According to Bruun in Roman Imperial Coinage VII, the mint at Constantinople opened in A.D. 326. There have been other dates given for the opening, some as early as 324, and it seems most likely that the mint did indeed open earlier...maybe mid-late A.D. 325. The Dafne issue began as early as 327, and replaced the other reverse types issued for Constantine. The previous reverse types showed traditional messages such as Libertas, Securitas and Spes. The mint struck the Dafne type without interruption until the restructuring in 330. Dafne coins were only struck for Constantine; the mint struck other types for the Caesars. The Constantinople mint began issuing the Dafne at seven officinae-- A (alpha), B (beta),Gamma, Delta, Epsilon, S (digamma), and Z (zeta). Constantinople issued the Dafne type primarily to pay the workers re-building Constantinople, but it was also a commemorative coin. Some people think that the coin commemorated a fort on the Danube. The man responsible for popularizing this belief was an Austrian numismatist named Joseph Hilarius Eckhel (1737- 1798).
“Various have been the opinions expressed
by the learned respecting it.- Eckhel (viii. 81), in citing them
all, considers that interpretation to be decidedly and most
probable, which Gretser and Spanheim drew from Procopius, viz.
that by Constantiniana Dafne is to be understood the castle or
camp (castrum) Dafne, constructed by Constantine on the bank of
The Primary Sources
The Romans built many forts; but they did not commemorate these other forts on coins. The only reason anyone even thinks that the coin commemorated a fort is because of Procopius, who was a historian during the reign of the emperor Justinian (ruled A.D. 527- 565). Around A.D. 550, Procopius wrote Buildings,which was an account of construction during Justinian's rule. The following selection is from Buildings, book IV, vii. 5-13.
"Just opposite this, on the other bank of the river, Constantine, Emperor of the Romans, once built with no small care a fort, Daphnê by name, thinking it not inexpedient that the river should be guarded on both sides at this point. As time went on, the barbarians destroyed this entirely; but the Emperor Justinian rebuilt it, beginning at the foundations."
So some people choose to believe that the Dafne coinage was named after this fortress mentioned by Procopius, when the coins and the fort might not be connected at all! Remember, that Procopius was also writing more than two hundred years after the fact. The fort was also on the north bank of the Danube, so a bridge would have been needed.
The Paschal Chronicle was written
by an anonymous Byzantine writer. He identified himself as a
contemporary of the Emperor Heraclius (ruled A.D. 610- 641).
According to the Paschal Chronicle,2
a bridge was indeed built over the Danube. "Constantine the
pious crossed the Danube very many times, and made a bridge for
it in stone." This took place in A.D. 328.
Aurelius Victor was a historian who lived circa A.D. 320- 390. He also mentioned the bridge in De Caesaribus 13.4 and 41.13. This bridge probably marked the start of a Gothic campaign. Victor said that the bridge was built and then, "camps and forts were strategically placed in many locations."
There was also a bronze medallion issued to commemorate this bridge.3 As the Dafne coins were possibly issued as early as 327, it seems unlikely a coin was issued to commemorate a fort that was yet to be built. At best, the fortress was in the planning or initial construction stages when the first Dafne coins were issued.
The Dafne fort is also mentioned by
Ammianus Marcellinus (A.D. 330-395) in his history of the later
Roman Empire. The emperor Valens (ruled A.D. 364- 378) was
preparing for a campaign against the Goths and he "established
his base near a fort called Daphne, and crossed the Danube on a
bridge of boats."4
Marcellinus must be mistaken in calling this fort Daphne,
though. Procopius said that the fort across from Dafne on the
south bank of the Danube was called Trasmariscas. Procopius also
said that the Dafne fort was destroyed; and the bridge must also
have been destroyed, since Valens had to use boats to cross. So
by the campaign of Valens, the Dafne fortress and bridge across
the Danube had already been destroyed by the Goths. 5
Map showing the Daphne and Transmarisca fortress
The Meaning of Victory
This coin most likely symbolized the
defeat of Licinius because the Greek word for laurel is daphne,
and laurel wreaths were signs of victory.6 The legend of the Dafne coin would
actually translate as 'Constantinian Laurel/Victory'. The fort
on the north bank of the Danube could very well have been named
"Daphnê". Dafne in Greek, after all, has a secondary meaning of
victory; so a fort called victory seems more than appropriate.
So, if the fort was named Dafne, it could actually have no
connection with the Dafne coinage, other than the use of the
word Dafne-- or victory. John of Ephesus even mentioned another
fort or camp called Daphnudii Castra, which was located near the
sea.7 Constantine did
have a victory over the Goths in the Danube area. In A.D. 332,
Constantine was awarded the title Gothicus Maximus.8 Coins issued in 327-8 would
not celebrate an anticipatory victory, but rather an
accomplished victory. After looking at the evidence, it seems
very evident that the Dafne coinage commemorated the A.D. 324
victory of Constantine over Licinius.
