Le monnayage de bronze de la Cyrénaïque hellénistique et les Lagides (original) (raw)
Related papers
The classification of the Hellenistic coinage of Cyrenaica is for a long time a matter of discussion among numismatists. Some, like E.S.G. Robinson and recently M. Asolati, were studying it as a specific production. However, J. Svoronos, or us, in our publication of the coins from the French excavations in Alexandria, have considered it as a part of the Ptolemaic coinage. The Cyrenaican coins were very rare in Alexandria and it is clear that they were not used there. The analysis of the types shows in one hand a very strong Ptolemaic influence and, on the other hand, the same evolution in the technical practices (die production, metallic composition). However, most of the time, some subtle transformations on the types and the discrepancy between the weights are indicating that coins from Alexandria and Cyrenaica have a different value.
Guerres et monnayages à l'époque hellénistique
There is a general agreement that, as a rule (but with exception), ancient coinages were mostly issued to match state expenditures and that military expenses generally come first in any budget before the 19th c. This paper focuses on two particularly well documented cases for the Hellenistic kingdoms: Alexander the Great and Mithridates Eupator. For Alexander, not only the peak of strikes in the years 325-323BC has been related with the paying of the disbanded mercenaries but the very pattern of strikes seems to indicate the geographical origins of these mercenaries. It does not seem random indeed if the mints of Lampsacus and Abydus specialized producing gold staters (for the Thracians on their way back home) while the coastal mints of Western Asia Minor mainly issued drachms (for the continental Greek mercenaries). Since the silver tetradrachms of Mithridates are dated by month, they represent a unique opportunity to study the rhythm of their issues. It turns out that the link with military expenditures is extremely strong (if not the only one in this particular case). Soldiers were paid before or after (if successfull), not during the campaigns. Not all the soldiers were paid (as a quantitative analysis tends to demonstrate) and some actions, as the building of a fleet or the so-called second Mithridatic war (led only with tributary troops), didn't necessitate fresh issues of coins. We are thus left with the following statement: coins were struck for military purposes, but first to pay mercenaries.
Deux politiques de l’or. Séleucides et Lagides au IIIe siècle avant J.-C.
Regards croisés en numismatique. Journées scientifiques en hommage aux travaux de Jean-Noël Barrandon, Orléans, 12 décembre 2008, Revue numismatique (2010), p. 71-93., 2010
"The Seleucid and Lagid dynasties are usually considered as rivals, particularly in view of their opposite economic policies. This article confronts the gold currencies of both kingdoms during the 3rd century B.C., especially weight standards, gold fineness, denominations, production and circulation, which underline the differences between the policies. However, the Lagids, like the Seleucids, selected portrait types for their gold coins. Moreover, metal analysis suggests that Ptolemies and Seleucids took their gold from a stock with special features. Séleucides et Lagides sont traditionnellement présentés comme rivaux, opposés notamment par deux organisations économiques radicalement différentes. Cet article confronte leurs politiques concernant le numéraire d’or au IIIe s. : étalon bien sûr, mais aussi titre, variété des dénominations, volume de la production, et circulation répondent à des choix divergents. Cependant, la typologie est dynastique, chez les Lagides comme chez les Séleucides. Surtout, l’analyse du métal montre que les deux royaumes ont utilisé un stock aux caractéristiques physiques distinctes."
Annales. Histoire, Sciences Sociales 69e année, 2014/1
Résumé Français Le système monétaire de l’Égypte ptolémaïque, instauré par Ptolémée I, était composé de pièces d’or, d’argent et de bronze, ces dernières n’ayant eu qu’une valeur fiduciaire. Alors qu’il réforma le système fiscal, Ptolémée II (284-246 av. J.-C.) imposa le paiement en monnaie de bronze d’un certain nombre de taxes dont il accorda une partie des revenus aux temples. Le clergé disposa dès lors de monnaie de bronze. Or, étant donné que de nombreux Égyptiens étaient employés dans les temples, on peut en déduire que cela permit la diffusion des pièces de bronze dans l’ensemble du pays du fait de la rétribution des travailleurs. Ptolémée II, par sa politique, favorisa donc la circulation de cette monnaie. English Ptolemaic Currency and Egyptian Temples : The Diffusion of Bronze Coinage in Thebaid in the 3rd Century BC The monetary system of Ptolemaic Egypt, established under King Ptolemy I, was composed of silver and bronze coins, the latter having only a fiduciary value. When he reformed the tax system, Ptolemy II (284-246 BCE) required the payment in bronze currency of numerous taxes – part of the proceeds of which were allotted to the temples. The clergy was therefore paid in bronze coins. Given that many Egyptians were employed by the temples, they were equally paid in bronze coins, which would explain the widespread distribution of this coinage in the country. Ptolemy II’s policy thus promoted the circulation of this form of currency. Plan de l'article Les acteurs de la diffusion de la monnaie de bronze Les temples, instruments de la politique monétaire lagide Payer les taxes Les temples, garants d’un substitut de monnaie ? L’argent du trésor de Ptah