperor himself. It is well known that a number of coins from Spain, Africa and Syria (and, under Domitian, Achaea: see p. 18) record that they were made permissu, the same word whose Greek equivalent (έπέτρεψα) is used by Antiochus V II in the Book of Maccabees. The permission might be that of Augustus, or perhaps of Tiberius (if it is correct to interpret the change from PERM DIVI AVG to PERM AVG at Romula and Italica in this way), the emperor’s provincial legate in an imperial province or the proconsul in a senatorial province (brackets denote alternative readings). See table below. It has been pointed out by B. Levy that the examples of permission being given by governors are not earlier than the late Augustan/early Tiberian period, and that there may therefore be a shift from the emperor to the governor as the authority for coinage.1213 Alternatively we might conclude that different possibilities existed. Permission might be sought from either emperor or (as his representative) the governor; such permission might apparently be long-lasting (as implied by the phrase PERM DIVI AVG) or only short term, as is implied not only by the naming of different proconsuls at Paterna, but also by their iteration. Such permissions, of course, had to be asked for. The only literary account of an embassy from a city to the Lusitania PER(M ISSV ) CAES(ARIS) AV G(VSTI) PER(M ISSV ) (IM P) CAES(ARIS) AV G(VSTI) PER(M ISSV) AVG(VSTI) Baetica PER(M ) (CAE)(S) AVG PER(M ) CAE(S) A V G PER(M ISSV ) CAE(SARIS) AVG(VSTI) PERM D IV I AVG PER(M ) AVG Africa PERM ISSV L A PRO N I PRO COS III PERM ISSV Q IV N BLAESI PRO CO S IT PER(M IS) P (CO RN ELI) DOLABELLAE PROCOS PERM L VO LV SI PRO COS P A V IBI H A B ITI PROCOS Syria12 PERM ISSV SILANI PERM SIL 12. P A V G a t B erytus 4542 does n ot, how ever, s ta n d for P erm issu A ugusti; see co m m entary. 13. B. E. Levy in M élanges Bastien, ed. H . H u v elin , M . C h risto l a n d G . G a u tie r, p. 54, follow ing T . M o m m sen , Histoire de la M onnaie Rom aine , tra n s. D u c de B lacas, V ol. I I I , p. 339. 14. L u c ian , Alexander 58: τ ο α ϋ τή σ α ι π α ρ ά το υ α ΐιτ ο κ ρ ά τ ο ρ ο ς . . . ν ό μ ισ μ α κ α ιν ό ν κ ό ψ α ι.

    emperor asking for coinage permission uses the verb αιτέω,14 and L. Robert has argued that the occasional appearance of the word αιτησάμενος on the civic coinage denoted that such an embassy had taken place.15 The formula occurs once during the Julio-Claudian period (Ancyra, 3111—13), where it is coupled with the name of the proconsul of Asia in the dative: ΑΙΤΗΣΑΜΕΝΟΥ TI ΒΑΣΣΙΛΑΟΥ ΕΦ OYΟΛΑΣΣΕΝΑ ΑΝΘΥΠΑΤΟ. Though Robert thought the proconsul’s name appeared only as a dating formula, it seems more likely that its appearance implies that permission was sought from and granted by him (so Levy). We should not, however, assume that all occurrences of a proconsul’s name refer to such an embassy, though Grant suggested that any Roman name with the formula ΕΠΙ implied such permission.16 An eponymous usage, however, is sometimes as likely. At Smyrna in the first century the names of either a proconsul or a stephanephoros appear in the genitive with ΕΠΙ, in addition to that of the strategos in the nominative. It seems that this indicates that the stephanephoroi appear as eponyms and that the instances where a proconsul’s name appears instead of that of a stephanephoros imply that they too are merely used as dating formulae. It is sometimes thought that the recording of imperial or governors’ permission is merely a form of imperial or gubernatorial flattery and irrelevant to the realities of the production of coinage.17 ‘It would have been theoretically possible for Rome to insist on authorising the production of coinage in areas under her direct control, though there is no evidence that she did so systematically.’18 But there is no evidence to suppose that the examples listed above were untypical, and one can defend the view that permission was regularly required by reference to the relatively minor mat­ ters with which the emperor or provincial governors might

    Ebora 50-1 (city of L atin right) Em erita 5-8, 10-19 (colony) Emerita 28, 34-6, 38-9, 45-6 Italica 60-3 (municipium) T raducta 98-100, 107—10 (colony) Patricia 127—31 (colony) Italica 64—5 Romula 73—4 (colony) Italica 66-72 Romula 75-6 Paterna Paterna Paterna Cercina T haena

    762-4 (colony) 765—7 768-70 802 (free city) 810 (free city)

    Berytus 4541 (colony)

    Berytus 4544 15. Hellenica 11-12, p p . 53-6 2 , M onnaies Grecques, p p . 5 3 -4 , B. E. Levy, loc. cit. 16. F I T A , p p . 396-400. 17. M . C raw fo rd in L a M onetazione di bronzo di Poseidonia-Paestum. Supplemento al vol. 18-IQ desii A I I N (1 9 7 3 ), p . 33 n o te 34.

    18. M .H . C raw fo rd , C M R R , p. 268.

    A uthority an d m agistrates

    concern themselves.19 Moreover, too sharp a distinction between flattery and the need for permission would seem implausible in the nexus of vague relationships which existed between emperor and city. The fact that some cities at least sought - and advertised - it indicates the desir­ ability of doing so, and this in itself would have tended to make it a requirement equally for all cities. In our view, therefore, permission was a requirement, and we argue below (Chapter 2, pp. 18-19) that it may perhaps have played a role in the cessation of western civic coinage. 2. At the second level, coinage had to be authorised by the ruling body of the city; for instance, the coinage of Paestum declares itself to be SC, authorised by the senate of Paestum, while a number of colonial issues are authorised EX D D or ex decreto decurionum (e.g. ‘Paterna’, Tingi, Cnossus, Dyme, Apamea). The putting of a motion for coinage to the council of Mylasa is presumably the point of the word ψηφισάμενος.20 Similarly, with federal coinages, the coinage would presumably need the approval of the koinon, whether that of Macedonia, Lycia or Crete. 3. At the third level, we sometimes find the mention of an individual on the coins, especially in the province of Asia (see index 5). Most commonly one finds a simple name or a name + patronymic. Sometimes one finds a double or even triple name in the Roman style.21 Sometimes, in the case of Romanised names we find the name + filiation, or with some honorific title such as ‘son of the city’ (Aphrodisias), philopatris (e.g. Dionysopolis, Prymnessus; though Philopatris might sometimes be a name) or euergetes (Laodicea). The names are generally either in the nominative case, or in the form ΕΠΙ + the name in the genitive. This latter is often regarded as an indication that the individual in ques­ tion was sometimes the senior eponymous magistrate of a city. Sometimes this is indeed so; for instance Ti Damas at Miletus (2712) is known from an inscription to have been the eponymous archiprytanis; similarly at Smyrna the coins generally bear two names, that of the eponymous stephanephoros in the form ΕΠΙ + genitive (just used for dating purposes), but the name of the strategos (the man actually responsible for the coin) appears in the nomina­ tive.22 But this cannot always be the case, as the coinage of Cotiaeum demonstrates; there we find no fewer than three magistrates with ΕΠΙ on coins of Galba (3222-7)! Moreover, one of them is specifically described as agonothete for life (3722). The interpretation of the appearance of these names is not usually clear in any given specific case. There are three main possibilities: they may simply be dating formulae (eponymous magistrates at Smyrna or the grammateus at Mylasa 2793), they may be the names of some magistrate (whether ordinary or special for the coinage) responsible for the coinage or they may be the name of a magistrate or private citizen who paid for the coin issue to be made. 19. E .g ., F. M illar, The Em peror in the Rom an W orld , ch a p te rs V I .5 a n d V I I .7, especially p p . 325-6 a n d 4 2 7-8, on financial affairs. 20. L. R o b ert, M onnaies Grecques, p. 54; C .J . H ow gego, G IC , p. 87. 21. See R . M erk elb ach , Z P E 22, 1976, pp. 200-2; for exam ples, see A ezani o r A egeae. 22. D . A. O . K lose, D ie M ünzprägung von Smyrna in der römischen K aiserzeit, p p . 64fr.


    These categories, of course, overlap. For example, the hold­ ing of the city’s eponymous magistracy might well be com­ patible with responsibility for the coinage, as may well have been the case with Damas at Miletus; or a magistrate responsible for the coinage might also pay for it (see below). When we look at the titles which appear during the JulioClaudian period a rather confusing variety of titles appear with the names (see index 5.2). The most common are the grammateus and the strategos; one also finds agonothete, archon, epimelete, episkopos, ephor, gymnasiarch, nomothete, prytanis, stephanephoros, synarchia and tamias. Sometimes more than one title appears at a single city; at Pergamum, for instance, we find a grammateus (2358), a gymnasiarch (2360), another grammateus (2362) and a high-priest (2366). At Laodicea, we find a priest (2912), a nomothete (2919) and a man simply described as a benefactor (2920). Such a variety of titles and the occur­ rence of religious offices (high-priest, priest, in one case specifically of Germanicus, or priestess) raise the possibility that, in some cases, the name is that of someone who was specifically appointed to produce coinage, on an ad hoc basis: such a person may or may not also have been the holder of a civil or religious office. This is, for example, the implication of the inscription from Magnesia listing the various duties undertaken by one Moschion, including the position he had held κατασταθεις δε καί επί τής χαράξεως του λεπτού χαλκού.23 The same procedure seems to have been adopted for the late Hellenistic bronze coinage of Sestos.24 On other occasions, a simple name might conceal the fact that its holder was a magistrate. The later Apollodotus of Hyrgaleis, who is known from an inscription κάψας καί [νομ]ίσματ[α], signs his coins with his magistracy, στρατη­ γό ς).25 In the period covered by this catalogue, we would not have known, for instance, that Damas was the archi­ prytanis of Miletus. On some occasions we find several names associated. Sometimes one finds two names on the same coin linked by καί (e.g. Amorium 3235, 3237, Aezani 3085; all with ΕΠΙ), and sometimes several names on different coins but linked together in some other way. The best example comes from Hierapolis (2929-42), where we find seven names on coins minted both for Augustus and the proconsul Fabius Max­ imus. The presence of the proconsul shows that all these coins were struck in a short time; in addition, they share very few obverse dies. Here we clearly have a board of some kind, and we find the same at Hierapolis for Tiberius and Nero. But what sort of board? There is some reason to think that Hierapolis had more than one grammateus·, this might explain why one man under Augustus signs his name with the title grammateus tou demou (2940), perhaps the president of a board of grammateis, all responsible for coinage at Hierapolis (though one calls himself an archon: 2955). Other such boards can be found at Hypaepa and Philadel­ phia. In the case of Philadelphia, the variety of description applied to the individuals (priest of Germanicus, Olympic 23. O . K e rn , I. M agnesia no. 164, L. R o b ert, M onnaies Grecques, p p . 103—4, su g g estin g a possible d a te i n th e first o r second ce n tu ry a d . 24. O G IS 339, lines 44-9 . 25. H ow gego, G IC , p. 87.



