Byzantine Tetartera and Islamic D?n?

rs
Author(s): Andrew S. Ehrenkreutz
Source: Journal of the Economic and Social History of the Orient, Vol. 7, No. 2 (Jul., 1964),
pp. 183-190
Published by: BRILL
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/3596238 .
Accessed: 07/02/2015 07:18
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.

BRILL is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Journal of the Economic and
Social History of the Orient.

http://www.jstor.org

This content downloaded from 192.87.31.20 on Sat, 7 Feb 2015 07:18:36 AM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

BYZANTINE TETARTERA AND

ISLAMIC DINARS
BY

ANDREW S. EHRENKREUTZ
Ann Arbor (Michigan)

In the course of the second half of the tenth century, Byzantine

authoritiesbegan to issue lightweight solidiwhich cameto be known as
tetartfra1). In discussing this monetary phenomenon Professor Philip
Grierson ingeniously attemptsto explain the nature of that coinage in
the light of territorialacquisitions of the Byzantine Empire in Syria,
during the reign of Nicephorus Phocas and his immediatesuccessors2).
According to Grierson, the population of that areawas accustomedto
the handling of lightweight Muslim dindrs.Consequently, Byzantine
authorities, desiring to conform with Syrian monetary practices,
decided to produce Imperial gold coinage with a reduced weight
standard.
While Mme Ahrweiler-Glykatzihas recently suggested a different
interpretation of the motivation behind the monetary measure of
Nicephorus Phocas2a, I feel compelled to question the validity of
anotheraspectof ProfessorGrierson'sthesis. I referhere to the problem
of the Fdtimid dindrswhich, according to Grierson (and AhrweilerGlykatzi, after him) 2b, were to serve as the weight prototype of the
tetartfraof Nicephorus Phocas. This is how this proposition is formulated:
i) For bibliographicalreferenceson the subject of the tetartfron,see Ph. Grierson,
"Nomisma, tetarteron et dinar: un plaidoyer pour Nicephore Phocas", RevueBelge

de Numismatique,

0oo, 1954,

P. 75-84; also, H. Ahrweiler-Glykatzi,

"Nouvelle

hypothese sur le tetarteron d'or et la politique mon6taire de Nicephore Phocas",

MilangesG. OstrogorskyI, (Recueil des travaux de l'Institut d'Etudes Byzantines,
No. VIII), p. 1-9.
z) Ph. Grierson, art. cit., p. 81-83.
2a) H. Ahrweiler, art. cit., p. 8-9.

zb) Ibid., p. 8.

This content downloaded from 192.87.31.20 on Sat, 7 Feb 2015 07:18:36 AM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

184

A. S. EHRENKREUTZ

La plupartde ces pays avaient6te sous gouvernementmusulman

pendantpros de trois siecles et &taientainsi habituesa l'usage du
dinararabe.Celui-ci,dansla deuxiememoitiedu Xe siecle,
,tait en
somme le dinarfatimide,car aucun monnayaged'or n'avaitplus
ete emis par les AbbassidesdepuisAl-Muqtadir(908-932) et celui
des Buwayhidescirculaitbien plus l'Est, en M6sopotamieet en
Perse, tandis que les Hamdanides,.qui gouvernaientla Syrie, ne
frappaientpratiquementpas For. Les Fatimides,d'autrepart, battaientdes monnaiesd'or en 1Egyptedepuis 341 de l'Higire "(952-3
apresJ.-C.) et en Palestineet meme en Syrie,a Tripoli et Tyr,
depuis 359 H. (969-70). Ce numnraire6tait 'mis en d'6normes
quantiteset durantla deuxiememoitiddu Xe et tout le XIe siecle
orientale.
il dominaitla vie commercialede la M6diterranee
Le dinar fatimiderepresenteune diminutionl6gere, mais bien
perceptible,de l'dtalontraditionneldes Ommeyadeset des Abbassides. Le dinarde ces derniers,commeon peut le voir clairement
d'apresla liste de monnaiesdansl'ouvragede Lavoix,a 6te frappe
au poids de 4,25 g environ,tandisque le dinarfatimidevariaitentre
4,05 et 4,15 g. Ceciest un poids identique"acelui du tetarteron....1)
A few of the points raisedin the above statementcan be easily
Gold coins issuedin the name
dismissedas inaccurategeneralizations.
of the 'Abbdsidcaliphscontinuedto be struckafterthe reign of al(A.D. 940-944)
Muqtadir.Thoseproducedon behalfof Caliph
territoriesas late as A.D.al-R.di
circulatedin
9732). Mesopotamian
F.timid
for the benefitof the Buwayhidswere situatedmuch
mints working
closer to Syriathan were the North Africanmints of the
F.timids.
is scanty
indeed,
Althoughthe numismaticlegacyof the
excellent
of
in
the
been
involved
have
to
.Hamddnids
were
striking
reported
they
thatthe Fitimids
to
state
incorrect
it
is
Above
all,
utterly
gold coinage.
struckgold coinsin EgyptsinceA.H. 341(A.D. 952-953). TheFdtimids
controlover Egypt
did not establishtheirpoliticaland administrative
Ph. Grierson, art. cit., p. 81-8z.
1) Cf.
al-Maqrizi, Itti'dz al-hunafd', 1948, p.

