The Imaginary Far West and South Iberian and North African Punic Coins

Full text

Money, Trade and Trade Rou tes in Pre-Isl amic Nort h Africa | 21
Nineteenth and 20th century European historiography on the
archaeology of the Maghreb and its early history contains
numerous references to the close relations between southern
Iberia and western Mauretania, the future Mauretania
Tingitana. This geographical proximity was particularly
obvious in the area of the Gibraltar Straits and had remarkable
influence not only on ancient Greek and Latin literary sources
but also on innumerable archaeological remains analyzed in
depth by research projects in southern Spain and Portugal and
northern Morocco.2 Coins have contributed to the definition of
the geographical and cultural area known as the ‘Círculo del
Estrecho’, a term proposed by M. Tarradell in the 1960s.3
Recent works by J. Alexandropoulos, L.I. Manfredi, L .
Callegarin and E. Gozalbes reflect appropriately the current
relevance of these topics in the field of numismatics (Pl. 1). At
the same time, these works also reflect superseded antique
visions of a colonial nature present in archaeological
researches from the times of the Protectorate4 (for ex ample,
numismatic studies since the 1850s). Thus, one of the main
Spanish numismatic corpuses was directed by A. Delgado in
late 19th century and includes a chapter devoted to the coins
from Tingitan Africa for a better understanding of ancient
Hispanic coinage.5
Leaving aside the political and ideological background
which partly inspires these works, I must highlight the
existence of other numismatic arguments which justifies my
interest in the ancient history of southern Spain and northern
Africa, considered as a single research area. Using less
information than that available nowadays, numismatic
literature since the late 19th and early 20th centuries contains
many modern concepts such as ‘com munity of interests’ and
‘cultural and ethnic interrelations’. The inscriptions on
Hispanic-Punic and Mauretanian coins, their iconographic
similarities, but also closer observations regarding coin find-
spots or the similarity of diameters and weights between coins
from both sides of the Straits of Gibraltar area culminates in a
Theory of Homonoias between the major cities from Baetica
and Tingitana.6
Of course, this old theory is overcome nowadays. However,
many studies insist on analyzing the important role played by
Gadir/Gades (present-day Cádiz) within the Straits area and,
particularly, in North African territories. The necessary review
of ancient literary sources and the growing number and quality
of archaeological records have incorporated, under new
methodological approaches, one of the richest historical
testimonies: the ancient coins from southern Iberian Peninsula
and north-western Africa.7
Phoenician-Punic influence in coin design
The usefulness of Phoenician-Punic influenced coin
iconographies in western Mauretania must be seen from a
threefold viewpoint: civic, territorial and self-defining. Thus,
coins minted in this region between the 3rd and 1st centuries
bc may be interpreted as a book put into images which
belatedly reproduce the Phoenicians’ and Greeks’ perception of
the Mediterranean Far West. This ranges from the first
references by Homer and Hesiod, and subsequent references by
Greek-Sicilian poets such as Stesichorus of Himera,8 to the later
and decisive contributions in Hellenistic-Roman times such as
Eratosthenes, Posidonius, Strabo and Pliny, among others. This
survey does not omit Peripletic literature: it is also important to
highlight the peripluses of Pseudo-Scylax and Hanno, etc.9
Firstly, these literary images from the Far West were alien
to the inhabitants of these territories, but – as confirmed by the
coins of the governing aristocracies in these towns and
especially of the Mauretanian monarchy – they assumed and
re-elaborated these geographical myths.10 With such an aim,
they made use of ancient iconographies but also introduced
new designs. Previous studies have particularly looked for
coincidences. I will also emphasize the existing differences put
Coins, Cities and Territories
The Imaginary Far West and South Iberian and North African Punic Coins1
Bartolomé Mora Serrano
Plate 1 ‘Circ ulo del Estrec ho’ (Círcle
of the Strait s) and its coinage
©B. Mora

22 | Money, Trade and Trade Routes i n Pre-Islam ic North Afri ca
Mora Serrano
forward by some outstanding and striking absences. In my
opinion, the abovementioned points suggest the possibility of
looking for a political and ideological justification regarding
the unquestionable inf luences of the Hispanic side of the
‘Circulo del Estrecho’ (particularly of Gadir) on the coins from
western Mauretania.
I certainly believe that Phoenician-Punic-influenced
iconographies from the Far West reflect the existence of old
myths related to ecumenical limits. However, at the same time,
these populations were in a marginal situation in relation to
the central Mediterranean. This peripheral situation is
enforced by the belated and limited diffusion of civic coins,
which was fostered by the restrictive monetary policy of
Carthage in this region until the end of the 3rd centur y bc,11
with only one important exception: Gadir. The coinage of this
city demonstrates the town’s interest in highlighting the
territorial and self-defining role of the old God of Tyre,
responsible for the colonization of the Far West, then
administered by Gadir. In short, it reflects Gadir’s intended
cultural and economic hegemony over the region.12
Th e m on eta r y la ng uag e o f Ga di r
The coins of Gadir makes use of Greek monetar y language,
which exemplifies the mythic image of the region shared by
both Phoenicians and Greeks. Gaditanus Melqart is shown as
Heracles by means of an iconography created in Cyprus and
perfected in Sicily.13
This area plays a key role in the development of the
monetary iconography of Melqart-Heracles and it is not
surprising that we find the main parallels in the coins of Solus
minted from the beginning of the 4th century bc, and also in
tetradrachms minted by Car thage in Sicily.14 However, when
the city mints silver coins in the second half of the 3rd centur y
bc, besides adding the place name and the formula of issue, it
introduces a new element to the type of Melqart-Heracles from
Gadir: a club or clava. It is a well-known attribute of this deity
but only in Gadir is it combined with the image of the beardless
god and also carries the lion-skin. Thus the uniqueness of these
coins is ensured, and by extension the city itself.
The head of Melqart-Heracles – in lion’s scalp and with tuna
fish – is combined with an interesting type: the facing head of
Helios (Phoenician Šamaš) which, under Greek interpretation
(Pl. 2), refers to the travel completed by Heracles on Helios’
golden bowl.15 That is how Stesichorus (frag. 184–185) and
Pherecydes (frag. 1–13, 17) recount it as a result of that new
image of the Mediterranean Far West, which is on the limits of
the known earth but nonetheless integrated within the
oikumene.
This iconography is a clear geographical reference to the
dominions of the Gaditanus god – the western territory where
the sun sets. It is found in Sicily (Panormus - sys), particularly
in beautiful coins showing the shape of a star with a human
face occupying its central part (Pl. 3).16 However, it is further
west where new and more numerous references to this
iconography are found in the earliest coins from Gadir, dating
back to the 3rd century bc. Nevertheless, these types alluding
to the west where the Sun sets, also seem to have their own
personality and meaning, which is independent from the
Melqart-Heracles image, used in coins of the Straits area
throughout the 2nd and 1st centuries bc. The most evident
testimony is provided by the coins from Malaca (present-day
Málaga) and Baria (present-day Villaricos, Almería). These
cities, the only two Hispanic-Punic mints located on the coasts
of southern Spain, made no use of the already widespread
Melqart-Heracles iconography (Mora Serrano, 2007: 429).17
Furthermore, the same iconographic motif was represented in
some enigmatic silver denominations with no inscription
which are likely to have been minted in the southern Iberian
Peninsula within the context of the Second Punic War (CNH
77.4; Campo and Mora, 1995b: 110). The male, bearded deity,
wearing an oriental crown, is combined with a little head
surrounded by light rays on the reverse (Pl. 4), wh ich i s
undoubtedly the same representation of Helios-Šamaš found
on the reverse of the earliest bronze Malaca coins (ibid.:
107–19, pl.3.3). This is a relevant piece of information to expand
upon later, but now I would like to emphasize the appearance
on the obverse of the first issue of Malaca of Egyptian
iconography – very possibly representing the Baal of the city –
as can be deduced from the presence of the double crown or
pschent. Malaca’s craftsmen follow the archaic fashion of
oriental inspiration, and especially Egyptian styles which are
reworked by Punic artisans.18 It should also be noted that
although it is a civic coinage, it seems likely that the abundant
minting should be linked to the presence of Carthaginian
troops in the region that would take advantage of the port and
its good connection with the valley of Guadalquivir, at least
from 212–211/209 bc. when it seems that these territories
became a strategic position for the Carthaginian army.19
The inf luence of the coins of Gadir in the Straits region,
Iberia and northern Africa must also be tackled. This influence
is unquestionable20 and can be observed both in the diffusion of
town epigraphic formulae preceding place names21 (mb’l - Lkš/
Lixus and mb’l – tyng’/Tingi) and in the influence of the
composition schemes of coin reverses. On several occasions
Plate 2 Gad ir (Alfaro IV.2) from Cayón auc t. 2002 no. 38 8 © Áureo&Calicó Plate 3 Pan ormo-sys (SNG Cop. 679) C NG 78 2008 © Class ical Numismatic
Group, Inc., http://www.cngcoins.com
Plate 4 AR obol from southern Spain (CNH 77.4) (size 2:1) © B. Mora

Money, Trade and Trade Rou tes in Pre-Isl amic Nort h Africa | 23
Coins, Cities and Territories
though – as observed in Tingi (Pl. 5) – both tuna fishes are
substituted by t wo wheat ears. The same can be seen in the
designs by relevant mints in the southern Iberian Peninsula
subjected to strong cultural and ethnic Phoenician-Punic
influence (Domínguez Monedero, 2000: 64–5).
However, there are also important absences in need of a
convincing explanation such as the absence of Gadir’s obverse
type, showing Melqart-Heracles wearing a lion’s scalp, which
remains a widely-known image within the region. This is not
only due to its presence on coins whose identification in
Mauretanian coins turns out to be as scarce as it is problematic.
Prior to the widely-known coins by Juba II, the clearest
representation of t his divinit y is found in Numidian coins f rom
Hippo Regius, although its iconography differs widely from
Gadir’s.22 This deity has also recently been described on the
obverse of coins of Zilil. However, most researchers identif y a
classic representation of Hermes/Mercury on the basis of the
caduceus in front of the head.23 The deficient execution of these
coins, together with the scarcit y of well-conserved coins,
remains a serious obstacle for this new identification. The same
occurs with that recently proposed for the obverse head on the
coins of Rusaddir (present-day Melilla) (López Pardo, 2006:
175–6). The bad conservation of these coins only enables
researchers to relate them to representations from Tingi and
other mints in western Mauretania, identifying the image as
Baal-Melqart, an unknown local divinity or, more recently, a
royal portrait, possibly that of Bocchus I (Manfredi, 1995: 182;
Alexandropoulos, 2000: 199–200).
