« Numismatic Taxonomy » - article ; n°26 ; vol.6, pg 258-268

Theodore V.Buttrey

Description

Revue numismatique - Année 1984 - Volume 6 - Numéro 26 - Pages 258-268
Revue Numismatique, 6e série, XXVI, 1984, p. 258-268. T. V. Buttrey, Numismatic Taxonomy. — A review-article of Alan M. Stahl, The Merovingian Coinage of the Region of Metz (Louvain-la-Neuve, 1982) [Publications d'Histoire de l'Art et d'Archéologie de l'Université catholique de Louvain XXX : Numismatica Lovaniensia 5]. The study (I) defines the monetary area of Merovingian Metz and collects a great many new coins, (2) calculates a gold fineness of many pieces by Specific Gravity and (3) proposes a new, computer-guided method of arranging the disparate material into chronologically sequential « Clusters ». Unfortunately the text is full of errors and inconsistencies, while the S. G.'s and the computer operation are unreliable.
11 pages
Source : Persée ; Ministère de la jeunesse, de l’éducation nationale et de la recherche, Direction de l’enseignement supérieur, Sous-direction des bibliothèques et de la documentation.

Informations

• Publié par: REVUE_NUMISMATIQUE
• Publié le: 01 janvier 1984
• Nombre de lectures: 53
• Langue: English

