An unusual roman hoard found in England’s West Country

Article by John Pearson Andrew – Consultant Editor Coin News (UK), correspondent Coin World (US) and Australian Coin & Banknote Review. As featured in The Australasian Coin & Banknote Magazine.

Perhaps the most famous place in the southwest of England, also known as the ‘West Country’, associated with the Romans is Bath, a settlement with natural hot springs. Before the Roman conquest of Britain, the Iron Age tribe of the Dobunni lived in the area and established a shrine at the springs dedicated to the goddess Sulis, who they believed had healing powers. The Romans invaded in 43AD and by 75AD had built a temple and spa complex at the site. This later developed into a bathing and socialising centre called Aquae Sulis, ‘the waters of Sulis’. Early in the 5th century AD Roman rule came to an end. Within a century the Roman Baths were lost as a result of the River Avon flooding and covering the site with mud. While the buildings collapsed, the mud preserved the foundations. The temple was discovered in 1727 and the spa complex in 1880. While the Great Bath is Roman lined with layers of lead, the structures and statues above ground level are all Victorian in the Roman style. In 2007 the Beau Street Hoard of 17,660 Roman coins were found near the Baths in eight money bags which had fused together. Dating from 32BC – 274AD these are now on permanent exhibition at the Roman Bath Museum. The city of Bath became a world heritage site in 1987.

Just 12 miles away from Bath is Bristol, now the most populous city in the West Country. The Romans had a small settlement called Abona there, which was connected to Bath by road. Isolated Roman villas, together with small forts and settlements were also scattered throughout the area. The most recent hoard of Roman coins were found at Hengrove in what is now the southern suburbs of Bristol. This was during September 2019 when the site was being cleared by a mechanical excavator ahead of a residential development by Bellway Homes. Planning permission had been granted by Bristol City Council after a heritage assessment of the land considered its archaeological potential was low. Consequently no archaeological work was considered to be required prior to the beginning of the development.

After the discovery initially of 277 coins, a watching brief was given to Cotswold Archaeology (CA), a registered charity that advances public education of archaeology and furthers appreciation of the cultural heritage and historic environment in the UK and elsewhere in the world. Normally, the first point of contact upon the discovery of potential Treasure would be the local Finds Liaison Officer for the Portable Antiquities Scheme. CA established that the hoard was deposited in a pit cutting the natural substratum. The coins, together with the pieces of the associated pottery vessel in which they were stored as well as a bronze pan scale were removed from the pit prior to the beginning of CA’s watching brief. During this process a further 32 coins were discovered, making the Hengrove Hoard 309 bronze and silver-bronzed low denomination mid-fourth century coins in total.

Hengrove is not close to any known Roman settlement, but 1000 Roman bronze coins of the first to later third centuries were found in the bank of a stream in nearby Filwood in 1869. The most recent coin in the Hengrove Hoard was struck at the Arles mint between 355 and 358 AD. It is thought that the hoard was buried no later than 360. Coins in the hoard are often unworn or just slightly worn indicating that they had seen little circulation before being buried. Experts at CA note that the area around Bristol has produced a number of mid-4th century Roman hoards, such as Wraxall, Gatcombe, Hanham Abbots and Blaise Castle, albeit that as a whole, the number of Roman hoards of the late 350s in England are comparatively small. Only 21 coins in the Hengrove Hoard were struck from 294-348, while those struck from 348-350 numbered 35 with the largest number dating from 350-353 clocking in at 214. Those dating from 353-358 were a modest 37 while two could not be dated.

A quarter of the coins are imitations of official coins. This was quite common in Britain in the 350s and early 360s. The imitations were produced locally to meet the demand for coinage in Britain not matched by the supply of coins from the imperial mints. The hoard included a significant number of coins (nearly 50% of the officially struck coins) issued in the names of the usurpers Decentius and Magnentius, who ruled the western provinces of the Roman Empire from 350-353. This is most unusual, making the Hengrove Hoard very different to other contemporary hoards.

So, who were these usurpers? We have to go back to the beginning of the 4th century. In 305, the Roman Emperor Constantius led his second campaign in Britain. His son Constantine accompanied him. Early in 306 the Romans defeated the Picts in northern Britain. York was one of the regional capitals in the Roman province of Britain and its legionary fortress was the HQ of the northern military command. When the Emperor was in the north of Britain, the city also became the seat of the Imperial Court. On July 25th 306, the Emperor died in York. At this time, sons did not automatically succeed their fathers to such positions of power, but on this occasion Constantius’s loyal troops proclaimed Constantine emperor. He reigned, with his three sons Constantine II, Constantius II and Constans as Caesars (i.e. a junior member in the imperial college).

