Pre-Columbian Old World Coins in America: An

Transcription

Pre-Columbian Old World Coins in America: An Examination of the Evidence [and Comments
and Reply]
Author(s): Jeremiah F. Epstein, Donal B. Buchanan, T. V. Buttrey, George F. Carter, Warren L.
Cook, Cyclone Covey, Stephen C. Jett, Thomas A. Lee, Jr., Balaji Mundkur, Allison C. Paulsen,
Hanns J. Prem, Jonathan E. Reyman, Miguel Rivera Dorado and Norman Totten
Source: Current Anthropology, Vol. 21, No. 1 (Feb., 1980), pp. 1-20
Published by: The University of Chicago Press on behalf of Wenner-Gren Foundation for
Anthropological Research
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/2741739
Accessed: 10-09-2015 17:43 UTC
Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at http://www.jstor.org/page/
info/about/policies/terms.jsp
JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content
in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship.
For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.
The University of Chicago Press and Wenner-Gren Foundation for Anthropological Research are collaborating with
JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Current Anthropology.
http://www.jstor.org
This content downloaded from 35.8.11.3 on Thu, 10 Sep 2015 17:43:20 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
CURRENT ANTHROPOLOGY
?
Vol. 21, No. 1, February1980
Research0011-3204/80/2101-0003$02.25
FoundationforAnthropological
1980by The Wenner-Gren
Pre-Columian Old WorldCoins in America:
of the Evience'
n ExaminatLon
by Jeremiah F. Epstein
a numberofpre-Columbian
Old Worldcoinshave been foundin theUnitedStates.In most
cases,thecoinswerenotfoundin clearlydefinablecontextsand
the documentationthat surroundsthe discoveriesis far from
adequate. The significanceof these individual finds is not
obvious.Diffusionists
arguethat,evenwithoutcontextualdata,
someformofpre-Columbiancontactis suggested.Professional
anthropologists
studiouslyavoid drawingany conclusionsfrom
the limiteddata available.
numberoffindshave been made to permita
Yet a sufficient
detailedstudyof the subject.The data are scatteredin newspaper reportsor literaturenot normallyread by anthropologists.The information
presentedherecame to myattentionas
a resultof widenewspapercoveragelinkingme witha Roman
follissaid to be froman Indian moundin centralTexas. Many
personswho had foundancientcoins wroteto me about them,
oftensendingthecoinsto me foridentification.
Otherssentme
that could easily have been overlooked.Thanks to
references
these generousand helpfulindividuals,I have been able to
on some40 coin discoveries.While the size
collectinformation
of the sampleis not impressive,it is large enoughto analyze,
and some conclusionscan be drawnfromit as to the nature,
extent, patterning,and significanceof pre-ColumbianOld
Worldcoinsfoundin America.
This is not the firststudy of ancient coins in America.
WITHIN THE LAST THREE DECADES,
I Withouttheunstinting
helpofJackKroll,DepartmentofClassics,
Universityof Texas at Austin,and Yaakov Meshorer,ChiefCurator
of the BronfmanArchaeologicalMuseum, the Israel Museum of
Jerusalem,thispaper could not have been written.Kroll checkedthe
manuscriptforaccuracyregardingthedescriptionsand identifications
of coins cited in otherliterature.Both scholarsidentifiedthe coins I
sent them and generouslypermittedme to quote them. Obviously,
theyare not responsibleforthe errorsthatoccurin thisstudy.
JEREMIAHF. EPSTEIN is ProfessorofAnthropology
at theUniver-
sity of Texas at Austin (Austin, Tex. 78712, U.S.A.). Born in
1924, he was educated at the Universityof Illinois (B.S., 1949;
M.A., 1951) and at the Universityof Pennsylvania(Ph.D., 1957).
He has taught at Texas since 1960. His researchinterestsare
Mesoamerican archaeology,early man in the New World, and
problems of transoceanic contact. His publications include
"Burins fromTexas" (AmericanAntiquity26:93-97); "Centipede
and Damp Caves: Excavations in Val Verde County, Texas,
1958" (Bulletin of the Texas ArchaeologicalSociety 33:1-128);
"Towards the Svstematic Description of Chipped Stone," in
Proceedingsof the 35th InternationalCongressof Americanists,
Mexico, 1962, vol. 1, pp. 155-69; and The San Isidro Site: An
Early Man Campsitein NuevoLein, Mexico (Universityof Texas
at AustinDepartmentof Anthropology,AnthropologySeries 7).
The presentpaper was submittedin finalform29 I 79.
Unquestionablyone of the best is that of Pohl (1973), who
combeda good shareof the literatureand newspaperaccounts
and cited eightseparatecoin reports.Pohl concludes(p. 35)
that the scatterednatureof the evidenceis moresuggestiveof
driftvoyagesmadein Romanshipsthanofplannedexpeditions.
Mahan and Braithwaite(1975) have added fournew itemsto
the list. My studydiffersfromtheseothers,I hope, in being
moredata. It deals,interalia,
moreanalyticaland in presenting
with the discovery,or purporteddiscovery,of coins both
and withreportsofcoinslostas wellas
genuineand counterfeit
found.
BACKGROUND
ReportsofthediscoveryofRomancoinsin Americago back to
the 16thcentury.The earliestaccountis thatofMarineoSiculo
(1533), who claimedthata coinbearingtheimageofAugustus
discoveries
was foundin thegold minesofPanama. No further
of Roman coins were mentionedfor 250 years. In the early
19thcentury,findswerereportedat separatebut neighboring
localitiesin Tennessee.Atwater(1820) was the firstscholarto
discuss this material,and his attitudewas decidedlyhostile.
Haywood (1823) was not so sceptical; he
His contemporary
publisheda list of objects suggestiveof transoceaniccontact,
includingfourRoman coinsfromthe area aroundFayetteville.
The earliestnoticeofa Hebrewcoin,as wellas thefirstaccount
ofa coin reputedto have comefroman Indian mound,is in a
letterpublishedby Schoolcraft(1854). The only other 19thcenturyfindofwhichI am awareis a bronzecoinofGreco-Syrian
reportedfromCass County,
Antiochus,
origin,commemorating
American1882:382).
Illinois(Scientific
abundant.
Discoveriesin the20thcenturyare comparatively
Startingin 1913, when a Macedonian tetradrachmaminted
about 350-336B.C. was foundin thediggingofa housefoundation in Montana (Pohl 1973), coin discoveriesincreaseat an
almost geometricrate. My researchuncovered31 reportsfor
thiscentury,but I am convincedthatmanymorelie hiddenin
thefilesof thenation'snewspapers.
The majorproblemin makingsenseof the coindiscoveriesis
of the
distribution
in findingpatternsin the temporal/spatial
coins themselves.Accordingly,the 40 reportsthat formthe
bodyofthispaperhave beenanalyzedin variousways.In table
1, the reportsare listedalphabeticallyby the state in which
they were foundand then numberedconsecutively;the two
reportsfromoutsidethe United States end the list. For each
reportare recordedthe date, theplace of originof the coin,its
whereknown,its date, thecircumstances
typeor denomination
Vol. 21 - No. 1 - February1980
1
I~~~~~~~r
o
d
=
E
a
_>^ = >
=
I~~~~~~~~~~0
a
a
?
c
f
0@
@
t! U U
r
t
=t
;
o Eo
Y d
E
d
d
d
4)
;
X P Q Q I A A ? mS o
O
0
o
~~~~~e
Cd
0.
o
d
>
X
Ch
$
*X
>
O
?
S
-4
:f^
~~~~~~~~~~~
U:~~~c
g
U
?:
>.U
o
t
=
I
i
ut
0=
Cd
v_t
.r
u
S._
4Q
-
C
>>cd O
o
o~~~co0
o?
OO
o
Q
o
omOO
O
> E = =z
~~
0
t.
~~>
g
?S
<L)
0
0
0
*
*
X~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~b
,
...
..
.
In~~~~~4-
F{ t3 e +
(Zh~
_
t
E0
.1
bD
-4r
c
a
,
YE
g
=
tn
or
4
tb0
0
sOF~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
>
0aCd
C
.
.
0
r.
-4
o
-
O
...
f
E0
oO
OOOo
e
E
o
ba>.
cd tn
O
o
X~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~C
Q
dYYd
>
,
cd
OFO
Z
>
=
I v=
X~~~~~~~~~~t
MS
aJ
0<
X
M~~~~~~~~~c
O
X
U
t
D)
d
$
e
t>
OOO
* > wWf
_***,Q
R
*_.
U t:~
a
XQ
XX
-4
t >
;X
0
c
OiX
ce
-
,,
C
d
bA t = g*S
*W2
W
Q
=
XE8S
ONUS'Y'
S~~~~~~~~~~~~_
I
'S
<r
1t*>
_
Cl
s;
Y
-t
5
0
a :3d
8 1z'w';:
o
e
o
S
8
u
-
f)dZ W
O
0
$
C
o
0
0
0
u
Z
10
N
0
0
0
En
P4
Cq
oo
1-4
PP
Cq
00
Cq
oo
Cq
oo
00
ng$
oo0
ce
oo0
ce
cd
0
o
ce>C
:
:
cd
Cd
--4
0
1-4
4)
o
ce
ce
ce
4-)0
ce
0
0
ce
0
Cd
ce
0
-4
U)
ce
0
1
0
z
It:$
14-4
N
0 0
0
-4
4-)
U-)
4)
..;
0
l+-q
1-4
Cld
4-)
En
I U "O
4) -t:sod
-4 z
Cd 4)
Cld
>
C'd-4 -4
b,Ob,0,4
biDbO
0
s-4
4-j
ce
0
0
-4
En
0
0
ce
ce
-4
4) $-7=
En Cd
biD
0-
0
1.11
0
bObOe
Cd
U
0
b.0
:3:
P.,P.,P,
0
0
10
ce
P.,
ce
ce
0
14-4
0
P.,Z
0
0
0
0
En
C
Cq0
Cld
u
6
U
Cd bO
14-4
$.4
Cld
q
bOC-4
z
.-
Cd
Cld
bO
I
bD11
bO00 Cld
Z
.,
"O
-
W
44
bO
P-4
Cld
4)
-q
Cld
z
Cld
u
E-4
N
4-)
M.
M.
b,O
Cld
4-)
0- Cld
4)
W
Zt
E-4
Cld
Cd
E-4
00
>
u
Cld
z
M.
Z
bO
Cld
0
uu
z
Cld
Cld
I:$
cld
0
C)
C)
CN
P
CN
M.
CN
P4 Z
P4
P4
cld
u
rq
rq
Cld
4)q)zq)ooww
Cld
4-j
0
00
-4
C\ 00
c
C\
C\
P4
r-
C\ C\ M
-4 -4 C'I
00 00 00
C4
u
M
C'I
00
C\ 14
-4 c
oo C\
4-j
4)
0
0 0C',
-4 0 cn
CN c
\0 in
C\ C\
C)
tC\
Ul)
C)
C\
wwww
00 M M
C,4 M
14
C\ C\ C\
C4
u
Cld
>4
z
-
C'du
>>>>
>
u
Cld
pq
0
-
.14 .-
u
4-i
-
C)
to
C\
-
.14 .14
> z
Cld(n
4.) od od od od od
Z Z 4A 4A 4A 4A
Cld
u
4) 0
7:$
cd (:)
Z P4
4
9:L,
.
I
Cld
U"-)
u
Cld
(5
U
Cld
'cl
C'd Cld
0 C'd Cd
u
, 1:4,
in whichit was found,and thesource.Tables 2-5 abstractthis
table accordingto discoverydates, mintingdates, geographic
ofthediscovery.If thereis
and thecircumstances
distribution,
in thedata, theanalysiswillpresumablyshowit.
anypatterning
The study then proceedsto a criticalevaluationof finds
eitherbecause they were
claimed to be especiallysignificant
associated with Indian sites or because they have received
attentionin the literature.The data analysisends witha discussionof materialthatI believeputs the coin discoveriesin a
on counterfeits,
largerperspective,
includinginformation
modernpatternsof loss of ancientcoins,and findsof Chineseand
Japanesecoinsobtainedfromaboriginalsiteson the American
NorthwestCoast.
PATTERNS IN THE DATA
As I have said, the 20th centurysaw a dramaticincreasein
The variousfindsare listedin table2
reportsofcoindiscoveries.
in orderof theirdiscoveryor firstreporting.
We see thatin the
ofthepresentcenturyand
13-yearperiodbetweenthebeginning
WorldWar I, thereare onlythreereports.BetweenWorldWar
I and World War II, thereare also only three.The striking
increasein coindiscoveriescomesafterWorldWar II; thereare
25 notices in this period. This coincideswith a time when
Americans,whetheras inducteesor as tourists,traveledto
Europe in greatnumbers,and it seemsreasonableto suppose
that most of the coins found since 1914 had been lost by
Americanswho had broughtthem back fromEurope. The
numberof coinspurchasedby Americansis hard to estimate,
but it mustbe quite large.For example,in the earlystagesof
this researchI met a man whose brotherhad purchased20
Constantinefolleswhilestationedin Italy in 1944. Coin collectorsand dealerstell me that the growthof coin collectingin
Americais essentiallya post-WorldWar II phenomenon.In
short,thepatternof coin discoveriesin thiscenturycorrelates
well withthe extentof foreigntravel.What of the 16th-and
accounts?The long period of time betweenthe
19th-century
firstreport,in 1576,and the next,in 1818,shouldarouse suspicion.If theywerevalid,one wouldimaginethatancientcoins
wouldhave shownup in increasingnumbersas Americabecame
settled.The timefactoralso raises suspicionsabout the Tennesseediscoveries.All occurredbetween1818and 1823,and no
discoverieshave been reportedin the state since then.These
suspicionswillbe examinedin moredetaillater.
The dates whenthecoinsweremintedare presentedin table
3. The significant
aspect of the chart is that it shows little
duplicationofdates. Insteadofa clusterofcoinsforanyparticular period,we see that the dates are spread across muchof
Greekand Roman historywith almost no overlapping.(The
main exceptionsare the Bar Kokhba coins that have been
reportedfromKentucky.As willbe shown,at least one ofthese
coinsis counterfeit.)
The mintingdates do not supportthediffusionist
position.If
therehad beencontactthroughEuropeanexploration,
we would
expectit to have been morefrequentin one periodof Greekor
Roman historythanin another.Similarly,ifthe coinscame to
the New World as a resultof driftvoyages,the incidenceof
driftsshould correlatemoreor less withperiodsof intensive
Roman shipping.In eithercase, we wouldexpectto findmore
coins that werestruckduringthe periodsof greatermaritime
activity.These expectationsare not met in the information
assembledin thistable.
The geographicaldistributionof findswithinthe United
Statesis givenin table4. The data are groupedintothreemajor
vs. coastalstates,stateslocatedeast or westofthe
sets:interior
MississippiRiver,and northern
vs. southernstates.The distributional information
is equivocal, and both proponentsand
in it.
opponentsofthediffusionist
positioncan findsomecomfort
For thediffusionist,
of coinsin the
thegreaterconcentration
Southseemsto correlatewithwhatis knownof the ocean currentsfromAfricato America.In the lightof Heyerdahl'sRa
TABLE 2
TABLE 3
COIN DISCOVERIES OF TABLE 1
ARRANGEDCHRONOLOGICALLY
MINT DATES OF COINS OF TABLE 1
ARRANGEDCHRONOLOGICALLY
YEAR
1533............
1818...........
1819...........
1823...........
1880...........
1905...........
1913...........
1928...........
1932...........
1933...........
1943...........
1945...........
1950...........
1953...........
1956...........
1957...........
1960...........
1961...........
1962...........
1963...........
1964...........
1965...........
1967...........
1970...........
1973...........
1975...........
1976...........
1977...........
ITEM
39
25
26, 27, 30
28,29
8
35
9, 19
36
11
37
38
4
17
12
34
1
10, 16*, 23*
7
33
40
31
3*
13, 22
5*, 6*, 14*, 15*,21*, 32*
2
20
24
18
* Precise discoverydate uncertain.
DATES (APPROX.)
B.C. 490 .................
350-36..............
300-200.............
173-64..............
146.................
27-A.D. 14..........
A.D. 41-54. .............
.
.
63-64
.
.
98-117
100-200
.
.
133................
137.................
152-53..............
161-80..............
191.................
194.................
238.................
253-68..............
270-73..............
293.................
296-97..............
300.................
313-14..............
364-67..............
594 .......
........
700-800.............
ITEM
1
19
23
8
2
39
28
16,24
5
25
11, 12, 13
26
35
3
27
20
15, 17
22
32, 7
10
9
29, 36
31, 18
33
14
21
NOTE: Items 4, 6, 30, 34, 37, 38, and
40, all of which are of uncertain dating,
are excluded.
CURRENT
ANTHROPOLOGY
expeditions,thesewould tend to take a driftingvessel in the
directionof the southernstates.Also,the factthat mostof the
European coins were foundin states east of the Mississippi
arguesforAtlanticseafarer/drifters.
thesis
The bestargumentagainstthe driftvoyage/migration
If Mediterin the interiorvs. coastal distribution.
is reflected
raneanshipshad landed in America,it is likelythat the survivorswouldhave remainedalong the coast ratherthan moving
farinland.If driftvesselslanded withno livingcrewmember,
the coinslootedfromthemshouldbe morecommonalong the
coast,althoughsome mightwell have been tradedinland.The
theseexpectations;slightlymore
data in table4 do not confirm
thanhalfofthecoinsreportedcomefrominteriorstates.
of coins in a specificlocalityis in
The only concentration
Tennessee,wheresix reportsoccur. As will be shown later,
however,it is probablethatfraudis involvedhere.The multiple
reportsforKentucky,Wisconsin,and Texas may be the result
of newspaperpublicitythat encouragedthe reportingof finds
have goneunnoticed.
thatwouldordinarily
In summary,the distributionalevidenceis inconclusive.I
wouldhave expecteda moreor less randomgeographicaldistribution,and thisis farfromthecase. The absenceofreportsfrom
as is thelack of
theWestCoast and theSouthwestis a surprise,
fromNew York. Perhapsthereis a directrelationinformation
of the
shipbetweennewspapercoverageand the sophistication
local populace. The southeasternUnited States, which long
TABLE 4
DISCOVERIES
OF COIN
DISTRIBUTION
GEOGRAPHICAL
IN THE
FROM
UNITED
TABLE
OF
NUMBER
REGION
Coastal.......
....
Interior
...........
North... .
South............
East........
.....
West............
STATES
1
NUMBER
STATES
REPORTS
11
9
10
10
14
6
18
20
14
24
27
11
OF
Epstein: PRE-COLUMBIAN
OLD WORLD COINS IN AMERICA
nourishedideas about the lost tribesof Israel and the moundbuilderrace, wouldperhapsbe morereceptiveto such reports
than eitherCaliforniaor New York.
