Page:1909historyofdec04gibbuoft.djvu/639

APPENDIX 571 road from Seleucia to Antioch is described in the Hou-han-shu (p. 43), where mention is made of a flying-bridge which has been identified by Hirth with the Euphrates- bridge at Zeugma. The road is described as safe from robbers, but dangerous from fierce tigers and bona. Nevertheless there is a difficulty in the interpretation of some Chinese words, which makes the identification of this route uncertain. But in the statement that " every ten li [in thiB country] are marked by a t'ing, thirty li by a ohih [resting-place] " we can recognize the thirty stadia, and the three Arabian miles, which were equivalent to a parasang (Hirth, p. 223). The chief products which went to China from the Koman orient were : precious stones, glass, the textile fabrics of Syria, including silk rewoven and dyed, storax and other drugs. Syria was famous as a centre of traffic in precious stones. In the Hou-han-shu (p. 43) it is sceptically remarked : " the articles made of rare precious stones produced in this country are sham curiosities and mostly not genuine ". Antioch, the capital of Ta-ts'in, is described in several of these Chinese histories, and its name is given (in the Wei-6hu, sixth century) as An-tu. We can recognize in this description (p. 49) the tetrapolis, or four oities, of Antioch, and Hirth has shown that the measurements given by the Chinese historians may not be far from the truth. The news of the conquest of Antioch and Syria by the Saracens reached China in a.d. 643 and is recorded in another history (tenth century ; p. 55). On Byzantine commerce in the sixth century, see Heyd, Histoire du commerce du levant au moyen age (translation by Furcy Raynaud, with additions by the author), vol. i., 1885, and Diehl, Justinien, 533 sqq. 14. JUSTINIAN'S COINAGE— (P. 254) " Anastasius introduced a new copper coinage in the year 498, in order to relieve the people from the inconvenience resulting from the great variety in the weight and value of the coins in circulation, many of which must have been much defaced by the tear and wear of time. The new coinage was composed of pieces with their value marked on the reverse by large numeral letters indicating the number of units they contained. The nummus, which was the smallest copper coin then in circulation, appears to have been taken as this unit, and its weight had already fallen to about 6 grains. The pieces in general circulation were those of 1, 5, 10, 20 and 40 nummi, marked A, E, I, K and M. " Justin I. followed the type and standard of Anastasius, but the barbarous fabric of his coins, even when minted at Constantinople, is remarkable. The same system and the same barbarism appear in the copper money of Justinian I. until the twelfth year of his reign, a.d. 538. He then improved the fabric and added the date, numbering the years of his reign on the reverse" (Finlay, History of Greece, vol. i. p. 445). Under Anastasius only three mints were at work, Constantinople, Nicomedia, and Antioch. Under Justin I. two were added, Cyricus and Thessalonica. " But Justinian the organizer of victory has left ineffaceable traces on the coinage, and in the place of the five mint-centres of Justin I. we have the eleven or twelve mints of Justinian. The conquest of northern Africa, of Sicily and Italy, made Carthage, Catina, Borne, and Ravenna Imperial mints." [Money was also coined under Justin- ian at Alexandria and Cherson.] " His coinage is remarkably abundant and was evi- dently regularized with care " (Wroth, Imperial Byzantine Coins, i. p. xv.). The portraiture of Justinian in mosaics and coins is discussed by Diehl, Justin- ien, 14 sqq., and Wroth, op. cit., xc. sqq. The bust on the gold and bronze issue of a.d. 538 seems to be a genuine attempt at portraiture and is of the same character as the mosaic representation of Justinian in S. Apollinare nuovo at Ravenna. It is beardless and agrees pretty well with the personal description of Justinian in Pro- copius, Hist, arc, c. 8. The Emperor's face in S. Vitale has a moustache (cp. John Malalas, 425), and we may suppose that at some time later than a.d. 538 Justinian adopted this fashion. Wroth, however, questions whether we can rely much upon the S. Vitale likeness. On the other hand he thinks that the profile head which appears on bronze coins struck at Rome either by Justinian or the Ostrogoths (Pinder and Friedlander, PI. v., 3) may be taken as a portrait.