In summation, the meaning of CONSTANTINIA DAFNE is
probably best translated as "Constantinian Victory" and has
nothing to do with a fort.
The DAFNE type must also be studied in context with the previous issues that it replaced. These other issues were also issued only for Constantine and celebrated his victory over Licinius --
“Four entirely new types were created for Constantine, GLORIA EXERCITVS, GLORIA ROMANORVM, LIBERTAS PVBLICA, and SPES PVBLIC…Here the reverses record a summing up of the Civil War II, the glory of the army constituting the glory of the Empire, the death of the tyrant (SPES PVBLIC) granting liberty for all.” RIC VII pg 567.
This coin replaced other reverse types for Constantine and was the only type issued for almost three years in the name of Constantine--and exclusively for him…this seems like an important point. If this coin commemorated an obscure fortress, three years would be a very long time for a coin to have been issued. However, becoming the sole ruler of the Roman Empire and building a new capitol might merit a special coinage! Engravers also never used the adjective CONSTANTINIANA except on this issue; so the word is unique to this series. I also believe that Constantine was addressing his new city of Constantinople with a message... the city was being reborn and spurning the old ways.
Eusebius wrote in his "Oration of Constantine to the Assembly of the Saints" in chapter eighteen:
“having been devoted by the folly of her parents to this service, a service productive of nothing good or noble, but only of indecent fury, such as we find recorded in the case of Daphne. On one occasion, however, having rushed into the sanctuary of her vain superstition, she became really filled with inspiration from above, and declared in prophetic verses the future purposes of God…”
Illustration of the Daphnaean Apollo temple from the Peutinger table. There was a Daphne suburb of Antioch.
This passage relates how the oracle realized the error of her old pagan beliefs. Maybe the Dafne coins also alluded to this change in spirituality. This coin may have had a message from Constantine to the people of Constantinople that his new city would be a Christian city and it also represented his victory over Licinius-- which was a victory of Christianity over paganism.
RIC describes the reverse as a Victory
holding a palm branch in each hand; but this is an error. Anyone
that looks closely at clear examples will see that it looks like
a laurel in the right hand and palm in the left hand of Victory.
Otto Voetter recognized the difference between the two branches
and in his 1921 catalogue on the Gerin collection described the
reverse as "Victoria mit Zweig und Palmzweig" (Victory with
branch and palmbranch) Laurel symbolizes victory while the palm
symbolizes peace. It is interesting though that Dafne in
mythology was associated with laurel. She was turned into a
laurel tree to protect her from Apollo.
Victory or Angel ?
At some point, the pagan Victory also
became the Christian angel. In this transition, the image of
Victory did not even change. She still had wings and is depicted
with the victor's wreath and palm. "This is perhaps the only
case in which the transition from pagan goddess to Christian
angel is perfectly clear."9Did
the Victory on the Dafne coinage represent an angel? It
certainly could have to some people, but in keeping with the
ambiguous religious themes used by Constantine, this imagery
would have been acceptable to pagans and Christians alike.
The Barbarian Attribute
There are different portrayals of the barbarians on the Dafne coins. Since barbarians are represented, some people think that these coins must have referred to the pacification of a local tribe. The barbarian is actually a symbol of imperial power-- the barbarian attribute. Small barbarian figures appear on many Roman coins and generally have nothing to do with a specific victory, but rather the representation of barbarians had been given a symbolic meaning. Barbarians are general symbols of victory.10
Diadems and the Physical Transformation
All Dafne issues have the new diadem, instead of the laurel crown. Constantine made a choice to stop being portrayed with the pagan laurel headdress or radiate headdress associated with Sol and starting using the kingly diadem. Philostorgius said that Constantine began wearing the diadem as a sign "of his sole rule and Victory over opponents."11 Maybe the Dafne coinage is an allegorical representation of Constantine turning his back on the pagan ways. Constantine is also never bearded again. In fact, Constantine undergoes an amazing physical transformation, perhaps symbolizing his spiritual transformation. The pictures below illustrate the three bust types for the Dafne issue.
"The distinction between plain diadem and
the rosette diadem is at times rather arbitrary. Diadems,
structurally consisting of bands adorned with pearls and jewels
and with small forehead jewel, if any, have been classified as
"This is further evidence for the argument that the diadem varieties which are known from only 1-3 examples from isolated officinae may be stylistic variations. RIC points out in a footnote to RIC 29 that 28 different diadem types have been noted for the Dafne reverse, giving immense weight to the argument that diadem varieties, especially those which are unique or nearly so, may be insignificant variants, undeserving of separate RIC numbers." 13
Since the authors noted 28 different diadem types and admit the difficulty in distinguishing diadems, there should probably be only three types, especially since some of those types were only seen in just one or a few coins and were probably just the result of artistic license on the part of an engraver.