And what a reign it was as he became known as Constantine the Great. When his father was appointed Caesar in 293, Constantine was ensured a place at the imperial court. However, he did not join his father’s court at Trier, but that of the senior emperor, Diocletian, which was based principally at Nicomedia in Asia Minor. He would have received training for high office learning the skills of both statesman and soldier. He was therefore well placed to step into his father’s shoes.

Being groomed for the position is one thing, but how did Constantine earn the title, ‘Great’? Dr Christopher Kellyi, a leading expert based at Cambridge University said at the occasion of the exhibition Constantine the Great – York’s Roman Emperorii that there were three main reasons. ‘After nearly 80 years and three generations of political fragmentation, Constantine united the whole of the Roman Empire under one ruler. He was responsible for restoring stability and security to the Roman world. Constantine also abandoned Rome as the most important city in the Empire. He built a new capital at Constantinople – now modern Istanbul. In the next two centuries Rome and Italy became vulnerable to barbarian invasions. The much more easily defensible Constantinople (renamed Byzantium) lasted for another 1000 years. But, it was Constantine’s strong support for Christianity which arguably had the greatest impact on European history.

Following their father’s death in 337, his three sons became co-Augusti and divided the Empire between themselves with Constantine II ruling the northern parts in the west while Constans ruled the southern ones and Constantius II ruled the parts in the eastiii. Unfortunately, fraternal rivalries soon emerged which reopened political as well as religious divisions. Civil war erupted between Constantine II and Constans in 340 with Constantine II marching to Italy to confront his brother Constans. En route he was ambushed and killed outside the northern Italian city of Aquileia resulting in Constans ruling as Augustus in the west and Constantius II as Augustus in the east.

According to Seth W Stevensoniv Magnentius was born in Gaul of obscure British or German parents. However, from about 303 AD he was brought up by Constans who admired his military skills. At one point when following a turbulent uprising when Magnentius was Captain of the Guard in Constans’ army, the soldiers were on the point of putting him to death, but Constans saved his life. One would have expected Magnentius to be a loyal servant of the Augustus in the West. However, Constans was cruel and tyrannical and consequently unpopular. In January 350 Magnentius, now a senior commander in his master’s army proclaimed himself emperor at Autun in Gaul. Constans fled, but was soon captured and killed. Magnentius was now sole Augustus of the western part of the Empire, but he was not recognised as such by Constantius II.

Constantius II headed west with his army in March 351 and defeated Magnentius at the Battle of Mursa (now Osijek in modern Croatia). As a result, the usurper lost control of Italy, Spain and Africa, but retained Britannia and Gaul. Defeated, but not broken, Magnentius appointed his brother Decentius as Caesar towards the end of 351 or early 352. Decentius’s first task was to defend Gaul against the Alemanni, a confederation of tribes on the upper River Rhine, which Constantius II had encouraged to cross the Rhine frontier into Gaul so as to distract the usurpers’ army. Unfortunately, the tribes defeated him. Just when he thought matters not get worse, they did. His brother Magnentius had raised taxes in Gaul to finance his conflict with Constantius II and as a result the citizens were in revolt and expelled Decentius from Treves, Gaul’s capital. He moved to the city of Sens, which was subsequently besieged by the Alemanni.

There were various attempts by Magnentius in 352 to broker a peace with Constantius II. However, all were rejected. In the summer of 353 Constantius II entered Gaul to confront the usurper with his army and was the victor at the Battle of Mons. Magnentius fled to Lugdunum (now Lyon) where he committed suicide by falling on his sword. On hearing the fate of his brother, Decentius hung himself in Sens.

Although the pottery vessel that contained the coins was broken the archaeologists at CA have managed to work out that it was 20cm (nearly 8in) high and the diameter at the top was 18cm (7in). The bronze pan scale found nearby could have fitted within the rim of the pot as it has a diameter of 13.5cm (just over 5in). Apparently very few Roman pan scales have been found in Roman Britain. Even more unusual about the Hengrove Hoard is the high percentage of coins issued by the usurpers (nearly 50%). A theory put forward by CA is that there could have been some political motivation for their concealment. Following the suicides of Magnentius and Decentius, it is believed Constantius II sought out those who had supported the usurpers in Britain. If this is the case, a supporter who had collected a good number of their coins, may well have thought that burying them was the best thing to do. We shall never know. However, the hoard is important evidence for the political and financial fortunes of the West Country in mid-fourth century Britain.

John Andrew