1

Tom VIII

MUZEUM NARODOWE W KRAKOWIESEKCJA NUMIZMATYCZNA

KOMISJI ARCHEOLOGICZNEJ PANODDZIAŁ W KRAKOWIE

Kraków 2013VIII

157

Tom VIII

Kraków 2013

ARKADIUSZ DYMOWSKIGdynia

More Roman Coins Found in Kuyavia. The Coinage of the Imperium Galliarum in Poland

The year 2012 brought a surprising abundance of new finds of Roman coins, especially from the 3rd century, found in the Polish region of Kuyavia.1 These finds supplement previously published coins,2 all of which provide us with important data concerning the history of Roman coinage in the territory of present-day Po-land. Unfortunately, as it has proved impossible to gain access to the actual coins, we have been compelled to describe and identify them on the basis of the photo-graphic and metrological material made available by the anonymous finders.

No later than October 2012, a coin of Postumus (Pl. 1, Fig. 1) was found near Inowrocław (County loco, Kuyavian-Pomeranian Voivodeship), but the exact site and the circumstances of the find remain unknown. The coin, which is 28 mm in diameter and has a weight of 10.67 g, is coated with a layer of dark-green patina. It is fragmentarily preserved with about one-third of the coin missing. An irregu-lar edge suggests that the coin may have been broken into pieces, rather than cut with a tool, yet it is difficult to decide on the nature of the act, whether deliberate or the result of accident, e.g., through some mechanized agricultural work at the

1 Thanks are due to the anonymous finders who provided me with the information on the coins finds and permitted me with photographs. I would like to thank Professor Aleksander Bursche, Archaeology Institute of the University of Warsaw and Marcin Rudnicki of the same Institute for their valuable suggestions concerning the identification of the Roman denarius hybrid described below. I am also indebted to Dr Kirill Myzgin of the Vasil Karazin National University of Kharkiv for his assistance in obtaining access to the material from the territory of Ukraine and his advice on how to interpret it. I also extend my thanks to Dr Anna Zapolska, Archaeology Institute of the University of Warsaw, for similar assistance and advice in regard to finds in the West Baltic area. The publication is financed from the Ministry of Science and Higher Education programme in the frames of the National Programme for the Development of Humanities 2012–2017.

2 See, e.g., A. DYMOWSKI, M. RUDNICKI, “Kujawskie znaleziska monet antycznych. Nowe źródła do dziejów pieniądza na ziemiach Polski w starożytności,” Biuletyn Numizmatyczny 4, 2012, pp. 241–258; A. DYMOWSKI, “A Roman antoninianus of Aegnatia Mariniana found in the Kuyavian region. The third-century silver coinage in the territory of the Przeworsk culture,” Notae Numismaticae–Zapiski Numizmatyczne VII, 2012, pp. 93–104.

158

ARKADIUSZ DYMOWSKI

site. The coin’s axis is ca 45°. The obverse has a discernible bust of a bearded emperor, radiate, draped, to right. The discernible part of the obverse border leg-end reads: IMPCMCASSLATP[…]. The reverse depicts a figure with a helmeted head (emperor?) standing to right, holding an unidentified attribute (globe?) in his outstretched hand and a spear; a “C” is visible on the right. The visible part of the reverse border legend reads: […]O[…]IIIPP. The coins appears to be a sestertius3 of Postumus struck in 261, at Lugdunum (RIC4 V 113), or a sestertius of the same ruler dating from 267, attributed to the mint of Cologne (RIC V 364).

Four coins were found sometime between January and November 2012, within an area of a radius of ca 200 m, in a ploughed field located within the limits of one of the villages near Inowrocław, not far from the road to Bydgoszcz. They probably come from a Roman period settlement in the area. The oldest coin discovered at the site is a denarius with a depiction of Domitian, about which we have unfortunately no further information. Another coin was a denarius as well (Pl. 1, Fig. 2). The obverse of this silver coin, 19 mm in diameter and 3.08 g in weight, depicts a bust of Faustina the Elder, to right, and the border inscription reads DIVA-FAVSTINA, while the reverse bears a representation of an eagle standing atop the altar, to right, with its head to the left, and the inscription CONSECRATIO. It is a hybrid of the obverse of the posthumous coin of Faustina the Elder (RIC III 343 and similar) issued in the years 141–161, and the reverse of the denarius, also posthumous, of Antoninus Pius, minted after 161, under Marcus Aurelius (RIC III 430). The style indicates, though not conclusively, that this particular coin may not be a product of an official mint. At the same time, the correct inscriptions suggest that even if it is an imitation it was nevertheless struck in the territory of the Empire. The denarius does not appear to be subaeratus, yet it is possible that the specimen had been struck using debased silver. If so, this unusual coin would then be a contemporary counter-feit rather than an imitation. The other two coins found nearby are antoniniani: an imitation of the issue from the 260–270s, the so-called “radiate” (Pl. 1, Fig. 3), and a coin with an image of Carausius (Pl. 1, Fig. 4). The imitation (15 mm in diameter and 1.18 g in weight) was probably modelled after an antoninianus of Victorinus or Tetricus I. It may have been minted somewhere in the Western provinces of the

3 The large bronze coins of Postumus, amounting to a dozen or so, or even over twenty, grams in weight, with the emperor’s depiction in a corona radiata, are sometimes designated as double sestertii. However, the relevant literature is overwhelmingly in favour of considering those coins as sestertii. This particular view can be found in the RIC (vol. V, part II, p. 346, note 1). See also H. HUVELIN, D. NONY, “Le trésor de Néry (Oise), monnaies de bronze sous Postume,” Revue Numismatique 6, no. 20, 1978, pp. 91–95; B.R. KANKELFITZ, Römische Münzen von Pompejus bis Romulus, 4. Auflage, Augsburg 1996, p. 348.

4 The Roman Imperial Coinage, vols. I–X, H. MATTINGLY, E.A. SYDENHAM, C.H.V. SUTHERLAND, R.A.G. CARSON, P.H. WEBB, J.W.E. PEARCE, P. M. BRUNN, J.P.C. KENT, I.A. CARRDICE, T.V. BUTTREY (eds.), London 1923–2007.

159

MORE ROMAN COINS FOUND IN KUYAVIA...