Two interesting observations can be drawn from the
previous comments.
1) The scarcity or absence of the adoption of Gadir’s Melqart-
Heracles model in civic and royal coins in western Mauretania.
It should be noted however that this absence has no direct
relation to the existence of the worship of Melqart, widespread
in these Far West territories.24
2) Closely related to point 1, there is a difficulty in identifying
Melqart-Heracles or other divinities of the Phoenician-Punic
pantheon. Identification is therefore sometimes justified on the
basis of the existence of a strong local component which
consciously impregnates many of the anthropomorphic
representations found in western Mauretanian coins.25 This
contrasts with the more canonized models found in mints west
of the Moulouya River.26
Gadir and L ixus: the iconogra phy of altars and temp les
This singularity or localism, which is particularly projected on
certain monetary iconographies in these regions due to the
infrequency of type or to the novelty of their combinations, can
be observed in the coins of Lixus. The importance and
antiquity of the Phoenician founding of Lixus is well
documented in texts (the capital city of the Kolpos emporikos,
‘the Gulf of Commerce’, mentioned by Strabo, Geographica,
17.3, 2). It does however need confirmation which can only be
provided by archaeological excavation. The earliest works in
the archaeological site date back to the 1950s, with Spanish and
French missions. These works are continued nowadays by a
Spanish-Moroccan archaeological team which is currently
obtaining excellent results.27
As already pointed out, the absence of Gadir’s Melqart-
Heracles iconography in the coins of Lixus is very significant.
This is also striking for many researchers,28 especially if we
bear in mind the close relation between this North A frican
emporium and Gadir. This relat ionship became closer within
the context of the great developments undergone by fishing
and pickling industries in the Hispanic-Phoenician town and
its surroundings from the 6th–5th centuries bc.29 In literary
sources, a classic example of this is the intended symmetry
between Gadir and Lixus situated on the 41' meridian, which
reproduces the Pillars of Hercules westwards. Referred to by
Eratosthenes’s Geographica,30 among some other passages
referring to the great age of the sanctuary of Hercules, its
origin is to be found in the re-elaborations of ancient mythic-
geographical tales which took place in Hellenistic times. This
last was also fostered by the attempt of local aristocracies to
rival neighbouring cities’ aristocracies in antiquity and
prestige.31 Undoubtedly, numismatic iconography is a suitable
field to spread this kind of message, as can be observed within
a later context of the Romanization of Hispanic-Punic and
Punic-Mauretanian coin series.32
In spite of having separated the identification with Melqart-
Heracles from the enigmatic identity of the characters
portrayed on the obverse of the coins of Lixus, whose parallels
in form with the coins of Malaca have supported an unlikely
identification with Chusor/Khotar (Hephaestus-Vulcan),33 the
coins of Lixus show the clearest allusion to Herculean myths in
this region. However, this allusion is singular, since it
represents a naiskos or altar devoted to its worship (Pl. 6).34
Unquestionably, this image is related to literary references to
the Melqart altar located in Lixus’ vicinit y – an old tradition
collected and reported by Strabo (17.3, 3). In this and the
subsequent, more explicit passage by Pliny (Naturalis Hi storia,
5.2–4) there is a reference to the existence of an altar (bomos/
ara) located on the outskirts of Lixus, in an islet located in the
estuary of the Loukkos River. Therefore, it differs from the
sanctuary of this divinity within the city walls, in the
monumental quarter, which must be identified with the
famous delubrum Herculis.35
These tales must have been well enough known among the
ruling classes in Lixus at least since the second half of the 2nd
century bc. This is because they were materially, culturally and
Plate 6 Lix us (Mazard 640) f rom Triton XI 2008 © CN G
Plate 5 Tin gi (SNG Cop. 721) © B. Mora

24 | Money, Trade and Trade Routes i n Pre-Islam ic North Afri ca
Mora Serrano
in mythic-geographical literature connecting the extreme of
the oikumene to fantastic events and to the riches and fertility
of these territories.42
What images then do they use? Common topics, of course.
There are no clear references to the items we know through
archaeology and literary sources (e.g., Hanno’s long Periplus)43
such as furs, gold, ivory, wild animals, precious timbers, etc.
These elements have been defined as exotic riches whose
image is projected into literary references after the Roman
conquest of Mauretania.44 On the other hand, the craftsmen
producing Mauretanian coins were subject to the technical and
composition-space limitations which characterize this kind of
work.45 Apart from some already mentioned exceptions, these
designs are usually inspired by common iconographic
resources and the craftsmen compose an image discourse at
the service of the governing authorities.46 Thus, they make use
of old types such as the tuna fish – an antique symbol of sea
wealth in Greek iconography of the Archaic and Classic
periods. Therefore, the tuna fish should not always be
associated with Melqart or pickling activities either. However,
it is true that in the Phoenician-Punic Far West, and
particularly in Gadir, the image of the Phoenician god is closely
related to the protection and indirect control of fishing and
related industries by means of the well-k nown western-
Phoenician pickling products (Pl. 9), whose consumption in
Athens, Olympia and Corinth were reported by literary sources
and are found in the archaeological record.47
However, most of these images of the riches of the Far West
are of an agricultural nature and so wheat and barley ears play
an important role in design. As with the tuna fish, this is an
iconographic type very widespread among ancient coins,
especially in Greek and Punic coins from the central
Mediterranean regions. This can be seen from the well-known
Greek models of Metapontum48 to those developed in
Carthaginian coins as a reflection of Carthage’s cereal policy. It
is rather striking that these types gathered a territorial
meaning based on their use in coins in the Libyan revolt and
especially on the reverses of the city of Iol (Pl. 10).49 Thus, it is
important to point out the antiquity of the coins from this old
African capital city (the future Caesarea). The appearance of
new coin finds in well-dated hoards or archaeological contexts
literarily open-minded to the Mediterranean Hellenistic
Koine36 which firstly favoured their early and intense contact
with Gadir and then with the presence of Romans and Italics in
the Straits region. Therefore, this literary culture is likely to
have inspired directly this minting activity, which, due to the
neo-Punic and Latin epigraphy, is believed to have taken place
in the second half of the 1st century bc.37
The Lixus altar occurs rather infrequently in the
iconography of the Phoenician-Punic coins of the Straits area.
However, it finds its main parallel in the Hispanic coins from
Lascuta.38 Here, the relation to Gadir’s Melqart-Heracles
worship manifests itself in the representation of two altars
linked to the image of the Phoenician god wearing a lion’s scalp
and carrying a club on the coin’s obverse (Pls 7– 8).39 The fact
that these types appear in a traditional Hispanic Libyan-
Phoenician mint has numerous implications when it comes to
evaluating the existence of an ethnic or, at least, cultural North
African Punic component in the populations of Phoenician
origin which differs from that reported.40 The Hispanic
testimonies commented on so far show an early inclusion of
worship objects into coin design in the ‘Círculo del Estrecho’.
This reaches its climax in coins from the 1st century bc and the
beginning of the following century with the presence of
temples in Malaca, Abdera (present-day Adra, Almería) and,
later, in Gades.41 The altar on the coins of Lixus fits into this
iconographic environment, although, as commented
previously, it shows a strong local personality.
Images of th e Far West
In spite of the evident contact and influence on coin
iconography in the Straits area, there are also clear differences,
and it is on this point that I shall focus attention next. The
singularity of coin types from western Mauretania should not
be explained by reasons of ‘Africanism’ or ‘indigenism’. I
certainly believe that it is more appropriate to talk about the
existence of ancient and new types articulated with local and
regional intention. These iconographies are also considered to
reflect an antique mythology of the Phoenician-Punic Far West.
However, – unlike the Hispanic population – Phoenician-Punic
communities select those most closely-related to their territory.
They therefore link an image to the old traditions reproduced
Plate 8 La scuta (CNH 126.3) from I VDJ no. 2043 © Instituto Vale ncia de Don
Juan (Madrid)
Plate 9 Gad ir (Alfaro V.1) from Cayón auct . 2002 no. 416 © Áureo&Cali có Plate 10 Io l (SNG Cop. 679) from CNG 8056 44 © Classical N umismatic Group,
Inc., http://www.cngcoins.co m
Plate 7 La scuta (CNH 126.2) from IV DJ no. 2042 © Institut o Valencia d e Don
Juan (Madrid)

Money, Trade and Trade Rou tes in Pre-Isl amic Nort h Africa | 25
Coins, Cities and Territories
bringing forward their chronology up to late 3rd century bc,
within the same chronological environment as Numidian
coins.50
In spite of being a less frequent type, though preserving the
same significance, there is the question of how the presence of
the bunch of grapes should be interpreted. It is also an old trope
related to the riches and fertility of a particular territory. The
clearest example of this can be found in the Bible (Numbers
13.24) with the well-k nown bunch of grapes sent to Moses from
the Valley of Eshcol (symbolizing the fertility and riches in the
Promised Land), an image which was to be renewed later on
coins from the two Jewish revolts against Rome (Pl. 11).51 Once
we have arrived at this point, we now face again the possibility
of an ‘economic’ viewpoint of t hese types, assuming an ancient
wine production in the region. Although the archaeological
evidence is insufficient, the representation of bunches of
grapes in coins is used to prove52 or to look for other
explanations 53 in which it is considered that in this case
bunches of grapes may be explained as the result of a complex
set of traditions including cultural customs and traditions
derived from mythic-geographical literature. This justification
is complex, but we should recall the existence of place names in
the region such as Arambys (Hanno’s Periplus, 5) and
Ampelusia (Pomponius Mela, De Chorographia, 1.5), meaning
‘Mount of Grapes/Vines’, which is identified with Cape Spartel.
In addition there is an ancient belief relating Dionysus to these
territories and the v ine culture developed by holy Ethiopians to
serve the Olympic banquets mentioned in the Iliad (I.423–25)
and the Odyssey (I.22–26).54
These iconographies become territorial images and gather
in the coins of western Mauretania, both in civic and
Mauretanian royal coins.55 When did this happen? The
identification and interpretation of iconographies in ancient
coins in general and in Mauretanian coins in particular faces
an important obstacle. The inaccuracy surrounding many pre-
imperial series is problematic and, as previously raised in
Hispanic-Punic numismatics,56 so is the fact that the same coin
may be dated with a range of more than a centur y according to
the supporters of a high or a low chronology. This fact does not
affect type interpretation to a relevant extent, but it does
inf luence research on type origin and subsequent diffusion.
