11 CAAWFo~D

'R. JO.'t3Q

Studies in
Numismatic Method
presented to
PHILIP GRIERSQN

edited by D
C. N. L. BROOKE, B. H. 1. H. STEWART,
J. G. POLLARD andT. R. VOLK
1-. ((11
~

ACULTAD D!OEOOUf'IA E 1m
BI8LtOl"ECI\

CAMBRIDGE UNIVERSITY PRESS

Cambridge
London New York New Rochelle
Melbourne Sydney
 4
Roman imperial coin types and the formation

• of public opinion

• The authority and personality ofthe Roman emperor and his government were mediated
to the subject population in a variety of ways. Perhaps the most important was the
complex of stories circulating probably even among relativdy humble people, many of
them about contact with the emperor or his representatives. 1 Of course such contact itself,
when it occurred, also mediated the authority and personality of the emperor and. his
government; the imperial cult, too, had an important róle to play, as did the erection
of figured monuments and imperial buildings and the distribution of imperial largesse.
Within the empire as a whole, the plebs in Rome naturally had privileged access to the
benefits of imperial rule and saw far more of the emperor and his works.
On the nature and importance within this context of the ról~Lthe imperil!! coina~s...
widely differing vie~_are expressed; at one extreme there is the view that the emperor
himself paid particu!ar attention to the ~.?i~2f..~s for his coinage in order to d;raw
attention to his virtues and his sug;esses and that these types had a major impact on
the population of the Rom~!" Empire, at the other ;xtremethé-ii"~~ that only mh;ora
department of government was involved and that the eiE!~E!~}.!~p'c~_.?!._t~.e_i!!,perial
coinage were ~tt1~_noticeda..ndoften .~i~~~ . ..._~--
1begin by looking at the extent to which historians in antiquity made use of buildings,
statues, inscriptions, archaeological discoveries and coins as historical evidence and then
consider the impact which was made by all of these and by coins in particular on th~
public as a whole. My conclusions are perhaps valid only for the educated c1asses, whQ.
created most of such records as we have which are relevant t~-this investigation - bu~
it is_unlikely ~!.~_t~~_~~pa~!.~!-a co~.2.~ ani~~~~.!.a..~.e.easa..!!.!
..!'.a..~.~eat~!.:...

Thucydides, as we might expect, uses an antiquarian 's method of research to aid

historical enquiry.3 He attempts to use the evidence provided by the clearance of the
graves on Delos in order to establish the identity of the primitive inhabitants of the
island.4 He is aware in his discussion of Mycenae of how little can be deduced frOIll
architectural remains about the size or importance of a city.· The dedicatory inscription
 of Pausanias on the tripod at Delphi, erected after the battle of Plataea, is admitted as
evidence for the improper ambitions ofthat wayward monarch.8 The altar of Apollo and
a stele on the Acropolis are used as evidence for the family of Peisistratus.' Similarly,
Aristotle cites an inscribed discus at Olympia in his discussion of Lycurgus." Polybius,
whose testimony is unwisely rejected by Livy, records the size and composition of
Hannibal's arrny for the invasion of Italy on the basis of the bronze inscription set up
by Hannibal in the temple of Hera Lacinia at Croton, an inscription which Polybius
himself sought out and inspected.8 And in his critique of Timaeus, Polybius' mounting
indignation reaches its peak with the remar k that Timaeus went to the trouble of
collecting inscriptions from hidden and inconspicuous parts of the buildings; and still
he was inaccurate.10 Diodorus justifies his belief in the revival of Sicily after Timoleon
by an appeal to the number and grandeur of the buildings erected.ll
When Cicero was trying to reconstruct the composition of the Commission of Ten
sent to help L. Mummius with the settlement ofGreece after the fall ofCorinth in 146 Be,
he accepted Atticus' identification of A. Postumius Albinus as a member of the
Commission on the basis of a statue at the Isthmus.12 Suetonius adduces statues of
Vespasian's father, dedicated 'to an honest tax-collector', in his account of Vespasian's
family}3 And Plutarch occasionally (unlike Suetonius) uses statues as a guide to the
appearance ofthe subjects ofhis Lives, in order to be able to argue from their appearance
to their character}4
For the use of coins ashistorical evidence we have only, so far as I know, the example
of the HisW;¡;;A;;¡~;¡;;;whe-;'; they-;~;~';;;d"';ather-to-l;nd verisimilitude to ...
historical
~~~.!'?!1:Büt·th;;i;~se·~this way implies thep~ss¡bitity oith~·i;-~;¡~··h¡~t~;y. 'Inth;;~ost
explicit example, the author and his friends are debating whether or not one Firrnus was
ever emperor. The opinion is advanced that he wore the purple, struck coins and was
called Augustus. Severus Archontius even produces coins of Firmus to prove the point.
Needless to say, none now survive and there is no reason to suppose that they were ever
more than a figment of the imagination of the author of the Historia Augusta.16 The
technique is a favourite one of his; Odenathus, Trebellianus, Victoria, all are endowed
with coins and the title of Augustus or Augusta}8 None deserves a place in history. It
is nonetheless interesting to note that the assumption Iying behind the argument is that
t~.eis~lIingofcoinageis amark~fs()Y~~i1ID!y, an assumption to which I return below.
It is alsointerest¡~g-th;t'tile~odern discovery of an emperor from his coins, Uranius
Antoninus, regarded by Michael Grant as one of the chief services of numismatics
to history, should share its methodology with historica~ fiction.I'
It is apparent, then, that t.heuse of monuments of one sort or another, including coins,
as historicalevidence was kno;nto·the1iTstor¡anso(antlquItY·.Ii·ls·alsolippli¡:e~:;t·thlit
'iheJ?f()J!liresponsi blefo!.al!·.t.~~~~§~ij~§~ij!S,,º~i@l1g~;~i~.Úl~~,iIl~~iJ.>~!ons
.and coins,
attachedsomeTm'p;rtañce-to them. One might presume this in any case fro~ thee~pense
..norIllally 'invóívé(nóthe¡¡:-p;od~~tion, but explicit evidence may also be found.
