I would like to share with you an area of numismatics that has been my concentration for nearly 40 years, trade coinage. It is hard to say when this interest started, but I think it is rooted in my fascination with ancient and modern history and economics (especially Fernand Braudel's two books, The Structures of Everyday Life and The Wheels of Commerce), and the romance of the Spanish Main acquired from childhood (lots of matinee movies back then). For the purpose of this tread, I am defining a trade coin two ways: First, as a coin specifically issued by a sovereign authority for the expressed use in international or regional trade; or Second, the coinage of any empire, kingdom or nation whose political, economic and military dominance of a region or regions makes that coinage the accepted medium of exchange within that empire. Until the advent of modern banks, letters of credit, currency, other paper financial instruments and ultimately digital technology now used in international trade, merchants, nations, cities, kingdoms and empires were dependent on the use of specie for transactions, both locally and internationally, for over two thousand years. Because of the need for a stable medium of exchange, one that maintains its reliability in precious metal content and appearance, throughout history certain coins stand out, both in terms of their widespread acceptance, and longevity: Aegina and her stater, Athens and her tetradrachm, the tetradrachms of Alexander III and his successors, the Byzantine Empire and her gold solidus, Spain and her 8 reales, the Dutch Republic and her lion daalder, gold ducat and ducatons produced for the Dutch East India Company (VOC), and Austria and her Maria Theresa dollar, to name some the major examples. There were also other attempts at creating an international trade coin, with limited success, notably the United States, Japanese and British trade dollar, and the portcullis dollar of Queen Elizabeth I. Even Denmark produced a trade coin, the “Greenland” dollar, patterned after the popular pillar dollar of the Spanish Empire. “Greenland” was something of a misnomer – the coin was actually intended for trade in the orient. The Roman Empire also used her coinage to promote her influence. The Roman monetary system was diversified. There was, over the course of time: the denarius, the aureus, and the antoninianus, sestertii and other bronze denominations, in addition to tetradrachms, drachms and bronze coinage from provincial mints. One of the outstanding features of many trade coins is their relatively consistent design and consistent silver and gold content. In a world where literacy was limited, a trade coin’s appearance was extremely important; hence Athena’s uniform gaze, with little change, on the obverse and the seemingly unvarying owl peering from the reverse. Spain’s 8 reales varied little over its over 300-year history as a trade coin, with only a handful of design revisions, as was also true for Mexico’s cap and ray 8 reales and peso, which had a nearly static design for almost 100 years. Weight, as an indicator of precious metal content was equally important and a key aspect of coinage used in trade. Because of this relative stability over centuries, commerce could be conducted across wide regions in a uniform manner – corn imported from Egypt to Athens with a constant underpinning of value through the tetradrachm, and goods from the Philippines be imported to Mexico and Spain with a constant underpinning of value through the 8 reales. The trade coin was the glue that bound together world commerce for centuries. It was through trade that helped Athens, with the aid of her tetradrachms, to develop into an empire and the center of culture and learning during the 5th century BC. Rome’s aureus and denarius fueled her trade and power throughout her vast empire. The Byzantine Empire owed as much to her power through trade with her gold coinage as through her military might. The Spanish Empire’s power existed in large part through her vast silver deposits in Peru (notably Potosi) and Mexico. Potosi alone produced enough silver, it was said, as an analogy, to build a bridge of solid silver from Peru to Spain. That silver helped to finance Hapsburg and Bourbon Spain’s numerous wars and pay their spiraling debt payable to the Europe’s banking houses. Trade was fundamental to the growth of the merchant and middle class, and it helped to foster the growth of the nation state over the centuries. It was the instrument of empires that has led us to our interconnected and interdependent world today. I would like to share some examples from my collection. Given the scope of this subject this is a limited group, and I am sure that there are many more coins that were used in commerce over the ages out there, so please post them if you wish. You'll see I am missing examples of other gold, silver and bronze coins, and trade coins from the Empire of Alexander, Corinth, the Roman Empire, Carthage and the Islamic Dynasties, as well as modern trade coins from the United Kingdom, United States, Japan, Mexico, Peru (19th century forward) and Maria Theresa dollars. There are many gaps. Aegina Stater, Early 5th century BC Attica, Tetradrachm, After 449 BC Byzantine Empire AV Histamenon Nomisma, Isaac I, 1057-1059 Dutch Republic, Holland, lion daalder, 1589 Spanish Empire, Potosi, El Peru, 8 reales "cob", Shield Type, Assayer B, Philip II Spanish Empire, Potosi, El Peru, 8 reales "cob", Pillars and Waves Type Assayer E, 1652, Philip IV Spanish Empire, Peru, 8 escudos, 1750, Assayer R, Ferdinand VI Spanish Empire, Guatemala, 8 reales, 1770, Assayer P, Charles III
Thank you for the brief history lesson. Someone could probably write volumes if they were to cover a comprehensive history of Trade Coinage.