The fact that the coins of Lixus are the ones likely to have
included and spread these types (tuna fish, wheat ears and
bunches of grapes) turns out to be interesting. However, so far
only the chronology of the second quarter of the 2nd century bc
has been ascertained (Ancient Mauritanian Period I, c.
200/175–150 bc) for denominations combining a male head
with exotic tiara and long cord on the obverse, with a bunch of
grapes f lanked by the neo-Punic legend mb’l/lkš (Pl. 12).57 In
the absence of further well-dated finds, traditional studies on
types and style, metrology and metallography will help to
identify the remainder of the coin issues in this important
mint.58 In this sense, it will be impor tant to know if the Lixus
mint begins with divisions of the unit, which are to be minted
later on as well. A nother remark should be made regarding the
variety of combinations shown by the Lixus coinage (also valid
for other mints such as Tingi) in the sense of an ‘overall
reading’ of the iconographies of a particular mint in successive
issues. The local nature of these coins and the prolonged period
during which coins are used as currency enabled users a
continuous and rich reading of these iconographic programs.59
Tuna fish, and especially bunches of grapes and wheat ears,
predominate in the mints on the Atlantic coast of present-day
Morocco, but their presence also extends to other
Mediterranean enclaves,60 among which Rusaddir (present-day
Melilla) is to be highlighted. The reverse composition of these
coins (in its two variants)61 is considered to show the reception,
in this eastern region, of the same riches-related topics
commented on so far. The tendency to interpret the types of
Rusaddir through economic reasons occurs again.62 This is in
spite of the fact that the possible agricultural advantage which
could be obtained from the city surroundings must be limited
and, so far, is only k nown through references from subsequent
years. On the contrary, monetary iconography contributes
nothing to the obvious exploitation of sea resources, and
perhaps also to city-controlled miners.63 Its possible relation to
the commercial route drawn by the Moulouya River should not
be ruled out, since the establishment of the city is essentially
due to its strategic coastal position.64 This is justified in the
sense of the city’s Phoenician name rs’dr: Rus (‘cape’) –addir
(‘powerful’), and its Greek versions, A kros from Pseudo-Scylax
(Periplus, §111), and possibly also Strabo’s Metagonion (17, 3, 6).
This is clearly related to the main geographical feature of the
Cape Tres Focas.65
Multiple interpretations have also been contributed to the
bee design on Rusaddir reverse designs (Pl. 13), which
undoubtedly is the most exotic among those commented upon
here. The handiest interpretation relates it to regional
agriculture,66 but there are also some other more suggestive
proposals, such the idea of a relation to some goddess such as
Artemis or Astarte (Fernández Uriel, 2004: 156– 62). This could
be supported by the discovery of a sanctuary of this Phoenician
deity in Melilla and by the re-interpretation of ‘Addir’ as an
epithet related to different goddesses of the Punic pantheon
such as Astarte, Isis and Tanit (López Pardo, 2006a: 170,
176–9). The inclusion of the bee may be interpreted here – as in
Plate 11 Bar Kochb a War (Hendin 729) Amph ora © D. Hendin Plate 12 Lixu s (SNG Cop. 695) from IVDJ no. 20 09 © Instituto Valenc ia de Don
Juan (Madrid)
Plate 13 R usa dd ir ( SNG Co p. 7 14v. ) fr om IVD J no . 19 93 © In st itu to V ale nc ia d e
Don Juan (Madrid)

26 | Money, Trade and Trade Route s in Pre-Isla mic North Afr ica
Mora Serrano
I consider that both the star and the mqm šmš inscription
(‘place of the sunset’)71 generically allude to the Far West and
therefore are also applicable to western North Africa, where
they acquire a special significance. This does not prevent the
design idea being claimed by other localities in the Circle of the
Straits, as in the case of Malaca72 or Lixus. Indeed as I have
pointed out this is so for the solar disc at the top of the altar or
chapel (shown by Alexandropolous, 2000: 340). This can even
be noted in the place name Lkš, since its meaning could be
related to the idea of remote, extreme places dominated by the
Sun.73 If this interpretation is accepted as a working hypothesis,
one of the most relevant issues in the study of mqm šmš coins -
the location of its mint74 – would now occupy a secondary
position in relation to the justification of the existence of these
singular types and inscriptions.
These coins, both those known as autonomous and those
referring to Mauretanian monarchs (Bocchus I, Bocchus II and
Juba II), show sophisticated designs. Therefore, my argument
is based on two main relevant points:
1) an insistance on the absence of references to Melqart;
2) the coins show an iconographic and epigraphic synthesis
with a clear pan-Mauretanian purpose.
Therefore, from this viewpoint, I believe that proposing the
attribution issues to the Mauretanian monarchy is very
interesting (Alexandropoulos, 2000: 195, 202–3). From a
chronological viewpoint, this dating is indirectly supported, as
already noted, by the discover y of a coin of Rusaddir in
contexts corresponding to the late 2nd century bc and by the
evident similarities among the reverses of both coins.75
Thus, together with well-known types alluding to mythic
territorial riches such as the wheat ear and the bunch of grapes,
other types are now added which locate it with greater
accuracy. This can be seen in the double allusion to Helios-
Šamaš through the inclusion of a star at the centre of the design
and the neo-Punic inscription mqm šmš below it (Pl. 15). A s
already pointed out, aside from the numerous transcriptions
proposed for the whole inscription (mqm šmš)76 it is a ‘non-
existent place name’ (López Pardo, 2006a: 210) and requires a
knowledge of the relationship of Šamaš with the Far West.77 In
this case, one or several mints in the service of the Mauretanian
monarchy could be in charge of minting these abundant coins
which mark, with the reign of Bocchus I (c. 118–80 bc), the
expansion of the use of local coinages in these territories.78
Ocean iconography
The other piece of iconography used in the design of these
coins which alludes to the Far West is the ocean. But, how is
this represented? Curiously this is represented in two forms,
both in an archaic image and a modern one. The former
appears on royal coin reverses in the shape of a zigzag79 or
meander80 pattern which refers to no particular river but to the
ancient image of the river-ocean which borders these lands to
the case of the wheat ear and the bunch of grapes – as a generic
allusion to the riches and fertility of these African Far West
territories.67
Apart from the complex interpretation of these Rusaddir
reverse types, I am also interested in their interesting
compositional scheme. The central motif (bee) is flanked by
two other motifs (two wheat ears or bunch of grapes and wheat
ear). This tripartite composit ion, whose origin is likely to be in
a Carthaginian coin reverse design showing three wheat ears,
and is also found in Iol’s reverse designs.68 This finds its closest
parallel in the coins of Timici where a bunch of grapes is
flanked by two palm leaves or maybe wheat ears.69 This can
however especially be seen in the troublesome mqm šmš coins,
which will be examined below. The bee is replaced in these
coins by a star with a bunch of grapes and a wheat ear, and
sometimes also a meander pattern. The attribution of the first
issues of this coin to Bocchus I (c. 180–80 bc)
(Alexandropoulos, 2000: 196–7, 406), together with the find of
a Rusaddir coin in an archaeolog ical context dating back to the
second half of the 2nd century bc (Villaverde Vega, 2004:
1863), leads us to suppose that the coins are contemporary. At
the same time, this raises the possibility that the Rusaddir mint
adopted some types and designs they identified themselves
with, and then substituted the star with the bee. This is another
illustrative example of the strong personality of the
Mauretanian numismatic types.
New designs f rom old territorial image s and mqm šmš
However, other new well-known topics from ancient images
used in regional coins – apart from these fertility-related topics
from the Far West – are added to coin designs later, but in new
forms. I refer in particular to the Helios (Šamaš) design which
uses both iconography and epigraphy. It should be taken into
account that this design was found in Malaca in the 1st centur y
bc in some denominations showing the neo-Punic inscription
šmš under a tetrastyle temple (Campo-Mora 1995a: 120–1; Mora
Serrano, 2007: 429) (Pl. 14). It is difficult to understand the
nature of this east–west relationship in the monetary types of
Malaca, but I think it is justified with Malaca’s view of itself as a
Far West place, as with other places in the region. Does this
imply close contact between this city and more western
territories? Recalling the oldest of Malaca’s emissions with
solar ty pes, the astral symbols and the inscription šmš that is
now under discussion, these have interesting parallels in North
African coins. But there is no evidence of a direct influence
between the coin-dies of Malaca and other North African
mints, although the parallels – though not direct – are oriented
towards western Mauretania, especially Lixus and mqm šmš.
Along with other numismatic and archaeological evidence, we
can recall the reference of Strabo (3.4.2) in which he describes
Malaca as a market for the nomadic people (or Numidian) from
the opposite coast.70
Plate 15 Mqm šm š (SN G C op. 705 -70 6) © B. Mo ra
Plate 14 Mala ca (CNH 101.16) from Cayón 20 02 no. 481 © Áureo&Ca licó

Money, Trade and Trade Rou tes in Pre-Isl amic Nort h Africa | 27
Coins, Cities and Territories
wheat ear and tuna fish as their central motif (Pl. 19).88
Looking back, most of the coin types from the cities of the
Phoenician-Punic tradition in the region of the Straits, can be
explained according to civic identity. However, this local
reading should not be interpreted as a localism because, when
the vast majority of these coinages were produced – 2nd–1st
centuries bc – the Roman hegemony in the region had
important consequences for these cities, transforming the
socio-economic and political structures and, more slowly, their
cultural structure in its broadest sense. An important aspect of
these changes is the development of commercial channels and,
consequently, the intensification of inter-regional contacts,
which in my opinion favours a supra-political reading for a
common iconography of these territories of the Far West.
My work is intended to demonstrate the geographical, self-
defining and non-ethnic interpretation of the coins of the
Straits area and especially of those from western Mauretania.
Unquestionably, there are shared myths and a common
substrate, but the differences bet ween both territories also
turns out to be rather significant. With the gradual economic
and political integration of Mauretania into the firstly
Hellenistic and subsequently Hellenistic-Roman
Mediterranean oikumene (since the late 3rd century bc), a
common cultural koine is constructed. This fixes old clichés
and mythic images linked to extreme spaces since very ancient
times. The ‘canonization’ of these traditions in Hellenistic
times ends up becoming a part of the idiosyncrasy of certain
peoples – those from western Mauretania in this case - who
associate with one another by means of symbols and myths
belonging to a legendary past constituting their identity.
