SOCIAL MEMORY IN FIFTH CENTURY

BY

SARAH DAWSON

B.A., UNIVERSITY OF WISCONSIN–MADISON, 2004

A DISSERTATION SUBMITTED IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE

REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY

IN THE JOUKOWSKY INSTITUTE FOR ARCHAEOLOGY AND THE ANCIENT

WORLD AT BROWN UNIVERSITY

PROVIDENCE, RHODE ISLAND

MAY 2010

This dissertation by Sarah Dawson is accepted in its present form

by the Joukowsky Institute for Archaeology and the Ancient World satisfying the

dissertation requirement for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy.

Date______Susan Alcock, Advisor

Recommended to the Graduate Council

Date______Sebastian Heath, Advisor

Date______Joseph M. Pucci, Reader

Date______John P. Bodel, Reader

Approved by the Graduate Council

Date______Sheila Bonde, Dean of the Graduate School

ii

CURRICULUM VITAE

Ms. Dawson received a double B.A. in French and Classics from the University of

Wisconsin–Madison in 2003. She received the Open Scholarship from The American

School of Classical Studies at Athens in 2006, and has given papers and posters on aspects of her doctoral research at the Theoretical Roman Archaeology Conference in

England in 2007 and the Netherlands in 2008. In 2009, she completed her M.A. degree in Classics from Brown University, submitting a thesis entitled, ―Lucretian Elements in

Ambrose‘s Hymns‖. She has taught Art History at the Community College of Rhode

Island, and served as a teaching assistant for courses in Archaeology, Art History, and

Urban Studies. Her fieldwork experience includes excavations at Tongobriga in

Portugal, Silchester in England, and Kenchreai in Greece.

iii

PREFACE

Propaganda was alive and well in Late Antique Rome. In a city struggling to maintain its significance, the use of small portable objects - coins, contorniates, diptychs, and calendars - was essential in the manipulation of social memory. In the fifth century, the Western Empire suffered several setbacks. It is in this period that the emperors refrained from campaigning, the city of Rome was sacked by the and the

Vandals, and the provinces of Britannia, Gallia, , and were lost. From the emperor to the lowliest local official, messages of effective governing, military prowess, the changing religious climate, and classical Roman virtues were disseminated throughout the city. These messages, meant to convince the people at Rome of its stability, were unable, in the end, to prevent its demise.

iv

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

I would like to thank my advisor, Sebastian Heath, for his patience and support as

I worked to make sense of such diverse and complex materials, often via conference call.

His suggestion to include contorniates helped open up my research, broadening it to include a much more cogent series of questions, which I hope to have answered in part in this work. His enthusiasm, guidance, critiques, and encouragement were vital to bringing this project to light.

I would also like to thank my co-advisor, Susan Alcock, for her suggestions and comments, particularly on the subject of social memory and propaganda. Our conversations about the intricacies of both were instrumental in rethinking how material culture could influence society.

I would also like to thank my readers, Joseph Pucci and John Bodel. In the final stages of this work, their comments were integral in helping to fine-tune my conclusions, clarify my audience, and work through complications in the presentation.

Finally, I would like to thank my mom, Rosalind Rafea Dawson, who has been the strongest support any graduate student could have. She continually encouraged me to keep writing. Without her, I would not have had the strength to persevere.

v

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Preface iv

Acknowledgements v

List of Tables vii

List of Abbreviations xii

Introduction 1

Coins 21

The Calendar 35

Contorniates 57

Ivory Diptychs 79

Propaganda in the Fifth Century 100

Bibliography 117

Figures 130

Appendix: Catalog 143

Coins 144

Contorniates 179

Diptychs 210

vi

TABLE 1: CROSS-MATERIAL THEMES

Themes Catalog Entries GLORIA ROMANORVM 1, 2, 5, 7

Emperor Spearing Foe 1,2

VRBS ROMA [FELIX] 3, 9, 13, 14, 15, 22

Roma Seated on Shield 3

FELICITAS ROMANORVM 4

Roma and Constantinopolis 4, 108

Emperor Dragging Captive 5, 7

CONCORDIA AVG 6

Constantinopolis [Seated on Throne] Constantinopolis folio, 4, 6, 108

Victory advancing r. [wreath and gl. cr.] [trophy] 8, 10, 12, 27, 28, 61, 64

VICTORIA AVG 8, 10, 12, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 26, 29, 30, 37, 39, 59 Roma Standing Facing [spear and gl. Vict.] 9, 13, 14, 15, 22

SALVS REIPVBLICA / E 11, 27, 28, 40, 43, 46, 47, 48, 49, 50, 51, 52, 53, 54, 55, 56 Victory Dragging Captive l./r. 11

vii

Emperor Spurning Captive [ and gl. Vict] 16, 17, 18, 19, 105

Victory Inscribing VOTA 20

VIRTVS EXERCITVS 21

Emperor Standing r. [spear and shield] 21, 69, 105

Roma Enthroned Facing Roma folio, 23, 24

INVICTA ROMA [AETERNA] 23, 24, 61, 62, 63, 64, 65, 66, 67, 68, 69, 70 Victory advancing l. [wreath and palm] 25, 26

Emperor with Human-Headed Serpent 29, 30, 36, 37, 39 [long cross and gl. Vict.] Cross in Wreath/Chi-Rho In Wreath 31, 38, 40, 41, 42, 43, 54, 55, 56, 60

Camp Gate 32

Organ 99

Priest/Priestesses January folio, 102

Asclepius and Hygieia 103

Adlocutio 104

Writing 104

Sparsio July folio, Roma folio, Constantius II folio, 35(?), 107, 108 Figure in Long Garment 85, 86, 87, 88, 93, 94

viii

VOTA PVB 32

Vota in Wreath 33

VOTA type (I) 34, 35, 36

Consul Seated Facing [mappa and scepter] 34, 80, 100, 107, 108

Emperor as Consul [kneeling woman] 35

Monogram 44, 57, 58, 63, 108

Two Figures Clasping Hands 45, 46, 47, 48, 49, 50, 51, 52, 53

Victory with Long Cross 59

Victory Behind Altar 62

Eagle 65

Fig Tree and Eagles 66

Wolf 67, 68

DNATALARICVS 69

Title in Wreath 70

Driver in Quadriga 71, 72, 73, 74, 75, 76, 78, 81, 96

ARTEMI VINCAS INVNDATOR PENNA 73, 74, 75, 78

Athena-Sapientia 79

ix

BONIFATIVS 81, 96, 97

Nude Athlete 82, 83, 84

NIKA/VINCAS 82, 88, 92, 94, 98

Chlamydatus 97, 98

Hercules 101

x

TABLE 2: OBJECTS BY EMPEROR

Pre-Division Calendar All Coins 1 - 7 Contorniates - Diptychs -

Honorius Valentinian III Petronius Maximus Calendar - - - - Coins 8 - 26 27 - 36 37 38 Contorniates 71 - 79 80 - 99 80 100 Diptychs 102 - 105 106 - -

Severus III Julius Nepos Odovacar/ Calendar - - - - Coins 39 - 44 45 - 58 59 - 60 61 - 70 Contorniates - 101 - - Diptychs - - - 107 - 108

xi

ABBREVIATIONS

DOC = Grierson, P., and M. Mays. 1992. Catalogue of Late Roman Coins. Washington, D. C.: Dumbarton Oaks Research Library and Collection. g. = gram

gl. cr. = gl. Vict. = Victory on globe

HCC = Robertson, A. S. 1982. Roman Imperial Coins in the Hunter Coin Cabinet. New York: Oxford University Press. l. = left

LRBC = Carson, R. A. G., P. V. Hill, and J. P. Kent. 1965. Late Roman bronze coinage, A.D. 324-498. : Spink. mm. = millimeter

obv. = obverse

PCR = Carson, R. A. G. 1978. The . Edited by R. A. G. Carson. 3 vols. Vol. 3, Principal Coins of the Romans. London: British Museum Publications. r. = right

rev. = reverse

xii

INTRODUCTION

A study of the way we remember, the way we present ourselves in memories, the way we define our personal and collective identities through memories, the way we order and structure our ideas in our memories, and the way we transmit those memories to others – is a study of the way we are.1

HISTORICAL OVERVIEW

Social memory is the way in which a society collectively stores and purges events based on current politics and emotions. The Roman government, in light of its waning importance, sought to maintain core values of the Roman society that had been in place since the end of the Republic through memory control and propaganda.2 From 350 CE to

476 CE, the influx of varying barbarian peoples for varying reasons undermined these values to such a degree that the variety of visual imagery that had hitherto been used to express individualistic values were gradually replaced by generic motifs that spoke to the core values of the empire itself.3 Specifically motifs such as Gloria, Salus, and were exploited to assure the general population that while it may have appeared as if the empire was in great peril – from , marauders, and economic collapse – it was actually in the same position it had been for centuries. This propagandistic approach in dealing with the people in the West in general and in the city of Rome (―the City‖) in

1 Fentress and Wickham 1992: 7. 2 The designation of the Roman government is here meant as a general term. It is unclear who actually decided what iconography would be included on coinage, some diptychs, and contorniates. It may have been the sacrarum largitionum or the emperor himself. 3 All dates are CE unless otherwise specified. 1

2 particular, was a tactic that had been in use since the beginning of Roman time.4 In essence, fifth century Western Roman government used coins and other portable elite and non-elite objects to sustain and influence social memory. The application of social memory to several new small objects (diptychs and contorniates), in addition to coins and calendars, makes the fifth-century governmental concern with controlling memory fascinating.

While it is inappropriate to talk about the decline of the as a whole, it is fitting to examine the gradual decline of the City.5 Beginning in the second century with (2nd century), the City began its slide into political obscurity. With

Hadrian‘s long military sojourns away from the capital and his lavish villa located at

Tivoli, Roman citizens became accustomed to having their emperor away from home.

Rome‘s decline culminated in 330 when Constantine officially moved the imperial capital to , the New Rome. Rome proper was no longer the center of the world. Even when the empire was divided into East and West in 395, the imperial residence in the West was often located away from Rome at , , or . In addition to the shifts in location of the capital and imperial residency, there were also important ecumenical councils and edicts held and issued outside of Rome throughout the fourth century, specifically the Edict of Milan and the Councils of Ephesus and .

Nonetheless, what Rome lacked in political and religious significance, it made up for with cultural importance. Rome was not just a city in the empire; it was the empire, embodied vividly in various artistic forms. From the foundation of the Republic in 506

4 Since the focus of this thesis is on the city of Rome and the tactics employed with respect to it, the Eastern empire will only be considered peripherally in this dissertation. 5 For an introduction to scholarship on Rome‘s decline, see Gibbon 1890; Momigliano 1964; Jones 1966; Kaegi 1968; Kagan 1978; Liebeschuetz 2001; Ward-Perkins 2005; and Heather 2006.

3

BCE, the City had been the epicenter of a society based on Etruscan and Hellenistic forms; a mélange of Mediterranean ideals and tastes that eventually conquered the majority of the known world. It was this cultural significance that struck pride in the hearts and minds of Rome‘s citizenry and envy in its hostile neighbors, even if it now only served as a symbolic memory of past grandeur.

It may seem odd then to examine social memory and propaganda in fifth century

Rome given its shrinking significance. It also may seem curious to study the continued practice of certain avenues of persuasion at a time when Rome‘s institutions were experiencing great change. The resurgence of Christianity in the early fourth century complicates the study of pagan symbolism traditionally employed by politicians to enhance their messages, while the abstraction of art begun in the mid-third century also hinders the pronouncement of iconographic absolutes. Christian agendas and classical motifs teeter along the line of public and imperial support in an effort to please many while alienating none. Likewise, abstraction can obscure the artist‘s intentionality, leaving scholars in the precarious position of deciphering subtle meanings and flushing out objectives that may be the result of poor artistry, a change in aesthetics, or a purposeful simplified focus. It is precisely because of these complications that the fifth century was chosen. The assortment of usurpers, pseudo-imperial pretenders, and puppet emperors on the Western Roman throne created various opportunities for propaganda to influence social memory. The early fifth century sees the end of the Roman imperial blood line and the increased promotion of emperors from military ranks. It also sees the settlement of barbarian kingdoms within Roman borders, the loss of Britannia, the distancing of Hispania, and the sacks of the City in 410 and 455. The political and social

4 turmoil swirling around the Western empire in the early fifth century makes it a particularly cogent target for a study of propaganda and social memory. The changing priorities of the empire had moved beyond its borders, but the local residents were unable to feel the change as we now see it in retrospect. The restitution of classical motifs in the coinage, diptychs, contorniates, medallions, and the Codex-Calendar, all created at Rome, illustrate a community struggling to maintain equal footing with a new capital and a new regime.

This dissertation examines a question about Rome that is often dismissed or taken for granted: how did the City react and survive during its waning? Despite being neglected, the early fifth century middle class and aristocracy, left with only fine arts production and minting, used small objects, particularly coins, to craft and preserve a shared identity with its classical past, a past filled with military victories, social mores, and religious praxis dictated by the City and its Italian aristocracy. In times of deep strife, propaganda was employed by the emperor to persuade the citizenry of the inherent stability of the empire and its Roman identity. The middle class and aristocracy kept

Rome‘s glory alive through classicizing elements and a dogged reliance on themselves.

This rekindling of Roman identity was not the result of anti-Christian xenophobia or pro- pagan sentiment such as that invigorated by the Altar of Victory scandal, a political stand-off between pagan senator Symmachus and Christian emperor Theodosius, but rather a return to simpler more prosperous times when the urbs Roma was the center of all orbs.6

6 In 357, the Altar of Victory, a pagan symbol of Rome‘s past, was ordered removed from the Curia by Christian emperor Constantius II. It was restored by the Apostate, but again removed by in 382. The battle over the altar embroiled numerous government officials and literary figures such as

5

THEORETICAL MODELS AND METHODOLOGY

Social Memory and Propaganda

Society inherently has a collective memory that its members adhere to, consciously or not. The recollection of specific events and the specific emotions attached to them begins as personal, individual experiences that, when combined with others, become shared memory, even if some individual details are changed and the individuality is stripped away.7 Social memory can be formed naturally through the agglomeration of shared ideas and experiences, or unintentionally through subliminal messages. The latter is broadly defined here as propaganda. Regardless of the form, social memory can be a powerful political tool. This author asserts that effective governing occurs when the public has confidence in the abilities and judgments of those in charge. Threats, either against the governing body or its citizens diminish confidence by inciting fear.

Therefore, it is the responsibility of government to build, nurture, and maintain the confidence of its citizens through whatever means necessary, including propaganda.

Often propaganda is the easiest method of restoring order, instilling trust, and keeping the peace.

One example of social memory as revisionist history is modern Germany‘s response to its Nazi past. Nazi Germany was the time and place of one of the most heinous political crimes of the twentieth century. The details are notorious. The slow

Valentinian I, Theodosius, of Milan, and Prudentius. Essentially, Christians saw the altar as a demoded icon to a faulty Roman past, while pagan aristocrats correlated the altar with their ancestral rights. The altar was never restored and the conflict may actually have led to more stringent laws against . 7 For more on social memory, see Durkheim 1912; Evans-Pritchard 1940; Halbwachs 1980; and Fentress and Wickham 1992.

6 rise to power of an Austrian nationalist to a new German party built on national pride; the initial segregation of Jewish Germans; the spread of National Socialism outside the boundaries of Germany; the concentration camps and mass genocide; the death of the party and the liberation of the survivors. What continues to puzzle society more than 50 years later is the question of how the people could seemingly support such a regime and why those who opposed it where unable to impede its progress. One answer to this multifaceted query is the strategic appeal to society‘s pride through a fabricated collective memory. This appeal came in the form of state-sanctioned propaganda.

After its defeat in World War I and the political and economic restrictions imposed afterwards, Germany was at a low point in terms of its pride and self-esteem.

The economic depression and mental degradation experienced country-wide created an environment ripe for manipulation. When the National Socialist party began to stir up feelings of previous grandeur and entitlement, many German people were receptive. It should be noted, however, that in the infancy of the party there were those opposed to the excessive rhetoric and false claims, but those people quickly were pushed into the background as the country rallied around their fabricated past. These ideas were reinforced through prehistoric archaeologists who themselves felt slighted and were looking to increase their value in the public eye.8 Numerous prehistoric societies cropped up including the Confederation for German Prehistory, a group interested in ―the interpretation and dissemination of unfalsified knowledge regarding the history and cultural achievements of our northern Germanic ancestors on German and foreign soil.‖9

8 Arnold 2008: 127. 9 Mannus Zeitschrift für Deutsche Vorgescichte 1938: flyleaf.

7

The curious thing about these types of organizations was their focus on the non-events of the past. Hitler actually believed German history was inglorious and should be ignored rather than highlighted. These ministers of culture, with the help of misguided scholarship, chose to attribute great works of art and cultural developments to German ancestors to create a past modern Germany could celebrate.10 The marriage between these ―scholars‖ and the National Socialist party created a new German history dating back to the Bronze Age that confirmed the supremacy of the German people and condemned their current state of insignificance.11

In the years immediately following the Nazi surrender, the German response would once again reimagine history. The two World Wars and the Holocaust had stigmatized Germany. It needed to reverse public opinion and reestablish itself as a first world country.

