Sunteți pe pagina 1din 4

Analizele efectuate pe monedele tip Koson1,2 au demonstrat c monedele cu

monogram conin >97% Au, i sunt confecionate cel mai probabil din aur retopit n
timp ce monedele frp monogram sunt confecionate din aur aluvionar (conin Sn i
Sb). Ali cercattori3 audemonstrat c aliajul kosonilor fie nu este electrum (aur
nativ), fie nu provine din Transilvania, fiind cel mai probabil aur de tipul celui care
circula n Balcani n epoc. Asemnarea cu pseudo-Lysimachii indic faptul c aceste
monede au fost btute de meteri greci, posibil chiar itinerani, ceea ce face ca ipoteza
baterii lor n Dacia s nu fie definitiv nlturat. Totui, faptul c nu a fost folosit aur
transilvan i similitudinea compoziiei lor cu cea a monedelor de tip pseudo-Lysimach
nclin balana spre ipoteza lui Prvan c au fost btute undeva n sudul Dunrii. De
asemeni, s-a analizat i o moned fr monogram i acesta are mult argint (10.71%)
i cupru (0.85%), fiind oarecum asemntor compoziiei aurului nativ transilvan (Ag
ntre 10% i 30%). AAP nu a indicat prezena n aceste monede a elementelor-urm
specifice aurului din Munii Apuseni (As, Hg, Te, Sb). n general majoritatea
analizelor, indiferent de metoda utilizat, au demonstrat c4 monedele cu
monogram sunt confecionate din aur rafinat (3-5% Ag., sub 0,5 Cu) iar cele fr
monogram sunt confecionate din aur extras din Transilvania (5-20% Ag., 0,5-2%
Cu) cu preponderen din surse aluvionare deoarece s-au detectat Al, Si, Fe ca
impuriti.
n concluzie, materia prim pentru confecionarea monedelor este diferit pentru
monedele de tip Koson cu sau far monogram. Unii cercettori sugernd c cele
dou tipuri de monede difer att prin material, tehnologia de fabricaie ct i perioada
n care aceste monede s-au produs5,6.

1
VASILESCU A., CONSTANTINESCU B., XRF-BASED COMPOSITIONAL MICROANALYSIS FOR
PROVENANCE STUDIES OF METALLIC ARTIFACTS, Romanian Reports in Physics, Vol. 63, No. 4, P. 901911, 2011

2
Constantinescu B., Vasilescu A., Martin Radtke, Uwe Reinholz, MICRO-SR-XRF STUDIES FOR ARCHAEOLOGICAL
GOLD IDENTIFICATION THE CASE OF CARPATHIAN GOLD AND OF ROMANIAN MUSEAL OBJECTS, Proceedings
of the 7th Conference on Nuclear and Particle Physics, 11-15 Nov. 2009, Sharm El-Sheikh, Egypt
3
Constantinescu B., Cojocaru V., Bugoi R., SPRE O ABORDARE CT MAI OBIECTIV N CERCETAREA
NUMISMATIC PRIN ANALIZE COMPOZIIONALE FOLOSIND METODE NUCLEARE, Cercetri numismatice, IX-XI,
Bucureti, 2003-2005, p. 389-404
4
Constantinescu B., C. Pauna C., Stan D., Ceccato D., New Analyses on Romanian Archeological and Native Gold Samples and
on Some Bronze Age Artifacts, Applied and Interdisciplinary Physics, LNL Annual Report, pag. 109-110;
5
Constantinescu B., Bugoi R., Gold provenance studies on Bronze Age objects and Greek and Dacian (KOSON) coins from
Romanian museums in relation to Transylvanian gold sources, AGLAE Experiment:12-14 January 2009

6
CONSTANTINESCU B., CRISTEA-STAN D., VASILESCU A., SIMON R., CECCATO D.
ARCHAEOMETALLURGICAL CHARACTERIZATION OF ANCIENT GOLD ARTIFACTS FROM ROMANIAN
MUSEUMS USING XRF, MICRO-PIXE AND MICRO-SR-XRF METHODS, ROCEEDINGS OF THE ROMANIAN
ACADEMY, Series A,Volume 13, Number 1/2012, p. 1926
Cotiso
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
Cotiso
King of Dacia

symbols of the Dacian kingdom


Reign c.40-c.9 BC
Predecessor Burebista
Successor Comosicus
Died c9 BC

Cotiso or Cotison (flourished c. 30 BC) was a Dacian king who apparently ruled the
mountains between Banat and Oltenia (modern-day Romania). Horace calls him king
of the Dacians.[1] Suetonius calls him king of the Getae.[1] He is mentioned also by
Florus, who wrote that Cotiso and his armies used to attack towards south when the
Danube froze.