Notes
1 Research project: HUM 343; PO6-HUM-01575; HUM2007-63419.
I would like to t hank G. Cruz f or interesting s uggestions and A .
Dowler (BM) for i mproving the E nglish version of t his paper.
2 In the case of th e Maghreb, these p rojects were promote d through
the creat ion of internationa l Hispanic-Moro ccan resear ch teams.
Excavat ion projects foc used on the ancie nt towns of Lix us, Tingi,
Tamuda (Beltrá n and Habibi, 2008; Ber nal, Raiss ouni et al., 2008),
Volubilis, Tha musida and Gilda are goo d examples of thi s.
3 Cf. Tarrade ll (1965), on classic work s on this issue deve loped by
Blázquez (1961) and Ponsich (1975). However, more recent views
sh oul d a ls o be re por te d, s uc h as th at o f Ni ve au d e Vi ll ed ar y (2 001).
Neverthe less, there are s carce historiog raphical ana lyzes on the
diff usive historica l and archaeolog ical context in wh ich this ter m
was create d (López Pardo, 2002: 21 –6; Aranegu i, 2008: 126–31;
Ramos, Pér ez Rodríguez et al., 2008: 116– 21).
4 The number of bibliograph ic references on th is topic has grown
considerably within the last few years, although under widely-
diffe ring perspe ctives (Gozalbes C ravioto, 2008: 76– 91;
En -N ac hio ui , 19 96 –7 : 78 5– 8; S eb aï, 20 05).
5 Gago, 1873: 351–64 , the author of thi s chapter, recall s the fact that
some of these te rritories were pa rt of the region of H ispania in
Roman times.
6 Applyin g to the West the well-k nown topic of monetary al liances
previousl y assayed in the ma in study focuse d on North Afr ican
the west (Pl. 15).81 However, in the choice of this archaic type,
the image the inhabitants of this region had of the meandering
streams of the large rivers flowing into the Atlantic Ocean
(large towns are located on the banks of the Sebou and
Loukkos) should not be dismissed. This justifies Pliny’s (Nat.,
5.2–4) allusion to the dragon which watched over the Garden of
the Hesperides, whose appearance in the coins of Tamuda,
flanked by two wheat ears (Pl. 16),82 strengthens this territorial
interpretation. At the same time, as we have already
commented in the case of Rusaddir, Tamuda coin reverses
show clear dependence on the designs made widespread by šmš
coins.
The second reference to the Ocean is much more
widespread and is found in the ‘autonomous’ series of coins.
(Pl. 17). On their reverse the image of the king is replaced by
the Ocean in a classical and high-quality representation. This
fits well into an exoceanic trend developed since the mid-2nd
century bc and of which Posidonius’ book on the Ocean is an
excellent example.83 This iconographic trend explains the
presence of the Ocean in the pre-imperial coins of Tingis and
also later in Augustan times, which can be related to the šmš
types.84 They can also be related indirectly to the coins of Gades
through the acrostilolium present in the reverse of the
sestertius and dupondius coins minted in the name of
Agrippa.85 The more explicit incorporation of Ocean into
Gaditanus Hercules iconography is provided by Hadrian’s
aureus (Pl. 18).86
Conclusions
These iconographies got progressively Romanized, but the
process by which they became an iconographic trope in the
Straits area can be observed in the transition to the Roman age.
The first coin of Julia Traducta (Algeciras?), founded in
Augustan times with inhabitants from Tingis and Zilis,
illustrates this process neatly. Combined with the obverse
representations of Gaius and Lucius, the reverses are occupied
by well-known iconographies from the region of the Circle of
the Straits such as the bunch of grapes, wheat ear and tuna
fish.87 Although debatable, a very late echo of these monetary
types with clear territorial allusions is probably found in
Islamic transitional coins minted in this region, which, apart
from the representation of a star on the gold coins, show a
Plate 16 Tamuda (SNG Cop. 718 v.) from IVDJ
no. 1994 © Ins tituto Valencia de Do n Juan
(Madrid)
Plate 17 Mqm šmš (SN G Co p. 7 11) f rom Tri to n au ct . V 592
2002 © Clas sical Numismat ic Group, Inc., ht tp://www.
cngcoins.com
Plate 19 Isl amic coin from Nor th Africa or Al-An dalus (Codera pl. I I.9)
© F. Codera (1879)
Plate 18 AV Hadria nus (RIC II 125 ) from CNG
© Classic al Numismatic Gro up, Inc., http ://
www.cngcoins.com

28 | Money, Trade and Trade Routes i n Pre-Islam ic North Afri ca
Mora Serrano
numismatics: Numismatique de l’Ancienne Afr ique by L . M ül ler
(Mora Ser rano, 1994: 68).
7 A s shown up in a rece nt overall view (Cal legarin, 2008).
8 The slow evolut ion of their percept ion culmin ates with Ptolemy
from the v iewpoint of the h istory of ancie nt geography (cf. Janni,
1997: 37).
9 It is true t hat no accurate conclusion s can be drawn f rom the firs t
references regarding the relationship existing between western
mytholog y and Heracles, t he Garden of the Hespe rides, the
Sunset, t he Ocean and the fe rtilit y associated wit h limina l spaces,
due to incomplete data, a mong other reasons. It s relationship to
saili ng and Phoenicia n-Punic and Gre ek environme nts however
seems rather clear (López Pardo, 2008).
10 A lth ou gh i t is of too lat e a d at e to be i nc lud ed in t h is d is cou rs e, th e
most evident e xample of all th is is found in Juba II (cf. Coltel loni-
Trannoy, 1997; Alexa ndropoulos, 2000: 22 2–30).
11 This topic wa s tackled in dep th by L. I. Manf redi (2003: 422–3 and
2006: 264– 71).
12 This especially conditions Gadir’s political-economical features in
re la tio n t o Ca rt ha ge (Cha ve s Tr is tá n, 2 009 : 33 2– 40). Th e
Ca rt ha gi ni an def ea t in Ib er ia and th e su bs equ en t pa ct sig ne d by
the inh abitants of Gadir w ith Rome gave rise to a new st age in
wh ic h, t og eth er wi th i ts wel l- kn ow n ec ono mi c ba ck gr ou nd,
ideological s trategies aime d at reinventing Gad ir’s identity wer e
put into pract ice, as reported b y Strabo (Cruz And reotti, 2007: 64).
13 Cf. Bonnet, 1988: 414– 15 and Hermar y, 1992: 131. Melqart’s c lassic
as pe ct mus t b e re la ted to t he Gre ek el eme nt s as so ci ate d t o Me lqa rt
worship in Her akleion, alt hough the traditiona l, Phoenician
component of its wor ship still re mains (Ma rín Ceballo s, 2001: 323–
7).
14 Alfa roAsins, 1998: 37; Ma nfredi, 200 0: 13 and Jenkin s, 1978: 5–10.
15 As re por te d i n ot he r, l ate r wo rk s s uch as th at b y Ap ol lo dor us ’s
Bibliotheca, who tried to show a n archaic ver sion of these myth s
(Giovannelli-Jouanna, 2004: 194–5). This relationship of Gadir’s
coins with Helios-Sun is compatible with the sailing vocation of
the town’s pat ron god (Chaves Tristán, 20 09: 319).
16 Cf. Ma nfredi, 1995: 34 2–3, nos 43– 6) and Gandolfo, 1998: 349. The
reference s to coins in the dif ferent corpuse s used are not
exhaus tive but are aimed at i llustratin g a few representati ve
issues.
17 By re-re ading the ty pes in thi s mint and in the ne ighbouring
Tgl(y)t/Tagil it (present-day Tíjola, A lmería), the intended
re pr ese nt at ion of M el qar t- Her ac le s is now in ter pr et ed a s A st ar te -
Isis (Al faro Asins , 2003). Therefore, the iconog raphy of the
Hispan ic mint is on the most we stern limit of t he numismatic
represent ations of this godde ss (Manf redi, forthcom ing).
18 C f. Hölbl, 2004, 65.
19 At lea st cf. López Sánche z, 2010: 43–4.
20 Among recent work s analyzi ng this topic, the cont ributions by J.
Alexa ndropoulos (1988) stand out.This also t ackles other
import ant aspects suc h as metrology, draw ing special at tention to
weight sta ndards. Thus, Mau retanian c oins from Li xus, Tingi ,
Rusaddir, etc. a re subjected to a twofold i nfluence: that of
Numidia n coins (Syphax) and Gad ir’s coins bet ween the 2nd and
1st centu ries bc, weighing a round 12.5 g and dia m. 27mm
(Alexa ndropoulos, 2000: 194; Mora Se rrano, 2006: 46).
21 Manf redi, 1995: 86–7 ( Tingi); 90–1 (L ixus). Their reper cussion on
the rema ining coins i n the region is ane cdotal (cf. Manfred i, 1995:
138 – Thaga ste), although the g reatest diff usion of this epigr aphic
formula i s found in Gadir’s Hi spanic-Pu nic coins (Alf aro Asins,
1991: 115–16; Manfred i, 1995: 130–2). The date these coin s were
minted is not pr ecisely know n; however, proposed dates are nea r
the Bark id intervention i n Iberia, thu s reaffir ming their p olitical
autonomy (cf. Mora Serran o, 2007: 416–17, 427), in agreement wit h
the early a nd intense development of wes tern-Phoenici an urban
development in t he 6th centur y bc (Ferrer A lbelda and Garcí a
Fernández , 2007). A simil ar interpretat ion may be proposed for t he
early adoption of t hese civic for mulae in Lix us and Tingi – in t his
ca se as a n e xp re ss ion of t he ir c iv ic ide nt it y i n op pos it ion to the
Mauretanian monarchy.
22 It is repr esented with no lion’s head, t he club behind an d a star over
its head, thus s trengthen ing its astra l nature (see for example ,
SNGCop nos 672– 4; Manfre di, 1995: 172–3; Alex andropoulos,
2000: 312).
23 Ale xandropoulos , 2000: 337; Mazard, 1955: nos 627– 9; SNGCop
nos 743–5. S ome other authors prefer not to dec lare thems elves
regarding this issue: they recall the prevalence of the caduceus in
North A frican re ligious iconography (cf. for thi s view Manf redi,
1995: 185– 6).
24 Cf. Jourda in-Annequ in, 1992: 282–91 and Bon net, 1988: 186–8,
196–201.
25 T hi s id ea w as dev el ope d b y J. Maz ar d (19 60: 11 2–1 6), w hi le J .
Marion (1972: 65) added a Hispa nic shade highly pr aised in rece nt
studies ( Manfred i, 1995: 182–6 and A lexandropoulo s, 2000: 203).
