Reappraising an Ancient Coin

The reverse side of an Athenian tetradrachm. ca. 450BCE - 406BCE. © The Trustees of the British Museum. RPK,p32D.12.Ath

Description

A pure silver tetradrachm minted in Athens ca. 450 BCE – 406 BCE which was donated from a personal collection to the British Museum in 1824 where it is now located, but currently not on display. It measures 25mm in diameter and weighs 17.2g.

The reverse side (image to the left) bears a square impression depicting an owl, an olive branch in the top left corner, and a crescent moon partially hidden behind the shoulder of the owl. There is an inscription in the bottom right that reads ΑΘΕ, an abbreviation of ΑΘΕΝΑΙΟΝ (“of the Athenians”). The obverse side (not shown) depicts the face of the goddess Athena looking to the right wearing an earing, necklace, and a crown adorned with olive leaves. The cracks on the edge are from striking during the minting process.

What Can We See?

Coins such as this one may seem mundane compared to other artifacts, but they can provide glimpses into a complex cultural and historical context. Since coins have only a small area to work with and are used in daily life, it was important to think carefully about what was worth including. The value of coins went beyond their literal worth as currency; they were expressions of self and culture (see table to the right). The imagery on the coin could even become synonymous with the coin itself leading to the tetradrachm being called "little owls" (Aristoph. Birds 1106). They were also expressions of power; the Athenian tetradrachm was the most widely used currency in the Eastern Mediterranean for hundreds of years and was the standard for trade. But these coins also have another story to tell, one that has been hidden in the background, a story of enslavement and its complexity.

Table summarising the imagery of the coin

A table summarising a few possible interpretations for the imagery on the tetradrachm from an Athenian perspective.

Image of a relief showing a banker at work.

Banker relief, 2nd century CE, marble, Kostolac (Viminacium). © National Museum Belgrade, Serbia.

Enslaved Labour and the Tetradrachm

Enslaved labour and these coins were so closely linked that even without the help of images they tell us the stories of enslaved people. The silver used to make this coin came from the Laurion silver mines. Although these mines were a great source of wealth to the Athenian polis, funding their fleet and some of their most iconic building projects like the Parthenon, this success was achieved through the exploitation of enslaved labour. The working conditions in these mines for enslaved labourers, which included children, were extremely poor and hazardous (see Iron Fetters for more details).

The contribution of enslaved labour was not only limited to unskilled work in the mines. The important task of maintaining the weights and standards of the coins was also done through enslaved labour. This was no minor job: the high degree of confidence in the quality of the Athenian drachma was one of the factors that allowed it to become the standard currency of the Eastern Mediterranean. The enslaved individual was the ultimate authority in assessing currency and their decision was respected even by their enslavers.

Experiences May Vary

The two forms of enslaved labour mentioned above highlight an important topic that is crucial to our understanding of Ancient Greek slavery: the diversity of the enslaved experience. There were those who were used for unskilled manual labour and subject to harsh treatment, like in the mines, but there were also enslaved individuals who possessed an expertise that was invaluable to the functioning of the state. The person in charge of maintaining the weights of coins was one such individual, but his situation wasn’t exceptional. He was part of an Athenian civic service, a group of enslaved individuals employed by the state called demosioi. The demosioi performed a wide range of essential tasks throughout the city such as acting as bureaucrats, a police force, accountants, and executioners, to name just a few. It was the expertise labour of these individuals that allowed Athens to function as a direct democracy, removing the barriers to participation for the average citizen. As one might expect, the individuals occupying these positions were granted additional privileges like living independently, having families, and participating in religious festivals. Though their cage may have been gilded, they were still subject to the same laws and treatment that governed other enslaved peoples, like corporal punishment by whipping, and were still deprived of the freedom to choose their own life.

These two examples represent some of the most extreme ends of the enslaved experience, but as always reality was more nuanced and the average experience would have existed on a spectrum. The amphipoloi (see Alabastron) are just such an example, spared the hazardous working conditions of those in the mine, but still denied the privileges given to the demosioi. This stratification of the enslaved experience is not just the result of a system of control through rewards and punishments, but the very stratification itself is another tool in the subjugation of the enslaved. By having such varied conditions of enslavement, it prevented social cohesion from forming among the oppressed and potentially developing into an attempt for freedom.

Taking Another Look

Although recognizing the relationship between enslaved labour and the tetradrachm is important, it still views the enslaved people in the same way as the enslavers, as nothing more than tools (Aristot. Pol. 1.1253b). What if we try to look at this coin through the eyes of someone who lived, worked, and died in Athens, yet who is not granted the identity of “Athenian” because of their enslaved status?