Lopadusa: an elusive mint*

FABRIZIO ROSSINI
Lopadusa: an elusive mint*
In Africo maris, non procul a Thapso, iacet ignobilis
insula quam Plinius longam VI miles dicit.
Ab una parte Iouis caput, ab altera piscis.
Ludovicus Nonnius, 1618
Introduction
The greek Lopadousa, today Lampedusa, is a flat
barren island, deeply set in the Mediterranean sea
lying 120 km south of the coast of Sicily and only 70
km north of Tunis. Early mentions of the island are
reported by Tolomeus, Strabo, Pliny the Elder, Livy
and Ovidius. Lopadusa has a documented history
going back to the Bronze Age, it was colonized by the
Greek, experienced Punic influence for a long time
and was conquered by the Romans who used the small
island as a strategic naval base in their operations
against the Carthaginians.
The tiny and unassuming island has produced one of
the lesser known bronze coinage of the entire Sicily
and Magna Graecia series. The only known coin-type
bears on the obverse a bearded head, probably Zeus,
and on the reverse a tuna-fish with the island’s ethnicon in greek characters.
Literary evidence
It is peculiar that the Lopadusa coinage had been
known as early as the late XVI century. The very first
evidence that has been possible to assess, concerning
this coinage, comes from a thesaurus written by XVI
century engraver, publisher and humanist Hubertus
Goltzius (1526-1583). The book1, the last one he
published in Antwerp during his lifetime, is a reference book of ancient monumenta, namely marble inscriptions and coins, which had been either directly
examined or collected by Goltzius. Under the list of
cities and peoples cited we find the entry
“Lopadoussaion”, in greek letters and next to it the
abbreviation “num.” which stands for numismatum
monumentis2, the book contains no plates or drawings.
A few years before, in 1576, Goltzius had published
the first part of his work devoted to Greek coinage3,
the sequel to this work, dealing with the coins of continental Greece and its islands (among which
Lopadusa coinage was to be included), was, however,
published only after his death, by Jacob de Bie4, in
1618, who apparently used only the coin plates that
Goltzius had already engraved, but not his text
manuscript5, today at the Plantin-Moretus Museum,
which is still unpublished6. The commentary to the
plates was provided by Ludovicus Nonnius (Luis
Nunnez), a physician and an antiquarian active in
Bruges at the onset of the XVII century. Nonnius provides a very short description of the island and of the
coin (cited above), whose engraved image appears, for
the first time, on plate XVIII (nº 1) of this work.
This first illustration is very important because it will be
published, identical, for more than four hundred years,
by all subsequent authors who have treated Lopadusa
coinage (as no other example of the issue had, in the
meanwhile, surfaced), until Calciati (see below) finally
produced the first picture of a Lopadusa coin. Goltzius
*
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
369
I am very much indebted to Christian Dekesel for his invaluable
assistance in locating, checking and interpreting for me long forgotten manuscripts, as well as to my friends Alberto Campana and
NS for their intelligent suggestions that helped me filling some
gaps in the history of Lopadusa coinage.
Goltzius, H.: Thesaurus Rei Antiquariæ Huberrimus, Antwerp, 1579
ibidem, Index XVII Regionum, Populorum, Opidorum, Fluviorum Nomina
Alia Chorografica, pag. 138
Goltzius, H.: Sicilia et Magna Græcia, Brugis Flandrorum, 1576
Goltzius, H.: Græciæ Eiusque Insularum et Asiæ Minoris Nomismata ab
Huberto Goltzio quondam Sculpta, Ludovici Nonni Commentario Illustrata,
Antwerp 1618
Goltzius, H.: Historiæ Urbium et Populorum Insulæ Græciæ, 2 volumes,
Antwerp, Plantin Moretus Museum, Manuscript M 156 I & M
156 II
In the manuscript Goltzius describes extensively the island of
Lopadusa but, apparently, makes no reference to its coinage.
FABRIZIO ROSSINI
had probably been the first and only one to actually see
the coin and certainly the first to write on it, though we
have no sure clue where he could have seen it.
size and with only the first four letters of the island’s
name visible, notwithstanding the supposedly poor
conditions the coin-type is definitely that of Lopadusa.
From the documentation we have left we know that
Goltzius had travelled extensively to see collections
all across Europe. We have an accomplished list7 of the
collections he can have possibly visited during his
grand tour that lasted two years (1558-1560). In the
section concerning Italian collections, though, names
stop little south of Naples and he seems never to have
set foot in Sicily where, most logically, he might have
seen the coin either in some private collections or on
the antiquarian market.