    victor, grammateus, or simply philopatris and philokaisar) make one think that such a board might be an ad hoc coinage board of a number of prominent individuals. Even at Hierapolis, however, there were other possibilities; at the end of Claudius’s reign, an extensive issue was struck just by the grammateus M Suillius Antiochus, without any colleagues. Sometimes an issue was made by a husband and wife, with the man signing the coins for the emperor and his wife those for the empress. An example occurs at Acmonea, where the senator L. Servenius Capito signs, sometimes as archon, for Nero and his wife Julia Severa for Agrippina and then Poppaea. In addition to magistracies and priesthoods, honorific titles are also found, especially of benefactors (euergetes, sotira, huios poleos philopatris). The person named may just be a benefactor of the city, but the presence of the title on the coins raises the possibility that part, at least, of the benefac­ tion may have consisted of paying for the issue of coinage. The best example of this comes from Republican Paestum (see p. 16), but one would also expect examples from the cities of the east, which depended heavily on the liturgical system, and it is usually thought that such benefaction lies behind the formula άνέθηκε.26 This occurs frequently in the later imperial period, but there is also an example from the Julio-Claudian period (Mylasa 2792). One also suspects that this is so in cases when a coinage was signed by only one person, but over a considerable period of time. Such benefaction might be undertaken in a donor’s capacity as a civic magistrate (e.g., Servenius at Acmonea, who signs as archon) or as a private individual (e.g., a woman at Paestum, p. 16 or, at a guess, Iulius Demetrius at Metropolis 2524-6). Thus the names which appear on the coins of Greek communities are those of a variety of magistrates, and non­ magistrates, and their presence on the coins can result from different reasons. The name might simply be used as a dating formula, or it might be that of the magistrate respon­ sible for the coinage, or of the person paying for its production. The picture at chartered communities is, however, dif­ ferent. Very occasionally at Roman colonies, ‘foundation issues’ bear the names of those responsible for the colony’s foundation, such as the proconsul Q Hortensius at Dium/ Cassandrea (1509-11) or M Turius, the legate (of Asia?) at the short-lived colony at Lampsacus (2268-73). Otherwise, the officials are normally those of the principal annual magistrates of the community, the duoviri and particularly the duoviri quinquennales (Carthago Nova, Ilici, Corinth, Dyme, Buthrotum, Dium, Pella). Others do also appear, such as quaestors (?) at Emporiae (236-7, etc.) or aediles. In Spain, the larger denomination is sometimes signed by the duoviri and the smaller one by the more junior aediles (e.g., Clunia 453, 455, 458), but the situation is sometimes more complicated, as at Saguntum, where it seems that the aediles made most of the semisses to complete an issue of asses and a few semisses of Ilviri (201-4). Similarly, at Parium the coins are signed either by Illlv iri or aediles 26.

    E .g ., H ow gego, GIC,



    (2253-9). Even at Paestum there is no sign, in imperial times, of the wide variety of people who signed the Republi­ can coinage of Paestum; under Tiberius the coinage is con­ fined to Ilviri. Not infrequently, local magistracies, particularly the col­ onial duovirate, were honorifically held by members of the imperial family or kings: Augustus: Agrippa: Tiberius:

    Carthago Nova 162-3 Carthago Nova 164 Carthago Nova 166, Paestum 610—1 r, Cnossus

    Drusus Minor: Germanicus: Nero Caesar:


    Carteia 123 Carteia 123, Caesaraugusta 325—9 Carthago Nova 179-81, Caesaraugusta 343, Utica 731-2 Carthago Nova 179-81, Caesaraugusta 343, Utica 733-4 Carthago Nova 182—4, Caesaraugusta 362-4

    J u b a II: Ptolemy:

    Carthago Nova 169 Carthago Nova 172

    Drusus (a d 7-33):

    Usually, in such cases, the name of the praefectus who acted on their behalf also appears on the coins. The discussion of authority has concentrated on the civic issues, but there were, of course, other ‘categories’ of coinage. Coins were also issued by koina and by so-called ‘client-kings’; the coinage of the latter, though nominally independent of Rome, might nevertheless be manipulated by the Romans (the silver coinage of Polemo II of Pontus, the bronze coinage of Antiochus IV of Commagene). Other, superficially civic coinages (e.g., Nemausus or the Cretan cities under Tiberius and Caligula), were manipulated in a similar way. In this way coinages of all ‘categories’ might be used by the Romans, in addition to the ones they specifi­ cally established to play a more important role in the Empire. The most important such coinages, as well as those from Rome and Lugdunum, were from Gaul (Nemausus: 523—6), Asia (the cistophori and the CA coinage: 2201—35), Cappadocia (3620-19, and also the Pontic silver of Polemo: 3813-38), Commagene (under Tiberius, 3868-70), Syria (the tetradrachms of Antioch and the SC coinage: 4124323) and Alexandria (5001-378). There were also other examples, on a lesser scale: the coinages of northwestern Spain (1-4) and of Carisius from Emerita (RIC 11-25), the coinage of Cyrenaica (939-49), Cyprus (3901-23) and most of that from Crete (1022-39). These seem to have been controlled by the Romans, and, though some of them are superficially civic or regal issues, most of them lack any form of overt authority or ethnic. This raises the question of the status of coins with no ethnic, which, since Grant, FIT A, have generally been regarded as ‘official’ issues. This seems, however, simplistic. Many of the regional coinages are, no doubt, ‘official’ in the sense that they were actually controlled by the Roman authorities. But there are several cases where coins without an ethnic are simply civic issues without an ethnic. Sometimes these may have the name of one of the city’s magistrates, but not necessarily. Civic coinage might cover the whole spectrum from coins with both ethnic and magistrate, through coins with either eth­ nic and no magistrate (common) or magistrate and no eth­ nic (rare) to coins with neither (also rare). Examples of

    A uth o rity an d m agistrates

    coins with magistrate but no ethnic can be found at Car­ thago Nova, Pergamum, Eumenea or Apamea in Asia; examples of civic coins with neither ethnic nor magistrate can be found at Hadrumetum, Cnossus or Pergamum. But while coins without an ethnic may be ‘Roman’ or civic, there are undoubtedly a number of cases where the status of the coins is hard to decide. Examples are the Latin coinages of Perinthus (1758-62), the ‘colonists’ type of Philippi (?) (1656-60), or the issue, probably made at Sardis celebrating the ΚΟΙΝΟΝ ΑΣΙΑΣ (2994-5). Other cases have been suggested, e.g., in Achaea under Nero and Bithynia under Claudius and Nero, but in these cases we feel that the balance of probability is that they are civic


    coins rather than federal or Roman issues (1371-7; 2031 and 2065-9; 2060-1 and 2084). Even when there is an ethnic, the status of coinages is not immediately obvious. The Cretan coinages of the cities (950-9, 1022-8) are presumably the constituent parts of an issue by the Cretan koinon, but are 3136-7 coins of Apamea or the Phrygian koinon? Difficulties of interpretation such as these serve to highlight the variety of authorities who produced coinage. While it is clear that coin issues were essentially either Roman, federal or civic, these categories embrace different sorts of coinage and not infrequently overlap. The attempt to make too rigid a distinction between them is futile.





    P T E R



    Gold During the late Republican period very little gold had been minted in the Roman world, though there were some, rather insubstantial, issues of gold from Ephesus (see p. 431). At Rome gold coinage had been introduced by Caesar on a regular basis in 46 b c . With the usurpation of minting by the various warring factions which took place after Caesar’s death, the minting of gold, together with that of denarii, spread throughout the Mediterranean. Issues were made in northern Italy, Greece, Asia Minor and perhaps even in Syria (RRC 549). With the victory of Augustus, the produc­ tion of gold was confined to his issues, minted first at his two uncertain (traditionally called ‘Spanish’) mints and later from about 15 b c at Lyon; Lyon remained the only mint for imperial gold until its activities were transferred to Rome, probably in either 64 or 6g.1 No other gold coinage was made within the Empire. There are some very rare gold pieces for Nero, apparently from Caesarea, but these are forgeries (see p. 557). Otherwise, gold coins were made in Thrace or Scythia (Olbia?) for the dynast Koson (1701), perhaps in c. 29 b c ; gold was also minted by all the Bosporan kings (1842—63), and in the Bosporan cities of Chersonesus (1937-8) and Olbia (though not in the Julio-Claudian period). Surviving specimens suggest that Bosporan gold coinage was never on a very large scale. There appears to have been no integrated circulation of Roman and Bosporan gold, nor indeed would one have expected it, as, although Bosporan coinage was clearly heavily influenced by Roman, it did, nevertheless, form a separate monetary system. This can be seen from its curious bimetallic currency of gold and bronze, from the value marks which appear on the bronzes (see p. 32) and from the fact that, although the early Bosporan gold coins were produced at much the same standard as Roman aurei, they soon drifted apart. Some small amounts of gold were also struck in the kingdom of Mauretania under Juba and Ptolemaeus on different occasions during their reigns at an uncertain standard.2

    Silver The general pattern in the Julio-Claudian period is the gradual replacement of both local civic and local Roman 1. F o r th e m o st rece n t discussion o f the d a te a t w hich th e m in t o f Lyon m oved to R o m e, see J .-B . G ia rd , B N C I I, p p . 4 -6 . 2. Five coins know n: M az. 297—8, 398-9 a n d L 1919—7 -1 4 -1 3 : 3.16, 6.60, 4.10, 3.18 a n d 3 - iig .