The German people attempted to distance themselves from the radicalism of the past through vocality and silence. Most Germans are now comfortable acknowledging the horror of the Holocaust. Looking inward and recognizing dormant personal beliefs that spurred it to action are difficult at best. The National Socialist party fed on nationalist (racist) pride at a time when the German economy was suffering. When times are hard, it is human nature to look for a scapegoat to absorb societal failures. Creating a class of ―undesirables‖ (the Other) made that process much more simplified. To avoid or deny these problems altogether, however, pushes these feelings to the subconscious instead of resolving them. Post World War II German society rewrote their past by

10 Arnold 2008: 129-134. 11 These ideas of supremacy built upon the work of various 19th century scholars including French social philosopher Gobineau and linguist Gustaf Kossinna.

8 scapegoating Hitler and his National Socialist party. It laid full responsibility on his shoulders while exhuming themselves from any misconduct. Collective memory now painted the rule of the National Socialists as a ruse that duped the entire country into following an evil regime. No one wanted to acknowledge that their family and friends had willingly supported propaganda machine.

This unwillingness to acknowledge internal weakness can also be seen in the fourth century with the scapegoating of certain barbarian tribes. For example, the constant petitioning by the Visigoths for entry into the empire was met, at times, with approval in exchange for military assistance. The military was stretched thin, and the emperor and his generals needed every available body to prevent complete chaos in the hinterland. As long as the barbarians cooperated, their presence was accepted. The government, however, often mistreated them and created tensions that led to much of the warfare of the late fourth and fifth centuries. Additionally, the Roman imperial family had produced a series of young, inexperienced heirs in the late fourth century, who proved unable to stymie the flood of aggressors in a constructive way. Nevertheless, the message to the people continued to be one of strength and efficacy in the face of a murderous barbarian horde.

Propaganda can also be used to change behavior. A contemporary illustration of this process can be found in the dualistic symbolism of the Vietnam War and the Vietnam

War Memorial in Washington, D.C. The Vietnam War, a Cold War military engagement between Communist North Vietnam and Democratic South Vietnam, was fought over a sixteen-year period. A civil war, it escalated to the international level because of the political significance it held for the rest of the world, and eventually enveloped several

9 other countries, including the United States, which backed South Vietnam. This war, which cost countless lives and pitted American citizens against their government and each other, in time devolved into a war with no foreseeable end. As the conflict continued and with the American Civil Rights Movement erupted simultaneously,

Americans lost patience with a war they saw as unjust and unnecessarily destructive.

Many felt it should have been fought exclusively between the two countries involved.

Moreover, the U.S. government, sunk in the quagmire of helplessness, soon realized the ineptitude of its savvy regarding the politics of the region. When the Viet-cong, a small

South Vietnamese communist faction, betrayed American and other South Vietnamese supporters, a successful campaign against the North Vietnamese appeared even more tenuous to the American people. Protests broke out. Men dodged the draft, some choosing jail in a supreme act of defiance. The rapid change in public opinion against the war led to a simultaneous backlash against the American government. Most disturbing in the shift in opinion was the condemnation of the American soldiers who fought in the war, men who had dutifully served their country. As each platoon of soldiers returned from the front, they were met with disdain, hostility, and rejection. Many Americans who had opposed the war saw the returning soldiers as sordid reminders of the killings and indiscretions that were televised at home, while they fought deep in the jungles. The backlash against the troops left an emotional scar on those men who were already physically wounded as well as the American society that rejected them, although their scars would not be truly felt for another 15 years.

These deep-seated emotions, which continued to percolate in the American subconscious year after year, were unleashed in 1979 by Joe Scruggs, an infantryman

10 who had served in Vietnam. His decision to build a memorial that included the names of every Vietnam veteran who died in combat forced Americans to examine their persecution of the troops. Raising more than nine million dollars in private funds, the memorial, designed by Chinese-American architect Maya Lin, was erected in 1982. An impressive visual reminder of the sacrifice of the troops, it also served as a reminder to the American people of their dishonorable behavior and an admonishment to never behave that way again.

The collective memory of the Vietnam War resurfaced in 1990 during the First

Persian Gulf War. Although this was also a war between two countries (Iraq and Kuwait) that did not initially involve the United States, Americans, recalling their reactions to the

Vietnam War, supported the government‘s decision to ally with Kuwait against Iraq. In addition, public support for the troops was overwhelming. Careful not to subject the Gulf

War troops to the same contempt shown to Vietnam veterans, poster boards, decals, bumper stickers, and other materials displaying phrases such as ―Remember Vietnam‖,

―Support the Troops‖, and ―Operation Desert Storm‖ were mass produced as propaganda to show support for the troops. Even those who opposed the war were quick to declare their loyalty to the enlisted soldiers. The collective memory of past wrongs coupled with propagandistic materials shifted public opinion, and consequently, changed how

Americans felt and acted.12

The failure of the soldiers in Vietnam and the propaganda issued in the 1990s can be compared with the failures of the Roman military in the fourth and fifth centuries. By

12 It should also be mentioned that the present American war in Afghanistan has also revived the negative feelings of the Vietnam War while celebrating the bravery of the combat soldiers.

11 the late fourth century, the successes of the military were few and far between. Unable to defend its frontiers in Britain, , Spain, and Africa, the Western Roman government often resorted to payouts and religious compromises to retain control of its lands. As with modern America, however, the Romans were unwilling to condemn their soldiers.

Instead, objects created at Rome demonstrate a stubborn defiance of the army‘s decline through messages of supremacy and ferocity at all levels of society.

Coins as Propaganda

In order to propose that coins helped shaped social memory, one has to consider coins one of the ―multifarious method[s] of communicating political ideology,‖ items that can be used to influence people‘s impressions of events and actors.13 In the Roman world, propaganda took many forms. Sculpture, painting, literature, rhetoric, architecture, gift objects, games, and coins could all help relay specific messages. Each of these forms could influence singularly, but were most effective when combined with other modes, particularly with coins.14 Unlike the other forms which were experienced in a dedicated location or time, coins were widely distributed throughout the empire and they reached every strata of society from the lower classes to the aristocracy.15 It is difficult to identify unequivocally if and which strata of society were targeted by certain coin denominations.

It is possible that the solidi, tremisses, and semisses were created for the upper classes, but some solidi were issued to soldiers as payment. Likewise, the smaller bronze coins

13 Strootman 2005: 102. 14 Galinsky 1996: 39-41. 15 It is difficult to identify unequivocally if and which strata of society were targeted by certain coin denominations. It is possible that the solidi, tremisses, and semisses were created for the upper classes, but some solidi were issued to soldiers as payment. Likewise, the smaller bronze coins would have been used for daily transactions, but it is unclear if such transactions applied only to the lower classes.

12 would have been used for daily transactions, but it is unclear if such transactions applied only to the lower classes. What is known is that the average citizen did not need to travel, output capital, or ingratiate him or herself to receive a coin and its message. As a result, each financial transaction provided an opportunity for the dissemination of propaganda.

Some scholars dismiss coins as effective vehicles of messages, seeing them as purely commercial, throw-away items that were largely ignored by the illiterate masses.

The image of the emperor on the obverse served as a mark of authenticity and minting authority, nothing more.16 The evidence presented, however, is the lack of notice given to coin obverses in contemporary literary sources. This evidence in abstentia has three major flaws. The first is the assumption that coin obverses should have been discussed at all in writing. Those familiar with obverses, particularly in the later empire are aware of the general regularity of the form. Additionally, few scholars have made the argument that the obverse image alone drove the propaganda machine. The second flaw is the lack of consideration for temporal issues. Coins from the early empire differ significantly from those of the later empire. No attempt is made to explain the change from elaborate individualized obverses to a standardized portrait of the reigning emperor. And finally, there is the matter of the portrait itself. Critics who deny any significance of coin types have essentially claimed that these small metallic portraits did not wield the same influence as their larger counterparts created in marble, bronze, or tesserae form. The rationale is that 1) the abstraction of the features, clothing, and military accoutrements

16 See Crawford 1983: 54-7 for a discussion of why classical society disregarded coin obverses. Codex Theodosianus IX.21.9 : Imppp. Valentinianus, Theodosius et aaa. ave Tatiane karissime nobis. Falsae monetae rei, quos vulgo paracharactas vocant, maiestatis crimine tenentur obnoxii. Dat. V kal. iul. Constantinopoli Timasio et Promoto conss.

13 made identification difficult, and that 2) the necessity and regularity of coining meant they would not have been influenced by current events or personal agenda. It seems, however, more likely that objects created in a few months would have a higher probability of relating current events than sculptures or mosaics which took much longer to produce.

Likewise, the reverse, with its reference to the mint, has been deemed decorative at best. Jas Elsner believes that the imagery placed on the reverse no longer carried the same significance as it did in the Augustan or Second Sophistic periods.17 With the countless wars in the late third century, the reverse had lost its punch, and now relied on trite classical images to fill up space. These images were accompanied by similarly trivial legends extolling this virtue or that wish, none of which related to any contemporary feelings of disillusionment or angst. But disillusionment and angst did exist, as we will examine further along – particularly at the now faltering ex-capital city,

Rome.

Another criticism arguing that the iconography and inscriptions on coins could not relate to current events is the minting process itself. It simply took too long to produce an issue that could respond to individual crises.18 This argument, while fairly prevalent in the scholarly record, is quite difficult to prove. Sources on the ancient economy, mints, even imperial beaurocracy fail to mention the time it takes to transition from metal blanks to finished coinage. The process of the actual striking is detailed, but the timeframe is never explicitly stated. Of course, in a period of literary limitations, it is

17 Elsner 1998. 18 Wolters 1999.

14 somewhat unreasonable to expect the minutiae of coin minting to be highlighted.

Nevertheless, it must be noted that once again a literary lacuna has been used to negate the significance of coins and their role in shaping and contorting social memory. If, however, the coins themselves are consulted, a different picture emerges. For example, we know that the INVICTA coins of Attalus were minted while he was under the influence of the Visigoths in 409. The significance of these coins lies in the relatively short period of time the Visigoths afforded him to sway and the .

He was in power for a few short months before they abandoned him.19 Thus, from the archaeological record, we can say that the minting process could have taken as few as several months. This would have been sufficient time to respond to many of the usurpations and other calamities within the Late Antique empire.

A further argument is that coins contain messages that are illegible to the vast majority of the population due to large-scale illiteracy.20 It is often alleged that the general Roman population was uneducated and thus illiterate.21 While it may well be true that the average citizen was unable to read unfamiliar words, it is unclear if that same lack of comprehension can be applied to reverse legends. It is possible that the consistent form and repetitive phrasing may have helped people identify a message, particularly when combined with a discernible image. Indeed, the varied nature of the coinage in the early empire may have been more difficult to decipher than the Late Antique coinage which generally relied on a small subset of types.

19 Grierson and Mays 1992: 222. 20 Crawford 1983: 58. 21 Harris 1989.

15

Finally a question this author poses concerns the circulation of coinage and the efficacy of minting a message for a target audience. Put plainly, can you mint a message for a senator based in Rome and have the coin pass into his hands? The same question can be asked of coins minted with the general public, soldiers, or foreigners in mind. The nature of coin distribution makes this question challenging and the answer to this question, thus far unknown from the literature, may never be known.

Given all the arguments against the importance of coining in the Roman Empire, should we then conclude that coin types developed accidentally due to an ―intensely competitive oligarchy‖ as Crawford postulates?22 Not if we consider other evidence such as the significance of coin distribution to the common people and the translation of coin motifs to other materials. Similar coin motifs appear in the Codex-Calendar of 354, on contorniates, and on diptychs, which are believed to have been intended for particular classes to commemorate specific events.23 In addition to the reuse and reinterpretation of these motifs, images of coins permeate the foregrounds of these objects as well. That the artists took the time to draw coins on several folios in the Calendar and carve coins into the foreground of several diptychs also indicates the significance coins played in Late

Antiquity. Thus the physical coin and its distribution on other objects in scenes of imperial or senatorial largesse are evidence of the importance of coins in social memory and propaganda.24

Taken together with the preponderance of certain reverse legends and motifs, a picture of political handling begins to take shape. Coins were not used solely to pay

22 Crawford 1983: 59. 23 Toynbee 1986: 112-121. 24 Scenes of imperial beneficence are rarely shown on coins in this period, but they do appear on diptychs and in calendars, such as the Codex-Calendar of 354.

16 salaries and purchase goods, they were also gifts from the government that reminded the general population of the benefits of being a Roman. This work will also show that the

Roman world was concerned with the increasing barbarian presence in the empire, the transition from paganism to Christianity, the failing strength of the military, and effective governing, from the emperor down to the least powerful local governor.

The methods employed in this dissertation began with an examination of coins minted in the fourth and fifth centuries throughout the Eastern and Western empires.

Trends and anomalies of their obverses and reverses were noted and compared with known historical events. The coin types were then considered with other portable materials of the time – the Codex-Calendar of 354, contorniates, and ivory diptychs.

Similarities and differences were explored and hypotheses proposed to explain them.

Finally conclusions were made based on the evidence.

NOTABLE EXCLUSIONS

The focus of this work is on the small material objects created within the city of

Rome between 350 and 476. Although issues relating to these objects – the economy, other Western provinces, and the Christian transition – can help inform the discussion, they are, in their own regard, topics that deserve their own treatment. To include more than a cursory discussion of these topics would not do them justice, and in fact, numerous scholars have grappled with their intricacies for years. Thus, any discussion of these topics has been restricted to references to previous scholarship.

17

Economy

The discussion of coinage in antiquity can lead to a broader discussion of the ancient economy, specifically, devaluation, metal composition, and counterfeits.

Although these issues are significant in a broader numismatic discussion, this author has chosen to limit the discussion to the visual evidence, what someone viewing a coin could deduce. Since the devaluation and metal composition of the coins were not easily discerned by the average citizen, both topics have also been excluded. Some counterfeit or pseudo coinage is included, particularly with regard to barbarian and usurper mints, but generally they are ignored.

Provincial Rome

In the Late Antique period, the regions outside the City had numerous cultural and political agendas, all struggling concurrently to be implemented. As a result, it is often difficult to pinpoint the motivations behind specific objects and literary accounts. The influence of various outsiders – Visigoths, , Ostrogoths, and – also created additional layers of complexity to political motivations and the remembered past of the native Roman people. Since the focus of this thesis is on the city of Rome and the tactics employed with respect to it, the Eastern empire will only be considered peripherally in this dissertation. The material objects of these non-Roman people, with the exception of specific coins, have been excised. Ateliers in France and Africa produced diptychs with varying quality and iconography which again makes it difficult to compare with other objects. Thus, the scope of this work has been limited to the City itself. Rome was the classical capital of the empire, the symbolic center of the economy,

18 and the last stronghold of Roman culture. As already stated, the fact that the location of the capital moved away from Rome with the emperor, and finally disintegrated under pressure from those outside opponents, did not weaken Rome‘s psychological control of the empire‘s inhabitants.

Pagan - Christian Transition

The slow transition from paganism to Christianity, which began during the reign of , is one of great scholarly contention. It has generally been conceded that there was no one event that signaled the end of paganism and the uniform adoption of Christian practices. Nevertheless, scholars continue to argue about the specific transitional periods and their clues within given events, objects, and literary works. None of these arguments, however, contribute significantly to the study of social memory in the Late Antique period because 1) the memories that were being recalled often preceded Constantine; and 2) it would be exceedingly difficult to identify Christian motivations for these memories without pinpointing an actual transitional time period.

Rather, to understand political and religious motivations in the fourth and early fifth centuries, it may prove useful to consider a model of bilateral acculturation, or the way in which both pagans and Christians influenced and changed each other‘s approach to and practice of religion.25 In this way, the transitional phase becomes less important, while the interplay between cultural markers takes precedence.

25 The process of acculturation has been addressed and critiqued in much the same way that has been dissected. Both theories involve one dominant culture overtaking a weaker culture. Also in both theories, there is an underlying current of elitism, namely that in some regard, the dominant culture is the better, more advanced culture, and as a result is justified in supplanting the weaker culture‘s belief system. One flaw in both theories with respect to Christianity is the overlooking of social complexity in Late

19

GOALS AND ORGANIZATION

The goal of this dissertation is to provide the seed for further study of social memory and propaganda in this period, while defending the capacity of coins (and other small objects) to transmit messages. The multiplicity and complexity of object types in the Late Antique period make it difficult to identify definitively precise meanings. It is possible, however, to pose questions, provide preliminary findings, and stimulate continued debate. This dissertation will also furnish a catalog of Late Antique objects created in the City between 350 and 476.26 Every attempt has been made to include all extant pieces, although it is possible that some pieces have been unintentionally left out.

