The manufacturing approaches used for Roman didrachms
Excerpt and screenshot from Star Trek Next Gen S2E16 “Q Who”:
SONYA: Hot chocolate, please. LAFORGE: We don’t ordinarily say please to food dispensers around here. SONYA: Well, since it’s listed as intelligent circuitry, why not? After all, working with so much artificial intelligence can be dehumanising, right? So why not combat that tendency with a little simple courtesy. Thank you. LAFORGE: For someone who just arrived, you certainly aren’t shy with your opinions. SONYA: Have I been talking too much? LAFORGE: No.
I fight the urge to use second person singular pronouns and include ‘simple courtesies’ and other things that might anthropomorphize LLMs. And yet every time I have this compulsion toward courtesy I remember Ensign Gomez schooling Commander LaForge that we don’t do these things for the machine but for our own humanity. In the Star Trek franchise Sonya makes Captain in Lower Decks and is portrayed as one who takes extra care towards compassion towards her own junior officers.
Of course the problem is that we’re told the extra gigabits of humanization is bad for our environment and we’re living in nothing like the post-scarcity future of the Star Trek universe. Still. I think I agree with Sonya. The risk for some is to start deluding themselves the replicator (or any other intelligent circuitry) is their friend. But, for others, the risk is becoming to used to issuing orders and perhaps losing a little of our soul in the process.
I’ve been asked to work in AI to my talk in Beijing next month. I’m excited for the trip and sad that “AI” is so popular that it makes muons less cool. For replicators to become a reality for our distant descendants we’re going to need the mouns perhaps even more than the LLMs.
Yesterday evening before my beloved read us all LOTR (my favorite crochet time!), I gave Claude this prompt
create a table with all these RRC didrachm types that includes the following data: mean box,peak,idle gaps, turnover min, anvils, as well as the ratio of obverse to reverse dies
I woke up to this:
As we think about ancient manufacturing practices there are two possible answers to the unscrambling of the crossed lines in die chain clusters, either one can theorize a die box with a few dies in use at the same time OR multiple workstations OR both. However I leave aside the possibility of both for small relatively simple issues as contrary to Ocham’s Razor, at least in the first instance.
I was suspicious of RRC 15/1. I’d not seen a die link chart to ‘prove’ this conclusion. I find charts far easier to fact check than these tables. I’m a visual person and they lay out data in a familiar way that is easy to cross reference against CRROs die link tables.
Prompt:
Show me a die link graph that illustrates the scenario of RRC 15/1 having only one anvil with no overlapping lines
This is where I started having intrusive thoughts about Ensign Gomez.
The other thing that seems noteworthy and concerning is where Claude tells me the answers it has given me before need correction:
For context, one generates briefings after a work session and then feeds that briefing into the next to ensure continuity of thought without maxing out a single chat thread.
So I put the above text into the box and then asked:
Explain how this error occurred, how it can be prevented, and why I should trust these results over the the prior results.
So now I get a result I think is actually important with my final prompt. And can use my commute into Manhattan to pick up my Chinese Visa to think about how I valid all of this prior to publication.
Prompt:
Same table with tweaks and additional data on RRC 25/1. Wait for RRC 25/1 data before beginning task. Change to minimum peak, minimum idle, and minimum turnover. Shade rows that require only one anvil.
This got good results but then I found I wanted more information so I used this prompt to modify:
Add to the chart a column for longest die cluster, and number of die pairs that connect to no other dies.
From 20/1 onwards we see a strong tendency to an approximate 1:1 obverse reverse die ratio. RRC 25/1 has the tightest manufacturing on this 1:1 model and in this most closely resembles RRC 15/1, but with far more pairings. Perhaps because it is a larger issue. The box is very shallow and not required to explain a one anvil hypothesis. There is little interest in creating chains. Perhaps even an avoidance of the practice. This shows to me concerted efforts to control (improve?) manufacture.
I manually downloaded the data on all examples of the types as cvs files from CRRO before asking Claude to do the following:
Prompt 1:
Extract the weight data from these four csv files. Calculate the median and mean for each coin issue, as well as the relative standard deviation. Create a box and whiskers graph to allow visual comparison of the four issues.
