Hubbry Logo
FollisFollisMain
Open search
Follis
Community hub
Follis
logo
8 pages, 0 posts
0 subscribers
Be the first to start a discussion here.
Be the first to start a discussion here.
Follis
Follis
Follis
View on Wikipedia
from Wikipedia

A follis of Diocletian. 27 mm.

The follis (plural folles; Italian: follaro, Arabic: فلس, romanized: fals) was a type of coin in the Roman and Byzantine traditions.

Roman coin

[edit]
Caesar Constantius II on a follis AE3, 18 mm, of Heraclea of the year 325.

The term follis is used for a large bronze Roman coin denomination introduced by Diocletian in about 294. The term "nummus" is now thought to be the actual ancient term, but usage of "nummus" has not caught on.[1] At first the follis weighed about 10 grams and was about 4% silver, with a thin layer of silver on the surface. Over the next decades it declined both in size and in silver content.

The word follis means bag (usually made of leather) in Latin, and there is evidence that this term was used in antiquity for a sealed bag containing a specific amount of coinage. It has also been suggested that the coin was named Follis because of the ancient Greek word "φολίς" meaning a thin layer of metal (cf. Latin folium, "leaf") which covers the surface of various objects, since originally, this coin had a thin layer of silver on top. The 'follis' of Diocletian, despite efforts to enforce prices with the Edict on Maximum Prices (301), was revalued and reduced as time passed. By the time of Constantine the Great, it was smaller and barely contained any silver. A series of Constantinian bronzes was introduced in the mid-4th century, although the specific denominations are unclear and debated by historians and numismatists. They are referred to as AE1, AE2, AE3 and AE4, with the first being the largest (near 27 mm) and the last the smallest (averaging 15 mm) in diameter. Namely:

AE1 AE2 AE3 AE4
over 25 mm 21 – 25 mm 17 – 21 mm under 17 mm

Discoveries

[edit]

Large hoards of folles have been discovered all across the Roman empire. For example, in Seaton Down, Devon, England, near the site of a second- to third-century Roman villa and fortifications, 22,888 folles were found in 2013.[2] Fourth century folles represent the largest category of coin finds in the United Kingdom.[3] Between 30,000 and 50,000 exceptionally well-preserved folles from the first half of the fourth century were discovered in the sea near the north-east shore of Sardinia in 2023.[4]

Byzantine coin

[edit]
40 ("M" is "40" in Greek) and 5 ("Є" is "5" in Greek) nummi of Anastasius.
A Byzantine follis of Constantine VII and Zoe. 914-919AD. 26 mm.

The term "follis" is used for the large bronze coin denomination (40 nummi) introduced in 498, with the coinage reform of Anastasius, which included a series of bronze denominations with their values marked in Greek numerals.

The fals (a corruption of follis) was a bronze coin issued by the Umayyad and Abbasid caliphates beginning in the late 8th century, initially as imitations of the Byzantine follis.

See also

[edit]
  • Trifollaro, a medieval coin worth 3 folles
  • Falus, former Moroccan coin
  • Fils, modern subdivision of certain Arab currencies

References

[edit]

Sources

[edit]
Wikimedia Commons has media related to Follis.
[edit]
Revisions and contributorsEdit on WikipediaRead on Wikipedia

Follis

View on Grokipedia
from Grokipedia
The follis (plural: folles) was a large or billon coin introduced in the late as a unit of for everyday transactions. It originated from the Latin word for a money-pouch, reflecting its initial distribution method, and was first minted around 294 AD by as part of his monetary reforms to combat and replace the debased . Typically featuring a or helmeted bust of the emperor on the obverse and symbolic reverses like the Genius of the Roman People, the follis was tariffed at 5 denarii communes upon introduction, with an initial weight of 8.5–11 grams (most commonly 9–10.5 grams) and a of 27–30 mm, containing about 4% silver in its billon composition. Diocletian's reform aimed to stabilize the economy during the (293–313 AD), but the follis quickly underwent : by 307 AD, its weight dropped to 6–7 grams and silver content to 2%, and further reductions to 4–5 grams and 18–19 mm diameter occurred around 310 AD under subsequent rulers. It played a key role in the period (284–476 AD), facilitating local trade amid ongoing inflation, though its value eroded over time—eventually adjusted to 12.5 or 25 denarii communes. Emperors like (r. 306–337 AD) continued its production, often with military-themed iconography, though production of the large follis denomination persisted throughout the in both the Eastern and Western Roman Empires before evolving into smaller types in the West. In the Eastern Roman (Byzantine) Empire, the follis persisted as a copper denomination worth 40 nummi, evolving into a staple of medieval Byzantine coinage until the 11th century, though with further reductions in size and quality. Its historical significance lies in illustrating the Roman Empire's economic challenges, from Diocletian's price edicts to the shift toward gold-based systems like the solidus, and it remains a common find in numismatic collections due to its widespread minting across provinces.

