Session: #402

Content:

“Imitation”, “Copy”, “Nachahmung”, “Barbarisierung”, “Limesfalsa” are just some of the terms used to describe a widespread numismatic phenomenon: that a coinage in some way imitates or references another coinage. However, whereas in the past numismatists have often had a very undifferentiated, even simplistic view of them with negative connotations, “imitations” are in fact a many-splendoured thing.
Even if it is generally the iconography that defines a coin as an 'imitation', coins themselves are a fusion of material, image and text, so that the legend, the metal or the denomination can also be significant. This complexity is further reflected in their ambivalent roles: on the one hand coins are official products of a central administration, on the other hand objects of everyday social, ritual and economic circulation.
In contrast to the antiquarian approaches of the past, modern contextual numismatics provides new insights that see the phenomenon as more than mere imitation or simple appropriation. The reasons for adopting or adapting aspects of coinages of other polities or groupings can be diverse: they could have been 'official', made by a government, perhaps during a crisis; be made by others as a criminal activity; or by persons wishing to emulate the benefits of having their own monetary system. They could also be objects that translate certain meanings and connotations of coins, such as power, wealth and representation; in their new context they could enjoy a very different, often non-monetary function, for example as jewellery or an emblem. They could give rise to novel, new creations.
The session will thus consider examples of the manifold forms of transformation from 'original' to 'final product' from the ancient and medieval world, from a wide range of geographical contexts.

Session: #402

Theme & Session Format

Title & Content

Organisers