Prompt 2:
Same task. Small tweaks. Remove any outliers over 12g and under 4g. Remove the files names just use the issue names, do not included dates or mints.
This is a task I could very easily do without Claude. The advantage was only time. I wanted to fact check a sentence in a co-authored piece. I didn’t want to take the time to do the manual data cleaning and manipulation. Claude continues to try to be ‘helpful’ but this unwanted ‘help’ is very good for me to identify my own superior expertise and knowledge. I can see how this could gaslight someone into thinking they know more than they really do. It is also a reflection of how much outdated information is encoded in our linked open data, from revised dating to mint locations, etc etc.
I also like the scatter added to the traditional box and whiskers. The messiness is an advantage for seeing the real nature of the data.
Note the quaint accounting of the number of coins in the hoards:
a) one coin,
b) two coins,
c) a few coins,
d) a healthy amount,
e) a very great quantity.
On RRCH 28 the 1862 hoard, Sambon says (Machine translation)
Although I do not know the origin of this find, I became convinced—when it was shown to me—that all the constituent coins belonged to a single, recently discovered hoard. Style, mint, patina, and encrusting soil all pointed to this conclusion. It is therefore probable that the coins, which showed only slight signs of circulation wear, dated from the same period. Judging by the obols of Aesernia, they must have been issued after 262 BC, the year in which the city was occupied by a Roman colony.
The description of the coins suggests a hoard collected throughout the 1st Punic War, probably the pay associated with the naval forces. What it doesn’t contain is any cast coin age which means one of my hand written notes in the margins of my copy of RRC is likely inaccurate and I need to go back to the original publication to see where things got confused.
The screenshot above also have the full entry for RRCH 29 = Basilicata 1860. Paestum 1858 = IGCH 1904 and Sava 1856 = IGCH 1890.
Weirdly the page numbers in IGCH for Sambon are also in the 30s. I wonder if there is a later addition of this same volume and I’ve gotten confused.
Ah yes, they refer to his 1870 publication, which included the same material above verbatim(!)
Noah Kaye posted this ‘new to me’ image on the socials:
My first thought was how similar it felt in form to the Pietrabbondante bilingual roof tile. My all time favorite piece of material evidence from the ancient world. Here are some slides from my Roman Art class followed by some from one of my AIA lectures on Papius and Fabatus control marks. I really like Katherine MacDonald’s blog on this inscription.
Can scholarship on footprint symbolism in the eastern Mediterranean and Anatolia help us understand Italic phenomenon or visa versa?
I ended up at this publication (open access):
Osborne JF. Imag[in]ing Hartapu: Reconsidering the rise of an Iron Age kingdom. Anatolian Studies. 2025;75:1-27. doi:10.1017/S0066154625000043
#GOALS (get cute photos of kids into publications!)
Dunbabbin, K.M.D. 1990: ‘Ipsa deae vestigia … Footprints Divine and Human on Graeco-Roman Monuments’ Journal of Roman Archaeology 3: 85–109
And I would have read and skimmed it quickly but I don’t have institutional access… Grrr. I’ll put in an ILL order and hopefully remember to come back to this post.
Rojas, F., Sergueenkova, V. 2014: ‘Traces of Tarhuntas: Greek, Roman, and Byzantine Interaction with Hittite Monuments’ Journal of Mediterranean Archaeology 27.2: 135–60 [available from academia[dot]edu via Google scholar]
This is where I was when I learned a squirrel had attacked my kid unprovoked in our own backyard and since said squirrel attack involved the very smallest about of broken skin the rest of my day was at the ER and pharmacy engaging in overcautious preventative medicine. But in the waiting I snuck in a covid and flu shot, so no bad thing.
Anyway my only final thought. Before I let this post go is that something about the engraved foot prints also reminds me of the pair of open hands we find all over Anatolian tomb reliefs.
Something, something… embodied prayer, permanent enactment of transient religious practice, etc. etc….
Yesterday, I was checking a reference to another occupational relief in this same 1877 German journal. When this figure at the table caught my eye. So I thought I’d let myself track it down this AM.