Etymology and Overview

Definition and Terminology

The follis was a large or employed in the late Roman and Byzantine empires, functioning as the principal low-denomination for routine commerce and daily exchanges. This type represented a standardized unit of small-value , distinct from higher-value silver or issues, and served as the backbone of everyday economic interactions across these realms. The name "follis" originates from the Latin term follis, denoting a leather bag or purse, especially one used to hold money, which initially described sealed pouches containing a fixed quantity of smaller coins like denarii or nummi rather than the coin itself. The term's first documented application to a specific coin denomination dates to approximately 294 CE, marking its adoption in late Roman monetary systems. In terminology, the plural is rendered as folles in both Latin and Greek (pholleis), reflecting its bilingual usage in imperial administration. The word exerted lasting influence on subsequent numismatic , evolving into the Italian follaro—a medieval copper in Sicilian and southern Italian contexts borrowed directly from Byzantine precedents—and the Arabic fals (plural fulūs), a base-metal age term derived from Byzantine usage. In Byzantine contexts, the follis denoted a coin worth 40 , underscoring its role as a multiple of the smallest bronze subunits.

Physical Characteristics Across Periods

The follis, as a primary bronze denomination in Roman and Byzantine coinage, was typically composed of a copper alloy, often incorporating tin and lead, with early issues featuring trace silver content up to 4-5% either alloyed within the metal or applied as a thin surface wash. Over time, this silver component underwent progressive , dropping to approximately 2% by the early and approaching 0% by its mid-century, transitioning the coin to a pure without any precious alloying. This evolution reflected broader metallurgical trends in imperial minting, where the initial silver enhancement provided a superficial luster but was abandoned as economic pressures mounted. In terms of dimensions, the follis generally measured 25-35 in , with weights varying from 5 to 12 grams across periods, and a thickness of 1-2 , making it substantially larger and heavier than subordinate denominations. These specifications allowed for clear visibility of designs, such as imperial portraits on the obverse, from a distance in everyday transactions. The coin's flan— the blank metal disc before striking—often exhibited large flakes or irregular edges due to processes, contributing to its robust, utilitarian appearance despite occasional production inconsistencies. Unlike smaller bronze units like the nummus (valued at 1/40 of a follis and typically under 20 mm in diameter with weights below 3 grams) or the later centenionale (a reduced mid-4th-century issue around 15-20 mm), the follis served as the principal large-module coin for mid-level , its size facilitating handling and recognition without requiring precise weighing. This distinction underscored its role as a standard unit, with physical traits prioritizing durability over fine artistry in production.

Roman Follis

Diocletianic Introduction and Reform

The follis was introduced in 294 CE by Emperor as a key component of his , designed to address the severe economic instability caused by the and currency debasement during the Third Century Crisis. This reform sought to restore confidence in the Roman coinage system by establishing a more stable trimetallic standard incorporating , silver, and denominations, thereby curbing the rampant that had eroded the value of earlier coins. The initial follis was a large , typically weighing around 10 grams with a diameter of approximately 28 mm, and featuring a thin silver wash or plating that provided an effective silver content of about 4-5%. It was intended to replace the heavily debased , a radiate that had suffered from progressive reductions in size, weight, and metallic purity, rendering it nearly worthless by the late third century. In the reformed system, the follis served as the primary unit, initially valued at 12.5 denarii communes (dc), with the silver argenteus equivalent to 100 dc, establishing a structured that tied the bronze coinage to the for everyday transactions. Production of the early follis began primarily at eastern mints, such as Antioch, which acted as the main hub for the , alongside facilities in and other regional centers, reflecting the reform's initial rollout in Diocletian's eastern domains. This new bronze denomination was closely linked to the issued in 301 CE, which set caps on s and commodity prices in denarii to combat ; following a that , the follis was adjusted to 25 dc, aligning it directly with basic daily wage units for laborers, such as the 25 dc per day for farm workers, to facilitate controlled economic exchange.

