Nero Question. Why Coinage Debasement?

Since I don't collect coins, I frequently depend on the numismatists on this forum.

Interesting article on the mythology surrounding the great fire in Rome 64 during Nero's reign:



https://www.independent.co.uk/news/science/nero-great-fire-rome-romans-b1719706.html

Does this comment seem right, however?:

I guess this is a question for those who have an interest in the economics of ancient Rome and the debasement of Roman coinage.


g

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

Nero debased the coinage for the same reason the other emperors did, to increase the money supply. As the empire grew so did it's expenses. Nero also needed lots of money to pay for his extravagant building projects.

 

Of course, eventually everyone catches on and hoards the money of higher purity.

 

This scarcer piece was part of the attempted monetary reform of Nero, where brass was used for the as.

 

From Harl's excellent "Coinage in the Roman Economy" (pp 90-91):

"In 64, Nero--under the pressures of debts incurred in a desultory war in Armenia, rebuilding Rome after the Great Fire, and his own depraved extravagance--conducted the first major debasement since the Second Punic War.

Nero debased the denarius by more than 20 percent. Its weight was reduced by one-eighth, from 84 to 96 to the pound, and its fineness was lowered from 98 to 93 percent. Thus, 1 million old denarii taken in taxes could be reminted in 1.2 million debased denarii ....

Furthermore, many denarii were deliberately struck below standard so that actual debasement probably ranged upward to 25 percent or more."

Thank you, Limes, for your post above that helps make this further point:

"Nero also abandoned, at least temporarily, the Augustan scheme of fractional coinage in two base metals by discontinuing copper asses and quadrantes in favor of ones struck from the brass alloy used for sestertii and dupondii."

Good stuff.

 

I don't think there is any question that he debased the currency in order to make more of it. What I think surprising is that there does not seem to have been any kind of raging inflation that followed. Sure, following Gresham's law (bad money drives out good) his earlier denarii were finding their way into hoards and melting pots but the older coins of the Republic and those of Augustus, which were on the almost pure silver standard, stayed in circulation because they had been so worn by circulation that they now matched the reduced weight and fineness of Nero. And although the aureus was also reduced in weight (but not in fineness) the rate of exchange remained 25 denarii to one aureus. For the average man-in-the streets, who probably handled a lot more brass and bronze on a day to day basis it may not have mattered. I think the coin supply of denarii remained plentiful enough for the economy, the aureus for which the new denarii (and older silver) could be exchanged and a plentiful supply of brass insulated the the economy from what we would think would cause some dislocation. It may be that the average Roman already saw the silver denarii as a subsidiary, token coinage whose value came from its issuing authority and convertibility to a gold coin of a new, lesser weight but continued fineness, which underwrote the denarius.

 

Michael Grant's biography of Nero says that this temporary abandonment of copper coinage was motivated by an imperial monopoly on zinc. Zinc is a component of brass and thus using brass exclusively created an opportunity for further profit.

Grant also says that hoard evidence demonstrates that people outside the Empire (Germans, etc) much preferred the coinage from before Nero's debasement, but that immediate effects inside the Empire were limited.

 

Yes, and we collectors are glad that he did. Those big, and they are big, brass sesterces and dupondii are among the most attractive and impressive coins ever issued by any Ancient state. I would gladly give one denarius for four of those sesterces. When I was a kid and those big,90% silver dollars were still in circulation, I would plunk a few of those into my pocket and walk around feeling rich and important, much more so than with a few crumply, wrinkly, soiled tissues of rag paper. Who wants one measly little silver coin of 3.4 grams when he can have four of these impressive brass pieces?



See what I mean? On far left a big, heavy brass sestertius of Titus with pax Augusti on rev. and the obligatory SC. Sear 2527. On the right, a dupondius of Vespasian with Fides on the rev. RIC 1211. Bottom left a dupondius of Nero with Securitas Augusta on rev. Notice the II on the reverse, bottom, of the coin for two asses. Sear 1968 (earlier edition). Last is one of those heavy US silver dollars that were in circulation (much to the irritation of Eastern US merchants) until about 1964. This one, 1921, is the last year of the Morgan issue. For those readers not familiar with US coinage, the US continued to mint these coins, with a different design, until 1935 and they did circulate widely in the Western US where, among other things, they were great for the Nevada casino's. Imagine a bucket load of these pouring out of a slot machine. Again for readers not familiar with US coinage, notice the use of Latin on the coin, E Pluribus Unum. From Many (states), One (country).

 

I REALLY enjoyed this book. Tied Roman coinage to their economy, politics, and how well they were truly doing as an Empire.

Here is one of Nero's Wives:


RProv
Claudia Octavia Augusta
AE 27 7.6g 54-62 CE
married Nero
Thrace Perinthus
Hera
Samos
RPC 1755

 

Pictured below is a debased tetradrachm of Nero from Antioch, Syria.