Torremuzza expresses extreme satisfaction for having
managed to find a specimen of the rare coinage. The
coin described in his work is particularly important
since it appears to be the second known specimen of
Lopadusa at that time.
Spanheim8, in 1671, is the second author to make
reference to Lopadusa. In his dissertatio quarta dedicated
to the animals depicted on coins, he describes the
piece citing the same coin plate number of the
Goltzius/Nonnius work. He relates that Goltzius had
been the first to see the coin and that Nonnius, in its
commentary, does not mention which type of fish is
represented on the coin’s reverse. The fish is unmistakably a tuna, very abundant in that portion of the
Mediterranean sea. The drawing reported by
Spanheim shows only the reverse of the coin with the
fish looking left instead of the correct right (very probably a print error). Also the coin’s legend is identical
to the Goltzius plate engraving.
In 1755 the coin is mentioned by Gessnerus9, in his
main work that is basically an atlas of all the ancient
coin types known at that time, with no written commentary. Gessnerus illustrates the coin providing
references to both Goltzius and Spanheim works,
correctly indicating the plate number and page references for each source.
Prince of Torremuzza10, mentions and illustrates the
coin, first in his main work published in 1781. At the
beginning Torremuzza doubts the existence of the
piece, not having confidence in Goltzius, but since
the coin had been described also by Spanheim and
Gessnerus, he thought appropriate to make a reference to it anyway, and to publish an engraving identical
to the archetypal type originally reported by
Goltzius/Nonnius.
In his first Addenda11, however, published in 1789, he
recounts to have finally seen and bought a specimen of
the coin. The specimen illustrated looks quite small in
The last ancient author to mention Lopadusa coins is
Eckhel12, who, in his Doctrina, again reiterates that nobody,
except Goltzius, had seen any specimen of that coinage.
After Eckhel for more than a 150 years no author apparently makes reference to the island’s coinage. All the
main authors who wrote on Greek and Sicilian numismatics (Sambon, Head, Babelon, Gardner, Salinas,
Rizzo, Gabrici, Kraay etc.) remain silent not only about
the coinage but even failing to mention the island.
In addition, all the published catalogues and Sylloges
of major public and private collections of greek coins
make no reference at all to the mint of Lopadusa.
After a fleeting, almost oblivious mention by Cirami13,
in 1959, who just reports the usual coin’s description
giving a line-drawing illustration of, once more, the original Goltzius engraving, we have to wait until 1979,
when Miní14 provides description and weights, but no
pictures, of the first new specimens appeared since the
XVIII century. Miní describes two coin types, the first
(n. 1), which we know, with the bearded head to the
right, for which he gives the Torremuzza reference and
provides three weights that, however, do not match at
all with those of the specimens we know today.
7. Beuther, M.: Calendarium Historicum, Frankfurt am Main, David
Zephel, 1557. (Royal Library Albert I Brussels, II 38334), with a
mention of nearly 800 collections.
8. Spanheim, E.: Dissertationes de Præstantia et usu Numismatum
Antiquorum, Amsterdam 1671, page 231
9. Gessnerus, Joh. Jacobus,: Numismata Græca Populorum et Urbium, Ulm
1755, Plate 26, nº 10
10. Torremuzza, Gabriele Lancillotto Principe di, Siciliæ Populorum et
Urbium Regum quoque et Tyrannorum Veteres Nummi Saracenorum Epocham
Antecedentes, Palermo 1781, page 93, plate XCV
11. Torremuzza, Gabriele Lancillotto Principe di, Auctarium I, Palermo
1789, page 19 pl. VIII.
12. Eckel, I.: Doctrina Numorum Veterum, Wien 1792, Vol. 1 page 269-270
13. Cirami, G.: La Monetazione Greca della Sicilia Antica, Bologna 1959,
pag.29, pl. 87
14. Miní, A.: Monete di Bronzo della Sicilia Antica, Palermo 1979, pag 496,
nº 1; nº 1a
370
LOPADUSA: AN ELUSIVE MINT
The second coin type (n. 1a) is described as showing
the bearded head looking left. Again, no pictures are
supplied and three different weights are provided. It
looks quite unusual that although he terms the coins
reported as “collezione privata”, a mention he often
employs to make reference to specimens coming
from his own collection, he does not supply pictures
for any of them.