2)

172.

This content downloaded from 192.87.31.20 on Sat, 7 Feb 2015 07:18:36 AM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

BYZANTINE

TETARTERA

18 5

until July of A.D. 969. A few Fdtimidd7ndrswhich, judging by their

legends, had been struck in Egypt prior to that date, constitute a
puzzling and so far unsolved historicalphenomenon. That no Fdtimid
coins had been struck in Egypt before the final invasion of Egypt is
evident from the proclamationissued on behalf of Caliph al-Mu'izz,
in which a promise was made to improve the local coinage and to raise
its standardto that of the Fdtimidcoinage 1).
It is the two main argumentsunderlyingGrierson'sthesis which call
for a closer scrutiny: Was the population of northern Syria really
accustomedto the use of Fdtimiddzndrsat the time of its conquest by
Nicephorus Phocas? Did the weight standardof Fdtimid dindrsconstitute a departurefrom the conventional standardof 'Abbdsid gold
coinage? To answer these questions one must begin by stressing the
chronological aspects of these arguments. Professor Grierson implies
that the population of Syria had been accustomed to the handling of
Fdtimid dindrsprior to the death of Nicephorus Phocas (12.16.969),
i.e., before the eastwardexpansion of the Fdtimidsand their minting
of gold coins in Egypt. In other words, it is impliedthat Syrianmarkets
were dominated by Fdtimid dindrsstruck in North African mints
between A.D. 909 and 969. One could speculatethat the Syriantrade
balance favored such a development or that there was an intensive
diffusion of Fdtimid d7ndrsfor the purpose of Ismd'ili propaganda.
But, other than such speculative ideas, I find no evidence suggesting
widespreaduse of North African dindrsin Syriaprior to the establishment of the Fdtimidsin Egypt. On the other hand, there exists textual
and numismaticevidence indicating that the Syrianpopulationhandled
other than Fdtimid dindrs,struck by various regimes of Syria and of
adjacent territories. One may refer here to the activities of Syrian
mints such as Aleppo, Damascus, Ramlah (Filastin), and Tiberias, as
attested by available gold coins dating from the pre-Ikhshidid and
Ikhshidid period (A.D. 905-935-969). While it is impossible to state
how intensive their productionwas, the activities of these Syrianmints
I) Cf. A. S. Ehrenkreutz, "Studies in the Monetary History of the Near East in
the Middle Ages. II",JESHO, 6, iii, 1963, P. 258.
JESHO VII

13

This content downloaded from 192.87.31.20 on Sat, 7 Feb 2015 07:18:36 AM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

i86

A. S. EHRENKREUTZ

suggest a demand for local gold coinage. Furthermore,considering

the excellentintrinsicqualityof Egyptiand7ndrs,struckby the Tfilinids
and the Ikhshidids1), it is reasonableto assume that Egyptian gold
coinage enjoyedpopularityin Syrianmarketsin the pre-Fatimidperiod.
If, then, the population of Syria could depend on the supply of local
coins or-on that coming from neighbouringEgypt, one finds it difficult
to understandhow the Fatimid dindrs,originating from distant North
African mints, could assert themselves on Syrian markets prior to
A.D. 969.
Finally, one must consider the problem of the weight standardof
relevant types of dindrs.There is no question about the weight of
'Abbdsid dzndrs.As long as they were struck according to a fixed
standard, their weight amounted to 4.25 grammes, representing the
conventional standard adopted by 'Abd al-Malik2). In the course
of the tenth centurya fixed standardwas abandonedby 'Abbdsidmints.
A similar lack of any uniform standardof weight characterizedthe
dindrs struck in Syria for at least one century before the advent of the
and Ikhshididissues in Syriaweighed
Fitimids. Tiilinid,
post-T.iifinid,
significantlyless than 4.0 grammes3). The same was true of Ikhshidid
dindrsof Egypt 4). On the other hand, the Egyptian gold coinage of
the Tiilfinids (A.D. 868-905) as well as that of the Aghlabids (A.D.
800-909), the predecessors of the Fdtimids in North Africa, was cha-

racterized by a stable and uniform standard of weight. It appears,

however, that there existed a definite differencein the weight standard
of the dindrsof the two dynasties.By applyingthe frequencydistribution
method, one can see that the majority of Aghlabid specimens5) fall
1) Cf. Idem,"Studiesin the MonetaryHistoryof the Near East in the Middle

Ages",JESHO, 2, ii, 1959,p. 149-150, 152-5 3.