    silver by the denarius, whose growth in circulation was the legacy of the civil wars of the late Republic. Denarii con­ stituted the only silver currency in several areas; in Italy, Sicily, Africa, Achaea and perhaps Cyrenaica. In other areas, the denarius was far and away the dominant cur­ rency; in Spain, there was a residue of Iberian denarii until the reign of Augustus (see p. 9); in the western part of the province of Macedonia (Illyria), the denarius was sup­ plemented by the silver of Dyrrhachium and Apollonia; in Britain, the denarius was accompanied, in Norfolk and south of the Thames, by surviving local British issues;3 and in Gaul, Gallic silver continued to play an important role in circulation, if not production, until the reign of Augustus.4 But while the denarius therefore dominated the silver cur­ rency of the Roman world as far west as Greece and Cyrenaica, its role further east was much more restricted or, in some places, non-existent. In these parts of the east, local silver coinages predominated. These local coinages com­ prised not so much the civic issues which had typified the Hellenistic period (though some of these did survive until the imperial period, especially in southwestern Asia Minor), but rather a few regal coinages which had previously been taken over by the Romans in the wake of their conquests and annexations. The main such local coinages during this period were the cistophori of Asia Minor, the drachms and didrachms of Caesarea in Cap­ padocia, and the tetradrachms of Antioch and of Alexan­ dria; in addition extensive silver coinages were made in the ‘client-kingdoms’ of Mauretania (Juba II and Ptolemaeus) and Pontus (Polemo II). The individual patterns of provincial silver circulation are discussed below in the survey of provincial silver. Here we wish to draw attention to the more general features of provincial silver coinage. Two of these seem important. First, the amount of coinage produced, even at most of the more important provincial mints, was not very great. This conclusion is based mainly on the rather subjective impression of the relative scarcity of most of these provin­ cial coins today. In addition, however, the die counts pro­ vided in this catalogue indicate that, generally speaking, the number of dies was not extensive, although obvious excep­ tions are the cistophori of Antony and Augustus, the Caesarean didrachms of Nero and Divus Claudius, the Antioch tetradrachms of Nero and much of the Alexandrian coinage. It is difficult to compare the figures with those that have been observed for denarii, partly because not many die 3. J . P. C . K e n t, C E N B 1973, p p . 2ff. 4. D . N ash , in ed. R. A . G . C arso n a n d C .M . K ra a y , Scripta N um m aria Romana. E ssays presented to H . Sutherland , p p . 21—2.

    P roduction an d circulation o f coinage

    counts have been made of imperial denarii, but mainly because the use of the same dies for denarii and aurei renders the comparison of die numbers for silver almost impossible. For instance, H.-M. von Kaenel counted 830 obverse dies in a sample of 1182 coins for Claudius, but a glance at his catalogue shows the impossibility of deciding what proportion should be allocated to silver rather than gold.5 C .H .V . Sutherland provided die counts of some Augustan issues, which avoid this interchangeability. For the early IM P CAESAR and CAESAR DIVI F silver issues he found a total of 340 obverse dies in a sample of 488 coins;6 this is a large, though by no means the largest, Augustan issue, but only the few provincial issues men­ tioned above have anything approaching the same general magnitude of dies. A comparison of output cannot be made on the basis of hoards, either, since there are very few hoards which include either provincial silver or both denarii and provin­ cial silver. This is so, partly because the provincial coinage had a highly localised circulation (in Syria and Egypt it comprised virtually the entire silver currency), but also because of the accidents of survival: in Asia, where denarii and local silver coinages do seem to have met, there is no significant body of hoard evidence. In this particular case, it has been suggested that the cistophorus was much more important than the denarius, because in 19-18 b c Augustan denarii minted in Asia were made from only 18+ dies and cistophori from 71 + .7 One cannot, however, press this inference, as it takes no account of denarii minted elsewhere which may have circulated in Asia. The definition of these large areas of circulation should, however, warn us against being too dismissive of the volume of provincial coinage. If provincial silver accounted for all the silver currency of provinces such as Syria and Egypt, and for at least a large percentage of that of Asia, then clearly its bulk cannot have been negligible. Moreover, the die counts for the issues mentioned above are substan­ tial, by any standard and particularly so in the case of Egypt. A second general feature of even these principal provin­ cial silver coinages is that their production was very irregular. Cistophori were produced in 39 b c , in the twen­ ties b c and on two brief occasions under Claudius. The coins of Caesarea were often produced in reasonably large quantities, but, again, only on irregular occasions: in c. a d 25, 33—4, once under Caligula, c. 46, c. 58—60 and c. 64. From Antioch, silver coinage was produced steadily throughout Augustus’s reign (though with a gap between 17 and 5 b c ) , but hardly at all under Tiberius. Issues were made during the first three years of Caligula’s reign, but nothing was produced afterwards till about 50. Under Nero coinage was produced in 54/5 and on a large scale between 60 and 64, and then again between 65 and 69, with issues continuing into the Flavian period. At Alexandria, no silver at all was minted for the fifty years between Octavian’s conquest (30 b c ) and the seventh year of Tiberius’s reign ( a d 20/1). Thereafter, production was resumed in 27/8, and 5. M ünzprägung und M ü n zb ild n is des Claudius, p p . 255-7. 6. R I C I, p. 30. 7. P. K in n s, in C R W L R , p p . 112-13.


    between 31 and 36. There was then again a gap in produc­ tion under Caligula, and under Claudius silver was produ­ ced only between 41 and 45/6; production again stopped until the third year of Nero’s reign (56/7), when it resumed for three years until 59/60; after another gap in 60/1-61/2, silver resumed and was then produced in extremely large quantities until the end of the period covered by this catalogue. It can, of course, be pointed out that this irregular pro­ duction of provincial silver is typical of the production of all imperial silver during this period. The minting of denarii was by no means regular throughout the Julio-Claudian period. It is well known that only small quantities of denarii were made in the reigns of Caligula, Claudius and the beginning of Nero’s reign, down to about a d 64. There were also periods with no coinage: for instance, under Augustus no denarii seem to have been produced between 27 and 19 b c , or between a d 2 and 13.8 Under Tiberius, too, there was not a steady production of PONTIF MAXIM denarii (RIC 26, 28, 39), but a very variable output with a peak in the early thirties.9 Even so, the question still arises of whether there was at any time an Empire-wide policy, which might explain the pattern of issues. Is the absence of any silver from Alexan­ dria under Augustus and Caligula, or the virtual absence of any Antioch tetradrachms under Tiberius and Claudius, the result of some local condition (in any sense) or of some imperial policy, as, for instance, Savio has suggested for Alexandria under Caligula?10 Do the large coinages under Nero from Pontus, Caesarea and Antioch indicate a diver­ sion of resources from north to south, together with the changing area of operations of Corbulo’s campaigns against the Parthians,11 much as the production of Republican cistophori had abruptly ceased at all mints in 67 b c , apparently the result of the enormous powers granted to Pompey in that year?12 Is it right to think that the silver recouped from the recoinage of the Egyptian silver in Nero’s reign was remitted to the treasury in Rome?13 The two considerations which would influence our attitude to these and similar questions are the question of for what purposes silver coinage was made and the sources of the bullion coined in provincial mints. There is no clear evidence on either point. It might be thought that state expenditure can explain to a substantial degree the pattern of denarii, whether on military pay and other expenses, or items like public works.14 Yet there is no obvious causal connection between the need for such expenditure and the pattern of the denarius issues at this time. If there were, one would have expected that a standing army would require regular large issues of coinage; nor is there any obvious correlation with wars or (e.g.) known building program­ mes. Given this, it is clearly unrealistic to expect any more 8 . A ccepting th e d a tin g o f th e G L G A E S A R E S d en a rii, R I C 2 07—12, to betw een 2 bc a n d a d 2. 9. T h is p a tte rn w as d e m o n stra te d for th e gold b y C. H . V . S u th e rla n d , Q T 1987,

    10. 11. 12.

    13. 14.

    p. 222; th e sam e stylistic g ro u p s are th e m o st heav ily re p re se n te d in silver h o ard s, as w e h o p e to show elsew here. A. Savio, L a Coerenza di Caligola nella gestione della moneta. W alk er, M etrology I I I , p p . 112-14. C raw fo rd , C M R R , p. 20 0 , P. K in n s, in C R W L R , p. h i . E. C h ristian sen , The Rom an Coins o f A lexandria, p. 109. F o r a critiq u e o f this view , see C .J . H ow gego, N C 1990, p p . 1-26.



    complete explanation to be forthcoming for provincial silver coinages. We can be confident that some coinages are connected with military expenditure. Good examples seem to be pro­ vided by the Syrian tetradrachms of Cleopatra and Antony (Antony’s Armenian campaign), or the Pontic and Caesarean issues of c. 56—8 and 58—60 (Corbulo’s first campaigns). We might similarly suppose a connection between the late Neronian silver coinages (from Antioch, and the Latin series, 4122-3) and the Jewish revolt or the civil war of 68—9. Other instances are less clear: for instance, were Augustan cistophori really minted as preparations for Tiberius’s Armenian campaign which took place only some five years later?15 Despite such doubts it does, nevertheless, seem plausible to think that some, at least, of the output of provincial silver was used for military purposes. This would, moreover, certainly seem to be likely for any of the silver issues made during the period of the civil wars of the late Republic (e.g., in Africa, Lycia, Galatia or Syria). Military expenditure, however, cannot have been the only rationale of provincial silver. There are, on the one hand, campaigns which ‘lack’ a coinage (e.g., Corbulo’s campaign in Cappadocia in 62). Conversely, there are instances where a silver coinage cannot be explained by military events, the entire Cretan silver coinage or the cistophori of Claudius being examples. Moreover, the exclusive use of Egyptian silver in Egypt and Syrian silver in Syria implies that some of these coinages at least must have been made to enable the local needs of the relevant province to be satisfied. We know that merchants and others in Ptolemaic Egypt could exchange their foreign pre­ cious metal currency for the local Egyptian by taking it to the mint for re-coining;16 even if this system did not survive in all its details into imperial times, there would still have been a need for a ready stock of local silver to supply the needs of money-changers exchanging ‘foreign’ for ‘local’ currency. Again, it is hard to quantify the proportion of local silver which can be explained by this consideration. One might think that the fifty-year gap in Egyptian silver production implies that its role as an explanation for the minting of new silver was fairly insubstantial, since for this long period exclusively old coin must have been used. Another explanation for some of the provincial issues is that they were produced as part of a coinage reform. This is clear in the case of Alexandria under Nero (see p. 689), and a similar explanation seems likely to apply to the Antioch tetradrachms of Nero (p. 610). In both cases it seems that earlier coins (Ptolemaic and Tiberian tetradrachms from Egypt, earlier Antioch tetradrachms and perhaps Tyrian shekels) were removed from circulation and the bullion recovered in this way was then at least partially re-minted, presumably to give in exchange for the coins which were removed. There may well be other cases. A number of Zeus tetradrachms of Claudius (4112-21) were struck over post­ humous Philip tetradrachms. Again, the abundant Republican and proconsular cistophori did not survive past the reign of Augustus: is the explanation for the very large 15. C .J . H ow gego, N C 1982, p p . 11-12. 16. A. H u n t a n d C . E d g a r, Select Papyri I I , 409.

