Why date coins?

ajaan · May 7, 2014 2:57AM

What was the reason coins started to be dated? Why all of a sudden in the late 15th C. dates were put on coins? What purpose did this serve? Do we really need dates on coins now?

NiceCurrency · May 7, 2014 3:11AM

I don't have an answer for you, but they were dated much earlier than that.

sumnom · May 7, 2014 4:55AM

I was under the impression that the practice was to facilitate keeping count of how many coins are minted. I suppose it is the same reason we have mint marks. You want to be able to keep track of how many coins are produced at particular mints in particular time periods in order avoid inflation/deflation.

mudskippie · May 7, 2014 9:36AM

Just to know when the coin was made is very important! If I have 2 of the same coin, I would like to know which one is older or was minted first and the year it was minted. Yup, circa 220BC - 180BC is not precise enough.

lordmarcovan · May 7, 2014 4:47PM

I can only guess at the purposes it served, but I'm glad most coins have dates. That's one thing that caused me to switch from stamp collecting to coin collecting when I was a kid.

As a collector, a specific date just tells part of the coin's story more specifically, somehow. You know what I mean.

BTW, though the late 15th century is probably the timeframe for the earliest AD-dated coins most of us mere mortals can afford, the first Christian-dated coin with an Anno Domini date was the Danish Roskilde denier of 1234

Sapyx · May 7, 2014 11:04PM

The short answer to the question, "Why do we put dates and mintmarks on coins when they appear to serve no obvious useful purpose?", is "Tradition".

Traditionally, mintmarks helped with quality control. In mediaeval times, if the government found large numbers of "official-looking" coins that appeared to have been struck with genuine dies but were inferior in weight and quality, the government would be able to tell when and where the debasement happened and prosecute the offending mint-master. The punishments for a mint worker making bogus coins was quite severe, and it was no idle threat, either. Mediaeval English coins bear neither dates or "mintmarks" as we understand them, but the name of the moneyer and the town in which he worked were spelled out in full on the coin's reverse. Back in 1124, King Henry I heard rumours that the standard of his coins was slipping, so he summoned all 150 moneyers from throughout the kingdom to appear and have their coins tested - and 94 of them failed the test, and were punished by having certain body parts removed. Ironically, the surviving coins from that time period show no evidence of any such debasement; either the debased coins were very thoroughly withdrawn and destroyed, or those 94 moneyers lost their limbs on the basis of dodgy test results. Adding a precise date or date-mark makes hunting down a perpetrator even more reliable, and thus even more of a deterrent.

The continued use of dates and mintmarks today is largely irrelevant, except perhaps to statisticians who might be able to derive useful information about currency movements within a country by studying the relative proportions of the different mintmarks at different locations. I'm not aware of any country currently paying someone to sit around and study this issue, but in theory it can still be done.

Dates on coins were, and in theory still are, helpful in recalling old coinage or otherwise controlling the currency. When worn-out or damaged coinage is returned for melting down and re-issue, statistical analysis of the dates can tell the government how long it's coins last in circulation, and therefore helps to estimate the need for striking new coins. The government also has the right to declare that "All coins struck before 1980..." or whenever "...are no longer legal tender.". Under such circumstances, dates on coins allow not just the government but the public as well to easily tell which coins are good and which coins aren't good any more.

These particular traditions do no harm and in fact earn money from the government, because coin collectors feel compelled to keep one of each date-and-mintmark; each coin you keep is one the government has to replace, making a profit as it does so. So as long as each coin remains profitable to produce and the "keep rate" does not exceed the minting capacity of the mints, I suspect the practice will continue.

Some modern countries have historically gotten along just fine issuing either undated coins or, more commonly coins with "frozen dates" - Ethiopia and Thailand are two countries that come to mind as being notorious for issuing frozen-dated coins (coins "dated" 1944, for example, but were actually struck for the entire period 1944-1977). In 1964, the US government did the same thing, freezing the dates and ceasing mintmarks on coins, for the express purpose of dissuading coin collectors from collecting them; apparently the government of the day felt that dates and mintmarks had no other practical function.

ajaan · May 8, 2014 12:14AM

Thanks.

Jinx86 · May 8, 2014 1:29AM

Thanks for the fun facts....of which I'll use to bore my coworkers and family members. I enjoyed it though.

FilthyBroke · May 8, 2014 1:31AM

Interesting info, Sapyx. Considering how little of Henry I's coins are left, it's hard to imagine even having 150 moneyers at that time. Those guys probably hated getting called to that meeting. But for Ajaan's question, I also wonder what specifically happened in mid-1500's Europe to start the need for dates. Why then and not much earlier? Moneyer info or mintmarks would point to whoever debased coinage, or could it be that the ruler wanted his own name or likeness on there alone? I'm sure it's probably a simple reason.

davidrj · May 8, 2014 7:06PM

<< But for Ajaan's question, I also wonder what specifically happened in mid-1500's Europe to start the need for dates. Why then and not much earlier? >>

Probably the adoption of Arabic rather than Roman numerals, dates would now take far less space.

many small 16th century coins only have the last 2 figures of the year so for example 1536 is represented just by 36

syl · May 8, 2014 8:00PM

I always thought that dates were on there so that people/rulers would know how much the piece of metal was worth vs the cost to make it. From year to year the country/state would partially demonicize the coinage, making less silver in the coinage by changing the alloy or making copper/brass/branze coins smaller to adjust for what the raw materials cost. Even in England, until the end of the 18th century, copper coinage size changed over the years. There, you used to get a halfpenny worth of copper for a halfpenny coin way back when .. the same with farthings and cents. I don't know where/when I heard this, but it made sense to me. Then a merchant would know how much bread/flour/rice/nails to give the customer for the coins he was paid and he could tell by the year how much the metal was actually worth.

FilthyBroke · May 8, 2014 9:10PM

<< 

<< But for Ajaan's question, I also wonder what specifically happened in mid-1500's Europe to start the need for dates. Why then and not much earlier? >>

Probably the adoption of Arabic rather than Roman numerals, dates would now take far less space.

many small 16th century coins only have the last 2 figures of the year so for example 1536 is represented just by 36 >>

That makes sense to me. It was around the mid-1500's that Arabic numerals came into widespread use in Europe as I understand it.

davidrj · May 8, 2014 11:48PM

<< 

<< 

<< But for Ajaan's question, I also wonder what specifically happened in mid-1500's Europe to start the need for dates. Why then and not much earlier? >>

Probably the adoption of Arabic rather than Roman numerals, dates would now take far less space.

many small 16th century coins only have the last 2 figures of the year so for example 1536 is represented just by 36 >>

That makes sense to me. It was around the mid-1500's that Arabic numerals came into widespread use in Europe as I understand it. >>

Forgot the picture

[URL=http://s593.photobucket.com/user/microtome/media/1536RevalTallinnBalticCrusadersLivoniaSchilling.jpg.html]

[/URL]

1536 Reval (Tallinn) Baltic Crusaders Livonia, Schilling

Stork · May 9, 2014 12:43AM

I tried dating stamps but they were too clingy. Once they attached themselves they were a pain to try and un-stick... It was like they wanted to be mine 'forever' and never move on, and they seemed to know where I lived. Dang stalkers.

Coins are much more cool.

<<okay, end of bad joke>>

edited to add: This has been a really interesting discussion! Too bad all I could add was a bad joke

.

ajaan · May 9, 2014 1:02AM

Cathy, ugh!!!! Too much time on your hands now?

theboz11 · May 9, 2014 4:21AM

Why date coins?

So you can tell the BC coins from the AD coins????

Why date coins?

Comments