Heretofore historical studies dealing with the spear conceived as a symbol of authority have not fully exploited coins as iconographic sources. On Bohemian coins the spear held by a ruler appeared from the reign of Duke Yaromir (1003-1012) as the only insignium with which the ruler was equipped. From the time of his royal coronation, Vratislas II wields an apple and a sceptre instead of a spear, which was assumed by the patron of the dynasty and the state - Saint Wenceslaus, portrayed on the reverse of the coin. Upon certain occasions the saint is symbolised only by a hand holding a spear and presenting it, together with a blessing, to the king as a symbol of governance over the state. Upon this basis, we are entitled to conclude that in Bohemia the spear was an insignium already before 1080, when Henry IV permitted Vratislas II to use the spear seized from anti–king Rudolph. The appearance of this older spear at the beginning of the eleventh century (together with the assumption of the cult of St. Wenceslaus by the Premyslid dynasty) entitles us to surmise that it, and not the spear received from the emperor, was already associated with the holy patron. On Hungarian coins, the spear appeared slightly earlier (1000–1001): its depiction, together with a banner, is to be found on the oldest denarii of Stephen I, minted probably in connection with his coronation. There is no doubt that it belonged to the king, as evidenced by the encircling inscription LANCEA REGIS. On the other hand, the identity of the hand holding a spear remains controversial. László Kovács assumed that this was the hand of Stephen himself. The author of the article maintains that we are dealing with Manus Dei, indicated by the accompanying lines, which symbolise clouds, and the manner of holding the spear.Through the intermediary of his coins Stephen I wished to show that he had received the spear from God. At first glance, this ascertainment unambiguously resolves the controversy relating to the origin of the Hungarian royal insignia. Was their source the pope or the emperor? Manus Dei would seem to speak in favour of the former, but it must be kept in mind that Emperor Otto III could have been recognised as a mediator in the transference of the royal insignia. The only source directly mentioning the presentation of a replica of the spear of St. Maurice to the Hungarian ruler is the chronicle by Adémar de Chabannes. Despite the fact that it has been recently recognised to have been written by Ademar himself in about 1028/1029, the fragment of particular interest to us (lib. III, 31) contains a jumble of information.Until this question is resolved we should accept the possibility that the emperor (co-operating with the pope) really did send the royal insignia to Stephen. They included a replica of the Holy Spear which, as the coins seem to indicate, was acknowledged by the recipient as the foremost insignium. The author proposes a hypothesis claiming that such a situation, without analogy in other countries, could have been the consequence of the fact that the gift presented by the emperor was enhanced by a vexillum donated by Pope Sylvester II and meticulously portrayed on the coin.