• 0 Posts
  • 18 Comments
Joined 2 years ago
cake
Cake day: June 13th, 2023

help-circle




  • Rio Tinto was exhausted, or at least exhausted of what could be reached using methods of the time. The output of those mines tapered off around 200AD which coincides (not really a coincidence) with the reign of Severus and the beginning of economic troubles. You’re correct that they didn’t exhaust Dacian mines but they did lose access to them, also not coincidentally a few years before our favourite cabbage-farmer took power and did what he could to right the economy.


  • (note - the decrease in silver content previously was not because of a lack of new conquests or mineral deposits, but because Emperors wanted to spend money without needing to raise or collect taxes on their wealthy supporters)

    Technically true, but they had gotten by for centuries beforehand through plunder and opening new mines, in particular the enormous ones at Rio Tinto as well as those in Dacia. The system worked fine until there was no grist left for the mill.



  • It’s one cabbage, Diocletian, how much could it cost? 10,000 sestertii?

    Edit: I should clarify this, because it looks like I’m describing inflation here. When Romans ran out of new conquests and mineral deposits, they debased their currency (reduced the amount of precious metals in the coins) which caused the value of new coins to be lower, but also caused those metals (and by extension older coins) to be worth more.

    Bitcoin is similar in that there’s only a finite quantity of them, so once they are all “mined” the value of BTC would tend to increase forever, which is one of the main reasons why it’s worthless as a currency: why would you get rid of something that is increasing in value by the minute?

    It’s also why BTC transactions are increasingly tiny fractions, i.e. is being debased, just like the denarius.