This started as collection of instances where Cicero refers to written account books in his whole corpus. I wanted to get a sense of the vocabulary, types of references, and any cultural norms around record keeping I can deduce. That’s easy to summarize, good Romans keep exceptionally precise records of their finances, good enough to be consider proof in court, bad Roman (and foreigners, obviously) don’t write stuff down and if they do it is on weird scrappy records not in neat chronological tables. Cicero likes to pun on the various uses of tabula. New tabula can mean both a wiping out of debts and the drawing up a list of items for auction. Tabula are places where you credit yourself a bribe from someone and also where you indicate your position on a legal matter. Lots of rhetorical fun.

But the best part of this reading exercise today was find the yummy passage below. I’ve read the letter a dozen times before, it is a pathetic and memorable one in many ways. Cicero is so upset his best friend is upset with his decisions. The civil unrest has come home to roost as Cicero feels his age.

sed abesse hanc aetatem longe a sepulcro negant oportere.

However they say that men of my age should not go far away from their graves.

This read through this particular passage hit different:

19 August 44 BCE, Att. 16. 7.6, written at sea near Pompeii

Reversionis has speciosas causas habes, iustas illas quidem et magnas; sed nulla iustior quam quod tu idem aliis litteris, ‘provide, si cui quid debetur, ut sit unde par pari respondeam. mirifica enim δυσχρηστία est propter metum armorum.’ in freto medio hanc epistulam legi, ut quid possem providere in mentem mihi non veniret nisi ut praesens me ipse defenderem. sed haec hactenus; reliqua coram.

My adjusted translation: I have given you the ostensible reasons for my turning back, and they are good and weighty enough. But as good as the best of them is one which you, once again, mention in another letter: ‘Take care, if you owe anyone anything, so that I may reply with like for like. The war scare has made things exceedingly difficult’ I read that letter halfway through the Straits, so that the only means of ‘making provision’ that I could think of was to be on the spot to defend myself. But enough of all this. What remains to be said can await our meeting.

S-B trans from new Loeb: ‘If you leave any debts, make provision that I have the wherewithal to square accounts. The war scare has made money amazingly tight.’

Don’t believe the bit in the SB translation about money. There is no words for money in the words of Atticus. Yes money is implied by the implication is deeper and Cicero knows it. Debetur can apply to both monetary debts but all sort of obligations, I’ve changed the translation to add in this vagueness. Atticus has cut off Cicero from any credit, not just monetarily, but socially. Hence Cicero’s choice of the verb defendo, he’s not coming home to settle accounts he’s coming back to save his credit in the sense of fides or good-word or social capital. He asks earlier in the letter if a defense is really necessary to Atticus of all people whom he felt supported his leaving. He will defend himself and his actions before Atticus, coram.

Money matters but money is also the language of mutual respect and trust among elite Romans. Cicero probably owes Atticus himself, he usually does, that cui, anyone, includes Atticus. Moreover Cicero knows from elsewhere in the letter that Atticus has stopped confiding in him. Pilia his wife had a stroke. Cicero learns this from Brutus NOT Atticus and expresses concern.

Other quotes from Atticus’ letter that Cicero rebuts:

‘Fine then! You who is all about of ‘belle mort’— Fine, forsake your country!’

‘bene igitur tu qui εὐϑανασίαν, bene! relinque patriam!’

SB: ‘All right then! You talk of an easy end—all right, forsake your country!’

The Greek does not imply easy but rather meaningful or well done. A good death.

‘velim σχόλιον aliquod elimes ad me, oportuisse te istuc facere.’

‘I should like you to polish up a little tract to show that such was your duty, and address it to me.’

It is in response to this that Cicero implies that Atticus has changed his tune and in doing so broking faith with him and asks how he can need to defend himself to Atticus even if he will write on duties Atticus will not be the addressee. Hence the origin story of one of Cicero’s final works.

---

Account books in Ciceronian Corpus

not a complete survey, but rather illustrative for my own purposes

de Orat. 1.250

An vero si de re ipsa, si de finibus, cum in rem praesentem non venimus, si de tabulis, et perscriptionibus controversia est, contortas res et saepe difficiles necessario perdiscimus:

acknowledging that legal matters often depend on documents that are not present but need complex explanation or discussion

pro Rosc. Com. 1

He, of course, as a fine gentleman and endowed with singular integrity, is attempting to use his own account books [tabulas] as evidence in his own trial. Those who have cited the payment of money by the account books of a man of proven character generally say: “Could I have bribed a man of such quality to make a false entry in his books for my sake?” I am waiting to see how long it will be before Chaerea uses the following argument: “Could I have induced this hand, full of treachery, and these fingers of mine to make a false entry of a debt?” But if he produces his account books, Roscius, too, will produce his. This entry will be found in the former’s books, but not in my client’s. Why should credence be given to the former rather than the latter?

—

Ibid 2

Aeque enim tabulae condemnantur eius qui verum non rettulit et eius qui falsum perscripsit.

For the account books of one who failed to enter what is true are as blameworthy as those of one who has written down what is false.

—

Ibid 3

Non confecit tabulas? Immo diligentissime. Non refert parva nomina in codices? Immo omnis summas.

Did he not keep books? On the contrary, most carefully. Does he not enter small debts in his ledgers? On the contrary, every sum.

—

Ibid 6

Quod si eandem vim, diligentiam auctoritatemque habent adversaria quam tabulae, quid attinet codicem instituere, conscribere, ordinem conservare, memoriae tradere litterarum vetustatem?

But if daybooks have the same value, the same exactness, and the same authority as account books, what is the use of establishing a ledger, of writing down, keeping an ordered list, and entrusting past events to a written record?

Both before and after this passage is extensive discussion of how tabulae are different and more fulsome that adversaria

—

Ibid 9

How is it that, when all other people who keep account books (tabulas) transfer their accounts nearly every month into their books, you allow this debt to lie neglected in your daybook for more than three years? Have you organized all the other debts in the ledger [codicem] of receipts and disbursements or not? If not, how do you keep your books? If you have, why is it that, when you were entering all the other debts in order, you left this debt, which was extremely large, for more than three years in your daybook? You did not want it to be known that Roscius was indebted to you. Why then did you write it down? You had been asked not to enter it. Why do you have it written in your daybook (adversariis)?

—

Ibid 13

Fannius admits that he did not pay the money, he does not say that he entered it as paid, since he does not quote his account books (tabulas). His only remaining alternative is to say that he made a stipulation (stipulatum). For I cannot think of any other way for him to be able to claim a fixed sum of money. You made a stipulation. When? On what day? At what time? In whose presence? Who says that I made a promise? Nobody.

—

Topica 16

A differentia: Non, si uxori vir legavit argentum omne quod suum esset, idcirco quae in nominibus fuerunt legata sunt. Multum enim differt in arcane positum sit argentum an in tabulis debeatur.

An argument based on difference: If a man has bequeathed to his wife all the money that is his, he has not, therefore, bequeathed what is owed him; for it makes a great difference whether the money is stored in a strong-box or is on his books.

—

Cat. 2.18

All right; but would you think that your estates will be regarded as sacred in the general devastation? Or are you waiting for new books? (tabulas) You need not expect them from Catiline; but my good offices are indeed providing new books—auctioneers’ catalogues (auctionariae).This is the only way in which men who possess estates can be solvent. If they had been willing to do this earlier and had not been so stupid as to try to meet the interest on their debts from the income of their estates, we should find them both richer and better citizens.

—

Cic. Att. 1 Oct 54

haec pactio non verbis sed nominibus et perscriptionibus multorum <per> tabulas cum esse facta diceretur, prolata a Memmio est nominibus inductis auctore Pompeio.

The compact, which, as was stated, was not an oral one but had been entered in the account books of many persons with names and full details, was produced by Memmius on Pompey’s advice with the names cancelled.

---

Itaque tanti acervi nummorum apud istum construuntur ut iam expendantur, non numerentur pecuniae.

Does it really mean weigh in the literal sense here or could it mean to estimate. Probably literal weighing…

—

Cic. phil.2.40

—

Balb. 11

---

---

Pro Caelio 17

Nam quod aes alienum obiectum est, sumptus reprehensi, tabulae flagitatae, videte, quam pauca respondeam. Tabulas, qui in patris potestate est, nullas conficit. Versuram numquam omnino fecit ullam.

As for the reproach that he is in debt, his expenditure blamed, his account-books demanded, see how brief is my reply. One who is still subject to his father’s authority does not keep accounts. He has never rolled over a debt to a new creditor. [trans modified]

—

Flacc. 20

The greeks don’t keep good records like we do! Cf. Pro Saur. 18.

---

Font. 11

Nemo Gallorum sine cive Romano quicquam negotii gerit, nummus in Gallia nullus sine civium Romanorum tabulis commovetur.

No Gaul ever does business independently of a citizen of Rome; not a penny changes hands in Gaul without the transaction being recorded in the books of Roman citizens.

—

Pro Sest. 72

subito nominibus in tabulas relatis nomen suum de tabula sustulit.

after he had posted up in his account-books the money he had received, removed his name from the posted list

[Cicero plays with the two types of tabula, the personal financial records vs the legal announcement]

—

Verr. 2.1.37

Previous governor turned over records (rationes) along with money, grain, and the army.

Cf. Ibid 98 – Verres uses excuses about not turning over his rationes to the treasury, Cicero holds he should have made copies.

—

Verr. 2.1.100

Hinc illae extraordinariae pecuniae, quas nullo duce tamen aliqua ex particula investigamus, redundarunt; hinc ratio cum Q. et Cn. Postumis Curtiis, multis nominibus, quorum in tabulis iste habet nullum;

He keeps accounts (ratio) with various bankers but doesn’t record them on his own tabulae.

Cf. ibid 102

Homo stultissime et amentissime, tabulas cum conficeres et cum extraordinariae pecuniae crimen subterfugere velles, satis te elapsurum omni suspicione arbitrabare, si quibus pecuniam credebas iis expensum non ferres, neque in tuas tabulas ullum nomen referres, cum tot tibi nominibus acceptum Curtii referrent? Quid proderat tibi te expensum illis non tulisse? An tuis solis tabulis te causam dicturum existimasti?

Oh you consummate fool and madman, when you were making up your books and scheming to escape being charged in connexion with those unrecorded sums of money, did you fancy that you could quite evade all suspicion simply by not recording the payment of money to those who took charge of it for you, or by showing your books with no such entries at all, when the accounts of the Curtii recorded all these sums received from you? How did it help you to make no entry of what you paid to them? Or did you imagine that your case would be tried on the evidence of no one’s accounts but your own?

---

Verr. 188

Capinatius money lender has secret account on the books for Verres under false name. Slave scribe assumed of writing this name.

Copies made and sealed by reputable men as proof

---

Verr. 2.3.93 for reading aloud of tabula

—

Flac. 21.

Official records of a magistrate must be held in public custody after being sealed

—

Cluent. 82

Cluentius has kept his accounts most scrupulously—a fact which assuredly has this advantage that no addition or subtraction could have been made to or from the family estate without its appearing. Yet for all these eight years you have been thinking over your case, investigating, discussing, examining every item relevant to it in his or other people’s accounts, and all this time not a trace do you find of such expenditure on the part of Cluentius.

---

Pis. 61

The treasure official copies out the provincial rationes of Piso and then is imagined exclaiming

ratio quidem hercle apparet, argentum οἴχεται.

The count indeed is plain, the coin—is gone!

Plaut. Trin. 2.4.18

The filing is in line with the Lex Julia

No, it is neither ancient, nor Roman. I probably paid more than I need to but I don’t like bidding. I just want to hit the buy button and be done with it.

I wasn’t even going to tell all y’all about it but wanted to write this evening just for me, and this is the first novel thing that came to mind. I’ve been writing a great deal off the blog and it is going well, but today was a “kill your darlings” kind of day with much thinking about structure and presentation. The material I know well and holds no novelty. Sometimes I crave intellectual novelty.

Do you see the design? It is a piece of spade money. Spade money is an an early form of coinage used by ancient Chinese peoples. The specific spade money chosen for these coins is similar to this one:

BM

The BM transcribes the inscription as 貝丘 (on the spade) = Bei Qui. I’m disappointed the BM catalogue cannot tell me more about Bei Qui and Google is equally crappy.

The BM dates the spade above to 481-221BCE the Warring States Period and the Eastern Zhou dynasty. I’ve got no way of validating that. They also say:

But again I cannot seem to confirm this. All the spades with this inscription in the BM were acquired from one single auction house a few early 1980s, a couple more mid 1990s. I decided to see if the auction catalogue writers were better informed. I learned: “Qi Bei is the traditional reading of this name, but Bei Qiu and Qui Bei have also been put forward as potential readings.” I also found question marks after the transliteration and suggestions it might be associated with the State of Han. Nothing that gave me great confidence. I will have to keep looking. I’d also love to know why of all the numerous spade money inscriptions this one ended up commemorated on modern coins.

I purchased my little coin because of how it evokes the ancient to legitimate the new, implying continuity. A theme I generally like to see as it manifests in different cultures. Yet, it also gave me the opportunity to learn about Sun Yat-sen and the politics and divisions in late 19th and 20th century China.

The denomination on mine is 5 Fen. Here’s a 1 Fen also from BM. You’ll see the choice of spade money is stable across denominations. I also am particularly enamored by the ‘Greek’ key design as border.

—

Yes this was inspired by upcoming China trip.

This is a “reference checking is distracting and I must move on” post.

Cleobis and Biton!

Earlier Post

Atlas!

Source

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.

Ok gotta do the school run.

I didn’t mean to make a post but I was checking a reference to RRCH 28 which Crawford cites as Sambon, Recherches, 33

This got me to the full text of Recherches sur les anciennes monnaies de l’Italie méridionale (1863), but the 33 seemed meaningless. Luckily it easy enough to find the accurate citations. Hoards are discussed and itemized on pages.

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(!)

Sambon, L.: Recherches sur les monnaies de la presqu’île italique depuis leur origine jusqu’à la bataille d’Actium.

Can I just say calling these publications Sambon 1870 and 1863 would have been much clearer than using a shortened title which could apply to both….

Ah well. Back to citation checking.

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….

It’s Monday and I have other work to do.

—

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.

—

If I return to this I must check this book.

—

keywords: vinter, wine merchant, harvest

—

Flashback.

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.

lucrum

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.

130 a.C. / 31 a.C. (palaeographia; lingua)

pignus

EDCS-20000227, Rome (Esquiline?) 100-93 BCE

[in ea] loca iecerit in[3 uti HS 3] / [ma]nus iniectio pignorisq(ue) capi[o siet]

… uncertain places, against him there shall be, for a fine of . . . sesterces, laying of hands upon him and taking of a pledge. [Loeb trans.]

pecunia

senatus consultum de Bacchanalibus of 186 BCE

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.]

EDCS-20000142

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]

EDCS-20200006 – Lex Acilia, c. 121-113 BCE

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 . . .

Praes, Praedium

EDCS-25900656, 105 BCE, Puetoli

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.

EDCS-26200338: Lex Bantia, c. 130-70 BCE (disputed)

[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.

Merces

EDCS-20000143

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.

---

Value conveyed without Vocabulary?!

EDCS-19900038

Rome, 88 BCE

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]

Pompeian Graffiti

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).

See on Cicero passage: Money from Moneta

---

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!