For Theopompus, inscriptions were so important to the community responsible for
their erection that a plausible accusation to level against Athens could be that of forging
the inscription relative to the peace of Callias.IM In the private sphere, three Thebans of
the second rank went to the length of erecting a monument bearing an inscription
explaining that it had really been they. not Epaminondas. who had won the Battle of
Leuctra.10 For a later periodo Polybius records a remarkable debate among the Aetolians
besieging the city of Medion. They were on the point of reaching the annual changeover
of generals and they believed that they were about to capture the city. A full-scale debate
ensued - who should have the right to have his name inscribed on the trophy, the general
who had conducted the siege or the general who would within the next few days receive
its submission? The Aetolians reached the equitable decision that both should be
inscribed on the trophy. Unfortunately, the ll1yrians appeared on the scene, the Aetolians
were soundly defeated and the siege was raised. The citizens of Medion gleefully inscribed
the names of both defeated generals on the trophy which they erected.20
For the Roman period, Dio records as a matter of some importance the decision of
Tiberius to inscribe the temple of Castor and Pollux with the name of Drusus as well
as with his own.21And Vespasian. established as the ruler ofthe Roman state, took steps
to replace the inscribed records ofthat state destroyed in the fire on the Capitol in AD 69,22
Again, in the private sphere, Trimalchio's long discussion of what sort of tomb he
wanted ended with the quotation ofthe inscription it was to bear, not the least important
part of which was the statement that he never listened to a philosopher.23
There is also much evidence for the importance attached to imperial statues. An un-
successful attempt at a prosecution for maiestas under Tiberius involved the charge
that the defendant had sold a statue of Augustus along with some gardens. Tiberius' reply
is well known, that his father had not been deilied in order that the honour should be
the ruin of his fcllow-citizens.21 But later history belied these good intentions and the
relevant title in the Digesl states that wanton damage to, melting down or sale of
consecrated statues of the emperor were all iIlegal. The emperors cared for their statues.26
For the only explicit evid~nce that the einperors cared for thetypes of!.tt.~ir...<:()inage
we have togo-tothe-CourtTl'-ceñi'ury treat¡~~~~!!~;¿;_~~!!]~ij:'The'-aut~~r of thistr'áct,
in the cóu~s~"ofh¡s'súgiesiioós fo~~tt<;.L&º-'!:(~rI!!!!!=.!!!.~fthe. Empire, offers some
~~!~~~.~!2.!~i.n ty~s. As-p~¡ser~ed,his designs are sadly uniffiaginaiive, but no matter.
They ~.()lIl~...~~r~IX~~~~..~t?t?,'!._()!~!!~E!~~.!!!~~.u..!.!t~().r
..~~e.~.t?~!~.~t.t.~~..~.~~j,~t.~~~..of
interest to an emperor.28 This belief is widely shared by modern scholars who are under
OOObITgatióót~ béiie~that the emperor cared for everything; and the fact that much
trouble seems to have been taken over the imperial coinage is adduced in support oftheir
notion. lt can hardly be denied that great care. was indeed lavished on the imperial
coinage, i~~~_,!-nd ~!!tio~ñdT~hz;úldí1oi'wish to"reje¿i"úle"belIer of the
autho-i-óf the de rebus beflicis as wholly unfounded. But explanations other than direct
imperial interest maybe invoked for the highquality of much ofthe-¡mi>erialcoinage
and a consideratioñ- of otl1ei--eVidencesuggests' thát'the~uthoronhede'¡;'ebus b~liíC{I"-
was expressing a hope rather than documenting an actuaIity:-···_ .... _-
Some monuments certainly made an impact on those who saw them, even if they were.
not historians in search of source material. The author of the speech concerning Neaira
preserved in the Demosthenic corpus would hardly have appealed to his listeners'
knowledge of a painting in the Painted Stoa to prove the presence of the Plataeans at
the Battle of Marathon unless he and they had been reasonably familiar with it.27The
paintings carried in Roman triumphs to portray the course of the war are recorded in
an abundance of sources, not only historical and anliquarian.2" They are included, for
instance, in the derisive account given by Cicero 01'the triumph which Piso c1aimed was
his for the asking. Herodian remarks on the impression made on lhe population as a
whole and on himself by pictures 01' the emperor. And right at the end of c1assical
antiquity the author of the panegyric to Maximian and Constantine talks of the painting
in the palace at Aquileia depicting in effect the mission of Constantine, a painting about
which the author seems to have heard in ordinary conversation.u
When Demosthenes was attempting to stir the Athenians to action against Philip 11
of Macedon, he appealed to his audience's knowledge of the buildings of Athens and
the marvels of the temples and the offerings therein, the achievements of the great days
of the fifth century, as well as to his audience's knowledge of the deeds of Miltiades,
Aristides and the rest.ao
Statues also excited attention. The Elder Cato of course rebuked those who regarded
the honour of a statue as important. al Cicero made effective use of the statues in the
Forum in the Sixth Phi/ippic, inviting his audience to compare those of L. Antonius and
of Q. Marcius Tremulus, victor over the Hernici in 306 BC.32 The thirty-first and
thirty-seventh orations of Dio Chrysostom are full of references to statues.
As for inscriptions, in his defence of M. Fonteius, Cicero appeals to the antiquity of
his c1ient's family, an antiquity documented and known from the inscribed· records of
its achievements. The younger Pliny records an inscription which he has himself seen,
that of Palias on his tomb along the Via Tiburtina.33
But what of coins? The ancients certainly examined their coins carefully, if only to
makesure that !h~ were not-rilse. They also·ha(rthe-¡:lll.bliofscrll.tcliíngin,S(;r.ip~i<.>~s
on coiñ;;(fig:"i)~34Ma;:;-y';fthese'appear to be gibberish, meaningless CcilIectlonsofletters,
• ,~., ..
1, .'
but those which are intelligible often suggest that the coins were intended as presents,
wh~rto gods'or to-other't\u;;an beings. It would besurprisíñgl(nó:'oneevc-rnoticed
;hatiypeorlegen3·"was'onll.cOln·ll.ñd'ii"is possíble that conscious selection sometimes
tookplace ofatype. suitable as.apresent or to accompany-~~~~iaLAn"asorDomitian
'wlth Forturíaas reverSe type wasfound in the maststep of the Roman ship from
Blackfriars.36 But the ~~,~.!~~~':l~~,~~i~~,.~l:_~~.r.l:~':1I~!!,Y.':!~~i~.?,
or at any rate noticed
and recorded, ~i~~I.YJ.i..Il!~~~_:_
Before looking at lhese records, we musl make two imporlanl dislinclions. References
to coin lypeS may be 01'lwo kinds, which I should like lo call direcl und indirccl. 11'u
man takes a coin oul 01' his purse, looks at the type and then records il, that is a direcl
reference, even if it comes to us by way 01' anolher uulhor. BUIa chronicler may also
record 01' a ruler lhat he struck a cerlain lype, wilhoUl ever seeing any example 01' lhe
coin in queslion, but deriving his informalion from the records 01' government. I regurd
a reference to a coin type 01'this kind as indirect.
The second distinction which I wish to make is this. The types and legendsof an anci~nt
coin normally had two functions, first to identify the authóf!:iir¡;sponsible I'otÜlecoTñ,
secoñ<fto-procíiíi~th;-;;;;-~g~, if any, which that authority wi!.~e,.~_~~J..Q!!tThe first
function is"~k;r1Yt'tle-moreimp~rtant. Tiiereisgoode~'¡(i'e;:;;;;;'that in the Greco-Ro"iñiUl
;-¿rld'the striking of cÓi;:;s';;~s~~i'~;rsally regarded as a mark of sovereignty.38As I have
noted above, this universal b'elief ílppe~stolTebeh1ñdthei1'se:"orabuse,Qf numismatic
evidence by the author of the Historia Augusta.
But we can go further than that. In the course of the celebrated debate between Agrippa
and Maecenas, staged by Dio in 29 BC, Maecenas assumes that Rome can regulate the
coinages of the cities 01' the Empire. And a curious story told by Dio 01' Vitellius, that
he made no attempt to eliminate the coinage 01' Nero, Galba and Otho, carries the same
implication, that the s!!ikin.&..QLsoi n~,~~~_!.~:.E.,:>~~ssi~!l,,~.~':>~~r.~.I!':l._j>,~'N..~L~ere
linked.37 Thus Vespasian began to strike coinage soon al'ter his proclamation; alleged
COiñSOfPerennis were regarded as evidence 01' a plot to seize the throne; Severus allowed
coins to be struck for Albinus al'ter making him Caesar.38 And it is because the striking
01' new coinage was linked with the refoundation 01' Abonouteichos as lonopolis that
Lucian records the fact; his actual description 01' the coins is phantasmagorical. 3" In
considering references to coin types we must therefore distinguish carefully between
references to types which identify. the issuing a~~~!i11 and references to those which
convey some Tuíther-message:"---"---""'- . -_ " _.