By presenting evidence of Rome‘s production of coins and small objects, the catalogue helps challenge the notion that all institutions at Rome declined. Instead what we see is the transformation of priorities in the face of change. To my knowledge, this catalogue will be the first of its kind and hopefully will spur other scholars to look at material in self-contained geographical locations within the Late Antique West.

The dissertation is organized into six chapters and culminates with a catalog of all consulted materials created at Rome between 350 and 536. Chapter II contains an analysis of the Western coin motifs from 350 through 476. The chapter identifies major numismatic trends and breaks with tradition as a type of forward to the manipulation of public memory seen in the later chapters. Sixth century Vandalic and Ostrogothic coins

Antique society. It is vital to remember that there were not two distinct groups of Christians and pagans. Like modern politics and religion, there would have been small percentages of people on both extremes with the majority residing, to varying degrees, in between. For more on acculturation in the Roman empire, see Roth and Kelle 2007; Hingley 2005; Laurence and Berry 2001; Goffart 1980. 26 It is possible that some pieces have been overlooked due to the difficulty of locating every extant object. All major works, however, have been consulted.

20 minted at Rome have also been considered. Chapter III looks at the Codex-Calendar of

354 and its inclusion of images of coins as well as motifs seen on coins either before or after 354. This chapter reinforces the claim that, at all levels of society, coins carried propagandistic weight, by showing the myriad ways coin imagery, coin iconography, and coin legends appear in alternate media. Chapter IV considers the phenomenon of Late

Antique contorniates and their contribution to social memory and propaganda among the fifth century middle class. Ivory diptychs and their communicative power among the aristocracy are examined in Chapter V. Finally, Chapter VI combines the observations of

Chapters I-V in a discussion of the mechanisms of promoting and altering social memory through material culture as well as cross-material connections.

COINS

The rulers of the Roman Empire were on the whole intelligent men and I find it hard to believe that with so much on their hands they, or indeed their senior advisers, devoted day-to-day attention to the devising and designing of types of which almost no-one took notice.27

Michael Crawford asserts that a cursory look at coins of the fifth century reveals a series of similar or identical coin types minted by emperor after emperor with no importance or purpose. These motifs seem to uphold the common sentiments of victory or glory in a declining society. A closer look at the corpus, however, indicates that these coins contained subtle social and political statements that, at times, referenced 4th century (or earlier) types.

This study of Late Antique coinage begins in 350 with the civil war between

Constantius II and , progresses through the end of the Western Empire, and enters the realm of the barbarian kings in the sixth century. In less than 200 years, the empire would be permanently divided, the city of Rome sacked twice, and the Western

Empire divided among barbarian kings. The coinage reflects these tensions and attempts to promote solidarity within the city of Rome while advertising the strengths of the emperor, the military and Christianity. In the motifs that follow, Rome becomes a singular entity that appears to fight its own battles unsuccessfully, without external assistance. The glory of Rome, having been completely decimated by treachery, laziness,

27 Crawford 1983: 59. 21

22 and a dearth of resources, is left to a series of barbarian kings who, strangely enough, renew its classical motifs in the sixth century.

The question of agency, however, must also be addressed. There is very little literature in existence from the considered period that discusses the daily tasks related to iconography selection and minting. This lacuna has created a type of scholastic vortex in which imperial agency has fallen. It is unclear if the emperor took a personal interest in the coin types minted, if he communicated general precepts to the comes sacrarum largitionum whose job it was to select appropriate coin images and inscriptions, or if the comes sacrarum largitionum selected the details of the obverses and reverses independently. It is sometimes easier to assign the task to the emperor, but often the reality is much less coherent. It is safe to say, however, that someone whether the emperor himself or someone in his employ chose the iconography and the inscriptions.

Thus coin iconography, although more nebulous than one would like, can still be considered an important factor in Late Antique social memory.

Since the obverse of coins is often generic in nature, emphasis will be placed on reverse iconography and legends. Historic events and developing sentiments are referenced where possible to draw a picture of the changing landscape of the period through these small items. A brief analysis of the types minted by each emperor follows the detailed description of their issues.

BEFORE THE DIVISION

The civil war between Magnentius and Constantius II was relatively short lived.

When the dust cleared in 353, Magnentius was dead and Constantius II was emperor of

23 the West. Both men, however, had used coinage to assert their positions and declare their legitimacy. In 350, Constantius II issued an AE 2 coin in his name from the Roman mint

[1]. It showed him in military dress on horseback, spearing a kneeling foe. Around this central figure was the inscription GLORIA ROMANORVM.28 The message presented on this coin was clear and concise – Constantius II was a capable military leader who would increase the glory of the empire through his deeds. Apparently Magnentius found this type equally compelling, because he issued the same type, within a year after

Constantius‘ issue [2]. The importance of the Magnentius issue, however, lay in the assimilation of Constantius II‘s agenda with his own. Perhaps his goal was to show the people how similar they were in an attempt to win over those not entirely swayed by

Constantius‘ campaign. Magnentius‘ absorption of numismatic iconography was a way of co-opting Constantius‘ positive aspects through coinage while presumably differentiating himself in other ways. Regardless of Magnentius‘ additional pursuits, the two coin issues are nearly identical, and a person holding both of them would have to look very carefully to distinguish one from the other. It is likely that the viewer would have only the inscription (or the shape of the letters for the illiterate) to differentiate between the two rulers.

The city of Rome makes an appearance in 350 on AE 2 coins minted in the name of Nepotian [3]. Roma sits on a shield, holding a Victory on globe and a spear. She is flanked by the words VRBS ROMA. Here, she may represent stubborn pride as the civil

28 and both minted a coin with his likeness on the reverse, but instead of spearing a captive, he drags him by the hair [5, 7].

24 war threatened to tear apart the West, or she may be a reminder to the viewer of Rome‘s military strength.

This period has also produced coinage of cooperation. The final division of the empire occurred in 395 when Theodosius I‘s death left his underage sons in charge of the

Eastern and Western halves of the empire. Prior to that event, both sides, although separated spatially, still worked together on policy, political and religious. Both

Constantius II and Theodosius I minted coins with personifications of Constantinople.

Constantius II‘s solidi, minted in 357, show Roma and Constantinople sitting together holding a wreath declaring public vows [4]. The legend, FELICITAS ROMANORVM, proclaims present and future successes through cooperation. From 383-388, Theodosius

I‘s AE 3 depict Constantinople on her own with her foot on a prow, indicating the military strength of the navy [6]. The legend reiterates the appeal for cooperation with the inscription CONCORDIA AVG. After Theodosius‘ death, manifestations of cooperation between the East and West became rare. It appeared that Rome now preferred to act alone.

HONORIUS, PRISCUS ATTALUS, AND JOHN

Honorius, the youngest son of Theodosius I, became emperor of the Western empire in January 395. He was ten years old. His regent, a vandal named , is believed to have made the majority of his decisions until his death in 408. The reign of

Honorius was tumultuous. Threatened by usurpers in Britain, Gaul, and Spain, he also had to contend with the Visigoths who made a strong push for power at the beginning of his tenure. Despite these threats and the subsequent defeats, his AE 2 coins, minted from

25

395-402, declare victory. Contained within the inscription SALVS REIPVBLICAE,

Victory advances carrying a trophy and dragging a captive [11]. His , begun one year earlier, shows Victory holding a wreath and globe. The legend reads VICTORIA

AVGVSTORVM [8, 10, 12]. The original type with palm branch, dating back at least to

Nero‘s 64 as issue, is traditional and universal.29 Choosing a coin type with ties back to the Republic may have been intended to remind the Roman people of the past accomplishments of its leaders and to tie Honorius historically to these military giants. It also served to help calm fears, which must have surfaced as each wave of attacks struck the empire. After all, Honorius was a child and as such, had little if any say in the governing of the empire. This type, then, was able to assuage the fears of the people while also serving double duty as wishful thinking with respect to the newly made emperor. Honorius even employed Victory on his quinquennalia issue [20].

As in the previous period, the emperor is shown actively defeating his enemies.

In 404, Honorius issues a showing him spurning a captive with his foot [16-19].

It is noteworthy that this coin, which was universal throughout Honorius‘ reign, is not minted at Rome in 410 following the sack of the city, but does continue at Ravenna. It is the only known instance of this type from Rome and it seems to correspond to another military issue, on the silver miliarenses, minted in the same year. The emperor holds a spear and rests his left hand on a shield. The legend reads VIRTVS EXERCITVS [21].

Honorius clearly wanted the message coming from the Roman mint to be one of strength and conquest.

29 PCR II.426.

26

Unlike previous rulers, however, this resiliency in battle did not come from assistance or cooperation. The coins minted in Honorius‘ name are focused on Rome.

From 394-5, AE 3 coins were issued showing Roma holding a trophy on a spear and a

Victory on a globe, her shield at her feet. The inscription reads VRBS ROMA FELIX

[9]. Eight years later, the type is resumed [13-15, 22]. No reference is made to the East.

This is in stark contrast to a solidus minted at Ravenna from 408-423.30 It shows two enthroned emperors seated facing front, each holding a mappa and a scepter. Below the two emperors is a palm-branch. The legend reads VOTA PVBLICA. This coin type shows a strong allegiance to the East and cross-imperial cooperation. The inclusion of the mappa and VOTA PVBLICA legend suggests that this type was issued to commemorate the New Year‘s games. The independent spirit exhibited by Honorius on his Roma coins may have contributed to one of the greatest catastrophes in the Late

Antique West.

Honorius had been having trouble controlling Alaric, king of the Visigoths. After broken promises and outrageous tribute demands, both men reached their breaking points. Alaric, led his troops to Rome and, in 410, sacked the city. No fiery response issued from the Roman mint. The humiliation and devastation was thorough, but

Honorius seemed to adopt a general policy of denial. It could be argued that the outrage felt after the sack was mitigated numismatically by a lack of access to the mint. It is clear, however, that Honorius minted an AE 4 coin with a traditional Victory motif and legend, nothing more [25-26].31 Outside of Rome, however, two types sprung up that

30 HCC, V, p. 439, 21. 31 John would copy this type during his usurpation from 423-5 [27-28].

27 contained a different message – one to never forget what had happened, while recognizing the end of an era.

In 410, a silver siliqua was minted at Ravenna of the type Roma Seated Left.32 It depicts Roma seated left, holding a Victory on globe and a spear. The legend reads

VRBS ROMA. Neither Roma nor the legend VRBS ROMA had appeared on a siliqua reverse since 394-7. VRBS ROMA had never appeared on his siliqua, but was used on

AE 3 types prior to 410. The inclusion of a trophy on this coin type, however, would have been too dramatic a manipulation for the administration. Together they created a more potent impression than the standard VICTORIA AVG legend. The combination of subject matter and legend in this particular year could be a response to the devastation felt by the Western empire at the sack of their symbolic capitol. It is worth reiterating that before the , Roma held attributes of victory and had been connected with the VRBS ROMA FELIX legend. The evidence suggests a certain melancholic singularity based on the subtle differences between this coin type and the one minted at

Rome. Here Roma is shown seated, reserved, without agency. Gone are the spear, the

Victory on globe, and the shield. Most convincing, however, is the excision of the word felix from the legend. The missing shield and the lack of felix points to a general sobriety of circumstance in which the minters found themselves. Roma continued to exist but without the protection and luck to which she was accustomed.

Emperor with Hand of God, a further solidus, was minted at Ravenna from

410-423.33 It depicts the emperor standing facing, crowned by the hand of God. He

32 PCR III.1512. 33 PCR III.1510; DOC 742.

28 holds a Chi-Rho-topped spear and a sword. Beneath his right foot is a lion. VICTORIA

AVG surrounds the image. Honorius‘ most Christianized type, it was first minted the year Rome was sacked. The heavy-handedness of the iconography suggests an attempt to restore public (and private) faith in his reign through religion. Although he had been powerless to stop Alaric and the Visigoths, he could still assert his legitimacy by reminding the Roman people (from Ravenna) that he had been chosen by God and intended to continue carrying out his work as illuminated through the depiction of the

Chi-Rho-topped spear and sword. Perhaps most interesting of all, is the response by

Priscus Attalus, a usurper and Visigothic pawn.

Of Greek origin, Priscus Attalus rose to prominence as a Roman senator and in 409. He was elected emperor twice, in 409 and 414, by the Visigoths who hoped to use him in negotiations with Honorius. When negotiations failed shortly after he was elected the second time, the Visigoths abandoned him once and for all and he was captured by Honorius. He suffered the indignity of being part of Honorius‘ triumph in 416 and then was exiled, only to die in prison the following year.

Two coin types were minted in the name of Priscus Attalus from 409-410.34

The first type, Roma Enthroned Facing, is a gold solidus minted at Rome [23-24]. The legend reads INVICTA ROMA AETERNA. Although each of Attalus‘ reigns lasted a few months at most, either Attalus deemed it necessary to mint a solidus with a new reverse legend, which clearly meant to recall the glory and invincibility of Rome.35

Having been a Roman senator, Attalus must have found it difficult to challenge Rome

34 It appears that Attalus only minted coins during his first reign. 35 It is also possible that the someone among the Visigoths chose the coin type and denomination to be minted.

29 repeatedly. His classical sensibilities may have led him to mint the solidus in an effort to summon times past when his political circumstances were not as conflicted. It is also possible that Attalus was trying to appeal to the aristocracy by resurrecting a classical concept and cult.

The second type is a silver siliqua of the type, Roma Seated on a Cuirass, minted in Attalus‘ name, which was similar to one minted by Valentinian II. It was minted at

Ravenna in 410 and bears the legend VICTORIA AVG. This coin type features a reused motif that suggests a contrasting message to Rome‘s past glory. Given the 410 sack, the meaning behind the siliqua legend could very well be an endorsement of the Visigoths and Attalus himself as their Roman figurehead – an interesting turnabout from the traditional praise afforded the governing emperor. This innocuous legend hints at a civil war victory. It celebrates the destruction of a long-standing Roman institution, the city of

Rome itself, at the hands of a and his barbarian allies. It is difficult to know whether Attalus‘ true feelings towards Rome had changed significantly as a result of his dealings with the Visigoths, or if he was merely positioning himself strategically to gain their favor and preserve his life. What is known is that three years later, the

Visigoths elected him again.

VALENTINIAN III

Valentinian III was the only son of Galla , half-sister of Honorius and

Constantius III. After being nominated in 424, he was named the following year at the age of six. Due to his youth, decisions were made on his behalf by his mother, and then his , Flavius Aëtius. Valentinian‘s rule was

30 characterized by military unrest – barbarians from every part of the world threatened the

Roman Empire, and several provinces, including Africa and large sections of Gaul and

Spain were lost. Nonetheless Aëtius had a very important victory over the Hun in

451, and Valentinian had him executed in 454. The following year, Petronius Maximus, one of Aëtius‘ supporters, returned the favor.36

The numismatic program of Valentinian III‘s reign differed substantially from that of Honorius, his half-uncle. The coins of Valentinian III are an amalgamation of past and present. He mixes coin types minted during the reign of Honorius with current themes to highlight his respect for his predecessor and understanding of his own tenuous political position. While his regular solidi were stylistically similar to those of Honorius, his special issues and other types had been unknown at the Roman mint. The message of his coinage (in order of importance) was on the power of Christianity, the presence of the military, his own strength, and his beneficence. It is during this time that the focus shifts away from Rome‘s greatness and resiliency, and refocuses on the importance of the emperor and his charity. The combination of so many games-centered coin issues and contorniates in his name reinforces the contention that Valentinian III considered the games essential to his popularity and the stability of his empire.

The reign of Valentinian saw the first Christian-focused coinage. The Cross in

Wreath type was first issued on tremisses in the name of , his mother [31].

The message that accompanied this type was the power of Christianity to preserve the

36 Betrayed by Eudoxia, his new bride and Valentinian III‘s widow, Petronius was murdered two and a half months later by a civilian (Grierson and Mays 1992: 247).

31 empire. This type would become a standard motif on tremisses until the end of the empire.

With constant threats against the West, the presence of the military was essential to instill confidence in the populace, particularly at Rome where the absence of the army had led to its sacking. The installation of military camp gates, then, served to publicize the military forces that served under Valentinian‘s rule and convey a message of safety to the citizens at a time when public security was desired. Valentinian‘s AE 4 coins show a camp gate with turrets and has the legend VOT PVB [32].37 It combines the military presence and the promise of provisions needed to calm fear at Rome, as the Vandals menaced Africa and threatened grain supplies into the city.