The most recent author to mention Lopadusa coins is
Calciati15 who, in his work on Sicilian bronze coinage of
1983 cites two types. The usual one with the head to
the right, and the Miní supposed variant with the head
to the left. Calciati gives pictures only of two specimens of the first type (for the second of these, n.1/1,
he gives an incorrect weight) and also cites three more
specimens known to Miní (one of these has the same
weight, gr. 4.11 as the specimen he illustrates, presumably being the same coin). For the second type he
cites the three Miní specimens pari passu including the
same weights quoted by Miní, but no pictures, again,
are shown. Incidentally, since three of the weights quoted by Miní are absurdly low and do not match with any
of the specimens found so far, one would be brought to
think that the Miní specimens are either the specimens
we know with incorrectly reported weights or altogether (head-to-the-left type) non existent.
Description of coin types and known specimens
So far, six original bronze coins can be unmistakeably
attributed to the mint of Lopadusa. Three specimens,
which share the same style and belong to the same
issue, possibly coming from the same hoard, had already been known, two of these described and illustrated by Calciati. Three other specimens belong to a
slightly different, possibly later, issue and had not
been known before.
1. First Type
D/= Bearded and laureate male head, probably Zeus,
to the right, hair and beard long and flowing
down to the neck
R/= Tuna-fish looking right, with legend above and
under fish:
LOPADOUS - SAIWN
AE
gr. 6.112 – 4.112
References:
Goltzius (1618) pl. XXVIII, nº 1;
Torremuzza, Auctarium (1789), pl.VIII;
Cirami (1959) pl.87;
Miní (1979), pag. 496, nº 1;
Calciati (1983), Vol. III, pag. 368-370, n. 1, 1/1
The known specimens of this issue are (Plate 1,
types 1.a - 1.c):
1.a gr. 6.112
Formerly Coll. M.; sold at Bank
Leu, auction 79,
Ø cm. 2.25 31st October 2000, lot n. 452.
Unpublished.
1.b gr. 4.668
Legend incomplete. Formerly Coll. C.;
Ø cm. 1.91 [Calciati, vol.III, pag. 369, n. 1/1].
1.c gr. 4.112
Formerly Coll. C.; sold at
Numismatica Ars Classica,
Ø cm. 1.84 17th May 2001, lot n. 140.
[Calciati, vol. III, pag. 369, n. 1]
On the obverse a bearded and laureate head of Zeus is
represented. The head has a straight nose, deep-set
eyes and fine, narrow, lips. Hair and beard are long,
wavy, and flowing down to the neck. On the reverse a
tuna fish of full rounded flat shape is represented.
Several other coins circulating in the Mediterranean
basin show the tuna-fish type, though usually in the
other issues the fish are normally two and of a more
elongated shape (cfr. Solous and some Punic mints,
like Gadez, etc.). The letters of the legend are small,
squarish, wide-spaced, and quite different from other
contemporary greek legends.
The three coins illustrated, share the same reverse die
as clearly shown by the examination of the letters of
the legend. We have evidence that the two lighter specimens come from a small hoard that was found on
the island in the years 1946-1948. From the very
scant information that we have been able to trace
back, we know that they were found when ploughing a
cultivated field at the foot of the only small hill of the
island. The hoard probably contained other coins, but
unfortunately we totally ignore what they were. We
only know for sure that no coins bearing the little
15. Calciati, R.: Corpus Nummorum Siculorum, Mortara 1983, vol. III
pag. 368-370, nº 1, 1/1, 2
371
FABRIZIO ROSSINI
crab, a type often attributed to the island, were present in the hoard. We would be inclined to believe that
the specimens with the crab and punic characters are
more likely to have been minted by nearby islands, or
possibly Motya, under Punic rule, rather than by
Lopadusa.
Originally, the two lighter coins were sold by the heirs
of the land’s owner to a small collector from whom
they subsequently passed into a private collection of
bronze coins. Although we lack formal evidence, we
believe that in all probability also the heavier specimen may come from the same hoard.
2. Second Type
D/= Bearded and diademed male head, probably of Zeus;
Diadem, at the top of the head, is surmounted by a
lotus flower (?)
R/= Tuna-fish looking right, with legend above and
under fish:
LOPADOUS - SAIWN
AE
Zeus-Serapis found on the coins of Menai or
Syracuse of the Roman period. The features of the
head, if confronted with those of the first issue show
a coarser, less refined style. The regular, straight, features of the god’s head in the first issue (look in particular at 1.c) are gone leaving place to thicker traits,
the eye is globular, the nose large and the lips fleshy.