--Some'ofihe-most striking references to coín types conveying some message which we
possess seem to be indlrect'Tfiiscomes out particufarTyclearlyiñtnecase-ofDío's recor¡r-
o'fihepTilcíñg ofCaesar's head on the coinage; the measure is recorded by Dio along
with the other measures voted by the senate towards the end ofCaesar's life.4°.Thereis
no evidence that Dio or his sources ever saw the coins in question (fig. 2).
Perhaps the most dramatic coin types 01' antiquity are those 01' the celebrated issue
01' Brutus, with the head 01' the Liberator on the obverse and the cap of Liberty between
two daggers with the legend EID MAR on the reverse (fig. 3). The production 01'this
issue is duly recorded by Dio:u •Brutus dealt with these affairs (before going to Asia
to meet Cassius), and on the coins which he struck he placed his portrait and the pileus
with two daggers, proclaiming thus and by the legend that he had freed his country with
Cassius.' The description is tolerably accurate, but again there is no reason whatever
to suppose that Dio or his sources ever saw one 01' these coins. They were not produced
in large quantities and are 01' extreme rarity now. Furthermore the description 01' the
•••••• 4
AUGUSTUS
•• 5
NERO
6
CONSTANTINE
legend, with the involvement of Cassius, is not such as one would derive from an
inspection of the coins, which bear no reference to Cassius. I think we may believe that
Dio's record of the coin does not derive from autopsy by anyone, but from a chronicle
of the activities of Brutus.
The same is true, I think, of a record in Suetonius of a coin type of Augustus. In 45-44 Be,
while the future Augustus was at Apollonia waiting for Caesar, his fortune was told by
Theogenes on the basis of his horoscope. In due course, Suetonius continues, he made
his horoscope public and struck a silver coin with as its type the sign of the zodiac
Capricorn, under which he was born (fig. 4). Augustus was'c:>fC~!~!1º!.!>.or~ ..':mde!
Capricorn, but under Libra, but the reason forthe-érrorofSuetonius (and of Manilius)
-neednot.détaifiUs.c'i"l'heíiñking of the remark about.A~gustl.is;coiñtype with the story
of his horoscope and its publication suggests to me that the record of the coin type comes
from. thememoirs ofAugustusoranassociate, not from- observaii"~¡'¡:·-··· .- - figures on the reverse (fig. 10).46
" . There-is no way oft~úi~gwhether the briefreferencéby'S~eto~i~~to the coin type
of Nero showing him playing the Iyre derives from observation (fig. 5).43 Only with the
description of the consecration coinage of Constantine in the Vita Constantini of
Eusebius am I reasonably sure of the relevance of observation (fig. 6).44
While we cannot conclude from the passages we have been considering that the Greeks
and Romans often noticed the programmatic coin types with which they were confronted,
one inference is possible. 1f chroniclers thought it worthwhile to record what rulers put
on their coins, we may reasonably infer that the rulers themselves and the educated classes
as a whole attached at least some importance to the subject. The belief of the author
of the de rebus beflicis, which we have already considered, is thus to a certain extent
vindicated.
What did the Greeks and Romans notice about the coins which they handled? The
•••
•••
most straightforward procedure for naming a coin is to adopt the name of the
denomination, to treat it in fact as purely and simply a piece of money. Both drachma
and denarius are names ofthis kind. But both in the Greek and in the Roman world
coins were often named after their types. The Roman examples which come most relldily
to mind are quadrigati, bigati, victoriati, each mimed after a type, Jupiter in a quadriga,
Victory in a biga and Victory crowning a trophy respectively (figs. 7-9).4& (It is
presumably not an accident that in each case the legend ROMA is associated with the
reverse type.) Tetrarchic nummi were perhaps called 'doubles' because they bore two
Greek examples are equally ready to hand. One of the commonest coins of the later
Hellenistic world was the cistopllOros, named from the cista mystica which it bore (fi~.
11). Similarly, the New Style silver coinage of Athens was distinguished from the 0111
Style by the olive-wreath which it bore on the reverse, occasioning the nallle
stephanephoros (fig. 12). The late Lycian issues were known as citharephoroi, from the
Iyre which formed the reverse type (fig. 13).47
Coin types in the Greek world were also noticed without giving their names to the
coins in question. The type of the Persian daric (fig. 14) provided Agesilaus with lhe
occasion for a bitter joke at the expense of the Athenians and Thebans bribed by Persia
to stir up trouble in Greece, that he was driven from Asia by 3°,000 arehers.48
The basic types of the Republican bronze coinage, a head of a deity on the obverse
and a prow on the reverse (figs. 15'·16), similarly found their way into the imagination
 in tile types which indicated the issuing authority. This appears most clearly in the case
ofihe Rorr,i,nTmper'¡~í~~i~~g~ '~~'~h¡C'h-th;-h~adof theemperor is the most significant

•• feature. filé'beSi:¡cñown example is probably theOñef¡:()~mHie ·Ñew-Tes·t~~e-n·t;~;h;~

r;;';;'~~amines the image and title of the emperor on a denarius and pronounces the
dictum, 'give to Caesar what is of Caesar'.63 The same concern with the head of the
emperor occurs also in Talmudic texts, where it is stated that the coins used for the

••
redemption of the second tithe must have the imperial image intact.64 The colloquial
expression domini for coins, surely deriving from observation of the imperial image, is
also worth noticing in this contex t. 66 The phrase Kaisaros nomisma was used by Epictetus,
13 'neither a banker nor a shopkeeper may reject the coinage of the emperor, but if someone
citharephorus produces it, whether he wishes or not, he must give over what is being sold for it' .68 We
need not doubt that the identifying feature of the coinage of the emperor was the image
of the emperor. An imperial law of AO 343 made the point explicitly, •all the solidi, on
which our images appear and for which there is universal veneration. must be treated
as of the same value ... '67

•• Of course, the corollary of the fact that the empero!,s head on the Roman imperial
coinage symbolised his authority was the fate which this head sulfered when the emperOr
portrayedfeiJ:WTliedeíaéement ofreliefs andinscripti;;ñ~w¡:;iChi~cluded a represeñüi"tioQ
or a .mentio'ñ of añ--'emperoc wh;-;ufi~red 'd~";'~"d¡i~ m;moriae ¡s·-a w~fí:kñ~wn
phe~~~~~~~-~--it-'did-'ñ~t-escape-ñóiice 'iñ-añiiq;ty"-oñ'6~mitiañ;s death th~- sen~t;
deCr~d'i¡;athis inscriptions were everywhere to be destroyed and his memory to be
of the users of the coinage. The Roman equivalent of the slight1y curious English obliterated.68 As early as the fourth century BC, Lycurgus told a story (probably
expression, heads or tails, was capita aut navia.u Two further comments may be made. apocryphal) about the melting down of a statue of Hipparchus, son of Charmus,
The erroneous beliefthat these coins were the oldest produced by Rome made their types sentenced to death in absentia for treason.80 Coins ofthe Roman Empire, surely becau~e
the most discussed of all antiquity and provided the stimulus for increasingly wild of the presence on them of the imperial po¡;n;ii, didñot-'always-é~- the fate of the
antiquarian and etymological speculation.60 But despite this interest, Pliny, true to form, man responsible for their production. Dio recordsÜiát- afte¡:ihe'de~t¡:;-of CajtguÍa:The
asserted wrongly that while the reverse type of the as was a prow, that of the triens and senaiedecrée(rtfíarairth~b¡:onze'C'Ofñage which bore his image should be melted down.
quadrans, two of the fractions of the as, was a raft.61 He was misled by the poetic An analogous political judgment is implied in Statius' derisive reference to an as
expression quadrans rati,us which he had read in Lucilius and generated a elear example Gaianus.8• Some thrifty souls in the Rhine army camps who seem to have wished to
of the preference for literary speculation rather than visual investigation.