Extrait

Theodore V. Buttrey
« Numismatic Taxonomy »
In: Revue numismatique, 6e série - Tome 26, année 1984 pp. 258-268.
Abstract
Revue Numismatique, 6e série, XXVI, 1984, p. 258-268. T. V. Buttrey, Numismatic Taxonomy. — A review-article of Alan M.
Stahl, The Merovingian Coinage of the Region of Metz (Louvain-la-Neuve, 1982) [Publications d'Histoire de l'Art et d'Archéologie
de l'Université catholique de Louvain XXX : Numismatica Lovaniensia 5]. The study (I) defines the monetary area of Merovingian
Metz and collects a great many new coins, (2) calculates a gold fineness of many pieces by Specific Gravity and (3) proposes a
new, computer-guided method of arranging the disparate material into chronologically sequential « Clusters ». Unfortunately the
text is full of errors and inconsistencies, while the S. G.'s and the computer operation are unreliable.
Citer ce document / Cite this document :
Buttrey Theodore V. « Numismatic Taxonomy ». In: Revue numismatique, 6e série - Tome 26, année 1984 pp. 258-268.
doi : 10.3406/numi.1984.1867
http://www.persee.fr/web/revues/home/prescript/article/numi_0484-8942_1984_num_6_26_1867V. BUTTREY* Theodore
« NUMISMATIC TAXONOMY »]
Little enough is known of the Merovingian economy. Stahl's
study undertakes to examine it through the coins of one area, to
derive from them some better idea of their source, scope and
purpose. More than simply a review of known material, the
book is built on three new investigations: S. (1) defines the mone
tary area in question and collects a great many new coins, (2)
calculates the gold fineness of many more pieces than have ever
been analyzed before, and (3) proposes a new, computer-guided
method of arranging this extremely disparate material into
chronologically sequential "Clusters". The Catalogue gathers
the civic coinages for Mettis and the region about, a considerable
advance over the work of Prou whose listing S. has more than
doubled, though the relatively few instances of dielinkage suggests
that much still remains to be discovered. These coins are arranged
by apparent type derivation and development into ten Groups.
S. has himself calculated the gold fineness of the pieces in the Biblio
thèque Nationale, Paris. The steady decline in mean fineness of
the Groups seems to support their chronological arrangement, one
which can be set against the chronologically better understood
regal Merovingian issues, whose fineness also declines. A second
arrangement of his material in Clusters, by a computerized compar
ison of all the coins with one another, produces a second, differing
chronology which also can be set against the regal. A chapter
on "Coinage and Urban Settlement" really has little to do with
coinage. S. sedulously collects all manner of contemporary refer
ence to Metz, Trier, Toul and Verdun, showing that the relative
* Dept. of Classical Studies, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan.
1. Review-article of Alan M. Stahl, The Merovingian Coinage of the Region of
Metz (Louvain-la-Neuve, 1982) [Publications d'Histoire de l'Art et d'Archéologie de
l'Université catholique de Louvain XXX; Numismatica Lovaniensia 5], vu, 200 pp ;
frontispiece, 15 pli.
Revue numismatique, 1984, 6e série, XXVI, p. 258-268. « NUMISMATIC TAXONOMY » 259
importance of Metz in matters political, religious and commercial
corresponds to its predominance in coinage. "Coinage and Rural
Settlement" considers the relation of minting to local settlement,
and concludes that it has less to do with specific commercial
activity or intensity of habitation than regional governance.
The important concluding chapter confirms that the Merovingian
coinage and monetary circulation of 560-660 A.D. must have been
almost exclusively in gold; that the numerous minters who sign
the coins are functionaries only ; that in spite of the absence of the
royal name, coinage was under royal control, the metal probably
deriving from the royal revenues.
Chapter VII is the most unusual feature of this study, an attempt
at sorting and arranging the coins of the Catalogue by a comput
erized exercise in numerical taxonomy. Since the computer is
likely to become more and more important in our studies in future,
it would be well to examine the use of it closely here. S's procedure
is too complicated for more than a general description in the book:
various features of the coins are provided with a coded description
by which they can be compared in many ways, to ascertain the
similarity or diversity of the issues. Similar pieces are gathered
into apparently coherent Clusters. We can see the results as they
are laid out in summary, p. 94, figure 27. Here the ten newly
generated Clusters are arranged by descending mean gold fineness
and divided into four Sets in relative chronological order. Each
Cluster is given its mean weight, the hoards which included coins
from it, and the Stylistic Groups which contribute to it. Compari
ng this summary with the Catalogue of coins, we find in this one
table a nest of errors:
of the Cluster totals of coins with gold analyses, two do not
tally with the Catalogue, J, N=24 and E, N=3, the latter perhaps
a misprint for N = 13. C, N=4 is correct after A5b and J7a are
emended in Catalogue to Cluster Ca. Cluster I omits Group IX,
В omits VII (P2a), D includes VIII wrongly (nothing such in
Catalogue), G omits IV if I2a should be here as per Catalogue and
p. 24. G also IX, С omits IX. Finally, the 6 coins in
Clusters Ca and Ga, not fitting the scheme conveniently, are simply
omitted.
Given the state of presentation of S's conclusions to this impor
tant chapter, how can we have any confidence in the accuracy of
the procedures which led to them, procedures which we cannot
check?
In fact, this is the state of the book throughout. To read it
requires a reader who is sufficiently willing, patient and industrious 260 T. V. BUTTREY
to re-edit it. When he does, he finds innumerable mistakes and
inconsistencies. In part the problem is editorial: thus p. 18,
"weights are available for" 214 coins; in the Catalogue their total
is 244. The inconcinnity here is owing to S's omission of weak
data, e.g. the weights of worn or holed specimens (S. to me, per
litteras). But the reader is told nothing when such occurs, and
is left to wonder whether the inconsistencies in the book are the
result of accident or design. Thus, p. 17 fn, the weights of Albi
and iii are compared, but in the Catalogue iii has no weight.
P.24, Group III gold content 74+/-9 % (N=6), but p. 54,
84+/- hoard" ; 11 but % in (N the = Catalogue, 10). P.24, p. "Coin 148, the C3a attribution was part is of questioned. the Buis
P.25, Group V weight 1.27 + /-0.05 (N = 13), but p. 54, 1.27+/-
0.04 (N = 16). P.27, the list of Group IX mints omits Nasio and
its coins ; in Group X add Doso G2a and read total fifteen. P.30,
"Nine names of minters appear on the coins of Metz, responsible
for a total of 85 extant specimens" ; but for these nine minters the
Catalogue lists 82 pieces; and see p. 31, "the 78 coins of Metz
itself." P. 31, "Marsallo produced 22 [known coins]": but the lists 26. P. 35, "gold content of the three coins [of
Manno] tested is 39 %" ; the Catalogue shows that four were tested,
mean content 41 %. P. 54, Fig. 4: 20 totals are given for the coins
weighed or assayed for this table; only 7 tally with totals taken
from the Catalogue. If doubtful weights have been intentionally
omitted (e.g. Group IX where N = 19 but 28 pieces are weighed
in Catalogue), we are not told the criteria for their suppression,
nor even that such has happened. And how to explain Group V
gold N = 10 when only 9 pieces are assayed in Catalogue; or Group
VII gold where N=33, but only 29 coins are assayed in Catalogue?
Four different figures are given for the total of coins whose Mean
Gold Content forms the basis of calculation: p. 17, 137; p. 54,
Fig. 4[a], a total of 138; Fig. 4[b], 135; p. 94, 119 (including the
14 of Group X which have been subtracted). (In Fig. 27,
Cluster E, N=3, though in the Catalogue some 13 pieces attributed
to E bear an indicated gold content: if N=3 is simply a
misprint for N = 13, the total 129 is still short.) P.62-3, the
Crondall hoard is dated "around 640"; for the St. Aubin hoard
"630-640 would be appropriate" ; but p. 94, the St. is
the later of the two in the arrangement of the Sets. (In consi
dering the dates of the hoards, S. refers to Lafaurie's important
work, but not the more recent, and differing, opinions of Rigold
in Sutton Hoo I.) On pp.68-70, the mean gold contents of four
hoards are shown in four histograms: every one of them is wrong.
45 pieces of the Escharen hoard have a known gold content, but « NUMISMATIC TAXONOMY » 261
the histogram gives only 41 ; Sutton Hoo, 37 pieces, but only 36
on the ("1" for "2" on the second column is an obvious
misprint; but Sutton Hoo I lists 9 pieces at 80-85 % where S. has 8,
and 13 at 90-100 % where S.