The dire position of the West required a show of personal strength which

Valentinian‘s advisors were quick to produce on his gold solidi. The Emperor and

Human-Headed Serpent, showing the emperor holding a long cross and Victoria on globe with his foot on a human-headed serpent and the inscription VICTORIA AVG, is propaganda at its best [29-30].38 Rather than depicting Valentinian as he was in 425, a six-year-old boy, he is aged to adulthood and shown, convincingly, conquering evil.39

The intended effect was to show a strong imperial presence capable of warding off attacks from the exterior and interior. It was immaterial that most of the fighting was carried out by Aëtius.

37 This type had not been used for centuries, perhaps as far back as ‘ praetorian camp from 44-45 (PCR II.392). 38 Petronius Maximus would copy this type during his own short struggle for the Western imperial seat [37]. It is interesting that he continued minting the same coin type as the man he murdered. It would have been more prudent to change the type altogether and break any association with the event. 39 Of course, this type was minted throughout his reign, and as a result, by the end, he would have been an adult.

32

One thing the young emperor could preside over was games and public distributions of wealth. Between 425 and 455, an AE 4 coin of the VOT XX in Wreath type was minted at Rome [33]. Supplementing this type, special issues celebrating two anniversaries were also minted. In 435, the first coin featuring a consular figure on a coin minted at Rome was produced [34]. It shows the consul enthroned and facing front, holding a mappa and a cross-scepter in his hands. The legend reads VOTX / MVLTXX.

Twenty years later the type is tweaked slightly to include a kneeling woman to whom

Valentinian extends his hand [35]. Finally, the legend of the Emperor and Human-

Headed Serpent type is altered to read VOTXXX/V/LTXXXX [36].

THE END OF THE WEST

The year 455 was one of the most turbulent in Late Antique history. Valentinian

III was murdered, his murderer was murdered, and the Vandals who had been considered allies of the West sacked Rome. The next 21 years, devolved into a power struggle as

Ricimer, a Suevic-Visigothic general, ruled through puppet emperors and the East tried to reassert its control. As each new contender gained a foothold, he minted coins often mimicking those of his predecessor. Occasionally a new type would surface that would either expand upon previous messages or assert completely new priorities. This period sees the aggrandizement of Christian motifs, the return to cooperation, and the futile resurrection of Victory.

Majorian was declared emperor by in 457, but remained unrecognized in the East. After victories over the , , Visigoths, and Vandals through military prowess or trickery, Majorian eventually lost popularity and was forced to

33 relinquish power in 461 after a mutiny in Lombardy. During his reign, only one type is known from the Roman mint, the Cross in Wreath tremissis [38]. Doubtless it was used to give him legitimacy and a link to the last recognized emperor.

After Majorian‘s death in 461, Ricimer next nominated Severus III to the Western throne. To assert his authority and proved his worthiness, he minted the same solidus type as Valentinian III, Emperor and Human-headed Serpent, as well as the same tremissis type, Cross in Wreath [39 and 41-2]. Identical messages of imperial strength and Christian power were delivered by these two types. Severus also created a new AE4 that displayed Ricimer‘s monogram in a wreath [44].40 Doubting his own abilities and those of the army, he also added a new type to his repertoire. Both the silver half-siliqua and the semissis share one type, Chi-Rho in Wreath (S3), and bear the legend SALVS

REIPVBLICAE [40 and 43]. The result was three circulating issues extolling the potency of Christianity, and only one displaying confidence in his own strength. Severus died in 465.

Finally, in an attempt to stabilize the West and decrease the influence of Ricimer,

Leo, emperor of the Eastern Empire, elected his own man, Anthemius, to the Roman court in 467. Their partnership would usher in a new propagandistic message not seen since before Honorius. The East and West would once again be represented together on the reverses of coinage minted at Rome. The appointment by Leo and the gratitude

40 There is debate about whether the monogram references Severus or Anthemius. It has been postulated by Woods that the monogram is actually of Severus‘ own name with a combination of Roman and Greek letters (2002: 5-21). Given the sway Ricimer had over Severus, however, it is not unlikely that he had this coin minted for his own glory. In addition, the lettering appears to feature an ―M‖ which could not be part of the name ―Severus‖ in or Greek. Incidentally, if the monogram is Ricimer‘s, it would be the only coin minted at Rome in this corpus with reverse dedicated to a barbarian.

34

Anthemius must have felt, led to a new numismatic campaign meant to persuade the people in the City of a new, stable, collaborative alliance. After a failed co-campaign with Leo against the Vandals in , Anthemius fell ill in 470. By then, too much damage had been done, and the power of the barbarians had grown beyond containment.

As with previous emperors, Anthemius copied Severus‘ Chi-Rho semissis, and duplicated Valentinian III‘s Cross in Wreath tremissis [54 and 55-56]. He also modified the monogram type instituted by Severus on his bronze nummi [57-58]. This time, however, the monogram featured his name. With these three types, Anthemius‘ intentions may have been to show continuity between previous emperors and himself.

After all, his reign was built on cooperation.

For his solidi, Anthemius create two new types based on the Two Figures

Clasping Hands motif. Both were new to the Roman mint. The first type shows two figures facing and holding hands, with an oval banner topped with a cross and inscribed with PAS [45]. A variant has the same basic motif, but in lieu of the banner, the two figures hold spears and there is a globus cruciger between them [46-53]. Unlike his predecessors, Anthemius strongly allied himself with the Eastern emperor. His coinage, rather than promoting his grandeur, focused on the relationship he shared with Leo in the

East, this, effectively demonstrating his allegiance. It also was a strong sign to the generation of people who had grown up without the presence of the East on their coinage.

The hardships of the past 75 years were being replaced with new hope in the form of a united empire. Leo and Anthemius were asking the people at Rome to trust that this new partnership would prevent further attacks on the City. Unfortunately, Anthemius and

35

Ricimer, who was still trying to direct policy from Milan, became embroiled in a civil war in 472. After five months, Ricimer was victorious and Anthemius was beheaded.41

Once again, Ricimer tried to seize power through imperial appointments, but Leo refused to cede the West to him once again. He appointed Julius Nepos in 474 to challenge , Ricimer‘s choice. Nevertheless, two coin types were minted in his name at Rome. In 476, Flavius Orestes, Nepos‘ own magister militum, mutinied and took control of the West. Although Nepos continued to be recognized as emperor of the West until 476, he fled to and was murdered in 480.

Two coin types were created at Rome in the name of Julius Nepos. Predictably, he also continued the Cross in Wreath tremissis [60]. Unpredictably, he abandoned the solidi of cooperation minted by Anthemius. Instead, his gold solidi resurrect Victory in a new guise. Victory in any form had not been seen at Rome since Valentinian III. The new type, Victory Holding Long Cross, had been popular outside of Rome since the time of Arcadius [59].42 Combined with the legend VICTORIA AVG and the obverse portrait of an emperor in armor, the message is clearly one of military prowess and conquest.

As with emperors before him, Nepos relied on past motifs to communicate the new political agenda to the Roman people. His continuance of the Cross and Wreath motif continued the insistence on Christianity as a positive factor in survival, while his revival of Victory tried to sell the Roman people on a strength that was not there. Its use,

41 Mitchell 2007: 116. 42 This type was first issued by Eudoxia, wife of Arcadius in the East. It continued to be a popular type in the East throughout the fifth century up until at least Leontius‘ reign from 484-488.

36 however, may have been a last ditch effort by Nepos to resuscitate the waning political structure in the West.

ODOVACAR AND THE OSTROGOTHS

Flavius Orestes, the successor to Julius Nepos appointed his son Romulus

Augustulus, the last Roman emperor of the West. Orestes‘ barbarian troops turned on him, however, and Odovacar, a German king and their leader took control of the West.

Thus ended the traditional Roman West. Immediately following the disillusion of the

Western empire, Odovacar began minting coinage in his own name from the Roman mint. From 477 until 491, he minted an XL-nummi with the bust of , emperor of the

Eastern empire from 476-491, on the obverse, and a combination of Victory motifs, the trophy and wreath, on the reverse. The reverse legend reads INVICTA ROMA; a curious choice given the fall of the empire and the City‘s transference to barbarian control. It is possible that Odovacar, who had been part of the Western military for nearly twenty years, preferred to continue Roman traditions. In fact Stephen Mitchell suggests that

―Odovacar brought a decade of relative stability to Italy.‖43 Scheming by the East, however, would end his rule and his life.

Persuaded by Zeno, Theodoric the Amal, headed towards Italy to engage

Odovacar. Although an agreement was reached to share Italy with Odovacar, Theodoric decided to murder him instead. On the Ides of March, he carried out his plan and proceeded to rule from Ravenna until 526. He was succeeded by Athalaric and then

Theodohad.

43 Mitchell 2007: 119.

37

The coinage minted under the barbarians in the late fifth and sixth centuries was unusual because of its return to pagan motifs [61-70]. From Odovacar through

Theodohad, the reverse images alternated between scenes of Victory before a lighted altar and animals (like the wolf and eagle) that had been equated with the city hundreds of years earlier. This manipulation of social memory was a clever way for non-Romans to show their understanding and appreciation of classical motifs, while equating themselves with the classical rulers of the West.

CONCLUSION

Late Antique emperors showed Rome‘s independence through its coinage. In times of political turmoil or military aggression, they refused to concede defeat, producing coinage that intimated imperial strength, victory, and the power of

Christianity. Even as Rome eventually fell to the barbarians, its classical motifs were revitalized. Although they had brought about the end of the Western imperial court, these new foreign rulers continued to admire Rome‘s cultural past and stature in the West.

THE CALENDAR

A calendar is an invention of the human mind, designed for the convenience of human beings. It is based on the observation of the natural phenomena by which men calculate the progress of time in order to regulate their own activities…one can learn a great deal about the customs and interests of the group or society that it represents.44

Calendars were a regular part of civic life for citizens of the Roman empire. Not only did calendars detail ludi, circenses, temple dedications, anniversaries of battles, specific emperors, and historical events, they also reinforced values and customs inherent in Roman society, as Michels intimates in the quote above. As a surviving written record of social memory, the Codex-Calendar of 354 provides a glimpse into the social fabric of fourth century Rome.45

In this chapter, my goal is to address the question of the Codex-Calendar‘s value to a discussion of numismatics by pinpointing the numerous ways coins were used in the

Codex-Calendar to create and enhance prestige in Late Antique Rome. The Codex-

Calendar is significant for a study of social memory because it serves as an example of imperial communication and elite reception. While the Codex-Calendar was created for a private citizen, the events and iconographic representations therein can be assumed to relate to imperial versions of such documents.46 Therefore, through the various cults, festivals, personifications, and illustrations in the Codex-Calendar, it is possible to piece together aspects of Rome‘s multi-faceted persona, which, in some cases, continued into

44 Michels 1967: 3-4. 45 See Salzman 1990: Appendix 1 for a full discussion of the problematic manuscript tradition. 46 See Beard 1987 for a discussion of the changing focus of imperial calendars with each emperor. 35

36 the fifth century unchanged, and in others, was reworked to fit into a new conceptual framework.

THE CODEX-CALENDAR OF 354

The Codex-Calendar of 354 was created by Furius Dionysius Filocalus for

Valentinus, a Christian aristocrat.47 In its entirety, the Codex-Calendar is a compilation of textual and visual components that represent the prevailing Roman culture of the mid- fourth century. The information contained within the Codex-Calendar can be divided into three main categories: civic, astrological, and religious.48 The civic and astrological categories will be considered here.49

The civic sections of the Codex-Calendar detail the inner workings of the socio- political Roman world. The Representations of the Public Fortune (Tyche) of Four

Cities (Section II) portrays the four epicenters of the Roman world: Rome,

Constantinople, Alexandria, and Trier. This section, in which the folios of Roma and

Constantinopolis are both placed on the left-hand side of the codex, shows the relationship of Constantinople to Rome in the imperial iconography. It also shows a

47 To refer to the Codex-Calendar in its entirety (Sections I-XVI), I will continue Salzman‘s conventions and use the term ‗Codex-Calendar‘, while the term ‗Calendar‘ will be used to refer solely to Section VI, the calendar proper. 48 The religious section of the Codex-Calendar, wholly without illustration, consists of several lists of bishops and martyrs and Christian events that had previously been recorded in other secular sections of the Codex-Calendar. The Easter Cycle (Section IX) provides a list of past dates from 312-354 on which Easter fell, as well as projected dates through 411. The next two sections, The Depositions of Bishops (Section XI) and Depositions of Martyrs (Section XII) ―provide a virtual abbreviated calendar, or feriale, of the most important dates observed by the church at Rome.‖48 These two sections were compilations of holy days beginning in 254/5 for bishops and the cult of martyrs. The last religious section, List of Bishops of Rome (Section XIII), contains chronological notations on all bishops of Rome beginning with Peter and ending with Gallus. It includes the bishop‘s name, length of his rule, his reigning emperor, and the consular dates of his reign. 49 The Imperial Dedication and the Dedication to stand apart from these as common conventions of patronage.

37 reduction in the imperial Tyche group. 50 The list of Natales Caesarum (Section III) provides the dates of birth of prominent Roman rulers in order to reinforce the importance of Constantius II and his Caesar, Gallus. In particular, Constantius II‘s preoccupation with improving his political position is apparent in the inclusions and exclusions to this list. Most striking, Constantius has omitted his murdered rivals, and Constantine II.

Section VI houses the Calendar Text and Illustrations. Each month is represented by an illustration of the personified month and a five-column list of festivities that were celebrated. Depictions of the reigning consuls are included in The Portraits of the

Consuls (Section VII). The List of Consuls (Fasti) (Section VIII) follows and is the most complete listing of consuls in existence.51 Commencing at the time of the kings, the list concludes its rehearsal of consular names in 354, and intersperses Christian events among the consular years.52 Similarly, the List of Urban of Rome (Section X), including prefects from 254 CE to 354 CE, is another sole surviving record of its type.

According to Michele Salzman, this list may have been included to showcase the increased prestige of the position of and to please Valentinus, himself an aristocrat who may have enjoyed possessing a list of this nature.

50 See below for a discussion of the illustrations of Roma and Constantinople in the Codex-Calendar. According to Stern, the general trope in official or imperial art was to include and as well (1953: 124-144). On sixth century diptychs, however, only Roma and Constantinople are shown [7], (Fig. 13). 51 The civic section also includes three important works that originally may not have been part of the Codex-Calendar. The Regions of the City of Rome (Notitia) (Section XIV) is the famous Notitia that contains the important ―buildings, monuments, and noteworthy sights in the fourteen regions of the city.‖51 Section XV houses the World Chronicle (Liber Generationis), a Latin translation of the Greek work of Hippolytus composed in 230-234 CE, with a one-hundred year historical extension that includes Christian and secular events. The Civic section concludes with the Chronicle of the City of Rome (Chronica Urbis Romae) (Section XVI) which detail all the rulers of Rome from mythical Picus through in 324. 52 Salzman believes the inclusion of Christian events underscores the ―personalized nature of this Codex,‖ and its intended recipient‘s religious affiliation (1990: 37).

38

The astrological sections of the Codex-Calendar are concerned with regulating daily activity according to the planets and zodiac.53 The Planets and Their Legends

(Sections IV) contains images of the planets although ―this section of the Codex-Calendar was mutilated sometime before 1560, when it was last seen and copied in its entirety in

Vienna‖.54 As a result, the order of the planets varies among the manuscripts. The

Effectus XII Signorum (Section V), or Text and Signs of the Zodiac, details appropriate activities to be done when the moon is in each of the twelve signs of the zodiac by month.

The Codex-Calendar, based on its content, can be thought of as an artifact of imperial political policy-making. It is also a testament to Filocalus‘ and Valentinus‘ personal reception of imperial ideals. According to Salzman, the Codex-Calendar is a conservative document primarily concerned with maintaining links to Rome‘s historical past.55 John Curran also believes that ―the imperial festivals celebrated demonstrated the traditional desire to promote the imperial dynasty.‖56 Rome‘s historical past and its imperial family were both inexorably linked to Roman religious practice. For this reason, the strong pagan flavor found in the events included in the Calendar is predictable. The transition from pagan to Christian feast days did not happen immediately. The

Calendar‘s creation for a Christian client, however, suggests that the iconography in the

Codex-Calendar, a component easily manipulated by the artist, may be more Christian- focused.

53 Salzman (1990: 32) believes this section would have been illustrated. 54 Salzman 1990: 30. 55 Salzman 1990: 176. 56 Curran 2000: 223.