The Greeks and Romans, then, noticed at least some coin types which had no necessary
connection with the issuing authority. But all the coin types so noticed were very common
indeed (despite which they were still sometimes mistakenly read or reported) and were
almost devoi~ of any kind ..of P.!:<;>~~Il1rI1a!~~co._~!~~t. The ~nly~yp~t.J:It:~~s
whic~.c.()~~_
Justify ..the be1ie( thaf"prógrammatic cointypes were ..noticed. is un~erifiable and
.improbable. Ii could be' argllerlihattheir"inter¿stwas' li~i'tedto·I~~'Pii.¡2~,~<itih~ü~
appearance, and that they were not récord~dpreClserY--bCCause~~ __ "thei~,~P.!t~I.11~!~l
sfgnliicance. But, if this is -so, -lt--is'surp-ri-srng---ihatClCerO"sn~merous references to
ephemerafpolitical concerns of the late Republic do not inelude a reference to coin types.
Cicero knew that Pompeius struck coinage at Apollonia in 49 BC, but he does not record
the types of this or any other issue.62
In any case, by far the most_~.idely noticed feature of ancient coins was that element
 express their disapproval ofCaligula wíthout going lo the lenglhs demanded by lhe decree
ofthe senate contenled lhemselves wilh a chisel blow lo deface the emperor's image. Their
Ilandiwork survives to be inspected.62 Caracalla had the coinage of Geta melted down.63
A political judgement is also implied in another slory of Epictelus. Aman was offered
a coin of Nero and rejected il in favour of one of Trajan, despite the fact that the coin
ofNero was of greater intrinsic value.u There is a curious Jewish example of the same
attitude; because of the outrages committed by Hadrian against the Jews in and after
D 132, some Talmudic texts held that the coins bearing his image should not be used
••••
and even went so far as to reverse their normal rule, saying that they could be used when
so worn that the image could not be recognised.66
The evidence of coinages other than the Roman imperial confirms the view that the
only reaUyimportant element in the typology was that whichserved to identify th.eissuing
aüihóniy:'ManyGréekéOíñswéié-ííamed~ ~fter Úie'cíty"whlchlssuéd ihem, KyziÍ<iñoi
-and so'on. But one can go further: the norm for Greek coinages was for the type of the
coinage of a city to be the current badge of that city. When Sestos decided to resume
bronze coinage in the second century BC, the twin reasons given are that the sema of
the city (in this case a seated Demeter) may be current and that the city may derive profit
from the coinage (fig. 19).66 A city's sema was known independently of her coinage; it
was often used in the fourth and third centuries BC to decora te an inscription relating
to the city or to one of its members.67 In the field of coinage, the p%i (colts) of Corinth
•••
••• 20
Corinth
21
Aegina
• ••
•
23 24
Arab imitation
Athens
(fig. 20), lhe ('he/onu; (lortoises) of Acgina (fig. 21) are familiar, and lhe K/uuke,~ (owls)
of Athens (fig. 22) are the mosl familiar of all. The imporlance of the semu of Alhens
is apparenl not only from the extent to which it was copied (figs. 23-24), but also from
the comment of Xenophon that the coins of Athens were in demand everywhere and even
carried a premium outside Athens.68 Their preponderance in the Aegean at the turn of
the fifth and fourth centuries is attested by a story of Plutarch. Gylippus was entrusted
with the money being sent back to Sparta by Lysander. The money was placed in bags
and sealed with a note inside each bag saying how much there was. But in the course
of the journey home Gylippus unpicked the stitching at the bottom of the bags, removed
some of the money and stitched the bags up again. The ephors were at a loss to account
for the discrepancy until Gylippus' servant informed them that there were many owls
asleep under Gylippus' roof-tiles.66
Further evidence that the only real1yimportant thingabout a coin was whetherit issued
fr~m arespectable authorityorñOtñiaybe dra;;';-fr;;m'th-;;-habitórna~I~g~~i'ns';tte~
-j)éopíé. 'fhe Lyd'iáJ;-Kr~i;;¡;;¡-(fig:-i5) and Persían Dar;cs (fig. 26) belong to this class,
as do the Carian Muusso/eiu (fig. 27) and the Macedonian Phi/ippeioi (fig. 28), the great
gold coinage which found its way into Hellenistic literature as the gold coinage pur
exce//ence and made its way from there through early Roman comedy into Augustan
poetry; coins were likewise named for Alexander and his successors. The whole of Sulla's
coinage in the east was named Lucu//ion (e.g. fig. 29), largely, I think, beca use Lucullus
was remembered as the collector of the levies of money which went to provide the metal
for the coinage.70 Three oddities are coinages apparently named from women, the
Phi/istideion, the Berenikeion and the Demareteion. The Phi/istideion is simply mentioned
by Hesychius and is presumably the portrait issue struck by Hieron 11 (fig. 30). The
Berenikeion is mentioned only in passing by Pollux in the middle of a list and presumably
refers to the coinage of Oerenice 11, consort of Ptolemy 111Euergetes and ruler of
Cyrenaica in her own right, a coinage which bears her portrait and inscription (fig. 31).71
The Demareteion is a curious and instructive case. By analogy with other coins named
after people, it should be a common coin. Out it cannot now be identified with certainty.
Diodorus, Pollux and Hesychius tell contradictory, etiological stories about its origin,
which are patently invented. Again by analogy, it should either be named, like the
Lucu//ion, beca use Demarete provided the wherewithal to produce ¡t, or because it bore
what was believed to be her portrait.72 In my view it is the common fifth/fourth-century
tetradrachm of Syracuse, with the head of Arethusa mistaken for that of Demarete
(fig. 32).
It seems, then, that there is little evidence for officia.1interest in coin types and evetl
less evidence that. in-the-Greco~Romañ-'worTa"coin"-t'ype;- ;hich"m"ity"bt;"caIied
progr;~~~tTc' 'OÚle'r'á~pects-ofcoi~';'á'~(f-¿ol~"tyPé~~;;
it;d' ~~~h'¡~p~~t:'~lth~~gh
ñOtJCed.73 This'fucti;Probablyeven more significant than the fact that the situation ",ith
,~e.spe:tt~ c()inty'pe~~i'!e.r~~~~~~~..'x
..E~.?,~.t~~.~i~l.Jllti0':l\Vit~,!~s~t
t~~~~~"r!i?~~~~nts.