Empire, most likely in Gaul or Britain.5 The obverse shows a bust of a bearded ruler, in a corona radiata, to right, and the following barbarized inscription: […]SP \ / \ /. On the reverse, a standing female figure, to left (Salus?), and a barbarized border inscription that reads […]LV-SIIVCC. The coin of Carausius should be assigned to the London mint and dated to the years 290–292 (RIC V 98). It is 24 mm in diameter and weighs 4.10 g. The obverse represents the emperor’s bust in an armour, a draped cloak, and a corona radiata, to right, and the legend IMPC-CARAVSIVSPFAVG, while the reverse shows the goddess Pax, to left, standing, holding an olive branch and a long sceptre, and the border inscription PAXAVG. The mint markings are “S” in the left-hand field and MLXXI in exergue; the char-acter in the right-hand field (if there was any) is indecipherable.

The 2nd-century hybrid denarius is interesting in itself. However, it should be interpreted within the broader context of the inflow and usage of 1st- and 2nd-century Roman denarii in the territory of the Central-European Barbaricum and, in this sense, this find is not anything out of the ordinary. As it is, 2nd-century denarii con-tinue to be the most frequently found Roman coins in the territory of present-day Poland. Much more noteworthy specimens are the recently found 3rd-century coins that are linked to the existence of the two ephemeral “states” in the Western part of the Roman Empire, the so-called Imperium Galliarum and Imperium Britanniarum.

The first of the emperors of the Imperium Galliarum, i.e., the territories of the Imperium Romanum remaining under the rule of the usurpers effectively beyond control of the central authority (in the years 260–274),6 was Postumus (260–269). This “state” encompassed the provinces of Gaul, Britain, and, temporarily, Spain. Following Postumus’ death, the self-proclaimed empire was ruled, very briefly, by Marius (269), who was succeeded by Victorinus (269–271) and Tetricus I (271–274), the latter of whom would rule jointly with his son, Tetricus II (in the years 273–274).7 Although the Imperium Galliarum remained under the usurpers’ rule, two more usurpers were proclaimed in that period: Laelianus (268), during

5 See, e.g., J.A. DAVIES, “The barbarous radiates from Richborough,” British Numismatic Journal 52, 1982, p. 23; A. BURSCHE, “Moneta i kruszec w kulturze wielbarskiej w okresie późnorzymskim,” Prze-gląd Archeologiczny 31, 1983, p. 60; K.W. HARL, Coinage in the Roman Economy, 300 B.C. to A.D. 700, London 1996, p. 148.

6 On the Imperium Galliarum and its history, see, e.g., J.F. DRINKWATER, The Gallic Empire. Separatism and Continuity in the North-Western Provinces of the Roman Empire A.D. 260–274, Historia Einzelschriften 52, Stuttgart 1987, passim; I. KÖNIG, Die gallischen Usurpatoren von Postumus bis Tetricus, Vestigia. Beiträge zur alten Geschichte 31, München 1981, passim; T. KOTULA, Kryzys III wieku w zachodnich prowincjach Cesar-stwa Rzymskiego, Antiquitas, vol. XVII, Wrocław 1992, p. 31 ff.; R. URBAN, Gallia rebellis. Erhebungen in Gallien im Spiegel antiker Zeugnisse, Historia Einzelschriften 192, Stuttgart 1999, pp. 88–93.

7 The regnal dates according to: E. WIPSZYCKA, R. SUSKI, “Listy władców,” [in:] E. WIPSZYCKA (ed.), Vademecum historyka starożytnej Grecji i Rzymu, vol. I/II, Warszawa 2001, pp. 570–571. Some publica-tions, especially the earlier ones, specify somewhat different dates of the reigns of the Gallic emperors: Postumus (259–268), Marius (268), Victorinus (268–270), Tetricus I (270–273); see, e.g., RIC V, pp. 310–327.

160

Postumus’ reign, and Domitianus8 (Domitian II) in 271 (?), in opposition to Victori-nus. In 274, as a result of the battle of Châlons, the Gallic domain ceased to exist and the Imperial authority of Rome was reasserted by the Emperor Aurelian (270–275). In turn, the Imperium Britanniarum, a “state” very much like that in Gaul, existed in the territory of the province of Britannia, temporarily also including a section of northern Gaul, in the years 286–296.9 The self-appointed rulers of this domain were Carausius (286–293) and Allectus (293–296).

The newly found sestertius of Postumus and the imitation antoninianus from Kuyavia are not the first specimens of coins of the rulers of the Imperium Gal-liarum recorded in Polish finds. Among the coins recorded to date: another ses-tertius of Postumus, from the vicinity of Chełmno (County loco, Kuyavian-Po-meranian Voivodeship)10 and 22 antoniniani of the Gallic usurpers from the years 260–274: 5 of Postumus,11 3 of Victorinus,12 and 14 of Tetricus I and Tetricus II.13

8 Domitianus is a figure known solely from some numismatic evidence. Until recently, just one single coin (antoninianus) of this emperor had been recorded, found in a hoard from Cléons, France, discovered in 1900. The authenticity of this specimen had been questioned until another coin of this ruler (an antoninianus as well, struck with the use of the same dies) was found in a hoard of Chalgrove (II), England, in 2003; see R.A. ABDY, “The second-known specimen of a coin of Domitian II recorded in a hoard from Oxfordshire,” Revue Numismatique 6, no. 160, 2004, pp. 219–220; J. MAIRAT, “Chalgrove II (2003), Oxfordshire,” [in:] R. ABDY, E. GHEY, C. HUGHES, I. LEINS (eds.), Coin Hoards from Roman Britain, vol. XII, Collection Moneta – 97, Wetteren 2009, pp. 113–114.

9 On the Imperium Britanniarum and its history, see, e.g., N. SHIEL, Episode of Carausius and Allectus: The Literary and Numismatic Evidence, British Archaeological Reports 40, Oxford 1977, passim; W. KACZA-NOWICZ, Uzurpacja Karauzjusza i Allektusa w Brytanii i Galii u schyłku III w. n.e., Katowice 1985, passim; P.J. CASEY, Carausius and Allectus. The British Usurpers, London 1994, passim.

10 A. BURSCHE, Later Roman-Barbarian Contacts in Central Europe. Numismatic Evidence, Studien zu Fundmünzen der Antike 11, Berlin 1996, p. 147; R. CIOŁEK, Die Fundmünzen der Römischen Zeit in Polen: Pom-mern, Collection Moneta – 67, Wetteren 2007, p. 27 – noted as a double sestertius in both publications; see note 3.