VERY nice writeup, @robinjojo ! Some great coins, thanks for a great post. I kept a small collection of Trade Dollars / Currencies which I have locked away and no pics, regretfully. Several Ducats of varying mintages, US Trade Dollars, Chinese Trade Dollars, Japan, several from SE Asia, Talers, etc. I would pick them up, or get them online as I travelled a lot on business, and they were cool units of trade. I was also under the impression that the Daric was one of the first GOLD unit of value that was traded far and wide. Yup, I understand the EL coins from Lydia were the first in the Western World, but I understand that Darius hijacked the idea, issued his in GOLD, and spread his Gold Daric throughout his Empire and beyond. Fast followers were Philip II's gold staters and Alexander III's gold Staters as widespread units of trade. PERSIA, Achaemenid Empire. Darios I to Xerxes II. Circa 485-420 BC. AV Daric (14mm, 8.30 g). Lydo-Milesian standard. Sardes mint. Persian king or hero, wearing kidaris and kandys, quiver over shoulder, in kneeling-running stance right, holding spear in right hand, bow in left / Incuse punch. Carradice Type IIIb, Group A/B (pl. XIII, 27); Meadows, Administration 321; BMC Arabia pl. XXIV, 26.
I didn't think I'd sold my one British Trade Dollar, and found it in one of my British coin trays. It's from 1930: Here's the description of the type from Numista, at https://en.numista.com/catalogue/pieces8472.html : Country United Kingdom Type Standard circulation coin Years 1895-1935 Value 1 Dollar (1/4) Currency Pound sterling (1158-1970) Composition Silver (.900) Weight 26.95 g Diameter 39 mm Thickness 2.7 mm Shape Round Orientation Medal alignment ↑↑ Demonetized 08-01-1937 References KM# T5, Schön# A1 Obverse Standing figure of Britannia holding trident and shield with merchant ship in background, date in exergue. Lettering: ONE DOLLAR [Date in Exergue] Engraver: George William de Saulles Reverse Chinese characters and Jawi script in ornamental flower. Lettering: 壹 ساتو رڠڬية 圓 Translation: Chinese: One Dollar Jawi: One Ringgit Engraver: George William de Saulles Edge Reeded Comments * Issued to facilitate British trade in the Orient, the reverse design incorporated the denomination in Chinese characters and Malay script (often found with chop marks which do not detract from the value).
That's a very nice example of the British trade dollar. It's a truly beautiful design. Here's an example of the SSC crown that was minted during the reign of George I for the infamous South Seas Company in 1723. This company is associated with one of the first speculative bubbles to burst, in 1720, ruining thousands of investors. Here's link for more information on that sorry time in British history: https://www.historic-uk.com/HistoryUK/HistoryofEngland/South-Sea-Bubble/ This coin is VF for condition and came to me many years ago by way of Karl Stephens.
I used to have one of those, but it was one of the many silver crowns I sold. I remember buying from Karl Stephens back in the 1980s. I still have a cartwheel twopence I bought from him.
