Origins of Coinage

The floors are all polyurethaned and the important walls are all
painted. With the kitchen set-up in process, we are going through
more boxes. I came across some old CELATORS and I want to archive
here a fact that I often cannot cite.

At the ANA 1998 Early Convention in Cincinnati, I delivered a talk on
"The Origins of Coinage." That was a facilitated session. I served
as host and moderator, opening up the floor to discussion. It was
NORMAN COCHRAINE who suggested that the first coins were made to
provide "window dressing" to bullion to make it more exportable.

That citation comes from the letters column of the May 1998 issue of
THE CELATOR.

We do not know why coins are invented. Any theory to explain them
must be internally consistent and must explain known facts.
Furthermore, any such theory should also point to related but
different truths. Best of all, a theory to explain the origins of
coinage should serve as a predictor for previously unknown facts.

Many theories have been offered. Some are compelling. A few are
better than others. None is perfect.

On 6 Nov 2003 06:51:33 -0800, (Michael E.
Marotta) wrote:

At the ANA 1998 Early Convention in Cincinnati, I delivered a talk on
"The Origins of Coinage." That was a facilitated session. I served
as host and moderator, opening up the floor to discussion. It was
NORMAN COCHRAINE who suggested that the first coins were made to
provide "window dressing" to bullion to make it more exportable.

This is an old and long discredited theory. One of the few things we
know somewhat conclusively, according to an abundance of archeological
and hoard evidence, about the first coins is that they were NOT
exported, not showing up in hoards outside their immediate areas of
minting. This would only happen later, when silver largely replaced
electrum as the numismatic metal of choice because traders could much
more readily determine the intrinsic value of silver than electrum.

We do not know why coins are invented.

This is in direct contradiction to two previous statements you made.
In one, you said we now know that the first coins were intended as
gifts. I pointed out that this was just Martin Price's theory and that
few numismatists today, for convincing reasons, subscribe to it. Some
weeks later you amended your original statement by saying the first
coins were probably intended as gifts. Now, you've finally got it
right! We don't know why they were minted, though there is no shortage
of theories or those offering them.

Another thing, however, that we do know with relative assurance, along
with the fact that they weren't used for trade, is that they weren't
used in everyday commerce either. Even the smallest-denomination
electrum coins, worth about a day's subsistence, would have been too
valuable for buying a loaf of bread. The earliest electrum coins have
been conspicuously absent from archeological finds in marketplaces
where they were struck. And bullion was still used for commerce,
showing up in archeological finds in marketplaces during the period
and in the places where the first coinage emerged.

Instead of commerce and trade, these earliest coins may have instead
been intended as salary to mercenaries and civilian workers, tribute
to foreign rulers, donations to religious foundations, and/or payment
of taxes and fines, among other possible purposes, with the stamps on
them identifying their source -- the issuing authority -- and
guaranteeing their acceptance by the source as return payments.

--

Email: (delete "remove this")

Coin Collecting: Consumer Protection Guide: http://rg.ancients.info/guide
Glomming: Coin Connoisseurship: http://rg.ancients.info/glom
Bogos: Counterfeit Coins: http://rg.ancients.info/bogos