Question: Weight Standards and their importance for ancient coin systems.

[Numis1557]

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

[I_v_a_n]

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.

[Deinomenid]

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).

 

 

 

 

 

[Numis1557]

Thank you so much for responding. It's crystal clear to me now! 

Kind regards

[Brennos]

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.