    Augustan (or the Antonian) cistophori that they represent earlier issues that had been re-coined? It is difficult to know how far to extend this line of thinking, but it seems likely that such re-coinages may well be a very important explanation of provincial coinages: it is noticeable that the cases just discussed are mostly the very instances men­ tioned earlier of exceptionally large provincial coinages. Thus a variety of reasons can help explain the larger provincial silver issues, though it is difficult to know how much weight to attach to each (or indeed others). All of them, however, reside in the field of state finances: the means for making state payments or for financing localised coinage systems or reforms, the function of both of which was to raise money for the state. And it seems likely that there was at least some degree of co-ordination between them. This seems clear from the probable re-coinages at Alexandria and Antioch under Nero. It cannot, obviously, be coincidence that these take place contemporaneously and in the general context of the Neronian coinage reforms (see also p. 52): similarly, it is hard to avoid the conclusion that the sudden cessation of Egyptian coinage in 30 b c and its suspension for fifty years should be explained by the diversion of Egyptian wealth to Rome, just as it has been argued, plausibly, by Christiansen that the ‘surplus’ silver from the Neronian re-coinage at Alexandria was sent to Rome. On the other hand, this relationship between dif­ ferent coinages or between them and Rome should not be over-emphasised. The pattern of provincial minting is very variable. Sometimes, all mints produce coin (e.g., late in the reign of Tiberius, when large issues were made at Caesarea and Alexandria, as well as of denarii). Sometimes, some mints only are active (e.g., under Claudius: very few denarii, Alexandrian silver at the beginning of the reign, cistophori at the beginning and the end, a small amount of Syrian silver at the end of the reign). Sometimes, nearly all the mints were inactive, as during most of Caligula’s reign. As well as this variable pattern of mint activity, one can observe that there is no sign in the Julio-Claudian period of the co-operation between silver mints which becomes a feature of the Flavian and particularly the Trajanic period. Furthermore, the cases where co-ordination seems likely are untypical: an explanation for Pontic and Caesarean silver as financing Corbulo’s campaigns is a unique instance, while the similar pattern of re-coinage at Alexandria and Antioch are by definition exceptional, both the conse­ quences of a single policy decision. The picture that seems most likely to us, then, is that there was no grand overall or continuing strategy for even the larger provincial coinages, though some such co-ordination could arise on an ad hoc basis. More generally it seems likely that it was the local requirements of the Roman administration which dictated the normal pattern of issue. But, while the larger provincial silver coinages can be interpreted in terms of state finances in these ways, some of the other smaller provincial silver coinages are to be explained in terms of civic or even personal finances. The best case from this period concerns the small issue of silver made at Chios with the inscription ΔΩΡΟΝ ΒΑΣΙΛΕΩΣ ANTIOXOY (2415-16). This small issue has been plausibly associated with the gift of fifteen talents made to Chios by

    Production an d circulation o f coinage

    Antiochus IV of Commagene on his honorific election to a magistracy there.17 These coins were presumably minted from the money or bullion received from Antiochus, though the tiny number of surviving specimens makes it unlikely that more than a fraction was minted or re-minted in this way. As for the purpose to which these coins were put, it is impossible to say, but it is tempting to believe that perhaps they were distributed to the Chiots, as we know could hap­ pen with bronze coinage (see below). This case perhaps lies at one end of the spectrum of possible explanations for the minting of provincial silver, at the opposite end from the big issues previously discussed. Other issues may naturally fall between these two extremes; though we have no specific evidence, one is tempted to look for explanations of the other issues in terms of local conditions, be they provincial (Crete?) or civic (the few city coinages in Asia or in Syria). Thus the silver coinage of the Empire gives a very varied picture of production and indeed circulation, with patterns varying from the exclusive use of denarii (Italy, Sicily), through a greater or lesser mixture of denarii and local coinages (Spain, Asia) to the use of only locally produced silver (Egypt, perhaps also Syria?).

    Summary of silver issues Spain This catalogue does not include any silver coinage made in Spain during this period. Iberian denarii continued to circulate until the reign of Augustus,18 and an issue of Iberian denarii had been made by Domitius Calvisius in Osca in 39 bc19; other issues of denarii were made in the civil wars by the Pompeians20 and the Caesarians.21 Under Augustus, denarii were minted by Carisius at Emerita in the twenties bc,22 and it has been suggested that the principal Augustan mints of 19—16 bc were also in Spain, though this is far from certain. In the civil wars of a d 68-9 extensive series of denarii were made in Spain.23


    of Augustus’s ‘Spanish’ coinages of 19-16 b c , 2 6 and Lugdunum was the principal gold and silver mint for the whole Empire from 15 b c for most of the Julio-Claudian period. Several issues of silver were made in Gaul in the civil wars, both after the death of Caesar27 and perhaps also during those of a d 68-9.28 Native British coinage has also been omitted, as its pro­ duction seems to have ceased after the Roman invasion of

    Italy and Sicily Only denarii had been used in Italy and Sicily from the time of the Hannibalic War. Though confined to the principal mint at Rome for most of the Republican period, other centres made denarii during the civil wars at its end. In Sicily denarii were made by Allienus and by Sextus Pompey.30

    Africa Denarii were made in Africa during the civil war between Pompey and Caesar;31 later on, an issue of gold and silver was minted by Cornuficius.32 There were also extensive coinages of the Mauretanian kings Juba II (25 b c - a d 23) and Ptolemaeus ( a d 20- 40), not covered here (see p. 214). Denarii were also minted in Africa in the civil wars of a d 68-9.33

    Cyrenaica No silver was minted in Cyrenaica except for the denarii of Scarpus, produced just before and after Actium.34 Although there is no very good evidence, it seems that denarii con­ stituted the principal silver currency.35



    The natively produced and relatively un-Romanised ‘Celtic’ coinages of Gaul are omitted from this catalogue; according to D. Nash, the more Romanised ‘quinarii’ struck after Caesar’s Gallic war were not struck in very significant quantities.24 Significant quantities of Roman silver first entered Gaul only after about 50 bc,25 and came to domi­ nate the silver currency. Gaul may also have been the mint

    The silver currency of Republican Crete consisted of a mix­ ture of issues from Crete, Asia and Athens. Perhaps in c. 40 b c , there was a change to local ‘cistophoric’ standard, and small amounts of silver were minted from the reigns of Tiberius to Nero. At first this, like the bronze coinage, was

    17. L. R o b ert, Etudes Epigraphiques et Philologiques , 193^, pp. i 39 “ 4 r > C .J . H ow gego, G IC , ρ. 86. ι8 . L. V illaro n g a, A m purias 33 ~ 4 > I 9 7 I~ 2> ΡΡ· 3 ° 5 _2°· ΐ 9· R R C 53220. R R C 4 4 6 -7 , 469-705 4 7 7 · 2 ΐ. R R C 468. 22. R I C 1-2523. R I C C ivil W a rs 1-36, G a lb a 1-84, V itellius 1—46; cf. C .H .V . S u th e rla n d , Q T 1984, ρ. 170. 24- Op. cit. (note 4), p. 21; ead., Coinage in the Celtic World , p. 34. 25. M .H . C raw ford, C M R R , p . 331.

    26. R I C 26-4 9 , δ ο - ' δ ί 27- S e e R R C . 28. See R I C C ivil W a rs 37-8 0 , 130-4, G a lb a 85-1 4 1 , V itelliu s 43—65; cf. C .H .V . S u th erlan d , Q T 1984, p. 170. 29. D . N ash , Coinage in the Celtic World, p. 142. 30. F o r I ta lia n m in ts, see R R C , p a ssim ; A llienus: (R R C 4 5 7 : 47BC); S extus P om pey: R R C 55 1 .

    31. R R C 450-62. 32. R R C 509: 42 b c . 33. R I C M a c e r, C ivil W a rs 135—6, G a lb a 31 5 -2 1 ; c f C . H . V . S u th e rla n d , Q T 1984, p. 170. 34. R R C 546, R I C 531- 5 . 35. N C 1944, p. 105, th o u g h see T . V . B u ttrey , in C R W L R , p. 170. A d e n a riu s o f A u g u stu s w as am o n g th e finds a t S a b ra th a : P. M . K en d rick , Excavations at Sabratha 1948-51, ρ . 258.

    Gaul M in t

    C at. no.

    D ate

    D enom ination

    W eight

    Lugdunum Nemausus Cabellio

    5 ! 2- i 3 5:9 527


    0-39 °-97

    0.45 2.22

    14+ 2 12 +


    quinarius obol hemidrachm obol drachm


    Forum Iulii

    44/3 c. 40 r 44/2 t c. 3 °

    D a te

    D enom ination

    W eight



    Sam ple


    O bv. dies

    ? ? I ? p

    Africa M in t

    Ju b a

    C a t. no.


    C. 10 BG C. 45 BC

    denarius quinarius sestertius ? denarius


    4 5 BG

    7 ï 8- i 9

    Lepcis Bogud

    720 847 853-5



    Sam ple





    0.77 2.77





    Obv. dies

    p p p I ?

    Crete M in t

    C at. no.

    D a te

    D enom ination

    W eight


    901-3 926 950-61

    67 BC 43 BC

    4-dr cist 4-dr 3-dr 2-dr 4-dr 3-dr dr 4-dr 3-dr dr dr 4-dr

    13-98 I 1.64 9.22




    Nero (early) (late)




    972-3 974-5

    c- 55 c.


    organised on a federal basis among the cities of Axos, Cydonia, Eleuthernae, Gortyn, Hierapytna, Polyrhenium and Lappa, but later on it was produced from a single centre, presumably Gortyn. There is no good evidence for the circulation of denarii in Crete.

    Achaea The principal coinages of Achaea, the silver tetradrachms of Athens and the coinage of the Thessalian League, seem to have ended soon after 50 b c (see p. 280). Sometime thereafter they disappeared from circulation, and were replaced by denarii, some issues of which, at least, were made in Achaea by Antony (see p. 245). Some Augustan denarii have been attributed to a Peloponnesian (?) mint,36 though this does not seem very likely (see p. 245).


    Sa m p le


    2 2

    7-57 2-45 9-59 7-55

    3 4 8 95




    9-93 7-43


    2.27 2.30 8.46

    7 3 4



    O bv. dies


    p 2 2 4

    4+? 7+? p 10+? 4+? 2 2 7+?

    part of the province of Macedonia, the earlier coinages of Dyrrachium and Apollonia seem to have continued to circulate with denarii into the imperial period.37 One issue of denarii may have been made at Apollonia during the civil wars,38 and at least one other issue was made in western Macedonia:39 perhaps also some of the issues of Brutus and Cassius. In the rest of Macedonia, silver currency was exclusively of denarii.