The drawing is fairly true to life it seems. The object is not on display but is well catalogued on the Liverpool National Museum (no. 59.148.298) with its appearance in modern publications.
Points that interest me.
Lids on Dolia apparently of wood.
The foreman with a book standing on the lid of a dolia to supervise activities
The offering of a taste
The filling of an amphora (from the dolia?)
The window, do the circles help us see the merchant is rich enough to have glass in his windows?
The snake as a stand in for the lararium and the piety of the operation.
The way the scene alludes to both indoor and outdoor work. Notice the roof on the far right as an indication of spatial transition.
I concur that the figures on the left are likely the married property owners rather than the woman being a customer. Notice the joining of right hands.
The website of the museum says that the man at the desk is likely the merchant. I doubt this. Rather I think it shows the employment of bookkeepers and overseers.
In 2018 about this time I was was worried about hammers on coins. In fact that post was commenting on an earlier one from 2013. I was wrestling with symbols on early denarii issues as possible canting puns for moneyers and Russo’s redating of some bronzes.
At the time of writing I didn’t know this publication:
Padilla Peralta, Dan-el. “Hammer time: The Publicii Malleoli between cult and cultural history.” Classical Antiquity 37, no. 2 (2018): 267-320.
we also had not digitized Schaefer’s archive yet with the help of the Arete foundation and ANS and what would become RRDP.
The weird obverse I was discussing I would now call obverse no. 3:
This post was written mostly in early August and then saved to drafts. I reviewed it today and decided I was going to post it as I have no intent on expanding the materials any time soon.
EDR166343 = EDCS-20402573 (Loeb Translation). From Forum Novum now in Parma, Museo Archeologico Nazionale, sala dei centri minori dell’Agro parmense, inv. nr. L. 181
(ii) [frau]de lucrum quaesivit su[um] [.. . . . p]rotendit turbam [m]agnam [fu]giesque eam semp[er].
(ii) He got his profit by fraud. . . . it holds out mighty turmoil. . . . and you shall always escape from it.
Sacerdos nequis vir eset; magister neque vir neque mulier quisquam eset; | neve pecuniam quisquam eorum comoine[m h]abuise ve[l]et;
…No man is to be a priest; no one, either man or woman, is to be an officer (to manage the temporal affairs of the organization); nor is anyone of them to have charge of a common treasury… [Wiki trans.]
an arbitration agreement of 117 BCE from near Genoa
pro eo agro vectigal Langenses / Veituris in poplicum Genuam dent in an(n)os singulos vic(toriatos) n(ummos) CCCC sei Langenses eam pequniam non dabunt neque satis / facient arbitratuu Genuatium quod per Genuenses mo[r]a non fiat suo setius eam pequniam acipiant tum quod in eo agro / natum erit frumenti partem vicensumam vini partem sextam Langenses in poplicum Genuam dare debento / in annos singolos quei intra eos fineis agrum posedet Genuas aut Viturius
For the said land the Langensian Veturii shall pay into the public treasury at Genua every year 400 coins of the victoriatus type. If the Langenses fail to pay the said money and do not give satisfaction according to the will and pleasure of the Genuans (on such condition that it is not through the fault of the Genuans that any delay hinders them from receiving the money)—in this case the Langenses shall be required to pay into the public [treasury] at Genua every year one twentieth part of the grain and one sixth part of the wine which shall have been produced on the said land. [Loeb trans modified]
Vectigal anni primi K. Ianuaris secundis Veturis Langenses in poplicum Genuam dare | debento. Quod ante K. Ianuar. primas Langenses fructi sunt eruntque, vectigal invitei dare nei debento.
