Coinage of Alexandria-Egypt

Note from Wayne Sayles:  Emmett "Alexandrian Coins" is the easiest to use, most complete and one of the most inexpensive references available for these coins. It also gives a complete rarity guide for every date of every issue.

On the reverses, the letter L represents the abbreviation for the word "year" in Greek.  The use of this format is what allows us to properly date to the regnal year of each coin issued.

Note from Mike Covili:  All of the standard references describe the two denominations of small bronzes together as dichalkae, although some of them do recognize that the smallest of them may be chalkae.  The larger of these two sizes, is the likely hemi-obol.  The smaller, previously called chalkon is the likely quarter-obol, or true dichalkon.  This stems from a paper by Klaus Maersch (in German) based on studies of the papyrus suggests these new denominations.  Erik Christiansen's Roman Coins of Alexandria continues this idea.  It seems to make much more sense.  I posted Keith Emmett's recent Celator article on my website:

http://www.coinsofromanegypt.org/html/library/emmett/emmett_aug.htm

This is from one of the notes: "The conventional view has been that these coins represent dichalkons, however, this may not be true for a number of reasons: from the sizes and weights in RPC1 and RPC2, it is apparent that the smallest denomination actually represents two denominations. From Table 2, the ratio of the obol to this "dichalkon" (called a hemiobol in the table) suggests that 2.17 to 2.36 of the smaller coin equalled an obol; however if the smaller coin were a dichalkon, then one would expect a ratio for 4 to an obol. The smallest coins cited in RPC1 and RPC2 are approximately half the weight of this "dichalkon", and these smallest coins likely represent the true dichalkon. This would result in coins of a half obol and a quarter obol, which would solve many of the questions raised regarding the bronze denominations cited in the papyri. These denominations of 2, 1, 1/2 and 1/4 obols correspond with Augustus' 80, 40, 20 and 10 drachm denominations. In the later empire, the weight of the 1/4 obol denomination was reduced to that of the older 5 drachm value denomination, which had been eliminated at an earlier period."

Note on rarity from p. xvii:

Rarity is denoted from 1-5 with 1 being most common and 5 being most rare with perhaps only one or two specimens found in any of the major Alexandrian collections. The rarity indicator will be in parentheses behind the attribution.

*****

Updated notes from Keith Emmett on 09/25/07:

I just have a clarification on Christiansen's view on the bronze denominations. He differs from me in that he assigns a value of 1-1/2 obols to my diobol and his next sized coin he calls a 3/4 obol, which is my obol and the next coin size he calls "trichalkon" which is my half-obol. He follows my logic in that the denomination halve in weight and thus in value, but he differs in calling a diobol as a 1-1/2 obol piece, probably because nobody else identified a half-obol and therefore the mention of a payment of 1-1/2 obols could not be figured out with the denominations known at the time.

I was just reviewing Klaus Maresch's book Bronze und Silber, and he does extend the values to 10 and 5. Because the work is in German, I can not be certain that he is calling Milne's dichalkon a hemi-obol. He does not give the weights of the coins, which would confirm the link. 

Maresch gives:

P  = 80 Rechendr. = Diobolon    (25 mm)
M  = 40    "      = Obolos      (20 mm)
K  = 20     "     = Hemiobelion (15 mm)
I  = 10      "    = Dichalkon   (10 mm)
E  =  5       "   = Chalkus     ( 5 mm)

The main stumbling block for the bronze coinage was not seeing that a half-obol denomination existed. I think there was too much importance placed on the weight of the smallest piece. There is still some debate on what if anything is smaller than a half-obol -- but I think there is a quarter-obol denomination (and at one time there was a 1/8 obol (chalkon)).

*****

From Emmett's research in his Celator article, Volume 17, No. 8, August 2004, here are the weight relationships, starting with the non-portrait coinage of Augustus:

The question as to when the older Ptolemaic denominations became replaced with the obol-based denominations is difficult to determine. Milne's third and fourth series may have been a reduced-weight series of 80 drachms (10.11 gm.), 40 drachms (5.14 gms.) and 20 drachms (2.66 gms.), or they may have been a new equating series of a diobol, obol and half obol, which had been reduced, again, as evidenced in Milne's fifth and sixth series.

Concerning the role of the coin-types without the portrait of Augustus, these coins provided the necessary smaller denominations of 40, 20, 10, and 5 drachms. The fact that they lack the portrait of Augustus makes them easy to distinguish from the later obol-based denominations. This indicates that the older Ptolemaic denominations lasted in Alexandria at least until year 38 of Augustus. It may well be that a dual value system for the coins was utilized for the Augustan bronze pieces:— one based on an equivalence to silver and the other one based on obol denominations.

*****

Notes to self added 01/08/2008 (thinking out loud - just ignore this) - AE Drachm (24.00g range) : Tetrobol (18.00g range) : Hemidrachm (12.00g range) : Diobol (8.00g range) : Trihemiobol (6.00g range) : Obol (4.00g range) : Hemiobol (2.00g range) : Tetartemorion (1.00g range) : Hemitetartemorion (0.50g range)

*****

Notes from Keith Emmett added 02/12/2008: 

Billon denominations = octodrachm (radiate) : tetradrachm : didrachm : drachm
Bronze denominations = drachm (6 bronze obols) : hemidrachm (3 obols) : diobol (2 obols) : obol (8 chalki) : hemiobol (4 chalki) : dichalkon (2 chalki) : chalkon (base unit)

The early period up to Nero (perhaps later) there was a 1 chalkon denomination (value mark = E=5) and later it seems that the hemiobol (called a dichalkon in most catalogs), and a dichalkon were the usual smaller denominations. With the three smallest denominations it is almost impossible to distinguish between the three denominations even when weighed and measured. Some of the so called "dichalkons" may have been minted for/in Caesaria? and may have been mixed with the Alexandrian issues and thus complicating the denominations.

A silver tetradrachm was not equal to 4 bronze drachms. The tetradrachm was usually equated to 28 or 29 bronze obols, the extra 2 to 3 bronze obols was likely a surcharge. The sizes and weights decreased for the denominations over time. I'll look at your weights and sizes later.

You have to compute the means and standard deviation for each denomination, as some weights may be abnormally heavy or light issues but when they are averaged you can see a clear picture. A diobol was usually 25 to 26 mm but eventually reduced to around 21 mm, approaching the size of an obol of an early period.

*****