Several scholars believe he is identical to Coson, a Dacian king whose name appears
on many gold Staters found in Transylvania.

Contents
[hide]
1 Background
2 Proposed marriage
3 Conflicts and death
4 Cotiso and Coson
5 Notes
6 References

Background[edit]
After the death of Burebista, the Dacian kingdom fell apart amid turnoil and civil
strife. Cotiso appears to have emerged as the dominant figure in Dacia at this time, but
nothing is known about his background. The new king found himself courted by the
two Roman antagonists, Octavian and Mark Antony. Cotiso was in a strong position
to dictate terms of any alliance to either of the conflicting parties. Octavian/Augustus
worried about the frontier and possible alliance between Mark Antony and the
Dacians, and plotted an expedition around 35 BC. Despite several small conflicts, no
serious campaigns were mounted. Cotiso chose to ally himself with Antony.
According to Alban Dewes Winspear and Lenore Kramp Geweke he "proposed that
the war should be fought in Macedonia rather than Epirus. Had his proposal been
accepted, the subjection of Antonius might have been less easily accomplished."[2]

Proposed marriage[edit]
According to Appian, Antony is responsible for the statement that Augustus sought to
secure the goodwill of Cotiso, king of the Getae (Dacians) by giving him his daughter,
and he himself marrying a daughter of Cotiso.[3] According to Suetonius, Cotiso
refused the alliance and joined the party of Antony.[4] Suetonius (LXIII, Life of
Augustus) says Mark Antony wrote that Augustus betrothed his daughter Julia to
marry Cotiso (M. Antonius scribit primum eum Antonio filio suo despondisse Iuliam,
dein Cotisoni Getarum regi) to create an alliance between the two men. This failed
when Cotiso betrayed Augustus. Julia ended up marrying her cousin Marcus Claudius
Marcellus.

According to Dio, the story about the proposed marriages is hardly credible and may
have been invented by Mark Antony as propaganda to offset his own alliance with
Cleopatra.[4]

Conflicts and death[edit]


After Augustus's victory in the civil wars, the Romans punished the Dacian ruler, who
was apparently defeated in battle around 25 BC.[5] In an ode dedicated to his protector,
Horace advises him not to worry about Rome's safety, because Cotiso's army has been
crushed.[6] In his account of his achievements as emperor, the Res Gestae, Augustus
claimed that the Dacians had been subdued. This was not entirely true, because
Dacian troops frequently crossed the Danube to ravage parts of Pannonia and Moesia.
[7]
He may have survived until the campaign of Marcus Vinicius in the Dacian area c.9
BC. Vinicius was the first Roman commander to cross the Danube and invade Dacia
itself. Ioana A. Oltean argues that Cotiso probably died at some point during this
campaign. He may have been killed in the war.[8] According to Jordanes Cotiso was
succeeded by Comosicus, about whom nothing is known beyond the name.[8]

Cotiso and Coson[edit]


The golden coin minted with the legend .

In the 16th century a large number of gold coins were discovered in hoards in
Romania. They were patterned after Roman coins, with a depiction of a Roman consul
accompanied by lictors apparently copied from coins issued by Marcus Junius Brutus.
The coins bore the name "Coson" or "Koson" written in Greek lettering. Theodor
Mommsen argued that Koson was probably a Dacian ally of Brutus, since the imagery
was taken from Brutus's coins. Recent scholars have argued that he is very likely to be
identical to Cotiso, since "Cotiso[n]" is an easy transcription error for Coson. Horace
always spells the name with an "n" at the end.[9] Ioana A. Oltean, however, argues that
Coson and Cotiso are different people, suggesting that Cotiso was Coson's successor.[8]