11 Kraków-Bieżanów, Lesser Poland Voivodeship (J. BODZEK, “Monety rzymskie znalezione w Krakowie Bieżanowie przy budowie autostrady,” Acta Archaeologica Carpathica XXXVIII, 2003, pp. 183–189); Nowy Sącz, N. S. County, Lesser Poland Voivodeship (A. KUNISZ, Znaleziska monet rzymskich z Małopolski, Wrocław 1985, p. 15; BURSCHE, Later…, p. 200; P. KACZANOWSKI, U. MARGOS (et al.), Tabula Imperii Romani. M-34 – Kraków, Kraków 2002, p. 222), Rodzone, Iława County, Warmian-Masurian Voivodeship (identification of the coin and the coin find location uncertain; A. DYMOWSKI, Znaleziska monet rzymskich z terenu Polski rejestrowane w pierwszych latach XXI wieku. Aspekty źródłoznawcze, Zielona Góra 2011, p. 127), the environs of Sobótka, Wrocław County, Lower Silesian Voivodeship (R. CIOŁEK, Die Fundmünzen der Römischen Zeit in Polen: Schlesien, Collection Moneta – 83, Wetteren 2008, p. 231), the vicinity of Żyrardów, County loco, Masovian Voivodeship (DYMOWSKI, Znaleziska monet…, p. 186). Notably, two of the coins in question (those from the finds at Kraków-Bieżanów and Żyrardów) are brockages, whose reverse is a concave negative of the obverse. Such brockages occurred when two flans to be struck were mistakenly inserted between the dies at the same time; as a result, the coin in contact with the obverse die would come off as a brockage very much like those mentioned above.

12 The environs of Krosno Odrzańskie, County loco, Lubusz Voivodeship (CIOŁEK, Die Fundmünzen… Schlesien, p. 123), Krzyżowice, Brzeg County, Lower Silesian Voivodeship (BURSCHE, Later…, p. 196; CIOŁEK, Die Fundmünzen… Schlesien, p. 125), Różyńsk, Ełk County, Warmian-Masurian Voivodeship (the “bronze” coin, probably an antoninianus); W. NOWAKOWSKI, Corpus der römischen Funde im europäis-chen Barbaricum, Polen – Bd. I: Masuren, Warszawa 2001, p. 94.

13 Duszniki Zdrój, Kłodzko County, Lower Silesian Voivodeship (BURSCHE, Later…, p. 188; CIOŁEK, Die Fundmünzen… Schlesien, p. 59), the vicinity of Elbląg, County loco, Warmian-Masurian Voivodeship (BURSCHE, Later…, p. 148; CIOŁEK, Die Fundmünzen… Pommern, p. 45), Gdańsk, Pomeranian Voivodeship (BURSCHE, Later…, p. 149; CIOŁEK, Die Fundmünzen…Pommern, p. 60), Jakuszowice, Kazimierza Wielka

ARKADIUSZ DYMOWSKI

161

In addition, similar antoniniani have been found in the following three hoards: Przezmark (Elbląg County, Warmian-Masurian Voivodeship) – 1 coin of Victori-nus and 2 of Tetricus I and Tetricus II, along with the later antoniniani and folles of the 4th century;14 Piła (County loco, Greater Poland Voivodeship)15 – among 4,665 of the recorded antoniniani encompassing the issues from Gallienus to Aurelian, the hoard contained 1 coin of Postumus, 5 of Victorinus (including one imita-tion), 12 of Tetricus I and II (including two imitations); environs of Gniewkowo (Inowrocław County, Kuyavian-Pomeranian Voivodeship) – an assortment of coins from a hoard and small finds contained 16 antoniniani, from Galien to Probus, in-cluding 2 coins of Postumus (one of which remains uncertain), 1 of Victorinus, 3 of Tetricus I and II (including one uncertain), as well as 3 imitations of antonini-ani (the so-called “radiates”) of unidentified rulers from the 260s–270s, perhaps of the Gallic usurpers.16 Moreover, we know of 7 aurei of the Imperium Galliarum from the single finds in Poland: 6 of Postumus17 and 1 of Victorinus.18

These finds are situated in the areas that were inhabited in the late-Roman period by all of the significant archaeological cultures and culture groups within the territory of present-day Poland. Nevertheless, it is possible to notice a certain regularity as regards the territorial distribution of the finds containing coins of the

County, Świętokrzyskie Voivodeship (BURSCHE, Later…, p. 99; KACZANOWSKI, MARGOS, Tabula…, p. 76), Kamień Pomorski, County loco, West Pomeranian Voivodeship (CIOŁEK, Die Fundmünzen… Pom-mern, p. 99), Malechowo, Sławno County, West Pomeranian Voivodeship (Ibidem, p. 128), Opole (EADEM, Die Fundmünzen… Schlesien, p. 186), Ostrowąs, Aleksandrów County, Kuyavian-Pomeranian Voivodeship (BURSCHE, Later…, p. 202), Pietrowice Wielkie, Racibórz County, Silesian Voivodeship (Ibidem, p. 203; KACZANOWSKI, MARGOS, Tabula…, p. 240; CIOŁEK, Die Fundmünzen… Schlesien, p. 196), Szczecin, West Pomeranian Voivodeship (BURSCHE, Later…, p. 219; CIOŁEK, Die Fundmünzen… Pommern, p. 237), Święta Katarzyna, Wrocław County, Lower Silesian Voivodeship (W. ŁONAK, “Nowe znaleziska mon-et rzymskich na Śląsku,” Magazyn Numizmatyczny, 34, Częstochowa 2006, p. 112), Trzcianka, County loco, Greater Poland Voivodeship (of an unidentified denomination, probably an antoninianus; BURSCHE, Later…, p. 220; CIOŁEK, Die Fundmünzen… Pommern, p. 247), Zielona, Żuromin County, Masovian Voivodeship (an imitation; S. KUBIAK, Znaleziska monet rzymskich z Mazowsza i Podlasia, Wrocław 1979, pp. 78–79; BURSCHE, Later…, p. 161; A. ROMANOWSKI, Die Fundmünzen der Römischen Zeit in Polen: Rechtsufriges Masowien und Podlachien, Collection Moneta – 84, Wetteren 2008, p. 154), an unidentified location in Silesia (CIOŁEK, Die Fundmünzen… Schlesien, p. 317).

14 BURSCHE, Later…, p. 156; CIOŁEK, Die Fundmünzen… Pommern, p. 171. 15 BURSCHE, Later…, p. 217; R. CIOŁEK, “Skarb antoninianów z Piły: skarb, kasa legionowa, czy annua

munera,” [in:] H. MACHAJEWSKI, J. ROLA (eds.), Pradolina Noteci na tle pradziejowych i wczesnośrednio-wiecznych szlaków handlowych, Piła 2006, pp. 245–248; CIOŁEK, Die Fundmünzen… Pommern, pp. 156–180.