The beard is no longer flowing but forms rather
undistinguished short curly flocks, bulging the cheeks. On the reverse, the tuna appears more elongated
and thicker than the the more rounded and flattish
shape of the other issue. The shape of the legend’s lettering is also slightly different, although the truncation takes place at exactly the same letter. Finally, the
flan of this issue is considerably narrower and thicker,
consequently, though these specimens appear rather
smaller, their weights are much the same as those of
the other issue. The weights equivalence would suggest a close temporal proximity in the minting of the
two series. On the other hand, the resort to a narrower, thicker flan, easier to prepare than a fully broad,
flat one, would imply a more hasty preparation for
their minting, which may as well explain the less refined features of this issue.
gr. 6.140 - 4.062
References:
This type does not seem to be known to the authors
who had previously treated Lopadusa coinage, and is
seemingly unpublished.
The specimens, so far known, belonging to this issue,
are (Plate 1, types 2.a - 2.c):
2.a gr. 6.140
The coin was part of a small hoard, located at the foot
of a hill, whose composition appears to have contained some fractional bronze coins of Lipari (type with
Ephestos and dolphin), eight silver litrae of Ziz, and
other no better specified punic small bronzes. The
presence of these coins, again if correctly reported, is
also of extreme interest since it constitutes the first
evidence for a tentative dating, at least, for the second
issue of this coinage.
Recent Contessa Entellina find.
Unpublished.
Ø cm. 1.80
2.b gr. 4.695
2002 Contessa Entellina find.
Unpublished.
Ø cm. 1.70
2.c gr. 4.062
The provenance of the heavier specimen (2.a) is from
a recent hoard found in the proximity of Contessa
Entellina, probably the original location of ancient
Entella, 80 km. south of Palermo. If the reported
news is correct, this, together with the next piece
(2.b) would be the first testimonial of the circulation
of Lopadusa coins beyond their island of origin.
1999-2000 unspecified find.
Unpublished.
Ø cm. 1.65
These three specimens clearly belong to a different
issue. The Zeus head is no longer laureate but shows
a diadem with two small protuberances at its top
which may perhaps be a lotus flower, suggesting a
similitude of the head with the representation of
More scant information is available about the other two,
lighter, coins. Specimen 2.b comes from an isolated find
(circa 2002) again in the proximity of Contessa
Entellina, albeit from a different location than the preceding specimen. Further investigation should be devoted to the underpinnings for the presence of two
specimens of such rare issue in this particular location.
Coin 2.c is also from a recent find (ca. 1999/2000),
372
LOPADUSA: AN ELUSIVE MINT
possibly located in North-western Sicilian mainland, on
which, however, no other information, at present, has
unfortunately been possible to collect.
As for the approximate dating of this issue the only
hoard, albeit incomplete, evidence we have would suggest a dating around the IV century BC, supported by
the Ziz litrae and not contradicted by the Lipari
bronzes, also present in the hoard, whose production
extended well into the fourth century as well.
In addition to these specimens whose whereabouts are
today known, we have sure evidence of two more pieces, as we have seen from the sources examined. The
first is the original specimen seen and, most probably,
bought by Goltzius, either for his own or possibly for
the collection of Marcus Laurinus, a nobleman form
Bruges for whom Goltzius often acted as an agent.
Such provenance would have suggested a possible
Belgian location for the coin today, however, a check
with the principal Belgian public collections did not
confirm the presence of a Lopadusa specimen.
Moreover, the Marcus Laurinus collection was stolen
in antiquity and probably dispersed in England.
Again, a search through all major British public collections, as well as, incidentally, all other major European
ones, did not produce any results.
The second specimen mentioned by the literature is
the one described and purchased by Torremuzza (see
above). The Prince’s collection knew an early dispersal into many different streams. A portion of it going
to enrich the funds of what will become the coin cabinet of the Archeological Museum of Palermo. Another
portion was sold to the Hunter collection, today at
the Glasgow Museum; others to Lord Northwick and,
finally, some portions were dispersed into several
major and minor Sicilian private collections. All the
checks made to verify the presence of the Lopadusa
specimen, owned by Torremuzza, in the above mentioned public collections have so far yielded negative
results16. It has, however, been possible to verify only
a few private collections.