    Thrace The silver coinage of Thrace was dominated by denarii (see p. 311), though some small issues, possibly also on the denarius standard, were also made at Byzantium.

    Asia Macedonia A silver coinage of denarii, quinarii and sestertii was struck at Apollonia, probably early in the period of this catalogue (pp. 288-9). A large number of names are known on the coins, suggesting a fairly extensive issue. In this western

    The silver currency of Asia had consisted mainly of cistophori, but from the period of the late Republican civil wars their monopoly was ended and denarii were also struck there, on various occasions until 18 b c (p. 368). 37. S. P. N oe, A Bibliography o f Greek Coin H oards , 419, 1112. 38. R R C 4 4 5 /1 -2 : see p. 288.

    P roduction an d circulation o f coinage

    Denarii were also struck in Asia, at Ephesus, by Vespasian.40 In the Republican period there were also issues of civic silver (see p. 369); most of these were small, except for Rhodes and perhaps Aphrodisias (see p. 466), some of which may have continued into the early imperial period, though they are not included in this catalogue (see especi­ ally Rhodes, p. 454). The silver civic issues that can definitely be attributed to the imperial period, and which are included, are all tiny in size. T hrace M in t


    C at. no.

    D a te f C.

    1774 1775


    1 j



    IO BC

    D enom ination 7 7



    7 7

    W eight

    5-83 3.46



    ■ 343


    Sam ple

    Obv. dies



    7 I

    3+ I I


    Asia M in t

    C at. no.

    D a te

    D enom ination

    W eight


    Sam ple

    Obv. dies


    2201-2 2203 2204 2205-12 2213-15 2216-20 2221-2 2223-5 2412-16

    39 BC 28 c. 27 27/6 25/20 19-18 BC C. AD 41 51 ist cent

    cist cist cist cist cist cist cist cist dr didr dr hem idr dr dr hemidr dr hemidr

    11.94 11.92




    171 5°

    Chios Stratonicea

    M ylasa Tabae Rhodes

    2779 2 7 7 5 , 2777

    2776, 2778 2782-5 2868 2869 2744



    •l ist cent

    I f



    ist cent Augustan Augustan Augustan

    ” •99


    80 8





    321 168 61

    ” •93

    11.94 11.27 11.27 2-94

    6.40 3.48 1.38

    89 91 92 85 94

    1-49 3-53

    1.78 2.80

    49 II I


    28 31 ?


    4 4 3 4

    4? 4 3







    28 201

    7 7


    Lycia In addition to the silver of the Lycian League, some denarii of Brutus, which are very similar in style, may also have been made in Lycia (see p. 523). C a t no.

    3301 3302 3303 3 3 °4

    3305 3306 3307-9 3310 33” 3 3 !2 3 3 3 4 -9

    D a te

    48-42 BC 42 ' 3 °s 3 °s 30/27 48/27 r 27/20


    Augustan 43

    c. a d

    40. W . E. M etcalf, in ed. T . H ackens a n d R . W eiller, Proceedings o f the g th International N um ism atic Congress, p p . 321-40.

    D enom ination

    W eight

    hemidr hemidr hemidr hemidr hemidr i /4-dr denarius hemidr 1/4-dr hemidr

    1.80 1.80 1.80 1.80 1.80

    0-75 : -45



    0-75 3-58


    Sam ple

    Obv. dies


    I 10 42 63


    88 59



    85 48 161


    92 24

    64 26 88 62 23 62


    86 45





    Galatia M in t

    Amyntas Deiotarus

    W eight

    C at. no.

    D a te

    D enom ination

    35 01 35 ° 8


    30 BC 37/6 BC

    4-dr dr

    ! 5-70 3-65

    C at. no.

    D a te

    D enom ination

    W eight


    Sam ple

    Ohv. dies

    98 3

    6 I

    Armenia M in t



    5 BC?





    Sam ple

    O bv. dies ?


    Caesarea T here is one early hoard of m ixed C aesarean silver (of Archelaus) an d denarii (p. 550). O therw ise, denarii do not seem to have playec an im p o rtan t role. M in t

    C at. no.

    A rc h e la u s

    3 6 0 I-2 3 6 0 3 -6 3 6 0 7 -8 3620

    T ib e riu s

    C la u d iu s

    3 6 2 1 -3 3624 3 6 2 5 -8

    G e rm a n ic u s


    C a lig u la

    D enom ination

    1 7 -1 5 BC


    AD 3 - 6

    dr h e m id r


    AD 25


    W eight



    1 .8 4 3.61

    3 3 -4


    3 -5 4


    3 -5 8

    d id r

    7 -3 2

    AD 46

    r ? 1

    r 88

    r 3 -6 5

    3 7 /4 1 C.


    d id r

    7 -5 °


    3 -t 4

    86 89 92

    86 86

    O bv. dies











    23 50

    19 24


    I I

    d id r

    7 -3 6


    24-a s

    5 -2 5



    3 6 3 7 -4 2




    3643 3 6 4 4 -6

    12 - a s

    3 .4 8 2 .5 0




    h e m id r

    1 .67




    3 6 3 1 -4 3 6 3 5 -6

    3647 3 6 4 8 -5 0

    5 8 -6 0




    2 12

    d id r

    7 .2 8





    3 -4 7




    h e m id r





    6 .7 2



    Sam ple

    Obv. dies

    3 6 5 2 -3


    d id r

    M int.

    C at. no.

    D a te

    D enom ination

    W eight


    Polemo I Pythodoris Polemo II41

    3801-2 3803-7 3810, 3821, 3828 3811-38





    dr dr didr

    3-43 7-13




    P o n tu s ?

    Sam p le

    2 62

    363° N ero

    D a te



    AD 15

    Syria R om an denarii do not seem to have circulated in Syria or been m ade there (p. 587). T h e principal silver currencies were the tetrad rach m s of A ntioch an d the shekels of Tyre; from a d 60 these were com bined in the new A ntioch ‘eagle’ coinage, a reform w hich m ay have involved some re-m int­ ing of earlier coins (see above and p. 607).41 41. T h e d a ta for th e dies o f Polem o I I a re taken from W alker, M etrology I I I , p. 1 12.


    5+ 16+ 8



    7 7 95

    P roduction an d circulation o f coinage

    M in t

    T a rs u s C le o p a tr a Z eu s

    N e ro A n tio c h

    S e le u c ia A pam ea L a o d ic e a

    S id o n T y re

    C a t . no.

    4004 4005 4009 4108 4109-10 411I 4112— 21 4122-3 4124-6 4127-34 4136-49 4150-60 4161 4162 4163— 8 4169 4170-1 4172-3 4174-5 4176-8 4179 4180— 6 4188-200 4328-9 4377 4381 4382 4383-5 4548-56 4557 - 61 4619-80 4681-706

    D a te

    AD e. AD C.


    5 35

    36 BC

    C- AD 5 T ib e riu s C a lig u la C la u d iu s c. 65 56-2 BC 47-38 BC 3I - I 7 BC 5 BC-AD 14 C. AD 15

    especially 184-7, H . W illers, Rhein. M useum f ü r Philologie 1905, pp. 321-60, especially th e ta b le on p. 328. 51. See th e calcu latio n m a d e by C .J . H ow gego, N C 1989, p. 199.

    milia); one of the other issues, perhaps of the Augustan period, portrays a woman called Mineia M f who is well known from Paestan inscriptions to have been a benefactor of the city.52 The same may have happened with a small silver issue from Chios (see p. 8) and it is generally thought that the formula άνέθηκε on provincial coins often denotes the donation of an issue by the named citizen.53 Other reasons may be deduced, and most of them can be subsumed under the two motives which led Sestos to prod­ uce its own bronze coinage in the late second century b c : prestige and profit.54 It is no accident that the same two motives also appear in the famous Ptolemaic papyrus of 258 b c . 5 5 Prestige as a motive for coinage can naturally be over­ stated, and it would seem wrong to regard provincial coinage as purely commemorative.56 Yet the desire for selfadvertisement would not be unexpected from the cities of the Empire; as a possible motive for the production of some coinages it might well extend to individuals.57 A case in point might be the foundation issues of colonies. Though the identification of colonial issues as ‘foundation issues’ was taken too far by Grant in FITA, there are some plaus­ ible cases. Examples can be found at Philippi, Sinope and Lampsa­ cus. One hesitates to say, however, that the desire for com­ memoration was the sole motive behind such cases, and such a view would make an unreasonable dichotomy between the political and economic role of coins. The invalidity of such a dichotomy has been rightly criticised in another context by A. Wallace-Hadrill,58 but the same criti­ cism is applicable here. Pride and profit can be seen as complementary, rather than exclusive, reasons for civic coinage. The profit would have arisen not from the insistence on using a particular city’s coinage in that city, since, though this was possible,59 finds show that this did not, in fact, happen in the Roman provinces; profit would, rather, have come from the universal need to exchange silver and bronze coins to carry out transactions of all kinds; the commission payable on such exchange was, in effect, a tax which would benefit the city.60 For all we know the money-changers who carried out this work may have been able to buy coinage from the city, just as late Roman money-changers bought bronze from the government.61 In both periods the smooth functioning of the economy, the emendi et vendendi utilitas62 and the desire to raise money for the state were both different and complementary aspects of the same phenomenon. Our conclusion, therefore, is that the motivation for the 52. M . C raw fo rd , in L a M onetazione di bronzo di Poseidonia-Paestum. Supplemento al vol. 1 8 - ig degli A H N (1973), p. 54, id. C M R R , p. 72. 53. G IC , p. 86; see also p. 3. 54. O G IS 339. 55. A . H u n t a n d C. E d g ar, Select P apyri I I , 409. 56. A s, e.g., C . R o d ew ald , M oney in the Age o f Tiberius , p. 80 n o te 27, L. R o b ert, M onnaies Antiques en Troade, p p . 86-8 . 57. M in eia a t P aestu m , Z euxis a t L ao d icea 3895; c f K . H a rl, Civic Coins and Civic Politics in the Greek E a st, p. 32. 58. J R S 1986, p p . 66-73. 59. A s a t fo u rth -ce n tu ry O lb ia: S IG 3 218. 60. C .J . H ow gego, G IC , p p . 9 2 -4 , A. B u rn e tt, Coinage in the Rom an W orld , pp. 102-3. 61. J . P. C . K e n t, in Essays in Rom an Coinage presented to M a ttin g ly, ed. R . A. G . C a rso n a n d C .H .V . S u th erlan d , p. 197; c f C icero ad A tt. 8 .7 .3 ? 62. A n o n ., D e rebus bellicis 1.1.2.