16 DYMOWSKI, RUDNICKI, “Kujawskie znaleziska…,” p. 245.17 Kosmów, Hrubieszów County, Lublin Voivodeship (BURSCHE, Later…, p. 152; KACZANOWSKI,

MARGOS, Tabula…, p. 108), Waplewo Wielkie, Sztum County, Pomeranian Voivodeship (BURSCHE, Later…, p. 159; CIOŁEK, Die Fundmünzen… Pommern, p. 254), Żary, County loco, Lubusz Voivodeship (BURSCHE, Later…, p. 170; CIOŁEK, Die Fundmünzen… Schlesien, p. 314), Lechitów, Góra County, Lower Silesian Voivo-deship (BURSCHE, Later…, p. 196; CIOŁEK, Die Fundmünzen… Schlesien, p. 130), Skałka, Wrocław Coun-ty, Lower Silesian Voivodeship (BURSCHE, Later…, p. 207; CIOŁEK, Die Fundmünzen… Schlesien, p. 227), Wrocław, Lower Silesian Voivodeship (Ibidem, p. 300).

18 Juncewo, Żnin County, Kuyavian-Pomeranian Voivodeship (BURSCHE, Later…, p. 191).

MORE ROMAN COINS FOUND IN KUYAVIA...

162

Gallic Empire: the farther west we proceed, the more such coins can be found19 (Map 1). A similar phenomenon has been observed for the territories between the Rhine and the Oder,20 which allows one to conclude that those coins had reached the territories of Poland via the shortest route, i.e., from the area along the Rhine. Considering the frequency of the coins from the Imperium Galliarum in the neigh-bouring territories, the inflow into present-day Poland from the south is not very likely,21 while the one from the south-east should be basically ruled out.22 As part of the West Baltic range, apart from the above-mentioned supposed antoninianus of Victorinus included as part of the “Polish” finds,23 the only recorded items are a single aureus of Victorinus from Sambia24 and a hoard from Kaunas, which should be treated perhaps as a presumed find (a modern-day collection?), which would comprise, among other things, three Gallic antoniniani: of Victorinus, Tet-ricus I, and Tetricus II.25

19 It should be noted that due to state of research, especially in eastern parts of Poland, these data could not be treated as fully reliable.

20 Cf. M. ERDRICH, Rom und die Barbaren. Das Verhältnis zwischen dem Imperium Romanum und den germanischen Stämmen vor seiner Nordwestgrenze vor der späten Republik bis zum Gallischen Sonderreich, Römisch-Germanische Forschungen 58, Mainz 2001, p. 131.

21 For the finds in the Bohemian Basin, the following items have been recorded: 3 coins of Postumus (1 antoninianus and 2 unidentified “bronze” coins), 1 antoninianus of Victorinus, and 6 antoniniani of Tetricus I & II; J. MILITKÝ, Finds of Greek, Roman and early Byzantine coins in the territory of the Czech Republic. I. Bohemia (Volume 1), Collection Moneta – 107, Wetteren 2010, pp. 109–110, 129, 165, 185; IDEM, Finds of Greek, Roman and early Byzantine coins in the territory of the Czech Republic. I. Bohemia (Volume 2), Collection Moneta – 108, Wetteren 2010, p. 137 & 162. For the territories of Slovakia and Moravia (in the parts featured in the Krakow TIR volume), no coins of the Gallic rulers have been recorded; KACZANOWSKI, MARGOS, Tabula…, pp. 377–476.

22 We know of 3 antoniniani of the Imperium Galliarum from the territories of the Chernyakhov Culture: 1 coin of Victorinus (found in a bird’s stomach, which puts any attempt at assigning the find to a specific ter-ritory in much doubt) and 2 coins of Postumus; D.A. BOČKOV, “Interesnyj slučaj nahodki dvernepimskoj monety,” Kratkie soobŝeniâ Instituta archeologii AN USSR, Vyp. 4., Kiev 1955, pp. 84–85; V.V. KROPOTKIN, Klady rimskih monet na territorii SSSR, Svod arheologičeskih istočnikov, Vyp. G. 4–4., Moskva 1961, p. 76; A.A. NUDEL’MAN, “Topografiâ kladov i nahodok ediničnyh monet,” Arheologičeskaâ karta Molodavskoj SSR, Vyp. 8., Kišinev 1976, p. 76. Sporadically recurring information on discoveries of coins of the Gallic usurpers in the Ukraine by the so-called “detectorists,” just like the news of the alleged find of an antoninianus of Marius in Cherson (KROPOTKIN, Klady rimskih…, p. 84) is not very trustworthy. Also, the northern fringes of the terri-tory of the Chernyakhov Culture is most likely the area where an aureus of Postumus (now at Zakład Narodowy im. Ossolińskich in Wrocław) was found; A. BURSCHE, “The Battle of Abrittus, the Imperial Treasury and Aurei in Barbaricum,” The Numismatic Chronicle (forthcoming). I. Bełkowska deals with the double sestertii of Postumus supposedly found in the Ukraine (I. BEŁKOWSKA, “Napływ dużych rzymskich monet brązowych na ziemie polskie w I–III w. n.e.,” Wiadomości Numizmatyczne XXV, 1981, p. 138), citing the publication of T.V. Buttrey. However, the article in question (T.V. BUTTREY, “A Hoard of Sestertii from Bordeaux and the Problem of Bronze Circulation in the Third Century A.D.,” The American Numismatic Society Museum Notes 18, 1972, p. 52) only makes reference to some single coins (antoniniani) of Postumus, Victorinus, and Marius from the Ukrainian finds cited after the 1961 inventory of Kropotkin.

23 Różyńsk, Ełk County – a “bronze” coin, probably an antoninianus; NOWAKOWSKI, Corpus…, p. 94.24 A. ZAPOLSKA, Znaleziska monet rzymskich z kręgu zachodniobałtyjskiego, Warszawa 2012, doctoral

dissertation submitted at the Archaeology Institute of the University of Warsaw, p. 199.25 W. KACZANOWICZ, “Moneta Allektusa znaleziona w Kownie,” [in:] J. KOLENDO, A. BURSCHE

(eds.), Nowe znaleziska importów rzymskich z ziem Polski II, Corpus der römischen Funde im europäischen Bar-baricum, Suplement, vol. II, Warszawa 2001, pp. 137–140; ZAPOLSKA, Znaleziska monet…, p. 228.