39

While Christian lists are included in the Codex-Calendar as supplementary information, the Calendar does not contain overt Christian iconography.57 To the contrary, the illustrations highlighted in the Calendar are predominantly pagan motifs dating back to the mid first century CE. It is important to note, however, that Christianity was still a new religion in 354, and as such, was still evolving.58 It was crucial for

Constantius II, and by extension Filocalus with his Codex-Calendar, to continue mixing religious ideas until all strata of society gradually converted to Christianity. As practicing Christians, Constantius II and successive emperors were charged with the process of syncretizing Christianity, itself viewed as ―nothing more than a syncretic group of cults,‖ with the traditional pagan cults still popular among the Roman people.59

Salzman asserts that the Christian side of the process was not sufficiently established to warrant a full-scale shift to Christian themes in the Codex-Calendar, even after Constantine‘s conversion. Jocelyn Toynbee states ―the Christian emperors of the fourth century, even in their official coinage and on their official medallions, while

57 Salzman sees the Codex-Calendar in two distinct halves. The first half, comprising Sections I-VII, is the main illustrated part that ―marks recurring time patterns or events,‖ while the second half, Sections VIII- XVI, supplies ―historical or chronographic information to mark past time in relation to the fourth century‖ (1990: 35). 58 Christianity struggled with numerous heresies throughout the fourth century, including , , and Priscillianism. While Trinitarianism was eventually deemed the official religion, heresies continued to prove problematic in large part because of the inclusive nature of Roman religion and complications from several influential barbarian tribes such as the Visigoths who were devoted to Arianism. See following sources for an overview of each heresy‘s tenets. Arianism: Duval 1998, Williams 1995, Sumruld 1994, Hanson 1988, Thompson 1966; Manichaeism: Gardner and Lieu 2004, Lieu 1992, Brown 1969, Widengren 1965; Priscillianism: Burrus 1995, Mathisen 1989, Van Dam 1985; Wand 1975. See Codex Theodosianus XVI.1.2 for the proclamation in 380 that made Trinitarianism the official religion of Rome. 59 Lançon 2000: 88. The pagan-Christian dichotomy has been the subject of numerous scholarly debates. See Alföldi 1976 for his view on the role of the contorniates and the pagan revolt against Christianity. See Toynbee 1945 for her rejection of Alföldi‘s pagan retaliation model. Specifically, Toynbee wonders whether it was necessary, during a time of exterior architectural paganism, to use contorniates to ―remind [Rome] of its traditional creeds‖ and encourage attendance at the games (1945: 118). See Salzman 1990 and Mazzarino 1951 for the shift to an assimilation model.

40

‗putting off‘ the gods of the old religion, have not as yet fully ‗put on‘ the God of the new‖.60 Nevertheless, there are small changes in the content and iconography of the

Codex-Calendar that show the beginnings of a shift that would carry over into the material culture created and consumed during the fifth century. One such change was the omission of scenes of pagan sacrifice, a practice that was offensive to Christians. For example, in the Vindobonensis manuscript (Fig. 1), a scene that traditionally would have included sacrifices was converted instead to a scene of incense burning.

COIN DEPICTIONS IN THE CODEX-CALENDAR OF 354

The Codex-Calendar of 354 has been studied for its iconographic and epigraphic significance. Evidence concerning the elite class of the mid-fourth century, pagan-

Christian relations, the state of public festivals in the Late Antique period, and changing tastes in calendar production have also been extracted from this document.61 The depiction of coins, however, while mentioned briefly by Salzman to discuss the contorniates issued in 356 by Memmius Vitasius Orfitus, has only been treated superficially by Strzygowski and Mommsen.62 Although there are issues of transmission hindering the collation of a complete authentic copy of the original manuscript, it is possible to cobble together a comprehensive manuscript from the extant copies. Thus, the images of the Tyches, the planets, the months, and the reigning consuls have

60 Toynbee 1945: 119. 61Salzman 1990; Mommsen 1981; Stern 1953; Strzygowski 1888. 62 Salzman 1990: 213ff. For Mommsen‘s and Strzygowski‘s interest in the coins see Mommsen 1981: Chapter 2; Strzygowski 1888.

41 survived.63 These images, which include coin events both static and active, illustrate the important role coins played in the creation and solidification of an imperial identity.64

Each depiction of coins in the Calendar, whether it accompanies a Tyche or a pagan god, can be seen as an augmentation of prestige applied to the imperial family, because it either hints at or shows the sparsio, the official dispersal of gifts to the general public.65

MERCURY AND JULY

Mercury and July represent commerce and largesse, respectively. Mercury, as the god of commerce in some traditions, and July, the personification of the Roman senatorial games and sparsio, play complementary roles in the Calendar.

Mercury is shown standing in the ―Praxitelean, hipshot pose of the fourth century

BC‖, between two smaller busts of himself with a chlamys draped over his left shoulder

(Fig. 3).66 He wears a winged helmet and sandals. His customary caduceus (double- serpented staff) leans against his left forearm and he holds a sack in his right hand. Since

Mercury is known as the god of commerce, it is reasonable to conclude that his sack held coins.67

63 The Codex-Calendar as conceived would have contained 40 illustrations in Sections I-VII, although only 25 are extant. Of these 40 images, it is likely, given that neither the zodiacal nor planetary illustrations are thought to include coins, that only 6 folios contain images of coins. It is not believed that the January folio would contain coins either. Nevertheless, the coin motif is the only one that repeats itself in the Codex- Calendar. The importance of festivals and the imperial acknowledgement of liberality seem to suggest that the inclusion of coins in several of the more important folios is intentional. 64 Of the six folios that contain coins, half of them show coins being distributed either by a break in a container, a putto, or the emperor himself, while the other half merely portray containers of coins. It is interesting to note that the method of dispersal ranges from accidental through imperial mandate, depending on who the coins accompany. 65 The depiction on the South Façade of Arch of Constantine of Constantine dispersing coins, is a likely model for such scenes. See Ramage, N. and A. 1996. Roman Art, 2nd ed. Englewood Cliffs, fig. 12.5. 66 Vermeule 1987: 40-41. 67 Vermeule 1987: 60; Salzman 1990: Fig. 54.

42

July is depicted as a man standing in an exaggerated contrapposto position (Fig.

4).68 He holds a shallow basket with three plants in his left hand and a closed, corded sack in his right hand. Beneath the sack is a broken vessel containing coins.69 To the left of the main figure are two lidded baskets with leaf motifs on the lids.

Salzman believes that the motifs presented in the July image can be attributed to the games of Apollo celebrated from the 5-13 of the month and resolves the discrepancy in iconography illuminated previously by emphasizing the allusion Filocalus makes to the ludi Apollinares where there would have been actual baskets and corded bags. Coins were known to be distributed by the imperial government at the games. Even after the holiday was Christianized, the practice continued.70 It also became a significant event for local praetors. In the West, when the emperor was away from Rome, the praetors held games in July in their own honor and at their own expense.71 In essence, the ludi

Apollinares were a prime opportunity for a display of liberalitas at the ―premier occasion for ostentatious senatorial display in the fourth century.‖72

This image of July, however, poses an iconographic problem due to illustrations elsewhere showing contrary motifs.73 In the Vossianus miniatures, a man holds a ―long,

68 Vindobonensis MS; Salzman 1990: 99. 69 Salzman (1990: 213 ff.) believes these coins may actually be contorniates based on the design of each object. 70 Salzman 1990: 100. 71 Salzman 1990: 100. See Chapter VI and V for senatorial displays on contorniates and diptychs. 72 Salzman 1990: 103. 73 Salzman 1990: 101. In the Voss. miniatures, the man holds a ―long, curved object, identified alternatively as a shepherd‘s crook, a sickle, or a plant‖ (1990: 99). Stern (1953: 29) describes the object as a caduceus, which would be interesting giving the similarities this author has observed in the Calendar. African mosaics at El-Djem, Zliten, and Carthage all depict scenes of harvest rather than a man holding a bag of coins (Salzman Appendix 2, no. 9, 10, 17). There are also scenes of someone eating berries for the month of July (Salzman, no. 190). One possible explanation for the scene in the Codex-Calendar could be that the citizens in Rome were the only ones to benefit directly from payouts in July, and as a result Filocalus, creating the Calendar for a Roman, may have added coins to July‘s attributes.

43 curved object, identified alternatively as a shepherd‘s crook, a sickle, or a plant.ˮ74 Henri

Stern describes the object as a caduceus, which would be interesting, given the similarities this author has observed in the Calendar.75 African mosaics at El-Djem,

Zliten, and Carthage all depict scenes of harvest rather than a man holding a bag of coins.76 There are also scenes of a person eating berries for the month of July.77 As

Venantius looked through the months, he may have expected to see one of these variants.

The substitution of this July type served to emphasize the importance of July in Rome.

After all, the citizens in Rome were the only ones to benefit directly from payouts in July, and as a result Filocalus, creating the Calendar for a Roman, may have added coins to

July‘s attributes.

Based on the representations of Mercury and July in the Codex-Calendar, it seems possible that Filocalus purposefully portrayed them 1) in a manner not seen before, and

2) as complements to each other. Both figures are nude. Both stand in the same contrapposto position. Each grasps a sack (presumably of coins) in his right hand, towards which he also glances. Each holds a secondary object in his left hand. The fact that there are so few illustrations with coins in the Calendar and that these two share several bodily positions and attributes suggests they may have been joined in the Roman consciousness. According to Charlotte Long, however, Mercury and July were not ancient pairs in the deity-month pairings. Instead, she allies Mercury with June, while

July is linked with Jupiter.78 This, however, does not preclude a shift in Late Antique

74 Salzman 1990: 99. 75 Stern 1953: 29. 76 Salzman Appendix 2, no. 9, 10, 17. 77 Salzman, no. 190. 78 Long 1989: Table 1.

44 thought concerning new combinations of deities and months, nor the link Filocalus may have created specifically for this document. Their conglomeration, thus, creates a composite image of two figures that together represent wealth and games.

THE TYCHES: ROMA AND CONSTANTINOPOLIS

The only authentic Calendar image of Roma is preserved in the 1 manuscript in the Vatican library (Fig. 5).79 It depicts a helmeted Roma in military dress seated on a throne flanked by curtains held with ties.80 She holds a spear in her left hand and a globe surmounted by a Victory holding a wreath and palm in her right hand. At her left foot sits a bag of coins marked with the letters MCCCC, indicating 1400 coins.81 To her right, a putto pours out coins from a bag slung over his left shoulder.82

As Stern and Salzman rightfully assert, the addition of coins is another visual nod to the sparsio, the state-sponsored distribution of coins and other gifts to the people during certain public festivals and games.83 Not only do these images demonstrate the significance of coins to imperial identity, they also help refute the claim that Rome lost its importance after the establishment of Constantinople as the new capital. The layout of the folios makes the placement of Roma particularly conspicuous. Both Roma and

79 See Salzman 1990: Appendix 1, ―The Romanus Manuscript Copies‖ for issues of authenticity. 80 Mellor (1981: 1016) describes this type as ―Roma Aeterna‖, while Vermeule (1974: 35ff) and Strzygowski (1888: 28) refer to this type as the Athena type. All agree that it dates back to Hadrian‘s revival. Stern believes the style recalls Minerva in arms (1953: 131) 81 Stern 1953: 131-3; Salzman 1990: 27. 82 Only one representation of Constantinopolis is transmitted through the Romanus 1 manuscript in the Vatican Library (Fig. 6). It is quite similar to that of Roma. Stern has related this image to those of the Syrian deity Astarté. She is depicted standing, wearing a turreted crown, and holding a wreath in her right hand and a spear in her left. Two putti flying overhead crown her, while one putto, supporting another holding a candlestick on his back, faces a bag of coins with the letter M, indicating 1000 coins. Another putto near her left foot holds a candlestick. 83 Stern 1953: 155-164; Salzman 1990: 27. See Chapter V for sparsio scenes on diptychs.

45

Constantinopolis (Fig. 6), placed on the left-hand side of the codex, are highlighted as capitals of the West and East respectively.84 Roma, however, at this time is shown as the most important of the personified cities based on her iconography, the agency of her putto, and the fact that she appears first. 85

In these two images, Roma is given priority of place and position. Her purpose is to instill pride in the citizens of the city through the recollection of past glory and mores.

24 years after the capital was shifted to Constantinople, Rome continues to trade in cultural capital. The resuscitation of an old type to create a new motif is a lucid demonstration of creating memory. Roma is shown seated on a throne, while

Constantinopolis stands in an unknown context. She also bears the sole responsibility for actively distributing monies, while Constantinopolis merely possesses an unopened bag.

It should be said, however, that Constantinopolis remained an important Tyche within the

Codex-Calendar. In the same way that Roma surpasses her, she surpasses the other

Tyches, Alexandria and Trier. These two folios, then, signal one instance of the largesse of the empire and the benefactions of the emperor, who is himself a living reminder of what both the city and empire of Rome had come to signify.

THE CONSULS: CONSTANTIUS II AND GALLUS

84 Stern 1953: 129. Stern makes the argument that Roma is not an actual Tyche based on her helmet and her seated position on a throne, but does agree that her inclusion is consistent with other contemporary Tyche groups (1953: 143). In the Calendar, coins do not accompany the Tyches of Antioch and Alexandria. Also, on contemporary imperial coinage showing Roma and Constantinopolis together, I am unaware of an instance where Roma is to the left of Constantinopolis. On the Orestes diptych, however, the Tyches are reversed, with Constantinople on the right and Roma on the left [7]. 85 Stern asserts that the artist takes known models and adds the money bags to the picture to signal the act of sparsio (1953: 143-4).

46

The consular portrait pair of Emperor Constantius II (337-361) and his Caesar

Gallus is a prime example of coins being used to both increase the prestige of an individual and distinguish one individual from another (Figs. 7,8). Constantius, dressed in a jeweled toga and diadem, is seated on a throne with his feet elevated. In his left hand, he holds a scepter while he drops coins from his right hand. By contrast, Gallus, standing, wears a toga decorated with pictures. He holds a similar scepter in his left hand and a Victory in his right hand. Near his right foot lies a bag of coins.

The juxtaposition of Constantius II and Gallus mirrors almost exactly the previous roles of Roma and Constantinople. As with Roma, Constantius II is the first depicted and occupies the left-hand side of the codex. He is enthroned with elevated feet and inclines his head towards the right, although he looks left. He also actively issues coinage as does

Roma‘s putto. On the facing folio, Gallus stands, his weight also shifted to his right leg.

Like Constantinopolis, he holds comparable objects in each hand, one signaling Victory, the other signaling strength. Near his right foot also sits a bag of 1000 coins. It is obvious from the rendering of these four personages that Filocalus was making a strong connection between these two pairs. For the average Roman citizen, it would be natural to equate Roma Aeterna with Constantius II. As discussed previously, the cult of Roma

Aeterna had been linked with the imperial family for centuries. It also makes sense to align Constantius with Rome on a purely geographical basis. Constantius ruled the

Western empire, while Gallus, here connected with Constantinopolis, reigned in the East.

Filocalus, then, by including these two complimentary pairs, made a strong statement for the longevity of both the Roman emperor and the Roman empire.

47

MAIN CULTS ILLUSTRATED THE CALENDAR

Constantius II sought to cement imperial stability by continuing cult worship that had been a staple of Roman society for centuries. The rising Christian community continued to support several ancient cults including the imperial cult and the cults of Sol

Invictus, Salus, and Roma Aeterna. With the addition of games, an increase in festival length, and the transition to Christian-friendly practices, these cults and their associated festivals reached a height of popularity that would carry them into the fifth century.86

IMPERIAL CULT

Imperial cult, the state-sanctioned veneration of the imperial family, was deemed essential to the safety and well-being of the empire.87 Perhaps this is one reason, in addition to confirmation of authenticity, for the use of the emperor‘s portrait on coins during his reign, and why defilements were punished so severely. Its popularity and strength also came from the public nature of the celebrations and the involvement of a majority of the people.88 Due to these factors, the imperial cult showed a strong, continuous history in Roman calendars dating back to Julio-Claudian times.

Following a period of civil war between and Constantius II, the

Calendar shows an increased focus on the imperial cult. The most compelling evidence is its ninety-eight days of celebration with ludi and circenses, the most days devoted to

86 Salzman 1990. 87 It is interesting that the imperial family, while depicted on coinage during their lifetime, do not themselves become gods until their death (Vermeule 1987: 14). Among Vermeule‘s list of gods, virtues, and geographical personifications, the imperial family is not represented, although he has made the argument that both Genius and Roma become intertwined with the imperial family in the late antique period. 88 Salzman 1990: 136.