or contextin whichthe coinswerefound
The circumstances
are presentedin table 5. The materialis arrangedin categories
that are notmutuallyexclusivein orderto illustratethe range
of situationsrecorded.It is apparent that ancient Mediterraneancoinshave been foundin back yardsof bothsmall and
largetownsand in pigpens,openfields,gullies,and citystreets.
They have been spottedin drainageditchesand while excavating house foundations.Except for the coins said to have
comefromIndian mounds,to be examinedin detaillater,none
of thefindshave pre-Columbianassociations.Most come from
thesurfaceor wereturnedup whilegardeningor rootingin the
back yard. As forthe coins that showedup whileexcavating
housefoundations,
tworeportsfromthe early19thcenturyare
probably,as will be shownlater,deliberatelyfraudulent.The
othertwo,bothfromthiscentury,lack the necessaryinformation on geological-archaeological
contextsthat would make
interpretation
possible.The ruralcategories(i.e., small town,
farm)are includedin thetable becauseoftheprevailingnotion
that coinsfoundin such environments
are moresignificant
for
transoceanic
contactthanthosefromurbansettings.Obviously,
a Roman coin picked offthe streetin Chicago or New York
wouldnot excitediffusionist
speculation,whereasone shoveled
out of a back yardin centralNebraska mightwell do so. The
presenceof the 14 coinsof our sample (38%) that fitinto the
ruralcategoryis not easily dismissed.I shall tryto deal with
thismatterlater.
Perhaps mosttantalizingare the pieces that were foundin
beach sands, near rivers,and at the bottomof Long Island
Sound. It takes littleimaginationto conjurean image of the
coinsbeinglost by (a) Roman explorersas theylanded on the
coast or (b) aboriginesas theylooted a driftedRoman hulk.
Howeverfetchingsuch notionsmay be, thereare otherviable
For example,it is just as likelythatthesewere
interpretations.
in the ballast of 18th-and 19th-century
once incorporated
sailing shipsand subsequentlyunloadedin America.One instance
of this has been documentedfora strangemix of materials
foundin Florida (Noel-Hume1974:122-24),and, accordingto
TABLE 5
CIRCUMSTANCES
OR CONTEXTS
OF COIN DISCOVERIES
OF TABLE
1
ITEM
Interior
Small town.................................
Farm, field.................................
Digging (garden,yard), plowing............
Excavations forhouse,barn,driveway.........
Streambed, gulley..........................
2' deep or more............................
6" below surface...........................
Surface....................................
Maritime
On the bottomof Long Island Sound..........
Along the coast, in beach sand................
On an island................................
Near a river................................
Historic
Abandonedwell.............................
1812 battlefield.............
................
Bus station.................................
Amongcollectionof historicartifacts........
Stuck to pop bottle.........................
Air Force base..............................
Pre-Columbian
Indian mound, midden......................
Cave ......................................
Vol. 21
.
.
1, 2, 7, 12, 13, 19, 20, 22, 23, 24, 31, 36, 37, 38
1, 2
4, 10,11, 13, 18, 21, 38
7, 19, 25, 26, 35
22, 27
19, 25, 26, 31
2, 32
1, 8, 20, 22, 24, 27, 33
TOTAL
14
2
7
5
2
4
2
7
3
17, 32, 43
5, 6, 17, 32
36
1
3
4
1
5, 6
14
15
16, 23, 28, 29
24
33
2
1
1
4
1
1
9, 31
30
2
1
No. 1 * February1980
Craig Sheldon,the same explanationapplies to some Roman
potteryfragmentsrecentlyfound near Brunswick,Georgia
(AssociatedPress,November8, 1976).
Up to thispoint,the data analysishas been concernedwith
ofthe40 reports.Whilethetablesare revealing,
thepatterning,
The factthattheyincludematerials
theyhave theirlimitations.
fromhistoricor moderncontextstends to obscurewhat may
prove most useful for demonstrating
pre-ColumbiantransI hope, is correctedin the
Atlanticcontact.This deficiency,
followingdiscussion.
ASSESSMENT OF INDIVIDUAL
FINDS
THE COIN FROM THE GOLD MINES IN PANAMA
The earliestnoticeofa Roman coinin theNew Worldis found
in thewritings
ofLucio MarineoSiculo (1460-1533),an Italian
who played a significant
humanist-historian
role in the renaissance of Spanish literature(EnciclopediaUniversalIlustrada,
s.v. "Marineo Siculo,Lucio"). The coin accountappears in his
De Las Cosas Memorablesde Espaiia (1533), a highlyfanciful
workwhichincludes,interalia, an imaginativedescriptionof
themiraclesthatoccurredwhenKing Ferdinandwas born.The
paragraphcontainingthe coin storyis as follows(folio 61,
translationmine):'
The Catholickings,havingsubjugated
theCanariesand established
thedivinereligion,
sentPedroCol6nwith35 ships(calledcaravels)
ofpeopletootherislands,muchlarger,
anda greatnumber
thathave
goldmines,notso muchbecauseofthegold(whichis abundantand
ofhighqualitythere),butforthesalvationand repairoftheirsouls.
Havingsailedalmost60days,theyfinally
cametolandsveryfaraway
ourown.Allofthosewhocomefromthereassertthattheseare
from
tousas theIndies),belowourownhemisphere,
theAntipodes
(known
and thatthereare regionstherethatlookmorelikemainlandthan
islands.Sincemuchhas beenwritten
about theseplaces,bothin
Spanishandin Italian,thereis no needformetowriteaboutthem.
thereis onethingworthnoting,
However,
whichothershavenot(I
aboutormentioned.
Thatis thatina region
think)written
commonly
called tierrafirme(wherethe FranciscanbishopFatherJuande
Quevedowas),a coinwiththenameand imageofCaesarAugustus
was foundby thosewhogo to theminesto takeout thegold.Don
JuanRuffo,
ofCosencia,had thiscoinand sentit to the
archbishop
popeas a marvellous
Thistakesthegloryawayfrom
thing.
thosewho,
in our day,claimto havefoundtheIndies,forit showsthatthe
Romansarrivedtherelongbefore.
The accountis so briefthatone is temptedto rejectit out of
hand. As far as I can determine,the only contemporaryto
acceptit was Gilbert(1576), whoused it as evidenceforAtlantis.Oviedo (1944[1535])findstheparagraphfullofinaccuracies
and takesMarineoSiculoto taskpointby Doint.The eventsto
2 Aviendolos Principes
Catolicos sojuzgado a Canaria y aviendola
puesto en el cultodivino/embiaron
a Pedro Colon con treyntay cinco
naos (q dizen Caravelas) y con gran numerode gente a otras yslas
muchomayoresq tienenminas de oro no tanto por causa del oro (lo
qual en ellas se saca muchoy muy bueno) quanto por la salvacion y
remediode las animas que en aqllas partes estavan. El qual como
navegassequasi sesentadias vinieronfinalmetea tierrasmuyapartadas de la nuestra.En las quales todos los que de alli vienenaffirman
q ay Antipodes (los que por nosotrosson dichas yndias) debajo de
nuestro hemisperioy que ay regionesde tanta grandeza/que mas
parescentierrafirme/q
yslas. Y porqde estas yslas muchosan escripto
muchas cosas/unos en lengua Castellana/otros en latina/no ay
necessidadque yo escriva. Emperouno cosa que no es digna de dexar
por olvido dire/dela qual (segunpienso) otrosque de estas regiones
escrivieronno hizieronmencio. Alli que es que en una region/que
vulgarmentese llama tierrafirme(de donde era Obispo Fray Jua de
Quevedo de la orde de sant Francisco) fue hallada una moneda coel
nobrey image de Cesaraugusto/porlos q andava en las minasa sacar
oro. La qual ovo do Jua Ruffo,Arcobispode Cosencia/ycomo cosa
maravillosala embio a Roma al Summo Potifice.La cual cosa a los
q en nuestrotiempose j(?)actavan aver hallado las yndias y ser los
primeros
- a ellas oviessen navegado quito la gloria y fama- avia
alcazado. Por aquella moneda consta que los Romanos avian llegado
grandetiempoavia a los yndios.
6
Oviedo tellsus, occurredin Santa Maria
whichhe is referring,
del Antiguadel Darien, whichis above the equator,not in the
antipodes,and Pedro Colon is confusedwithCristobalColon.
(Here I suspect that Marineo Siculo meant Pedro Arias de
Avila, whoseill-fatedexpeditionset out withBishop Quevedo
and 25 ships to colonizeTerra Firme [i.e., Panama] in 1514.)
As forthe coin story,Oviedo rejectsit completely.He recalls
that he was in Darien at the same timeBishop Quevedo was,
wherehis job was to overseethegold mines.If sucha coinhad
beenfound,he says,he wouldhave beenthefirstto knowabout
therewas a deathpenaltyforanyonewho conit. Furthermore,
Oviedo'sargumentsare so tellingthat
cealed suchinformation.
thereis no reason to add to them.Clearly,the Roman coin
foundin the gold minesof Panama is a figmentof Marineo
Siculo'simagination.
THE VENEZUELAN COLLECTION
The onlyreportof a hoard of Roman coinsin Americais that
ofIrwin(1963:258):
wherethewavesoftheCaribbean
washthe
OnthecoastofVenezuela,
a mostunusualfindwasmade:a jar
northern
bulgeofSouthAmerica,
severalhundredRomancoins.The coinsdate fromthe
containing
reignof Augustusto about 350 A.D. and covereveryintervening
ofMendelPeterson
oftheSmithsonian
period.Nowin thepossession
whichithasbeen
from
thecoinsincludemanyduplicates
Institution,
ofa numismatist,
collection
thattheywerenotthemisplaced
inferred
buried
readycash,carefully
oncea Romantrader's
butwereprobably
in thesandbytheirownerorwashedashoreaftera shipwreck.
It is lamentablethat Irwindoes not supplymoreinformation.
One would like to knowwho foundthe coinsand underwhat
and whetherthecontainerwas a ceramicamphora
circumstances
or a picklejar. It is of interestthat Mendel Petersonhas not
publishedon thisdiscovery.
The possible pre-Columbiansignificanceof this report
depends upon whetheror not the coins are a hoard. Irwin's
argumentsare not convincing.None of thehundredsofhoards
knownin the Old World have coins fromeveryintervening
periodbetweenAugustusand A.D. 350. Completecoverageof
thiskindis a featureof veryspecializedcollections,and in all
such assemblagesduplicatesinvariablyoccur.Therefore,it is
mostlikelythattheVenezuelanhoardwas theworkofa numismatist.Sincecoincollectingwas essentiallyunknownbeforethe
14thcentury(Clain-Stephanelli
1965:13), it is mostimprobable
that the coinscame froma pre-Columbiancontext.If thereis
any truthto thestoryat all, thecollectionmayhave arrivedin
Venezuelaperhapsa hundredyearsbeforeColumbus,yet this
Spanish,
taxes credulity.The idea of a 14th-or 15th-century
Portuguese,or Venetiannumismatisttravelingthe high seas
withhis preciouscollectionmakeslittlesense.
In short,theVenezuelanreportis hardto take,and I suspect
to Irwin.
that the detailsof the discoveryweremisrepresented
COINS FROM INDIAN SITES
The Seip Mound token.The Seip moundgroupin the southwesternpart of Ross County,Ohio, is, dependingon how one
viewsit,thelargestor thesecondlargestknowngroupofearthworks of the Hopewell culture.The site was excavated by
Shetronein 1925,but a detailedmap of the localityhad been
made much earlierby Squier and Davis (1848). The major
moundwas knownforitsabundanceofspectaculargravegoods,
and it seems noteworthythat Shetronehimselfwas nearly
ofthe
killedby a landslidewhileexcavatingit. Abouttwo-thirds
mound was eventuallyexcavated,and afterit had been rebuilt the workwas shut down.Two men,Isaac Abrahmsand
are said to have examinedthesiteat this
another,unidentified,
time and to have kickedup a clump of earthcontainingthe
piece now known as the Seip Mound coin. The piece was
A
heavilycorroded,so detailsofit werenot clearlyidentifiable.
CURRENT
ANTHROPOLOGY
oftheoriginalperceptionofthatcoinand
delightful
description
its finalresolutionhas recentlybeen givenby Keeler (1972),
who cleanedit and made positiveidentification
ofit. In its uncleaned state, the coin showedfaintlywhat appeared to be a
wingedfigurein a pose commonto Roman coinsofthe reignof
Maximus,ca. A.D. 235. Aftercleaningand carefulcomparisons,
thatwingedfigureturnedout to be a portrayalofFatherTime,
whichappearedon an Elgin Watch Companytokencommemoratingthe ChicagoExpositionof 1874.
The RoundRockJollis.In the latterpart of 1976,one of my
studentstold me of a professionalsurveyorwho had founda
Roman coin in an Indian moundnear Round Rock in central
I contactedWalterL. Horton,Jr.,
Texas. Shortlyafterwards,
whograciouslyoffered
to let me borrowthecoin.He apologized
forthe factthathis noteswerenot available but respondedto
my questionswithdetailedinformation
about the moundand
theprovenienceofthecoin.The coinwas said to have lain 3 ft.
belowthe mound'ssurface,which,judgingfromthe natureof
thesoilprofile,
was at or closeto theoriginalgroundlevelupon
whichthe moundwas built. Beforeleaving,I requestedsome
characterreferences,
and Horton gave me the names of two
persons,one ofwhomis a memberofmydepartment.
I subsequentlycheckedwithmy colleague,who said that he
had knownHorton since high school, where they both had
studied under a teacherwhose particularinterestwas local
In theiryouth,theyhad even dug or tested some
prehistory.
sitestogether.The matterofthe Roman coin was a surpriseto
mycolleague,who said he wouldcheck it out for me. This he
me thenextday thatHortonwas indeedserious
did,informing
about the coin and that he believedhim. The coin was then
shown to Jack Kroll, Departmentof Classics, Universityof
Texas, who identifiedit as a follis,mintedin London about
A.D. 314. The coin commemorates
Constantinethe Great (see
Brunn1966:97). In viewofthe commentsofmycolleagueand
Kroll's positiveidentification
of the coin,I informed
the press
ofthediscovery.
It was almostthreemonthsbeforeHortonwas able to take
me to the site. He noted that the topographyof the area had
of InterstateHighway
changedas a resultof the construction
35, and themounditselfwas almosttotallydestroyed.Enough
remained,however,to indicatethat fewdetails of the mound
jibed withtheinformation
originally
supplied.These discrepancies mayperhapsbe explainedas a memorylapse, forit was 12
yearssincehe had dug there,but I couldn'thelp beingsuspicious. Even if the identification
of the site is accepted,thereis
on themoundto rejecttheclaimfora preenoughinformation
Columbiancontextforthe coin. The moundand a numberof
othersclose by have longbeen knownto local professional
and
amateurarchaeologists
and reliccollectors,whowereforbidden
to dig thereby the landowner.When the propertywas purit became accessibleto the
chased forhighwayconstruction,
public. ApparentlyHortonwas one of the firstto arrive,but
thereweremore.Amongthemultitude
veryshortlyafterwards
werestudentsfromthe Departmentof Anthropology,
UniversityofTexas, and membersoftheTravisCountyArchaeological
Society.These conscientious
individualstooknotes,whichwere
filedin the officeof the Texas ArchaeologicalSurveyat the
Balcones Research Center, Universityof Texas at Austin.
Althoughtheywereable to spendless thanone fullday at the
on soil stratigraphy
site, they recordedinformation
and collected a series of projectilepoints. In termsof our present
knowledgeof CentralTexas prehistory,
the points that came
fromthesiteare olderthanthecoin.If the coin came fromthe
originalground level, as Horton claims, then the cultural
at the site was obviouslyjumbledwhen he dug
stratigraphy
therein 1964.Anyclaimfora pre-Columbian
associationofthe
coin is, therefore,
unfounded.It seemsmoreprobablethat the
coin lay on the surfaceof the mound in historictimes and
eventuallyworkedits way to thebottomthroughtheactionof
rodentsand treeroots.That historicmaterialcan workitself
Vol. 21
*
into the groundin this way has been well documentedin a
recentstudyby Prewitt(n.d.).
The Indiana shekel.The earliestreportofa coin said to have
come froman Indian mound was publishedby Schoolcraft
(1854:149-50), who, as far as I can determine,includes it
amonghis documentsbut does not commenton it:
ofa very
description
hurried
Sir: I sendyoua briefand somewhat
whichwas foundnotfarfromLaporte,Ind. on the
greatcuriosity,
towardsMichiganCity.... It was pickedup amongthe
direction
havingbeendugoutofan Indian
bonesofan Indian,as is supposed,
whichhe supposedto be
mound,by a personin questof treasures
as a pieceofmoneycoin
it was offered
Subsequently
thereinterred.
as
andrejected
counter,
whohadfoundit,at a grocers
bythelaborer
andgave
notbeingwortha penny.A personat handsteppedforward,
intothe
coming
forit; and afterwards,
themana pennyin exchange
by
ofourfellowcitizen,Dr. Zina Pitcher,
it was brought
possession
itscharacter.
himto meto decipher
anddistinctly
marked
I findit tobe a welldefined
Onexamination