JESHO, 3,
2) Cf. Ph. Grierson,"The MonetaryReformsof 'Abd al-Malik",
196o,p. z53f.
NotesandMonographs,
(Numismatic
of theTtl7inids,
3) Cf. O. Grabar,TheCoinage
des monnaiesikhchino. 139),1957, p. 76 andpassim;
P. Balog,"Tablede rdfdrences
dites",RBN, 103, 1957, p. I10.

4)Ibid.

;) In tabulatingthese statisticsI have consideredthe undamagedspecimensin

the collectionof the AmericanNumismaticSociety. I have also consultedthe

This content downloaded from 192.87.31.20 on Sat, 7 Feb 2015 07:18:36 AM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

BYZANTINE TETARTERA

I87

within the weight category of 4.16-4.2 grammes. The average weight

of specimens in that category amounts to 4.183 grammes. Adding
1.5 per cent to compensate for loss due to wear 1), one obtains the
weight of 4.245 grammes, which almost exactly corresponds to the
classicalstandardof Islamic dindrs.The majorityof Tiilanid specimens
fall within the weight class of 4.11-4.15 grammes. The average weight
of specimensin this categoryis 4.132 grammes,which, afterthe "wear"
adjustment,produces the figure 4.193. The second highest number of
Tdilinid specimens fall within even lower weight brackets. On the
basis of this analysisone may submit that Egyptian Tailinid dindrswere
characterizedby a light standardof weight, in distinctionfrom regular
Umayyad, 'Abbdsid, or Aghlabid gold coinage.
TABLE I
(a)
Dinirs
of the
Aghlabids
(A.D. 800-909)
Tfilfnids
(Egypt only)

(c)
(b)
Number of Frequency
Specimens Peak (Wgt.
in g.)
105

167

4.16-4.2
i) 4.11-4.15
ii) 4.06-4.1

(d)
Number
of Spec.
in (c)

(e)
(f)
Ave. Wgt. Adjusted Ave.
of Spec. Wgt. of Spec.
in (c)
in (c)

31

4.183

4.245

45
33

4.132
4.091

4-193
4.I52 2)

(A.D. 868-905)

In inquiring into the nature of the weight standardof Fdtimid gold

following numismatic catalogues: S. Lane-Poole, Catalogue of Oriental Coins in the
British Museum; H. Lavoix, Cataloguedes monnaiesmusulmanesde la BibliothbqueNationale; G. C. Miles, FartimidCoins in the Collectionof the UniversityMuseum, Philadelphia,
and the American Numismatic Society. For Tfilonid dindrsI have also consulted the files

of Professor O. Grabar,which served for his publicationof TheCoinageof theTfalfnids.

Of the Fatimid dinarsthose of al-Musta'li (A.D. 1094-1 ioi) have not been considered

because of an inadequatenumber of available specimens.

i) Cf. G. C. Miles, "Byzantine Miliaresion and Arab Dirhem: Some Notes on
Their Relationship", The American Numismatic Society MuseumNotes, 9, 1960, P.

214.

It is interesting to observe that in the case of these two types of lighter dindrs,
the difference between their respective weight and that of the conventional dindr
2)

amounts to about one habbah (or 1/72 of a dindr) in the case of the former, and to
about i/2 qirict (or 1/48 of a dindr) in the case of the latter. Such lighter dinars are

frequently referredto in the ninth Egyptian papyri. Cf. A. Grohmann, Einfiihrung

und Chrestomathiezur arabischenPapyruskunde,1954, P. 187-188.

This content downloaded from 192.87.31.20 on Sat, 7 Feb 2015 07:18:36 AM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

A. S. EHRENKREUTZ

188

coinage for the purpose of the present discussion, one must distinguish
two phases. During the early pre-Egyptianperiod Fdtimiddindrswere
struckin North African mints. It was the weight standardof the North
African Fdtimid dandrswhich allegedly served as the prototype of the
tetartfraof Nicephorus Phocas. During the second period, extending
from the conquest of Egypt to the reign of al-Amir (A.D. I101-1130),

Fdtimid dindrsproduced in Egyptian mints asserted their monetary

preponderancebecauseof the excellent stabilityof their weight standard
and high intrinsic quality1). Consequently,by studying the weight of
d7ndrs
dating from the second period, one would be justifiedin drawing
conclusions about the weight standard of Fatimid gold coinage in
general.
As may be seen from the following table, the pre-Egyptian or
North African dindrs of the Fitimids do not show any decrease in
standardof weight.
TABLE II

(b)

(a)
Fdtimid
Dindrs
North

African,

priorto A.D.