26 This is a t raditional border b etween both Mau retanias wh ich has
its lim its in the east w ith the ‘region of Iol- Caesarea’.
27 A mong a vast bibliography whe re we find reasonable ove rviews
about these c oins, I must point out t he excavation repor ts
pu bli sh ed b y t he U ni ve rsi ty of V ale nc ia (Ar an eg ui , 20 05), wh ic h
are espe cially intere sting for the st udy of the coins of Li xus. The
lo ca tio n of th e Gu lf of C om me rce in Li xu s’ nei gh bou rh ood is not
un an im ou sly ag ree d u pon due to t ra ns mi ss ion er ro rs i n a nc ien t
so ur ces , b ut i t is th e mo st li kel y l oca ti on ( for th is arg u men t se e
López Pa rdo, 2004: 89–9 0).
28 In this s ense, it is not ful ly discarded , according to the weight of
archaeolog y and especi ally the Hercu lean literar y tradition
related to th e city (cf. Bonnet, 1992: 124– 5)..
29 Cf. Muñoz Vicente and Fr utos Reyes (2009) and Aranegu i
Rodríg uez and Rodrigo (2007).
30 Cf. Moulay Rchid, 1989: 328 –31; Jourdain-A nnequin, 1992: 268 –9.
31 Cf. López Pa rdo, 2000: 821–5. T he best example is s till Gadir/
Gades (Cruz A ndreotti, 200 7: 60, 386). The conti nuation of neo-
Punic epi graphy and the per sistent use or revi sion of ancient ty pes
in Roman-provincial Hispanic coins emphasize this point (Beltrán
Lloris , 2002: 179).
32 Whe re there is a combinat ion of civic identit y and connect ion to
the impe rial house (R ipollès, 2005a: 91; an d Amandr y, 2000).
Gadir is one of t he most signif icant cases: the p ortraits of Aug ustus
and his suc cessors, together w ith the allus ion to Balbo (López
Sánchez , 2003: 103–5), are associ ated with the anc ient protective
di vi ni ty of G ad ir (c f. Cha ve s Tr is tán , 2 009 : 34 6).
33 Man fredi, 1995: 186– 7; Alexandr opoulos, 2000: 339– 40; Botto and
Oggiano, 2003: 145– 6.
34 Manf redi’s (1996) well- documented study of t his monument,
whose genera l research li nes I assume, suppor ts the formal
identification of this representation as an Egyptian style votive
aedicula or edicule for wh ich parallel s from Cart hage-inf luenced
regions in t he central Med iterranean ca n be found. At the same
time, t his work also reca lls the exi stence of other source s of
inspir ation for coin ty pes such as the c arvin g of precious stones
and gold/silver work, b etter known t hrough Punic nu mismatics
from eas tern Mediterra nean regions (see Mora Ser rano, 2000: 158,
164).
35 Bui ldings H and, es pecially, F – accordi ng to M. Ponsich’s (1975)
names – ar e the best candidate s for identificat ion with the
Me lqa r t-H era cl es t em ple (se e al so Blá zq ue z, 1 988 : 53 1– 5, 537 –4 0;
López Pa rdo, 1992; Mierse, 2004: 570 –1).
36 For this view s ee Ghazi-Ben Ma ïssa (2005). Although its Hi spanic
origin i s likely, the diff usion of imitations of bl ack-varnished
dinner-services in western Mauretania is an interesting indicator,
together with the evolution of the index of shapes (see Bridoux,
2008: 621–4). In general , the study of ceram ic materials
(particularly amphoras) from Mauretanian archaeological sites is
essent ial to get to know the nat ure and evolution of the i ntegration
of these ter ritories into Medite rranean comme rcial circ uits
(Ca lle ga ri n, 20 08: 315 –8).
37 Cf. Ma zard, 1955, nos 639 –40 and Alex andropoulos, 20 00: 478–9.
The poss ibility of relat ing these coin s to the extraor dinary lab ours
pe rf or med by Jub a II in th is tow n ( hi s l ite ra ry er udi ti on i s w ide ly
k now n, as p oi nte d o ut b y Ro ll er (2 003 : 16 3– 82)) i s r at her
at tr ac ti ve. Th er efo re , it is u nq ue st ion abl e t hat Jub a I I to ok
ad va nta ge of t he tow n’s my th ic pas t i n re la ti on t o Me lq ar t-
Heracles (for fu rther view s see Jourdain-A nnequin, 1992: 290;
Roller, 2003: 133– 5, 154– 5; Araneg ui, 2008b: 126).
38 CNH 126,1–2; 126,3: we must add to t hese examples t he type of
Tagilit alr eady mentioned (SNGCop no. 750), related in thi s case to
Asta rte-Isis’ wor ship in Baria .
39 Cf. García-B ellido, 1987: 135–5 .
40 Apart from it s definition, one of t he main problems f aced by its
study is deter mining t he moment, or the diffe rent stages, at whic h
the sett lement of these people s took place: Punic or Second P unic
War times (see Dom ínguez Monedero, 2000: 67– 70; López Pardo

Money, Trade and Trade Rou tes in Pre-Isl amic Nort h Africa | 29
Coins, Cities and Territories
and Suárez Padilla, 2002).
41 Mierse, 1993: 40 –9. Chaves Trist án 2009: 346. Their i nterpretation
is not consiste nt. Without denying a p ossible allusion to t he new
imperial order, I think this is compatible with the allusion to the
old Heracleion.
42 Common topics in many cases related to Heracles, Helios or Ocean
in the my thic-geograph ical space shared by b oth Phoenicia ns and
Greeks, w ho were interested in t he exploitation of the n atural
resource s of these Far West terr itories (for examples of th is see
Jourdai n-Annequi n, 1992: 269–72; López Pa rdo, 2000: 11 and
2004: 86, 96).
43 The proble matic data and author ship of this work has b een
exhaustively analyzed (see González Ponce, 2009: 19–44).
However, I believe t his does not affe ct the general as pects I am
intereste d in, such as source s of wealth and the c haracteris tics of
commercial exchange in Atlantic Africa.
44 See Goza lbes Cravioto, 2008: 602– 6.
45 See G ozalbes and R ipollès, 2002: 15–16.
46 See Mora Serra no, 2000: 158, 160; 2007: 423.
47 Man fredi (1987); Mederos (2007) and López Cast ro (1997: 96–100)
all contr ibute literary r eferences and arc haeological and
numismat ic documentation .
48 That is, SNG A NS no. 602, from the late 3rd ce ntury bc.
49 See in part icular Man fredi, 1993: 200; 1993–1995: 247– 9 (on land).
50 Cf. Ma nf re di, fo rt hco mi ng. Co nte mp ora r y to Sy pha x c oi ns, it has
been sugge sted – for silver issue s from the Second Pu nic War –
th er e i s a p os sib le d ep end en ce o n t he m one ta ry po lic y o f t he
Numidia n kings (for this v iew see Manf redi, 1995: 179; Ripollès,
2008: 56– 7).
51 In a cle arer way in the Sec ond or Bar Kochba War: 132– 5 bc (e.g .
Hendin, 2001: n. 729 –30). See also Por ton, 1976: 173 and Goodma n,
2005: 166. This i mage of opulence (see Goor, 1966: 49) is moved to
A fr ica , a s r epo rt ed b y S tr abo (X V II , 3, 4), w ho ref er s to su ch h ea vy
bunches t hat two men were neces sary to car ry them.
52 Se e Marion, 1970: 110–1; Ale xandropoulos , 2000: 339; Hilali, 2008:
224–6.
53 T his is generall y the most extended inte rpretation for His panic-
Punic coi ns (for this view se e Chaves Tristán an d García Vargas,
1991: 1 40; Mor a Ser rano, 1993: 74– 5).
54 See Bia nchetti, 1991; López P ardo, 2004: 88, 95– 6; Gabard and
Rebuffart, 1990: 231–2.
55 Since the inte resting coin s attributed to t he western Numid ian
realm, p erhaps to Massin issa (see Mazard, 1955: nos 99 –100 and
Manf redi, 1995: 313 nos 31–32), date back to early 1s t century bc
(Alexa ndropoulos, 2000, 404). An adva nced chronology i s also
proposed for t he coins of Sala, who se reverses (for example ,
SNGCo nos 715 –716) reflect t he iconographic model cr eated in
Lixu s and, partic ularly, the mqm šmš issues.
56 Campo, 1994: 82– 4; Ripollès, 2005b: 196.
57 E .g. Mazard, 1955: no. 633; SNGCop no. 694; Ale xandropoulos ,
2000: no. 168 and Tarradel l-Font, 2005: 188–9. O ther simila r
examples , also includi ng the possibil ity of anepigraph ic coins with
the same t ypes are r eported in a highe r number of levels
corresp onding to Antique Mau ritanian 2 pha se (c. 150–30 bc)
58 See L. Callegarin in this issue.
59 Cf. Garcí a-Bellido, 1992: 241; Mora Se rrano, 2000: 161–2 and 2007 :
410, footnote 4.
60 I recogn ize here the presen ce of these ty pes as the mai n or
outstand ing part of a desig n and not as an accompany ing
secondar y type or eleme nt, as occurs, for e xample, with the bu nch
of gr ape s o n th e o bve rs es o f G unu gu /Gu ni gu m (s ee M az ar d, 1 955 :
no. 569).
61 Cf. SNG Cop nos 713–4.
62 For t his view see M arzard, 1960: 115; Man fredi, 1993: 200;
Gozalbe s Cravioto, 2004: 146. However, other aut hors are more
cautious and ge nerically a llude to fertil ity-related ty pes (for
example, Alexandropoulos, 2000: 200).
63 T he knowledge of Phoenici an-Punic Mel illa began w ith the
important necropolis in Cerro de San Lorenzo. Furthermore,
recent excav ations in other ar eas of this town , especially i n Plaza
de Arma s, confirm t he existence of a pick ling indust ry (see López
Pardo, 2006: 183; Ferná ndez Uriel et al., 2008: 10–3). On the ot her
hand, the e xploitation of iron and le ad mines in antique t imes has
also be en suggested (see Man fredi, 2006: 264).
64 It is a c onvenient stopover in th e Straits route due to its st rategic
location in t he Alboran Se a and its connect ion with Malaca , on the
Hispan ic coast (cf. Gozalbes Cr avioto, 1991: 112; Callegarin , 2008:
298, 302).