specimenof the ancientHoly Shekelof theJews.On one side is
fromit,and in veryhandestampeda vase,withsmokeascending
thewordsShekelIsrael.On thereverse,
is an
someHebrewletters,
withthewordsHakedoseJerusalem,
in Hebrew
olivetreeorbranch,
butnothing
toindicatethedateofitsorigin.
character,
rather
thana moneycoin,andso faras I
It appearstobe a weight,
seemstocorrespond
anyreflection,
havebeenabletogivethematter
nearerto theancientholyshekeloftheJewswhichwereofthefirst
I can
orsecondyearofthereignofSimonMaccabeus,thananything
to whichI
ofcoinor numatological
treatises
see in any collections
haveaccesson thissubject.The pieceweighs8 grainsTroyweight
totheParisianstandard
(1,219Troy)makesit233-232
whichreduced
Parisiangrains.The weightof the shekelvariessomewhat-the
heaviestbeing2713/4Parisiangrains.
TheHebrewcharacters
mean"ShekelofIsrael"ontheonesideand
is of
"theHolyJerusalem"
on theother.I cannotthinkitsantiquity
thedateoftheancientMaccabeancoin,thoughthemetalis tin,and
by rust.Nordo I thinkit to be
notso liableas ironto be corroded
oneofthetokensgivenby theJesuitsto theIndians,as thereis no
that
signofthecrossuponit.My opinioninclinesto thesupposition
ofsome
probably
weight,
in thepossession
it mayhavebeena Jewish
in
theearlySpanishadventurers
Jewishtrader,whoaccompanied
theirsearchforgold,and whichmayhaveforcedits wayintothe
tothe
ofsomeIndian,andbeenburiedwithhimaccording
possession
customofhis tribe-orpossiblyit mayhave beenburiedwiththe
traderhimself.
by
I havecausedplastercastsofthecoinorweighttobe prepared
Mr. Zeni, the Italian artist,residingnear the GermanCatholic
can be obtainedby all whoare at all
Church,ofwhomspecimens
further.
GeorgeDuffield
[signed]
anxioustoinvestigate
thematter
Duffield'sletteris a masterfulexampleof how to keep the
readerhangingin mid-air.He suspectsthat the object is not
reallya coinbut a weightand suggeststhatit is a post-Columbian introduction
buriedwithan Indian or possiblyeven with
the traderhimself.Yet the piece is reputedto come froman
Indian moundand is in the styleof Maccabean coins,albeit
slightlylighter.At a timewhenthe lost tribesof Israel figured
race, the signifistronglyin the literatureof a mound-builder
cance of thisreportcould not be easilyignored.
I sentcopiesofthepublisheddrawingsofthecointo Yaakov
Meshorerof the Israel Museum, Jerusalem.He replied as
follows:
shekel."Fromthe
is a wellknown"imaginative
The coinconcerned
inEuropeand
wereproduced
suchshekels
sixteenth
century
onwards,
withthehistory
to collectors,
and othersconcerned
offered
pilgrims,
oftheHolyLand and thelifeofJesus.Theywereclaimedto be the
originalshekelsthat JudasIscariotreceivedas paymentforhis
and
in Gerlitz,
Mostofthesefakeswereproduced
Germany,
betrayal.
sometimes
called "Gerlitzshekels."They are copied
are therefore
of genuineshekelswhichappearedin
fromliterarydescriptions
do noteven
sourcesofmedievaltimes,and therefore
literary
Jewish
War
thegenuineshekelsstruckby theJewsin theJewish
resemble
forgerieswere
against Rome. Even the regional sixteenth-century
later imitated,and the one shown in the paper you sent me is ap-
No. 1* February1980
7
parently
an eighteenth-century
musthavelostit in
type-somebody
Indiana.
yardsfroma creekwhichemptiesinto Elk, and not farfromthe ruins
of a veryancientfortification
on thecreek,was founda smallpiece of
silver coin of the size of a ninepennypiece. On the one side of this
The RomancoinfromIllinois.In 1913,a Romancoinwas said
coin is the image of an old man, projected considerablyfromthe
to have beenfoundin a moundin Illinois.Apparentlyaccounts
superficies,with a large Roman nose, his head covered apparently
of the eventappearedin somenewspapers,but the onlyinfor- witha cap of curledhair; and on thisside,on theedge,in old Roman
mationI couldfindis thatofEmerson(RecordsofthePast 1913):
letters,not so neat by far as on our moderncoins, are the words
AntoninusAug: Pius. PP. RI. III cos. On the otherside,theprojected
Earlyin theyeara Romancoin3/4in. in diameter
was reported
as
image apparently18 or 20 years of age; and on the edge, Aurelius
in one of themoundsin Illinoisand was submitted
discovered
to
Caesar.,AUGP. III cos. The U is made V. PP. perhapsare theinitials
AlfredEmerson,Ph.D. of theArtInstituteof Chicago.As he had
of princepspontifex:RI. RomanorumImperator.It was coined in the
in thepress,wetakepleasureinprinting
beenmisquoted
a portion
of
thirdyearofthe reignofAntoninus,whichwas in theyearofourLord
hislettertous regarding
thecoin.
137,and mustin a fewyearsafterwardshave been depositedwhereit
"EditorRecordsofthePast,Washington.
was latelyfound.The prominentimagesare not in the least impaired,
Dear Sir:The indications
are thatthecoinis oftheraremintage nor in any way defaced,nor made dim or
dull by rubbingwithother
ofDomitiusDomitianus,
in Egypt.As toitsdiscovery
in an
emperor
money;neitherare the letterson the edges....
the
for
with
thediscoverer
Illinoismound, responsibility thatlies
and
Besides this coin impressedwith the figuresof Antoninus and
thefindtoshowthemoundwaseither Aurelius,anotherwas also foundin a gullywashedby
owner.Formypart,I consider
torrents,
about
towhiteranging
ofthiscontinent,
posterior
orthatthecoinreached two and a half miles fromFayetteville.... It was about fourfeet
themoundafteritserection.
Havingexpressed
myself
pretty
clearly below the surface.The silverwas verypure,as was also the silverof
to be quotedas an
in thissenseto reporters
I was not surprised
the otherpiece; evidentlymuch moreso than the silvercoins of the
illustriouspersonholdingthe opposite view.... It will be a pleasure
presentday. The lettersare rough.Some of themseem worn.On the
of thefoolishness
to clearmyself
imputedto me by theseirrespon- one side is theimageofa man,in a highreliefapparentlyof theage of
siblesbya shortnoticein RecordsofthePast." [signed]
A. Emerson 25 or 30. And on thecoin,near theedge,werethesewordsand letters:
Commod
us. The C is defacedand hardlyvisible. AVG. HEREL. On
Of the fourcoin-in-Indian-site
reports,thislast is the most
the otherside, TR. IMP. III. COS. II. PP. On this latterside also
One wouldliketo dismissit becauseoftheabsence
troublesome.
is the figureof a woman,witha hornin her righthand. She is seated
of preciseproveniencedata, witnesses,etc., but such an apin a square box on theinsideofwhich,touchingeach side and resting
proachwouldneversatisfytheavid diffusionist.
Whatmakesso
on thegroundis a wlteel.Her leftarm,fromtheshoulderto theelbow,
littlesense is the exceptionalrarityof the coin. Why shoulda
lies on her side, fromthe elbow is raised,a littleabove the top: and
coin that is seldom,if ever,foundoutsideof Egypt pop up in
across a smalldistaff,
proceedingfromthe hand,is a handle,to which
Illinois?It is temptingto suspectfraud,but it is difficult
to
is added a tridentwiththe teethor prongsparallel to each other.It is
explainwhyanyonewoulduse a rarepiece forthat purposesupposed that Faustina, the motherof Commodus,who was deified
unless,ofcourse,he did notappreciateitsvalue. It is comforting afterher death by her husband Marcus Aurelius,withthe attributes
to knowthatthispiece leftFort (1973:160) equallyperplexed: of Venus, Junoand Ceres is representedby this figure.The neck of
mehereis thata jokershouldnothavebeensatisfied Commodusis bare.... This piece of moneywas probablycoined in
Butwhatstrikes
the year of our Lord 191.
Romancoin.Wheredidhegeta rarecoin,andwhy
withan ordinary
I havelookedovernumismatic
wasitnotmissed
from
somecollection?
Haywood ends his book with the description of two addiofeveryrarecoinir,
journalsenoughto acceptthatthewhereabouts
tional coins which, since they were found in 1823, had probably
is knowntocoincollectors.
Seemsto menothing come to his attention just before his book went to press (1959
anyone'spossession
"identification."
leftbuttocallthisanother
[1823]:407-8):
Two pieces of coppercoin, one of whichis undoubtedlyRoman, and
probably the otherlikewise,were lately foundin the year 1823, at
Fayetteville,amongstothercuriositiesleftthereby Mr. Colter,when
In theearly19thcentury,Tennesseebecameknownas an area
he removedto Alabama. The smallerpiece is thediameterofthefourwhereRomancoinswerebeingfoundwithsomefrequency.
The
pennypieces now current,but morethan twiceas thick,coveredwith
earliestreportof whichI am aware occursin theNils Register a deep and darkaerugo,whichrendersthelettersand devicesdifficult
(Baltimore)forAugust1818. Here it is reportedthat a Nashto be seen. On the one side of the smallpiece, is a pair ofscales in the
ville correspondent
noted the discoveryof a 2d-century-A.D. centre,suspendedfromthe ends of the beam, and betweenthe two
scales the lettersPNR. and in the legend, LAVDIVS. III. The C
fora building
coinofRomanoriginwhilediggingthefoundation
whichprecedesthe L is not visible. On the otherside are the letters
(Warshavsky1961:107,citingArmstrong
1950). The coin was
SC. about the centre,coarselymade; and on the legend,MI. COS.
said to have come froma depth of 5 ft. How manysuch disOn one side of the largerpiece, the diameterof whichis littleless
coverieswere made is not known,but there were certainly
thanan inchis thehead ofa man or woman,withtheface to theright,
enough to infuriateAtwater (1820:120-21), who wrote, in
withthreeprojectingprominencesrisingfromtheback and top of the
regardto severalRoman coinsclaimedto have beenfoundin a
head one-fourthof an inch, in small blunt prongs,and froma cap
cave near Nashville,Tennessee:
whichcoversthe head to the temples,wherea ribanddescendsfrom
That somepersonshavepurposely
theforeheadto thehinderpartsof thehead, and thereendsin a small
lostcoins,medals,etc.in caves
whichtheyknewwereaboutto be explored,
or depositedthemin
knot. Beforethe face in the legend,are the lettersCARTFN. On the
whichtheyknewwereaboutto be opened,is a wellknown otherside is a humanfigurenaked, withhis body and face turnedto
tunnels,
factwhichoccurred
at severalplacesin thiswestern
the left,one leg straightto the ground,the rightleg raised so as by
In one
country.
the leg and thighto make an angle of seventydegrees.In his right
word,I willventureto assertthatthereneverhad beena medalor
coinor monument
in all NorthAmerica... thatdid notbelongto
hand ... is somethingheld,whichis not at thistimedistinguishable;
and hadbeenbrought
Europeansor theirdescendents,
ormadehere and in the lefthand ... a barbed instrument.... This instrumentis
ofAmerica
sincethediscovery
in the shape of a spear; the barbed part touchingthe ground....
Columbus.
byChristopher
THE COINS FROM THE FAYETTEVILLE
REGION, TENNESSEE
on coindiscoveriesofall kinds
The mostdetailedinformation
was suppliedby Haywoodin hisNaturaland Aboriginal
History
of Tennessee(1823). Haywood was clearlyobsessed with the
idea that Hebrews,Romans, et al., had arrivedin the New
Worldand playeda rolein producingAmericanIndian culture.
He backedthisup witha longlistofdiscoveries,noneofwhich
wereexaminedcritically.His information
on two Roman coins
is as follows(1959[1823]:162-64):
Abouttheyear1819indigging
a cellarat Mr.Norris'in Fayetteville,
on Elk River,whichfallsintoTennessee,and about twohundred
8
There are a number of reasons for believing that the finds
mentioned by Haywood were deliberate plants and that
Atwater's suspicion was well founded. Perhaps the most obvious
is that all of the Tennessee discoveries seem to have occurred
between the years 1818 and 1823, and no Roman, Greek, or
Hebrew coins have been discovered there since. Also suspicious
is the fact that all fourof the coins mentionedby Haywood
come fromthe area aroundFayetteville.Except forclaimsof
discovering
a hoard,thepatternoffindingmorethantwocoins
fromthe same generallocalitydoes not occurelsewherein the
CURRENT
ANTHROPOLOGY
New World. Finally,Haywood appears to be pointingto the
culpritwhenhe says that two ofthe coinshad been "leftthere
by Mr. Colter,whenhe removedto Alabama." Why he mentionsthesecoinsat all is strange,forneitherapparentlycame
withproveniencedata. By describingthem,Haywood implies
they are significant-perhapsbecause he knew Colter personallyor because of his compulsionto compileevidencefor
transoceaniccontact.The fact that Colter had discardedthe
as notedearlier,howlittlevalue Roman
twocoinsdemonstrates,
coins had in the early 19th century.One cannot help but
wonderwhetherColter,by way of farewellto Tennessee,was
not tryingto wipetheslate clean and tellHaywoodsomething.
Whetherthisis trueor not,it is mostcuriousthat the discoveriesofRomancoinsaroundFayetteville,and, forthatmatter,
in all of Tennessee,seem to have stoppedabruptlyafterMr.
ColterleftforAlabama in 1823.
Since Bar Kokhba coins were mintedduringa very short
period,ca. A.D. 132-35,and relativelyfewwereproduced,the
discoveryof threewithinthe same state calls forcomment.In
I sent a
possibilityof counterfeits,
view of the ever-present
photocopyoftheClay Citypieceto Meshorerforidentification.
He wroteme as follows(March 3, 1978):
fromthe
in thepaperyousentmeis a forgery
The coinillustrated
during
of thiscentury....in the 19thcentury-mainly
beginning
visited
and otherHolyLand tourists
itssecondhalf-manypilgrims
and
theperiodoftourism
theholyplacesin Palestine,thusstarting
andthistoowasthetimewhenthe
raisingthedemandforsouvenirs;
of Jewishantiquitiesbeganto supplythe market's
firstforgeries
principalJewish
demand.Around1900therewerealreadytwenty
coinswhichwereforgedand sold as original"genuineJewishSouvenirs"oftheHolyLand.
oftheClay Citycoinshouldendthe
Meshorer'sidentification
matter,but Naamani (personalcommunication)continuesto
accept Marcus's judgment.Both Meshorerand Marcus are
Three separatefindsof Hebrew coins in Kentuckyhave been
expertson the Bar Kokhba period. Marcus was (he died in
used as supportiveevidence for the view that Hebrews or
experton Josephusand had writtenon the
1956)an outstanding
Canaanitesreachedthe Americas.Accordingto Gordon(1971:
Dead Sea Scrollsas wellas on othersubjects.Meshorer'sJewish
176-79):
Coins oftheSecondTemplePeriod(1967) is consideredauthoriofthesecondcentury tative. Marcus personally examined the Clay City coin;
Othercontacts
withtheRomanMediterranean
A.D. have meanwhile
cometo lightin Kentucky,
whereinscribed Meshoreronlv had a photocopyofa newspaperarticleto work
HebrewcoinsofBarKokhba'srebellion
againstRome(A.D. 132-135)
therefore
weredugup in Louisville,
Hopkinsville,
and ClayCity.The assorted with.I am inclinedto acceptMeshorer'sopinion,and
of
Bar
Kokhba
by
Bray in
found
the
coin
I
am
sceptical
coinswerefoundat different
timesandin widelyseparated
areas:at
Louisvillein 1932. The details on the obverseof thispiece,as
Louisvillein 1932,at Clay Cityin 1952,and Hopkinsville
in 1967.
seemidenticalto thoseobserved
shownin the Courier-Journal,
Thesecoinshavebeenexamined
andidentified
byProfessor
IsraelT.
foundby Ken Lyles near Alcolu,
of Louisville(see TheCourier-Journal, on the Bar Kokhba forgery
Naamaniof the University
Louisville,
ofJuly12,1953,March14,1967,March20, 1967).There
South Carolina (see below), which was also identifiedby
is nodifficulty
inidentifying
theseBar Kokhbacoins.The ClayCity
Meshorer.If I am correct,thentwoofthethreecoinsdiscussed
of
coinwassenttothelateProfessor
RalphMarcusoftheUniversity
by Gordonare frauds.
Chicagowhohadno trouble
in reading"Simon"(Bar Kokhba'sperto disposeofall theBar Kokhba coins
It wouldbe satisfying
sonalname)on oneside,and "Year2 oftheFreedom
ofIsrael"(i.e.,
but
is
as
this
hardlynecessary.They were found
forgeries,
A.D. 133)on theother.
eitheron the surfaceor close enoughto it to be rootedout by
This briefdiscussionis both inadequate and misleading. pigsor dug up by a smallboyplayingin hisgarden.Thereis no
Gordonsuppliesno information
on the circumstancesof the
In
contextin any way suggestiveoftheirbeingpre-Columbian.
findsand fails to mentionexactlyhow many coins were obthisconnection,it is worthnotingthat Naamani said, bothin
Bar Kokhba coinsare shownon
tained.Sinceabout 18 different
withme,
articlesand in his correspondence
the Courier-Journal
pp. 176-78, the impressiongiven is that a great numberof
probably
that he thoughtthe coins wererecentintroductions,