ARKADIUSZ DYMOWSKI

163

Compared with the coins of the Gallic usurpers, the finds of coins from the Imperium Britanniarum in the territory of the Central-European Barbaricum are incomparably less frequent. The new find from the region of Kuyavia is the first relatively securely and precisely (in terms of its location) recorded specimen of this type among the Polish finds. A similar antoninianus of Carausius, from the London mint as well, had been supposedly found in 1995, somewhere up the Kaczawa in Lower Silesia.26 Moreover, a “quinar” of Allectus belonged to the aforementioned, uncertain hoard of Kaunas.27 In Western Europe, as one may expect considering the territorial extent of the usurpation, the finds of coins of Carausius and Allectus are concentrated mostly in the territory of Britain and, to a lesser degree, in Gaul.28 It may be assumed, in this context, that the recently discovered antoninianus of Carausius reached Poland from Gaul, just like the coins of the Imperium Gal-liarum did. It is certainly more likely than a British source for the inflow.

As the hypothesis assuming that the coins of the Gallic (and British) usurpers had reached Central Europe from the territory of the Imperium Galliarum does not basically raise much opposition,29 some more attention should be focused on the problems of the chronology and causes of the inflow of this coinage. Let us begin with the aurei. In view of the fact that the recently recorded finds have yielded no new material of any relevance to the subject, there is no ground for disagreeing with A. Bursche, in whose opinion the gold coins of the Imperium Galliarum had reached the territory of the Barbaricum, including Poland, as payment for the Ger-manic soldiers in service of the Gallic emperors, which is attested in the written sources.30 It is only worth noting that there is a coincidence between the concentra-tion of the finds of Gallic aurei in Silesia (Map 1) and the supposed location of the territory inhabited by the Silingi.31 If one compares it with the data indicative of the military activity of the Silingi along the Rhine in the late 270s,32 there could be an argument in support of the hypothesis that the Barbarians inhabiting the territories of present-day Poland may have been actively involved in the fighting between the legitimate Roman emperors and the Gallic usurpers that had been waged in the

26 KACZANOWICZ, “Moneta Allektusa…,” p. 140.27 Ibidem, pp. 137–140; ZAPOLSKA, Znaleziska monet…, p. 228.28 KACZANOWICZ, “Moneta Allektusa…,” pp. 139–140.29 Cf. BURSCHE, Later…, pp. 97–98; KACZANOWICZ, “Moneta Allektusa…,” p. 140; BODZEK,

“Monety rzymskie…,” pp. 185–187; CIOŁEK, “Skarb antoninianów…,” p. 248. Other possible sources of the inflow are northern Italy (cf. BURSCHE, Later…, pp. 127–128; BODZEK, “Monety rzymskie…,” p. 187) and Britain (cf. KACZANOWICZ, “Moneta Allektusa…,” p. 140).

30 BURSCHE, Later…, pp. 115–116 and 127–128; IDEM, “Relations between the Late Roman World and Barbarian Europe in the light of the coin finds,” Bulletin du Cercle d’Études Numismatiques 43, 2006, p. 225 – the aforementioned written sources to be found therein.

31 J. STRZELCZYK, Wandalowie i ich afrykańskie państwo, Warszawa 1992, pp. 59–62.32 Ibidem, p. 66.

MORE ROMAN COINS FOUND IN KUYAVIA...

164

same region up to a dozen or so years before.33 We shall return to the question of the chronology of the inflow of the Gallic aurei below, following an analysis of the data on the coin finds comprising other denominations.

As regards the finds of sestertii, or, to put it in more general terms, the large bronze coins of the rulers of the Imperium Galliarum, we know of only the two above-mentioned sestertii of Postumus from the entire area of the Central-Euro-pean Barbaricum: the newly found specimen from the vicinity of Inowrocław and the one found near Chełmno. In strictly geographical terms, the locations of these two coin finds are not very far apart. Nonetheless, it must be noted that in the Ro-man period the first of these locations was situated within the territory inhabited by the Przeworsk Culture, while the other one by the Wielbark Culture. Thus, as a matter of fact, these coin finds could be considered isolated from one another. As in the case of the other coins from the Imperium Galliarum found in the area of the Central-European Barbaricum, the most plausible hypothesis seems to be that of a Gallic source of the inflow. In Gaul, as throughout the Western part of the Em-pire, sestertii had fallen out of circulation by the 270s.34 Consequently, the sestertii in question must have left Gaul during the reign of Postumus, or possibly very shortly thereafter. With all the circumstances taken into account, we are thus faced with two possible interpretations. Either the sestertii of Postumus reached the terri-tory of Poland for the same reasons, and at the same time, as the aurei of Postumus and Victorinus35 or those sestertii may be considered as the final specimens of a broad influx of bronze coinage, above all sestertii, reaching the area of the Cen-tral-European Barbaricum, especially the West Baltic territories, in connection with the long-range amber trade.36 In the case of the latter hypothesis, however, there are no clues directly indicative of the dating of the above inflow of sestertii (arriving likely from Italy via the territories along the Rhine) to a period later than the 250s.37 In fact, we do not know of any sestertii later than the coins of Valerian (253–260) from the West Baltic finds, and there have been no records of hoards containing any sestertii of Postumus from the entire area of the Central-European Barbaricum. As long as we have nothing more than these two single finds, both of the above hypotheses are equally plausible, and we can only hope that more coin finds will be able to shed some more light on this particular set of problems.

33 Cf. BURSCHE, “Moneta i kruszec…,” p. 74; IDEM, Later…, p. 127; CIOŁEK, “Skarb antoninianów…,” p. 248.

34 Cf. J.-P. CALLU, La politique monétaire des empereurs romains de 238 à 311, Paris 1969, pp. 120–129.35 Cf. BURSCHE, Later…, p. 117.36 See Ibidem, p. 100 and 125–126; ZAPOLSKA, Znaleziska monet…, pp. 80–99; cf. also BEŁKOWSKA,

“Napływ…,” pp. 133–134.37 BURSCHE, “Relations …,” p. 222; ZAPOLSKA, Znaleziska monet…, p. 150.