1. head with diadem (plain, rosette, pearl) -- RIC 30
2. head with diadem (plain, rosette, pearl) looking upwards-- RIC 32
3. diademed (plain, rosette, pearl), draped and cuirassed bust-- RIC 35, RIC 38
The first, RIC 30, shows a bull-necked Constantine with sharp features and short hair. I believe that RIC 30 is an accurate portrayal of Constantine. Constantine appeared thick-necked on his statues and had a nickname of "bull-neck".14 The RIC 30 bust also looks more like earlier issues from Rome, Arles and Ostia. By the last bust type, RIC 35, Constantine has softened, even feminized. His features are softer, his neck is thinner and more graceful and his hair is now curling down his neck.
The middle bust is RIC 32, issued in late
327 A.D. This is the ‘looking up to the heavens” type. “It is
tempting to associate the short use of the eyes raised type with
the vision of Constantine in November 327 in conjunction with
the founding of the enlarged capitol, but it is only speculation
to do so, though the chronology must be very close.” –Speck and
"How deeply his soul was impressed by the power of divine
faith may be understood from the circumstance that he directed
his likeness to be stamped on the golden coin of the empire with
eyes uplifted as in the posture of prayer to God: and this money
became current throughout the Roman world." (Eusebius IV.15)
RIC 38 (issued circa
Jan. 328 to late 329) has a star in the exergue. Some scholars
believe that the star commemorated the residence of Constantine
in Constantinople because he adopted the star as his personal
symbol. A variation of RIC 38 has a dot in the exergue. The
author of RIC, Patrick Bruun, mentions this coin in the
footnotes. "Some coins not with star but with dot in exergue,
the dot most likely intended for a star." The author noted one
specimen for officina 'A'. Speck and Huston in Constantine's
Dafne Coinage have noted a coin from officina 'B', the only one
not footnoted in RIC, so every officina has been filled to match
RIC 38. "This mintmark with the dot in exergue matches a coin in
gold struck circa 330, suggesting strongly that the issue with
dot is from the Gold mint and follows the issue with and without
star as a separate issue in this continuous series, deserving of
its own listing in RIC, rather than a 'footnote variety'."15 Coins have also turned up
for the Caesars which further prove that this is a separate
listing-- campgates for each with the mintmark CONS •.
The chart below is adapted from
Constantine's Dafne Coinage. This chart was originally made in
1992, and many more Dafne coins have entered the market since
then. The original chart has been modified based on observations
of the marketplace and estimates. Since this chart is not
continually updated, actual numbers will be higher, but the
numbers given will serve as an estimate of rarity.
Notice that by RIC 35 there are no
DAFNE types issued from workshops gamma and S. These workshops
were used to strike the campgate coins for Constantine II and
|30 (mid 327)||
|35 (Jan. 328 into 329)||
|38 ✶ (Jan. 328 until late 329)||
|38 • (late 329 into early 330)||
There is only one more Dafne type to talk about, and it is
an obverse not mentioned in RIC. It is an eyes heavenward type
without the obverse inscription (anepigraphic). Though not
listed in RIC, there is an example included in the Voetter
catalogue of 1909 “Constantinvs Junior Inbesonders seine Münzen
als Augustus und die gleichzeitigen Kupferprägungen in den
römischen Münzstätten” from workshop B
Voetter catalogue of 1909 “Constantinvs Junior Inbesonders seine Münzen als Augustus und die gleichzeitigen Kupferprägungen in den römischen Münzstätten”
Maurice also mentions an unpublished coin with diademed head
and no legend..."une tete diademee sans legende" (pg 514 #3) in
his 1911 book "Numismatique Constantinienne"
So for some reason Bruun did not have
this type in RIC VII, perhaps oversight or he did not believe
the type actually existed; but it was "rediscovered" in 1989.
According to Speck and Huston in "Constantine's Dafne
Coinage at Constantinople", note 8, there were three specimens
of this coin in the Bankhaus H. Aufhaeuser Munich auctions 7.
1990, 777; 8, 1991, 704; and 9, 1992, 522. Two of these coins
were officina A and one was officina S. Speck and Huston placed
this type with the other 'raised eyes' type for chronology but
speculated that these coins could have been for special
Quite a few examples have since
turned up since Speck and Huston wrote their catalogue, with
examples from every workshop noted. Today this type would still
be rated rare, but not nearly as rare as not being in RIC might
deeply his soul was impressed by the power of divine faith may
be understood from the circumstance that he directed his
likeness to be stamped on the golden coin of the empire with
eyes uplifted as in the posture of prayer to God: and this money
became current throughout the Roman world." Eusebius (IV.15)
The above coin is a very rare, possibly unique coin from
Helena. It is very similar in style to Constantine's Dafne
coinage and was probably issued at the same time. The obverse
is anepigraphic and the reverse is Victory seated on a cippus,
right foot on a prow; holding a cornucopia in the left arm,
and right holding an olive branch.