65 See Lipin ski, 2004: 418– 20 and López Pardo, 20 06: 169–74.
66 E.g. Maza rd, 1955: 177; Manfr edi, 1995: 182; Alexand ropoulos,
2000: 200, the lat ter two followi ng the interpr etation by
Fernández Ur iel, 1992: 328–9. A lthough assu med by some
resear chers (e.g. Fernández Urie l, 2004: 161), the relation ship
betwee n Rusaddir and some place na mes such as Meli ssa or
Melitta i n ancient source s which refer to Nort h Africa n coastal
locations a re rather unclea r (e.g. Hecateus, fr ag. 327 and Hanno’s
Periplus, 5, 8), since the neare st location may corre spond to Slyt (if
we admit its re construct ion via Selitta), to be found bet ween
former Zi lil and prese nt-day Asilah (see Ló pez Pardo, 2004: 89;
Lipinsk i, 2004: 450). Any way, Melitta/Mel issa is reporte d to refer
to other locat ions in the North A frican l ittoral (cf. Lipinsk i, 2004:
569). Furthermore, it sh ould not be fully di scarded that t he bee is
an al lu sio n to one of the fo rme r t ow n na me s, t hu s fo ll ow ing
widely-know n examples in Gre ek numismatics (see García-
Bellido, 1992: 241). However, the coin wou ld be the only remai ning
testimony. In spite of be ing rather forced, we m ay recall here t he
old proposal b y St. Gsell justi fying Siga’s re verse typ e with the
represent ation of Bacchus, as a pu n between the na me of the king
and that of t he Roman god (for this s ee Alexand ropoulos, 2000:
200).
67 Honey is also a s ymbol of abundance an d prosperity i n ancient
imager y (for examples see Vázquez Hoys , 1991: 65).
68 Reuse d in a coin of Tingi (SNGCop no s 734–737).
69 See Maza rd, 1955: no. 577 and Manf redi, 1995: 181. On the other
hand, its re lation to the ty pes attribute d to Camarata is obv ious
(SNGCop nos 676– 7) (see Alexa ndropoulos, 2000: 198). The head
on the obverse of t hese coins is con sidered to be a represe ntation of
a Maureta nian king, po ssibly Bocchus I, as s uggested also for
Tingi, Tamuda, Sa la and mqm šmš (Ale xandropoulos, 20 00: 196–
203). No findings p rove these earlie r chronologies, un like those
already ment ioned for Lixus a nd Rusaddir, or the identi fication of
the interesting re-striking of Timici over Ebusus (see Callegarín,
2008: 313– 4).
70 López Cas tro and Mora Ser rano 2002: 187–8.
71 Cf. Bonnet , 1989: 98.
72 For ex amples of these see L ópez Castro a nd Mora Serrano, 20 02:
187–8.
73 For th is theory s ee López Pardo, 2004: 86; Jou rdain-An nequin,
1992: 268.
74 It is a w idely discusse d topic. However, no agreement has b een
reached by re searchers yet. T he classic conne ction to Lixu s
(Man fredi, 1995: 88– 91 and 2006: 282) is opposed by a more
norther n and interior locat ion between Volubilis
(Alexa ndropoulos, 2000: 197–8) and Gi lda (Callega rin and
El-Har rif, 2000: 29–31). Among the a rguments us ed to support one
or another loc ation, the distr ibution of coin find s is very
im po rt ant . T hi s h igh l igh ts the sc ar ce p re se nce of t he šm š co in in
Lixu s and its surrou ndings. The public ation of new coin find
suggests g reater prudence when put ting forwa rd this arg ument
(cf. Callegar in, 2008: 314).
75 I n any case, it rem ains clear t hat the coins of Rus addir coins are
previous to t he reign of Bocc hus II (49–33 bc) as has b een
previously discussed.
76 M an y vi ew po in ts h av e be en pro po sed fo r th is in sc ri pt ion
followin g its interpretat ion as market, temple and eve n necropolis,
but all of the m agree in its re lation to the Far West (Ma nfredi, 1995,
89–90).
77 T his should logica lly also be appl ied to the Hispan ic Eastern
World, as in the iconog raphic study of one of its most
re pr ese nt at ive mon um ent s ( Ló pez Pa rdo , 20 06 b: 2 08 –10).
78 Cf. Ale xandropoulos , 2000: 203 and Callega rin, 2008: 311, 316.
79 Alexa ndropoulos, 200 0: 200, suggests the st ylized repr esentation
of a sun-ray.
80 Suggested by M anfredi, 1995: 187.
81 T hi s is a v er y ol d l ite ra ry im age , a s se en in H om er ic p oe ms, cl os ely
linke d to the Far West and the colon ial environ ment shared by
Greeks a nd Phoenicians (cf. Plácido, 2008: 37).
82 Cf. Mazzard , 1955: nos 583–4; SNGCo nos 7 18–19. See also LI MC
VII /1, 32 and pl. 22. 1
83 However, its popular ity and dif fusion can be fou nd in
A rte mi dor u s’ a nd Pol ybi us ’ w ri ti ngs qu ote d by St rab o (s ee Cr uz
Andreotti, 2007).

30 | Money, Trade and Trade Routes i n Pre-Islam ic North Afric a
Mora Serrano
Méditerranée, (Studia Phoenicia, 8), Leuven.
Bonnet, C. 1989. ‘Le dieu solaire Shamash dans le monde phénico-
punique’, Studi epigrafichi e linguistici sul Vicino Oriente antico 6:
97–115.
Bonnet, C. 1992. ‘Les divinités de Lixus’, Lixus. Actes du Colloque
(Collection École Française de Rome, 166), Rome: 123–9.
Botto, M. and Oggiano, I. 2003. ‘L’artigiano’, in J. A. Zamora (ed.), El
hombre fenicio. Estudios y materiales, Rome: 129–46.
Bridoux, V. 2008. ‘Les “imitations” de céramiques à vernis noir en
Numidie et en Maurétanie (IIIe–Ier siècles av. j.-c.): état des
recherches’, inJ. González, P. Ruggeri et al.(eds), L’Africa romana
XVII, Rome: 609–36.
Callegarin, L. and El Harrif, F.Z. 2000. “Ateliers et échanges
monétaires dans le ‘Circuit du Détroit’”, in M.P. García-Bellido
and L. Callegarin (eds), Los cartagineses y la monetización del
Mediterráneo Occidental. (Anejos de AEspA XXII), Madrid: 23–42.
Callegarin, L. 2008. ‘La côtte mauretanienne et ses relations avec
le littoral de la Betique (fin du IIIe siècle a.c. – Ier siècle p.c.)’.
Mainake XXX: 289–328.
Campo, M. 1994. ‘Moneda griega y púnica de Hispania: las primeras
emisiones’, in IX Congreso Nacional de Numismática, Elche 75–92.
Campo, M. and Mora, B. 1995a. Las monedas de Malaca, Madrid.
Campo, M. and Mora, B. 1995b. ‘Aspectos de la política monetaria de
Malaca durante la Segunda Guerra Púnica’, in M.P. García-Bellido
and R.M. Sobral Centeno (eds), La moneda hispánica. Ciudad y
territorio. I Reunión de Numismática Hispana, (Anejos de AEspA
14), Madrid: 105–10.
Chaves Tristán, F. 2009. ‘Identidad, cultura y territorio en la Andalucía
prerroana a través de la numismática: el caso de Gadir-Gades’, in
F. Wulff Alonso and M. Álvarez Martí-Aguilar (eds), Identidades,
culturas y territorios en la Andalucía pererromana, Málaga: 317–59.
Chaves, F. and García Vargas, E. 1991. ‘Reflexiones en torno al área
comercial de Gades: Estudio numismático y económico’, in
Alimenta. Estudios en homenaje al Dr. Michel Ponsich (Gerión
Extra 3), Madrid: 139–68.
CNH = Villaronga, L. 1994. Corpus Nummum Hispaniae ante Augusti
Aetatem, Madrid.
Codera y Zaidín, F. 1879. Tratado de numismática arábigo-española,
Madrid.
Coltelloni-Trannoy, M. 1997. Le Royaume de Maurétanie sous Juba II et
Ptolémée, Paris.
Corzo Sánchez, R. 2004. ‘Sobre la imagen de Hercules Gaditanus’,
Romula 3: 37–62.
Cruz Andreotti, C. 2007. ‘Estrabón y la tradición geográfica’, in G. Cruz
Andreotti, M.V. García Quintela and J. Gómez Espelosín (eds),
Estrabón. Geografía de Iberia, Madrid: 44–66.
Domínguez Monedero, A.J. 2000. ‘Monedas e identidad étnico-
cultural de las ciudades de la Bética’, in M.P. García-Bellido
and L. Callegarin (eds), Los cartagineses y la monetización del
Mediterráneo Occidental, (Anejos de AEspA XXII), Madrid 59–74.
En-Nachioui, E.-A. 1996-1997. ‘Mauritania Tingitana: Romanización,
urbanización y estado de la cuestión’, Annals d l’Institut d’Estudis
Girondins 37: 783–93.
Fernández Uriel, P. 1992. ‘Algunas consideraciones sobre la miel y la
sal en el extremo del Mediterráneo Occidental’, in Lixus. Actes du
Colloque (Collection École Française de Rome, 166), Rome: 328.
Fernández Uriel, P. 2004. ‘La moneda de Rusaddir. Una hipótesis de
trabajo’, Gerion 22(1): 147–67.
Fernández Uriel, P., Bravo Nieto, A. et al. 2007. “Diez años de
arqueología en Melilla”, Akros 6: 7–18.
Ferrer Albelda, E. and García Fernández, F.J. 2007. ‘El fenómeno de
la polis en el mundo púnico occidental’, in J.J. Justel, B.E. Solans,
J.P. Vita and J.Á. Zamora (eds), Las aguas primigenias: el Próximo
Oriente Antiguo como fuente de civilización, Zaragoza: 653–67.
Gabard I. and Rebuffat R. 1990. ‘La vigne au Maroc, dans L’archéologie
de la vigne et du vin’, in Gaule et dans les provinces voisines
(colloque du Centre de recherches A. Piganiol), Paris: 219–36.
Gago, M. 1873. ‘Africa Tingitana’, in A. Delgado y Hernández, Nuevo
método de clasificación de las medallas autónomas de España,
Seville: 351–84.
García y Bellido, A. 1963. ‘Hercules Gaditanus’, AEspA 36: 70–153.
García-Bellido, M.P. 1987. ‘Altares y oráculos semitas en Occidente:
Melkart y Tanit’, Rivista di Studi Fenici 15(2): 135–58.