4th-Century Evolution and Denominations

Following the initial Diocletianic reforms, the Roman follis underwent progressive debasement in the early , with its silver content reduced from approximately 3-4% to trace amounts of around 1.4% or less by the 310s CE, as imperial authorities extracted silver for other coinages amid economic pressures. This process involved metallurgical adjustments, including the use of leaded alloys, which further diminished intrinsic value while maintaining the coin's role in everyday transactions. By the era of Constantine I (r. 306-337 CE), follis weights had stabilized at around 5-7 grams, reflecting a shift toward lighter, more producible issues to combat without fully abandoning the denomination. Under Constantine, the follis was integrated into a structured system of denominations, classified by size and relative value as AE1 (largest, over 25 mm in , often serving as the primary follis), AE2 (21-25 mm), AE3 (17-21 mm), and AE4 (under 17 mm). These categories, with folles predominantly in the AE1 format, facilitated standardized production and circulation, though exact values remained tied to imperial tariffing rather than strict metallic content. Key revaluations occurred in 310 CE, when Constantine reduced weights and silver wash to align with emerging gold standards, and again in 324 CE following his victory over , which demonetized debased eastern issues and linked values more closely to the new gold solidus of 4.5 grams. This solidus linkage emphasized gold's stability, positioning the follis as a subordinate unit in a bimetallic framework. Minting expanded dramatically under Constantine, with over 20 imperial workshops across the empire—such as those at , , , , and Antioch—producing vast quantities of these coins to support military campaigns and administrative needs. Regional variations emerged, with heavier folles (closer to 7 grams) issued in the Western provinces to reflect local economic demands, contrasted by lighter eastern examples (around 5 grams) influenced by differing mint practices and resource availability. These adaptations built briefly on the Pricing Edict of 301 CE's original valuation of the follis at 25 denarii communes, though mid-century hyperinflation soon eroded such fixed ratios.

Iconography and Production

The obverse designs of Roman folles from the Diocletianic period prominently featured imperial busts, typically depicting the laureate head of the emperor facing right, such as Diocletian or his co-rulers in the Tetrarchy. Accompanying inscriptions often read "IMP C DIOCLETIANVS P F AVG" for Diocletian, emphasizing his role as Imperator Caesar and Pius Felix Augustus, with the portrait style characterized by a rigid, idealized profile that conveyed authority and uniformity across the tetrarchic rulers. On the reverse, motifs centered on personifications symbolizing Roman prosperity and divine favor, most commonly the Genius Populi Romani—a nude, winged figure standing left, pouring a libation from a patera while holding a cornucopia—to invoke the protective spirit of the Roman people under "GENIO POPVLI ROMANI." Other prevalent reverses included Victory advancing or crowning a trophy, Sol Invictus standing with a globe and whip to represent the unconquered sun god, and occasional military themes such as two soldiers holding standards or shields, reflecting the era's emphasis on stability and martial prowess. Under Constantine I, obverse iconography maintained the laureate bust tradition but evolved toward greater personalization, with legends like "IMP CONSTANTINVS P F AVG" or "IMP C CONSTAN-TINVS MAX AVG," showcasing a more dynamic and lifelike rendering of the emperor's features, departing from the Tetrarchy's standardized, abstract profiles to highlight individual rulership. Reverse motifs continued to draw from earlier themes but shifted emphasis, frequently depicting in a radiant or advancing pose under "SOLI INVICTO COMITI" to associate Constantine with solar invincibility, alongside Victory types such as the goddess walking left with wreath and palm, or martial scenes of soldiers with captives to commemorate military successes. These designs underscored Constantine's consolidation of power, blending pagan solar symbolism with emerging imperial legitimacy, while size classifications in the Constantinian era often distinguished larger folles around 25-28 mm from smaller fractions. Folles were produced through striking techniques, where engraved metal dies impressed designs onto heated bronze flans, creating raised relief images on both sides; early issues under Diocletian incorporated a silver wash—a thin electrochemical coating applied post-striking via immersion in silver nitrate solutions—to impart a silvery sheen mimicking higher-value coinage. This process enhanced visual appeal and perceived worth, though the wash often wore off in circulation. Major imperial mints, including those at London (marked LON), Trier (TR), and Rome (RM), operated multiple workshops simultaneously, enabling large-scale output in the millions across the empire to support widespread economic needs during the 4th century.

Byzantine Follis

Anastasian Reform and Early Issues

In 498 CE, Emperor Anastasius I (r. 491–518) implemented a significant that reintroduced and standardized the follis as the principal large-denomination in the , marking a shift from the debased and fragmented Roman copper coinage of the preceding centuries. This reform replaced the tiny, low-value nummi—previously the smallest unit, equivalent to 1/7,200 of a gold solidus—with a hierarchical system of larger, coins valued in nummi, including the follis at 40 nummi, alongside halves (20 nummi) and quarters (10 nummi). The follis, weighing approximately 8–12 grams initially, was struck on broad, thin to facilitate clear denomination markings, with designs featuring the emperor's diademed bust on the obverse and a large Greek numeral "M" (representing 40) on the reverse, often accompanied by a above or imperial monograms. These features ensured easy identification and helped establish the coin's nominal value over intrinsic weight, addressing the confusion from Roman-era debasement trends where coins had become irregularly small and undervalued. The primary purpose of the Anastasian reform was to stabilize the coinage system amid economic pressures, including inflation and the inefficiencies of distributing pay in vast quantities of minor coins, thereby unifying the low-value for everyday transactions across the empire. Mints in and were the main production centers for these early folles, with additional facilities at Thessalonica operational prior to the reform and later expansions to Nicomedia and Antioch by around 518 CE to support broader circulation. Early issues under Anastasius from 498 to about 512 CE were sometimes underweight, leading to market discrepancies, but a secondary adjustment in 512 introduced heavier folles averaging 15–16 grams and added a 5-nummi denomination, enhancing the system's without altering the 40-nummi standard. This approach, where the coin's value was guaranteed by imperial authority rather than metal content, laid the foundation for Byzantine bronze coinage's longevity. The reform's folles continued seamlessly under Anastasius's successor, (r. 518–527), maintaining the same denominations and designs with minimal variations, such as continued use of the "M" marking and officina indicators in the exergue (e.g., CON for ). Production during Justin's reign focused on refining the weight standards to around 12–15 grams, ensuring consistency and trust in the currency as the empire transitioned into the . These early Byzantine folles, distinct from their Roman predecessors in their standardized Greek notations and imperial focus, represented a pivotal that supported economic cohesion in a period of relative stability before later debasements.