ARKADIUSZ DYMOWSKI

165

Compared with sestertii, antoniniani are much better represented in coin finds, both small finds and hoards, thus offering a significantly broader range of interpre-tative possibilities based on several facts. First, small finds have been noted for an overwhelmingly larger number of the issues of Tetricus I and Tetricus II (includ-ing imitative coins) than those of Postumus and Victorinus, which indicates that those coins, most of them anyway, would have arrived no sooner than in the 270s.38 Second, the hoard of Piła did not contain any coins later than those of Aurelian, while one antoninianus of Probus (276–282) was found in the hoard of Gniewkowo. Third, for the territory of Poland, especially the country’s western regions, a number of antoniniani dating from the 270s–290s39 have been found as well as folles from the late 3rd–early 4th c.,40 from the mints in Gaul;41 this list could also include the antoniniani of Carausius, including the one recently found near Inowrocław, which had most likely arrived from Gaul as well. Fourth, the antoniniani of the Imperium Galliarum can are rarely found in the hoards from the western provinces of the Empire whose latest coins are datable to the late 3rd, 4th, or even the early 5th centu-ry.42 And fifth, there are no clues to suggest that the inflow of the antoniniani of the Imperium Galliarum into the territory of Poland may have been linked to the stream of the folles reaching there from the areas along the Rhine in the 320s–330s.43

In consideration of all the above facts, it may be said that the antoniniani of the Gallic usurpers reached the territory of present-day Poland most probably in the 270s–290s, or possibly beginning in the late 260s and continuing to the early years of the 4th century, travelling along with the coinage issued by the legiti-mate emperors, probably from Gallienus (sole emperor in the years 260–268) to

38 Cf. BODZEK, “Monety rzymskie…,” p. 187.39 The antoniniani of Probus from the mint of Lugdunum, found at Tomaszów Mazowiecki (KUBIAK,

Znaleziska monet…, p. 72; BURSCHE, Later…, p. 210; KACZANOWSKI, MARGOS, Tabula…, p. 331), near Góra in Lower Silesia (A. DYMOWSKI, “Drobne znaleziska monet rzymskich z terenu Polski (cz. 1),” Wiado-mości Numizmatyczne LVI, 2012, p. 121), and in the environs of Szczecin (Ibidem, p. 124), and the antoniniani of Diocletian from the same mint, found at Wołów (BURSCHE, Later…, p. 212; CIOŁEK, Die Fundmünzen… Schlesien, p. 286) and at Legnica (BURSCHE, Later…, p. 197; CIOŁEK, Die Fundmünzen… Schlesien, p. 131).

40 A follis of Diocletian from the mint of Trier, found at Tarnowiec, Subcarpathian Voivodeship (KUNISZ, Znaleziska monet…, p. 217; BURSCHE, Later…, p. 209; KACZANOWSKI, MARGOS, Tabula…, p. 320), folles of Maximian from the mint of Lugdunum, found at Skawina (BURSCHE, Later…, p. 207; KACZANOWSKI, MARGOS, Tabula…, p. 297) and Szczecin (BURSCHE, Later…, p. 219; CIOŁEK, Die Fundmünzen… Pom-mern, p. 239) and a follis of Galerius from the same mint, found at Ostrówek, Mazovian Voivodeship (KUBIAK, Znaleziska monet …, p. 63; BURSCHE, Later…, p. 155; KACZANOWSKI, MARGOS, Tabula…, p. 232).

41 In the case of the majority of the recorded and described late antoniniani and early folles from the coin finds in Poland, there is no information concerning the mints. For this reason, some of the inaccurately identified specimens may have come from the Gallic mints as well.

42 See, e.g., P. BASTIEN, “La trouvaille de Francavilla Fontana (Pouilles),” Revue Numismatique 6, no. 6, 1966, pp. 241–265; J.-B. GIARD, “Le trésor de Montereau,” Revue Numismatique 6, no. 14, 1972, pp. 184–207; P. GUEST, R. BALND, J. ORNA-ORNSTEIN, P. ROBINSON, “Bishop Cannings (Blagan Hill), Wiltshire,” [in:] R. BALND, J. ORNA-ORNSTEIN (eds.), Coin Hoards from Roman Britain, vol. X, London 1997, pp. 426–462.

43 Cf. BURSCHE, Later…, pp. 100–101 and 129–130; R. CIOŁEK, “Die Römischen Münzfunde in Pom-mern,“ Polish Numismatic News VII (Wiadomości Numizmatyczne XLVII), 2003, pp. 32–33.

MORE ROMAN COINS FOUND IN KUYAVIA...

166

Diocletian (284-305) and his co-rulers. There are no grounds for restricting this inflow to a brief (several years long, at the most) time-span and linking it with one specific historical event. On the contrary, the existing indications appear to point to a continuous stream drawn out over a more extended period of time. Evidently, however, the inflow of the late antoniniani under consideration ought to be treated as separate from the stream of the earlier ones (up to Valerian I), coming from the territories along the Rhine as well and recognizable in quite a few coin finds, in particular from the area of the Luboszyce Culture,44 which extended over, i.a., the south-western regions of present-day Poland.45 Since the territories along the Rhine limes had been going through a turbulent period in the late 3rd century, it may be assumed that the late antoniniani found their way into Barbarian possessions in connection with some military activity. Apart from the Barbarian incursions, one should also mention within this context the wars between the legitimate emperors and the Gallic/British usurpers. It is however difficult to determine whether the inflow of the antoniniani into the Barbaricum should be associated with the inter-nal conflicts among the Romans supported by various Germanic reinforcements or with the Barbarian raids into the territories of the Empire already torn by in-fighting, and whether the inflow was linked with soldiers’ pay or some war spoils.46

If we draw comparisons between the above dating of the inflow of those various denominations from the Imperium Galliarum into the territory of Poland, some conspicuous differences between the particular time-spans are evident. For the sestertii, the dearth of available material does not allow for easy interpretation, whereas more can be said about the, aurei and antoniniani. For the territory of Poland, especially Silesia, we know of several finds of aurei of the emperors from

44 This concerns the single finds of Valerian’s antoniniani as well as hoards of denarii and antoniniani with the latest coins of Valerian I, largely from the Gallic mint of Lugdunum. These hoards do not contain coins of the Gallic usurpers or any other pieces struck after the 250s. See BURSCHE, Later…, pp. 127–129 and 161–170; DYMOWSKI, “A Roman antoninianus…,” pp. 97–98.

45 It is not completely out of the question, however, that at least some of the antoniniani of the Imperium Galliarum, in particular those of Postumus, had reached the territories of Poland along with the older antoniniani, especially those of Valerian’s. It is worth noting that in Poland the antoniniani of Postumus from minor finds can be found, as a rule, in the area of the Przeworsk Culture (see note 11). At the same time, we know of a fairly large number of Valerian’s antoniniani found over the territory of the Przeworsk Culture, with the simultaneous near-absence of those from the emperors directly preceding the latter ruler (DYMOWSKI, “A Roman antonini-anus…,” pp. 96–97 and 103–104). It is possible then that one should mark out a small-scale stream of antoniniani of Valerian and Postumus, datable to the 260s or, more broadly, to the late 250s and 260s, coming from the West, recognizable in the coin finds from the territory of the Przeworsk Culture; cf. Ibidem, p. 100.