García-Bellido, M.P. 1992. ‘La moneda, libro en imágenes de la ciudad’,
in R. Olmos (ed.), La sociedad ibérica a través de la imagen,
Madrid: 237–49.
84 For t his see Ale xandropoulos, 1988: 5– 13 and 2000: 333.
85 RPC no s 80–84; A lfaro Asi ns (1998: 155–6) and C haves Tristán
(2009, 346). However, the main and most ev ident relation is to
Agrippa, whether as Praefectus Classis or as t ow n pa tr on .
86 Espe cially RIC I I no. 125, where – apar t from the legend HE RC-
GADIT – it i s represented wit h the bow of a ship and a re clining
figu re (probably alludi ng to the Ocean, ma ybe even to the Oceanus
gaditanus mentioned by Pl iny (Nat. 2.227; 9.10) (cf. Garcí a-Bellido,
1963: 145; Corzo Sánc hez, 2004: 53– 62; Cruz Andr eotti, 2007: 434).
87 RPC nos 101–106.
88 Its po ssible relation to th e Straits’ anc ient numismatic s was
pointed out by A . Delgado in the 19th cent ury (see Rodríg uez
Pérez, 2005: 25 –9).
Bibliography
Alexandropoulos, J., 1988. ‘Le Détroit de Gibraltar. Remarques
d’iconographie religieuse’. MCV 29: 5–18.
Alexandropoulos, J., 1992. ‘Contributions à la définition des
domaines monétaires numides et maurétaniens’, in T. Hackens
and G. Moucharte (eds), Numismatique et Histoire économique
phéniciennes et puniques (Studia Phoenicia. IX), Louvain-la-Neuve:
133–47.
Alexandropoulos, J., 2000. Les monnaies de l’Afrique Antique 400
av.J.-C. – 40 a J.-C., Toulouse.
Alfaro Asins, C. 1988. Las monedas de Gadir/Gades, Madrid.
Alfaro Asins, C. 1991. ‘Epigrafía monetal púnica y neopúnica en
Hispania. Ensayo de síntesis’, in Ermanno A. Arslan Dicata, I,
(Glaux, 7), Milan: 109–50.
Alfaro Asins, C. 2003. ‘Isis en las monedas de Baria y Tagilit’, Numisma
247: 7–18.
Amandry, M. 2000. ‘Transformation des villes indigènes en villes
romaines en Maurétanie: Apport de la numismatique’, in M.P.
García-Bellido and L. Callegarin (eds), Los cartagineses y la
monetización del Mediterráneo Occidental, (Anejos de AEspA XXII),
Madrid: 43–52.
Aranegui, C. (ed.) 2005. Lixus 2 Ladera Sur. Excavaciones marroco-
españolas en la colonia fenicia. Campañas 2000–2003 (Saguntum-
extra 6). Valencia.
Aranegui, C. 2008a. ‘Tarradell y la historiografía de la arqueología
del norte de Marruecos’, in J. Beltrán Fortes and M. Habibi (eds),
Historia de la Arqueología del Norte de Marruecos durante el período
del Protectorado y sus referentes en España, Seville: 121–33.
Aranegui, C. 2008b.‘La arqueologíaa de Lixus y la monarquía
mauritana’, in J.M. Candau Morón, F.J. González Ponce and A.L.
Chavez Reino (eds), Lybiae lustrare extrema. Realidad y literatura
en la visión grecorromana de África (Estudios en honor del Profesor
Jehan Desanges), Seville: 117–26.
Aranegui, C, Rodríguez and C.G., Rodrigo, N.J. 2007. ‘Datos para la
gestión pesquera de Lixus (Larache, Marruecos)’, in L. Lagóstena,
D. Bernal and A. Arévalo (eds), Cetariae 2005. Salsas y salazones
de pescado en Occidente durante la Antigüedad, (BAR Int. Series
1686), Oxford: 205–14.
Aranegui, C. and Mar, R. forthcoming, ‘Juba II y Lixus (Marruecos)’,
XVII Congress AIAC (Rome 2008).
Beltrán Lloris, F. 2002. ‘Identidad cívica y adhesión al príncipe en las
monedas municipales hispanas’, in F. Marco Simón, F. Pina Polo
and J. Remesal Rodríguez (eds), Religión y propaganda política en
el mundo romano. Barcelona: 159–87.
Beltrán, J. and Habibi, M. (eds) 2008. Historia de la Arqueología
del Norte de Marruecos durante el período del Protectorado y sus
referentes en España. Seville.
Bernal, D., Raissouni, B., Ramos, J., Zouak, M. and Parodi, J. (eds)
2008. En la orilla africana del Círculo del Estrecho. Historiografía y
proyectos actuales (Actas del III Seminario Hispano-Marroquí de
especialización en Arqueología), Cádiz.
Blázquez, J.M. 1961. ‘Las relaciones entre Hispania y el norte de Africa
durante el gobierno Bárquida y la conquista romana (237–19
a.C.)’. Saitabi 11: 21–43.
Blázquez, J.M, 1988. ‘Los templos de Lixus (Mauritania Tingitana) y
su relación con los templos de ciudades semitas representados
en las monedas’, in El estrecho de Gibraltar (Actas del I Congreso
Internacional), Ceuta: 529–61.
Bianchetti, S. 1991. “Aethiopes in Africa: aspetti della storia di un
nome”, in L’Africa romana VIII, Sassari: 117–25.
Bonnet, C. 1988. Melqart: cultes et mythes de l’Héraclès tyrien en

Money, Trade and Trade Rou tes in Pre-Isl amic Nort h Africa | 31
Coins, Cities and Territories
Ghazi-Ben Maïssa, H. 2005. ‘Le règne de Bogud (78–38 avant J.C.) ou
l’extraordinaire effervescense économique du Maroc anticue’, La
Recherche Historique 3: 5–23.
Giovannelli-Jouanna, P. 2004. ‘L’hellénisme chez les historiens grecs
de l’Ouest. Les historiens grecs et le Périple d’Heraclès Dans
l’ouest de la Méditerranée: Les enjeux du mythe’, in J.M. Candau,
F.J. González Ponce and G. Cruz Andreotti (eds), Historia y mito.
El pasado legendario como fuente de autoridad, Málaga: 193–209.
González Ponce, F.J. 2009. Periplógrafos griegos I. Épocas Arcaica
y Clásica 1: Periplo de Hanón y autores de los siglos VI y V a.C.,
Zaragoza.
Goodman, M., 2005. ‘Coinage an Identity: The Jewish Evidence’, in C.
Howgego, V. Heuchert and A. Burnett (eds), Coinage and Identity
in the Roman provinces, Oxford: 163–66.
Gozalbes Cravioto, E. 1991. La ciudad antigua de Rusadir. Aportaciones
a la historia de Melilla en la Antigüedad, Melilla.
Gozalbes Cravioto, E. 2008a. ‘Los españoles y las antigüedades de
Marruecos. De Ali Bey el Abbasi al inicio del Protectorado (1800-
1936)’, in J. Beltrán and M. Habibi (eds), Historia de la Arqueología
del Norte de Marruecos durante el período del Protectorado y sus
referentes en España, Seville: 63–95.
Gozalbes Cravioto, E. 2008b. ‘La economía exótica en el África
occidental en época romana”, L’Africa romana XVII. Rome: 602–6.
Gozalbes, M. and Ripollès, P.P. 2003. ‘La fabricación de moneda en la
Antigüedad’, in XI Congreso Nacional de Numismática, Zaragoza:
11–34.
Gandolfo, L. 1998. ‘Le monete’, in C.A. Di Stefano (ed.), Palermo
punica, Palermo: 348–59.
Goor, A., 1966. ‘The History of the Grape-Vine in the Holy Land’,
Economic Botany 20(1): 46–64.
Hendin, D. 2001. Guide to Biblical Coins, New York.
Hermary, A. 1992. ‘Quelques remarques sur les origines proche-
orientales de l’iconographie d’Héraclès’, in C. Bonnet and C.
Jourdan-Annequin (eds), Héraclès d’une rive à l’autre de la
Méditerranée. Bilan et perspectives, Brussels-Rome: 129–43.
Hilali, A. 2008. ‘In vino veritas: la vérité sur une richesse africaine à
l’époque romaine’, in J. González, P. Ruggeri et al. (eds), L’Africa
romana XVII, Rome: 223–36.
Hölbl, G. 2004. ‘Iconografie egiziane e documenti archeologici
dell’Italia punica’, in E. Acquaro and G. Savio (eds), Studi
iconografici nel Mediterraneo antico. Iconologia ed aspetti materici,
Sarzana: 65–82.
Janni, P. 1997. ‘Los límites del Mundo entre el mito y la realidad.
Evolución de una imagen’, in A. Párez Jiménez and G. Cruz
Andreotti (eds), Los límites de la Tierra. Espacio geográfico en las
culturas mediterráneas, Madrid: 23–40.
Jenkins, G.K. 1978, ‘Coins of Punic Sicily. Part IV’, Revue Suisse de
Numismatique 57: 5–68.
Jourdain-Annequin, C. 1992. ‘Héraclès en Occident’, in C. Bonnet and
C. Jourdain-Annequin (eds), Héraclès d’une rive à l’autre de la
Méditerranée. Bilan et perspectives, Brussels-Rome: 262–91.
Lipinski, E. 2004. Itineraria Phoenicia (Studia Phoenicia, 18. Orientalia
Lovaniensia Analecta, 127), Leuven-Dudley.
LIMC = Cahn, H.A. 1994. s.v. ‘Okeanos’, in Lexicon Iconographicum
Mythologiae Classicae. VII, Zurich-Munich-Dusseldorf: 32–3.
López Castro, J.L. 1997. ‘Los fenicios occidentales y Grecia’, in J.M.
Presedo et al. (eds), Xaipe. Homenaje al profesor Fernando Gascó,
Seville: 95–105.
López Castro, J.L. and Mora Serrano, B. 2002. ‘Malaka y las ciudades
fenicias en el occidente mediterráneo. Siglos VI a.C. – I d.C.’,
Mainake 24: 181–214.
López Pardo, F. 1992. ‘Reflexiones sobre el origen de Lixus y su
Delubrum Herculis en el contexto de la empresa comercial
fenicia’, in Lixus. Actes du Colloque (Collection École Française de
Rome, 166), Rome: 85–101.
López Pardo, F. 2000. El empeño de Heracles. La exploración del
Atlántico en la Antigüedad, Madrid.