coins,if not severalhoards,were found.The Courier-Journal lost by some minister,priest,or layman who had acquired
articles,however,discussonly threecoins,none of whichare
themwhileon a tripto the Holy Land. No explanationseems
illustratedby Gordon.
to fitthe factsbetter.
The basic detailsofthe newspaperreportsare as follows:In
the Courier-Journal
and LouisvilleTimes Sunday Magazine of
July12, 1953,a copyrighted
articleby staffwriterJoe Creason
COUNTERFEITS AND WHAT THEY
detailsRobertCox's discoverysome 18 monthsearlierofa Bar
HAVE TO TELL US
Kokhba coinin a pigpennear Clay City,Kentucky.The piece
was in an earthclod, apparentlyrootedup by the pigs. There
that thereis littleinforbut not surprising,
It is unfortunate,
are good photographsof both obverseand reverseand of the
coins.The onlypublished
mationon thediscoveryofcounterfeit
place wherethecoinwas found.This was thespecimenidentified reportof whichI am aware is thatby Noel-Hume(1974), who
by Ralph Marcus ofthe Universityof Chicago.Accordingto a
discussestwo findsfromVirginia.The engagingquality of a
later articleby ChristineEade, cited below, Israel Naamani
viewpoint,is that,once
fraud,at least fromtheanthropological
identifiedthe piece as a Hebrew overstrikeof a Roman coin.
identified,it cannot be seriouslytaken as evidence of preThe Courier-Journal
ofMarch 14, 1967,carriesa copyrighted Columbiancontact.Furthermore,
whilea Roman coin said to
articleby staffwriterKennethLoomis about anothercopper
comefroman Indianmoundmaysuggestancienttrans-Atlantic
Bar Kokhba cointhatwas turnedup by a farmer
nearHopkinsin the same contextis unequivocalevicontact,a counterfeit
ville,Kentucky.The latterbroughtthe specimento Naamani
denceofdeception.For thepurposeof thisstudy,the distribuforverification.
AfterNaamani had identifiedit, the farmer tional evidenceis especiallyrevealing.Earlierit was observed
lefthurriedly,
withoutgivinghis name, takingthe coin with
thata numberofgenuinecoinshad beenfoundin ruralsettings.
are also
him.
The data, sparseas theyare,indicatethatcounterfeits
A thirdcopyrighted
discoveriesthatI
articleappearedin the March 20, 1967,
foundin suchcontexts.Of thesix counterfeit
Courier-Journal
and was writtenby staffwriterChristineEade.
knowabout, none came fromurbansettings.Since counterfeit
This discussesa Bar Kokhba coin that came fromthe cityof
Roman and Greekcoins are foundin ruralareas, just as are
Louisville in 1932. The findwas made by JosephBray, then
it followsthat the size of the townin which
theirprototypes,
eightyearsold, whilediggingin his back yard.A photoshows
the discoverywas made has no implicationsfortransoceanic
the coin, held betweenBray's thumband forefinger,
withthe
contact.
obverseside facingthe camera.The detailsare clearlyvisible.
What has been termed"a bronzemedallion,mintedin the
THE BAR KOKHBA COINS FROMKENTUCKY
Vol. 21 * No. 1 * February1980
9
Atheniancolonyof Thurium"(Covey 1975:7), was foundencrustedin red clay duringthe summerof 1954 or 1955 by a
schoolboywhilecrossinga fielda coupleof milesfromthe Red
Riverat Terral,Oklahoma.The medallionhas foursmallmetal
ringsattached to it, presumablyfor suspension(p. 8). The
obversesideshowsa helmetedhead ofAthena,whilethereverse
has a chargingbull over a dolphinand a seriesof seven Greek
lettersspellingoutthenameofthecolony.Inconsistencies
in the
normalGreeklettersare explainedby Coveyas "a Romandiecutter'sconfusion... which... suggestsa less literateperiod
after200 B.C."
indefinitely
Colorslidesof bothsidesof thispiece,graciouslysentto me
by GloriaFarley,wereexaminedby Kroll,whocharacterized
it
as a poorly produced imitationof a 4th-century-B.C.
silver
"distater"ofthe GreekcityofThurium.Amonghisreasonsfor
thisjudgment,Krollnotedthattheinscription
above thebullis
blundered,showingthat the forgerdid not understandGreek
letters-letter1, a theta,lacks a dot in the center;letter4, a
rho,is blunderedto forma kappa; letter6, omega,is blundered
to forma lambda, and the originalletter7, a nu, is omitted.
the "medallion"is gold or golden,whereasthe
Furthermore,
prototypeand all othercoinsin preciousmetalsfromThurium
are of silver.Ancientmedallions,officialmementosof coinlike
shape,werenot used untiltheRomanperiod.Thus nonecould
be suspectedofhavingbeenstruckat Thurium.Details indicate
that the coin and the fourattachedringshad been cast in one
piece. Greekcoinswerenot cast, but stampedor struck,and if
the piece had been intendedas an item of jewelrythe rings
wouldhave had to have beensoldered.Finally,theamateurish
copyingof the face of Athenalacks the gracefulcontoursand
subtleplasticmodellingofthe Greekoriginal.Stylistically,
this
piece is not evena good copyoftheprototype(forexamplesof
the latter,see Kraay and Hirmer1966: pl. 87, no. 252; pl. 88,
no. 254).
A Hebrewcoin in the styleof thosemintedduringthe Bar
Kokhba period (ca. A.D. 133) was foundin November 1976
about 4 in. belowthe surfaceof the churchyard
in the townof
Alcolu,some 17 milessouthof Sumter,SouthCarolina(Sumter
Daily Item,January4, 1977). The finder,Ken Lyles,supplied
mewithexcellentphotographs
ofbothsidesofthecoin.Because
ofcertainanomaliesin thedepictionoftheark and theabsence
ofletterson therightsideoftheark,I sentcopiesofthephotograph to Meshorer,and he identifiedit as a 50-60-year-old
forgery.
In late 1976 or the earlypart of 1977,a schoolboyfounda
coinin a fieldwithinthecitylimitsofRoundRock,Texas (pop.
7,000).The coin was shownto me and to Kroll,whoidentified
it as a counterfeit
in the style of 3d-century-B.c.
Ptolemaic
Egypt. Prototypesof this piece are illustratedin Kraay and
Hirmer(1966: pls. 20, 219).
In 1975 or 1976,Mr. and Mrs. R. M. Miller founda coin
near a trailerpark in Temple, Texas. This was identifiedby
Kroll as a moderncopyofa 4th-century-B.C.
coinfromAspendus,a GreekcityofPamphylia.
Two forgeries,
one ofa denariusof the emperorAugustus,of
a type mintedbetween25 and 22 B.C., the otherof uncertain
denomination
(it had thehead ofOctavianon one sideand that
of Mark Antonyon the other,which,if it had been genuine,
would have dated it about 40-36 B.C.) werereportedto have
been foundon the southside of the JamesRiver,close to the
James River Bridge (Noel-Hume 1974:122, fig. 54). NoelHume notesthat manygood-qualityforgeries
weremintedby
18th-century
counterfeiters
to supplythe growingantiquarian
market.He impliesthat these pieces may have enteredthe
estuaryof the JamesRiver as a resultof the use of trashas
ballast.As an example,he citesa collectionofpottery,tobacco
pipes, bricks,drainpipes,and kiln equipmentfromthe River
Thamesthatwas foundnearthemouthof the St. Marys River
near Jacksonville,
Florida.
10
THE LOSS OF COINS TODAY
Duringtheearlystagesofthisstudy,I receiveda letterfroma
proponentof transoceaniccontactwho argued that the wide
distribution
of Roman coins in America,even thoughnot in
pre-Columbiancontext,mustmean somethingsimplybecause
peoplejust do notlose suchthings.My correspondent
assumed
thatcoinsso rareare keptunderlockand key.This assumption
is not valid. The coinsthathave beenfoundin Americaare not
that precious.Most of the Roman follescan be boughttoday
forless than $10 each. BeforeWorldWar II, a folliscould be
pickedup for$1 or less. In short,untilrecentlymostancient
coinshad morehistoricalthan commercialvalue. This is indicated by the factthat theywerekeptas luckypieces,wornas
amulets,and simplycarriedin walletsas curiosa.The reason
for what may seem a lightheartedattitude towards these
antiquesis that theywereproducedin vast numbersand are
easilyobtained.I askedseveralcoindealersfora roughestimate
of the numberof coins of Roman mintagethat have been
broughtto America,and all said theycould not makeeven an
approximateguess.WhenI suggestednumbersrangingupwards
from1,000,all thoughtthat therewereover 1,000,000Roman
coins in Americatoday. With such a large numberof coins
available,it seemsprobablethata fewwillbe lost.
Do peopleactuallylose them?The answeris, unequivocally,
yes. The evidenceis of variouskinds.Perhapsmostimportant
are thestatementsofthelosersthemselves.Dealers wereasked
iftheyhad everlostancientcoins,and all said thattheyhad
manyofthemreporting
lossesofcoinsthatwerehighlyvalued.
Some also recalled losses by customers.Hoping for further
information
on the subject,I wroteto Coin Worldrequesting
reportsfromreaderson coins both lost and found.My letter,
printedMay 18, 1977, receiveda fairresponsebut unfortunatelylittlethatdealt specificallv
withpre-Columbian
coinage.
The onlydata relevantto thispaper wereprovidedby Karol
W. Stoker,whowrotefromMali, and CharlesH. Langdon,who
called fromTennessee.Listed below are the recentcoin losses
that have come to my attention.While thereare not many,
they demonstrateclearly that 20th-centuryAmericansdo
indeedlose ancientcoins.
A coinidentified
as a Syracusan,datingfromabout 490 B.C.,
was foundby a smallboy in 1957 in a fieldon the outskirtsof
Phenix City, Alabama. The coin was traded for 15 cents'
worthof candy and eventuallyreachedthe hands of Preston
BlackwelloftheUniversity
ofGeorgia,whosentit to theHogg
Museumforidentification.
Blackwellkeptthecoinin hiswallet,
and, whilehe was hospitalized,the wallet was stolen (Mahan
and Braithwaite1975).
A denarius commemorating
AntoninusPius was lost by
Karol W. Stokerwhilevisitingin GlenwoodSprings,Colorado,
in 1967. The coin was in very good conditionand had been
used as a pendant(Stoker,personalcommunication,
1977).
A Greekcoin,showingAthenaon theobverseand a horseon
the reverse,was lost by CharlesH. Langdon of Chattanooga,
Tennessee,whileskindivingin Barbadosin 1970.Langdonhad
originallypickedup the coin whilein Tripoliand had wornit
around his neck as a charm since 1960 (Langdon, personal
communication,
1977).
A Phoeniciantetradrachma
ofAntonyand Cleopatra,carried
as a souvenirin a coinpurse,was lost in a New York Citybus
station in 1955 by T. V. Buttrey(personal communication,
1977).
The circumstances
of discoveryof severalof the coinsin our
sample stronglysuggestloss in moderntimes. For example,
threeRomancoinswerefoundby professional
in
archaeologists
a well on St. SimonsIsland, Georgia.One was mintedduring
the reignof Trajan (A.D. 98-117); anotherappears to be a
Roman copy in orichalcumof a Greekcoin fromCorinth.The
last, a NorthAfricancoin,is undescribed.Apparentlyall came
fromthe collectionof the plantationowner,JohnCooper,or
CURRENT
ANTHROPOLOGY
his family,whichwas scatteredwhenNortherntroopsoccupied
thepropertyduringthe Civil War (Fairbanks1976). A Roman
sestertiusofPupienus,whoreignedfora shorttimein A.D. 238,
was foundby HarryStockmanand Don Millerin the rubbish
oftwobus stationsthathad been torndownto make roomfor
Auditoriumin Louisiana.
the Baton Rouge Centro-Complex
The coin was a C (Cohen) #24,whichshowedPax seated left
(Louis R. Goodwin,personalcommunication,
1977). In 1962,
G. W. Packardfounda Roman coin nearthe frontdoorof the
serviceclub at theAmarilloAirBase (personalcommunication,
1977). The piece is an antoninianus,mintedin Siscia (now
northern
Yugoslavia) about A.D. 364-67,witha portraitof the
emperorValens.
CHINESE AND JAPANESE COINS FROM THE
NORTHWEST COAST
Since the publicationof Brooks's (1875) landmarkstudy of
have waitedforreasonJapanesedriftvoyages,archaeologists
ably well-documented
reportsof Orientalartifactsin America.
Whilesuchmaterialis known,mostcomesfromhistoricNorthwest Coast sites, and surprisingly
little of it is fromJapan.
OnlyfourJapanesecoinshave been reported.These, all found
in Oregon, are Kuan-ei square-holedcoins, with Chinese
characters,and were mintedfromthe latterpart of the 17th
to the mid-19thcentury (Beals 1975, 1977). In contrast,
Chinesecoinsare comparatively
abundant,and mostoccurin
18th- and 19th-century
aboriginal contexts.The data are
entirelyconsistentwithwhat is knownabout the Northwest
Coast Indians; at thattime,theywereactivelyinvolvedin the
furtradewiththe Orientand acquired Chinesecoinsin large
quantities.Coins weresewn to clothing,baskets,and wooden
artifacts.Someofthismaterialhas endedup in museumcollectionsin Canada (Keddie 1978) and the UnitedStates (Phebus
1974).
Of theseveralhundredChinesecoinsfoundso far,mostwere
mintedin the 17thand 18thcenturies(Beals 1976). A feware
in date. Those collectedby professional
pre-Columbian
archaeologistsconsistof a Sung Dynastypiece,ca. A.D. 1125,found
in the 18th-century
Chinlac Village site in BritishColumbia
(Borden 1952) and a Yung Lo coin,ca. 1402-10,pickedup by
the SmithsonianInstitutionfromMemaloose Island, Oregon
(Beals 1977). AnotherSung Dynasty piece, but of the Yuan
Feng period(ca. 1078-85),is in a privatecollectionand is said
to have comefroma burialin an Indian site in Oregon(Beals
1977). Quite recentlya Ming Dynastyissue of the Hung Wu
period(1368-98) was foundin Oregon.This came froman area
knownforChinesegold-mining
activity(Beals 1977) and indicates thatveryold Chinesecoinswereintroducedby late 19thcenturyChineseimmigrants(Beals, personalcommunication,
1977). The presenceof llth-, 12th-,and 15th-century
coinsin
historiccontextsis not unexpected,forthe Chineseoftentook
coinsout of circulationand thenrecirculatedthemat a much
later time(Keddie 1978).
In theexampleslistedso far,theNew Worldassociationsare
but two caches have been reportedin
clearlypost-Columbian,
which the phrasingsimply greater antiquity. MacMillanBrown(1927:67) reportsthat "a Russian farmerdug up when
ploughingvirginsoil in 1913a largestonelamp witha Buddhalikefigurerisingfromthe bottom:it is in theJuneauMuseum,
and in the same case withit are largeChinesecoinsalso found
beneaththesoil,and these,fromtheirinterpretation,
belongto
the reignof an Emperorin the eighthcentury."Accordingto
Larson (1966:44), "in 1882a cache of Chinesebrasscoinssaid
to have been dated 1200 B.C. was dug up by minersat a place
called Cassier in BritishColumbia,along with a bronzefan
bearingChinese characters."Like the Roman coin accounts,
these lack pre-Columbiancontextand are difficult
to verify.
Larsonsuppliesno reference
forhis story,and mytwoinquiries
to the Juneau Museum have not been answered.The early
dates assignedto both caches,however,are probablywrong.
Larson'sclaimfora 1200B.C. date is an obvious error,forno
coinswerebeingmintedin Chinaor anywhereelse at thattime.
As forMacMillan-Brown'sreport,it is noteworthy
that these
pieces bear no resemblanceto the standardKai Yuan issues
mintedextensively
and in continuoususe froMA.D. 618 to 907.
Beals (personal communication)suggeststhat they are not
coins at all, but amulets,and pointsout that similarobjects
servedas eyesin a mid-19th-century
masktakenfroma Chilicat
medicineman's grave(Bolles 1892).
This briefexaminationoftheOrientalcoindata bringsout a
numberof pointsthat are relevantto our studyof Mediterranean coinage. AlthoughBrooks (1875) has shown that
Japanese driftvoyages to Americaoccurredwith some frequency,Japanesecoinsare exceptionally
rarein theWest,and
all that have been foundso far are post-Columbianand are
associatedwithChinesecoins.PresumablyJapanesedriftvessels and, by extension,
driftvoyagesin generalhad littlerolein
depositingartifactsin America.
All of the reportsof Orientalcoinsin Americaappear to be
confinedto theWestCoast,which,ofcourse,is wherewe would
expectto findthem.The abundantevidenceof Chinesecoins
along the Pacificlittoralcontrastssharplywiththe relatively
few,yet widelydistributed,
Roman, Greek,and Hebrewcoins
in the East and Midwest.It is clear that wherewe have documentedexamplesofcontact,thecoinsdo notmovetoo farfrom
thepointofintroduction.
It therefore
followsthattheMediterranean coins were not lost by ancient Romans, Greeks,or
Hebrews,but ratherby their19th-and 20th-century
descendants.It is also apparentthat whencontactsituationsexist,as
in thecase of the Chinese-Northwest
Coast furtrade,the coin
evidenceforcontactis abundant.The sameholdstruein Ceylon
and India, whereRoman contactis well documented-findsof
are relativelycommon.
coins,bothin caches and individually,
The Roman,Greek,and Hebrewcoinsfoundin Americajust do
notfitthispattern.
SUMMARY
The significance
oftheoccasionaldiscoveryofa Roman,Greek,
or Hebrew coin in Americais hard to assess, largelybecause