6th-7th Century Developments

Under (r. 527–565 CE), the follis underwent significant adjustments building on the Anastasian valuation system of 40 , with a major reform in 538/539 that initially increased its weight to approximately 22–25 grams and diameter to 38–45 millimeters, producing large, heavy coins that served as a symbolic assertion of imperial power amid extensive military campaigns. Subsequent reductions during his reign, particularly after 541/542, brought the average weight down to around 11–15 grams by the later years, reflecting economic pressures from ongoing wars and administrative needs, while issues often included markings on the reverse for dating and control. These coins typically featured the emperor's facing bust on the obverse and a on steps or globus surmounting steps on the reverse, emphasizing Christian and imperial authority. By the reign of (r. 610–641 CE), the follis had further declined in size and weight due to the empire's territorial losses and fiscal strains, averaging 4–8 grams for 40 pieces by the mid-630s, though early issues could reach 10–15 grams, with diameters shrinking to 25–32 millimeters and coins becoming thicker to maintain some perceived value. The denomination remained notionally 40 (marked "M"), but fractional issues of 20 ("K") and 30 ("XXX" or "ã") became common, especially from 10 onward, to accommodate debased circulation; reverses shifted to include hexagrams enclosing officina marks or prominent cross-on-steps designs, signaling defensive religious appeals amid crises. Production expanded beyond Constantinople during this period, with increased minting at and to support regional trade and military logistics in and , though output quality varied and supply chains were disrupted by Slavic and Persian incursions in the early . The invasions from 634 onward severely impacted these peripheral mints, leading to the closure of by 642 and by 698, which forced reliance on and accelerated the follis's weight reduction as bronze resources dwindled and hyperinflation loomed. For instance, Justinian's expansive folles contrasted sharply with Heraclius's more compact, robust issues, such as a typical 28-millimeter 40 nummi from year 15 weighing about 6 grams, highlighting the shift from grandeur to practicality.

Anonymous Folles and Iconographic Shifts

The anonymous follis series represents a significant departure in Byzantine bronze coinage, initiated around 976 CE during the reign of and , where the emperor's name and portrait were omitted in favor of exclusively religious centered on . These coins featured a bust of on the obverse, typically nimbate and holding the Gospels, flanked by IC-XC ( ) and often accompanied by the legend +EMMANOVHA (Emmanuel), symbolizing divine and authority. The reverse bore the inscription in four lines: +IhSUS/XRISTUS/bASILE/bASILE ( , ), underscoring the theological emphasis on Christ's sovereignty over earthly rulers. This design shift marked a profound , prioritizing spiritual legitimacy amid the empire's political turbulence, including frequent dynastic changes and military challenges. Numismatists classify the anonymous folles into a series of types, commonly labeled Classes A through G, spanning from approximately 976 to 1092 CE, with subclasses reflecting stylistic refinements and production variations. Class A, the earliest and most prolific, divides into A1 (lighter, smaller examples with simple nimbus dots), A2 (heavier, with elaborate ornaments like dots or lines in the fields, exceeding 60 varieties), and (intermediate weight and size); all depict the facing bust of Christ within a linear square or without, maintaining the core religious motifs. Subsequent classes introduced subtle innovations: Class B retained the Christ bust but paired it with a on steps and a three-line reverse IS XS/bAS ILE/bAS ILE; Class C showed Christ in three-quarter length as Antiphonetes () with NI KA () and a jeweled cross reverse; while Classes D and F portrayed seated Christ on a (with or without backrest), evoking transferred to the divine. Class E returned to the bust form with a gesture, and Class G innovated by placing the Virgin Mary (praying) on the reverse with MP ΘV (Mother of God), the first such depiction on Byzantine copper coinage. These evolutions in iconography—from static busts to dynamic seated figures and Marian elements—reflected deepening Christological and Marian devotion in , while weights generally ranged from 5 to 8 grams early on, reducing slightly over time in line with prior 7th-century debasements. The issuance of anonymous folles served a deliberate ideological purpose, promoting the emperor's rule as divinely sanctioned rather than personally glorified, particularly during periods of instability under Basil II's long reign and the subsequent Argyros and dynasties. Valued at 1/288 of the gold (solidus), these copper coins facilitated everyday transactions and were produced in vast quantities, often overstruck on earlier issues to conserve metal. This anonymity and Christocentric focus contrasted with earlier named folles, reinforcing the Byzantine synthesis of imperial and ecclesiastical authority. The series persisted through emperors like Romanos III, Michael IV, Constantine IX, and Romanos IV, adapting designs to affirm continuity of divine favor despite coups and invasions. By the late 11th century, economic pressures and the prompted a transition away from anonymity. Under in 1092 CE, the anonymous series ended with his monetary reform, which introduced signed folles bearing the emperor's name and portraits, often featuring reverses with St. George or allegorical scenes of manual labor to symbolize renewal and productivity. Classes H through K, transitional and lighter (around 6 grams), briefly continued anonymous religious types like Christ with a book or the Virgin, but were quickly supplanted, marking the close of this theologically driven bronze era.