46 Cf. BURSCHE, Later…, pp. 101–128; CIOŁEK, “Skarb antoninianów…,” p. 248; P. KEHNE, “Auskünf- te antiker Schriftquellen zu Umständen und Größenordnungen des Abflusses römischer Münzen ins Barbaricum vom 1.–5. Jahrhundert n. Chr. – Eine Problemskizze,” [in:] A. BURSCHE, R. CIOŁEK, R. WOLTERS (eds.), Roman Coins outside the Empire. Ways and Phases, Contexts and Functions, Collection Moneta – 82, Wetteren 2008, pp. 75–81.

ARKADIUSZ DYMOWSKI

167

Aurelian to Maximian (285–305), from the mints in Gaul and Italy.47 Therefore, could this uninterrupted flow of the aurei from Gaul be dated, as in the case of the antoniniani, to a period from the beginning of the Imperium Galliarum until the 290s? In that case, the antoniniani and aurei may have reached Barbarians’ hands in connection with the same political developments along the Rhine limes.

The finds of coins of the Imperium Galliarum offer valuable evidence for the inflow of Roman coinage into the Central-European Barbaricum, as well as offering, in the case of coin finds of the Gallic (or British) usurpers, information on the location of the mints. For the issues of legitimate emperors, the absence of information referring to the mint, which tends to be the rule rather than the excep-tion when it comes to coin finds, has a significant negative impact on the research value of the material yielded from such finds. For the time being, we know of more than fifty coins of the Imperium Galliarum and two of the Imperium Britanniarum obtained from coin finds in Poland. Let us hope that the list of such specimens will soon grow longer and that new discoveries will shed more light on the question of the flow of Roman coinage out of the territory of Gaul in the last three decades of the 3rd century.

Contact the author at: arekdym@yahoo.comTranslated by Marcin Fijak

47 2 aurei of Aurelian, minted in Italy, found at Masłów and Racibórz in Silesia (BURSCHE, Later…, p. 198 and 204; KACZANOWSKI, MARGOS, Tabula…, p. 264; CIOŁEK, Die Fundmünzen… Schlesien, p. 145 and 201), an aureus of Tacitus, minted in Rome, found at Gostwica, Lesser Poland (KUNISZ, Znaleziska monet…, p. 64; BURSCHE, Later…, p. 189; KACZANOWSKI, MARGOS, Tabula…, p. 58), an aureus of Probus, minted in Lug-dunum, found at Paszowice in Silesia (BURSCHE, Later…, p. 202; CIOŁEK, Die Fundmünzen… Schlesien, p. 190) and an aureus of Maximian, minted at Ticunum, found near Gdańsk (EADEM, Die Fundmünzen… Pommern, p. 62).

MORE ROMAN COINS FOUND IN KUYAVIA...

168

STRESZCZENIE

Kolejne monety rzymskie znalezione na Kujawach. Pieniądz Imperium Galliarum na terenie Polski

Rok 2012 przyniósł zaskakująco dużo informacji o niezwykle ciekawych znaleziskach monet rzymskich, zwłaszcza trzeciowiecznych, z terenu Kujaw. Do monet wcześniej zarejestrowanych można dodać kilka następnych, które wnoszą wiele nowych informacji do naszej wiedzy na temat dziejów pieniądza rzymskiego na obszarach dzisiejszej Polski w starożytności. Nie później niż w październiku 2012 r., w nieokreślonym bliżej miejscu i okolicznościach nieopodal Inowrocła-wia znaleziono rzymski sesterc Postumusa (z 261 lub 267 r.). Kolejne rzymskie monety, co najmniej cztery, znaleziono między styczniem a listopadem 2012 r. w promieniu ok. 200 m na polu ornym w granicach jednej z wsi w okolicy tego samego miasta. Prawdopodobnie pochodzą one z terenu osady z okresu wpływów rzymskich. Najstarszą monetą odkrytą na tym stanowisku był denar z portretem Domicjana (sprawującym samodzielne rządy w latach 81–96), o którym niestety nie udało się pozyskać bliższych informacji. Drugą monetą był również denar, hybryda awersu emitowanej w latach 141–161 monety pośmiertnej Faustyny Star-szej oraz rewersu denara (również pośmiertnego) Antoninusa Piusa, wybijanego po 161 r., za panowania Marka Aureliusza. Styl wykonania stempli może wska-zywać, choć niejednoznacznie, że opisywana moneta nie jest produktem oficjalnej mennicy. Dwie dalsze monety odnalezione w pobliżu to antoniniany: naśladow-nictwo emisji któregoś z uzurpatorów galijskich z lat 60–70. III w., tzw. radiat, oraz antoninian Karauzjusza z lat 290–292.

Nowo zarejestrowane sesterc Postumusa i antoninian naśladowczy z Kujaw nie są pierwszymi monetami władców Imperium Galliarum uchwyconymi w pol-skich znaleziskach. Wśród drobnych znalezisk z terenu Polski odnotowano jak dotąd jeden sesterc, również Postumusa (z okolic Chełmna), oraz 22 antoniniany uzurpatorów galijskich z lat 260–274: 5 Postumusa, 3 Wiktoryna i 14 Tetryków. Ponadto antoniniany takie wystąpiły w trzech skarbach: z Przezmarka, Piły oraz z okolic Gniewkowa. Dodatkowo z polskich znalezisk drobnych znamy 7 aureu-sów Imperium Galliarum: 6 Postumusa i 1 Wiktoryna. Odkrycia te umiejscowione są na obszarach zajmowanych w okresie późnorzymskim przez wszystkie podsta-wowe kultury archeologiczne i grupy kulturowe z terenu obecnej Polski. Niemniej jednak można zaobserwować pewną prawidłowość w rozrzucie terytorialnym znalezisk monet władców galijskich: otóż im dalej na zachód, tym jest ich wię-

ARKADIUSZ DYMOWSKI

169

cej. Najprawdopodobniej monety te napłynęły na ziemie polskie najkrótszą drogą z terenów nadreńskich.