Out the facts require at least some attempt at explanation. Why did the inhabitants of
!he Rom.a~-Eire ~!notic,:,the programmatic element in the eve-r-ehang1ngcoiñ'tYPes.
..~QI11~ll!~~~I:-.
~!-~_",~i(:~_,~~l:)'"\V.l:!l: --.----- ,,-~ -,-.- -....... ...- .
 One. problem remains, to find anexplanation for the diversi%. imaginativeness and
ofteh grclIibéauty of Roman ~ríar~ªI~JX~j~ The rul~the R~~-;n"'Empire were

•
on"nlé"wlloíe"Tiltelligeñlmeñ"and 1 find it hard to believe that with so much else on their
hands they, or indeed their senior advisers, devotea·al1f:t_()-~aYl;\.t!~~"t!pI)J~t
the ..Q~~sing
and designin~~~~~.gL~~~_h a).'!!2!~_n.?:one"tookany notice.
lile 'reaso~, 1 think, is a combination ~racéide·ñtandhúman-nature. The accident is
that ~¡;~e:;h~.~~t"~~()l?~"~~.~~~I~~ig[~º¡!lªg~::;ª;g9:Yl;[ii~~""bii~.int~Ils~IX~2fu2itiiive

•
oligarcny. The Republican oligarchy entrusted the production of its coinage, as it was
&;üñd to do, to añ'"anrÍüarryciiiiñgiñgiñagistracy; the rest follow~~ earlier that
the norm for Greekooín types wasthe'bad~'of"the city and all that the Roman oligarchs
did with the coinageoft"¡:¡eíi'cíiy,"wh~hey'~b~~dóñed the public types with which il
began, was to place their own priva te badges oñíi.'Q'uesúoñsabout'tbe'reeeptión of this
coinage by those who saw it probabíy-dfJ"not arise.
The victor in the civil wars eventually exclul,tedall but his own badges from the coinage
and fromthís-poiiir()r'frorrtonevery'~ooñafier li theímperilli' coinllge was: 1iitil)k,
largely carried on byan independent artistic tra~ition. The~ma~w~;~t~ch~f¡~íl)
capablCoftherr¡ass~proauciIoñOf'c;;i~-di-~~:'bút titey'do not seem to have attempted
this until very late, no doubt for the same reasons which inhibited technological advanct
29 in other fields. Instead they employed artists, eng~ll.\'~rs,to cut the dies. It would nol
be surprising if this group experimentedan<f'¡nnovated, bringing their skill to bea.r ir
"ií1e-creatíoñ"o{llrilsiIcaiíysatiSfyIngtypes;'whichrepréiíCnted their ideas of the momenl
aboutthe-silite'a:n,(fiheñJf;r forwhóffi"they worked-:lñotller'words;"UlemOdeTí pr(;pos<

•
'isaiargei:Y'ascendiñg one; ofcourS¡;;'iñ'cmperor may have issued a general directivt
to ensure that his coinage represented his"t"j)ersonaifiy'¡añdlhe"mooelmay 'tfiUsTaf15t
adesceñd,ñgone;"'í)üfUíe"patterñror"ifíe-most pártlS surelyoneofamintdoin~ it$ ~
for its patrono The most conspICüous're;;:;íts 'üf"t'his 'effort a~e~fc~u¡'s~'thé'''greií
-iñéifálliOñsof"the later Empire. The officials of the mint doubtless knew how to portra~
an emperor without much prompting,just as a governor of Asia, Avidius Quietus, writinl

•
to Aezani, knew very well how to portray Hadrian.7• One can easily understand th.
obvious fact that the ct>inªg~"gL~t>meemperors reftectstheirreignsquite acc~rately
"
~ith.'-l~t pos!ulli~~!l:~li.~.li~~i.~:~f!.~r.~!?~t>~!ªPH-\:)Ji~9P'.iº!9n,directed tromaboveam
doomed to failure. One can also easily understand that the coinage of some emperor
30 31 32 only reftects their reigns in a very odd way: thus the coinage OfV~spa-Sillñ~-at"fiis~"síg¡
inoovlit(;iy~;¡th it~'éño'ññOüS'rañge-o{changing types, in fact borrows almost every typ
First of all, surely, because those whowere e~ucated enough systeIllll!i~!ly~9.!!!ª.~~ from the Republic or earlier emperors.75 The mint is presumably following a genera
_
sense of the reverse types of ti;'imnerial
, ••.•• _>< •• _, __ ._.
cóinage
,r:,.."....."",.,.."....
"~"".»"'" ••" ."_",,,.,_, ,_,0-"'
"hád
,,,...,',.."',<-,_.,."".',., .....•..
", .• ' '0'_ ...•
muchbetter;ays
,. " ...., ,•.••.•... _,_.••. ,..,." .•..." ." ..
·.",.,.,.,.,'_M."··
of finding out
.." ..~,·,., ..v.," ...,·.•..N.~,," •.•• , ,.~.'"" ..'.",_.,, __ ,.',,.,,>'._"',,~',.,
directive to make the coinage as like earlier coinage as possible; the result is as fa
about thé-emperor and his activities. It is also relevant precisely that the types were removed from anything resembling propaganda as one can imagine.
--;¡:r-c-----·-" ..,---- ..
---··
..''''" ·•
.···--''
. ., ," -."."
..
'..
- .
-ever:.¿lúúlging:tfíevast mlljorityo(the inhabitants of the Roman EIIlpire:'if they saw l''Iot tne least of an emperorls functlons was that of patron of the arts; conspicuou
cofñ~~aL~)l;}~"."I!~~I~s~~~~i"üi~ip~rtof~.rri.~~i"?n~~~S~~\I:~¡ng'a cc·niury-or"~o¡:e. consumption in this field was expected of him. But no-one has suggested, 1 think, tha
ft1S not surprising that it was the head of the emperor which was noticed: lloddoubiless al! emperors personally inspected and passed the designs for al! the buildings and statue
alone symbolised for many people the fact that they belonged to the Roman Empire. erected on their behalf. There is no reason to suppose that they did this for the coina.g
Another factor must have been sheer size. A picture carried in a triumph is both more either.
strikingaño'casier to see than thetypc(')f a coíñañ'-mch-or'jess"across:'-'
 commission of 146 BC', Hommages iJ M. named on its base, Cicero, ud AI/icum vi
NOTES Renard(ed. J. Bibauw), Collection Latomus I. 17; A. E. Wardman (see n. '4 above);

CI, Brussels 1969, 54-65; E. Rawson, H. Blanck, Wiederverwendung alter SIaluen

The following additional abbreviations are employed: als Ehrendenkmiiler bei Griechen und
'Cicero the historian and Cicero the
antiquarian', JRS LXII'972, 33-45 at 40. Romern", Rome 1969,Studia Archaeologica
Aufslieg und Niedergang der romischen Well: Principal (ed. H. Temporini, etc.),
13 Suetonius, Vespasian 1; compare Vespasian XI. See also K. Scott, 'The significance of
Berlin/New York '972-
12 for the actual tombs of the Vespasii. See statues in precious metals in emperor
ILLRP A. Degrassi, Inscripliones lalinae Iiberae rei publicae, Florence '957-63.
in general A. Stein, Romische Inschriflen in worship', Transaclions and Proceedings of
BMCRR H. A. Grueber, Coins of Ihe Roman Republic in Ihe Brilish Museum, London
der anliken Lileralur, Prague '93'; R. the American Philological Associalion LXII
'9'0. Chevallier, Epigraphie el [jlléralure iJ Rome, 193', 101-123.
S. W. Grose, Calalogue of Ihe McClean Colleclion of Greek coins [in the
Faenza '972, ch. 2. 26 Anonymous, de rebus bellicis 3, 4; see
Fitzwilliam Museum], 3 vols., Cambridge '923-9.
'4 A. E. Wardman, 'Description of personal E. A. Thompson, A Roman reformer and
OGIS W. Dittenberger, Orienlis graeci inscripliones seleclae, Leipzig '903~5·
appearance in Plutarch and Suetonius: the invenlor, Oxford '952, 36--37. Eusebius,
RE Paulys Real-encyclopiidie der classischen AIIl'rtumswissenschafl (ed. G. Wissowa,
use of statues as evidence', Cla.vsical Vi/a Conslanlini 4, '5, also assumes that the
etc.), Stuttgart. Munich 1894- emperor chose coin types (see n. 44 below).
Quarlerly' XVII1967, 4'4-420, with earlier
RIC The Roman imperial coinage (ed. H. Mattingly, etc.), London 1923- 27 [Demosthenes] lix 94; on this text see
bibliography.
RRC M. H. Crawford, Roman republican coinage, Cambridge '974 (published 1975)· A. M. Snodgrass, Arms and armour of the
'5 Scriptores Historiae Augustae (hereafter
SNG Sylloge Nummorum Graecorum [GB], London 1931- Greeks, London 1967.94; on the fame ofthe
SHA), Firmus 2, 1.
16 SHA. The Joprelenders 26.3; 31, 3; The two Stoa Poikile see R. E. Wycherley, 'The
I See, provisionally, F. G. B. Millar, The Storia e Letteratura XLVII, Rome 1955, Gallieni 12, I for Odenathus; K. Menadier painted stoa', P!wenix VII 1953, 2035;
emperor in Ihe Roman world, London '977, 67--106 at 100; SIudü's in hi.\'lOriography, argues that the type alleged is that of the C. M. Roberlson, Greek arl, Cambridge
3-4· London 1966, 1-39 at 4); see also R. Weiss, coinage of the age of Julian (' Die Münzen '975,242.
2 The central expositions of the first view in 'The study of ancient numismatics during und das Münzwesen bei den Scriptores 28 W. Ehlers, 'Triumphus', RE VIlA,493-5"
recent times have been by H. Mattingly, The the Renaissance', Ne' VIII1968, '77-'87. Historiae Augustae', ZfN XXXI'9'4, 1-144 at 503.
emperor and his clienls, Todd Memorial 4 Thucydides i 8, 1; for attempts to relate the at 55). For other numismatic figments ofthe 29 Cicero, in Pisonem 60; Herodian iv 8, 1-2;
Leclure I1, Sydney 1948; and C. H. V. evidence of Thucydides to the archaeo- imagination of the author of the Hisloria V, 5, 7; Panegyrici la/ini 7 (6), 6.
Sutherland, Coinage in Roman imperial logical evidence see R. M. Cook, 'Thucy- Augusla see Alexander Severus 25, 9; 30 Demosthenes iii 25.
policy, London '95' (compare the attempt dides as archaeologist', Annual of Ihe Antoninus Diadumenianus 2, 6. 3' Plutarch, CalO Maior '9.
to defend Ihe approach by the latter in the Brilish School al Alhens L '955, 266--270; '7 M. Grant, Roman hislOryfrom coins, Cam- 32 Cicero, Philippics vi 12; compare vii 16.
President's Annual Address, NC' XI '95', C. R. Long, 'Greeks, Carians and the bridge 1958, 58. 33 Cicero, pro Fomeio 4'; Pliny, Lel/ers vii 29;
Proceedings, 6--20 at 13-19). An incisive purification of De1os', American Journalof 18 F. Jacoby, Die Fragmente der griechi.vchen compare viii 6.
critique of this approach is that of Archaeology LXII1958, 297-306; J. Board· Hisloriker, Berlin 1923- , fr. '53-'54, 34 J. Friedlaender, 'Eingeritzte Inschriften auf
A. H. M. Jones, 'Numismatics and his- man, 'Sickles and strigils', JHS XCI '97', compare Plutarch, Cimon '3, 4-5. Note Münzen', ZfN III 1876, 44-46 (expanding
tory', Essays in Roman coinage presenled lO 136--137;compare Plutarch, Solon 10,4-5, also H. Volkmann, 'Die Inschriften im 'M ünzen mit eingeritzten Aufschriften',
Harold Mallingly (ed. R. A. G. Carson, for an alleged allusion to burial habits by Geschichtswerk des Herodot', Convivium, Berliner Bliil/er für Münz- Siegel- und
C. H. V. Sutherland), London 1956, '3-33 Solon and his opponents in the argument Beitriige zur Allertum,vwissenschafl. Konral Wappen-kundev 1868, 146--147);G. F. HiII.
at '5 (reprinted, with a brief bibliographical over the Athenian c1aim to Sala mis. Ziegler dem Lehrer und Freunde... zum 70. A handbook of Greek and Roman coins,
mise-au-point by myself, in A. H. M. Jones. 5 Thucydides i lO, 1-3; Cook, n. 4 above. Geburtslag, Stuttgart 1954,41-65· London 1899, '97; BMCRR 1, 30; ILLRP
The Roman economy (ed. P. A. Brunt), 6 Thucydides i '32, 2; compare [Demos- '9 M. N. Tod, A seleclion of Greek historical 1, 88, no. "4 - d'Ailly Collection no. 921
Oxford 1974,62-81). Sutherland replied in thenes) lix 97. inscriplions 11,Oxford 1948,92-94, no. '30. (Bibliotheque Nationale, Paris); ILLRP "
'The inlelligibilily of Roman imperial coin 7 Thucydides vi 54, 6--55, 2, with A. W. 20 Polybius ii 2,8-1 I and 4, 1-2. 127, no. '9'; C. w,cl on RRC 1,4'9-436,
types', JRS J(.L1X'959, 46--55, whence the Gomme, K. J. Dover, A. Andrewes, A his- 21 Dio Iv 27, 4. no. 408 (Staatliche Museen, Berlin);
brief exposition in The emperor and Ihe lorical commenlary on Thucydides IV, 22 Suetonius, Vespasian 8; compare Demos- C. M. Kraay, Archaic and classical Greek
coinage, London 1976, 96--101; the ap- Oxford '970, 317-337 at 330--334· thenes xxii 69-78. coins, London 1976, 16--17; C. T. Seltman,
proach is essentially sterile, since it ignores 8 Plutarch, Lycurgus I = Aristotle (ed. 23 Petronius, Salyricon 7', 12. The lemple coins of Olympia, Cambridge
much of the available evidence. V. Rose, Leipzig I886),frag. 533. 24 Tacitus, Annals i 73, 2. 1921, 10, no. 218 A (reprinted from
3 See A. D. Momigliano, 'Ancient history 9 Polybius iii 33, 18; 56,4; Livy xxi 38, 2. 25 Digesla lusliniani xlviii 4. 4, 1-6; see also Nomisma VIII '9'3, 23-65; IX '9 4, 1-33;
and the antiquarian' ,Journal oflhe Warburg 10 Polybius xii 11,2. Suetonius, Tiberius 58; Philostratus, Apol/o- XI '92', 1-39). '
and Courlauld Inslilules XIII1950,285-315 II Diodorus xvi 83. nius of Tyana i '5. It remains true, of 35 P. R. V. Marsden, A ship of Ihe Roman
at 287-288 (reprinted in A. D. Momigliano, 12 Cicero, ad Allicum xiii 32, 3; on the whole course, that people did not always care period from Blackfriars, London 1967.
ContribulO alla sloria degli sludi ciassici, episode see E. Badian, 'Cicero and the whether a statue was really of the person 36 See Herodotus iv 166.2; 1Maccabees '5,6.
 OGIS 1, 370, no. 119 at line 55 (in a treaty
between Smyrna and the ineolae of Mag-
nesia, the legal tender of Smyrna is imposed
in Magnesia).
37 Dio lii 30, 9, with my remarks in 'Finance,
coinage and money from the Severans to
Constantine', ANRW 11-1,560-593 at 561;
Dio Ixiv 6, 1.
38 Tacitus, Histories ii 81; Herodian i 9,7; ii
15,5·
39 Lucian, Alexander 58; in view of Alexander's
hostilily to the city of Amastris, it is ironical
that dies for the coinage of Abonouteichos-
lonopolis were probably always made in
Amastris (U. Westermark, 'Amastris-Abo-
noteichos', Numismatiea Stockholmiensia l'
1975/1976 (1978), 7-8 at 7).
40 Dio xliv 4, 4·
41 Dio xlvii 15, 3.
41 Suetonius, Augustus 94; Manilius ii 497;
K. Kraft, 'Zum Capricorn aufden Münzen
des Augustus', Jahrbuch für Numismatik
und Geldgesehichte XVII1967. 17-17 at 17
for this error (reprinted in Gesammelte
Aufsiitze zur antiken Geldgesehichte und
Numismatik 1 (ed. H. Castritius, D.
Kienast), Darmstadt 1978.161-171).
43 Suetonius, Nero 15·
44 Eusebius, Vita Constantini iv 73; veiled head
of Constantine on the obverse; Constantine
going up to heaven in a chariot on the
reverse. Compare iii 47 for the mother of
Constantine on gold coins; iv 15 for
Constantine looking upwards on gold coins.
I suspect that with the advent of the
Christian Empire coin types were more
noticed, though l am not sure why.
45 Pliny, Natural History xxxiii 46.
46 See the texts collected in Crawford, n. 37
above. 580 n. 80.
47 J. R. Melville Jones, 'Greek coin names in
-phoros', Bu/le/in of the Instílute for
Classical Studies XXI1974. 55-74.
48 Plutarch, Agesi/aus 15,6; Artaxerxes 10, 4;
Moralia 111b.
49 Macrobius, Saturnalia i 7, 11; Festus, de
verborum significatu at Navia; Origo gentis
romanae iii 5.
50 RRC, 718, n. 1. Roman antiquarian specu-
lation actually invented coin types: Plutarch,
Quaestiones romanae 174e--f; Poblicola
1I - ox, sheep, and pig as lypeS, on the
grounds lhat these were lhe source of the
wealth of early Rome.
51 Pliny, Natural History xxxiii 45·
51 Cicero, ad familiares xiii 19, 4. Lucilius
178-181W suggests that the rich did not
normally handle coins but this does not of
course mean that Cicero would not have
reported changes in coin types, if their
impact had been politically important.
53 Luke 10, 14; Mark 11, 17; Matthew 11, 11.
54 E. Lambert, 'Les changeurs et la monnaie
en Palestine du le' au lIle siecle de I'ere
vulgaire d'apres les textes talmudiques',
Revue des Études Juives LI 1906,117-144 at
143 n. 4; LII 1906, 14-41 at 19 n. 1. The
exposition of D. Sperber, Roman Palestine
200-400, Ramat-Gan 1974,69, is less lucid.
55 Martial iv 18, 5.
56 Arrian, Epictetus iii 3, 3·
57 Codex Theodosianus ix 11.
58 To show disrespect for the coinage of a
living emperor was of course lese majesté,
see the texts cited in nn. 14-15.
59 Suetonius, Domitian 13; Plin~, Panegyricus
51.
60 Lycurgus, in Leocratem 117; see H. Blanck,
n. 15 above, 109-111, for other examples;
Plutarch, Solon 11, 3.
61 Dio Ix 11, 3; Statius. Si/vae iv 9, 11. See
W. Trillmich. Familienpropaganda der
Kaiser Caligula und Claudius, Antike
Münzen und Geschnittene Steine VIII,Berlin
1978, 46 n. 99.
61 H. Chantraine, Novaesium 111: Die antiken
Fundmünzen der AUofgrabungenin Neuss,
Limesforschungen VIII,Berlin 1968.11. For
the countermarking and overstriking of
coins of Elagabalus from Phoenicia and
Palestine, see A. Kindler, 'The damna/io
memorial' of Elagabal on city coins of the
near Easl', Gazette Numismatique Sui.ue no.
I 17 1980, 3-7; on ancient erasures in general
see M. Bernhart, 'Erasionen', [Festschrift]
Heinrich Buchenau, Munich 1911, 1-8 (1
owe this reference to T. R. Volk); K.
Regling, ZjN 1911, 166 n. 5, at 169;
P. Berghaus, Festschriji F. Dorner 1,Leiden
1980, 158.
63 Dio Ixxvii 11,6. See K. A. Neugebauer, 'Die
Familie des Septimius Severus', Antike XII
1936, 155--171at 161; lig. 17, a coin wilh ele('/ion (!f the emperor as a political ('onL'ept
facing portraits of Caracalla and Geta, lhe at Rome, Papers and Monographs of lhe
latter erased. American Academy in Rome XXVI,Rome
64 Arrian, Epictetus 5, 17. For conlemporary 1977, 199-105; D. H. Euan-Smilh, 'Ob·
cancellalion of Nero's portrait, see lig. 18. verse portrait propaganda' , Quaderni
65 Lambert, n. 54 above, [L1]141-143. Ticinesi [d/l Numismatica e Antichíla Classi-
66 OGIS 1, no. 339; see the commentary of che VI 1977. 157-169; W. Trillmich, n. 61
L. Robert, 'Les monétaires et un décret above, 4-5. Contrast the caution, on general
hellénistiquedeSestos', RN'xv 1973,43-53. grounds, of D. Mannsperger, 'ROM ET
Note Periplus of the Red Sea 47 for the AVG. Die Selbstdarstellung des Kaisertums
legends of the coins of Apollodotus and in der romischen Reichspriigung', A N R W
Menander. II-i, 919-996, doubting whether the coin
67 L. Lacroix, 'Les ••blasons" des villes grec- types or legends of antiquity resembled a
ques', Études d' Archéologie Classique 1 newspaper or a royal diary and pointing lo
1955/1956(1958)(Annalesdef Est: Mémoire the likely roles of tradition, climate of
no. 19),91-115; T. Ritti, Sig/e ed emb/emi opinion and initiative in the adoption of a
sui decreti onorari greci, Atti della Acca- coin type. .
demia Nazionale dei Lincei: Memorie della 74 OGIS 1,no. 501; see R. Fears, n. 73 above,
Classe di Scienze Morali" XIV-V, Rome 179, for a clear use of rather striking - and
1969. appropriate - types being chosen withoUI
68 Xenophon, Poroi 3, 1. intervention by the emperor.
69 Plutarch, Lysander 16, 1. 75 T. V. Buttrey, 'Vespasian as moneyer', Ne'
70 RRC, 80 n. 1; compare Martial xii 57, 7 for XII 1971, 89-1°9; the suggestion lhat
Neronia massa. Vespasian had been moneyer under Tiberius
71 Pollux ix 85. and so acquired a numismatist's love of
71 Diodorus xi 16, 3; Pollux ix 86; Hesychius diverse coin lypes is, as Buttrey admils,
s.v.l:i1/pa.péf€lOl'; for a dedication by Gelon fanciful. Note that G. G. Belloni, 'Monete
and his brothers see [SimonidesJ (ed. romane e propaganda. Impostazione di una
E. Diehl, Anthologia Lyrica Graeca 11, problematica complessa', Contributi del
Leipzig 1915), no. 106. Istituto di Storia Antica [della UniversitA
73 Contra, e.g. H. Gesche, 'Die Reiterstatuen Cattolicadel Sacro Cuore) IV1976, 131-159,
der Aemilier und Marcier', Jahrbuch für and 'Significati storico-politici delle figura-
Numismatik und Ge/dgeschichte XVII1968, zioni e delle scritte delle monete da Augusto
25-42; M. Manson, 'La Pietas et le senti- a Traiano " A N R W II-i, 997-1 144, sees coin
ment de I'enfance il Rome d'apres les types as for record purposes, not for
monnaies', RBNS CXXI 1975, 11-80; persuasion.
R. Fears, Princeps a diis electus: the divine
KEY TO ILLUSTRATIONS
(AII Fitzwilliam Museum, Cambridge)
Text figures
I Metapontum, obv. didrachm (FM: McClean Collection, no. 914).
1 P. Sepullius Macer for Julius Caesar, denarius as RRC, 489, no. 48o/5b (FM: Museum of
Classical Archaeology, Gow Collection).
3 L. Plaetorius Cestianus for Brutus, denarius as RRC, 518, no. 508/3 (FM: Hart gift).
4 Augustus, denarius as BMCRE 1, 56, no. 305 (FM: general collection).
5 Nero, dupondius as BMCRE 1,149, no. 156 (FM: Young gift).
 6 Constantine n, etc., for Divus Constantinus, nummus as RIC VJII,539, no. 12 (FM: general
collection).
7 Roman Republic, didrachm as RRC, 145, no. 30/1 (FM: general collection).
8 Roman Republic, denarius as RRC, 251, no. 206/1 (FM: Young gift).
5
9 Roman Republic, vic/oria/us as RRC, 192, no. 102/1 (FM: McClean gift).
10 Third tetrarchy: Galerius Maximian, nummus as RIC VI, 208, no. 676a (FM: Grierson gift).
Coín hoards and Roman coínage of the thírd
11 Ephesus, cistophoric te/radrachm (FM: SNG lv-vi, pl. Ixxxv, no. 4434).
12 Athens, New Style /e/radrachm (FM: SNG Iv-iv, pl. lix, no. 3206).
century AD
13 Patara (Lycia), drachm (FM: SNG lv-vii, pl ci. no. 5045).
14 Persia, 5th-4th centuries BC,gold daric as Kraay, Archaic and c/assica/ Greek coins, pl. iv, no.
82 (FM: Leake Collection).
15 Roman Republic. as as RRC, 158, no. 56/2 (FM: general collection).
16 Roman Republic, quadrans as RRC, 159, no. 56/5 (FM: general collection).
17 Stratonicea (Caria) for Caracalla and Geta, bronze issue (FM: SNG lv-vi, no. 4732); for an
undefaced specimen of this issue, see SNG Copenhagen XXVI,pl. xii, no. 510.
18 Nero, dupondius, type of D. W. MacDowell, The wes/ern coinages 01 Nero, Numismatic Notes
and Monographs CLXI,New York 1979, 172, no. 193 (FM: general collection).
In his IiUle book Numisma/ics,l in the chapter devoted to coin finds and hoards, Philip
19 Sestos, bronze issue (FM: McClean Collection, no. 4173).
Grierson wrote that •hoards are for the most part less obviously interesting than coins
20 Corinth, s/a/er (FM: McClean Collection, no. 5312).
2t Aegina, s/a/er (FM: McClean Collection, no. 6042). in collections, since they often consist of hundreds of virtually identical objects ... but,
22 Athens, tetradrachm (FM: SNG Iv-iv, pl. Ivi, no. 3063). quite apart from being the ultimate so urce of all the coins that one sees in collections,
23 Athens, triobo/ (FM: SNG Iv-iv, pl. Ivi, no. 3109). coin finds are the numismatist's most valuable single guide to c1assification and dating'.
24 Gaza (Palestine), drachm (FM: McClean Collection, no. 9547). This statement is of general application to all series of coins, and to all periods within
25 Croesus, gold stater (FM: McClean Collection, no. 8635). any given series, but there are some series and periods for which the evidence of coin
26 Persia, 5th-4th centuries BC,gold daric (FM: Tremlett bequest). hoards is more valuable than for others, and for the Roman coinage ofthe third century
27 Maussolus, tetradrachm (FM: McClean Collection, no. 8519). AD the evidence of coin hoards is, for a variety of reasons, particularly valuable, and
28 Philip n, gold stater (FM: SNG Iv-iii, pl. xxxvi, no. 2026). the techniques by which this evidence can be exploited merit consideration.
29 Roman provincial administration, New Style tetradrachm of Athenian type (FM: SNG Iv-iv.
The ultimate object in the study of any series of coins is to create, from a mass of
pl. lix, no. 3231).
material, as fully detailed a chronological picture of the coinage as possible, so that
30 Syracuse, sixteen /itrae (FM: McClean Collection, no. 2912).
evidence of the coinage can make its contribution to the history of the periodo In such
31 Cyrene, didrachm (FM: McClean Collection, no. 9966, as of Berenice 1).
32 Syracuse, /e/radrachm (FM: SNG Iv-H, pl. xxii, no. 1245). a re-creation one of the prime sources, that of contemporary historians, is conspicuously
lacking in the third century, in contrast with both the earlier and later centuries of the
Empire. The contemporary sources fail in the early part of the century, Dio Cassius in
the reign of Severus Alexander (222-35), and Herodian only a few years later in 238, and
recourse must be had to the testimony found in the epitomists or in the juridical sources,
or else in documents such as papyri and inscriptions. In the third century, also, the
amount of coinage which carries a reasonably overt indication of date of issue is
significantly smaller than hitherto, andit becomes much less common for offices such
as the consulship, whose dates are known, or the annual recording of the tribunician
power, to appear in the imperial titulature on coins in anything like the fashion of coinage
in the first and second centuries.
The methods so far advocated for calculating the total output of coinage at any given
period are neither convenient nor, seemingly, reliable, for it remains true that the coins
available for study are only a sample of those that have been found, while coins that
have been found form only a sample of those that have been lost, and these in turo are