Economic and Cultural Role

Role in Roman Economy and Pricing Edict

The follis served as a principal bronze denomination in the late following Diocletian's monetary reforms of circa 294 CE, functioning primarily for everyday transactions such as daily wages, tax payments in kind or coin equivalents, and small-scale trade in urban and rural settings. It was particularly vital for compensating unskilled laborers, with its nominal value approximating one day's labor for such workers under the pricing framework of the 301 CE , where farm hands were capped at 25 denarii communes per day without meals. This made the follis accessible for the lower strata of society, facilitating the purchase of basic commodities like or in local markets. Central to the follis's economic integration was its role in Diocletian's , promulgated in 301 CE, which established it as a foundational unit in the empire's valuation system to combat rampant triggered by prior debasements. Prices for over 1,200 goods, services, and wages were denominated in denarii communes, an accounting unit where 25 denarii communes equated to one follis, providing a standardized benchmark for transactions across diverse regions. For instance, a modius of was limited to 100 denarii, while higher-value items like a pair of boots reached 100 denarii, underscoring the edict's intent to align coin values with controlled pricing and prevent . The higher silver argenteus and gold complemented the follis by handling larger exchanges, but the bronze coin remained the backbone for routine economic activity. In circulation, the follis was ubiquitous for military salaries, which formed a significant portion of imperial expenditures, and in bustling urban marketplaces where it enabled quick exchanges for food and services. Soldiers, often paid in mixed coinage including folles, relied on it for daily needs, while its portability supported trade in provincial towns. During economic crises, such as inflationary spikes, hoarding of folles became prevalent as individuals sought to preserve value amid uncertainty, exacerbating shortages. Although the edict initially provided temporary stabilization by enforcing price ceilings and tying them to reformed coinage like the follis, its rigid controls proved unenforceable, leading to black markets and further disruptions. Over the fourth century, progressive of the follis—reducing its weight and silver wash—undermined confidence in the currency, contributing to broader economic instability and the erosion of fiscal cohesion in the .

Circulation and Influence in Byzantine Trade

The follis functioned as the principal copper denomination in Byzantine , enabling small-scale transactions in urban markets, rural economies, and the collection of shipping tolls along key routes. As a , it provided the necessary for everyday exchanges, complementing higher-value and silver issues in a tri-metallic system that supported the empire's . Its integration into broader networks was evident in the Mediterranean basin, where it circulated alongside goods like textiles, ceramics, and spices, and in overland connections to the , facilitating payments for eastern imports such as silk arriving via ports like and . In provincial contexts, the follis underpinned rural exchanges, including agricultural produce and local crafts, while tolls on maritime and riverine routes—such as the 10% kommerkion tax—relied on its availability for efficient revenue collection. The extent of follis circulation reflected the Byzantine Empire's geopolitical reach, spanning the , , and as core zones of production and use. Minted primarily at and regional facilities like those in , , and Syracuse, the coin proliferated in Anatolian themes through administrative distributions and market flows, while in the , it supported commerce in settlements from the frontier to the . Exports extended to peripheral regions, including Slavic territories via trade outposts like Preslav in and military interactions along the northern borders, as well as through eastern provincial ties and caravan routes. In , particularly and , follis hoards from the 11th century—such as 74 specimens at —illustrate its role in sustaining Byzantine economic influence until disrupted flows around 1071. This broad dissemination, evidenced by over 30 analyzed hoards with significant 10th-12th century representation, underscores the follis's adaptability in both imperial heartlands and frontier economies. The follis's design and weight standards profoundly influenced neighboring monetary systems, particularly in the and Russian principalities, where it was not only imported but actively imitated to align with Byzantine economic norms. In , early medieval circulation—documented in mid-8th to early 9th-century finds at sites like and Preslav—led to local adaptations that mirrored the follis's iconography and metrology, aiding integration into Bulgar trade networks post-conversion. Similarly, in Kievan Rus', the coin reached hubs like , a Byzantine mint outpost, inspiring imitations that adopted its weight (around 5-10 grams in 10th-century issues) for regional exchanges, as seen in mixed hoards combining official folles with crude copies. These imitations, often produced in silvered to emulate Byzantine quality, facilitated cross-border commerce in furs, , and slaves, extending the follis's economic footprint without direct imperial control. By the 11th century, the follis underwent progressive debasement and gradual phase-out amid fiscal crises and monetary reforms, culminating in its replacement by the hyperpyron system under (r. 1081–1118). Responding to inflation and territorial losses, Alexios's 1092 reform introduced the as the new standard, alongside lighter and billon coins, rendering the traditional large-denomination follis obsolete in central minting by the mid-11th century. However, debased variants persisted in provincial circulation, particularly in remote Anatolian and Balkan areas, where they continued to serve local trade until the 12th century, bridging the transition to smaller tetartera denominations. This shift marked the end of the follis's dominance in high-volume commerce, as the prioritized for international prestige while provincial economies retained for subsistence-level exchanges.