Ammianus Marcellinus, The Later Roman Empire, Translated by Walter Hamilton, New York: Penguin Classics, 1986.
Aurelius Victor, Liber de Caesaribus (Book on the Caesars), edited by H.W. Bird.
Chronicon Paschale, translated by Michael Whitby and Mary Whitby, Liverpool University Press, 1990.
Ecclesiastical History of John, Bishop of Ephesus, Translated from the original Syriac by R. Payne Smith, Oxford University Press, 1860.
Eusebius, Life of Constantine, edited by Averil Cameron & Stuart Hall, Oxford University Press,1999.
Procopius, Buildings, translated by H.B. Dewing & Glanville Downey, Loeb Classical Library, 1940.
John McGregor, "Constantiniana Dafne: A Different Point of View". Journal for the Society of Ancient Numismatics 15, No. 3 (Fall 1984) : 44-46.
R. S. Speck and Stephen M. Huston, Constantine's Dafne Coinage at Constantinople, Stephen M. Huston, 1992.
R. Mowat, “Constantiniana Dafne.” Bulletin de la Société nationale des antiquaires de France (1912) : 310- 315.
Sutherland and Carson, Roman Imperial Coinage VII. Spink
& Son, 1997.
Jules Maurice, Numismatique Constantinienne, 1908
Otto Voetter, “Constantinvs Junior Inbesonders seine Münzen
als Augustus und die gleichzeitigen Kupferprägungen in den
römischen Münzstätten” 1909
Otto Voetter,"Die Münzen der römischen Kaiser, Kaiserinnen und Caesaren von Diocletianus bis Romulus, Katalog der hinterlassenen Sammlung und Aufzeichnung des Herrn Paul Gerin" 1921
1 This quote is from Seth W. Stevenson, A Dictionary of Roman Coins, originally published in 1889. He is referencing Eckhel, Doctrina Numorum Veterum, 8 vols., published 1792-1798.
2Chronicon Paschale 284- 628 A.D. Translated by Michael and Mary Whitby. New York: Liverpool University Press (2007) : 15.
3 RIC VII Rome 298. The reverse is SALVS REIP bridge with three arches, whereon emperor advancing right in military dress, holding transverse spear, shield, preceded by Victory, holding trophy, turning head towards him, in front, suppliant; beneath, to left, Danube resting; in exergue DANVBIS. This medallion was struck between 327-333. For an article on this medallion see Andreas Alföldi, “Die Donaubrücke Constantins des Grossen und verwandte historische Darstellungen auf spätrömischen Münzen” Zeitschrift für Numismatik 36 (1926) : 161- 167.
4 Ammianus Marcellinus book 27, v-5.
5For more on the chronology of the bridge's destruction, see the article by E.A. Thompson, “Constantine, Constantius II and the Lower Danube Frontier,” Hermes 84 (1956) : 372- 381.
6 John Melville Jones, A Dictionary of Ancient Roman Coins. Numismatic Fine Arts Intl (1990) : 81.
7 John of Ephesus lived circa A.D. 507- 588 and spent many years in Constantinople. Translated from the original Syriac by R. Payne Smith in Ecclesiastical History of John, Bishop of Ephesus, Oxford University Press, 1860 : Book III, section 8 talks about the fort.
8T. D. Barnes, “The Victories of Constantine.” Zeitschrift für Papyrologie und Epigraphik 20 (1976) : 153.
9Harold Mattingly, The Man in the Roman Street. New York: W. W. Norton & Company (1976) : 79.
10Annalina Calo Levi, "Barbarians on Roman imperial coins and sculpture." American Numismatic Society 1952 (offprint)
11Noel Lenski, The Cambridge Companion to the Age of Constantine. Cambridge University Press, 2005, pg. 29.
12 Sutherland and Carson, Roman Imperial Coinage VII. Spink & Son (1997) : 574.
13 R. S. Speck & Stephen M. Huston, Constantine's Dafne Coinage at Constantinople, Stephen M. Huston (1992) : 10.
14 Samuel N.C. Lieu & Dominic Monserrat. From Constantine to Julian. Pagan and Byzantine: Views A source of History. Routledge (1996) : 5. For more on the meaning of the phrase "bull-neck" see Christer Bruun, "The Thick Neck of the Emperor Constantine. Slimy Snails and 'Quellenforschung'" Historia : Zeitschrift für alte Geschichte 44.4 (1995): 459 – 480.
15 R. S. Speck & Stephen
M. Huston, Constantine's Dafne Coinage at Constantinople, Stephen
M. Huston (1992) : 10.
last modified on 11 April 2016