Silver plated vs silver wash, which coin would've been more valuable?

Let's say I'm in Rome, buying groceries in a market around the late 260s when the Roman empire was trifurcated, and the denari/antoniniani were nothing but a copper coin with a thin layer of silver wash, not to pass it of as a solid silver coin, but to maintain the morale. Given they still had silver denari from previous centuries still circulating, although most of them were hoarded for their silver content or melted to make more antoniniani, as it's not uncommon to see a worn denarius in the circulation here and there.
So, my question is, If I have a worn fourree with exposed core, but still having some significant solid silver layer, and an antoninianus with no silvering at all, which coin do you, as a vendor, think would have had more value simply for its silver bullion content? the 10-20% silver containing fake denarius or an official antoninianus with <5% to almost nil silver content?
A fourree Domitian
A silvered Gallienus from 267 AD
However, the majority of antoniniani in circulation would've been crude with no visible silvering

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

Were I the vendor, I would accept the non-coated coin and treat the partially coated as a fake. Answer to your question: Official antoninianus.

 

I think the silver content doesn't matter at all. The equivalent situation today would be someone presenting you with an official US dollar note of 2010 (silver wash), an official USD note of 2020 (no silvering) and a fake dollar note (fourree). I guess it is clear now what you do.

 

Merchants probably had few options, and I don't think the good silver circulated much after 260 until the introduction of the argenteus in the 290's. Judging by Diocletian's Edict on Maximum Prices and Wages, inflation had been a problem for a very long time. And instituting the death penalty for violations of the Edict shows how the Imperium was determined to make the values of the nummus (follis) fixed. However the proclamation shortly after seemed to be ignored by the populace.

 

It may seem strange but many Romans were still accepting coinage at its nominal value as opposed to its intrinsic value as late as the third quarter of the Third Century AD. My reading of the value of coinage and the prices of goods in the market place does not reveal as much inflation as we would imagine at that time period. In a sense, over time, the Roman populace had become, like us today, willing to accept, in place of twenty dollar gold pieces and gold sovereigns 150 years ago, today with pieces of paper with zero intrinsic value but still valued by the populace as having real worth. As long as the Roman government accepted the coinage in payment of taxes the coinage had real value, perhaps an almost entirely fiat value but, still value. A sestertius of bronze circa 260 AD of about 16 grams may have had more intrinsic value as metal than a lightly silvered double denarius of four grams but that antoninianus was tariffed as eight times the sestertius and still accepted as such, apparently both in the market place and by the tax collector and may still have been convertible to gold. This fourre was trash. Nobody wanted it or would have accepted it as lawful currency. A silvered antoninianus would probably have been preferred over one with no silver showing but even those with no visible silver did have some, albeit a small amount, silver within the alloy of the coin. As above, the official antoninianus had more value as lawful currency.

 

I think the Romans accepted coinage at its intrinsic value right to the end of the Empire. The monetary system was basically split in a gold coinage with intrinsic value, a silver coinage that was prone to inflation (i.e. drop in standard) and even hyperinflation and an outright fiat coinage in bronze which had no real intrinsic value (regardless of different weights) and which was accepted at its nominal value.

 

As I recall, old money was called in more than once so a merchant would be unlikely to be presented with that choice. Was it not Trajan that demonetized old coins? I forget where I read that (Harl???). Anyone? Would a merchant accept the Domitian? Possibly, but we in the US can slip in Canadian quarters as well as 90% silver when the person running the cash register is not watching. 90% is still legal but I do wonder how many are still in circulation.

 

I thought that all antininanus coins were silver washed. The ones that exist today with no trace of silver lost it over time.

for example, those large Tetrach follis coins and the Julian Bull were all originally silvered although they’re tough to find today with any of it still intact.

 

That is as I understand it. The post reform fractions of the folles of Diocletian were not silvered and after that we need to study carefully which were and which were not.