After centuries of debasement the once mighty denarius finally became obsolete during the 3rd century CE. Despite no longer circulating, the denarius evolved into a unit of account called the denarii communes, usually referred to as dc. It was replaced by a series of fiat coinage; small bronze radiates with a thin layer of silver on the surface that wore off with moderate circulation. These radiate coins were called antoniniani. To make matters worse barbarian groups in the Western Empire were counterfeiting these cheap coins. Inflation was out of control and the Roman Empire was on the brink of financial collapse. Aurelian initiated a currency reform in 274 CE by creating a new radiate coin of excellent quality guarantied to have a silver content of 5% and a superior silver wash on the surface. The new coins were called aureliani, and were circulating well into the reign of Diocletian. These radiate coins ceased to be made after Diocletian's currency reform of 293/294 CE. Diocletian's currency reform ended the minting of all regional provincial coinage too, and a uniform system of coinage was created to be used throughout the empire. The defunct Roman denarius was revived in the form of a new coin called the argenteus. The argenteus was modeled after Nero's denarius, (1/96 lb., but only 80% silver). The aurelianus was replaced by a new billon coin, the nummus, struck with a weight of 1/32 lb. and containing 4% silver. Diocletian also had a small radiate bronze coin made that had no silver and weighed about 3 gm. The gold aureus was also revived with a weight of 1/70 lb. containing 98% pure gold. The argentei and nummi were hoarded as quickly as they struck because of under evaluation in regards to the other coins circulating at that time. To induce the public to start using the new coins instead of hoarding them a 2nd reform was introduced on September 1, 301. The argenteus was revalued from 50 to 100 dc, and the nummus was revalued from 12.5 to 25 dc. This 2nd reform along with excessive minting of nummi did not stop inflation and rising prices. Diocletian was forced to impose his Edict of Price Controls on goods and services in the marketplace. This edict turned out to be a failure too, and the public reverted to the barter system for a long time thereafter to obtain goods & services. Diocletian's attempt to restore a tri-metallic currency system was admirable but not well thought-out. He didn't understand the intricacies of imposing this new system and tying it to all the other coinage in circulation. I finally acquired an important coin long missing from my collection, a Diocletian era argenteus pictured below. The coin is a lustrous, well struck example from CNG Triton XXV, depicting a finely engraved portrait of Galerius. Galerius as Caesar, 293-305 CE (struck circa 295). AR Argenteus: 3.37 gm, 18.25 mm, 12 h. Nicomedia Mint, Officina #3. Obverse: Laureate head of Galerius, MAXIMIANVS CAESAR. Reverse: The four tetrarchs sacrificing over an altar before a city enclosure with six turrets, VIRTVTI MILITVM (virtue of the military), in exergue S M (SACRA MONETA, "sacred money"), N (Nicomedia), followed by the Greek letter Gamma (3). RIC VI 20. CNG Triton XXV, lot 998; CNG Triton XXII, lot 1168, from the William Whetstone Collection. The photos in the catalog and website were darker than the actual coin, a common flaw with CNG photos. Simple photo editing would have corrected this. I did a search on the Wild Winds website and found a coin that is the exact same type as my coin, that was sold by Freeman & Sear in their Mail Bid Sale #12. Roman Empire: Galerius as Caesar, AD 293-305 (struck circa 295). AR Argenteus: 3.43 gm. RIC 20. RSC 234Ab. Rare. Good extremely fine. Estimate $1,500, price realized $1,518. Freeman & Sear Mail Bid Sale 12, lot 625, October 28, 2005. Picture below is another handsome and rare argenteus from the Nicomedia Mint with a portrait of Maximian Herculeus, commemorating a military victory over the Sarmatians. Maximianus Herculeus, 1st reign, AD 286-305 (struck circa 295/296). Nicomedia Mint. AR Argenteus: 3.33 gm, 20 mm, 1 h. The reverse depicts a camp gate with open doors. RIV 25b. RSC 553c. Photo courtesy of Leu Numismatik AG> Auction 10, lot 2362. Estimate 750 CHF, price realized 2,800 CHF ($3,515 including buyers premium). References: Coinage in the Roman Economy, 300 BC to AD 700. Kenneth W. Harl. John Hopkins University Press. 1996 The Oxford Handbook of Greek and Roman Coins, edited by William E. Metcalf, Chapter 29, THE LATER THIRD CENTURY by Sylviane Estoit. Reprinted by: www.academia.edu. Diocletian and the Roman Recovery. Stephen Williams. 1985 Essay from: www.academia.edu, Diocletian's Monetary Reform, C.G.J. Paankeet - Slootdrop 2013. CT members are welcome to contribute anything relevant to this thread .
A beautiful coin and a great write-up! Do we know that the argenteus was actually called the "argenteus," and that the "aureliani" of Aurelian were actually called that as well? Here is my one and only argenteus -- a nice example, I think, except for the small areas of discoloration on the obverse around Diocletian's nose and the top of his head: Diocletian, AR Argenteus, ca. AD 295, Heraclea Mint (1st Officina). Obv. Laureate head right, DIOCLETI-ANVS AVG / Rev. The four tetrarchs [the Augusti Diocletian and Maximian, and the Caesars Constantius Chlorus and Galerius], draped, sacrificing over a tripod altar, two of them on each side, before military camp gate with six turrets (four in front and two in rear), VICTORIA-SARMAT [referring to victories over the Sarmatians*]; in exergue, H A [Heraclea, 1st Officina]. RIC VI Heraclea 6 [see http://numismatics.org/ocre/id/ric.6.her.6], RSC V Diocletian 488j, Sear RCV IV 12612. Purchased from Kenneth W. Dorney, Oct. 2021. Ex. Ira & Larry Goldberg Auction 90, 2 Feb. 2016, Lot 3274. 19 mm., 2.70 g. *See Stephen Williams, Diocletian and the Roman Recovery (Routledge, 2000) at p. 76 (preview at Google Books): “In 294 Diocletian launced a fresh offensive against the main body of the Sarmatians. . . . By the latter half of 294 they [the Sarmatians] had sustained such a defeat that they ceased to be a threat for many more years. Sarmatian warriors were taken into the Roman armies in large numbers, either as mercenaries or under treaty, and later fought well under Galerius against the Persians.”
The first time I encountered the term aurelianianus (note the spelling) was in David Vagi's Coinage and History of the Roman Empire (1999). I had been interested in Roman coins for some 25 years by that time and had never come across the word in any of my reading. I have always been under the impression that David coined the term himself to distinguish the reformed double-denarii of Aurelian from those of Antoninus (Caracalla) but in the article below, he attributes it to "an early sixth century A.D. text of Zosimus": https://www.coinworld.com/news/precious-metals/twice-as-nice.html [edited]
Fascinating. Of course, Zosimus was writing 250 years after the fact, and I don't think we know whether that's what the coins were called contemporaneously. The article is also interesting in attributing the term antoninianus (for Caracalla's double-denarius) to the Historia Augusta. I always thought it was an invention of 19th or 20th century numismatists.
Donna, Thanks for posting the handsome Diocletian/Sarmatian argenteus . I wouldn't be concerned about the dark spots on the obverse, the coin has a good natural look. Thankfully no one tried to remove the spots ! The reverse shows more die wear but the inscription is clear & easy to read. The Sarmatians were a warlike group with blood ties to the Scythians, so it's no surprise to learn that they fought with their enemies for money. Everybody needs a good paying job . The origin of the words argenteus & antoninianus is a good question . I believe there is valid support for the word argenteus being ancient although I have no printed info at my fingertips to post. The word antoninianus, on the other hand, seems to be an invention by numismatists from the 19th century, copying the word from Caracalla's name. I have had coins with the strange spelling that dltsrq pointed out (Aurelianianus). As far as I know David Vagi is the only person using that spelling. I do like the label double denarius instead of antoninianus, since it probably best describes the actual value of the coin .
Nice coins! I only have 1 argenteus that I ended up buying last year. The reverse isn't as crisp as yours but the toning made up for it and won me over.
kazuma, That's a nice looking argenteus of Constantius I . The reverse of your coin shows more die wear too, which is usually the case. I felt lucky to find a coin struck from fresh dies on both sides & paid a premium for it .
Beautiful ! Argentei are often seen in very good condition, which makes them even more desirable Diocletian, argenteus - Nicomedia mint, 3rd officina, AD 295-296 DIOCLETI ANVS AVG, Laureate head of Diocletian right VICTORIAE SARMATICAE, The tetrarchs sacrifying before a campgate. SMNΓat exergue 3.3 gr Ref : RCV # 12615 (1000), Cohen #491 var, Constantius, argenteus - Antioch mint, 8th officina, c. AD 296-297 CONSTANTIVS CAESAR, Laureate head of Constantius right VIRTVS MILITVM, Campgate, *ANTH* at exergue 3.40 gr Ref : Cohen #318, RCV # 13966 (1100) Q
Q, Both of your coins are gems, thanks for posting !. I like the unusual beard on the Constantius coin . You're right, it's more likely than not to find high-grade argentei because so many were hoarded & never circulated .
