Death to Coin Collectors in Ancient Rome

Hobo · 06-23-2009, 03:00 AM

Due to the contunual debasement of the currency the Roman Empire forbade coin collecting under penalty of death. The penalty seems harsh but I guess the penalty for most "crimes" was death during that era.

The following quote is from a book that was quoted in an on-line article. The article is an interesting read. It makes parallels between hyperinflation and the collapse of the Roman Empire's economy and what is going on in the US today. (I'll stop there so as not to venture into the realm of political discussion.)

A History of Inflation in Rome: Are We on a Similar Course?

Quote:

"In monetary affairs, ineffectual regulations were decreed to Combat Gresham's Law [bad money drives out good] and domestic speculation in the different kinds of money. It was forbidden to buy or sell coins: they had to be used for payment only. It was even forbidden to hoard them! It was forbidden to melt them down (to extract the small amount of silver alloyed with the bronze). The punishment for all these offenses was death. Controls were set up along roads and at ports, where the police searched traders and travelers. Of course, all these efforts were to no purpose."

physics-fan3.14 · 06-23-2009, 11:26 AM

Talk about harsh measures! I guess I'd be a goner for sure.

stainless · 06-23-2009, 11:33 AM

Interesting read. Thanks for the link Hobo, I am reading it right now.

stainless

**De Orc** · 06-23-2009, 12:42 PM

Oh boy that would have been a few of us for the chop, thanks Hobo

900fine · 06-23-2009, 12:47 PM

I wonder how they defined hoarding ? Searching merchants at the border... they had had to have coins to make change and run the biz ! How could los federales tell the difference between a legitimate holding of coinage and hoarding ?

**De Orc** · 06-23-2009, 12:49 PM

I think that would be decided by the size of your bribe LOL

vipergts2 · 06-23-2009, 01:06 PM

It's a good thing our government didn't threaten that punishment in the thirties when gold was banned from private ownership. We might not have as much gold coin left.

By the way Hobo, you're looking quite young today.

CamaroDMD · 06-23-2009, 01:15 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by physics-fan3.14

Talk about harsh measures! I guess I'd be a goner for sure.

I think a lot of us would be.

willieboyd2 · 06-23-2009, 01:16 PM

Currency inflation in the Roman Empire is an old story.

Gibbons book "The Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire", published in the
1770's, blamed the decline on the emperor Septimius Severus who used
debased silver currency to finance an invasion of Parthia (Iraq).

Drusus · 06-23-2009, 01:34 PM

It started in earnest under his son Caracalla who began issuing the Antoninianus. Named after Caracalla whose real name was Antoninus...change to that from his original name Bassianus for its connection to Antoninus Pius and Marcus Aurelius. The real name of this currency is unknown. It was worth 2 denarii but only had about 1.5 denarii worth of silver in it...after than the coins rapidly debased to bronze and copper with little to no silver content.

900fine · 06-23-2009, 03:44 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by De Orc

I think that would be decided by the size of your bribe LOL

ROFL

Sounds like the "executioners" did a little hoarding of their own !

900fine · 06-23-2009, 03:48 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by willieboyd2

Gibbons book "The Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire", published in the 1770's, blamed the decline on the emperor Septimius Severus who used debased silver currency to finance an invasion of Parthia (Iraq).

Correct me if I'm wrong, but I thought the province of Parthia was a little farther east, over the mountains, in the modern day province of Parsia - from which we get the name Persians (the most populous ethnic group in Iran).

900fine · 06-23-2009, 03:50 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by willieboyd2

Gibbons book "The Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire", published in the 1770's, blamed the decline on the emperor Septimius Severus who used debased silver currency to finance an invasion of Parthia (Iraq).

Again, correct me if I'm wrong... but I would think something as complex as the decline of the Roman Empire cannot be traced to one simple thing like an invasion of Parthia; but rather would have multiple contributing root causes.

rzage · 06-23-2009, 04:47 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by 900fine

I wonder how they defined hoarding ? Searching merchants at the border... they had had to have coins to make change and run the biz ! How could los federales tell the difference between a legitimate holding of coinage and hoarding ?

Good question but I guess the difference if one of us was carrying a few hundred bucks compared to someone carrying $10,000 , the person carrying $10,000 would raise some questions .
rzage

Ardatirion · 06-23-2009, 07:58 PM

I have to disagree with you on this one, Hobo. I think you misinterpreted the statement. There are no decrees banning the collecting of coins in ancient Rome. What that article is referring to is more speculating, as one today would buy euros in the hope that they'll rise in value compared to the dollar. Or, as the coins were primarily precious metals, something more akin to bullion investing.

Of course, it is also possible that the author himself is misinterpreting the statements in Diocletian's Edict that banned the transport of more than 1,000 folles of coined money. (not much at all!)

Welcome to Coin Talk! Register Now, it's easy and FREE!