Annual Pay - How Much?

[Mithras]

The runaway inflation that baffled emperors of the 3rd century is baffling me, too. I've read in Goldsworthy that the annual wage (stipendium) was last raised to 400 denarii is Severus day and remained at that figure through to the 4th C (I presume).

Elsewhere I read a reference to Jones who seems to state the annual figure in the 4thC was more like 1800 denarii. :?

What was the annual wage in silver (-ish) coin of a legionary and an auxiliary in 400AD? Was it 400 denarii or 1800 denarii or some other some. For that matter, did the ancients still call their coins denarii? THey seem to in the literary records - did the average Joe?

Lots of questions, sorry ... :roll:

[Jona Lendering]

As far as I know, a normal legionary received 225 (Augustus), 300 (Domitian), 600 (Severus), 900 (Caracalla), 1800 denarii (Maximinus Thrax). In Late Antiquity, payment was not in coins but in kind. At least, that is what the Neue Pauly says, s.v. Sold.

Jones, LRE, 623:
A recently discovered papyrus has revealed that in Diocletian's reign -to be precise in the years 299 and 300- soldiers received an annual stipendium, paid as under the Principate in three installments. It seems to have amounted to 600 denarii a years for legionaries [...] These sums, which must have remained unchanged from the Severan period, had by now owing to the inflation become almost nominal. According to the prices laid down in Diocletian's edict of a year or two later the whole ration allowance would have purchased only two modii of corn [...]. Pay however was amply supplemented by annual donatives given on the birthdays and accession days of the members of the imperial college, and also on their consulates. Legionaries and other first-class troops received 1,250 denarii for each celebration of an Augustus, and half that sum for those of Caesars. That would therefore have made a regular 7.500 denarii per year.

The papyrus is P. Beatty Panop. 2, and the end-note in which Jones explains the "seems" I underlined, covers three pages.

[Mithras]

There''s the conundrum right there. 1800 denarii under Maximinus Thrax, yet Jones states the coin payment stayed at 600/year (although 3 x 600 = 1800 ...)

Still confused!

I know the coin payment was nominal and outclassed by the huge donatives, but I'm still trying to get a grip on the actual figure in the 4thC.

As far as I know, a normal legionary received 225 (Augustus), 300 (Domitian), 600 (Severus), 900 (Caracalla), 1800 denarii (Maximinus Thrax). In Late Antiquity, payment was not in coins but in kind. At least, that is what the Neue Pauly says, s.v. Sold.

Jones, LRE, 623:
A recently discovered papyrus has revealed that in Diocletian's reign -to be precise in the years 299 and 300- soldiers received an annual stipendium, paid as under the Principate in three installments. It seems to have amounted to 600 denarii a years for legionaries [...] These sums, which must have remained unchanged from the Severan period, had by now owing to the inflation become almost nominal. According to the prices laid down in Diocletian's edict of a year or two later the whole ration allowance would have purchased only two modii of corn [...]. Pay however was amply supplemented by annual donatives given on the birthdays and accession days of the members of the imperial college, and also on their consulates. Legionaries and other first-class troops received 1,250 denarii for each celebration of an Augustus, and half that sum for those of Caesars. That would therefore have made a regular 7.500 denarii per year.

The papyrus is P. Beatty Panop. 2, and the end-note in which Jones explains the "seems" I underlined, covers three pages.

[Flavius Promotus]

Paul, the classic denarius as we know it (a silver coin of about 4 g weight) has nothing to do with the late Roman denarii communes mentioned in Diocletian's price edict, except the name. The denarius under Diocletian was rather some kind of theoretical exchange currency for assessing the price of goods and services - but there were no longer any denarius coins!

Try to compare it to the Italian Lira [in memoriam] - you could spend thousands of Lira only for a little shopping in the local supermarket, but you did not pay in 1 Lira coins - that would have required a wheelbarrow!

The denarius lost nearly its entire silver content in the 3rd century crisis, and the most frequent coin in that period was the Antonininanus, the so-called double-denarius introduced by Caracalla. By the mid of the third century, the silver content of the antoniniani, too, had dropped to almost nothing.

Diocletian introduced a new silver coin with a weight of ca. 3,4 g which is called "argenteius" by modern scholars (the ancient name is unknown) - this was basically the successor of the ancient denarius, until Constantine introduced other silver coins (his Siliqua still had a weight of ca. 3,4 g).

So, if a Roman soldier in the tetrarchic period indeed received 600 denarii a year [????????], this was a pittance, and maybe just window-dressing or maybe tradition. Anyway, he did not receive 600 denarii coins!
Donatives were given in silver and gold, and otherwise the stipendium seems to have consisted mainly of payments in kind (annonae).

As far as I know there have been new interpretations of the sources, so don't count too much on what I have written :wink:

[Mithras]

Mmmm, I was aware that the denarius 'as a coin' had long since been replaced, but also that Diocletians Edict prices everything in 'denarii' as if it is a 'standard' by which goods can be valued.

So what value in 'denarii' is the stipendium. Indeed, does anyone here still believe there was a 3 yearly stipendium of coinage (even token)? Food and clothing rations were the norm at this point, can we assume they rendered a 3-yearly coin payout redundant?

I like the idea of troops turning out in full dress kit on parade 3 times a year for a pouch full of coins that isn't worth much, then going to the horrea (storehouse) later in the day for cloaks, blankets, new boots etc!!! i.e. a token gesture, while retaining the ceremony of it all.

[D B Campbell]

There''s the conundrum right there. 1800 denarii under Maximinus Thrax, yet Jones states the coin payment stayed at 600/year (although 3 x 600 = 1800 ...)

Your 1,800 figure is only theoretical, Mithras.
The basic facts are: under the early empire, legionaries apparently drew 3 instalments of 75 denarii (225 denarii), supplemented under Domitian by a 4th instalment of 75 denarii (= 300 denarii).
Thereafter, the 3-instalment system seems to have been reinstated, but at the new level of 100 denarii each time (still 300 denarii total).
This remained unchanged for over a century (!) until Septimius Severus granted an increase of unknown size, but commonly thought to have been 50 per cent (= 450 denarii) by analogy with Caracalla's later increase.
Under Caracalla, who evidently increased pay by 50 per cent, a legionary was probably drawing 675 denarii. (Note that this is not certain.)
Finally, Maximinus Thrax increased pay, again by 50 per cent, which would give a probable annual pay of 1,350 denarii. If Severus had doubled pay (instead of giving only pay-and-a-half), the final post-AD 234 rate would be your 1,800 denarii. :?

... if a Roman soldier in the tetrarchic period indeed received 600 denarii a year [????????]

This was Jones's interpretation of the Panopolis papyri of AD 298-300, subsequently reinterpreted (by Richard Duncan-Jones) to give an annual pay of 1,800 denarii. (Incidentally, this may or may not support a doubling of pay under Septimius Severus, depending on your viewpoint!)

What was the annual wage in silver (-ish) coin of a legionary and an auxiliary in 400AD?

The evidence of Ammianus Marcellinus is more important for your purposes, Mithras.
As others in this thread have already pointed out, we are in entirely different territory by the late fourth century. Basically, your 1,800 denarii figure is irrelevant! Ammianus still refers to stipendium (monetary pay: e.g. 20.8 ), but we have absolutely no idea what this amounted to. However, as soldiers were, by now, issued with rations, fodder and equipment, it was perhaps only viewed as petty cash.
The regular donatives and discharge bounty were perhaps more important.

[Mithras]

Thank you Mr. Campbell! That certainly lays out the 'known' for me. I will look up that Ammianus reference.

I guess the value of any three-a-year payout for the 4thC is, then: unknown!

[D B Campbell]

Thank you Mr. Campbell!

No problem -- glad to help.

I don't have the commentary on Amm. Marc. bk. 20 (J. den Boeft, D. den Hengst, H.C. Teitler, Philological and Historical Commentary on Ammianus Marcellinus XX-XXI, Groningen 1987, 1991).
Maybe some of our colleagues who have access to this volume can say whether there's a discussion of 4th C stipendium there?

[Jona Lendering]

No, only volume XXIII...

[Mithras]

Mr Campbell, I have PM'd you

[D B Campbell]

Just to clarify some references, Paul:

The R.P. Duncan-Jones article is a classic: "Pay and numbers in Diocletian's army", Chiron 8 (1978), 541-560.
As far as I remember, it was subsequently reprinted as an appendix to the same author's book, The Economy of the Roman Empire.
And the Jones that everyone has been referring to is, of course, the late A.H.M. Jones, author of The Later Roman Empire (which is the size and weight of a breeze block, even in the paperback edition).

Hope that helps.

(And, please -- call me Duncan.)

[Mithras]

Cheers!