rareand seldomadequately
such discoveriesare comparatively
This studyattemptsto evaluatethehistoricvalue
documented.
of the findsby employingvariousapproachesin a search for
patterningin the data. The patternsthat have been found
indicatethat, insofaras coins are concerned,no case can be
made for pre-Columbiancontact betweenAmericaand the
Mediterranean.
When one examinesthe dates of the coin discoveries,the
distributionof the finds,and the timeswhen the coins were
is thatthe coinswere
minted,the mostplausibleinterpretation
lost recently.In fact,mostof themappear to have been lost
sinceWorldWar II. It is also apparentthat,in spite of their
Romanand Greekcoinsare
age and theirhistoricsignificance,
frequently
lost,in bothurbanand ruralsettings.The factthat
a coin is turnedup in a hithertounplowedfieldprovesnothing
of these
otherthan that it was once lost there.Confirmation
interpretations
comesfromEngland,whereAlexandriancoins
occur with some frequency.Accordingto Robert Carson,
Departmentof Coins and Medals, BritishMuseum (personal
communication):
forlocalcirculation,
wasdestined
The RomancoinageofAlexandria
andas suchdidnotfitreadilyintothegeneralempirewide
monetary
intherecords
coinsappearing
I amnotawareofAlexandrian
system.
ofexcavated
coinsinBritain,
andI certainly
haveneverexcavated
an
examplemyself.
Alexandrian
coins,however,
arecommonly
produced
11
withreportsof theirhavingbeenfoundin
hereforidentification
to investigatethe possibilitythat a Roman shipwreckmight
coinsare,or at leastwere,very lie in the watersoffPlum Island, Massachusetts(see Item 17).
gardens,etc.... SuchAlexandrian
forsale to tourists
in Egypt,and thosecommonly
offered
commonly
In connectionwith Epstein's remarksconcerning"interior
backbyservice- vs. coastal distribution,"it mightbe worthconsideringhow
havebeenbrought
seenin Britainalmostcertainly
menandtourists:
as alsois reported
tobe thecasein Australia.
many of the coins foundin the interiorwere located on or
The biggeststumblingblockin the way ofgivingthesecoins
close to major waterwaysor tributariesof major waterways
pre-Columbianstatus is that none have been foundin docu(the likeliestrouteforancientexplorers).
contexts.In thosecases whereancientcoins
mentedprehistoric
I repeat: Epstein'sarticleis usefuland a good beginninghave been foundin Indian sites,the contextsare thoseof the
but onlya beginning.
historicNorthwestCoast tribes.In these instancesthe coins
come fromChina, and it is significantthat the patternsof
are quitedifferent
from byT. V. BUTTREY
density,mintingdates,and distribution
those of theirMediterraneancounterparts.Chinesecoins are
ofMichigan,Ann
ofClassicalStudies,University
Department
comparativelymore abundant and are concentratedin the
Arbor,Micli. 48109, U.S.A. 26 vii 79
Northwest,whereChinesecontactwith the Indians, through This is an importantcontribution
of a
to the understanding
the furtrade,was extensive.In contrast,Roman and Greek
phenomenonwhich has had far more superficialthan real
of the UnitedStates.
coinsare scatteredovertwo-thirds
importance.What is immediatelystrikingfrom Epstein's
Withinthe last fewdecades,a numberof booksand articles
surveyis the poor qualityof the evidence:
literaturecitingone coin dishave appearedin the diffusionist
1. Archaeologicalcontrol:Only one European coin has ever
coveryor anotheras beingespeciallyimportant.A reviewof
been found in the Americasin a controlledpre-Columbian
thesefindsshowsthat thereis virtuallynothingin the data to
archaeologicalcontext-the Viking coin recentlyfound in
give them credence.We are dealing eitherwith instancesof
Maine (Seaby 1978). Supposed finds of Greek, Roman, or
deliberatefraudor withclaimsthat are so totallyinconsistent Hebrewcoinsare invariablydescribedto otherswho werenot
withwhat we knowof humanbehavior,past or present,that
presentand oftenappear as newspaperaccountsratherthan
theymustbe disregarded.
scholarlystudies. Such coins are regularlybroughtto me in
Michigan.On inquiry,"It was foundin ourgarden"frequently
means"It is fromGranddad'swallet.I thinkhe once remarked
that Grandmafoundit in the garden." Modern loss, or misComments
understanding,
is the regularexplanation.(Fraud is possible,
byDONAL B. BUCHANAN
as in the case of a Roman coin recentlydiscoveredduring
2040 LordFairfaxRd., Vienna,Va. 22180,U.S.A. 16 viii 79
water-pipeexcavations.The homeownerlaboriouslydid his
own work,and his neighbour,a professorof classics,made it
Sunderland(1979) has called for an analyticalstudy of the
moreinteresting
by plantingan inexpensiveRoman coin where
discoveryof exoticcoinsin the New World.Epstein'sarticleis
it could easilybe dug up-as it was.)
a good beginningand an extremelyusefulcompilationof the
2. Amateurdescription:In no case was thecoinfirsthandled
data available. Its tone,however,is somewhatmorenegative
findsare missing by anyone withprofessionalnumismaticskills.The amateur,
thanthe data warrant,and severalimportant
understandably,does not know how to read a coin. I was
fromhis excellenttables.
recentlybroughta Syracusandecadrachmof 5th-century-B.c.
The coin listedas Item 1 in his table 1 (foundin Alabama
type,but brassratherthansilverand plainlyreading"Tiffany"
and called "Syracusan") is identicalin everyrespectwiththe
as an additionallegend.Such modernimitationsand forgeries
bronzecoin foundnear Cauthron,Arkansas(Item 2)-lacking
of ancient coins are common.Again, the numismatistshave
less wear. Thus, the
and exhibiting
onlythe singleperforation
sketches,or photographs.
Alabamacoinshouldbe classifiedas Carthaginianand similarly oftenhad to workfromdescriptions,
can sometimesbe caughtin this way,
dated. Totten (1978) has statedthat the two coins came from Grossmodernforgeries
the same die. At the CastletonConferencewhoseproceedings but thebetterfakes,suchas good casts fromancientspecimens,
can onlybe perceivedon directexamination.
I have just cited,Tottenand Farleybothreportedthata third
mayhave been moredoubtfulthan
Also,someidentifications
coin,identicalwiththe two above, was foundat a depthof 6"
nowappears,and the coinsare no longeravailable forreexamiin a fieldnear Franklin,Kansas, in 1976. The site was near a
nation. Much is made of the rarityof the coin of Domitius
tributaryof the SpringRiver.Tottenhas also reportedthat a
Domitianusfoundin Illinois,but was it struckby thisephem"Grade I Romano-CelticMinim"dated to the4th centuryA.D.
eral emperor?Emerson said, "The indicationsare that the
was foundby a boy in Champaign,Illinois,in 1885. The coin
coinageis of theraremintageofDomitiusDomitianus,"which
was in a lumpofclay thrownout of a trenchbeingdug by the
I assume means that the readingwas not certain.His types
city; above the clay layerin whichit was foundwas a thick
wereidenticalwiththoseofDiocletian,and theirobverselegends
layerofblacksoil.Totten,by theway,assertsthattheso-called
follisfoundnear Round Rock, Texas (Item 31), is not a follis both begin IMP C ... and end ... AVG. On a worn specimen
at all, but a "smallerbronzetype." As forthe medallionfrom thescholarwouldhave to makeout DOMITIANVS as against
DIOCLETIANVS, not always easy. Emerson'sidentification
Thuriumfound in Oklahoma and reportedby Covey, it is
reported,
accordingto Totten,thatanothercoinfromThurium, of the coin in 1913 would have depended eitheron Cohen
(1888-92) or Maurice (1908-12),bothinadequateand confused
virtuallyidenticalbut lackingthe attachments,was foundin
and now well out of date. Anyhow,the rarityof thesecoins is
Black Gum, about 3 mi. east of TenkillerDam in eastern
overstated.Domitius is sought by collectorsbecause of his
Oklahoma.
shortreign,but Sutherland(1967:649-50) now remarksin his
It is truethaton thebasisofcoinfindsaloneno valid case for
standardwork,"Coins withthenameofDomitius[are]common
pre-Columbiancontactcan be made. The discoveryof a coin
withshortlegend."
with no accompanyingpre-Columbianartifactstells us only
3. Chronologicaldistribution:AlthoughGreek and Roman
that somebody-sometimeafterthe coin was minted-lost it.
The finds,wherefraudand post-Columbianloss can somehow coinswereproducedin incrediblequantityand variety,at any
given momentor place the actual circulationwas normally
inoperative,can best be indicatorsofwhereone
be determined
mightlook forotherevidenceofcontact.In linewiththisview,
types,and mintsand to one
limitedto certaindenominations,
theScientific
Explorationand Archaeology
Societyis mounting specificmonetarysystem. The compositionof the alleged
a jointexpeditionin 1979withtheEarly SitesResearchSociety
Venezuelanhoard -"coins . .. fromthe reignof Augustusto
12
CURRENT
ANTIIROPOLOGY
about 350 A.D. and [covering]everyintervening
period .. . a
Roman trader's ready cash"-is contraryto the plentiful
evidenceon ancientmonetarycirculation.Epstein speaks of
"hundredsof[Roman]hoards"knownto us; read,rather,"tens
of thousands." Not one-literally-is known with such a
composition;it would be equivalentto a hoard of American
ofcoinsfrom
coins,"a Yankee trader'sreadycash," consisting
theMassachusettsBay Colonyof 1652downto theEisenhower
silverdollar and coveringeveryintervening
period.Epstein's
withrespectto all the finds
table 3 revealsthe same difficulty
takentogether.It is not possiblethat thesecould have circuin antiquity,so thaton thediffusionist
latedtogether
argument
therewould have had to be trip aftertrip to the Western
Hemisphereduringwhichtheseparticularpiecesweredeposited,
aftertheyfirstwerestruckbut beforetheyhad passed out of
circulation.
In sum, Epstein has made a solid case against taking this
materialseriously.Ancientcoins have been broughtto the
timesby thehundreds
WesternHemispherein post-Columbian
of thousands.Some have subsequentlybeen lost or stolen;the
touristicoriginof othershas been forgotten.
Their appearance
in odd cornersof the United States therefore
says nothingof
theirearlierhistory.Certainpre-Columbian
contextsare wanting, actual contextsare uncertainor ill-defined,
identification
of the coins as genuinelyancient or modernimitationsor
modernfakesis verymuchup in the air. Whateverthe merits
of the diffusionists'
case, the numismaticevidence will not
support it.
byGEORGE F. CARTER
Department
ofGeography,
Texas A and M University,
College
Station,Tex. 77840, U.S.A. 17 viii 79
As one of thosewho sent in coin references
to Epstein,I was
rewardedby his givingan earlyversionof thisexcellentpaper
beforemygraduateseminar.My criticalcommentsare minor;
myadmirationforthiscontribution
to clearingaway ofa lot of
rubbishis major.
Afterthe counterfeit-coin
evidenceis used to clear away a
mountainoffindsand pointup theperilsofunexcavatedfinds
thereremainsa residuethatperhapsshouldnot be too quickly
discarded.This seems to apply to the Tennesseefinds,where
the evidencemeetsEpstein's own requirements,
in part, fora
genuinefind.The coinsare foundin a restricted
area, the dates
on the coinsare concentratedin time,and the timecoincides
withthepeak ofRomaninfluence.
Althoughhe doesn'tmention
it, a Roman head of this period (2d centuryA.D.) has been
foundin Mexico,and a pineappleof the same time(end of the
1st centuryA.D.) is painted on the walls of Pompeii. This
points to deliberatetwo-wayvoyages betweenthe Mediterraneanand Americaat this time.Epstein seems to underrate
deliberatevoyagingand overemphasizedriftvoyages.
One mightdo a bit more with the cumulativedata that
Epsteinpresents.The morecoinsbroughtto America,themore
coinswillbe lostin Americaand themorecoinswillbe foundin
America.This is apparentin Epstein'stable,wherethe rate of
findsgoes fromone per centuryin the earlyperiodto one per
yearin thelatterpart ofthe20thcentury.Thereis a veryclear
buildupof findsthroughtime,witha greataccelerationin the
20thcentury.Withperhapsa millioncoinsbroughtto America
in this century,the numberof lost coins foundis minutein
comparisonwith the potential.Apparentlythe chance of a
Roman coin's beinglost and foundis about one in a million.If
coinsreachedAmericabeforeA.D. 1500,the expectablenumber
wouldbe verysmall,the lost numbersmaller,and the number
likelyto be foundstillsmaller.We willbe veryfortunate
if we
everfindone in archeologicalcontext,but therecentreportson
theNorsecoinfoundin suchcontextin Maine indicatethatthe
possibilityis there.
byWARREN L. COOK
StateCollege,Castleton,
Vt.05735,U.S.A. 13 viii 79
Castleton
Epstein's carefulcompilation,in usefultables, of a body of
never previouslyassembled will fascinatethose
information
interestedin possibletransoceaniccontactsbeforethe Vikings.
however,to the
The evidencedoes notlead withany certainty,
conclusionshe would extract.The dichotomyset up at the
and "professionalanthropolooutset between"diffusionists"
gists"suggestsa mind-setprevailingthroughout.
Epsteinis so convincedthatEuropeancoinsfoundin America
cannothave arrivedin ancienttimesthathe mustfindways to
discreditthem,acceptingsome verytenuousargumentsin the
to sucha largearea thatOviedo's
process.Tierrafirmereferred
dismissalofMarineoSiculobecausehe had neverheardofsuch
a findis hardlyconclusive.The coins-as-ballasttheorybends
Meshorer'slabellinga
over backwardsto discountdiffusion.
on the basis of a photoKentuckyBar Kokhba coin a forgery
yet Epcopied newspaperarticleillustrationis unconvincing,
steinis readyto condemnsimilarcoinson such authority.
That the concentrationof findsin the period since 1914
suggestslosses fromcoin collectionsis a weak hypothesis,
despiteinstancesof coin disappearances.Some of the coins in
in the
questionare fartoo rareto have escaped documentation
Totten(1978:45) describesan Oklahoma
literature.
numismatic
find"virtuallyidentical"to the "Thurium"Athenamedallion,
but withoutthe fourrings,and asks, "Is it reallypossiblethat
a collectorof ancientThuriumcoinshas goneabout scattering
his materialall over easternOklahoma,to be dug up by farmpatternin ancient
boys and chickens?"The most significant
coin finds,as Epsteinadmits,is theirnonrandomdistribution,
whichbeliesthecollectors'lossestheory.That manywerefound
far inland and (exceptingthe Montana example) only from
Texas eastwardargues against modernloss and in favor of
penetrationof NorthAmerica'sgreatrivers,as otherevidence
suggests,to search out copper and gold. That Asian coins
foundin Americaoccur only along the Pacificlittoralcannot
be used as evidenceagainstthe importanceof European finds
deep withineasternNorthAmerica.
The table of mintingdates suggestscontact duringmany
centuries.As Carter(1978:85) has remarked,
We usedto haveput uponus thedemandfornamingthemanwho
arrivedin whatyear,at whatport,by whatboat, and precisely
etc....
whatspeciesofbeingsdidhe bringornotbringto America,
It was a falsemodel,becausethemodelthatyouare seeingis not
a voyageat a time,buta modelwhichsaysthatAmerica
wasreached
oftime-a verygreatmanypeoplewhocame
overan enormous
length
acrossboththeAtlanticand thePacific,bearingboatloadsofideas,
ofculturalmaterial,
and thatis ultimately
bringing
greatquantities
Indiancivilization.
fortheoriginoftheAmerican
theexplanation
Coinfindsdo notprovethecase forancientvoyagesto America,
but theysupportothercategoriesof evidenceforsuch events.
byCYCLONE COVEY
WinstonDepartmentof History,Wake Forest University,
Salem,N.C. 27109, U.S.A. 29 viii 79
Our expectations,our credulity,and the "known"have hardly
truth.
everheldup as adequate criteriaforhistoricor scientific
evidencedoes not negateit,
Not to be able to explainbaffling
but I could think of possibilitiesother than those Epstein
provenanceof the coin
begrudges,such as the river-highway
findseven forcentralTexas, whichwould make some sense of
their"random"distribution.
If the Venezuelancache included
Arab coin (can't the collectionbe checked?),
an 8th-century
as well as a
whynot consideran Arab merchant-numismatist
pre-ColumbianinVenetian?The postantiquity,
14th-century
troductionof maize into Eurasia and the medieval Chinese
13
geographers'
accountsof Arab voyagesto SouthAmericafrom
Portugalor MoroccowouldfittheVenezuelanevidenceas well
as a post-Columbian
deposit.
How scientific
is it to excludeepigraphic,linguistic,
ceramic,
cultic,and astronomicalor hengeevidence,whichis harderto
plantand whichposes thesame interpretive