    P roduction an d circulation o f coinage

    striking civic coinages should be sought in the cities them­ selves, and would have included the prestige and profit arising from the provision of small change.63 The conse­ quence was the successful functioning of the monetary system of the Empire.

    The pattern o f issue throughout the Empire It is notoriously difficult to provide any reliable quantifica­ tion of the relative, let alone the absolute, amount of coinage produced in the Empire. The following table aims to provide some such guide, though its obvious deficiencies do not, perhaps, need to be unduly stressed. In this table we list, for each province (or in the case of Asia, conventus) the number of cities producing coinage under each emperor. We also list the total number of coins appearing in the ‘frequency’ index (i.e., the number of coins in each of the core collections listed on p. xiii). ‘Pseudo-autonomous’ coinages have also been included: where difficult to date, they have been spread over the whole period. There are various other omissions, such as small areas of the east, which have been left out to avoid confusing the picture. Gaul has been omitted, in view of the difficulty of collating information about the Celtic issues, produced perhaps down to the reign of Tiberius (or Augustus: see below, p. 19). Syria also has been omitted, as no frequency statistics were kept for the numerous ‘pseudo-autonomous’ coins made in that area. See table below. It is notorious that counting the number of coins in museums in this way can be very misleading.65 Coinages with a lot of variation (e.g., the mention of different magis­ trates) will inevitably be over-represented in museum col­


    Spain64 Italy Sicily Africa (prov.) M auretania Cyrenaica Crete Achaea Corinth rest M acedonia Bithynia Asia (by conventus) Cyzicus Adramyteum Pergamum Smyrna Ephesus Miletus Halicarnassus Alabanda Cibyra Sardis Apamea Synnada Philomelium Total (Asia)

    lections, while more common coinages will be under­ represented (e.g., the SC coinage of Antioch under Claudius). However, because provincial coinages are generally rare, this will be less of a problem, while it emerged from the discussion of ‘frequency’ (pp. 55—7) that these figures are not totally worthless, since it was shown that there does seem to be a very general correlation between the occurrence of such provincial coinages in museums and their original output (as defined by obverse dies used or by their representation in excavations). Moreover, it would be hard to devise any other method of making Empire-wide comparisons, short of producing die counts for every coinage. But even if such die counts would give a sound statistical base (which is unlikely, given the small numbers generally involved), the task is clearly com­ pletely impracticable. The figures in the table can give some indication of the relative output of the different cities and areas, though we should never be tempted to use them for any detailed calculation or argumentation. A final problem with the table is, of course, that it takes no account of different denominations; in addition, as these tended to increase in size during the period, another consequence will be to under-estimate the money represented by the later issues. With these qualifications, the table invites a number of questions. First, is there any overall pattern of issue? There does, indeed, seem to be a general tendency throughout the Empire for coinage to be produced more abundantly and at 63. T h o u g h , if th e face valu e o f th e coinage w as sm all, th e p ro fit w o u ld be co rresp o n d in g ly sm all. 64. N o t in c lu d in g N Y. 65. See p p . 5 5 -7 an d , e.g., A. J o h n sto n , R N 1984, pp. 240 -5 4 , for discussions o f th e m eth o d o lo g ical problem s.

    No. of cities/Trequency’ total Gai- Vit



    29-30/1847 7/100 15/290 5/22 1/76 3/169

    25/1436 1/82 2/43 8/354 1/2 1/26 3/46

    8/187 6/114

    l/l -





    3 /1°3

    1/161 12/337 9/34° 7/92

    I/22I 6/135 5/233 4/22

    1/116 2/54 3/39

    1/83 4/75 6/224 7/1II

    1/352 10/239 1/10 7/69

    l/l I I 3/52 -

    1/43 10/195 3/155 8/339 9/240 4/48 2/124 15/229 4/197 3/48 7/106 4/53

    i/o 5/23 2/80 4/118 8/43 2/23 9/181

    1/10 3/32 3/69 6/124 3/76 3/19 4/69 3/89 4/257

    3 /4 6

    4/29 2/19 2/116 3/24 r /5 4/66 l/l 3/2OI 1/15



    I/I2 6/26 7/64 5/269 7T95 3/49 2/11 11/88 4/147 8/220 4/229 6/80 64/1390

    2/14 l / l 12 1/16 4/142




    5/181 6/80

    4 9 /9 3 3




    Augustus ?



    4/74 i / 17 35/836




    more cities under Augustus than under his successors. Should we, with Crawford,66 conclude from this that ‘local coinage nearly died in the east under Tiberius or Gaius and did die in the west’? Or should we, rather, ask why coinage seems so plentiful in the reign of Augustus, especially in areas like Africa and Macedonia where very little or no coinage had been produced for the previous century. An obvious point to make, of course, is that the reign of Augustus was twice as long as that of Tiberius, and that this would inevitably lead to a picture of less coinage for Tiberius, just as it does dramatically in the case of a short reign like that of Caligula. Moreover, the specific evidence given by Crawford for the decline of eastern coinage is partial (only some cities, only Greece) and inaccurate (Sparta, Patras, Thessalonica). Furthermore, the relative uniformity of the scale of issue under Tiberius, Caligula, Claudius and Nero seems to support the view that Augustus’s reign was exceptional, and that it can be at least partly explained by its enormous length.

    The ending o f city coinage in the west The other principal conclusion shown by the table is, of course, the contrast between the cessation of city coinage in the west and its continuation in the east (for over two cen­ turies until the mid-third century). This question is usually examined in the context of Spanish coinage alone, but it can be seen that the picture in Spain is really only part of a much more general trend. It may be true that we shall probably never know exactly why local coinage ceased in the west, but it is important to try to identify whether the reasons are likely to have been economic or political. First of all, we would stress that the cessation of local coinage is a phenomenon of the western Empire alone; to seek its ending in a context of a general decline of civic coinage throughout the Empire seems, as already discussed, misleading. Secondly, it is clear that city coinages did not stop abruptly, but rather that they gradually dried up over a period of some twenty-five years. This can be seen from the decline in the number of cities producing coinage: Spain Italy Sicily Africa M auretania





    29 or 30

    25 I











    I? 7 r5 5

    i or 2


    When we examine the detailed chronology of the ending of western bronze we find a similar picture. Spanish coinage continued until the issue of Ebusus for Claudius (482). In Gaul, the coinage of Nemausus ceased at the end of Augustus’s reign and that of Lugdunum only just continued for a short period under Tiberius; only one civic issue was made in Gaul under Tiberius (537—8) and this, too, seems to have been the period of the final demise of the production of local Celtic issues. The cessation of Paestan coinage under Tiberius is not easy to date. There are five or six colleges of duoviri: we might guess that the coinage ends c. 25. In Africa, we can date the coinages rather better (see 66. M .H . C raw ford, C M R R , p. 271.

    below, p. 20), and can establish that nothing was produced after 30. In Sicily, only Panormus (and perhaps one uncertain mint) minted after Augustus. There are two issues from Panormus; though not datable, we might again assume that the coinage ceased in about 25. Though the pictures from Spain and Africa might be compatible, in view of the short period in question (ten years from a d 30) and the relative numbers of cities minting (under Augustus, twenty-nine or thirty in Spain, but only fourteen in Africa), it is nevertheless clear that coinage stopped substantially earlier in Sicily and Gaul. This gradual nature of its cessation is sufficient to show that the ending of coinage was not the result of a direct instruction from the Roman authorities. If so, the end of the coinage would surely have been sudden, as was the case with Achaea under Vespasian. The abrupt way in which the coinages of Corinth, in particular, or Patras stop after Galba suggests that Vespasian’s removal of Nero’s grant of freedom to Greece resulted in the loss of ‘coining rights’, inasmuch as coinage ceased, only to resume under Domitian by the PERM IM P (Corinth) or as MONETA INPETRATA INDVLGENTIA AVG (Patras). Another clear example is the abrupt cessation of Asian cistophori in 67 B C , when Pompey was granted his enormous commands throughout the Mediterranean. In a similar way, the native coinage of Britain, Mauretania and Thrace (and perhaps Lycia) was brought to a stop by the conquest and annex­ ations of Caligula and Claudius. If direct political intervention seems unlikely, an econ­ omic explanation might seem more plausible. Such an econ­ omic explanation might take different forms. It has, for instance, been thought in the case of Spain that ‘the removal of revenues from a number of cities by Tiberius almost killed off local coinage’.67 Yet it has already been argued that the phenomenon was confined to the western Empire whereas the changes Suetonius says Tiberius made (Tib. 49) affected Spain, Gaul, Syria and Greece: hardly a good correlation with the areas in which coinage ceased. Moreover, the apparently small total face value of all prov­ incial coinage (see above) suggests that it could hardly have been a major drain on civic resources and expenditure; a fortiori, if it is correct to think that civic coinage was a source of profit. Indeed, in the one area where we might have expected a diminution in local coinage, the cities of Asia around Sardis which were devastated by the earthquake of a d i 7, we find little change. In this area, although there are clear traces of the earthquake both in the typology and the lighter metrology of the cities affected (see p. 375), the number of cities producing coins and quantity of coins minted does not seem to have been significantly reduced.68 A final argument against an economic explanation for the end of western city coinage is the abundance of imitations of Claudian bronzes, found throughout the western Empire, especially in Britain, Gaul and Spain, and perhaps also Africa. These coins present us with a dilemma. On the one hand, it is sometimes suggested that these imitations were 67. M .H . C raw fo rd , C M R R , p. 272; G ra n t, F I T A , p. 203 n o te 13. 68. O n e sh o u ld n o t, p e rh a p s, press this arg u m e n t, since, o f course, th e relief w hich w as given for th e effects o f the e a rth q u a k e m ig h t, in fact, ac tu ally stim u late coinage: A. Jo h n sto n , in T . V . B u ttre y et al., Greek, Rom an and Islam ic Coins fr o m Sardis, p. 84 on no. 270.