Legacy and Influences on Successor Currencies

The follis exerted a significant influence on early Islamic coinage, particularly through the adoption of the term "" (plural: fulus), which derived directly from the Byzantine follis as a designation for or bronze coins. During the in the late 7th century, mints in and produced fals coins that closely imitated the size, weight, and composition of Byzantine folles, often as pseudo-Byzantine types featuring imperial imagery to facilitate continuity in local economies following the Arab conquests around the 640s. These imitations, such as those struck in under Caliph , retained the follis's role as a low-value unit for everyday transactions, with weights initially around 6 grams before further debasement. Under the in the 8th century, the fals evolved while preserving this structural legacy, incorporating more Arabic inscriptions but maintaining the base and modular denominations inspired by Byzantine prototypes. In medieval Europe, echoes of the follis appeared in Italian coinage systems, notably the follaro, a small denomination introduced in and Norman during the 11th-12th centuries, which derived its name and function from the Byzantine follis despite its much reduced size of less than 1 gram. In Norman , follaro issues under kings like William II (1166-1189) featured hybrid designs, such as masks on the obverse and legends on the reverse, reflecting the island's multicultural heritage and the follis's adaptability as a base-metal medium for trade in Mediterranean ports. This influence extended indirectly to the Carolingian denier system in the 8th-9th centuries, where the revival of base-metal coinage alongside silver deniers drew on Byzantine monetary traditions to standardize low-value exchanges across Frankish territories. The follis's long-term legacy lies in its embodiment of base-metal currency continuity from into the , serving as a foundational model for durable, accessible coinage in both Christian and Islamic realms. Modern numismatic studies highlight its role in linking ancient imperial economies to early medieval trade units, emphasizing how its —often prototyped in anonymous follis classes—facilitated economic transitions without reliance on precious metals. Culturally, the follis symbolized enduring imperial authority, bridging Byzantine Christian iconography with Islamic adaptations and underscoring monetary stability amid political shifts in the .

Archaeological Evidence

Major Hoard Discoveries

One of the largest Roman coin hoards discovered in Britain is the Seaton Down Hoard, unearthed in November 2013 by a metal detectorist near Seaton Down in , . This assemblage comprises 22,888 bronze coins, predominantly 4th-century folles issued during the , with the majority dating to the reigns of and , and the hoard likely buried between approximately 355 and 360 CE. Similarly, the , found in April 2010 near in , , represents another major British discovery, consisting of 52,503 Roman coins stored in a ceramic pot. These include a mix of denominations from the late CE, with bronze antoniniani forming a significant portion among the issues, reflecting circulation during the Crisis of the Third Century. In a more recent maritime context, a substantial deposit of 30,000 to 50,000 well-preserved 4th-century Roman folles was identified in 2023 off the coast of , , initially spotted by a recreational diver amid . Italian authorities attribute the find to a probable from the early to mid-4th century CE, with the coins featuring emperors such as Constantine I and his successors, highlighting extensive Mediterranean trade networks. Turning to Byzantine examples, a hoard containing 6th-century Anastasian folles—reformed bronze coins introduced under Emperor Anastasius I (r. 491–518 CE)—was documented from in modern-day , with 54 specimens of issues from Anastasius I, , , , and Maurice discovered in 2010 during excavations, underscoring the coin's role in early Byzantine provincial economies. Additionally, excavations in have yielded significant groups of anonymous Class A folles from the , such as a 1999 find of 21 specimens, which lack imperial portraits or names and feature on the obverse, dating primarily to the reign of (r. 969–976 CE).