problemsas coins?
For example,in the cases of thepre-Columbian
Mimbresbowl
depictinga catfishcaptioned"catfish"in Libyanscriptand the
excavatedin pre-Columbiancontext
head of a Roman figurine
at Calixtlahuaca,what if, instead of by the respectivecelebratedarchaeologists,
theyhad been discoveredby the honest
farmwoman Mrs. Joe Hearn or by a possiblydissimulating
public servant?Would the artifactsautomaticallychange to
fiction?
Perhaps a proliferation
of discoveriessince World War II
correlateswithfraud,butit correlatesno less withtheproliferationofmetaldetectors,land development,
knowledge,communication,concentratedsearching,leisure,and facilities-i.e.,
opportunitiesfor discovery.Probably no group has had to
reviseits presuppositions
moreradicallysince World War II
than the vanguardanthropologists.
Most of the knownMiocene-through-Pleistocene
fossils have been discoveredsince
WorldWar II, as have such significant
ancientsettlements
as
Beidha, Ganjdareh,PPNA Jericho,Chatal Huiyiik,Khirokitia,
Ebla, the palace at Kato Zakros, the "firstMaya city" El
Mirador,etc.
It was not until 1973 that the Monitorwas discovered.By
Epstein's theoryof diabolism,thisoughtto be gravelysuspicious. The metal mightassay right,and the styleof mustard
bottle,butwhybelievethattheshipnowlieswhereit originally
sank (merelybecause that is the simple,obviousexplanation)?
Further,it was discoveredthe same yearthat a man withthe
improbablenameofJamesBond,whoalso mustbe disqualified
because he has collectedAmericancoins,founda marl-encased
copper coin fromthe reignof Claudius on the same North
Carolinashore.The Smithsonianauthenticatesit as a Roman
coin,but let us not rashlyjump to the conclusionthat thereis
any connectionbetweena Roman coin and Roman voyagers.
In the laboriouscontriving
of epicyclesagainst the mounting
evidence,theredoes,however,lie to hand thissimpleexplanation forthe occurrenceof Roman coins over many centuries
along Americanwaterways.
bySTEPHEN C. JETT
Departmentof Geography,University
of California,Davis,
Davis, Calif.95616, U.S.A. 3 viii 79
Although"diffusionists"
and "professionalanthropologists"
are no longermutuallyexclusivecategoriesas Epsteinimplies,
it is truethat it has been mainlyamateursor diffusionists
in
fieldsotherthananthropology
or culturalgeographywhohave
attributedsignificance
to coinfinds.Professionals
have not put
much weighton coins, mainlybecause they have not been
discoveredundercontrolledcircumstances.
The greatincreasein coindiscoveryreports
sinceWorldWar
II is meaningful,
and thecorrelation
withthegrowthofforeign
traveland coin collectingis no doubtvalid. Besidesthe spread
of Euro-Americansettlement,
factorspossiblycontributing
to
the increasingnumberof reportsare increasededucational
levels, leading to recognitionof old coins as significant;the
ofarchaeology,
development
yieldinga risein publicinterestin
antiquities;an increasingnumberof outletsforreports;and
the postwarresurgenceof interestin questionsof pre-Columbiantransoceanic
contacts(e.g.,Ekholm1950,Heyerdahl1950).
Further,sincemanyofEpstein'sdata comefromrecentnewspaper clippingsand personalcommunications,
his sample is
biased towardmorerecentfinds.
Epstein makes the point that a clusteringof mintingdates
wouldbe expectedifcoinsfoundreflected
periodsof especially
14
TABLE 1
TEMPORAL
CLUSTERS
OF COIN FINDS
'%O
OF TOTAL
FINDS
CLUSTER
Cluster1 (28, 16, 24)..............
Cluster2 (25, 11, 12, 13, 26)........
Cluster3 (22, 32, 7).............
Cluster4 (29, 36, 31, 18) ...........
10
15
10to
12
HMINIMUMMAXIMUM
TIME SPAN
9-23
4-37
5-20
13-14
to 18and
thepercentage
NOTE: AddingItem35 to Cluster2 wouldincrease
yielda timespanof20-53years;addingItems15 and 17to Cluster3 would
15 and the timespan 32-35 years;addingItems10
makethe percentage
18 and thetimespan20-21.
and 9 to Cluster4 wouldmakethepercentage
greatmaritimeactivity(althoughsuch periodsare not identified). He sees little clusteringexcept for the dubious Bar
KokhbacoinsfromKentucky.One cannotexpectmuchclusteringin a sampleof 33 coins,but additionalclustersare identifiable (table 1). These temporalclusterswouldhave moremeaning if there were associated geographicalclustering(Jett
1971:40-44). Cluster 1 shows no such grouping.Cluster 2
does (Tennesseeand Kentucky),but includesthe two counterfeit(?)Bar Kokhba coinsand one of the questionableFayetteville occurrences.All but one of the Cluster3 coins are from
the Southeast,but one is froma "box ofcolonialartifacts"and
one fromthe ruinsof a bus station.Cluster4 includesthree
fromtheMidwest,includingone from"an Indian mound,"but
the other finds were widely scattered. Further,no cluster
correlateswithcoastal localityor consistentoccurrenceon or
nearmajorrivers(thelikelyroutesofinlandexploration).Thus
the temporalclusterscannot be consideredparticularlysignificant.
I have furthertabulated (1) locationsof coin finds,using
morerefinedregionalcategoriesthan Epstein's; (2) sites (not
as coastal, on or near major rivers,or
states) distinguished
interior;and (3) mintinadates (table 2). The greatestregional
concentration
(14 finds)is in the "Bible Belt" Upland South
(easternOklahoma to westernNorth Carolina), followedby
the Deep South (lowland Georgia,Alabama, Mississippi,and
Louisiana; 7 finds)and theMidwest(Indiana,Illinois,Wisconnumbers.
sin; 7 finds);no otherregionhas yieldedsignificant
Of thesethreeregions,onlyin the Deep Southweremostfinds
coastal or on or near principalrivers.Minting-dateclustering
is exhibitedonly forthe Upland South. The latterseems an
unlikelyregionto be frequentedby Mediterraneanexplorers,
but it also is probablynota centerforlatter-daycoin-collectors.
PerhapsEpstein'shypothesisabout "the sophisticationof the
local populace" has merit.(Of course,if the Fayettevillecoins
the
were"plants" and the two Bar Kokhba coinscounterfeits,
of dates
region'snumberof findsdropsto 8 and the clustering
possibilityis that
disappears.)The onlyobvious"diffusionist"
soughtthe highlandsin searchof minerals.
Mediterraneans
Respectingthe Venezuelan"hoard" of coins, Epstein cites
Irwin (1963:258) instead of Gordon (1971:68). The latter
Arab
reportsthat the collectionincludedtwo 8th-century-A.D.
coins,whichwould precludedepositionby classical voyagers.
Further,this extendsthe span of coin dates in the collection
even more,supportingthe idea that it was a numismatist's
accumulation.
oftheallegedimportance
refutation
To me,themoststriking
of the coin findsis that althoughtheyare almostall fromthe
Greco-Romanworld, the areas of their discoverydo not
correspondwithNew Worldregionsshowingculturalevidence
of possibleclassicallinks,viz., the CentralAndeanregionand,
to a lesserdegree,the Teotihuacanzone (Jett1978:629, 631I knownofno coinreportsfromthoseregions.
32). Conversely,
Excepting the NorthwestCoast Chinese coin finds,which
CURRENT
ANTHROPOLOGY
TABLE 2
LOCATIONS
AND MINTING
REGION
Deep South
...
Georgia.........
Georgia.
...
Georgia........
Alabama ....
...
Mississippi . . . ..... .
Louisiana.
Louisiana............
Upland South
Oklahoma...........
Arkansas............
Kentucky...........
Kentucky...........
Kentucky...........
Tennessee...........
Tennessee.....
.....
Tennessee. ....
...
Tennessee.........
.
Tennessee.....
...
Tennessee...........
North Carolina ......
North Carolina .......
Chesapeake Bay
Virginia.
Maryland.. ........
Northeast
New Jersey. ........
Connecticut....
. .
Massachusetts. ..
Midwest
Wisconsin. .......
.
Wisconsin.........
.
Wisconsin ..i.......
Wisconsin...........
Illinois..
....
Illinois .............
Indiana .
Plains
Texas .(r)
Texas. ....
.......
Texas .i
Nebraska . . .......
Montana.?
a
DATES
LOCALE
TYPEa
OF COIN FINDS
MINTING
DATE
r
c
c
r
?
?
r
?
?
+98-117
-490
+313
+594
+238
i
?
r
(r)
i
i
r
i
i
i
r
i
?
+63
-146
+133
+133
+133
+137
+100-200
d--191
+41-54
+300
?
+253-68
-300-200
c
c
?
+64
i
c
c
+700-800
+161-80
+238
i
i
l
i
(r)
?
r
+ 152-53
+ca. 300
?
?
- 173-64
-296-97
+293
c
r
+313-14
+364-67
+270-73
+194
-359-36
c, coastal;r and (r),on or neara majorriver;i, interior.
occurin a different
context,Epstein'shypothesisthat mostor
all of the coins discoveredrepresentpost-Columbianlosses by
collectorsor souvenir-seekers
seemsas plausibleas any.
by THOMAS
A.
LEE,
JR.
New WorldArchaeological
Foundation,ApartadoPostal 140,
Las Casas, Ciliapas, Mexico.23 vII 79
San Crist6bal
Epstein is to be commendedforspendinghis timeand effort
on what can only be labelled a dirtybut necessary job. What he
debunks is only a step away from the recent flood of absurd,
quasi-mystical interpretations of valid archaeological remains
which is being spoon-fed to a greedy, undiscerning public
purely for motivesof profit.This undesirablemovementof
fictionmust not go unanswered.What good does it do for
governments,
universities,and foundationsto provide funds
forlegitimateresearchprojectsintothe natureofprehistory
if
the resultsof theseprojectscan, withimpunity,
be turnedinto
tales that would have made even the Grimm brothers laugh?
It is doubly unfortunate that the refuting of these recently
developedmythsmustbe undertakenby thosebest qualified,
sinceit willcost as muchas wouldsignificant
originalresearch
and willpreventtheseindividualsfrommakingvalid advances
in knowledge.
More worklike Epstein's must be carriedout on a whole
hostoftopics,and even thiswillnotbe enough.The fightmust
be carriedto thestreet,whereit willbe ultimatelywon or lost.
We can no longerhide behindthe severefagadesof our professionaljournalsand monographseries;we mustalso present
the results of our researchin economical,attractive,and
interestingformatswhich command the attention of the
some who have triedto popugeneralpublic. Unfortunately,
larize theirresearchresultshave been seriouslyrebukedby
theirpeers for "conduct unbecominga scholar." I believe,
is to the general
however,that our ultimate responsibility
publicthatpays the bill and that ifwe do not fulfillour social
obligationswe will eventuallyfindourselvesin the same predicamentas the dinosaur,the battleship,and the chamberpot.
byBALAJIMUNDKUR
Box U-42, Storrs,Conn. 06268,
University
of Connecticut,
U.S.A. 26 viii 79
One need not be a numismatistto realize that Epstein has
attempteda dispassionate,commendablymethodicalanalysis
of a difficult
theme.The data to be siftedmustinitiallyhave
involvedmoreintangiblesthan one ordinarilyencountersin a
reviewbased, for example,chieflyon a surveyof literature.
sort,he acknowledgesthe
Epstein'ssleuthingis of a different
limitationscarefully,and his conclusionsare consistentwith
the information
at hand.
His themeimpingesupon an importantaspect of modern,
"popular" culture.Lopsidednotionsofpolitical,and especially
social, historyare to some extentinevitableamonghobbyists
so numerous,diverse,and avid as coin collectors.They have
theirown journals,some of which,I assume,are responsibly
edited on behalfof a small minorityof seriousnumismatists,
but the vast majorityof less specialized collectorsand the
generalpublic are apt to be misledby the kind of uncritical
reportsthat Epstein has closelypursued.One need onlykeep
in mindthe immenseinfluenceof televisionand newspapersin
perpetuatingseriousbeliefsin the "Bermuda Triangle,""unidentified
flyingobjects," Atlantis,the occult,and the like,so
ifgullible,people.Precisely
widelyprevalentamongintelligent,
the same kindsof groundlessnotionslurkamidstthe archaeological interestsstimulatedby popularliteratureand modern
museums,even though the popularization,particularlyby
unrelatedto coins
museums,is usuallyin responsibledirections
transoceanic
culturediffusion.
ortheproblemsofpre-Columbian
One with an interestin Egyptology,for instance,could
yield to speculationsarousedby press and telethoughtlessly
visioncoveragelike thataccordedHeyerdahl'sRa expeditions,
Egyptians,Phoenito whichEpstein makesfleetingreference.
cians, "white Semites,"Negroes,Libyans, Hindus and Buddhists fromIndia and Southeast Asia, Polynesians,ShangperiodperiodChinese,Japaneseof the Neolithicmid-Jomon
all have been envisionedby variouswriterssincethe mid-16th
centuryas settlersin theWesternHemispherethroughaccident
or design who bequeathed some of their cultural traits to
Americanindigenes.The Micmacs and relatedAlgonquins,for
example,are alleged to have inventeda systemof writing
traceableto Egyptianand Libyan hieroglyphs
(Fell 1976:25385).
Heyerdahl has speculated on details that are somewhat
Variouselaborations
different
fromthoseofotherdiffusionists.
have been generated,however,by his belief (1971: 123-40)
including"repthat colonistsfromthe easternMediterranean,
resentatives of the intellectualelite . . . withample knowledge
of both Egyptian and Mesopotamian civilizations,"were
15
numerousenoughthat,by dintofprecept,theywere"capable
of foundinga culturelike thatof the Olmecs."But he has also
regretted,and properlyso, "the tendencyon the part of too
to draw far-reachingconclusionson the
many Diffusionists
basis ofdetached,individualpiecesofevidence[thathave been]
justifiablycriticizedby the Isolationists,who gain something
of an upperhand in the debate merelythroughthe defaultof
are
among the diffusionists
theiropponents."The differences
less importantthan the ironyof Heyerdahl'sstatementthat
"the Isolationistpositionrestson searchingout flawsin the
Diffusionists'
arguments...."
Critical "diffusionists"
and "isolationists"alike, I believe,
will welcomeEpstein'smarshallingof some of theseflaws.He
has broughtthemto our attentionin a mannerrarely,if ever,
attemptedin newspaperand televisionreportsor, regrettably,
in diffusionists'
evaluationsof theirown data on the subjectof
coins. On the contrary,aided by the news services,theymay
of
to the prematureestablishment
unwittingly
be contributing
"facts" in the mindsof the generalpopulace and, sometimes,
of scholarsremotefromthe actual problemsof demonstrating
acceptable evidencesof pre-Columbiantransoceanicdiffusion
of culture.
byALLISON C. PAULSEN
Yager Museum, HartwickCollege,Oneonta,N.Y. 13820,
U.S.A. 7 ix 79
and thereis
information
When thereis morethanpreliminary
close examinationof the evidence,major transoceanicdiffusionisttheoriestend to yieldto alternativeexplanations(Cole
and Godfrey1979:41). Epstein'sarticleis a welcomeaddition
to a growinglistofsuchrefutations
ofpopularlyappealingbut
unscientific
claims.However,extremeparticularismis always
hard to refute-thereis always one moreparticularto explain
away!-and here his method of presentationis especially
ingenious.First he describeseach item in the words of the
originalreportofits discovery,and thenhe extractsthe essendiscoverydate and
tial facts of that discovery-provenience,
and commemoration-and
context,coin origin,denomination,
correlatesthesedata in a seriesof tables.These in turngraphically reveal three of his concerns:the nature, extent,and
ofpre-Columbian
Old Worldcoinsfoundin America.
patterning
and foretic science,and their
The tablesspeak forthemselves,
withthe prolixityof the unsuccinctnesscontrastseffectively
substantiatedclaimsforpre-Columbiandeposition.
Epstein has one moreannouncedaim: to draw conclusions
of the diffusionist
claims. I am sorry
about the significance
that he does not go veryfarintothisaspect of his subject.He
might have viewed the matter in the context of broader
or hyperdiffusionism,
perhaps against the backdiffusionism,
groundof recentexcursionsinto what has been called cult
archaeology(Cole 1978:2-3), which is part of an alarming
trendin present-dayscience.These notionscould have led to
speculationsabout the anthropologyof anthropologyand of
archaeology,a neglectedfieldthat remainsto be exploredby
thoseenterprising
who can recognizean interanthropologists
estingand complexsubculturewhentheysee one.
byHANNS J. PREM
MiinUniversitdt
und Afrikanistik,
Institutfur Volkerkunde
33, D-8000 Miinchen40, Federal Rechen,Schellingstrasse
publicofGermany.18 ix 79
ofopinionbetweenscholars
Thereis obviouslya vast difference
theoriesand theiropponents.Arguments
favouringdiffusionist
and
are widelyused by theformer
based on culturalsimilarities
viewedscepticallyby thelatter.The onlyevidencethat might
be accepted as conclusiveby both sides seems to be artifacts