48 one cult.89 Of the ninety-eight days, games for the Constantinian dynasty, which included Constantius, constitute sixty-nine days. The types of events celebrated included natales, military victories, the , the profectio, votive days, and other historical occurrences.90

One explanation for the increase in imperial cult days is the civil strife mentioned previously. writes:

While these arrangements were being made in the East and in Gaul to meet the needs of the time, Constantius, behaving as if the temple of Janus were shut and all his enemies overthrown, conceived a strong desire to visit Rome and celebrate the fall of Magnentius by a triumph to which he had no title, since it had been won by the spilling of Roman blood. He had not overcome in person any race that made war on him; nor news had arrived that any had been defeated by the valour of his generals; he had added nothing to the empire; he had never been seen fighting at the head of his men or even in the front rank in moments of crisis. His object was simply to display his gold-inlaid standards and his brilliant retinue in a procession of inordinate length before the eyes of a populace that was living in peace and neither expected nor wished to see any such show.91

From Ammianus‘ description of Constantius‘ adventus in 357, it appears that he, at least, found the triumph in honor of the victory over Maxentius unwarranted, most likely because it celebrated a victory over a fellow Roman citizen. Ammianus‘ objection may have stemmed from his recollection of one of Rome‘s most painful civil contests – that between Julius Caesar and Pompey. While not a personal memory for fourth century citizens, Ammianus possibly utilized it to spur the collective memory of the event in order to highlight the undesirable nature of civil war, particularly with greater of external

89 Salzman (1990: 120) calculates 177 holiday or festival days with games. The six great public games (Romani, Plebeii, Apollinares, Cerialici, Megalesiaci, and Florales) are the next most celebrated cults with a combined thirty-seven days of celebration. 90 See Salzman 1990, Table 5 for a complete list of festivals associated with the imperial cult. It is interesting to note that the imperial cult is celebrated in every month of the year except June. 91 Ammianus Marcellinus 16.10.1-2. Constantius quasi recluso Iani templo stratisque hostibus cunctis Romam visere gestiebat post Magnenti exitium absque nomine ex sanguine Romano triumphaturus. nec enim gentem ullam bella cientem per se superavit, aut victam fortitudine suorum conperit ducum, vel addidit quaedam imperio, aut usquam in necessitatibus summis primus vel inter primos est visus, sed ut pompam nimis extentam rigentiaque auro vexilla et pulchritudinem stipatorum ostenderet agenti tranquillius populo haec vel simile quicquam videre nec speranti umquam nec optanti

49 foes. Regardless of the circumstances of Constantius‘ victory, as both Salzman and

McCormack assert, ―the occasion, the coinage, and the Calendar… indicate that victory was indeed intended to be viewed as an inherent imperial quality‖.92

Constantius redirected the public‘s attention away from his tainted victory and reinforced his own legitimacy to the throne by increasing the number of public spectacles dedicated to the Constantinian family‘s victories.93 With this increase in games, he sought to celebrate his other military successes, as well as point to popular family accomplishments celebrated by his father, Constantine the Great, and his grand-father,

Constantius Chlorus. In an attempt to further capitalize on his predecessors‘ popularity,

Constantius also continued to support the cults of Sol Invictus, Salus, and Roma

Aeterna.94

SOL INVICTUS

The Cult of Sol Invictus appeared in the Roman empire ―as early as the fourth century BC‖ as Sol Indiges.95 According to , there were two temples dedicated to

Sol, one on the Quirinal and one in the Circus Maximus.96 It is shown in the Augustinian calendar that the foundation anniversary of the Quirinal temple fell on 9 August and that

92 Salzman 1990: 145; MacCormack 1981: 41-42. Curran sees the inclusion of military battles of the reigning family to the exclusion of other imperial families as a statement of military health (2000: 228). See Chapter 3 for my discussion on the adventus and Chapter 5 for the continuity of Victory motifs on coins in the fifth century. 93 John Curran is in agreement about the message the Codex-Calendar sends (2000: 228). 94 All of these cults would play a vital role in the fifth century numismatic program. Salus and Roma were both prominent figures on coins from Theodosius through Valentinian III. Sol Invictus is more difficult to follow, simply because the cult itself was not maintained. However, some of the iconography was absorbed by Christians and can be seen on the obverse of coins in modified form for the same period as the Salus and Roma depictions. 95 Halsberghe (1972: 27) maintains that Sol was not a Greek import, but rather an autochthonous Roman god. 96 Tacitus, Annales, XV, 74.

50 of the Circus Maximus temple on 28 August.97 Originally venerated as a protector of fertility and health, a revealer of truths, and an avenger of wrongs, beginning in the second century CE, the autochthonous Sol was supplanted by Eastern sun worship, particularly in the form of the Syrian sun god Sol Invictus Elagabal.98

Under Antoninus, commonly known as , reigning emperor from 218 to 222, the cult of Sol Invictus Elagabal was elevated above all other

Sol cults, even that of Jupiter Optimus Maximus Capitalinus, and was celebrated as the

―main event of the year.‖99 Although Elagabalus was murdered and received the damnatio memoriae, the cult of Sol Invictus continued in existence due in part to the accommodating polices of Alexander Severus and its revival under and

Constantine the Great. As Gaston Halsberghe so aptly states, ―the opportunistic support of the emperors guaranteed the incontestable supremacy of the cult of Sol Invictus.‖100

During the reign of Constantius II, the Sol festivals began on 6 June with the

Colossus coronatur, a crowning ceremony dating back to the reign of . The

[Natalis] Solis et Lunae was celebrated with circenses on 28 August.101 The ludi Solis took place during October 19-22, concluding with thirty-six circus races on the final day.

Finally, the Natalis Invicti is marked in the Calendar on 25 December.102

Although not as prevalent as the imperial cult, which spanned almost the entire calendar year, in the Christian period the retention of four associated pagan festivals in

97 CIL I2, p. 327. 98 Halsberghe 1972: 26. 99 Halsberghe 1972: 75, 88. 100 Halsberghe 1972: 37. 101 See Salzman 1990: 150-151 for issues of attribution for this festival. 102 As with the [Natalis] Solis et Lunae and ludi Solis, the Natalis Invicti is thought to have gained in importance because of Aurelian‘s religious reforms (Salzman 1990: 150; Halsberghe 1972: 144). Salzman also refutes Halsberghe‘s (1972: 122-126, 186ff.) claim that the Natalis Invicti is related to the birth of Christ (1990: 150).

51 the Calendar and the depiction of the emperor in the guise of Sol Invictus illustrates the continued elevated status of Sol Invictus (Fig. 2).103 In addition, the prevailing influence of Sol Invictus can be seen in the diversity of emperors who chose to depict him on their coinage and the unwavering reverse legends associated with his image.104 Beginning with (193-211, the popularity of the Sol Invictus motif was employed for more than two centuries by emperors such as , Alexander Severus, Aurelian,

Florian, , and Constantine.105 The cult and its related coinage reached its zenith under Constantine, whose ―reign was spoken of as Sun emperorship‖.106 Sol Invictus remained popular under Constantius II and continued to receive imperial monetary support, although it eventually fell out of favor as Christianity spread.107

103 The integration of Sol with the emperor beginning with could help explain the gap in imperial cult celebration days in June and the decline of the Sol cult after the rise of Christianity. See Halsberghe 1972: 81 for a discussion of the belief system of Sol Invictus worshippers. See Chapter 5 for a discussion of the syncretization of Sol Invictus with the Emperor as a Christ-Figure. 104 Reverse legends alternated between ORIENS AVG and SOLI INVICTI, although Aurelian and Florian also used the legend PACATOR ORBIS. 105 Septimius Severus: PCR II.696. 106Halsberghe 1972: 167; See Salzman 1990: 149ff. for a discussion of coins depicting Sol Invictus. 107 Salzman 1990: 152. It is possible to see the devotion to Sol through the numismatic evidence. Coin types featuring Sol either standing or advancing left, raising his right hand, and holding a whip or globe are the most common among Constantinian Sol coins. Constantine minted coins with these types in Britannia (London), Gallia (Trier, , ), Italia (Rome, Ticinum, Ostia, Aquileia, Siscia), and Africa (Antioch).107 All coins were either bronze folles or bronze half-folles and bore the reverse legend SOLI INVICTO COMITI. Coins with this motif are attested beginning in 307 and continue in production through 324. It appears that after 317 Sol coins were minted only in the names of Constantine‘s sons, Crispus and Constantine II. It should also be noted that Antioch is a special case. At Antioch the coins are minted from 324 to 330. Antioch also boasts the only gold solidi with the Sol motif and the legend SOLI COMITI AVG N. It is also interesting that the coinage bearing Sol Invictus is not attested in Constantinople and seems to taper off towards the end of Constantine‘s life, namely, in the period leading up to his conversion to Christianity. Coins minted at Rome were of the same denomination and reverse legend, although they only appear in the archaeological record from 312 to 317. There is some ambiguity concerning the dating of these coins. Robertson (1982) has classified them as dating from 312-317, or later.

52

SALUS

According to Martin Marwood, the cult of Salus existed in four main respects throughout Roman history: as a personal deity, as a state deity, as an adaptation of Greek

Hygieia, and as a substitute for Greek soter108. A temple to Salus was completed on the

Quirinal hill in 302 BCE, in fulfillment of an oath sworn by C. Junius Bubulcus in 313

BCE.109 There is ambiguity in the sources concerning private cultic practice for personal safety, but it is possible there was an ancient cult of Salus before the completion of the

Quirinal temple. Livy‘s account is the first mention of a cult temple for Salus as a state deity.110

By Julius Caesar‘s time, ―increasingly, the salus of the state was regarded as dependent upon outstanding individuals.‖111 There was a marked shift in the imperial period when Salus became associated with the safety of the imperial family, and by extension, the empire itself.112 Nevertheless, the only attested festival day for the cult of

Salus is the Natalis Salutis on 5 August, the day on which the temple of Salus on the

Quirinal hill was dedicated.113 This festival, however, culminated in twenty-four circus races, a testament to Salus‘ popularity. The continued support and universal appeal of the

108 While Marwood believes it may have been possible for Romans to separate out each aspect in some cases, all aspects are mixed in the evidence so it is a difficult task for scholars. 109 Livy, IX.43.25; X.1.9. 110 See Marwood 1988: 4 for evidence of previous incarnations of Salus cult structures. As with Sol Invictus, the origins of Salus are also disputed. According to Marwood, the cult may have had an Italic origin in one or more of its aspects, but also most likely was influenced by Greek cults, particularly during and after the Samnite Wars. 111 Marwood 1988: 148. 112 Salzman 1990: 154. 113 Salzman 1990: 153.

53

Salus cult was largely due to the benign nature of the message, and explains the pervasiveness of the Salus motif throughout the Roman Imperial period.

Coins minted with reference to Salus range in date from the reign of Augustus through the Late Antique period.114 Early imperial emperors who have minted Salus coins include Augustus, , , , , and Tacitus. During the fourth and fifth centuries, Salus coins were popular with , Magnentius,

Constantius II, Valentinian II, Theodosius, and Honorius. It is also a reverse type that was used on coinage in the name of two fourth century empresses, Fausta and Flacilla.

As Salzman rightly purports, Christian emperors could easily incorporate the attributes of

Salus into a Christian context without alienating the public or their own ideals.115

ROMA AETERNA

As with the cults of Sol Invictus and Salus, the cult of Roma Aeterna was a vastly different institution at its inception. Beginning as the restless exile Thea Rhome who eventually compelled her people to settle the city of Rome in Greek myth, the Greek version of Roma was far from the goddess she would become by the mid fourth century.116 According to Ronald Mellor, the ―earliest attested cult of Roma was established at Smyrna in 195 BC.‖117 Roma, however, was not venerated as a Tyche, but rather, in the spirit of adulatio Graeca, as a political powerhouse.118 For the Greeks, ―the

114 The most common denominations in the fourth century were the AE 2, AE 4 and bronze follis, and they were minted throughout the empire. Reverse legends were numerous and included SALVS AVGVSTI, SALVS AVGVSTORVM, SALVS REIPVBLICAE, and SALVS AVGVSTA. 115 Salzman 1990: 154. 116 Mellor 1981: 954. 117 Mellor 1981: 956. 118 Mellor 1981: 957.

54 worship of Roma could be used to convey a wide spectrum of political attitudes: admiration, gratitude, flattery, wariness, and sheer terror.‖119

In the Roman world, however, Roma was merely a geographical designation for the majority of the Republican period.120 Not until the Greeks began joining her to

Augustus after the battle of Actium did Roma start taking on a collective, divine persona among the Romans.121 Once the Eastern cult of ―Roma et Augustus‖ moved to the West and was linked with the imperial cult, ―she becomes a divine analogue for the Roman people… a traditional deity,‖ although with no actual mythology.122 Roma was now worthy of worship, but it was Hadrian‘s revival that cemented the idea of Roma Aeterna in the Western minds and ―the Greek goddess Roma was finally brought into the Roman pantheon.‖123 By converting Roma from a military figure seated on arms to an enthroned goddess holding a Victory on globe, Hadrian‘s iconographic program changed the conception of Roma forever. Roma Aeterna, therefore, was a collective persona crafted from Greek and Roman of concepts that came to symbolize an empire and by extension its first imperial capital. Her fluidity in the Roman consciousness only made her more significant as the empire transitioned in the fourth and fifth centuries.

Roma Aeterna, unlike other prominent gods in the fourth century, was not adversely affected by the conversion of Constantine to Christianity and the gradual replacement of pagan gods. In fact, of all the gods worshipped in the early fourth

119 Mellor 1981: 958. 120 See Roberts 2001: 542 ff. for the continued vision of Roma as a collection of important geographical locations. 121 Mellor 1981: 977ff.; MacCormack 1975: 139ff. 122 Mellor 1981: 984. Mellor says that Roma stops appearing on coinage from the reign of Tiberius (14-37) until 69 CE, but Nero (54-68) mints coins with Roma as early as 60 (PCR II. 416, 418, 432, 434). 123 Mellor 1981: 1021.

55 century, Roma was one of the most amenable to the Roman Christian. The numismatic evidence shows that Roma was a popular motif, particularly among the Christian emperors. Coins bearing either images of Roma or legends about Roma were minted from the Republican period through the end of the Empire. Reverse legends included the ubiquitous ROMA AETERNA and URBS ROMA, but also the more rare ROMA

BEATA and ROMA RENASC. The Roma motif can also be found on a wide assortment of denominations in gold, silver, and bronze: antoninianus, aureus, denarius, dodrans, dupondius, follis, , sestertius, siliqua, and solidus. These coins were minted throughout the empire.

Roma, while a goddess to pagan Romans, was ―ultimately, the superhuman might, majesty, and imperial spirit of Rome‖ for Christians.124 Although they did object to

Roma as a goddess, there was no reason why the idea of the power and eternity of the

Roman empire should conflict with the religious beliefs of Christians.125 In fact, in the fourth century, Roma was a popular and secure Roman deity replete with temples, altars, and festivals, as well as a priesthood, the duodecemviri urbis Romae, dedicated to serving it.126 In fact, the Natalis Urbis, commemorated during the reign of Constantius II on

April 21, was celebrated until 444.127 As Mellor puts it, ―amidst the increasing insecurity of the later Roman empire, Roma Aeterna symbolized the cultural traditions and political institutions which seemed to provide a bulwark against impending chaos.‖128 Salzman sees the continuation of the cult of Roma Aeterna as a bridge between pagans and

124 Toynbee 1947: 135. 125 Mellor 1981: 1017; Salzman 1990: 155; See MacCormack 1975: 140 ff. for a discussion of the various incarnations of Roma according to religious persuasion. 126 Salzman 1990: 155. 127 Salzman 1990: 155. 128 Mellor 1981: 1028.

56

Christians.129 In other words, Roma Aeterna served as a cult of social memory. By focusing energy on the strength and welfare of the empire as a whole, the hardships of daily life became less perceptible.

CONCLUSION

The Codex-Calendar is valuable as a third-party example of imperial communication and reception. Through the illustrated sections of the Codex-Calendar, it has been possible to reconstruct not only aspects of the religious climate at Rome, but also the significant role coins played in numerous facets of daily life. Coins were used concretely to reward crowds at festival events and they were used more abstractly as additions to increase the stature of the imperial family and the Roman empire. The

Codex-Calendar makes its contribution to this discussion as a manifestation of imperial ideals filtered through two lenses, one of the artist, and one of the aristocratic patron. It is through the Codex-Calendar that we see stringent adherence to imperial political policies and the inconsistencies of religious reform.

129 Salzman 1990: 155.

CONTORNIATES

For such demons are pleased with misleading songs, with worthless shows, with the varied foulness of the theatre, with the frenzy of the games, with the cruelty of the amphitheatre, with the violent contests of those who undertake strife and controversy provocative even of hostility in their support of noxious characters, for instance, of an actor in a mime, a play, or a pantomime, of a charioteer, or of a venator.130

Augustine‘s diatribe against Rome‘s entertainments, while informed by his

Christian faith, nevertheless reveals their wide-spread popularity. Spectacles in Late

Antiquity, just as in earlier times, were multi-media extravaganzas that encompassed nearly all of society. Ranging from chariot races to recitations to dances, there was something for every citizen to enjoy. Their popularity and variety is not known solely from literature. They are also expressed materially on contorniates.

