DOI issue:
Artykuły / Articles
DOI article:Van Alfen, Peter G.: Problems in the political economy of archaic greek coinage
DOI Page / Citation link:https://doi.org/10.11588/diglit.22230#0024
PETER VAN ALFEN
coinage throughout the Aegean and in the Greek west. The methodology, in the
main, is inductive, framing problems within anthropological or literary theories in
order to approach the materiał evidence of coinage through the literary represen-
tation of coinage. When successful, these studies have been able to map archaic
Greek mentalities coming to terms with the social, political, and economic aspects
of money generally, rather than with the decisions of individual poleis regard-
ing the production of specific series of coins. This has led in some cases to gross
generalizations derived from the treatment of money/coinage as an abstraction,
or to the inadvertent oversight of numismatic particulars that negate or seriously
undermine conclusions. Leslie Kurkę (1999),28 for example, maintains that in the
conflict between ‘elitist’ and ‘middling’ traditions over the civic appropriation of
the long-term transaction order, there was tremendous elite hostility to coinage.
This claim, however, is difficult to support sińce it was the elites who were respon-
sible for producing coins in many poleis;29 archaic Syracuse and Athens stand out
as obvious examples.
Greek numismatic studies, on the other hand, have traditionally been deduc-
tive, or simply descriptive. They often focus intensely on single mints, such as Syr-
acuse, and follow an established procedurę: for comparatively smaller mints, i.e.,
those that did not produce a truły massive ąuantity of coins, die studies provide
a relative chronology of the various series and the statistical basis for determining
the ąuantity of coins produced, plus technical information on weight standards
and die axis preferences. For larger mints, like Athens, a researcher might produce
a typology, illustrating all known types and attempts to establish a relative chro-
nology.30 In both cases, once the relative chronology has been worked out it is set
against the political history of the polis derived primarily from textual sources.
As noted before, known political events, such as wars, changes in constitutions
or hegemonie takeovers, are thought to be reflected in the coins, and therefore
these events are used as anchor points for turning the relative chronology into an
absolute chronology, thus producing a “story” of the mint that is neatly linear and
mainly political. Because there is still so much basie work to be done in Greek nu-
mismatics (e.g., die studies, attributions), synthetic treatments, like those of Thom-
28 KURKĘ, Coins, bodies, games andgold....
29 As noted by KROLL, “Review of S. von Reden...”; IDEM, “Review of Leslie Kurkę... and DE
CALLATAY, „Sur les origines de la monnaie...” and SEAFORD, “Reading money...” in their reviews of Kurkę
and von Reden.
30 The most ambitious die study of an ancient Greek coinage to datę is that of W. FISCHER-BOSSERT,
Chronologie der Didrachmenpragung von Tarent, 510—280 v. Chr., Berlin—New York 1999, who studied rough-
ly 8,000 didrachms of Tarentum. C. FLAMENT. Le monnayage en argent d’Athenes: de )’epoque archaiąue
a l’epoque hellenistiąue (c. 550—c. 40 av. J.-CLouvain-la-Neuve 2007 has recently offered a typology of Athe-
nian silver coinage in lieu of a die study.
coinage throughout the Aegean and in the Greek west. The methodology, in the
main, is inductive, framing problems within anthropological or literary theories in
order to approach the materiał evidence of coinage through the literary represen-
tation of coinage. When successful, these studies have been able to map archaic
Greek mentalities coming to terms with the social, political, and economic aspects
of money generally, rather than with the decisions of individual poleis regard-
ing the production of specific series of coins. This has led in some cases to gross
generalizations derived from the treatment of money/coinage as an abstraction,
or to the inadvertent oversight of numismatic particulars that negate or seriously
undermine conclusions. Leslie Kurkę (1999),28 for example, maintains that in the
conflict between ‘elitist’ and ‘middling’ traditions over the civic appropriation of
the long-term transaction order, there was tremendous elite hostility to coinage.
This claim, however, is difficult to support sińce it was the elites who were respon-
sible for producing coins in many poleis;29 archaic Syracuse and Athens stand out
as obvious examples.
Greek numismatic studies, on the other hand, have traditionally been deduc-
tive, or simply descriptive. They often focus intensely on single mints, such as Syr-
acuse, and follow an established procedurę: for comparatively smaller mints, i.e.,
those that did not produce a truły massive ąuantity of coins, die studies provide
a relative chronology of the various series and the statistical basis for determining
the ąuantity of coins produced, plus technical information on weight standards
and die axis preferences. For larger mints, like Athens, a researcher might produce
a typology, illustrating all known types and attempts to establish a relative chro-
nology.30 In both cases, once the relative chronology has been worked out it is set
against the political history of the polis derived primarily from textual sources.
As noted before, known political events, such as wars, changes in constitutions
or hegemonie takeovers, are thought to be reflected in the coins, and therefore
these events are used as anchor points for turning the relative chronology into an
absolute chronology, thus producing a “story” of the mint that is neatly linear and
mainly political. Because there is still so much basie work to be done in Greek nu-
mismatics (e.g., die studies, attributions), synthetic treatments, like those of Thom-
28 KURKĘ, Coins, bodies, games andgold....
29 As noted by KROLL, “Review of S. von Reden...”; IDEM, “Review of Leslie Kurkę... and DE
CALLATAY, „Sur les origines de la monnaie...” and SEAFORD, “Reading money...” in their reviews of Kurkę
and von Reden.
30 The most ambitious die study of an ancient Greek coinage to datę is that of W. FISCHER-BOSSERT,
Chronologie der Didrachmenpragung von Tarent, 510—280 v. Chr., Berlin—New York 1999, who studied rough-
ly 8,000 didrachms of Tarentum. C. FLAMENT. Le monnayage en argent d’Athenes: de )’epoque archaiąue
a l’epoque hellenistiąue (c. 550—c. 40 av. J.-CLouvain-la-Neuve 2007 has recently offered a typology of Athe-
nian silver coinage in lieu of a die study.