Numismatic Insights from Finds

Hoard discoveries of Byzantine follis have provided critical evidence for estimating mint output volumes and regional production preferences. Analyses of large assemblages, such as those exceeding 18,000 base-metal coins from Eastern mints, demonstrate the dominance of and Antioch in coin production during the 6th and 7th centuries, with quantitative distributions revealing spikes in output under emperors like [Justinian I](/page/Justinian I) to support military and trade demands. In the , hoards indicate selective minting preferences, where heavier follis from imperial centers were prioritized over local issues, reflecting centralized control over currency supply. Circulation patterns inferred from these finds highlight the follis's role along Mediterranean routes, with hoards off the Israeli coast containing clusters of 6th-7th century issues that trace maritime shipping networks for commodities like wine and . Overstruck coins within hoards, such as those countermarked under in the Dor assemblage, enable precise dating of deposition, often linking circulation to short-term economic pulses rather than long-term hoarding. Regional variations, like the prevalence of Constantinopolitan follis in Syrian and Levantine finds, underscore eastward flows, while Balkan examples show westward redistribution via routes. Many hoard burials correlate with historical upheavals, offering insights into crisis-driven concealment. In the 5th and 6th centuries, deposits in the align with barbarian invasions, such as Avar-Slavic incursions around 580 CE, where small copper hoards (typically under 100 coins) buried in fortifications suggest emergency hiding amid territorial losses. By the , follis hoards from the Iconoclastic period reflect disruptions in circulation tied to religious and political controversies, with reduced outputs and altered in finds from indicating economic strain under emperors like Leo III. These patterns distinguish intentional savings from opportunistic losses, illuminating societal responses to instability. Modern analytical techniques, particularly (XRF) , have enhanced understanding of follis production through hoard-based studies of compositions. Examinations of anonymous follis (ca. 970–1085 CE) reveal consistent high-copper alloys (95.9% Cu bulk average) with low lead and trace impurities like iron and , pointing to standardized and sourcing practices across mints despite debasement trends. Such non-destructive analyses trace regional variations, like elevated in Eastern issues, filling gaps in distribution maps; recent underwater discoveries, including the 2023 Sardinia assemblage of early follis precursors, have updated models of Mediterranean dispersal by confirming coastal trade vectors previously underrepresented in land-based hoards.