    P roduction and circulation o f coinage

    made in the same places as had made the earlier Celtic or Spanish bronze coinage:69 if this is correct, then the change from local to ‘Roman’ types must have had a political rather than an economic origin. But if, on the other hand, the imitations were privately made, then it must have been economic to produce them; and if they were an economic proposition, so was civic coinage. Thus, either way, the Claudian imitations suggest that the civic coinage of the west did not end for economic reasons. We seem, then, to be forced back to thinking in terms of a political motive, but one which did not bring a sudden end to the coinage. A possible model explanation could be reconstructed, partially on the basis of the discussion of authority (Chapter i ). If we take seriously the mentions of the asking for and granting of permission for coinage, we should also take seriously the possibility that such permis­ sion might be refused (as it might be for a provincial tem­ ple), or perhaps rather that the very requesting of permission was discouraged. Such refusals or discourage­ ments, whatever their rationale, would not necessarily have been universal or have had an immediate effect. One might perhaps recall the way in which, under Augustus, the prominent self-representation of senators gradually dried up.70 In the case of prominent Romans it became inap­ propriate to put forward one’s own position rather than that of the emperor. A similar sort of motive could have operated on a civic level and caused the ending of the western coinage. Why it should have happened when it did or why it should have taken so long to take effect, however, remain elusive, though it took place in an atmosphere of political interference with the coinage (the demonetisation of Cali­ gula’s bronze: Dio 60.22.3) ar

    Huawei Internet Service Show More...

    テレビ視聴  icon
    テレビ視聴 APK
    本アプリケーションは「Pocket WiFi 501HW/502HW」,「PocketWiFi 303HW/304HW」専用のテレビ視聴アプリケーションです。テレビ視聴するためには、「Pocket WiFi501HW/502HW」,「Pocket WiFi303HW/304HW」と下記対応機種をWi-Fiで接続する必要があります。動作確認済み機種※接続手順は機器によってことなります。詳しくは各機器の取扱説明書をご覧ください。※フルセグ/ワンセグ放送は、利用環境によって受信状態が悪くなったり、受信できない場合があります。※対応リストに無いモデルやOS ver. であっても、対応試験がまだ実施されておらず、テレビ視聴が可能な場合があります・Nexus 6P (Android 7.0)・Nexus 6 (Android 6.0)・Nexus 9 (Android 6.0)・Nexus 5 (Android 6.0)・Nexus 7(2013) (Android 6.0)・Lenovo TAB2・LUMIERE 503HW・DIGNO C・DIGNO U・AQUOS CRYSTAL Y・AQUOS CRYSTAL X・AQUOS CRYSTAL・STREAM S 302HW・Media Pad M1 8.0 403HW・ARROWS A 301F動作確認済み機種の詳細はこちら主な機能・画面フリック、タップでかんたん選局・Wi-Fi接続している端末の縦横に合わせて、自動的に画面回転・テレビ番組表閲覧(視聴中のチャンネルのみ)・フルセグとワンセグ自動切り替え(フルセグ優先設定時)・地域チャンネルスキャン・テレビチューナー状態表示注意事項・本アプリケーションのみでのテレビ視聴はできません。・ご使用される場所が放送波を受信できるエリアである必要があります。・著作権保護のため、USBおよびBluetooth機器など他の機器への音声およびテレビの出力はできません。This application "PocketWiFi 501HW / 502HW", is the "Pocket WiFi 303HW / 304HW" dedicatedtelevision viewing application. To television viewing, "Pocket WiFi501HW / 502HW", you need to connect to the "Pocket WiFi 303HW /304HW" the following compatible models with Wi-Fi.Tested models※ connection procedure varies depending on the device. Refer to theinstruction manual of each device for details.※ full-segment / one-segment broadcast, or reception status becomesbad by the use environment, it may not be able to receive.※ even in the model and OS ver. Not in the corresponding list, thecorresponding test has not yet been carried out, it might bepossible to watch TV· Nexus 6P (Android 7.0)· Nexus 6 (Android 6.0)· Nexus 9 (Android 6.0)· Nexus 5 (Android 6.0)· Nexus 7 (2013) (Android 6.0)· Lenovo TAB2· LUMIERE 503HW· DIGNO C· DIGNO U · AQUOS CRYSTAL Y· AQUOS CRYSTAL X· AQUOS CRYSTAL· STREAM S 302HW · Media Pad M1 8.0 403HW· ARROWS A 301FClick here for more information about the confirmed operationmodel main function-screen flick, according to the length and breadthof the terminal that is connected simple tuning · Wi-Fi in the tap,automatically screen rotation and TV program guide browsing (onlychannel being watched) - Full-Seg and One-Seg automatic switching(full-segment priority setting) and regional channel scan TV tunerstate displayCaution television viewing only in the matter, this application isnot possible. - Use is is where you need is an area that canreceive broadcast waves. - For copyright protection, you can notoutput of audio and TV to other devices, such as USB and Bluetoothequipment.
    HUAWEI AI Life icon
    AI Life lets you manage all of your smart devices in oneplace.Letting you discover and create new ways to use your smartdevices,including your 5G/4G router, audio accessories, smartappliances,and more. Upgrade your life with AI. Features: Easysetup, add yoursmart devices to your AI Life ecosystem for quickdevicemanagement, updates, and customization, and combine them insmartscenes.
    Huawei HiLink (Mobile WiFi) icon
    Huawei HiLink (Mobile WiFi) APK
    Huawei HiLink merges the functions of the Huawei Mobile WiFiandRuMate apps to provide you with a more consistent andsimplifiedmanagement experience. As a uniform management app,Huawei HiLinkworks with many Huawei products, such as Huawei MobileWiFi (E5series), Huawei routers, Honor Cube, and Huawei homegateways. Itcan be used to search for and manage all Huawei HiLinkterminaldevices. Huawei HiLink is an app that lets you manage yourHiLinkdevices from your phone or tablet. Functions: •View networkstatus,including your carrier name, roaming status, and signalstrength.•Manage connected devices, disconnect any device at thetouch of abutton, and set Internet access priorities. •Remind youwhen youhave low battery, steep data usage, and new messages. •Saveandback up the files in your phone or tablet to the microSD cardinyour HiLink device. •Share photos without generating mobiledatatraffic. •Diagnose and optimize your HiLink device to itsoptimumstate. •Toggle between sleep and standard modes. •Enableparentalcontrol and set limits on the duration of Internet usageforchildren. •Set up a guest Wi-Fi network to improve the securityofyour home network. •Provide diverse functionality, includingtheInternet connection wizard, SSID and password modification,APNmodification, carrier selection, and device shutdown orrestart.Tip: The functions that Huawei HiLink provides vary withthe actualHuawei terminal device used. Huawei HiLink APP can beused on thefollowing devices: Mobile WiFi (E5 series): E5331,E5332, E5372,E5375, E5756 E5151, E5220, E5221, E5251, E589 E5730,E5776, E5377,E5786, E5573 EC5321, EC5377U, E5771s HWD34,HWD35Wingles E8231,E8278, EC315, E355 CPEs E5186, E5170, B310,B315s,HWS31 Homerouters: WS318, WSR20, WS331a, WS331b, WS330,WS880, WS326, WS328,Honor Cube(WS860), WS831

    Raspberry Pi OS Software Packages

    Lib Packages

    raspberryLibraries and Plugins

    To install Raspberry Pi OS software on a Raspberry Pi

    Packages are installed using Terminal. First get an updated package list by entering the following command in to terminal if this has not been done today
    Then install your chosen package with the command Find out more with the Guide to installing software with the apt command

    WWW: Please Note: each listing has a www link to a related webpage, the links are supplied by the author. I can not guarantee thay are all active and related to the listed package.

    Distro Version:

    The latest Distro for Raspberry Pi OS is Buster, the previouse version was Stretch. Next to each package is the version available for each distro.

    Buster(#) = Raspberry Pi OS Buster
    Stretch(#) = Raspberry Pi OS Stretch
    Buster & Stretch(#) = same version for both.
    If only one Distro is listed then the package is only available on that distribution.

    Jump to section A B C D E F G H I J K L M N O P Q R S T U V X Y Z
    – FOV around target (wich means FOV decreases the further away target is)
    * Wallhack
    * NoSmoke
    * NoFlash
    – FlashPercent (what alpha flash should start at, around 200 is ‘legit’)
    * AntiRecoil
    – RecoilStrength (100 = No recoil)
    Download Adv Hack
    Downloaded 395.314 times

    – Aimbot
    – Wallhack
    – ESP hack
    – VAC 3 Undetected
    – Windows XP/Vista/7 x86 & x64 Support
    – Virtualization & Mutation
    – Supports ALL HL1 Mods
    Much more features.
    Download asdfHook 1.0 HL
    Downloaded 155.320 times

    (SOH) CS1.6 Hack v1

    Released: Apr 1, 2012 – Detected

    – DepthRange Wallhack
    – Asus Wallhack
    – Wire Wallhack
    – No flash/No smoke/No sky
    – Lambert
    – Day/Night mode
    – Wire Models
    – Crosshair
    Download (SOH) CS1.6 Hack v1
    Downloaded 94.140 times

    Super Simple Wallhack v7.3

    Released: Feb 2, 2012 – Unknown

    Perfect Depthrange Style Walls
    NoAds (Banners Above Scoreboard & Banners On Walls)
    F8 (Toggle Crosshair On/Off)
    F9 (Toggle Walls DR/ASUS/Off)
    F10 (Toggle NoSky On/Off)
    F11 (Toggle NoFlash On/Off)
    F12 (Toggle Lambert On/Off)
    Works In All Games On The HL1 Engine.
    Download Super Simple Wallhack v7.3
    Downloaded 1.005.006 times

    Cs 1.6 Wallhack 7.2

    Super Simple Wall v7.2

    Released: Dec 27, 2011 – Detected

    Perfect Depthrange Style Walls
    NoAds (Banners Above Scoreboard & Banners On Walls)
    F8 (Toggle Crosshair On/Off)
    F9 (Toggle Walls DR/ASUS/Off)
    F10 (Toggle NoSky On/Off)
    F11 (Toggle NoFlash On/Off)
    F12 (Toggle Lambert On/Off)
    Works In All Games On The HL1 Engine.
    Download Super Simple Wall v7.2
    Downloaded 197.370 times

    Download Wallhack Cs 1.6 F11 Download

    Super Simple Wall v7.1

    Released: Nov 12, 2011 – Detected

    Perfect Depthrange Style Walls
    NoAds (Banners Above Scoreboard & Banners On Walls)
    F8 (Toggle Crosshair On/Off)
    F9 (Toggle Walls DR/ASUS/Off)
    F10 (Toggle NoSky On/Off)
    F11 (Toggle NoFlash On/Off)
    F12 (Toggle Lambert On/Off)
    Works In All Games On The HL1 Engine.
    Download Super Simple Wall v7.1
    Downloaded 209.296 times

    Counter:Strike 1.6 Wallhack Hook
    Download T-ManBlueSea v1.0
    Downloaded 114.747 times

    EnhancedAim Cracked CS1.6

    Released: Jun 22, 2011 – Unknown

    – Aimbot
    Auto Shoot
    NonSticky Aim
    Aim Mode
    Aim FOV
    No recoil
    – ESP hack
    Weapon ESP
    Name ESP
    Cross ESP
    Box ESP
    Distance ESP
    Ballhack ESP
    Nadeglow ESP
    Health ESP
    – Visuals
    No Sky
    Glow Models
    Flash Warning
    Entity wallhack
    Flash Alpa
    – Misc
    Auto Pistol
    Panic key
    No SlowHack
    Anti HL-Guard
    Download EnhancedAim Cracked CS1.6
    Downloaded 439.550 times


    Follow us on Facebook
    Subscribe to YouTube

    If you have ever wondered how it feels to use aimbot, wallhack, esp hack, noclip, speedhack or even god mode in CS:GO, you now have the chance! These console commands works for Counter-Strike: Global Offensive, and will give you just that. While it might be a stretch to call them hacks, it will certainly feel like how some hacks work.