At some point, other specimens have been claimed to
be around at different locations. One had been reported at the Museum of Catanzaro, in Calabria. A thorough check with the curators of the collection, which
has recently been entirely catalogued, has proved the
statement inaccurate. Another specimen was claimed
to be housed in the collection of Prof. Pugliatti of
Messina. But Consolo-Langher, who has published the
Pugliatti collection, does not report the piece17.
Further investigation with the regional archeological
Museum of Messina, where Prof. Pugliatti resided,
did not produce any more evidence.
Finally, we have received credible evidence that two
more specimens, in rather poor conditions, had appeared on the antiquarian market in the late Seventies,
possibly coming from a contemporary hoard, which
has not been possible to locate so far.
All in all, evidence has been ascertained for the existence of up to ten specimens, six of which have been
possible to trace back and properly describe.
Conclusions
The only issue attributed with certainty to the island
of Lopadusa confirms its character of rarity and obscure origin. The very few specimens survived and the
scant information remained shed but little light on
the issue’s history.
Some of these coins’ elements may suggest a possible
stylistic influence derived by the punic environment,
as the island remained under Punic dominance for an
extended period of time. However, the issue bears a
distinct greek character that may conflict with the
proposed dating placed between the 3rd and the 2nd
centuries BC, under Roman rule18. The only hoard evidence so far retraced would support a dating anticipated to the IV century.
Other Sicilian issues bearing the tuna-fish type are
those of Solous19 also from the IV century, though the
Lopadusa tuna looks more refined in style and detailed than the Solous representations, which in addition
bear punic letters, not greek ones.
16. We would like to express our thanks, for their prompt and factual
cooperation, to the curators and senior officers of the
Soprintendenze and Archeological Museums of : Palermo, Trapani
Agrigento, Siracusa, Catania, Messina, Reggio Calabria, Catanzaro,
Crotone, Vibo Valentia, Milano, Padova, Bologna, Napoli, Roma.
17. Consolo-Langher, S.: Contributo alla Storia dell’Antica Moneta Bronzea in
Sicilia, Milano, 1964
18. See Walker, Bank Leu Auktion 79, Zurich, 31-10-2000, description of lot 452 and Calciati (cit.) vol. III p. 368
19. See Calciati (cit.) Vol. I, nnº 11-12 and especially nº 15, dated by
Calciati at 300-241 BC. See also Campana, A.: Corpus Nummorum
Antiquæ Italiæ, CNAI, nº 20, dated by Calciati at 330-260 BC.
373
FABRIZIO ROSSINI
The lettering utilized for the ethnicon is also puzzling as
the irregular size, wide spacing, and squarish shape
employed for its characters (in particular the “L”, “S”
and the “N”), finds few parallels in the Sicilian series20.
The mint , which was very probably situated on the
island, could have been located close to the island’s
natural harbour of Le Saline, thence the tuna-fish on
the reverse of the coin. Tuna fishing and commerce
had been popular for centuries in Sicily, as testified,
for instance, by the delightful representation of the
tuna seller on the Mandralisca crater (fig. 1) in the
Cefalú museum. Incidentally, the tuna at the fisherman’s stall looks impressively similar to the fish
shown on the first issue of Lopadusa.
The minting must have been extremely limited in time
and also in quantity, as is testified by the fact that the
three known specimens of the first issue all share the same
reverse die. And the three known pieces of the second
issue also appear to share same obverse and reverse dies.
The motives that led the tiny Lopadusa to mint
these bronze coins can only be surmised. Almost
certainly, the need for exchange currency did not
justify the issue, as was amply satisfied by other
contemporary currencies that circulated on the
island. More imaginatively, we like to suppose that
the crave for resurgence and self-determination of
the small Sicilian city centers ensuing in the
Timoleontian aftermath, might have provided the
appropriate fertile ground to support the flourishing of small local mints that concentrated on a
small bronze output as a means to voice their own
self-determination.
It is to be hoped that the excavations presently
undergoing on the island, under the direction of
Soprintendenza Archeologica di Agrigento, may
bring in some new elements that will permit to better understand the historical implications and to
help placing an appropriate dating for this intriguing issue.
20. Some bronze coins of Agyrion (Calciati, cit., vol. III, pag. 115 ss.)
show legends which bear a faint resemblance to the Lopadusa
legend’s characters.
374
LOPADUSA: AN ELUSIVE MINT
1a
1b
1c
2a
2b
Fig. 1
2c
375