López Pardo, F, 2002, ‘Los fenicios en la costa atlántica africana:
balance y proyectos’. in B. Costa and J.H. Fernández Gómez (eds),
La colonización fenicia de Occidente. Estado de la investigación en
los inicios del siglo XXI, (Treballs del Museu Arqueologic d’Eivissa i
Formentera 50), Ibiza: 19–48.
López Pardo, F. 2004. ‘Puntos de mercado y formas de comercio en las
costas atlánticas de la Lybie en época fenicio-púnica’, in F. Chaves
and R. González Antón (eds), Fortunatae Insulae (Exhib. Cat.
Museo Arqueológico de Tenerife), Tenerife: 85–100.
López Pardo, F. 2006a. ‘La fundación de Rusaddir y la época púnicai,
in A. Bravo Nieto and P. Fernández Uriel (eds), Historia de Melilla,
Melilla: 167–89.
López Pardo, F. 2006b. La torre de las almas. Un recorrido por los
mitos y creencias del mundo fenicio y orientalizante a través del
monumento de Pozo Moro (Anejos de Gerión 10), Madrid.
López Pardo, F. 2008. ‘Marinos y colonos fenicios codificando la costa
atlántica africana’, in J.M. Cadau Morón, F.J. González Ponce
and A.L. Chavez Reino (eds), Lybiae lustrare extrema. Realidad y
literatura en la visión grecorromana de África (Estudios en honor
del Profesor Jehan Desanges), Seville: 25–51.
López Pardo, F. and Suárez Padilla, J. 2002. ‘Traslados de población
entre el Norte de África y el sur de la Península Ibérica en los
contextos coloniales fenicio y púnico’, Gerión 20(1): 113–52.
López Sánchez, F. 2003. ‘Retratística imperial en las series
hispanolatinas y estructuración territorial de un Far-West
romano’, in Les imatges monetàries: llenguatge i significat (VII Curs
d’Història monetària d’Hispània), Barcelona: 103–18.
López Sánchez, F. 2010. ‘Numidian Kings and Numidian Garrisons
during the Second War: Coins and History’. Potestas: Religión,
poder y monarquía, Revista del Grupo Europeo de Investigación
Histórica 3: 17–52.
Manfredi, L.I. 1987. ‘Melqart e il tonno’, Studi di egittologia e di
antichità puniche 1: 67–83.
Manfredi, L.I. 1993. ‘La coltura dei cereali in età punica in Sardegna
e Nord-Africa’, Quaderni della Soprintendenza Archeologica di
Cagliari e Oristano 10: 191–218.
Manfredi, L.I. 1993–1995. ‘Il grano e l’orzo fran Nord-Africa e
Sardegna’, Nuovo Bolletino Archeologico Sardo 5: 219–76.
Manfredi, L.I. 1995. Monete puniche. Repertorio epigrafico e
numismatico delle leggende puniche (Bolletino di Numismatica,
Monografia 6), Rome.
Manfredi, L.I. 1996. ‘Un’edicola votiva punica su due serie monetali di
Lixus’, Rivista di Studi Fenici 34(1): 47–57.
Manfredi, L.I. 2003. La politica amministrativa di Cartagine in Africa,
Rome.
Manfredi, L.I. 2006. ‘Le monete puniche nel Mediterraneo antico:
produzione, coniazione, circolazione’, Mediterranea III: 257–98.
Manfredi, L.I., (forthcoming). ‘Le monete neopuniche di Iol-Caesarea
(Cherchel, Algeria)’, in VI Congresso Internacional de Estudos
Fenícios e Púnicos (Lisboa 2005), Lisbon.
Marín Ceballos, M.C. 2001. ‘Les contacts entre Phéniciens et Grecs
dans le territoire de Gadir et leur formulation religieuse: Histoire
et Mythe’, in S. Ribicini, M. Rocchi and P. Xella (eds), La questione
delle influenze vicino-orientali sulla religione greca. Stato degli
studi e prospettive della ricerca (Atti del Colloquio Internazionale,
Rome 1999), Rome: 315–31.
Marion, J. 1970. ‘Le thème de la grappe de raisin dans la
numismatique antique’, Cahiers Numismatiques 26: 101–11.
Marion, J. 1972. ‘Les monnaies de Shemesh et des villes autonomes de
Maurétanie Tingitane au Musée Louis Chatelain à Rabat’, Ant. Afr.
6: 59–127.
Mazard, J. 1955. Corpus Nummorum Numidiae Mauretaniaeque. Paris
Mazard, J. 1960. ‘Création et diffusion des types monétaires
maurétaniens’, Bull. Arch. Mar. 4: 107–16.
Mederos, 2007. “Los atunes de Gadir” in D. Plácido, F. Moreno Arrastio
and L.A. Ruiz Cabrero (eds) Necedad, sabiduría y verdad: el legado
de Juan Cascajero, (Gerión Extra), Madrid: 173–95.
Mierse, W.E. 1993, ‘Temple Images on the Coinage of Southern Iberia’,
Revue Belge de Numismatique 139: 37–57.
Mierse, W.E. 2004. ‘The Architecture of the Lost Temple of Hercules
Gaditanus and its Levantine Assotiations’, AJA 108(4): 545–76.
Mora Serrano, B. 1993. ‘Las cecas de Malaca, Sexs, Abdera y las
acuñaciones púnicas en la Ulterior-Baetica’, in Numismática
hispano-púnica. Estado actual de la investigación (VII Jornadas de
Arqueología Fenicio-Púnica), Ibiza: 63–95.
Mora Serrano, B. 1994. ‘Notas sobre Numismática e Historiografía.
Berlanga y las homonoias hispano-africanas’, in IX Congreso
Nacional de Numismática, Elche: 67–74.
Mora Serrano, B. 2000. ‘Las fuentes de la iconografía monetal fenicio-
púnica’, in M.P. García-Bellido-L. Callegarin (Coords.), in M.
P. García-Bellido and L. Callegarin (eds), Los cartagineses y la
monetización del Mediterráneo Occidental, (Anejos de AEspA XXII),
Madrid: 157–68.
Mora Serrano, B. 2007. ‘Sobre el uso de la moneda en las ciudades
fenicio-púnicas de la Península Ibérica’, in J.L. López Castro (ed.),

32 | Money, Trade and Trade Rout es in Pre-Isl amic North Af rica
Mora Serrano
and Identity in the Roman provinces, Oxford: 79–93.
Ripollès, P.P., 2005b. ‘Las acuñaciones antiguas de la península
ibérica: dependencias e innovaciones’, in XIII Congreso
Internacional de Numismática, I, Madrid: 187–208.
Ripollès, P.P. 2008. ‘The X4 Hoard (Spain): Unveiling the Presence of
Greek Coinages during the Second Punic War’, Israel Numismatic
Research 3: 51–64.
RPC = Burnett, A., Amandry, M. and Ripollés, P.P. 1992. Roman
Provincial Coinage, I. From the Death of Caesar to the Death of
Vitellius (44 bc to ad 69), London-Paris (re-published 1999) and
Suppl. 1998.
Rodríguez Pérez, R. 2005. ‘Iconografía y simbolismo en los feluses de
Al-Andalus’, Gaceta Numismática 156: 21–33.
Roller, D.W. 2003. The World of Juba II and Kleopatra Selene. Royal
Scholarship on Rome’s African Frontier, New York-London.
Sebaï, M. 2005. ‘La romanisation en Afrique, retour sur un débat.
La résistance africaine: une approche libératrice?’, Afrique and
histoire 5: 39–56.
SNGCop = Sylloge Nummorum Graecorum: The Royal Collection of
coins and medalls. Danish National Museum. Spain-Gaul, ed. G.K.
Jenkins, Copenhagen.
Tarradell, M. 1965. ‘Los fenicios en Occidente. Nuevas perspectivas’, in
D. Harden, Los fenicios, Barcelona: 213–36.
Tarradell-Font, N. 2005. ‘Las monedas’, in C. Aranegui (ed.), Lixus 2.
Ladera Sur. Excavaciones marroco-españolas en la colonia fenicia.
Campañas 2000–2003, (Saguntum-extra 6), Valencia.
Villaverde Vega, N. 2004. ‘Nuevos datos arqueológicos de Rusaddir
(Melilla): un santuario de Astarté-Venus Marina en Plaza de
Armas’, in L’Africa romana XV, Rome: 1837–76.
Las ciudades fenicio-púnicas en el Mediterráneo Occidental, Almería:
405–38.
Moulay Rchid, E.M. 1989. ‘Lixus et Gadès. Réalité et idéologie d’une
symetrie’, DAH, 15(2): 325–31.
Muñoz Vicente, A. and Frutos Reyes G. de, 2009. ‘La pesca y las
conservas en la Bahía de Cádiz en época fenicio-púnica’, in D.
Bernal Casasola (ed.), Arqueología de la pesca en el Estrecho de
Gibraltar. De la Prehistoria al fin del Mundo Antiguo, Cádiz: 81–131.
Niveau de Villedary y Mariñas, A.M. 2001. ‘El espacio geopolítico
gaditano en época púnica. Revisión y puesta al día del concepto
“Círculo del Estrecho”’, Gerión 19: 313–54.
Plácido, D. 2008. ‘Océano y sus hijos: la proyección especial del mito’,
in R. González Antón, F. López Pardo and V. Peña Palomo (eds),
Los fenicios y el Atlántico, CEFyP VI), Madrid: 31–37.
Ponsich, M. 1975. ‘Pérennité des relations dans le circuit du Détroit de
Gibraltar’, ANRW II(3): 654–83.
Porton, G.G. 1976. ‘The Grape-Cluster in Jewish Literature and Art of
Late Antiquity’, The Journal of Jewish studies 227(2): 159–176.
Ramos, J., Pérez Rodríguez, M., Domínguez Pérez and Vijande, E.
2008. ‘El africanismo en los estudios pre- y protohistóricos. La
aportación del Miguel Tarradell’, in D. Bernal, B. Raissouni, J.
Ramos, M. Zouak and J. Parodi (eds), En la orilla africana del
Círculo del Estrecho. Historiografía y proyectos actuales (Actas
del III Seminario Hispano-Marroquí de especialización en
Arqueología), Cádiz: 116–21.
RIC II = Mattingly, H. and Sydenham, E.A. 1972. The Roman Imperial
Coinage II. Vespasian to Hadrian. London (reprinted).
Ripollès, P.P. 2005. ‘Coinage and Identity in the Roman provinces:
Spain’, in C. Howgego, V. Heuchert and A. Burnett (eds), Coinage