W porównaniu z monetami uzurpatorów galijskich znaleziska monet Impe-rium Britanniarum na terenie środkowoeuropejskiego Barbaricum są nieporówna-nie rzadsze. Nowe znalezisko z Kujaw jest pierwszym względnie pewnie i precy-zyjnie pod względem lokalizacji uchwyconym egzemplarzem tego typu z polskich odkryć. Analogiczny antoninian Karauzjusza miał być odkryty w 1995 r. gdzieś w górnym biegu rzeki Kaczawy na Dolnym Śląsku. Można założyć, że nowo od-kryty antoninian Karauzjusza trafił na ziemie polskie również z Galii.

Jeśli chodzi o znaleziska sesterców, to z całego obszaru środkowoeuropejskie-go Barbaricum znamy jedynie dwa wspomniane określone w sposób pewny se-sterce Postumusa. Pod względem geograficznym miejsca odkrycia obydwu monet są położone blisko siebie, należy jednak pamiętać, że w okresie wpływów rzym-skich pierwsza lokalizacja leżała na terenie zajmowanym przez kulturę przeworską, a druga przez kulturę wielbarską. Mamy więc dwa pojedyncze, odizolowane te-rytorialnie znaleziska, które trudno interpretować na podstawie samego rozrzutu terytorialnego. Mamy dwie możliwości interpretacyjne, bardzo problematyczne ze względu na szczupłość materiału znaleziskowego. Po pierwsze, sesterce Postumusa mogły napłynąć na ziemie polskie z tych samych przyczyn i w tym samym czasie co aureusy Postumusa i Wiktoryna, o czym niżej. Po drugie, sesterce te można uznać za egzemplarze zamykające dużą falę brązów, przede wszystkim sesterców, które napływały na teren środkowoeuropejskiego Barbaricum, zwłaszcza na tereny kręgu zachodniobałtyjskiego, w związku z dalekosiężnym handlem bursztynem.

W wypadku antoninianów, w porównaniu z sestercami, mamy do dyspozycji znacznie bogatszy materiał znaleziskowy, obejmujący zarówno znaleziska poje-dyncze, jak i skarby. Przede wszystkim należy zwrócić uwagę na kilka faktów. Po pierwsze, w znaleziskach drobnych odnotowano miażdżącą przewagę emisji Tetryków (w tym monet naśladowczych) nad monetami Postumusa i Wiktoryna. Wskazuje to, że co najmniej większość tych monet napłynęła nie wcześniej niż w latach 70. III w. Po drugie, skarb z Piły zawiera monety nie młodsze niż Aure-liana, a w skarbie spod Gniewkowa uchwycono antoninian Probusa (276–282). Po trzecie, z terenu Polski, przede wszystkim zachodniej, pochodzi wiele antoninia-nów z lat 70.–90. III w. oraz follisów z końca III i początku IV w. z mennic galij-skich. Do listy tej można dopisać antoniniany Karauzjusza (w tym ten nowo odkry-ty pod Inowrocławiem), które najprawdopodobniej również napłynęły z Galii. Po czwarte, antoniniany Imperium Galliarum, wprawdzie nieliczne, można znaleźć w skarbach z terenu zachodnich prowincji Imperium datowanych najmłodszymi monetami na koniec III, IV lub nawet początek V w. Po piąte, nic nie wskazuje na to, aby napływ antoninianów Imperium Galliarum na ziemie polskie łączyć ze

KOLEJNE MONETY RZYMSKIE...

170

strumieniem follisów, które docierały w te rejony z obszarów nadreńskich w latach 320–330. Biorąc to wszystko pod uwagę, można postawić tezę, że antoniniany uzurpatorów galijskich napłynęły na obszar obecnej Polski najprawdopodobniej w latach 270–290, ewentualnie w okresie od końca lat 60. III w. do pierwszych lat IV w., z całą pewnością w trudnym obecnie do oszacowania stopniu przemieszane z monetami emitowanymi przez legalnych cesarzy, zapewne od Galiena (samo-dzielne rządy w latach 260–268) do Dioklecjana (284–305) i jego współwładców. Nie ma podstaw, aby napływ ten ograniczać do krótkiego, co najwyżej kilkulet-niego zakresu chronologicznego i wiązać z jednym konkretnym wydarzeniem hi-storycznym. Wręcz przeciwnie, dostępne przesłanki wskazują raczej na strumień rozciągnięty w czasie. Najwyraźniej jednak opisywany napływ późnych antoninia-nów należy oddzielić od strumienia wcześniejszych antoninianów (do Waleriana), również docierających z kierunku nadreńskiego, czytelnego w całkiem licznych znaleziskach, głównie z terenu kultury luboszyckiej (obejmującej swoim zasię-giem m.in. południowo-zachodnią część obecnej Polski). Ponieważ wzdłuż limesu nadreńskiego koniec III w. nie należał do okresów spokojnych, możemy założyć, że późne antoniniany dostały się do rąk Barbarzyńców w związku z wydarzeniami o charakterze militarnym.

Jeśli chodzi o aureusy Imperium Galliarum, to obecnie nie ma podstaw, aby podważyć tezę, według której trafiły one na teren Barbaricum (w tym na ziemie polskie) jako zapłata za poświadczoną w źródłach pisanych służbę wojskową Germanów pod sztandarami cesarzy galijskich. Warto jednak zwrócić uwagę, że z terenu Polski, przede wszystkim ze Śląska, znamy kilka znalezisk aureusów ce-sarzy od Aureliana do Maksymiana (285–305) z mennic galijskich i italskich. Być może więc nieprzerwany napływ aureusów z Galii można datować, podobnie jak w odniesieniu do antoninianów, na okres od czasów funkcjonowania Imperium Galliarum do lat 90. III w. W takim wypadku antoniniany i aureusy mogły docie-rać do rąk Barbarzyńców w związku z tymi samymi wydarzeniami politycznymi wzdłuż limesu nadreńskiego.

ARKADIUSZ DYMOWSKI

171

MAP 1

Finds of coins of the Gallic and British usurpers, territory of Poland (ed. A. Dymowski)

172

PLATE 1

1

2

3

4

Fig. 1. Environs of Inowrocław, Postumus, sestertius, 261 or 267, Lugdunum or Colonia (photo: author’s archive)Fig. 2. Environs of Inowrocław, Faustina the Elder (hybrid), denarius (imitation?), after 161 (photo: author’s archive)Fig. 3. Environs of Inowrocław, an antoninianus imitation, 260s–270s (photo: author’s archive)Fig. 4. Environs of Inowrocław, Carausius, antoninianus, 290–292, London (photo: author’s archive)