Here's another coin that shows up with some regularity in hoards in the eastern Mediterranean region. It is from Pamphylia, Side, an important trading city on the southern coast of Turkey. This example has the anchor counterstamp said to be associated with Antiochos III. Pampyylia, 190-36 BC Side Obverse: Athena, wearing a Corinthian helmet, facing right, anchor counterstamp on the helmet. Reverse: Nike, standing, facing left, holding a wreath above pomegranate, (KA)E below. 16.3 grams Fine
I used to buy world coins from Karl back in the 80's through the 90's and a bit beyond, before eBay became a big deal on the con market. Now that I have returned to ancients, basically (I do have an occasional relapse) I haven't kept in touch with him. However, he is still selling world coins, now online: https://karlstephensinc.com/
My interest in such matters also tracks back in large part to Braudel's book, The Structures of Everyday Life. Back in the early 1980’s I noticed that in that book he led readers to believe that when India returned to a pure silver coinage (ie when Sher Shah launched his rupee - around 1539) this was somehow linked to the finds of silver in South America. But Potosi was not even discovered until 1545. The idea was and is utterly preposterous. So I wrote to Immanuel Wallerstein, who ran the Fernand Braudel Center for the Study of Economies, Historical Systems and Civilization to ask him why Braudel had written this nonsense. He replied that Braudel had no knowledge of Indian economic history. But that begs the question – why would a man consistently claimed to be ‘the world’s greatest historian’ write nonsense about things he had (supposedly) never studied? Athens and Spain were dumping silver overseas in exchange for goods and services. It seems unlikely that either was meeting the need for silver coinage in domestic trade. To that extent, it seems misleading to call their issues “trade coins”, since they do not seem to be championing trade even in their home market. Personally I think it would be more accurate to call them “bullion export coins”. Concerning the link to a piece by Ellen Castelow on the South Sea Bubble – she suggests: We read about the South Sea Bubble today and wonder how so many people got involved in such a dubious undertaking. Well - count me out Ellen. When I read about it I think “Here we go again”. Rob T PS A pity Julian II is not around on CoinTalk..........
You're right about the Athenian tetradrachms and Spanish 8 reales as being bullion and treated as such by merchants, most of whom were not literate and relied on the appearance of a coin, its design and letters to follow a consistent pattern. However, I do think of these coins a being integral with commerce in their days, both locally and across other kingdoms and regions. They were valued for their metal content and they were also issued by governing authorities, so they were official coins and not random pieces of privately produced silver or gold. They had assigned values based on official standards. So, the fine points can be discussed, but in the end, in my view, these are coins used in trade, hence trade coins. As was the case for centuries, bronze coinage generally support day-to-day transactions. Silver and gold were used for larger transactions, both locally and internationally. They were also the metals of choice for hoarding wealth, often buried and forgotten, only to resurface thousands of years later and sold to collectors worldwide.
But all coins are used in trade of some sort – so on that basis “coins” is enough. “Trade coins” are conventionally coins struck specifically for overseas territories, and not for domestic use. I can see the sense in calling Athenian tets and Spanish dollars 'trade coins' of course – but I challenge your claim concerning the extent that they were used “locally”. They were way too big for most daily transactions and in both cases they seem to go side by side with a lack of small change in silver for domestic use. 17th century Spain surely was chronically short of domestic silver currency – people were driven to towing cartloads of junky copper around to make payments. Great care is needed concerning expressing this suggestion. The idea that domestic coin should be valued according to its metal content is very controversial. Adam Smith in the 18th century called the idea: a vulgar abuse…... (of)……. the mercantile system. Alexander del Mar in the 19th century called it: a monetary crime As I mentioned above – I started to figure out almost 40 years back that much of what modern academia put out regarding matters of coin issue and use is very misleading on these matters. Close to propaganda. I found it deeply disturbing then and I still do. Please bear in mind too that I have published a detailed paper bearing exactly on how prominent academics are misleading (and themselves misled) on these sort of coinage matters. And that the paper was passed for publication - refereed by two former presidents of the RNS. (If such things matter any more?) Rob T
Nice coins, all! Most Seleucid Tetradrachms were used in very large payments or for military purchases/salaries. As the Seleucids had an open currency system it wouldn’t be unusual to see some of their Tetradrachms appear in other parts of the Hellenistic world. Antiochus I Soter Tetradrachm SC 379.3c; HGC 9 16.73 g Seleukeia on the Tigris mint. Diademed head right / Apollo Delphios, testing arrow and resting hand on grounded bow, seated left on omphalos; monograms to outer left and right. Material: Silver Weight: 16.85 g Syria, Antiochus II; 261-246 BC, Perhaps Tralles, Tetradrachm, 16.85g. SC-534.2. Obv: Diademed head of Antiochus II r. Rx: ΒΑΣΙΛΕΩΣ ΑΝΤΙΟΧΟΥ Apollo, slight drapery on r. thigh, seated l. on omphalos, testing arrow and resting l. hand on bow; control marks in outer l. and r. fields. Obverse somewhat high relief. aVF / Fine A good example of these coins high value is that in Babylon/Seleucia one of these tets would get you 120 liters of dates or 180 liters of barley!