The Langensian Veturii are required to pay into the public [treasury] at Genua a first year’s rent on the first day of January next but one. For such land as the Langenses have enjoyed and shall enjoy before and up to the first day of January next they are not required to pay against their will. [Loeb translation]
queive filius eorum quoius erit quoius pater senator siet in annos singolos pe<c=Q>uniae quod siet amp[lius HS n(ummos) 3] [pro inperio prove potestate ipsei regive populove ipsius parentive ipsius queive in potestate manu mancipio suo parentisve sui siet fuerit quo]ive ips[e] paren[s]ve suos filiusve suos heres siet ablatum captum coactum conciliatum aversumve siet de ea re eius petitio nominisque delatio esto [pr(aetoris) quaestio esto ioudicium ioudicatio leitisque aestumatio queiquomque] [ioudicium ex h(ace) l(ege) erunt eorum hace lege esto 3 sei quis deicet praetorem nomen ex h(ace) l(ege) ita non recepisse utei delatum esset neque ioudicium ex h(ace) l(ege) ita datu]m esse utei peteret de ea re eius petit[i]o nominisque delatio esto pr(aetoris) quaestio esto ioudicium ioudicatio leitisque aestumatio quei quomque ioudic[ium ex h(ace) l(ege) erunt eorum hace lege esto 3]
[Long list of elected officials…] or any person who or whose father is a senator, for a sum of more than . . . sesterces in money for any particular year . . . such sum having been, in the exercise of official rule or rightful authority, carried off, seized, exacted, embezzled, or misappropriated from the person himself or his king or his people or his parent, or from whoever may be or shall be bound to him or his parent in authority, possession, or formal ownership, or from any person to whom he or his parent or son stands as heir—in such a case the said person shall have the rightful power to sue or summon; the inquiry shall be undertaken by a praetor; and the trial, judgment and assessment of damages shall by this law be undertaken by those persons whosoever by this law shall form the court. . . .
… De nomine deferundo iudicibusque legundeis. Quei ex h. l. pequniam ab …
Any person who by this law shall sue an opposing party for a sum of money
. | . q]uei pequniam ex [h. l.] capiet, eum ob eam rem, quod pequniam ex h. l. ceper[it, nei . . . neive tribu mo]veto, neive equom adimito, neive quid ei ob eam rem fraudei esto.
In the event of any person taking money under this law, a censor shall not, on account of such act in taking money under this law . . . or remove him from his tribe, or take away his horse, nor shall any disadvantage occur to him on account of such act.
. | . Ad quem praetorem ita relatum erit iudicum plus tertiam partem negare iu]dicare, is HS. n. [special character], quotiens quomque amplius bis in uno iu[dicio iudicare negarint . . . singulis quei iudicare negarint multam dicito. Tu]m quam ob rem et quantum pequ[niae dixerit, publice proscribito
. . . The praetor to whom it shall be reported that more than one third part of the jurors refuse to give a verdict, the said praetor shall inflict a fine of 10,000 sesterces in money on each separate juror who shall have refused to give a verdict as often as they so refuse more than twice in one trial. Then he shall cause a written public notice to be made giving the reason and the amount of the fine he has announced.
[De praedibus dandis bonisve possidendis. Iudex, quei eam rem quaesierit, earum rer]um, quei ex h. l. condemnatus erit, q. praedes facito det de consili maioris partis sententia, quantei eis censuer[int; sei ita p]raedes datei non erunt, bona eius facito puplice possideantur conq[uaerantur veneant. Quantae pequniae ea bona venierint, tantam pequniam iudex, quei eam rem quaesierit, ab emptore exigito . . | . quaestorique eam pequniam et quanta fuerit] scriptum transdito; quaestor accipito et in taboleis pobliceis scriptum habeto.
The judge who shall have held the said inquiry shall, in regard to such matters, cause the person who shall have been convicted under this law to give a quaestor sureties according to the vote of the majority of the jury and of the amount which shall have been assessed by them. Should sureties not have been so given he shall cause the goods of the said person to be taken into possession by the State, procured, and sold. As regards the amount of money at which the said goods shall have been sold the judge who shall have held the said inquiry shall exact the amount from the buyer . . . and shall hand over the said money, with a statement of the amount in writing, to the quaestor; the quaestor shall receive it and preserve the written statement among the public records.
