As of 2006, only five Moses coins have been found, and they are all unusual in more ways than one. They are called "Moses" coins because, although similar to Islamic dirhams which have the phrase "Muhammad is the messenger of God" (or a similar phrase), they are inscribed with "Moses is the messenger of God" in Arabic. Who made these? It turns out that they were made by the Khazars.
The Khazars were a nomadic people who ranged in the area between and north of the Black and Caspian Seas starting in the late 6th century. Geographically, they were a buffer between the Byzantine Empire and the Umayyad Caliphate. In the second half of the 10th century, they were conquered by the Kievan Rus ruler Sviatoslav I. The Khazars were not a homogeneous culture: among their tribes one could find three languages and several religions. Judaism is considered one of the Khazar religions, and the Moses coin is the only evidence found to support that claim.
According to The Jews of Khazaria, by Kevin Alan Brook, the Khazar government minted four series of dirhams in 837-838, all from the same mint. One series included the phrase (in Arabic) Ard al-Khazar ("Land of the Khazars"), with the date 3 December 837 to 22 November 838.
This Khazar mint was also the source of the Moses coins, but the five found so far all have fake mint dates and locations. The one from the Spillings Hoard is inscribed with Madinat as-Salaam (Baghdad) and the date 766-767. The other four Moses coins (found in hoards from Russia, Estonia, and Finland) include Madinat as-Salaam with the dates 803-804. Why the Moses coins exist and why they have inauthentic dates and mint marks is a mystery.
Above I said the coins were similar to Islamic dirhams. Brook's book says the Khazars minted "additional varieties of imitation dirhams after the year 838." The actual name of the Khazar silver coin was the sheleg, a name we get from the Russian Primary Chronicle, in which the sheleg is mentioned as tribute. What was the Russian Primary Chronicle, you may ask? It was briefly mentioned here, but maybe it deserves a closer look...next time.