Scholars have spent countless years trying to demystify contorniates – what they are, why they were made, and to whom they were given. There are four studies that make interesting and useful claims about the contorniate corpus. In 1887, Charles

Robert, a French scholar and collector of antiquities, published an article on his collection of contorniates. He classified contorniates as coin-like objects, a distant cousin of the medallion, with a groove around the outside edge that helped differentiate them from coins. Another differentiating factor was the absence of the reigning emperor‘s portrait on some of these objects.131 Robert writes, ―les contorniates qui ne portent pas de tête

130 Augustine, Sermons 198.3. Translation from Muldowney, M. S. (ed.) 1959. Saint Augustine: Sermons of the Liturgical Seasons. New York. 131 In Robert‘s collection, however, there were no fifth century contorniates, and thus none with the reigning emperor‘s portrait. 57

58 imperial montrent, sur l‘une et l‘autre de leurs faces, des sujets relatives aux jeux.‖132

The games had been an integral part of Roman life, he asserted, and therefore, it was entirely reasonable that a genre of small, portable objects would be devoted to aspects of the games. As a result, he chose to look specifically at the relationship between these bronze objects and Roman ludi. Robert identified several categories of his contorniates:

1) general view of the theatre or summary of the scene; 2) depiction or name of the contestant; and 3) wishes for success. The third category, as will be shown later, fits into the broader political machine that sought to influence public opinion in the late fourth and fifth centuries.

In 1961, A. N. Zadoks and Josephus Jitta published the contorniates in the Hague.

Their main concern, apart from adding their pieces to the general corpus, was to engage the debate on function and purpose. They agreed with Jocelyn Toynbee that the contorniates were not given to aristocrats.133 Their opinion, as was hers, was based on the crudeness of the artistry, believing contorniates ―must certainly have been repellent to the refined taste of the upper circles as it emerges from the medallions they received and the diptyches they gave away.‖134 While this argument has its problems, it is possible that contorniates were not gifts to and from the upper classes at Rome, and thus not symbols of anti-Christian resistance in the late fourth and fifth centuries. Indeed, Zadoks and Jitta make the point that their ―contents are not so much deliberately anti-Christian as unconsciously pagan.‖135 Another point they raise is the history of the aristocracy, including the emperor, giving old coins as presents. They believe contorniates, then, can

132 Robert 1887: 40. 133 Toynbee 1945: 115-121. 134 Zadoks and Jitta 1951: 82; Toynbee 1986: 234-6. 135 Zadoks and Jitta 1951: 82.

59 be viewed as a hybridized version of these old coins and medallions at a time when old coins were not plentiful, and therefore had to be imitated. Zadocks and Jitta also assert that contorniates took on a life of their own and became degraded in quality as the clamor for newer, more expensive displays of prestige (diptychs) replaced them.136 Perhaps their most astonishing theory, however, is that contorniates were not gifts at all, but rather were sold as mementos at a stand during the games. The evidence they present comes from one of their own contorniates.137 Andreas Alföldi identifies the scene as one of largesse, but Zadoks and Jitta are right to point out that the iconography is unlike other distribution scenes. Normal distribution scenes from the fourth and fifth centuries show the emperor dropping coins from his hands, assistants distributing coins, or sacks of coins suggesting distribution. This scene, however, shows coin-like objects piled on a table.

Thus, they conclude that it must show the sale of contorniates, and that their fabrication and distribution were part of a ―private commercial enterprise.‖138 It is probably that

Zadoks and Jitta are correct in their refutation of this contorniate‘s largesse motif. It is more tenuous, however, to suggest that the objects were contorniates for sale, since no known evidence exists to support such transactions at the games.

Andreas Alföldi‘s opus, Die Kontorniat-Medallions, released in its entirety in 1976, remains the single greatest study conducted on contorniates to date.139

Not only does he provide a thorough catalog of extant contorniates available to him at the time, but there is also a concordance that allows the researcher to quickly locate parallels across time. If the catalog were the sole contribution to the record of contorniates, it

136 Zadoks and Jitta 1951: 82. 137 Zadoks and Jitta 1951: pl. II.8; Alföldi 1976: 149, # 104. 138 Zadoks and Jitta 1951: 83. 139 Alföldi 1976

60 would still be of immense value. Alföldi also offers a supplementary explanation of what contorniates are, when they were produced and in which mints, and to whom they were given. Although modern scholarship has squabbled about the dating of certain pieces, and the pagan revivalism Alföldi purports is evident in the contorniate corpus, the catalog is still one of the most important references for studying Late Antiquity. Others have undertaken studies on individual types, pieces, or imperial issues, but all of their work stems from his. The breadth and comprehensive nature of the collection demonstrates the contorniates‘ substantial role in late fourth and fifth century social life.

PREVIOUS EMPERORS

It is now widely accepted that portraits of Alexander, Nero, and , which show up on many fourth century and several fifth century contorniates, were meant to recall their patronage of the arts and support of athletic contests. The revival of early imperial figures is a prime example of Late Antique emperors using the collective past to give their current projects weight. Although Alexander and Trajan were considered exemplary rulers, Nero has been regarded as one of the worst emperors in Roman history.

Nevertheless, his love and support of athletic, dramatic, and musical contests was well known. Fourth and fifth century emperors who chose to include his portrait, conveniently disregarded his political infamy in favor of his patronage of the arts. The portraiture of contemporary, reigning emperors, however, is more complex. The correlation between the imperial portrait on the obverses and the reverses focused on spectacle creates an intriguing juxtaposition that adds a new layer to the problem of social memory and propaganda in the fifth century.

61

REIGNING EMPERORS

Based on style, die studies, and other techniques, it appears that the imperial portraits of Honorius, Valentinian III, Majorian, and Anthemius are the only contemporary portraits in the contorniate corpus. As with contorniate obverses, the

Reigning Emperor contorniates did not imitate or copy the reverses of contemporary coinage. In fact, the reverse types rarely coincide with the reigning emperor‘s coinage at all. Instead, there is often an archaizing look and feel to the contorniate reverses that has led some scholars to define them as pagan propaganda pieces. While it may be true that the reliance on pagan imagery is a prominent characteristic of contorniates, it is not clear, given the other objects created contemporaneously, that they were part of a strong pan- aristocratic upholding of pagan ideals. What we do know is that the contorniates seem to include references to ludi and circenses, they have unusual obverse additions, and they communicate themes of victory that extend far beyond the arena.

Alföldi separates the contorniates into three categories: those minted in the second half of the fourth century (geprägten), those cast or molded between 394-410

(gegossene), and a small series minted between the reigns of Honorius and Anthemius.140

I have chosen to classify them in two broader categories: those that show earlier rulers

(such as Alexander, Nero, and Trajan) and those that display the contemporary reigning

140 As has been pointed out by Zadoks and Jitta, the dating for the second category is perhaps too rigid. Alföldfi asserts that the cast contorniates, because of their inferior craftsmanship (in comparison with the minted contorniates) must have been clandestinely made during the period of Theodosius anti-pagan campaign. This assumes, of course, that the contorniates are a pagan response to Christianity and that they previously had been made at the official mint. There is no concrete evidence to support either supposition.

62 emperor on its obverse. This latter category, the focus here, can also be subdivided into two additional subcategories: 1) game-centered motifs, and 2) contemporary issues.

THEMES OF THE GAMES

In the fifth century, contorniates carried an array of symbols that indicated the imperial or consular games. These images ranged from singular designs of suns and palms scratched into the obverse of a piece to more elaborate compositions featuring dancers or musical instruments created for the reverse. Although there is some overlap of purpose, it is generally accepted that the following motifs are representative of the games.

The most curious aspect of contorniates, obverse additions, affects a fairly large proportion of the corpus. An obverse addition includes any symbol, inscription, or other marking that was inscribed or etched on the contorniate after its striking. What makes them curious is the selectivity of the additions as well as the varied and seemingly arbitrary motifs that comprise them. Some symbols are rare, such as the arrow, ivy leaf, swastika, sun, horse, or cross while others, such as the PE monogram and palm branch, are common. Additionally, the markings often appear more akin to graffiti than an intentional part of the die. Robert believes that some additions may have been either a record or a promise of a given prize for a specific .141 They may also represent gifts awarded to the audience members as part of the largesse.142 It is also possible that the markings recorded some other function. This author finds the arrow, ivy leaf, and horse, although rare on the obverses, to be obvious indicators of athletic contests. If these

141 Robert 1887: 52. 142 Toynbee 1944: 235.

63 additions represent prizes, then it is possible that these motifs can be taken at face value.

The other additions, however, have wider implications that encompass other materials in this work, and therefore, have been explored further.

The sun motif shows up on 27 contorniates, although only two were made in the time period concerned [79, 88]. The most common form is a circle with rays extending away from the edges. As with many of the obverse additions, the sun motif has a long tradition in numerous cultures. One of the earliest examples of sun worship comes from

Egypt and the cult of Aten dating back to Akhenaten and the Amarna period. Sun worship continued in the East and eventually entered the Roman empire. As discussed previously, the sun was an important symbol for Constantine.143 His worship of Sol

Invictus and subsequent conversion to Christianity ensured that the sun would continue to play a significant part in Roman religion.

The cross motif is commonly considered the most identifiable symbol of the

Christian faith. On the contorniates, crosses are employed alone, as brands on animals, and as tattoos on people. They are also used as apotropaic symbols and good luck charms. The lone extant contorniate of Majorian [90] depicts him as consul holding a mappa and a scepter with cross. Alföldi asserts that the crosses inscribed or etched onto contorniates are conspicuous symbols of Christianity.144 However, there are two problems with that assertion. The first is that the context of the crosses is distinctly un-

Christian. Branding and tattooing were not widespread Christian practices. Furthermore, while the cross certainly became a standard symbol of Christianity by the fifth century,

143 See Chapter III for a discussion of the history of Sol Invictus in the Roman Empire. 144 Alföldi 1976: 324.

64 its meaning in the third and fourth centuries, the high tide for contorniate production, is far from concrete. Both Christians and Jewish-Christians employed the cross as a reminder of Christ‘s death by crucifixion.145 Before the ratification of accepted Christian canon in the fourth century, the overlap of Jewish and Christian symbols was common.

This is not to say that the symbol on contorniates was never an endorsement of

Christianity, but rather to suggest that here it most likely was a differentiating symbol working in concert with the other obverse additions.

The swastika is found on three extant contorniates, one of which falls within the temporal scope of this work [87]. Alföldi considers it an extension of the cross, and deems it to be a Christian symbol. He also assigns the same uses to it as he does to the cross – branding, apotropaic symbol, good luck charm.146 The swastika, however, has a long and varied history in the East as a sun symbol. It is possible that it entered Roman symbology through a fascination with Mithraism.

The PE monogram, the letter P with several horizontal bars on its flag and sometimes filled in with silver, is almost as mysterious as contorniates themselves [74,

84, 86, 93, 96, 99]. There seems to be no consensus on its precise meaning, but there are two schools of thought. The first is that the P stands for palma, the ultimate gift at the games. The winning athlete would be given the palma, often in addition to monetary gifts, which were considered secondary gifts. Since the PE monogram often accompanies another symbol – sometimes a palm branch – some scholars have rejected the palma

145 Israeli and Mevorah 200: 127-45; Taylor 1993: 39-41. 146 The archaeological evidence Alföldi supplies for its use as a brand include two lamps found in Rome (1976: 326). As an apotropaic symbol or good luck charm it appears on mosaics, silver, and a bronze coin from the reign of Valentinian I (1976: 326).

65 premise in search of an alternate interpretation.147 Praemia, the Latin word for gifts or rewards, is a possible substitute in this context. Robert points out that the praemia at the games included those secondary monetary gifts that could accompany the palma. The word praemia is often seen as part of a longer inscription, p[raemiis] fel[iciter] r[emunerabimur], which was abbreviated P E R on other materials, and PE in order to fit the small field of the contorniate.148 Robert further postulates that the P not only indicates the word praemia, but that its extended flag with horizontal bars attached, thus forming the ―E‖, signifies how much each winner received. He believes that each bar equaled 10,000 sesterces at one time.149 Given the combination of the PE monogram with palms on contorniate obverses, it is likely that the P is in fact an abbreviation of the word praemia. The argument for the horizontal bar being an indicator of payment amounts in sesterces, however, is less convincing, particularly since contorniates with the

PE monogram continued to be made in the fifth century, well after the sesterces was removed from circulation sometime in the third quarter of the third century.150 If the addition were part of the die, it could be assumed that the monetary assertion made by

Robert had been a holdover of a previous type. The fact that it was added afterwards, however, means that, at least in the fifth century, it could not represent a sesterces-based payment. This does not preclude, however, its use as a monetary gift for the victor.

It can be argued that the palm branch was the most popular symbol of victory in

Late Antiquity and highly recognizable throughout the empire. The palm branch was known as an ancient symbol of fertility for Jews, which was transitioned to Christianity

147 See Robert 1887: 44-48; Alföldi 1976: 310. 148 Alföldi 1976: 310. 149 Robert 1887: 46. 150 Sutherland 1961: 94.

66 with the additional meaning of victory.151 This assignment of victory most likely came from the Graeco-Roman tradition. It is well-known that the palm branch was utilized as a victory object in various athletic and non-athletic competitions and incorporated into imperial portraits as a sign of superiority. Examples can be found on several contorniates from the fifth century. Unlike other motifs considered here (except the cross), the palm branch is the only one that appears on the obverse and reverse of these contorniates. It can appear as one branch, in a wreath, loosely with others in an urn, as well as any number of other configurations. On the obverse, it stands alone as an afterthought scratched into the surface [71, 75-6, 78, 80-81, 83, 85, 89, 99]. On the reverse, however, it works in tandem with other motifs such as the naked athlete, the chlamydatus, or the charioteer [73-76, 82-83, 97] to express ideas of victory more fully.

Contorniate reverses also included athletic and non-athletic contestants, who competed in the theatre and Circus Maximus. These types of entertainments became increasingly more popular as the political and religious spheres became more strained.

Margarites and Karamallus were victors in the pantomime, a silent solo dance competition that reenacted stories, often Greek myths.152 Margarites, a dancer from

Cyzicus, is known from the Chronographia of Malalas, a Byzantine chronicler from

Antioch. Inscriptions that read MARGARITA VINCAS appear on the reverses of several contorniates [88, 92, 94]. All three instances appear along with a figure holding a victory wreath, wearing a long robe and possibly a chlamys. The figure is accompanied

151 Israeli and Mevorah 127; Taylor 1993: 55, 177. 152 While the performers enjoyed a large level of celebrity, they still were treated as inferior members of society (Jory 1996: 3).

67 by an Eros as well.153 Several pantomimes named Karamallus are known from Sidonius

Appolinarus, Aristaenetus, and Malalas. The inscription KARAMALLE NICAS, which only appears on one contorniate [98], may suggest the Greek origins of the pantomime but still expresses the same announcement of victory. These contorniates illustrate a broadening of the concept of victory beyond the physical arena to include artistic endeavors. Winning, regardless of the contest, was the message imparted by such pieces.

The organ is an example of a fairly obscure symbol that makes reference to an aspect of the games rarely mentioned in literature or art. There is one example of the organ accompanied by three people on the reverse of a contorniate created during the reign of Valentinian III [98]. Jory maintains that organ music would have accompanied the pantomime.154 Robert states that the wishes for victory shouted by the various

(charioteer) factions in the audience would have been accompanied by music played by gigantic organs.155 Perhaps it is not a coincidence that the organ depicted on the contorniate is at least twice the size of the people. The effect of the chanting and music would have been similar to the music and singing observed in modern sporting events. If the supposition is correct, this analogy is apt, given the fervor Romans showered on their games. What is curious is organ‘s absence from other game depictions, and its relative obscurity in the textual record.

153 Jory believes the small figure is actually a winged victory that also holds a victory wreath (1996: 7). The state of the contorniate, however, makes it difficult to discern these features. 154 Jory 1996: 5. 155 Robert 1887: 43.

68

CONTEMPORARY ISSUES

Although the contorniates have traditionally been considered a phenomenon of the games, there are several contemporary themes that appear on their obverses and reverses. Ideas of military strength and victory are explored in the costume of the emperor and the charioteer motif. Likewise, important personalities, such as gods and local officials, are also celebrated.

Victory, it has already been shown, was a major theme on Roman coinage and in the Codex-Calendar. The idea that Rome was losing its ability to conquer errant citizens and various barbarian tribes was unconscionable, and the governing powers used Victory to assure the people of the military‘s continued supremacy. It is for this reason that the inclusion of victory‘s attributes on the obverse (and reverse) of contorniates must be considered beyond the standard interpretations of winning athletic or artistic contests.