Damages assessed at double the value of what was taken by the convicted person
Disputed funds may have been deposited in the aerarium and must be paid out without any dispute within 3 days
With multiple claimants the judge determines who gets what
Money not paid out for a no show claimant is deposited in the aerarium for five years, then forfeit to the state
fiet, nepotesque [t]um eiei filio gnateis ceiveis Romanei iustei sunto [et in quam tribum, quoius is nomen ex h. l. detolerit, sufragium tulerit, in eam tribum sufragiu]m ferunto inque eam tribum censento, militiaeque eis vocatio esto, aera stipendiaque o[mnia eis merita sunto. Neiqui magistratus prove magistratu . . . eius h. l.] | nihilum rogato.
then born to such son, be full Roman citizens; and in whatever tribe the party whom he shall have summoned under this law shall have voted, in that tribe shall the said persons vote and in that tribe shall they be rated by the ’censors; and the said persons shall have exemption from military service, and all moneys and pay earnable by the same therein shall be regarded as earned. It is not intended by this law that any magistrate or pro-magistrate shall not . . .
Lex parieti faciendo in area quae est ante I aedem Serapi trans viam. Qui redemerit | praedes dato praediaque subsignato | duumvirum arbitratu.
Contract for making a wall in the vacant building-space which lies in front of the temple of Serapis across the road. The contractor shall provide bondsmen and register their estates as securities at the will and pleasure of the members of the Board of Two.
Dies operis: K. 55Novembr. primeis. Dies pequn.: | pars dimidia dabitur ubei praedia satis | subsignata erunt; altera pars dimidia solvetur | opere effecto probatoque. C. Blossius Q. f. | 𐆘 ∞ Đ, idem praes. Q. Fundus Q. f. | Cn. Tetteius Q. f. C. Granius C. f. Ti. Crassicius.
Day for beginning the work: the first day of November next. Day of payment: one half of the sum shall be handed over when the estates have been registered to satisfaction as securities; the other half shall be paid off when the work is completed and approved. Gaius Blossius son of Quintus; he contracts for 1500 sesterces; is likewise surety.
Earlier post on the verb probare. The language of estates as surety is pretty standard, cf. EDCS-44100001.
[sciens d(olo) m(alo) HS 3 n(ummum) populo dare damnas esto et] eam pequniam quei volet magistratus exsigito … sei condemnatus [erit quanti condemnatus erit praedes] ad q(uaestorem) urb(anum) det aut bona eius poplice possideabtur facito sei quis mag(istratus) multam inrogare volet [quei volet dum minores] partus familias taxsat liceto eiq(ue) omnium rerum siremps lexs esto quasei sei is haace lege [pequniam quae s(upra) s(cripta) e(st) exigeret]
… let him be condemned to a fine to a fine to the people of . . . sesterces in money; and let any magistrate who shall be so minded exact that sum. … If he shall have been condemned to pay, he must present bondsmen before a quaestor of the city for the amount in which he shall have been condemned, or in default let the praetor cause his goods to be publicly confiscated. If any magistrate shall be minded to inflict a greater fine, let it be allowed him who shall be so minded, provided only that the same comes to less than a half part of the defendant’s estate; and let the law hold good for the said magistrate in all respects just as if he had exacted, under this law, the sum above set forth.
Sulla’s law of 81 BCE on the 20 quaestors from the temple of Saturn
q(uaestorem) urb(anum) quei aerarium provinciam optinebit eam mercedem deferto quaestorque quei aerarium provinciam optinebit eam pequniam ei scribae scribeisque heredive eius solvito idque ei sine fraude sua facere liceto quod sine malo pequlatuu fiat olleisque hominibus eam pequniam capere liceto
the amount of said payment the magistrate shall report to a quaestor of the city who shall have the treasury as his province, and such quaestor who shall have the treasury as his province shall pay the said money to the said scribe (or scribes) or to an heir and he shall be permitted to do so without risk of personal penalty, in so far as it is done without fraudulent embezzlement, and the aforesaid persons shall be allowed to take the money. [Loeb trans. modified]
…
viatores praecones quei ex hac lege lectei sublectei erunt eis viatoribus praeconibus magistratus prove mag(istratu) mercedis item tantundem dato quantum ei viator(ei) praeconei darei oporteret sei is viator de tribus viatoribus isque praeco de tribus praeconibus esset quei ante hanc legem rogaram utei legerentur institutei sunt
A magistrate or a person acting as a magistrate shall pay, to the messengers and heralds who shall be chosen or substituted by this law, just so much by way of payment as would be required to be paid to a messenger or a herald if such messenger or herald were chosen from the detachment of three messengers or three heralds respectively who were appointed to be chosen before the passing of this bill into law.
Cn. Pompeius Sex. f. imperator virtutis caussa turmam Salluitanam donavit in castreis apud Asculum cornuculo et patella, torque, armilla, palereis et frumentum duplex.
Gnaeus Pompeius, commander-in-chief, son of Sextus, in camp at Asculum, for valour presented the Salluitan squadron with the helmet-horn, a plate, a necklace, a bracelet, breast-pieces, and a double ration of grain. [Loeb trans modified]
This post started as just a running list of bibliography I wanted to return to. That material is at the end of the post.
Bowes, Kim. “Tracking liquid savings at Pompeii: the coin hoard data.” Journal of Roman Archaeology 35, no. 1 (2022): 194-220.
p.199:
P. 200
P. 201
P.202 (I would have liked these as box and whiskers to see shape of data or at least know median)
P. 204
P. 205
P. 211 – good discussion of costs for sustenance and housing, cf. Bernard 2026 for similar data. The continues on 212 with more prices and notes than if we relied on literary sources alone.
P. 213 –
P. 214
P. 215-216
Cf. Verboven, Koenraad. “Currency and Credit in the Bay of Naples in the First Century AD.” The Economy of Pompeii (2017): 363-386. [on file] From Flohr, Miko, and Andrew Wilson, eds. The economy of Pompeii. Oxford University Press, 2017. [acquire?]
Cf. Andreau, Jean. “The use and survival of coins and of gold and silver in the Vesuvian cities.” The monetary systems of the Greeks and Romans (2008): 208-225.
Cf. Duncan-Jones, Richard P. Roman coin circulation and the cities of Vesuvius. na, 2003. in Lo Cascio, Elio. “Credito e moneta nel mondo romano.” In Credito e moneta nel mondo romano. Edipuglia, 2003. [physical book]
Silver, Morris. “Finding the Roman Empire’s disappeared deposit bankers.” Historia: Zeitschrift für Alte Geschichte (2011): 301-327.
Super interesting and challenges von Reden 2002. Treasure trove of citations esp around credit-earning deposits going back to Republic.
Discusses interest rates. Still anecdotal and focused on empire.
This piece of Arrian is priceless.
The article ends with the author’s view that by 3rd century CE vast majority of Roman economy is token while acknowledging detractors to this view. Accepts however QMT as fact (see earlier post).
Frangipane, Marcella, Monika Poettinger, and Bertram Schefold. Ancient Economies in Comparative Perspective. Springer, 2022.
May interesting essays in this volume: PDF on file:
Gabrielli, Chantal. “Debt and Usury: Economic and Financial Questions in the Roman Republic (Fifth–First Century BC).” In Ancient Economies in Comparative Perspective: Material Life, Institutions and Economic Thought, pp. 325-341. Cham: Springer International Publishing, 2022.
V high level overview. Smart but not terribly useful to me at the moment besides leading me to the reference I really really needed: Ioannatou, M. (2006). Affaires d’argent dans la correpondence de Cicéron. L’aristocratie sénatoriale face à ses dettes. Paris: De Boccard. [ILL ordered whole book, could not buy in time, so will scan private copy.]
Ialongo, Nicola. “Weight-based trade and the formation of a global network: material correlates of market exchange in pre-literate Bronze Age Europe (c. 2300–800 BC).” In Ancient Economies in Comparative Perspective: Material Life, Institutions and Economic Thought, pp. 207-232. Cham: Springer International Publishing, 2022.
Merola, Francesca Reduzzi. “Slaves Sales in the Roman Empire and Perspectives of Comparison.” In Ancient Economies in Comparative Perspective: Material Life, Institutions and Economic Thought, pp. 361-371. Cham: Springer International Publishing, 2022.
Verhagen Hendrik L.E., Security and Credit in Roman Law. The historical evolution of pignus and hypotheca. Oxford University Press, Oxford 2022. XII, 434 S., ISBN 978-0-19-969583-6
R. Svensson (ed.), Economic Perspectives on Monetary History. Stockholm: The Swedish Numismatic Society 2026. I’ll dive in at another point for all I’m irrationally hostile to the AI generated book cover the images and narrative seem sensible enough. [open access]
Morcillo, Marta García, and Cristina Rosillo-López, eds. The real estate market in the Roman world. Taylor & Francis, 2023.
Esp. Andreau, Jean. “The Real Estate Market in the Campanian Wax-Tablets.” in this volume
Andreau, Jean. “Capital and investment in the Campanian tablets.” Capital, Investment, and Innovation in the Roman World (2020): 417-35.
Bernard, Seth. “Slavery, prosperity, and inequality in Roman Pompeii.” Past & Present 272, no. 1 (2026): 3-50. On file!
The form of the cippus as reverse type is also fascinating as a means of taking a monumental text and circulating. There are more examples, all the relevant ones seem Augustan.
Inscriptions on Cippi on Augustan Coins (all c. 16-12 BCE):
Camodeca, Giuseppe. “Il credito negli archivi campani: il caso di Puteoli e di Herculaneum.” In Credito e moneta nel mondo romano, pp. 69-98. Edipuglia, Bari, 2003.
(It gets good about p. 76) I realize that maybe I’m jumping into the material at the wrong point.
Camodeca, Giuseppe, Tabulae Pompeianae Sulpiciorum, 1999 is the primary reference.
It can no longer be had as a physical book for love or money and does not seem digitized (at least not legally), but is in most major research libraries.
I found this review article a good entry point overview:
So I go to APh and sadly this Italian conference proceedings volume was never catalogued there (plenty of Camodeca’s other publication), then I go to google scholar, viola!, lots of newer stuff citing this piece. No surprise it had a big influence on how Harris thought and wrote about the Roman economy as well as Lo Cascio and Scheidel and others. This led me to take note of all sorts of interesting citations, but those are being stored in another post (currently in drafts). I’m going to come back to these and some are in the next post, but her I stick with the Camodeca and TPSulp stuff for this post.
Then I read these two pieces:
Jakab, Éva. “Loans and securities: Tracing Maritime Trade in the archive of the Sulpicii.” Roman law and maritime commerce 137 (2022).
Candy, Peter. “Credit for Carriage: TPSulp. 78 and P. Oxy. XLV 3250.” Roman Law and Maritime Commerce 175 (2022).
Both in
PETER CANDY and EMILIA MATAIX FERRÁNDIZ (EDS), ROMAN LAW AND MARITIME COMMERCE. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press, 2022. Pp. x+ 204, illus. isbn 9781474478144.
Like in my reading of Camodeca above my impression is that the sums are so much smaller than those in the Ciceronian archive. A different order of magnitude that makes me re calibrate my reading.
Also I hate endnotes. Not always but wow they are harder to utilize as a scholar looking to extract and check information than just leisurely digest.
To read something more recent by Camodeca I went here as it gives incite both into acknowledgement of a debt but also Camodeca’s methodologies in reading these texts:
Camodeca, Giuseppe. “Il Senatore Q. Cassius Gratus e Un Suo Affare a Puteoli. Ricomposizione Di Una Tabula Herculanensis Del Gennaio 53 (TH2 A 32).” Zeitschrift Für Papyrologie Und Epigraphik 217 (2021): 261–65.
Obviously I love the vocabulary of probare (another post). But the central point of interest is that the creditor is a praetorian ranking senator making a loan through his enslaved agent to a third party. The document sets a deadline for the repayment of an outstanding balance, forces the debtor to acknowledge that balance, the timeline, and sets a penalty:
Visual for context:
I love an article that deep dives one piece of evidence, but I also realize that how I feel about this type of material culture is how others feel about coins, a specialized field where one struggles to understand how to check the validity of the claims.
Silver, Morris. “Finding the Roman Empire’s disappeared deposit bankers.” Historia: Zeitschrift für Alte Geschichte (2011): 301-327.
more notes from this article in next post, keeping this one focused on Sulpicii material or trying to.
