The discovery of the hoard in Tomares in 2016 shook numismatic science on the peninsula. The study of the hoard, consisting of about 53,200 coins, yielded striking results.
The chance discovery of the Tomares treasure in 2016 completely shook numismatic research in the south of the peninsula. Nineteen large amphorae filled with late antique coins were hidden under the opus signinum paving of a rural building, probably a horreum or fundus warehouse. The scale of the find, which amounted to about 53,200 coins weighing about 600 kilograms of metal, made it one of the most exceptional in late European antiquity from the outset.
A huge find under the floor of a Roman fundus
The treasure was discovered by chance during public works. Eight amphorae were broken as a result of the work of the machinery that uncovered the deposit. Two others, although cracked, retained their contents, and nine remained intact and sealed. Micro-excavation of amphorae 10 and 11 allowed the extraction of about 5,600 coins, which currently constitute the part of the treasure on which research is focused. Thanks to this preliminary work, researchers were able to reconstruct the composition, chronology and origin of the treasure with great accuracy.
Archaeological expertise confirmed that the amphorae were lined up and buried at the same time. The regularity of their arrangement, the sealing of their necks with compacted earth and the identical number of coins in each vessel (about 2,800 in each amphora) indicate that this cache was deliberately hidden. All this points to a premeditated plan by a person or group of people who had access to large sums of money from the Tetrarchy (293 AD – approx. 313 AD).
Set of Diocletian’s nummi
With the exception of a single Agrippa as, a rarity completely unrelated to the tetrarchic set, all coins from the Tomares treasure are nummi issued between Diocletian’s monetary reform (294 AD) and the last years of the first decade of the 4th century. Thus, the chronological range is very limited in time. The latest coins, which make up a small part of the collection, belong to the Maventius issue, minted in Ostia between the end of 309 and October 312. Furthermore, scholars have not found any coins of Constantine minted after 313. Thus, the hoard was probably hidden between 307 and 312, most likely in conditions free from military conflict, as there are no signs of conflict in the region during those years.
Who collected such a large number of coins?
The question of who could have accumulated and hidden such a large amount of money remains open. The study rules out the possibility that it was military funds. Baetica was not a zone of conflict during the period under analysis, and there is no evidence of the deployment of troops that would have required such a large amount of money to pay for them. The find is more likely to come from a prosperous agricultural area that was part of the sea and river trade routes that connected this settlement with the vast Mediterranean routes.
Thus, the owner should be sought among major rural investors, regional traders or managers of vast estates. The notable presence of coins from Italian and Gallo-British mints, as well as a significant proportion of coins from Carthage (the most represented mint in the collection), confirm that the person who collected the treasure had extensive economic connections.
The predominance of coins issued before 307, along with the rarity of later coins, suggests that the coins entered the hoard continuously and relatively steadily until some unknown event prompted their final concealment.
Significant political composition
An analysis of the types and authorities represented on the coins has shed new light on the origin of the funds. The hoard contains examples of all the emperors of the Tetrarchy. Maximian is the most represented emperor, followed by Constantius and Diocletian. The predominance of the first tetrarchs suggests that most of the money in circulation in Baetica came from the early stages of the tetrarchic system and the issues that immediately followed the reform of 294.
On the other hand, the very rare presence of Maetius coins and the almost complete absence of Licinius, represented by only three specimens, reinforce the idea that the hoard was closed before the political and monetary reforms of the Constantinian era changed the flow of coinage. Neither political instability nor military restructuring can explain this profile. According to scholars, the hoard is more likely to reflect an economy in which money flowed by sea and land from the famous mints of the western Mediterranean.
The mints of the hoard: the trade links of Baetica
The volume of data already available, based on nearly 8,700 classified coins, allows us to reconstruct the geographical distribution of the currency with a high degree of detail. Carthage is undoubtedly the most represented mint in the treasure, even ahead of Treveris and Rome, which occupied leading positions in preliminary analyses. Its prominent role is significant, considering that the mint closed in 307. The predominance of its coins indicates that the flow of money from North Africa was very intense in previous decades.
The Gallo-British and Italian mints represent almost equal shares, around 36% each, with Rome and Treveris as the key centres of issue. Ticinum, Lugdunum and Londinium also occupy a prominent place, reflecting the links between the Atlantic Ocean and the Mediterranean Sea that were characteristic of the south of the peninsula.
Balkan and eastern mints, although in the minority, are also present and account for almost 4%, which is high compared to European hoards from the same period. Their presence can be explained by the strategic position of Baetica on the sea routes that directly linked it to the eastern Mediterranean.
An unprecedented scientific project
The study of the Tomares treasure required an exceptional interdisciplinary effort. Coordination between various institutions, including the Archaeological Museum of Seville, the University of Seville and the National Accelerator Centre, made it possible to combine numismatic, metallographic and archaeological analyses. The use of the numisdata system, with an optimised working protocol and the participation of numismatists, restorers and students, was a decisive factor in the systematic cataloguing of thousands of items. However, more than 80% of the collection still needs to be classified, which will allow for an unprecedentedly accurate analysis of the economic and political dynamics of the early 4th century in Spain.