in undeniable
in theOld Worldand encountered
manufactured
16
contextsin theAmericas.However,as Epstein's
pre-Columbian
paper showsbeyonddoubt,thereare a lot of pitfallshere as
this,
well. Coins are probablythe best exampleto demonstrate
because they are accepted in Old World archaeologyas a
primarytool forthe dating of associated findsand, to some
degree,as indicatorsof culturalcontact.Yet Epsteinis able to
convincehis readersthat thereis a nearlyunlimitednumber
of ways in whichartifactslike European coins mintedin preColumbiantimesmay have foundtheirway in more or less
recent times into Americansoil. The spatial and temporal
ofhislargesampleofRoman,Greek,and Hebrew
configuration
coins does not allow any seriousexplanationotherthan accidentallosses in moderntimes.Nevertheless,some 10% of the
relevant
coinshad managedto workdownintoarchaeologically
strataand to get intopre-Columbiancontext(or at least to be
archaeologistknowsthatthese
so reported).Everyexperienced
thingshappen with isolated objects (althoughhe frequently
does notknowhow) and willrecallsimilarexamplesofhis own.
sceptithe well-founded
Epstein'sstudywill,I feel,strengthen
cismof existingsceptics,but I wonderifhe willbe so luckyas
eyes
In the diffusionist's
to convinceeven a singlediffusionist.
his argumentswilllack the finalproof,forin not a singlecase
the wholehistoryof
has he been able to pin downconvincingly
a particularcoin: whobroughtit to America,wholost it under
and so on. In every instancethere are
what circumstances,
morequestionsremainingthan answers.
What, then,is the resultof Epstein's study? He makes it
evidentthatancientEuropeancoinshave been recentlylost in
Americamoreoftenthanone mightbe inclinedto assumeand
thatnoneofthereportedfindsas suchhas any relevanceto the
discussionof pre-Columbiancontacts. Thus the burden of
ofevery
evidencecontinuesto lie withtheminuteinvestigation
find.There is, however,anotherresult:Epstein'swork
further
discouragesany attemptto identifyobjects less unambiguous
than coins, for example,ceramic artifacts.European origin
locationin a pre-Columbianburialhave been
and undisturbed
claimed by Heine-Geldern(1961), on the basis of Garcia
Payon (1961), fora clay head fromCalixtlahuaca(Mexico). In
thelightof Epstein'sstudythereseemsto be littlechanceof a
defiof such objects,whichtherefore
convincingidentification
nitelycease to be valid pieces of evidence.
byJONATHAN E. REYMAN
Normal,Ill.
Program,Illinois State University,
Anthropology
61761,U.S.A. 6 viii 79
This paper is valuable forfourreasons: (1) Epstein provides
to date, ofdata on pre-Columthe mostcompletecompilation,
bian Old World coins, real and counterfeit,found in the
that noneof the coinsare from
Americas;(2) he demonstrates
indisputablypre-ColumbianNew World archaeologicalconper se,
that the distribution,
texts;(3) he arguesconvincingly
of the coinsin timeand space is evidenceforpost-Columbian
deposition;and (4) his researchindicatesthat,whateverother
evidence may exist for such interaction,these coins do not
constitutereliablesupportforthehypothesisofpre-Columbian
transoceaniccontacts.
problemwhichEpsteinonly
Thereis, however,an important
brieflydiscusses.In referenceto the 1913 findin Illinois of a
states,"One wouldliketo dismiss
rareRomancoin,he correctly
it becauseoftheabsenceofpreciseproveniencedata, witnesses,
etc., but such an approachwouldneversatisfythe avid diffuwillhardlybe satisfiedwithEpstein's
sionist."Aviddiffusionists
otherexplanationseither.The problemis thatavid diffusionists
such as Fell, von Daniken, and even Heyerdahlsimplyignore
the archaeologicalcontextand any otherdata whichdo not fit
theirvariousnotions.It is theexistenceoftheartifactand how
muchit lookslikewhattheyexpectto findthatcount;authenticity,provenience,and otherdata pertainingto the archaeoCURRENT
ANTHROPOLOGY
logical contextare irrelevant.In short,that pre-Columbian
Old Worldcoinsare foundon or in aboriginalNew Worldsites
is sufficient
proofforthesewritersthat pre-Columbiantransoceanic voyages were made. Unfortunately,
membersof the
lay public,at whomtheirworkis aimed,probablyneverread
analysessuch as Epstein's;or his workmay be misrepresented
by thediffusionists
as just one moreexampleofnarrowresearch
by what they see as closed-mindedarchaeologists.In either
case, the public is not likelyto benefitfromEpstein's study.
One hopes that he will publish a paper in the popular press
summarizing
his resultsand theirimplications.
by MIGUEL RIVERA DORADO
Departamento
de Antropologia
de Am6rica,UniversidadComplutense,
Ciudad Universitaria,
Madrid3, Spain. 25 viii 79
Este articulotiene el enormemeritode sintetizarde forma
ordenada,y segun tres criteriosbasicos-distribucionde los
hallazgos,circumstancias
de los mismosy momentohistoricosociologicoen que tales descubrimientos
se producen-el ya
abultado dossierde las monedasde la antiguiedadoccidental
recuperadasen America.Aunque la orientacionde sus comentariosapunta hacia la descalificacion
del dato en si, la lectura
del texto se convierteen esti'mulopara planteamientosmbas
generales,y a ellos me voy a referir
brevemente,
por cuantoen
lo demfas
me consideroen total acuerdocon el procedimiento
y
conclusionesa que llega el autor.
Parece innecesariosenialarhoy que oponerseal difusionismo
no es equivalentea rechazarla difusion.Este es un fenomeno
de
transmisioncultural reconocibledesde los remotostiempos
paleoliticoshasta nuestrosdias, pero como tal, fuerade ser un
sintomade cambio,y de la curiosidaderuditaderivada de su
constatacion,no aporta avance algunoen el objetivoprincipal
de explicarcomoy por que razonesha tenidolugarla transformacionobservada,y bajo que condicioneslos resultadosde ese
procesopuedenser elevadosa la categoriade ley. He escritoen
otrolugar (Rivera 1976) que lo que puede ser explicativoes el
analisisde los mecanismosde adaptacionde componentesculturalesa contextosdistintosdel que los invento,que el interes
del investigadordebe centrarseen averiguarlas motivaciones
de la difusiony las causas de la integraciondel elementoen la
culturareceptora.
El trabajode Epstein,'utilcomocreo que es, es tambienuna
lanzada a toromuerto,porquenadie que esteal corriente
de los
interesesde la antropologiacontemporaneapuede encontrar
justificacionpara derrocharsu esfuerzoen probar que varias
monedasgriegaso romanasencontradasen Americallegaron
efectivamente
desde el Mediterrfaneo
en la epoca de su acufiacion. ,A dondenos conduciriael verificarsemejantesupuesto?
Quizfasa afirmarla fuerza de las corrientesoceanicas, o la
capacidad comonavegantesde los viejos marinoseuropeos,pero
ningunaotra deduccionpodriahacersesin pruebassuficientes,
y cientificamente
obtenidas,de que esa difusionpudo implicar
modificaciones
significativas
en las tradicionesculturalesdel
Nuevo Mundo. Ese es el verdaderoproblemadel arqueologo,
el de explicarla asimilaciono el rechazodel rasgodifundido,y
sus consecuencias,a la luz de las caracteristicasdel contexto
receptor.En el caso de las monedas,no solo est'anmuylejos los
difusionistasde este tipo de planteamientossino que tampoco
se hanpropuestodiscernir
conun minimode rigorlas condiciones
en que vale la pena hacersiquieramencionde los hallazgos.
En el trabajo que comentoest'aimplicitoel hechode que es
precisamenteen Estados Unidos donde aparecen un numero
relativamente
elevadode monedasantiguas,mientrasque est'an
ausentespor el contrariolas anforas,los exvotos,las lucernas,
las espadas o los brochesde cinturon.Ningunode estosobjetos
se adquiere con facilidaden un viaje turistico,son pocos los
coleccionistas,y por su formay volumense extraviancon dificultad. Dejemos, pues, a un lado el inacabable tema de los
rasgosexoticosdifundidosy, si de difusionse trata,abordemos
el estudiode los procesosdebidoa los cualesfuerontransmitidas
las innovacionesy de aquellos otros que aconsejarono permitieronla adopcion de elementosculturalesextrafios.No es
que la crlticaa los entusiastasdescubridoresde monedas del
sea superflua;es que,
Viejo Mundo en la Americaprecolombina
sencillamente,
carecede interes,al menosdada la formaen que
aquellos presentanel asunto,mas propia del sensacionalismo
de los periodicoslocales,lugardonde,probablemente,
seriamas
justo hacerleslas adecuadas reconvenciones.
[Epstein'sarticlehas the enormousmeritofsynthesizing
in an
orderlyway, accordingto threebasic criteria-distribution
of
finds,theircircumstances,
and the historical-sociological
momentin whichthediscoveriestookplace-the nowlargedossier
of ancientWesterncoins recoveredin America.Althoughhis
remarksare orientedtowardthe disqualification
of the data
themselves,readingof the text stimulatesmore general approaches.Because forthe restI agree fullywiththe author's
proceduresand conclusions,
I am goingto discussthesebriefly.
It seems unnecessaryto point out today that opposing
is not equivalentto rejectingdiffusion.
diffusionism
This is a
phenomenonof culturaltransmission
observablefromremote
Paleolithictimesto thepresent,but apart frombeinga symptom of changeand apart fromthe scholarlycuriosityaroused
it does not introduceanythingnew with
by its verification
regardto the main objectiveof explaininghow and why the
tookplace and underwhatconditions
observedtransformation
the resultsof that processmay be elevatedto the status of a
law. As I have discussedelsewhere(Rivera 1976), an explanationmaylie in the analysisofthe mechanismsofadaptationof
culturalcomponentsto contextsdifferent
fromthe one that
producedthem. I have argued that the researcher'sinterest
mustfocuson discovering
and
themotivationsforthediffusion
the causes of the integration
of the elementinto the receiving
culture.
Epstein's article,usefulas I considerit to be, seems like
beating a dead horse. No one familiarwith contemporary
anthropologycan find any justificationfor wastinghis/her
efforts
to prove that the variousGreekor Roman coinsfound
in Americacame fromthe Mediterranean
in theperiodoftheir
minting.What would be the purpose of verifyingsuch an
assumption?Perhaps it would show the strengthof the ocean
currentsor the navigationskillsof the old European sailors,
but no otherinferencecould be drawnwithoutsufficient
(and
could have
scientifically
obtained)evidencethatsuch diffusion
in the culturaltraditionsof
impliedsignificantmodifications
theNew World.This is thearcheologist'sreal problem:how to
featureand
explainthe assimilationor rejectionof the diffused
of thereceivits consequencesin thelightofthecharacteristics
ing context.In the case of coins,not onlyare the diffusionists
veryfarfromthistypeofapproach,but theyhave notattempted to specifywithany rigorthe conditionsunderwhichit is
even worthtalkingabout the finds.
The article under reviewimplicitlyacknowledgesthe fact
that it is preciselyin the UnitedStates that a relativelygreat
numberof ancient coins has been found while,in contrast,
there is a lack of amphorae,votive offerings,
candlesticks,
swords,and belt buckles.None of theselatterarticlescan be
easily acquired on a touristtrip,thereare few collectorsof
them,and theydo not getlost easilybecause oftheirformand
volume.We must set aside, then,the inexhaustiblethemeof
diffused
foreigntraitsand, if we want to talk about diffusion,
undertakethe study of the processesby which innovations
were transmittedand the processes that recommendedor
permitted
adoptionofthoseinnovations.It is notthatcriticism
oftheenthusiastic
ofOld Worldcoinsinpre-Columdiscoverers
bian Americais superfluous,
but simplythatit is uninteresting,
17
What is hopedforis not thatone's workingbias be changed
forthisreason,but that findsof ancientcoinsbe recordedfor
their possible importanceratherthan dismissedas inconsetoday are
quential. Though the majorityof anthropologists
skeptical about significantOld World influencein America
duringthe 1,000orso yearsbeforeColumbus,thismightchange
are amassed and
linguistic,
as otherformsof data, particularly
byNORMAN TOTTEN
analyzed. A little foresightis better than hindsightwith
16 BelmontSt., Newton,Mass. 02158,U.S.A. 17 vii 79
Epstein has broughttogethera good listingof pre-Columbian regrets.Publishedreportscan be evaluated at any time,but
dismissedand neverrecordedsoon cease to exist.
findings
is sparse.
coinsfoundin America.As he notes,documentation
of coins,includingauthenticity,
Fifth,
correctclassification
1978).
1978,
Totten
(Seaby
been
reported
A fewotherfindshave
addressedbut hardly
is a problemEpstein has meaningfully
specuThe virtuesofhis articleare many,includingsignificant
inadequate,and the
are
usually
descriptions
Published
solved.
overand
of
coins,
my
lations on the authenticity several
is often concompetencyof persons makingidentifications
whelmingreactionis gratitudefor his effort.But is his case
do not adehelpful,
most
though
Even
photographs,
jectural.
a
hefore
Columbus
of
coins
to
America
against the diffusion
quatelysubstituteforexaminationsof coins themselves.Most
strongone? I believenot.
of the findsI have been asked to look at have, indeed,been
First, regardingdistributionsof finds,his argumentthat
ships and theircoins would have stayed on the coasts rather fantasypieces,trade tokens,talismans,and coins datingsince
1500.This sortingout may obscurebut does not alterthe fact
than movinginlandhas onlylimitedvalidity.Naturallysome
ships,passengers,and goods would remaincoastal, but rivers that some ancientcoins seem to have been in Americafor a
very long time. The circumstancessurroundingsuch coins,
were the primaryhighwaysin pre-ColumbianAmerica and
Europe. Shallow-draftvessels,such as those of the Vikings, includingtheirdiscovery,shouldnot be disregarded.The coin
couldeasilynegotiateriversas wellas seas. Even theSpaniards, I have mostfullyreported,foundin Arkansas,is listedsecond
in Epstein'stable 1. It is thesametypeas hisfirstlisting,found
whosecaravelswereunsuitableforrivernavigation,movedin
by the Fogg. Otherexamplesof
in Alabama and misattributed
is
a
vast
there
fromthe coasts once theyarrived.Moreover,
this very rare type are now knownfromKansas and Conabundanceof evidenceformovementof artifacts,motifs,and
it to
necticut.WhileI cannotsummarizethe data here,suffice
peoplesoverwideareas in ancienttimes.
say that had theybeen discoveredin similarcontextsin the
the antiquityof coin
Second,the authorhas misunderstood
no one wouldsupposethemto represent
collecting,believingit to have begunonlyin the 14thcentury. westernMediterranean
modernlosses.
This has considerablyweakenedhis critiqueof the hoard of
I believethattheevidenceofancientcoinsfoundin America,
Roman coinsfoundin Venezuela.From the scant information
setwithinthecontextofotherdata, suggestsbut does notprove
available I would agree that the coins seem to have been
contacts.Epstein,in makingthe oppositecase,
that is, to have formeda collection. pre-Columbian
assembledtypologically,
too hard.
However,thereis no valid reasonto assumethatart-collecting squeezes the ambiguousand inadequateinformation
fraud"
"deliberate
the
evidence
involves
either
that
He
states
Greeksand Romans,who treatedmanycoinagesas art, never
withwhatwe knowofhuman
or claims"so totallyinconsistent
made type collections(forartistic,historic,and mintingreabehavior,past orpresent,thattheymustbe disregarded."Such
Roman coins
sons) and that a collectionof lst-4th-century
with his statement
conclusionsseem inconsistent
far-reaching
musthave been assembled1,000or moreyearslater. Coin and
avoid drawing
studiously
"professional
anthropologists
that
medal collectionsweremade in classicaltimes;a good example
any conclusionsfromthelimiteddata available."
of one in gold is in the BostonMuseumof Fine Arts.
Third,thoughthis articledeals only withcoins,coins constitutebut one kind of materialremainamong many. Other
monetaryformsrelatedby typeorscriptto theOld Worldhave
beenfoundin America:theoxhideingotshapein variousplaces
Reply
and cultures(Totten 1978:45), an Ohio tokenimitating,apparently,an unknowncoin typeof Evion (Fell 1978:74), and
byJEREMIAH F. EPSTEIN
a stone tokeninscribedin Libyan foundin Tennesseein the
Austin,Tex., U.S.A. 10 x 79
early 1890s(Whitehall1978:37-38).
I wouldlike to remarkat the outsetthat I considermy study
need to be made betweenfinds
Fourth,clearerdistinctions
contribution
ratherthan a debunking
to be a methodological
and publishedreportsof finds.Having studiedcoinsformany
I have gatheredas manydata on thecoinsas I couldand
effort.
never
I
are
years, know that most coins (whereverfound)
analyzed themin various ways in orderto see what kind of
reported,muchless published.The same is true for
officially
occurs. The absence of any pattern that would
patterning
otherkindsofancientartifactsdiscoveredoutsidearcheological
Roman contactis, I believe,inherentin the data, not
suggest
excavations.Thereare a varietyofreasonsforthis,but onlya
and
in my mind-set.If otherscan take thissame information
fewneedconcernus here.As Epsteinpointsout,coincollecting
to builda convincingargumentfora Roman connection,
use
it
in America has increaseddramaticallysince World War I,
let themdo so. The factthatJetttriedand came up withthe
meaning inevitablymore losses from collections.But the
Like all materialthat
same conclusionsas I is mostgratifying.
populationhas about doubled,meaningmorebuildingexcavalacksarchaeologicalcontext,thecoindiscoveriesare intriguing.
tionsand morepeoplelooking,somenowwithmetaldetectors.
Data ofthiskindshouldnot be ignored;theproblemis how to
Even moresignificantly,
literacyand generaleducationin rural
handlethem.I hope theproceduresdevelopedherehave wider
Americahave increasedappreciably.Such once widely held
applicability.
ideas as thatold bronzecoinsare worthlesshave changed,and
It is a pleasure to find colleagues who appreciate one's
of theirfinds. efforts.
seek identification
people muchmorefrequently
Since both Buttreyand Jetthave added new informaAt least some of the reasonspeople reportand do not report tion, I would like to commenton theircontributions.
As a
theirdiscoverieshave to do with the attitudesof authorities classical scholarand a leading authorityon Roman coinage,
whom theyconsult,or would consult.The currentlypopular
a viewpointthat is mosthelpful.His comments
Buttreyoffers
view that ancient coins foundin Americamust come from on the possible confusionbetweencoins of Domitius and of
modernlosses createslittle reason or opportunityto publish Diocletian and the overstatedrarityof the formerput my
discussionof the coin supposedlyfoundin an Indian moundin
them.
at least giventhe way in whichtheypresentthe matter.This
perspectivemore properlybelongs to the headlinesof local
newspapers-whichprobably would be a more appropriate
place forthe reproachesthat are called for.]
18
CURRENT
ANTHROPOLOGY
Epstein: PRE-COLUMBIAN OLD WORLD COINS IN AMERICA
Illinoisin properperspective.Both Buttreyand Jettaddres:
themselvesto theproblemof the Venezuelanhoard.Jettnotec
that I missed Gordon's(1971:68) statementabout two 8thRothoviusof the New England AntiquitiesResearchAssociation,who sent me copies of newspaperclippings,and George
centuryArabcoinsin thecollection,whichprecludethehoard'<
RochesterMuseum
Hamell,AssociateCuratorofAnthropology,
beingpart of a Roman trader'sreadycash as Irwin asserted
and ScienceCenter,who suppliedcopiesof fieldnotes,reports,
In thisconnectionit is ofinterestthat Gordonthoughtof that
and photographs,
it is nowpossibleto talk about the discovery
hoardas readycash, too, but froma Moor's ship. He citesthe
ofsucha coinat the GreatGullysite,a historicUpperCayuga
factthatRomancoinscontinuedin use in medievaltimes.That
Iroquoisvillagefirstdescribedby Skinner(1921:55-68). Three
thiscannotbe so is underlined
by Buttrey'sremarkthatsucha
cemeteriesare knownforthislocation,all containinghistoric
rangeof coinageis not in accord with what we know about
in ancienttimes.Jettmakestheimportant materials.In 1928-29,excavationswere carriedout thereby
monetary
circulation
observationthatit is in theAndeanregionand at Teotihuactan Harrison C. Follett and George Selden, whose work was
that one mightexpectto findevidenceof Roman connections largelyconcentratedon the excavationof burials. The clear
iftheyoccurred.The apparentabsenceofRomancoinsin these
associationof the coin withhistoricmaterialsis evidentfrom
Follett'sfieldnotes(1929:12-13):
areas, compared with their comparativeabundance in the
United States, makes little sense in the light of a Roman
Skeleton33 and 34. Belowthisarea at a depthof 20 inchestwo
presence.
maleskullsofa personaround17 years,headswest,close
probably
While my criticsconsidermy compendiumuseful,theyare
in southsideof graveskullscrushedpelvisand whatwas
together
and tibialayeightincheslowerdown.In thesoilabove
leftoffemur
in fundamental
withmyconclusions.At issuehere
disagreement
ofAP 34 a coin3 horsesand charioton onesideand
pelvisremains
is what constitutesacceptable proofof Roman contact with
humanhead on oppositeside,At thehead of33 a smallchunkof
pre-ColumbianAmerica. The criteriaemployedby sceptics
orclayball,nearthisa largebrassbuttonwith
an earthen
hematite,
cause themto rejectvirtuallyall claimsfora Romanconnection. piecesof apparentbeaverhairmass aroundit, one longred glass
The heart of the matteris the absence of a pre-Columbian beadlayoverthebutton,
In thesoilon thenorthwalltwoironnails
archaeologicalcontextforthe putativeevidenceof Romans in
ironimplement,
In the
twosmallglassbeadsand a smallunknown
cornerofthegraveand nextto thewall a hornspoon.
America.Those who marshaldata forcontactmusttherefore southeast
use otherkindsof arguments,
and sincesomehave been made
as commemorating
EmperorAntonius
The coin,lateridentified
hereby Buchanan,Carter,Cook, Covey,and Totten I would
Pius, was mintedabout A.D. 165. Since thisvillagewas located
like to respondto them:
only 2 mi. fromthe Cayuga Mission, it is speculated that
1. Assumingwhathas yetto be demonstrated:
Tottennotes
Father Rene Menard (1605-61) may have given the coin to
thatthe coinshe has describedfromArkansasand Alabama,if
one of his charges.That he could have had such a coin is
foundin similarcontextsin the westernMediterranean,
would
indicatedby the fact that he had previouslyspentfouryears
not be viewedas modernlosses.He impliesthat sincean early
studyingtheologyat Bourges,France, the site of a Roman
contextis not requiredfor everyRoman coin foundin the
militarycamp (Stewart 1934). In summary,even when we
Mediterraneanit is unreasonableto demand one forsimilar
have an aboriginalarchaeologicalcontextfora Roman coin in
coins foundin the United States. What he overlooksis that
America,the associationsare all post-Columbian.
Roman influencethroughoutthe Mediterraneanhas been
abundantlydocumented,and so Roman coins,even if found
out of context,are not surprising.Roman contact with the
New Worldhas not been demonstrated,
and therefore
modern
Cited
References
lossesappear to be the mostlikelyexplanation.
2. Confirmation
fromotherkindsof data: Buchananasserts,
ofthe
ATWATER, CALEB. 1820. ArchaeologiaAmericana.Transactions
"Coin findsdo not prove the case for ancient voyages to
AmericanAntiquarianSociety1: 66-313.
America,but they supportother categoriesof evidence for
BEALS, HERB. 1975. Japanese coins on the NorthwestCoast. Screenings 24(4):2-3.
such events."While he offersno examples,Carterand Covey
1976. Chinese coins and Pacific Northwest archaeology.
do. This kind of thinkingis extraordinarily
seductive.If it is
Screenings24(4)12-3.
followed,one is soon overwhelmedby evidence,each piece
--.
1977. Chinese coins: New evidence.Screenings26(8):2-4.
reinforcing
the nextbut fewcapable of standingon theirown.
BOLLES, T. Dix. 1893. Chinese relics in Alaska. Proceedingsof the
U.S. National Museumfor 1892 15: 221-22.
It is necessaryto clear the air-to separatewhat is solid from
C. E. 1952. Results of archaeological investigationsin
BORDEN,
what is suggestiveand to discardwhat has no value. I have
in British Columbia 3:
central British Columbia. Anthropology
concentratedon coins because any digressionwould diffuse
31-43.
that argument.
BROOKS, C. W. 1875. Reports of Japanese vessels wrecked in the
North Pacific: From the earliest records to the present time.
3. The exaltedprofessional
versus"thepeople": Professional
ProceedingsoftheCaliforniaAcademyofScience6:50-66.
archaeologistshave long been accused of hidinginformation
BRUNN, P. M. 1966. The Romanimperialcoinage.Vol. 7. Constantine
fromthe public (see, for example, Gladwin 1947). In this
and Licinius,A.D. 313-337. London: Spink.
connection,Covey asks if certaindiscoverieswould turn to
CARTER, GEORGE. 1978. "Commentatorson [Barry]Fell address."
Castleton
Proceedingsof theCastletonConference,
AncientVermont:
fictionhad theybeenmadeby a farmwomanor a dissimulating
StateCollege,October14-15, 1977. Edited by WarrenL. Cook, p. 85.
publicservantratherthanan archaeologist.
The problemis not
[WLC]
Rutland, Vt.: AcademyBooks.
who makes the find,but its nature.If a coin werefoundin a
E. 1965. Numismatics: An ancient
ELVIRA
CLAIN-STEPHANELLI,
verifiablepre-Columbiancontextby a farmwomantrainedto
fromtheMuseumofHistoryand Technology
science.Contributions
32.
distinguishdisturbeddeposits whose excavating techniques
1888-92. 2d edition. Monnaies imperiales.Paris:
COHEN, HENRI.
weremeticulousand whosefieldnotesand documentation
were
(TVB)
Rollin et Feuardent.
impeccable,thenthe discoverywouldpass inspection.I doubt,
COLE, JOHN R. 1978. Barry Fell, America,B.C., and a cargo cult in
archaeology.Bulletinof the NezwYork State ArchaeologicalAssohowever,ifI wouldbe as confident
ifthe discoveryweremade
[ACP]
ciation74: 1-10.
by a dissimulating
servant,publicor no.
COLE, JOHN R., and LAURIE R. GODFREY. 1979. Biological analogy,
Throughoutthesediscussions,
have
stressed
that
no
81:37-44.
Roman
J
and archaeology,AmericanAnthropologist
diffusionism,
[ACP]
coin bas been excavatedundercontrolledarchaeologicalcondiCOVEY, CYCLONE. 1975. Calalus: A RomanJewishcolonyin America
tions. RecentlyI have found that J was mistakenin this.
AlfredtheGreat.New York:
through
fromthetimeof Charlemagne
Thanks to Carl Comptonof The Inlteramericanl
and Andrew
Vantage Press.
19
EKHOLM, GORDON F. 1950. Is American Indian culture Asiatic?
Natural History59:344-51, 382.
[SCJ]
FAIRBANKS, CHARLES H. 1976. Spaniards,planters,ships,and slaves:
in
Florida
and
Historical archaeology
Georgia. Archaeology29:
164-72.
FARLEY, GLORIA. 1977. Ancientcoins found.OklahomaToday 27(2):
31.
FELL, B. 1976. AmericaB.C.: Ancientsettlers
in theNew World.New
York: QuadrangleBooks.
[BM]
--. 1978. "Vermont'sancientsitesand thelargerpictureoftransAtlanticvisitationsto America,B.C.," in AncientVermont:
ProceedCastletonState College,October14ings of theCastletonConference,
Edited
Warren
L.
15, 1977.
by
Cook. Rutland, Vt.: Academy
Books.
[NT]
field
notes for excavations. MS,
FOLLETT, HARRISON C. 1929. Site
RochesterMuseum, Rochester,N.Y.
FORT, CHARLES. 1973. The bookofthedamned.London: Abacus.
GARCIA PAYON, JOSEi. 1961. Una cabecita de barro, de extrafio
fisionomia.Boletindel InstitutoNacional de Antropologia
e Historia
6:1-2.
[HJP]
GILBERT, SIR HUMPHREY. 1576. A discovrseof a discouriefor a new
passageto Cataia. London: HenryMiddleton.
GLADWIN, HAROLD S. 1947. Men out of Asia. New York: McGrawHill.
GORDON, CYRUS H. 1971. BeforeColumbus:Links betweenthe Old
Worldand ancientAmerica.New York: Crown.
HAYWOOD, JOHN. 1823. The natural and aboriginalhistoryof Tennesseeup to thefinal settlements
thereinby thewhitepeoplein the
year1768. Nashville: GeorgeWilson.
The
--.
1959 (1823).
naturaland aboriginalhistoryof Tennessee
thereinbythewhitepeoplein theyear1768:
up to thefinalsettlement
Includingarchaeological,
geological,and historicalannotationsbringing theancientaccountintofocuswithpresent-day
and an
knowledge
sketchof the author,John Haywood, by Mary U.
introductory
editor.Jackson:McCowat-Mercer.
Rothrock,
HEINE-GELDERN, ROBERT V. 1961. Ein romischerFund aus dem
vorkolumbischenMexiko. Anzeigerder osterreichlischen
Akademie
der Wissenschaften,
phil.-hist.Klasse 98:117-19.
[HJPl
HEYERDAHL, THOR. 1950. The Kon-Tiki expedition.
London: George
Allen and Unwin.
[SCJ]
. 1971."Isolationist or Diffusionist?"
in The questforAmerica.
Edited by G. Ashe. New York: Praeger.
[BM]
IRWIN, CONSTANCE. 1963. Fair gods and stonefaces. New York:
St. Martin's Press.
JETT, STEPHEN C. 1971. "Diffusion versus independentinvention:
The bases of controversy,"in Man across the sea: Problemsof
pre-Columbiancontacts.Edited by Carroll L. Riley, J. Charles
Kelly, Campbell Pennington,and Robert L. Rands, pp. 5-53.
Austin:Universityof Texas Press.
[SCJ]
- . "Pre-Columbian transoceanicinfluences,"in AncientNative
Americans.Edited by Jesse D. Jennings,pp. 592-650. San Francisco: Freeman.
[SCJ]
KEDDIE, GRANT. 1978. The reliabilityof dating archaeologicaland
ethnographicmaterials with associated Chinese coins. Datum
3(2):1-2.
KEELER, CLYDE E. 1972. The Seip Mound "coin" identified.New
EnglandAntiquitiesResearchAssociationNewsletter
7(2):22-24.
KRAAY, C. M., and M. HIRMER. 1966. Greekcoins. New York:
HarryN. Abrams.
20
LARSON, R. 1966. Was America the wonderfulland of Fusang?
AmericanHeritage17: 106-9.
MACMILLAN-BROWN, J. 1927. Peoples and problemsof the Pacific.
London: T. Fisher Unwin.
MAHAN, J.,and D. BRAITHWAITE. 1975. Discovery of ancient coins
in the United States. Anthropological
Journal of Canada 13(2):
15-18.
MARINEO SICULO, Lucio. 1530. De las cosas memorables
de Espafia.
Alcala.
MAURICE, JULES. 1908-12. Numismatiqueconstantinienne.
Paris:
Leroux.
[TVB]
MESHORER, YAAKOV. 1967. Jewishcoins oftheSecond Templeperiod.
Tel Aviv.
NOEL-HuME, IVOR. 1974. All thebestrubbish.New York: Harper and
Row.
OVIEDO Y VALDES, GONSALO FERNANDEZ DE. 1944(1535). Historia
generaly naturalde las Indias. Asunciondel Paraguay: Guarania.
PHEBUS, GEORGE E. 1974. "Konapee's money?" elicits Smithsonian
response.Screenings23(2): 2-3.
POHL, FREDERICK J. 1973. Did ancientRomans reach America?The
New Diffusionist
3(10):23-26.
PREWITT, ELTON R. n.d. The RogersSpringssite: 1974 investigations.
Texas ArchaeologicalSurveyResearch Report 54.
Recordsof thePast. 1913. A Roman coin fromone of the moundsin
Illinois. 12:182-83.
RIVERA, MIGUEL. 1976.Criticade la arqueologiadifusionista.
Anuario
Cientifico(UniversidadCentral del Este, San Pedro de Macoris,
RepiublicaDominicana) 1:155-65.
[MR]
SCHOOLCRAFT,HENRY R. 1854. Historicaland statisticalinformation
thehistory,
conditionand prospectsoftheIndian tribesof
respecting
theUnitedStates.Vol. 4. Philadelphia: Lippincott,Brambo.
ScientifcAmerican.1882. 46(24):382.
SEABY, PETER. 1978. The firstdatable Norse find from North
America?Seaby Coin and Medal Bulletin,no. 724 (December 1978),
pp. 369-70, 377-82.
[TVB,NT]
SKINNER, ALANSON. 1921. Notes on Iroquois archeology.
Musuem of
the AmericanIndian Heye Foundation,Indian Notes and Monographs.
SQUIER, E. G., and E. H. DAVIS. Ancientmoundsof theMississippi
Valley.SmithsonianInstitutionContributionsto Knowledge 1.
STEWART, ALEXANDER McGINN. 1934. Rene Menard 1605-1661.
Privatelyprinted.
SUNDERLAND, RILEY. 1979. Silver tetradrachm of Philip II in
Montana: Coin find or lost coin? Occasional Publicationsof the
[DBB]
EpigraphicSociety7(174).
SUTHERLAND, C. H. V. 1967. The Roman imperialcoinage. Vol. 6.
London: Spink.
[TVB]
TOTTEN, NORMAN. 1977. Carthaginian coins found in Arkansas and
Alabama. OccasionalPublicationsof theEpigraphicSociety4(88):
1-7.
1978. "Numismatic evidence for pre-Columbianvoyages."
--.
AncientVermont:ProceedingsoftheCastletonConference,
Castleton
State College,October14-15, 1977. Edited by Warren L. Cook,
p. 45. Rutland, Vt.: AcademyBooks.
[DBB,WLC,NT]
WARSHAVSKY, DR. 1961. Letter to Editor. New World Antiquity
8(7):106-7.
WHITTALL, JAMES P., II. 1978. An inscribed token from a necropolis
in Tennessee. Early Sites ResearchSocietyBulletin6(1).
[NT]
CURRENT
ANTHROPOLOGY

Pre-Columbian Old World Coins in America: An

Transcription

Similar documents

Shove ha`penny - North Road Community Primary School

Heavy Duty Coin Counters / Softers

Heavy Duty Canadian Coin Counters / Packagers

Tiny Gift - Christian Record Services

`Fourth Century Coins Discovered at St Andrew`s Theological College.`

Tips on identifying counterfeit $10 coins

JetSort High Speed Coin Sorters

JetSort® - Cummins Allison

01-b Student Graduation

JetSort LX