Thank you for the comments, and it is true that the silver tetradrachms and gold coins generally were not used domestically except to finance large scale efforts, such as the building of Athens' fleet and construction projects in the 5th century BC, and Rome's use of gold to finance civil projects, such as the improvements made by Claudius to the harbor at Ostia in the first century BC. I think that the coin hoard distributions throughout the Mediterranean and further east suggest that certain coins were widely used for trade and commerce. This is certainly true for the Attica tetradrachms. As for trust in a coin's content. This has been a central issue over the centuries, as demonstrated by the numerous examples of coins that have been cut or counterstamped (or "chopmarked" in the case of China), and it is known that coins entering certain kingdoms were frequently tested by local authorities, and often marked with their own seal to validate content. Merchants also tested coins passing through their hands, as demonstrated by the private countermarks found on many coins. There was an episode at Potosi, in the middle of the 17th century, when silver coinage was debased, sometimes quite seriously. That resulted in a trial of assayers that resulted in the execution of one, Felipe Ramirez de Arellano. Silver content was a very important issue back then, especially connected to international trade.
I always akin this coin as a Trade Coin, because the Carthage Empire was inherently a trading empire; this coin was minted during its Zenith as a World Power in the Med; and it represented a large value (DekaDrachm). Africa, Zeugutana, Carthage Anonymous BCE 310-290 EL Dekadrachm - Stater 18.5mm, 7.27g Obv: Wreathed head of Tanit left, eleven pendants on necklace; pellet before neck Rev: Horse standing right; three pellets below exergue line Ref: MAA 12; SNG Copenhagen 136 Ex: @Ancientnoob
Yes – of course that is true. But it does not really get to first base about the technicalities of pre-Keynsian coin issue. Let me sketch my opinion about all this Medieval European practice seem to be inspired by the reforms carried out at Damascus in 77-78H (c. 697-8 AD) It seems to fix gold and silver coin at 15/16 against bullion – thus 1/16th seigniorage (= state profit + making costs). In Europe the weight calculations seem to have the same basis – but varied from very low at the centre at Venice (roughly 2%) to higher at the periphery in England (1/16th by weight plus 1/16th by debasement thus 1/8 overall - that around 12th century or so). By the mid 17th century seigniorage seems to be lower in England – perhaps only 3.5%. However there was a parliamentary campaign to abolish it altogether – and this happened in principle in 1666 and in practice in 1696 - with the re-coinage. The people in parliament pushing for the abolition of seigniorage claimed that charging zero seigniorage would make English domestic coinage an international currency – and foreigners would flock to the mint bringing silver to coin for free – boosting English trade. What actually happened after it was put into practice in 1696 was a huge amount of silver was taken out of England cost free by the king for continental wars, and another huge amount was taken by the East India company cost free to spend on overseas trade. By 1725 markets were struggling to operate due to lack of small change. By around 1750 the mint stopped minting silver altogether. Shop trade was replacing market trade – (markets sold goods cheap on paid and quit terms – but shops sold on credit at higher prices) – in part because there was no small change to facilitate paid and quit transaction. The mint was only making gold guineas. Alexander del Mar called this a monetary crime. He claimed that the merchant faction within parliament had planned this all along – to strip cash out of the country – and push the bulk of the population into cashless transactions carried out on the books within shops – at inflated prices. Adam Smith was more circumspect. He pointed to the fact that France still maintained 8% seigniorage on coin and thus still retained a domestic silver currency. He scoffed at the English treasury without going into further details – but his views were clearly close to what del Mar chose to call “a monetary crime”. You can get a much more detailed account of all this here https://www.academia.edu/33034920/Maria_Graham_and_the_Problem_of_Small_Change Footnote 1 will tell you who amongst the elderly members of the British Numismatic community approved publication in NC. Many thanks to you personally for approaching this matter in a dispassionate matter. Over the course of my lifetime I have watched people from academic archaeology and economics encroaching upon numismatic studies. Time and time again these people scoff at me – imagining that I do not understand the past. Well, I am rather sure that its more the other way round. And if its me that is being lead by the nose – I am curious to know who it is supposed to be pulling the rope? Rob T PS interesting to note that even the word "seigniorage" does not appear in 21st century spell checkers.