(c)

Number of Frequency
Specimens Peak (Wgt.
in g.)
34

4.16-4.2

(d)
Number
of Spec.
in (c)
IT

(e)

(f)

Ave. Wgt. AdjustedAve.

of Spec. Wgt. of Spec.
in (c)
in (c)
4.19

4.25

9
8

4.088
4.133

4-149

8
24

4.173
4.128

4.235
4.189

19

4.188

4.25

4-178
4.232

4.24
4.295

4.229

4.292

4.186

4.252

969-970

Egyptian,of:
al-Mu'izz
(A.D. 952-975)
al-'Aziz

35

41

i) 4.06-4.I
ii) 4.II-4.I5
iii) 4.I6-4.2
4.11-4.15

4.194

(A.D. 975-996)
al-Hikim
(A.D. 996-i02I)
al-Zihir
(A.D. I02I-I036)
al-Mustansir
(A.D. 1036-1094)
al-Amir
(A.D. I101-1130)

4.16-4.2

135

4.21-4.25

5
5
24

Ioi

4.16-4.2

15

21

i) 4. 16-4.2
ii) 4.21-4.25

I) Cf. A. S. Ehrenkreutz,"Studies in the MonetaryHistory.. .II", JESHO, 6, iii,

1963, p. 257f.

This content downloaded from 192.87.31.20 on Sat, 7 Feb 2015 07:18:36 AM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

BYZANTINE

TETARTERA

189

The average weight of specimensin the peak frequency category of

4.16-4.2 amounts to 4.19, which after the "wear" adjustmentproduces
the exact figure of 4.25. Thus, there seems to be little doubt that as
regardstheir gold minting policy the Fdtimidscontinued the traditions
of the Aghlabids1). And since the Fdtimid dlndrsprior to A.D. 969
were not of a light standardof weight, they could not influence the
weight standardof the tetartdraof Nicephorus Phocas.
Upon the establishmentof the Fdtimidsin Egypt the weight standard
of their Egyptian dindrsseems to have undergone an interestingevolution. One can definitely detect a decrease in the weight standardof
dfnirs of al-Mu'izz (d. A.D. 975). The adjusted average weight of
specimens in the highest frequencygroup amounts to 4.149 grammes.
The second highest frequency group consists of specimens with an
adjusted average weight of 4.194. The number of specimens in this
group is equaled, however, by specimens with an adjusted average
weight of 4.235. One should emphasizeimmediatelythat the striking
of such lightweight dindrsdid not constitute an innovation in Egyptian
monetary history. It is enough to glance at the weight standard of
as compiled in Table I, to notice a weight relationship
Tfilfinid dAndrs,
between them and the dirnrsof al-Mu'izz. It is quite probable that in
restoring monetary stability after the Ikhshidid disorganization,al-Mu
'izz adopted the weight standard of the excellent gold coins of the
Thilanids. Consequently, if one admits this possibility, one is bound
to conclude that Egyptian Tfilanid dindrsrather than Fdtimid gold
coinage influenced the weight standardof the tetartira.
At any rate, the striking of such lightweight dindrsby the Fdtimids
was of short duration.They were still producedunder al-'Aziz (d. A.D.
996). Beginning with the reign of al-HIkim (d. A.D. Io02) the regular
standard of c. 4.25 seems to have prevailed again. The standard of
of
dandrs
(d. A.D. 1036) and al-Mustansir(d. A.D. 1094)appears
to have exceeded
al-Z.hir that level. On the other hand, the specimens issued
the
during
reign of al-Amir (d. A.D. i1 3o), who is known to have
i) Cf. Ibid., p. 256-257.

This content downloaded from 192.87.31.20 on Sat, 7 Feb 2015 07:18:36 AM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

190

EHRENKREUTZ,

BYZANTINE

TETARTERA

proceeded with special investigations in the production of gold coinage 1), indicate the prevalence of the regular 4.25 standard. Finally,
the two highest frequencyconcentrationsamong all Egyptianspecimens
of the Fitimids are represented by dindrsfalling within the weight
brackets of 4.11-4.15 and 4.16-4.2. The adjustedaverage of specimens
in the formeris 4.24; that in the latter amountsto 4.246. It thus appears
to me that these findings are conclusive enough to dispel any notions
about the light weight standardof Fitimid dindrs.
i) Cf. A. S. Ehrenkreutz, "The Standardof Fineness of Gold Coins Circulating
in Egypt at the Time of the Crusades",JAOS, 74, iii, 1954, P. 165.

This content downloaded from 192.87.31.20 on Sat, 7 Feb 2015 07:18:36 AM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions