The Roman monetary system was highly complex. It involved official Roman coins in both silver and bronze, which some provinces produced while others imported them from mints in Rome and elsewhere, as well as, in the East, a range of civic coinages. This is a comprehensive study of the workings of the system in the Eastern provinces from the Augustan period to the third century AD, when the Roman Empire suffered a monetary and economic crisis. The Eastern provinces exemplify the full complexity of the system, but comparisons are made with evidence from the Western provinces as well as with appropriate case studies from other historical times and places. The book will be essential for all Roman historians and numismatists and of interest to a broader range of historians of economics and finance.

In Coinage in the Roman Economy, 300 B.C. to A.D. 700, noted classicist and numismatist Kenneth W. Harl brings together these two fields in the first comprehensive history of how Roman coins were minted and used.

Most people have some idea what Greeks and Romans coins looked like, but few know how complex Greek and Roman monetary systems eventually became. The contributors to this volume are numismatists, ancient historians, and economists intent on investigating how these systems worked and how they both did and did not resemble a modern monetary system. Why did people first start using coins? How did Greeks and Romans make payments, large or small? What does money mean in Greek tragedy? Was the Roman Empire an integrated economic system? This volume can serve as an introduction to such questions, but it also offers the specialist the results of original research.

The debasement of coinage, particularly of silver, was a common feature of pre-modern monetary systems. Most coinages were issued by state authorities and the condition of a coinage is often seen (rightly or wrongly) as an indicator of the broader fiscal health of the state that produced it. While in some cases the motives behind the debasements or reductions in standards are clear, in many cases the intentions of the issuing authorities are uncertain. Various explanations have been advanced: fiscal motives (such as a desire to profit or a to cover a deficit caused by the failure to balance expenditure and revenues); monetary motives (such as changing demand for coined money or a desire to maintain monetary stability in the face of changing values of raw materials or labour costs); pressure from groups within society that would profit from debasement; misconduct at the mint; or the decline of existing monetary standards due to circulation and wear of the coinage in circulation. Certain explanations have tended to gain favour with monetary historians of specific periods, partly reflecting the compartmentalization of scholarship. Thus the study of Roman debasements emphasizes fiscal deficits, whereas medievalists are often more prepared to consider monetary factors as contributing to debasements. To some extent these different approaches are a reflection of discrepancies in the amount of documentary evidence available for the respective periods, but the divide also underlines fundamentally different approaches to the function of coinage: Romanists have preferred to see coins as a medium for state payments; whereas medievalists have often emphasized exchange as an important function of currency. The volume is inter-disciplinary in scope. Apart from bringing together monetary historians of different periods, it also contains contributions from archaeometallurgists who have experience with the chemical and physical composition of coins and technical aspects of production of base alloys

A broadly-illustrated overview of the contemporary state of Greco-Roman numismatic scholarship.

This tenth volume of Roman Imperial Coinage completed the first edition of the series founded by Mattingly and Sydenham in 1923. Its layout is based on the division between the eastern and western parts of the empire, and the reigns of successive emperors. A further section deals with imitative coinages struck by certain of the barbarian peoples. There are detailed accounts of the monetary system and mints, and of the coin-types and legends. The catalogue comprises some 1,800 entries, each individually numbered, and illustrated by 80 plates. (NP The coinage is discussed not only in its historical setting, but also in a comprehensive and documented conceptual context, making RIC X essential reading for students of the late Roman and Byzantine period, as well as for collectors. This seminal volume is reprinted by Spink in 2018 to make it available again to all those interested in this fascinating period of Roman Imperial coinage. (NP) Dr John Kent joined the Department of Coins and Medals at the British Museum in 1953, and was Keeper from 1983 until his retirement in 1990. As well as being an editor of the Roman Imperial Coinage series , he is the author of Roman Imperial Coinage Volume VIII (1981).

Roman monetary history has tended to focus on the study of Roman coinage but other assets regularly functioned as, or in place of, money. This book places coinage in its broader monetary context by also examining the role of bullion, financial instruments, and commodities such as grain and wine in making payments, facilitating exchange, measuring value and storing wealth. The use of such assets reduced the demand for coinage in some sectors of the economy and is a crucial factor in determining the impact of the large increase in the coin supply during the last century of the Republic. Money demand theory suggests that increased coin production led to further monetization, not per capita economic growth.

Information on the rarity of each type, including estimates of their value when first published in 2000, are presented in a separate table. The numerous, though less precisely understood, local coinages of the Imperatorial period are listed in an extensive appendix.

The first comprehensive study in over 100 years, cataloging the issues of each coiner in the period 280-31 BC and describing and dating them as accurately as the evidence permits.