Silbannacus and the two coins
HistoryComments
Calling him a "ruler or usurper" is a bit of a leap based solely on numismatic evidence. We lack the administrative records to confirm he actually exercised power beyond a local mint.
It is similar to the "phantom" figures in early medieval charters. One forged document or a single stray coin can create a historical person who never actually existed.
This is why local museum curators fight for funding for coin catalogs. Most people ignore the spreadsheets until a name like this pops up and turns a tray of metal into a person.
The sheer volume of short lived claimants during the Crisis of the Third Century makes this plausible. If you look at the Gallic Empire period, there were multiple regional breakaways that barely left a footprint.
The article notes these were antoniniani, which were the standard silver coins of the era. They weren't found in a hoard but as separate finds, suggesting they actually circulated.
Since they were separate finds, do we know if they were discovered in the same geographic region or across different provinces?
I am not sure circulation proves he had power... couldn't these have been "fantasy" coins or commemorative pieces made by someone else later?