BÍRÓ-SEY KATALIN: COINS FROM IDENTIFIED SITES OF BRIGETIO AND THE QUESTION OF LOCAL CURRENCY / Régészeti Füzetek II/18. (Magyar Nemzeti Múzeum Budapest, 1977)
I. INTRODUCTION
Before analyzing the coin material of Brigetio, a few methodical questions need to be discussed. These will clarify the classification of the coins in the catalogue. Coins with known sites are classified into three groups. 1. Scattered coins - scattered coins from excavations, and scattered imitation coins. 2. Coins from graves - also from excavations, or as scattered finds. 3. Hoards. Scattered coin s are most useful for statistical purposes, because they provide the greatest spontaneity. The number of coins getting underground in each period always depended on directly on the influx of currency. If the influx of currency is high, the number of scattered coins are high also. Most useful from a statistical point of view would be the coins deriving from the excavation of the settlement because the sites and even the stratigraphic location of these coins are known. The numismatic material of a settlement could be easily evaluated if the whole settlement were excavated. In the case of patrial excavation, proper caution need to be applied in using the coinage, otherwise a biased view could be established, concerning the circulation of money in the area. In the case of scattered coins, which are not from excavations, we are faced with the problem of the hoards getting included in this type of material also. There is one like this in the coinage of Szőny too. The find closing in 167 A. D. ^ (Find. No. II) got into the possession of Ödön Kállay, who included it into }-Q S collection. Since there was no precise identification of the find, it was impossible to screen it from the Ká Hay - Lenhardt material. The find of the third century closing in 252 A.D. got into this collection in its entirety. Thus we must contemplate that the find mixing with scattered material changed the picture of the currency between Julia Domna and •7 V olusian. Coins from graves, either by excavation or scattered, are the least useful for statistics. Caution need be used to date graces and cemeteries by these. In currency evaluation we study them in view of the facts given by the scattered finds and hoards. The closing date of hoards may link them with some wa r - type-activity . From the point view of currency they reflect the circulation a few years before their closing dates, strongly. Evaluating them like this we must also consider what the scattered coins show for the same period. Accordingly, a few questions arise; is there a close check between the data provided by the hoards and the scattered coins concerning each period? Furthermore what quantity of scattered coins can reflect currency, that is. can it be used for evaluation? May we speak about Roman coin currency in the neighbourhood of Pannónia, in the Barbaric areas between the first and fourth centuries A.D. ? We cannot answer all o the questions. Hoards and scattered coins do not always provide the same information within one period. Considering the first decades of the Empire, for instance, and not only Brigetio, but the whole of Pannónia, we discover that there are only a very few scattered coins. Even these few are mainly bronze coins, no hoards are known from this period. Here, we do not consider the first decades of the reign of Augustus, because some impressions of this period occur in the Lágymányos find. But this being such a special collection with the Eravisc denarii and the Eravisc imitations of Roman denarii, that we do not deal with it here. Q 4
