Numis1557 Posted December 5, 2023 · Member Share Posted December 5, 2023 (edited) Hello everyone, I'm a newcomer to the world of numismatics and still navigating the complexities of ancient coins. Today, I delved into the topic of Weight Standards. I came across information indicating that Weight Standards played a crucial role in ancient gold and silver coin systems but were relatively less significant for base metals like copper, bronze, potin, etc. I'm curious to understand why this is? Could someone kindly shed some light on this for me? Additionally, and forgive me if this seems basic, but why were Weight Standards deemed so crucial? Was it due to the fact that governments could exert greater control over coin production and standardisation, thereby fostering increased trust in the currency (for instance in the context of trade)? Thanks a lot! Many regards. Edited December 5, 2023 by Numis1557 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
I_v_a_n Posted December 5, 2023 · Member Share Posted December 5, 2023 My opinion is that an answer lies before coinage invention, when values of commodities were directly determined by the weight of ingots or hacked silver first of all (hacksilber economy). So, for valuable metals such as EL, AV, AR the weight is a crucial characteristic. These coins accepted by international trade. AE coins in most cases are tokens (i.e. signs of value) and only regionally accepted, so, theirs weight less significant. 5 1 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deinomenid Posted December 5, 2023 · Supporter Share Posted December 5, 2023 Standards were almost crucial as they helped facilitate trade, or more precise gift-exchange (early on), or payment for mercenaries etc. Set standards also made the system of seigniorage, whereby the state takes a small set percent of the value of the coin a steady and monitorable lucrative but mostly accepted tax. Plenty of ancient economies though survived or thrived for a long time with little use of coinage. I say almost crucial as standards varied even within a trading block using nominally the same type, albeit not by much. Also standards, in terms of weight, metal composition etc varied over time, as did the silver/gold ratio with gold being typically worth 12-17 times silver - for context that ratio is currently 80! plus some states changed their system with mind-numbing regularity. Please see the attached images of one such state (Abdera) that even had ~separate systems for local and international use. There are many caveats to the above, but it's roughly right. As Ivan says, bronze has little intrinsic value, certainly with reference to coinage, and was just a fiat currency, only as good as the state that insisted on it so the value was the imposed value, which could fluctuate wildly by diktat (eg 4th and 3rd century Sicily). 5 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Numis1557 Posted December 7, 2023 · Member Author Share Posted December 7, 2023 Thank you so much for responding. It's crystal clear to me now! Kind regards 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brennos Posted December 8, 2023 · Member Share Posted December 8, 2023 The organization of ancient monetary systems is a fascinating field. It's also important to note that the spheres of circulation of coins were not the same for precious metals and bronze. e.g. It was of course not possible to change 10 coins like this one (an AE drachm) : into a coin like this one (a silver decadrachm) : yet both coins are contemporary and were issued by Dionysius of Syracuse in the early 4th century. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.