I was scrolling through the most recent Roma auction listings, and, incredibly, found a laureate denarius of Probus. I used to think that Aurelian was the last emperor to reasonably issue the denarius for general circulation. I understand that special issues were issued through the Tetrarchy. https://www.romanumismatics.com/252...ype=&sort_by=lot_number&view=lot_detail&year= My own Aurelian denarius: And a denarius-sized laureate coin of Maximian. What's the latest true denarius you have?
Mine is Gordian III. His issues were somewhat plentiful but not as common as the antoniniani. Interesting auction example of Probus.
To be honest I wasn't aware Probus issued those. Interesting. My latest denarius is from Julia Mamaea.
After falling out of production under Gordian III, the denarius was apparently not made again until the 250s under Valerian (except some possible off-metal strikes with aureus dies). Almost every emperor between Valerian and Diocletian made them, although only Aurelian and possibly Valerian/Gallienus intended them to circulate. They were probably more intended for some ceremonial purpose. My late denarii Gordian III Gallienus Aurelian Severina
Many thanks, @hotwheelsearl, for starting this thread. I have to be reminded (too dimly to be of use) of a thread over the last month, anyway, getting into c. mid-later 3rd c. denarii. The persistence of the denarius as a denomination this improbably late into the 3rd century, in any capacity, has its own fascination, even on a speculative level. --As you sometimes need, even regarding later Roman. (Regarding published, accessible documentation, medieval has been in a long drought. Where your example of Galerian is concerned, I'm clearly out of my league. But this is the interval where you have to ask yourself, Well, Wait a minute: what do you do with all the subsequent AE issues of Constantine I and his heirs, on comparable modules, with the same, laureate motif? Never mind the post-reform issues of Diocletian and Contantine, where the AR denomination was revived, respectively as the argenteus and the solidus. ...The latter continued, thank you (<--shorthand for, You Knew This), over several ensuing centuries of Byzantine issues. ...Right, so, just regarding contemporaneous understanding and implementation of the various denominations, What Were They, Really? Whether or not in terms that we would be readily able to apprehend, from our own, highly circumscribed communal frame of reference.
The Constantinian AE3 from the reform of 318 through to the FEL TEMP reform of 348 is believed to be the "centenionalis" referred to in the Codex Theodosianus. There is some debate as to the meaning of the word and the value of the coin. The root "centen-" means 100 and earlier references suggested a value of 1/100 of a solidus for the centenionalis. More recently, however, Latin etymologists have weighed in, noting that the -ion- suffix does not give the meaning "100th part" but rather "piece of 100 units". The written unit of account for ordinary transactions in the 4th century was the sestertius. Therefore, the nominal value of the centenionalis was likely 100 sestertii (= 25 denarii).
Wow, @hotwheelsearl , I had to dig on this one. My latest Denarii were from the messed up Emperors period, all kinda bunched together on the Timeline: RI Severus Alexander 222-235 CE AR Denarius laureate Victory stndg VOT shield foot on helmet RIC 219 RI Maximinus Thrax 235-238 CE AR Denarius Victory stndg RI Balbinus 238 CE AR Denarius 20mm 3.7g Rome Laureate draped cuirasses - Victory wreath palm RIC 8 RI Pupienus 238 BCE AR denarius bust r Concordia throne patera dbl cornucopiae Seaby 6
I think we can answer some of those questions, at least partially and with caveats, if we follow the modern countries that had an episode of hyperinflation and after a stabilization, the government decided to operate a denomination -- that is cut a number of zeros from the currency thus practically creating a new currency. You can follow this in Hungary in 1946-7, Israel in 1986 et al. The main difference is that while modern denominations scrape the board clean, Roman monetary reforms seem to have kept the denarius (denarii communes) as a money of account, at least for some time, and then time and again, with the actual petty coinage in use as a multiple of the denarius -- the radiate antoninianus, the 'new' antoninianus in 274 (some call it the aurelianus), the reform of Diocletian of 294 introducing the follis/nummus (which kept the 'radiate fractions' for some time, at the beginning, even mimicking the design of the 'aureliani'), the 24/25 denarii and 12.5 denarii of the first half of the 320s etc. The continual devolution in terms of weight and size after 294/305 culminating with the one standard GLORIA EXERCITVS type and the votives of 342-7 was reset with the new 'centenionalis' of 348 and the large 'double maiorinae' of 352/3 and this system continued until ca. 365. In the 370s-380s the 'centenionalis' was probably the small ca. 2g AE3 and the place of the previous 'double maiorina' was taken by an AE2 similar in dimensions to the AE2 coinage of 348. This lasted until 395, when the large AE2 was discontinued. The silver introduced in 294 should have been a coin in the tradition of the old denarius (I think it was even struck with the finess of the denarius of the 1st century AD) but it was certainly not worth 1 denarius. It was also a functional coinage of the Tetrarchic military. In fact the silver and gold of the 'Dominate' was very centralized and revolved almost exclusively around state affairs, while the public and market affairs were left to the copper-based, sometimes silvered coinage.
@seth77, thanks for this! I've never begun to study monetary history per se. But your explication provides resonant precedent for the medieval practice of using 'denarii' and 'solidi' (even together, however anachronistically) both in reference to circulating money, and as money of account. ...Which you got into in some depth, maybe a few months ago.
I would love owning a denarius of Probus, but that of Aurelian, and even more so of Philip the arab are covetable too Speaking of the latest issues of denarii, for now I have to satisfy myself with Gordian III, and the occasionnal Severina Q
I remember, it was on the linguistic aspects of denarius and its passing to different languages and cultural areas to mean the same thing -- money.
I've been fascinated by these too! They're awfully hard to come by, though (except for Aurelian/Severina, as you note). Here are the late denarii I've managed to pick up... Gallienus: Severina: Carinus: This tiny (and rare) post-reform coin of Diocletian was likely valued at 1 denarius communis. It's 1.42g and 17mm: (I also have a pre-reform small laureate coin of Diocletian, though the denomination normally called "quinarius": Going even later, Philip Grierson (Medieval European Coinage vol. 1, pp. 105-6) argues cogently that the Merovingian deniers c. 700 were called "denarius", and valued at 12 to the "solidus." Here's mine (c. 700-725):
Or in the UK until decimalization. (English) Pound/ shilling/ penny = (Latin) Libra/ solidus/ denarius = (abbreviated) £ / s / d.
Is there any etymological evidence for the word denarius turning into penny? Ie: denarius -> denarii -> denary -> denny -> penny ?
'Penny' is a Germanic word, from the same root as 'pfennig'. It's the English translation of 'denarius' rather than an etymological derivative.
@hotwheelsearl, if you did a search for "denarius," you might be able to find @seth77's recentish thread about how that evolved into the middle ages. But regarding pennies and denarii, @dltsrq nailed it. From the 9th and 10th centuries, the variations both of "penny" and "denarius" (equally anachronistic, but moving in opposite directions), begin to sprout all over what can broadly be called western Europe, not only linguistically but in terms of mintage in real time. But for the Scandinavian penning no less than for the Catalan diner, the English penny and the French denier were the prototypes in the more immediate, medieval context.
