The weight and diameter of the follis - it seems to vary a lot

I have been collecting the follii (?) of the caesars who served during the Diocletian era. I have noted that the weight and diameter of these pieces can vary a great deal. I take that this is either normal, or I have purchased some "reproductions" which I hope is not the case. Here are the pieces.

Galerius - caesar under Diocletian 293 - 305, Sear number 14397



10.61 grams,
approx diameter (these things are not perfectly round) 26.5 mm

Constantius - caesar under Maximian 293 - 305, RIC-3a



9.93 grams
diameter 28.5

Severus II, 305 - 306 caesar under Galerius



9.97 grams
diameter 3.0 mm

Maxentius, son of Maximian 307 - 312



5.85 grams
diameter 24.5 mm

Licinius Emperor 308 - 324



4.45 grams
diameter 22.0 mm

Maximinus II (Daia), 309 - 313



7.08 grams
diameter 21.5 mm

I would like to read your opinions.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

You have coins from different issues. At various times, coins were struck at different standards.

Here is a chart from Harl's "Coinage in the Roman Economy"




So, for the first example in the chart 32 coins were struck from a pound. You might get weight variation in each coin though. The weight in the chart is optimum, but you can always find heavy examples and light examples. Next is 40 to a pound and so on. As more coins were struck from a pound, the flans become smaller-- AE1- AE4. AE1 is the largest and AE4's are the smallest on the chart, no surprise as, for the last couple shown, you can see that 196 coins were struck from a pound.

 

A productive OP post and helpful chart from Victor.

“Follis” is a third declension Latin noun. That means its plural is a bit strange to English ears: “folles.”

I believe it would be pronounced “FALL-aze” or something close to that.

 

Follis is a term applied to these coins by modern numismatists. We don't know for certain what they were called at the time but it was almost certainly not a follis. The term was used in the ancient world for a bag of coins, at times for a bag of coins of a precise value. It was also applied by modern numismatists to the large Byzantine coppers.

SC

 

Do we have any idea as to how much these coins were worth relative to any of the Roman coins of the period, like the silver argenteus?

 

The large follis or nummus was introduced at 12.5 denarii communes (d.c.). At that time the silver argenteus was worth 50 d.c.

In 301 the value of the nummus was doubled to 25 d.c and that of the argenteus to 100.

The the argenteus was worth four of these large coins.

This 25 d.c. value for the nummus likely lasted until 318, although the actual denomination shrunk from 1/32 of a Roman pound to 1/96.

The argenteus ceased to be struck by circa 310 so there are really no comparisons after this.

The

 

Many thanks guys for helping me understand a great deal more about the Roman monetary system during this period. I have added this information to my notebook.

 

Thanks, Victor_Clark. A very helpful chart.

 

Various reforms between the mid 290's up until the 330's resulted in the nummus being reduced from a large coin to a small coin, presumably because of the pressures of inflation.

 

I mentioned Harl's book, but I highly recommend it. I was fortunate because it was the first Roman coin book that I read. It will answer questions you didn't even know you had!

Coinage In The Roman Economy, 300 B.C. To A.D. 700