    The way the hacks work is with console commands and they are not real CS:GO hacks or cheats. However, they imitate how hacks usually work, for example by giving you the ability to see enemies through walls.

    We hope that by trying these kinds of hacks, you will stay away from using actual hacks in CS:GO.

    The hacks work by typing console commands into the developer console. Therefore, they do NOT work in competitive mode or other multiplayer game modes. They only work in offline games with bots, or in community servers where you are the admin. Before you get started, you need to activate the developer console + activate cheats in the game/server. If you are new to configs and console commands, you might want to read our CS:GO config and autoexec guide.

    Activate the developer console in CS:GO

    If your developer console is not already activated, you will need to to this.

    This is simple:

    1. Go to game settings
    2. Set “Enable Developer Console (~)” to YES.

    When you have enabled the developer console, you can open the console by pressing the tilde key (~) on your keyboard.

    You might have another key binding, you can check which key opens the console in your keybind settings.

    More info: how to enable developer console in CS:GO.

    Activate sv_cheats: sv_cheats 1

    Before you can use any of the hacks and cheats in this guide, you will need to activate cheats (sv_cheats).

    In the event of termination, and without limiting any other remedies which may be available against you, you must immediately return the font software to House Industries and certify that no copies remain in your possession or exist on the originally licensed site.9. Without limiting the aforementioned, House Industries shall in no event be liable for any direct, indirect, consequential, or incidental damages, including damages from loss of business profits, business interruption, and loss of business information, arising out of the use or inability to use the product.10. Any violation by licensee of this agreement shall cause this license to be terminated. Neutraface 2 font free download. House Industries makes no warranties express or implied as to merchantability, fitness for a particular purpose, or otherwise. Multi-device License Upgrade Schedule:House Industries software is automatically licensed for use on a maximum of six rasterizing devices connected to the same local area network.

    How to activate sv_cheats:

    • Open the developer console (~)
    • Type: sv_cheats 1
    • Hit enter

    You are done, sv_cheats have been activated and you can use all the hack commands.

    For more sv_cheats 1 commands, read our sv_cheats 1 guide.

    Can I get VAC banned for using sv_cheats 1 commands?

    NO, you can NOT get banned or VAC banned for using the commands in this guide, or sv_cheats 1 commands in general.

    These commands only work in offline games or in community servers where you are the admin. They will not work in official CS:GO competitive, causal, wingman, demolition and so on.

    You can therefore safely use all of these commands. They are meant for developers to test the game.

    Now that this is out of the way, let’s see the “hack” commands available in CS:GO.

    Wallhack commands

    There are several commands for enabling wallhack and esp hack in CS:GO. Here are most of them.

    r_drawothermodels 2

    Download Wallhack F1

    This command will render all player models in wireframe, which will enable you to see teammates and enemies through walls.


    • 0: OFF – You will not see any models
    • 1: ON – default value
    • 2: ON – player models with wireframe wallhack

    mat_wireframe 2

    Download Wallhack For Cs Go

    This is another wireframe wallhack, but instead of only displaying models as wireframe, it will also display some of the environment as a wireframe.

    You can choose between the values 0, 1, 2, 3, 4. The default value is 0 (off).

    enable_skeleton_draw 1

    This “wallhack” will enable you to see the “skeleton” of player models through the walls.

    Values can be 0 (off) or 1 (on). The default value is 0.

    mat_proxy 2

    This is like a “traditional” wallhack, where you can straight-up see the enemies through the walls. However, it will fade in and out, so in the end, the command is not that useful.

    Values can be 0 (off), 1, 2 or 3. The default value is 0.

    mat_fillrate 1

    This command will also give you wallhack, but at the same time your screen will become red. Mat_fillrate 1 also prevents you from being flashed.

    No Recoil and No Spread

    These console commands will enable no recoil and no spread. This means that you will have 100% accuracy all the time without any randomness, also while running.

    Turn on no spread:

    weapon_accuracy_nospread 1

    Use this command to enable no spread – disable weapon inaccuracy spread.

    Turn off (enable spread):

    weapon_accuracy_nospread 0

    Turn on no recoil:

    weapon_recoil_scale 0

    This command will enable no recoil. The default value is 2. The higher value, the higher recoil. If you use a negative value, the recoil pattern will invert.

    Turn off no recoil (default recoil):

    Adobe Reader 9 Windows free download - Adobe Reader for Windows 8, Adobe Acrobat 9 Pro Extended, PDF Reader for Windows 7, and many more programs. Expect adobe reader 9 all family software by adobe systems are available for free download for users on adobe website. Adobe reader can only read and print PDF files it can’t use for create a PDF files. You can just take a view of PDF files in adobe reader you can’t create new file or edit PDF files in adobe reader 9. Adobe reader 9.2 free download. Office Tools downloads - Adobe Reader by Adobe Systems Incorporated and many more programs are available for instant and free download. Download free Adobe Acrobat Reader DC software for your Windows, Mac OS and Android devices to view, print, and comment on PDF documents. Download Adobe Reader for Windows. Fast downloads of the latest free software! Adobe reader 9 free download for windows.

    weapon_recoil_scale 2

    Aimbot commands

    It is actually possible to get aimbot in CS:GO with cheat commands.

    Csgo Wallhacks Download Free

    Aimbot on bots

    Turn on:

    ent_fire cs_bot AddOutput “ModelScale 0”

    Use this command to turn aimbot on for all bots.

    Turn off:

    ent_fire cs_bot AddOutput “ModelScale 1”

    Use this command to turn off aimbot for bots.

    Aimbot on players

    Turn on:

    ent_fire player AddOutput “ModelScale 0”

    Use this command to turn on aimbot for players.

    Turn off:

    ent_fire player AddOutput “ModelScale 1”

    Use this command to turn off aimbot for players.

    Aimbot on specific player or bot

    Turn on:

    ent_fire !picker addoutput “ModelScale 0”

    You need to aim at the specific player or bot when you use this command.

    Turn off:

    ent_fire !picker addoutput “ModelScale 1”


    Again, you will need to aim at the specific player or bot when you use the command.

    Aimbot on yourself

    Turn on:

    ent_fire !self AddOutput “ModelScale 0”

    Turn off:

    ent_fire !self AddOutput “ModelScale 1”

    God mode command

    With the god mode command, you will become invincible and take no damage from bullets or grenades.



    To turn god mode off again, just type god in console again.

    Noclip command

    Noclip mode (also known as “noclipping”) gives you the ability to fly through walls and around the map.



    To turn on and off, type noclip in console.

    Unlimited ammo – Infinite ammo command

    This command will give you an unlimited amount of ammunition for all your guns.

    Infinite ammo without reload:

    sv_infinite_ammo 1

    Infinite ammo with reloading:

    sv_infinite_ammo 2

    Turn off infinite ammo:

    Download Wallhack F1 For Cs 1 6 Warzone

    sv_infinite_ammo 0

    Full brightness – Fullbright command

    This command works in different ways. In general, the command will provide more brightness and remove details from objects.

    mat_fullbright 3

    Select a value between 0-4. Tumbi tronik vst free download. The default value is 0 (off).

    No flash command

    With mat_fillrate, your screen will not become white whenever someone throws a flashbang grenade. The command will also enable you to see players through walls (wallhack).


    mat_fillrate 1

    To turn it off again, use the command mat_fillrate 0. The default value is 0.

    Wallhack Cs Go Download

    No smoke command

    This command will hide the smoke from smoke grenades. If you stand inside the smoke, you will still see smoke.

    Enable no smoke:

    r_drawparticles 0

    Disable no smoke:

    r_drawparticles 1

    The default value is 1.

    Speedhack & slow-motion commands

    There are two commands that you can use for either speed hack or slowmotion.

    Both commands will affect everyone that is in the server.

    host_timescale (value)

    Official description: Prescale the clock by this amount.

    Replace (value) with a number. The default value is 1.

    • Anything below 1: Slow-motion
    • 1: Default value
    • Anything above 1: Speedhack.

    If you set the value to 2, you will move with twice the speed.

    If you set the value to 0.5, you will move with half the speed.

    host_framerate (value)

    Official description: Set to lock per-frame time elapse.

    Replace (value) with a number. The default value is 0.

    This command works relatively to your FPS (frames per second). You can control your maximum FPS with the fps_max (value) command.

    Download Wallhack F1 For Cs 1.6

    If you have max fps of 100, and the lock the host_framerate to a lower value, let’s say 50 (speedhack), you will move twice as fast.

    If you instead set the host_framerate to 200, you will move twice as slow (slow-motion).


    fps_max 100


    host_framerate 50


    host_framerate 200

    With all these commands available in CS:GO, you can get the feeling of what hackers can archive with external programs. While they do not work in official servers, you can use the console commands to play around with bots, or have fun with your friends. If there is a command we forgot in this article, feel free to leave a comment and let us know.


    5 Replies to “Nexus VST 3.20.3 Crack + Serial Key Free Download 2021”

    1. We are also designed to be compatible with all other solutions, and have almost no impact on system performance, especially when compared to other bears like Norton.В 

    2. Thanks a lot! I tried a lot of different methods, in the spam of a few days, but this was the first one to work.

    3. Both DAWs are great, my brother uses ableton and it’s great for him, especially cause he’s more into live performing, and I use FL cause I find it a bit easier for drum patterns in trap beats. They do the same things so just use what works for u best

    4. For my music/video playing, I do use VLC (for movies) and Windows Media Player (for music). Works great for me, except for a recent update that caused WMP to have a problem with the visualizations. They work when I first open WMP and paly music, but when it switches to the next song on the playlist or a curtain amount of time goes by, the visualization stop working.

    Leave a Reply

    Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *