Interesting question - How many antoninianii was striked with one die?

[Tibsi]

Hello,

Somebody know how many antoninianii was striked with one die in the middle of 3th century (Gordian, Philippus and Decius Family?
Specially obverse and reverse. I know the obverse must be excellent quality for crisp emperor's portrait.
I know it so about some hundred to one thousand. Or not?

Thanks,
Tibsi

[mix_val]

I read somewhere that a bronze die could strike 10,000 coins before wearing out.

[Robert_Brenchley]

It would depend how much wear they were willing to live with. By the time you get to the Gallic Empire, (OK, a bit later than you said) you get very few with seriously worn obverses, but some very worn reverses indeed.

[jmuona]

Hi,
actually an easy question: nobody knows...
To be lessc cynical, under certain fairly reasonable assumptions thousands of dies appear to be the maximum. However, such numbers are based on die-analysis of remaining coins and there are many problems involved.
The numbers people suggest in publications are more or less educated guesses. In general, it is assumed that many dies broke early on and did not contribute to the existing coinage in significant numbers. This is based on the fact that often when a die-analysis is made, the number of singletons (dies known from one coin only) are proportonately too common.
s.
Jyrki Muona

[leseullunique]

Roger Bland in his thesis refer thoses informations

Sellwood's experimental re-creation of an ancient mint has provided the starting point for the study of this problem. He found that his obverse die was able to strike at least 16.000 coins and estimated that it could probably produce many more. In 1974 Crawford proposed the figure of 30.000 for republican denarii. this figure has become the most widely accepted one, followed, for example, by Carradice in his die-studies of the coinage of Domitian. On the other hand, Walker poreferred the 'more conservative' figure of 20.000.

Kins has put this debate on a new basis, combining epigraphic evidence for the total amount of bullion coined for the tetradrachms of the Amphictionic coinage of Delphi with a die study odf the coins themselves to suggest that the obverse dies struck between 23.000 and 47.000 coins. The figure of 30.000 sits comfortably within this range.

[Andrew McCabe]

Roger Bland in his thesis refer thoses informations

Sellwood's experimental re-creation of an ancient mint has provided the starting point for the study of this problem. He found that his obverse die was able to strike at least 16.000 coins and estimated that it could probably produce many more. In 1974 Crawford proposed the figure of 30.000 for republican denarii. this figure has become the most widely accepted one, followed, for example, by Carradice in his die-studies of the coinage of Domitian. On the other hand, Walker poreferred the 'more conservative' figure of 20.000.

Kins has put this debate on a new basis, combining epigraphic evidence for the total amount of bullion coined for the tetradrachms of the Amphictionic coinage of Delphi with a die study odf the coins themselves to suggest that the obverse dies struck between 23.000 and 47.000 coins. The figure of 30.000 sits comfortably within this range.

Crawford's figure has also been widely rubbished, with some feeling that whilst the number for some issues may indeed be in the tens of thousands or higher, that for others may be as low as the hundreds, a possible variation so wide to be useless for economic calculations. Accidental circumstances of die metallurgy, die manufacture, coin metal composition (from soft to brittle) and striking technique may well have resulted in a huge variation, mainly on the downside. The whole calculation of the spurious 30000 was based on a few very large and evidently well managed issues (evidence of die numbering) at one specific point in time that likely as not represent the upper end of the scale of output per die. There are seemingly significant issues that may have been struck from vast numbers of dies (indicating very low numbers per die - I cite the crescent issue Crawford 57 as an example), and small issues are a case all by themselves - one has no idea whether they were struck in regular circumstances, and whether production numbers are limited by  technology or financial / political circumstances. In short, we know very little about this subject.

[Robert_Brenchley]

Any advances or variations in the metal technology available would make an enormous difference. We can't just assume the figure was anything like the same everywhere at all times in the 'ancient' period.

[rsuarez]

i agree that the number is mostly unknowable and the figures given little more than guesswork. there's just too many variables that are missing. what were the ancient dies made of? were the blanks heated or struck cold? when was it decided that a die had had enough and could be retired? then to make matters worse there's no saying that the methods didn't change over time nor that the same techniques for producing coins of one denomination would be used for another.

however, there is one way to come up with a more valid number. if you were to take two die-linked ants whose die wear state was sufficiently different you could (in theory) make a test die then go nuts and strike lots of coin blanks so that you can determine how many blows it takes to get from point A to B. still, i wouldn't trust the figure much for the same reasons as noted above: your die and the flans, and the whole manufacturing environment, are different than the originals so there's no way to be sure that comparing the service life of the two is even approximately similar.

ras