 

WOW! This is great information. I was fortunate to be able to travel through Rome in 1956 before all of the restrictive access to many of their buildings and other historical sites. I was especially enamored with the coliseum. We were allowed access to the floors and the slave quarters. We walked the Apian Way with all of their structures. We later went to Pisa. We were allowed to walk up to the top of the "Leaning" Bell Tower of Pisa. They allowed us to walk on the outside of the tower in certain areas. There were no ropes or railings on the outside then. I didn't have an appreciation for our travels, as I was only 9 at the time.
I returned to Rome and other sites in 1966, when I was 19. Although it was only 10 years later. The government rebuilt many of the destroyed buildings as well as restricting access to many of their structures with ropes, tourist helpers, and armed military guards. Sadly, I was unable to enjoy the same access to the coliseum and the catacombs as well as the Bell Tower of Pisa. Since the Bell Tower is leaning to the point of falling over today, there is no access to the tower as well as many other sites. I would love to go to Rome again.

 

I, too, had the opportunity decades ago to visit Rome when the sites were not nearly as secured as they are today. I found out that nobody was on the site of the Coliseum until maybe a half hour after sunrise. I made sure to get there the next day before sunrise. No gates, no locked ones, anyway, just me some bored pigeons and a lot of cats. I walked all over the place and got to do something I had always wanted to do, yell some of the cheers of the fans at the "games". Of course i started off with the "moritori te salutamus" (we who are about to die salute you). Then the cheer of "occide, occide" (roughly, kill the bum) and then " hoc habet, hoc habet ) he's had it. The last time I yelled so loud pigeons took off like a flight of flushed quail. For just a minute it was not the 20th Century but the 2nd, and I was there. By the way, Jim, if you threw your "three coins in a fountain" while there, you will go back.

 

I forgot about the 3 coins. I didn't see it in my later visit, but I have a picture with my brother and 2 sisters in front. Now were did I put that picture......

 

Too bad that Rome is so secure now. At least in Cambodia and parts of Mexico there are still relatively “wild” ruins that you can climb all over

 

Some great coins and fantastic insights. Thank you for sharing.

Great point. Thank you.

Michael Grant was one of those rare historians who bridged the gap between history and numismatics.

Here's more of Kenneth Harl on the subject:

"Debasement netted Nero revenues, but it courted risks. Price increases sparked by the debasement in 64 apparently had little long-term impact, but imperiling confidence in the currency was the first step toward financial disaster. The international reputation of Roman coins was tarnished. Merchants ceased to export aurei and denarii to South India soon after 64, and Tacitus acidly notes how untutored Germans outwitted Romans by insisting upon Republican denarii instead of debased imperial ones. Coins, however, were a minor part of overseas trade, for once they crossed the imperial frontiers, they passed in local marts by intrinsic worth rather than tariffing. It was public trust within rather than outside the empire that was critical to the success of imperial coinage."

So, it seems that Rome was well on its way to a fiat currency, that is, money that gets its value from government order (fiat). By definition (and similar to modern coinage), its intrinsic value is lower than its face value.

Roman Egypt had long used a fiat currency:






(My visitors, but not my pictures)

 

The debasement continued, of course.

Here's an antoninianus of Herennia Etruscilla, 250 AD. At 80% silver content, when first issued by Caracalla, this denomination was steadily debased, to the point that late issues contained 2-4% silver.

Actually, as these coins go for this period, this one is a heavy weight at 5.6 grams.

RIC 58b

Obverse: HER ETRVSCILLA AVG, Bust of Herennia Etruscilla right, lower crest.
Reverse: PVDICITIA AVG, Pudicitia, veiled, standing left, with right hand drawing veil, holding a scepter with left hand.

 

I think you will find that most metallurgist believe that the fineness of the silver issues of Caracalla was closer to a bit under 50% fine silver. In addition to the Harl book mentioned in this article above, Kevin Butcher has written an incredibly detailed and researched book on this very topic. Butcher has relied on the latest technique for calculating the content of these coins, not by testing the fineness of the surface metal, which for several reasons tends to be somewhat higher than for the metal below the surface, but by relying on a procedure that drills into the heart of the coin and removes the metal from the coin's interior. These tests have revealed that most studies calculating the percentage of silver in these highly debased coins are too high and need to be lowered to reflect the entirety of the alloy.

 

Thanks

That's very interesting information. So was the silver coinage in the later years plated with higher grade silver or silver washed to give the appearance of high silver content?

I got the 80% from the Internet, which, as we know, is full of alternate realities. Knowing Caracalla, 50% is more in line with his coinage. I do collect some of his colonial tetradrachms, notably from Antioch, which are mostly highly debased (billon).

 

I will probably mangle Kevin Butcher's work trying to do that but I believe it has to do with a natural process whereby copper is leached out of the silver on the surface by naturally occurring atmospheric conditions and chemical changes from contact with chemicals from handling, the other from some kind of technique the mint workers knew of that allowed for a greater purity of silver on the exterior. Butcher did not say this but I have wondered if it might be similar to what the US mint employed with the Kennedy half dollars and some of the Eisenhower dollars of the late 1960's which were 80% silver on the exterior and a much debased silver below that for a total of 40% silver as opposed to the earlier 90%. Perhaps someone else here more versed in the metallurgy of either (or both kinds ) of coins could chime in on this.

 

A friend of mine is a medieval coiner for fun, and he said he was able to reproduce late Roman silver wash coins by roughly reproducing what we have read the Romans did. We read they took planchets with low levels of silver and put them in casks of seawater, replacing the seawater periodically. This leeched copper from the surface, so when struck the remaining silver liquefied and coated the coin a silver color. He did the same in small batches, and indeed turned mainly copper planchets into "silver" coins.