References

  1. https://www.forumancientcoins.com/numiswiki/view.asp?key=follis
  2. https://ancientcoinstories.com/follis/
  3. https://penelope.uchicago.edu/Thayer/E/Roman/Texts/secondary/SMIGRA*/Follis.html
  4. https://www.doaks.org/resources/coins/glossary
  5. https://www.oxfordreference.com/display/10.1093/oi/authority.20110803095826614
  6. https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/journal-of-roman-studies/article/origin-and-early-history-of-the-follis/9550DC948BBFAC8695676D426719AE22
  7. https://en.numista.com/102597
  8. http://augustuscoins.com/ed/tetrarchy/Diocletianfolles.html
  9. https://www.ngccoin.com/news/article/2700/ngc-ancients-the-tetrarchy-of-diocletian/
  10. https://www.britishmuseum.org/collection/object/C_1904-0511-352
  11. https://coinweek.com/diocletian-coins-the-great-reformer/
  12. https://www.thecollector.com/diocletian-constantine-monetary-reforms/
  13. http://www.numisbel.be/2017_6.pdf
  14. https://www.cambridge.org/core/books/antioch-on-the-orontes/coinage-of-and-in-antioch-in-the-late-antique-and-early-byzantine-periods/9FA0EBE7336F7633189154903D0B502B
  15. https://imperiumromanum.pl/en/article/edict-of-diocletian-on-maximum-prices-from-301-ce/
  16. https://researchonline.ljmu.ac.uk/id/eprint/5590/1/373706.pdf
  17. https://www.academia.edu/106282371/The_Roman_coinage_in_the_4_th_and_5_th_century_AD
  18. http://dlib.nyu.edu/awdl/isaw/isaw-papers/14/
  19. https://www.academia.edu/38465693/The_Constantian_Monetary_Revolution
  20. https://www.artic.edu/artworks/141813/follis-coin-portraying-emperor-diocletian
  21. https://www.moneymuseum.com/en/coins?&id=1540
  22. https://harvardartmuseums.org/collections/object/183903
  23. https://www.alvin-portal.org/alvin/view.jsf?pid=alvin-record:112202
  24. https://www.moneymuseum.com/en/moneymuseum/archive/coin-catalogue?&id=716
  25. http://augustuscoins.com/ed/tetrarchy/index.html
  26. https://publications.artic.edu/roman/reader/romanart/section/512
  27. https://www.judaism-and-rome.org/nummus-depicting-head-constantine-and-sol-invictus-310-313-ce
  28. https://rg.ancients.info/constantine/Sol_other.html
  29. https://www.academia.edu/36805667/An_Issue_of_Follis_Fractions_with_Denominational_Marks_by_Constantine_I_at_Rome_In_H_Chr_Noeske_H_Schubert_eds_Die_M%25C3%25BCnze_Bild_Botschaft_Bedeutung_Festschrift_fur_Maria_R_Alf%25C3%25B6ldi_Frankfurt_am_Main_New_York_Paris_1991_410_422
  30. https://www.numisforums.com/topic/379-the-art-of-silverwashing-there-must-be-some-value-in-there-somewhere/
  31. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2352409X22001729
  32. https://www.ostia-antica.org/dict/topics/mint/mint09.htm
  33. http://www.chiark.greenend.org.uk/~jjarrett/files/folles1.pdf
  34. https://www.ngccoin.com/news/article/2391/chaos-and-coinage-post-reform-bronze-issues-of-the-byzantine-empire/
  35. https://www.academia.edu/349317/Early_Byzantine_coin_circulation_in_the_Eastern_Provinces
  36. https://www.persee.fr/doc/numi_0484-8942_2012_num_6_168_3186
  37. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/309294521_Heavy_money_weightier_problems_The_Justinianic_reform_of_538_and_its_economic_consequences
  38. http://www.mpov.uw.edu.pl/en/thesaurus/artefacts/follis-
  39. https://ia801805.us.archive.org/16/items/grierson-byzantine-coinage/Grierson_Byzantine%20Coinage.pdf
  40. https://www.byzantine-ae.info/wp-content/uploads/2018/09/chapter_17-updated.pdf
  41. https://www.academia.edu/99255768/The_Cross_Above_Steps_on_the_Byzantine_Coins
  42. https://www.academia.edu/2652060/The_Production_Supply_and_Use_of_Late_Roman_and_Early_Byzantine_Copper_Coinage_in_the_Eastern_Empire
  43. https://coinweek.com/coinweek-ancient-coins-the-anonymous-folles-of-byzantium/
  44. http://augustuscoins.com/ed/ByzAnon/
  45. https://www.academia.edu/33471190/The_Value_of_Money_Coinage_and_Diocletians_Price_Edict
  46. https://kark.uib.no/antikk/dias/priceedict.pdf
  47. https://scholarship.law.upenn.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=7817&context=penn_law_review
  48. https://www.jstor.org/stable/137598
  49. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/288558802_Byzantine_Money_Its_Production_and_Circulation
  50. https://www.academia.edu/854239/_Byzantine_coin_circulation_in_early_medieval_Bulgaria_mid_8th_early_9th_c_PROCEEDINGS_OF_THE_22ND_INTERNATIONAL_CONGRESS_OF_BYZANTINE_STUDIES_SOFIA_22_27_AUGUST_2011_30_31
  51. https://curtopelle.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/11/CurtoPelle_Ilia_JuniorPaper.pdf
  52. https://www.academia.edu/15488891/Copper_Coins_minted_in_Damascus_in_the_First_and_Second_Century_Hijra
  53. https://www.academia.edu/30857954/AN_INTRODUCTION_TO_ARAB_BYZANTINE_COINAGE
  54. https://repository.arizona.edu/bitstream/handle/10150/291184/azu_td_1326384_sip1_w.pdf?sequence=4
  55. https://library.oapen.org/bitstream/handle/20.500.12657/24386/1005729.pdf?sequence=1&isAllowed=y
  56. https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-england-devon-29368075
  57. https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2014/sep/26/roman-coin-hoard-clinton-devon-estates
  58. https://www.theguardian.com/science/2010/jul/08/hoard-roman-coins-somerset
  59. https://frome-museum.org/frome-hoard
  60. https://www.theguardian.com/science/2023/nov/06/up-to-50000-roman-coins-discovered-off-coast-of-sardinia
  61. https://www.cnn.com/2023/11/06/style/diver-ancient-coins-sardinia-scn-intl-scli
  62. https://new.coinsweekly.com/people-and-markets/archaeologists-in-awe-at-the-sight-of-sardinias-folles-hoard/
  63. https://www.academia.edu/39736145/Abramzon_M_2017_A_Hoard_of_Byzantine_Sixth_Century_Folles_from_Jericho_Israel_Numismatic_Research_12_173_184
  64. https://journals.flvc.org/athanor/article/download/126458/125930/
  65. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/262098071_Hoards_and_Hoarding_Patterns_in_the_Early_Byzantine_Balkans
  66. https://www.academia.edu/3756931/Coin_Hoards_From_Byzantine_Shipwreck_Assemblages_off_the_Israeli_Mediterranean_Coast
  67. https://publications.iaa.org.il/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1483&context=atiqot
Add your contribution
Related Hubs
User Avatar
No comments yet.