The paludamentum was a type of cloak reserved for military commanders. As the

Roman empire conquered its enemies throughout its first three centuries, the cloak, which began as a simple garment worn in times of strife, became a symbol of military ability and triumph. Since the emperor was the head of all military commanders, he was known to wear it as well. Representations of the paludamentum can be seen on the contorniate obverse portraits of Honorius, Valentinian III, Majorian, and Anthemius as well as in sculptures such as the Prima Porta Augustus. (Fig. 9).156

156 Only contorniates 99 and 100 exclude the paludamentum.

69

Chariot races were perhaps the most popular spectacles in the Roman empire from its inception through its transition to an .157 Teams of 4-horse quadrigae competed in the Circus Maximus where victory brought prize money and accolades that were showered on winners by their rabid fans. Only seems to have precipitated private fan clubs and factions: russata (red), albata (white), veneta

(blue), and prasina (green). Fans of each faction would show up on match day wearing their team colors, and would assemble in special reserved seating.158 There, the fans chanted their approval or disapproval not only of the contest‘s outcome, but also of the official sponsoring the games. Alison Futrell believes the games may have served as a referendum on the official‘s policies, and that the boisterous nature of the charioteer‘s fan club would have signified significant disapproval of those policies if the chants were primarily negative.

The motif of the victorious charioteer, then, became a ubiquitous one in Rome throughout the . Literary accounts are numerous, but there are also tangible examples of this motif‘s prevalence on contorniates. Those from the fifth century uniformly depict on their reverses a charioteer driving his quadriga forward, raising a wreath and palm in his hand, with his horses advancing forward on either side [71-76, 78,

81, 96]. The image of the victorious charioteer is also seen on mosaics. The imagery is the same – a driver facing front in a 4-horse chariot holding a palm and wreath.159 Thus, the charioteer serves as an emblem of the games themselves, as its most popular draw.

He also, however, symbolized abstract victory. As Katherine Dunbabin emphasizes, ―the

157 , Variae 3.51.1-2. 158 Futrell 2006: 210-11. 159 See Dunbabin 1982 for a detailed discussion of the charioteer on mosaics throughout the empire.

70 significance of the charioteer is as an image of victory, as a bringer of good luck and felicitas.‖160 In this role, the charioteer, particularly in the fifth century, is utilized by the creator of the contorniates to work in two capacities: as a reminder to the public of the provision of their favorite entertainment, and as a sign of good luck for the empire. In essence, as long as the government was able to provide chariot races and other diversions, the empire upheld an appearance of stability.

The people who grace the reverses of fifth century contorniates, either in figural or epigraphical form, are varied. They include gods and heroes, athletes and dancers, consuls and other officials. These are categories of people generally avoided on the coinage of the period, but materialize on other gift objects such as the Codex-Calendar and the diptychs.161

Hercules, the legendary son of Zeus and Alcmene, has long been a symbol of physical superiority. His reputation came from the bravery, strength, and craftiness he displayed in accomplishing his 12 labors, a series of feats assigned to him by Eurystheus.

His two main attributes, the lion skin and the club, come from his first labor, the slaying of the Nemean lion. Legend has it that the lion‘s skin was impenetrable and that

Hercules was forced to club the lion and strangle it when his arrows proved futile.

Some Roman emperors found the myth compelling and chose to associate themselves with Hercules. Some even believed themselves to be Hercules. For example,

Commodus, a second century emperor known for his insanity, was one such person and included the attributes of Hercules in his portraiture (Fig. 10). By the fourth century,

160 Dunbabin 1982: 65. 161 The exact persons examined here do not show up in the Calendar or on diptychs. There are representations, however, of Mercury, a dancer, Constantius II, and Gallus in the Calendar, and Asclepius, Hygieia, and countless officials in the diptychs.

71

Hercules had become a special hero for such pagan traditionalists as Symmachus and

Nicomachus, men who had had skirmishes with the government over the retention of pagan values. In fact, he once even served as a battle cry.

In the Battle of Frigidus, Theodosius (378-395), emperor of the East, fought against (392-4), emperor of the West, for control of the empire. This battle was essentially a conflict between new Christian and old pagan Rome. On the battlefield, this tension was played out in the standards carried by each side, as described by of

Cyr in his Historia Ecclesiastica.162 Outnumbered and low in morale, Theodosius instructs his troupes to trust in the power of the labarum, the Christianized standard bearing the Chi-Rho, and to discount the power of the image of Hercules wielded by

Eugenius and his army.163 The inclusion of Hercules on the Western standard suggests that he had become the emblem for pagan values, and that his strength had been invoked to stave off the Christianization of the empire. Unfortunately, Eugenius lost that battle.

Hercules continued to inspire emperors in the later fifth century. The lone extant contorniate of Anthemius‘ reign features Hercules on its reverse [101]. The inscription,

(H)IPODROMOS HERACLEOS ANDREAS, suggests that a contestant named

Andreas was victorious in the hippodrome of Hercules. Fifth century Hercules had lost his pagan luster, but returned to being a paragon of physical accomplishments.

The precise identity of the Bonifatius referenced on three contorniates [81, 96, 97] is unclear. In the Prosopography, one person, identified as Bonifatius 3, seems possible, given that all three contorniates were created during the reign of Valentinian III.

162 As with other historian, the reliability of Theodoret‘s account is contested. It has been suggested that he exaggerated certain facts or was misinformed in his account of events. However, it would be odd for him to select Hercules at random unless the cult of Hercules had some connection with Eugenius. 163 Theodoret, Historica Ecclesiastica 5, 24, 4. See also Bruggisser 1989: 381.

72

Bonifatius had an illustrious military career that included numerous victories over barbarian tribes in Spain and Africa. He was one of Galla Placidia‘s leading generals, but his rivalry with Aetius led to enmity that would bring about his downfall. After losing a battle against the Vandals (his previous allies) in 430, Bonifatius was recalled to Rome.

There he was granted the offices of and magister utriusque militiae in 432.

That same year, at the Battle of Rimini, he finally defeated and killed Aetius, but himself died of wounds he sustained in battle.

Curiously, the iconography that accompanies the BONIFATIVS inscriptions is indicative of charioteers; two are of the Driver in Quadriga type, while the third is of the

Chlamydatus Holding Wreath type. It is possible that the tenacious nature of Bonifatius against Aetius and his successes against the barbarian hoard earned him a respect that spilled over into the arena. Another possibility is that during his year as patricius, he was able to sponsor games before he died. A further conjecture is that the person indicated on the contorniates was actually a famous charioteer of the same period and not the military persona killed at Rimini. Without evidence of Bonifatius on other contemporary pieces, one must rely on conjecture.

It is likely that the person mentioned on a Valentinian III contorniate [80] is

Petronius Maximus.164 The obverse portrait of Valentinian gives a terminus post quem for the identification. We know that Petronius Maximus had a long and illustrious career in Roman politics that included the consulship. Born in 396, he quickly rose through the ranks to become tribunus and notarius at the age of 18. He served as praefectus urbis

164 Martindale 1980: 749-751. In order to differentiate between the often numerous entries with similar names in his Prosopography, Martindale has numbered these individuals. The Petronius referenced here is listed by Martindale as Petronius Maximus 22.

73

Romae from 420-421. Sometime between 421 and 439, he held the positions of praefectus urbis Romae and praefectus praetorio simultaneously. Petronius Maximus became consul in 433, and resumed the office of praefectus praetorio from 439-441. In

443, he was consul for the second time, and was named patricius in 445. Intrigue and scandal surrounding the death of Valentinian III led to his appointment as Augustus in

455, but he was murdered months later during a fear-fueled flight from Rome.165

The reverse of the contorniate highlights the most prized attributes of a consul in the mid fifth century. A consul holding a mappa and scepter sits amidst the inscription

PETRONIVS MAXIMVS CONS.166 The consul is often shown with the mappa circensis, the ancient equivalent of the starter‘s pistol, and scepter to demonstrate his ability to provide games and his political power in general. The importance of the games was twofold. First, now that the emperor was located away from Rome, the consul became the local governing body. He made local decisions, and also was allowed and expected to show his strength by financing elaborate games in his own honor. The consular games were an important political statement in their own right because they showed effective management of funds and organization. Second, the games were highly popular with the common people. As mentioned above, they never lost their appeal even as Christianity grew more dominant in the empire. It was the consul‘s job, then, to supply the people with entertainment and cash payouts to keep them happy and loyal.

165 It is believed he plotted the murder of Valentinian. The fear at Rome came from a Vandal attack. 166 This motif is seen on a Valentinian III coin and on several diptychs.

74

CONCENTRIC CIRCLES

Perhaps more elusive, is the relationship between the concentric circles found on reverse types of Honorius [77] and Valentinian III [89, 90] and the games. Concentric circles have been long known in Roman art as decorative additions to objects like mirrors and pottery.167 Its connection to the New Year‘s games, however, is perplexing given the lack of corroborating evidence on fifth century coins or diptychs. It would be useful to have textual descriptions of circles used in seating assignments or chariot decorations.

No such descriptions exist. Indeed, the use of plain circles seems rare on known materials made in the city of Rome in the fifth century. Thus it appears that contorniates of this type have no correlation to the New Year‘s festival and their associated games.

USE AND MEANING

As has been demonstrated, contorniate imagery is multifaceted. The combination of imperial portraiture on the obverse and spectacle on the reverse creates a tension that only generates additional questions about the usage of contorniates, their recipients, and ultimately their role in fourth and fifth century propaganda and memory. From charioteers to dancers to a large-scale organ, the reverses seem, at their most basic, to relate to the New Year‘s games. In spite of the focus on contests, questions remain regarding contorniate manufacturers, functionality, and significance.

167 See Taylor 2008 for a discussion of circles in mirror decoration; see Girgoire 2007, n. 97 for a similar decoration on a patera.

75

The unofficial production of these objects in the official mint at Rome creates an additional level of complexity in trying to understand the function and meaning of these pieces. The manufacturer would have needed to procure the dies, a substantial amount of raw materials, and craftsmen to perform the task. Someone would have had to provide it to them. The procurement of the resources needed to create these objects would have required organization as well as permission from the comes sacrarum largitionum. After all, most obverse dies mimicked contemporary coin dies, and reverse dies were replicas or reinterpretations of past recreational types that could be correlated with existing contests in the circus. It also seems unlikely that average citizens, whether middle class or aristocrats, would have the bronze stores to create these pieces. For an object that is often overlooked because of its coarseness of style, a contorniate must have required a lot of coordination to create, which highlights the uncertainty surrounding its use and meaning.

It is possible that contorniates served as gifts to the aristocracy or middle class.

Alföldi believed that contorniates were gifts created in the imperial mint for distribution to the aristocracy in honor of the New Year celebrations. As has been discussed previously, Zadoks and Jitta disagreed on the basis of style and behavioral precedence.

The practice of giving old coins had been imitated and degenerated by the lower classes, while the aristocracy transitioned to ivory diptychs. As with the Symmachus and

Nicomachus diptych, the Asclepius and Hygieia diptych, and the Codex-Calendar, the contorniates offer a general classicizing effect, particularly on their reverses. Pagan gods such as Artemis, Athena, and Hercules are featured as well as other aspects of the traditional pagan games, while Christianity is limited to a few cross obverse additions.

76

The focus on the games and pagan gods is one reason the pagan aristocracy cannot be ruled out completely as manufacturers and recipients of these objects.

Contorniates may have been game pieces.168 This raises the question, what precisely is a game piece – a token or ticket? Were these objects that audience members used, perhaps as betting markers, in the stands? Were they used strictly at New Year‘s games, or other less important games? Unfortunately, none of the scholars working on contorniates have defined the term ―game piece.‖ It is taken for granted that the reader will understand the nuances of such a generic description. As far as tokens are concerned, contorniates were too valuable to be used for sport. While they have been considered too crude to be given as gifts or too unofficial to have circulated as currency, they are still bronze pieces.

Comstock suggests that contorniates were entrance tickets to public festivals, such as the New Year‘s games. 169 It is possible that they were used as entrance tickets, but the relatively small corpus suggests otherwise. Even if we include the contorniates that depict Alexander, Nero, and Trajan, there would still only be a small sample compared to the thousands, if not more specimens created throughout this period. A question not posed by Comstock, is why restrict access to the games? Their use as an entrance ticket suggests that there were certain people who were not allowed at these spectacles. To my knowledge, the games were open to all citizens, although seating was segregated by class.

Thus, a ticket would not be needed. If there were restrictions on attendance, the question then becomes, why mint or cast an entrance ticket? It would be more cost efficient to use

168 Robert 1886: 48; Comstock 1968: 35; Toynbee 1944: 234-6. Toynbee sees the turned up groove, the identifying feature of a contorniate, as evidence of their use as game counters. 169 Comstock 1968: 35. Comstock differentiates between the reigning emperor contorniates and those of Alexander, Nero, and Trajan. She defines the latter as game pieces or entrance tickets.

77 a cheaper material such as wood or terra cotta, and if counterfeiting was feared, special measures could have been taken to ensure authenticity. Using bronze just to gain entrance to the circus seems like a waste of money at a time when the West could ill afford to misspend its funds. The value of the metal used in contorniates was low. If, however, they were produced for every game given throughout the year, it would surely add up to a rather prohibitive amount.170 It is clear from several examples that some contorniates were saved and mounted or turned into jewelry [87, 93, 96]. Perhaps these objects were special because the New Year‘s games were special and these ―tokens‖ became commemorative pieces after the event. In a way, they can be compared with tickets to a contemporary sporting event, the World Series. The ticket serves as a method of access before and during the game and, depending on the outcome of the game, can become a keepsake afterwards. They may have been saved, however, becomes they were mementos of victory.

It is most likely that contorniates were given to victorious contestants. The use of the obverse additions has thus far been cryptic, although some scholars have postulated that individual motifs such as the palm and racehorse indicate the actual prize received by the victor. Robert suggests that one obverse addition, the PE monogram, which indicated specific levels of monetary honors granted to the victor or his (horse) supplier, was added after the contorniates were struck, serving as an additional honor. Two questions arise in light of this interpretation. First, who was responsible for making these alterations and where? The logistics of bringing however many contorniates to each New

170 See Chapter II for a description of some of the games offered in 354. The quantity and frequency of the games, if these were in fact entrance tickets, would suggest inferior materials for the majority of the games offered.

78

Year‘s game and then hand-etching them after each victory for presentation to the victor would have been a cumbersome undertaking, and one would reasonably expect a record either in the literature or visually of such an undertaking. And second, if the PE monogram has a specific monetary value assigned to it, as Robert postulates, do the other objects that often share the same position on other contorniates, have a similar function?

Regardless of what contorniates were used for, they were distributed, either privately or publicly, and were viewed by the public. A close investigation of the types discussed above reveals a subtle program of communication that is fitting with the general purpose of the games themselves. Officials were expected to provide these spectacles for the benefit of the people as well as their own glory. Contorniates remind us that society relied on the games to take its mind off of daily struggles. The games served as entertainment but also as a place of bi-lateral communication. Within the walls of the Circus Maximus and theatre, the people could voice their opinions on contemporary issues, while the game‘s provider could reinforce the main Roman virtue of the fifth century, victory. Even in this small selection of contorniates, it is clear that winning was valued above all else. Through the amalgamation of coins, calendars, and contorniates, the idea of present and past victories permeated society at all levels. Even while the empire was suffering in countless struggles, the falsehood of unwavering might continued to circulate in the hands and hearts of its citizens.

IVORY DIPTYCHS

Patronage of eborarii and other artisans was, like the practice of politics, literature and philosophy, the mark of a well-placed, well-rounded man.171

We have seen that the Romans relied on minting, casting, and drawing to influence the memory of its citizens. They also sculpted, imbuing their ivory objects, specifically diptychs, with persuasive messages. These messages could echo coin types or they could draw on other symbolic tropes already in the general artistic corpus. This chapter looks at diptychs created around the fifth century which played a role in the gift- giving practices of the elites, and thus the manipulation of elite memory and further underscored the significance of coin messages and legends, objects that, as already mentioned, were distributed widely to the entire empire.

THE DIPTYCH

In its simplest form, a diptych is a pair of panels joined together with cylindrical hinges, forming a type of codex. Diptychs were made from wood, bone, and ivory.172

The exterior surface could be unworked or carved in relief, while the interior surface usually included a minimally worked recess filled with a thin wax coating that bore

171 Cutler 1998: 20. 172 To my knowledge, no diptychs manufactured of silver or gold have been found, but the style and detail of extant diptychs do not preclude this possibility. There is also scientific evidence that, like other Roman sculpture, these objects were embellished with pigments and gold leaf (Olovsdotter 2005: 5-6). The presence of gold leaf suggests that a golden appearance was desirable and the production of actual gold panels would have constituted the ultimate gift. 79

80 various messages for the recipient. Unfortunately because of the nature of ivory and wax, the messages on the tablets have not survived.173

Two categories of diptychs were supplied in the Late Antique period: gift diptychs and Christian diptychs. These distinctions are somewhat illusory. It appears that gift diptychs, commissioned by various individuals, were given to honorands to commemorate the commissioner‘s specific achievements or personal events, while

Christian diptychs were created to further the religious agenda of certain politicians.

There is no reason to believe, however, that there was not an overlap of purpose for both groups. Under the heading of gift diptychs falls the codicil diptychs

(Codicillardiptychen), official diptychs (Amtsdiptychen), private diptychs

(Privatdiptychen), priest diptychs (Priesterdiptychen), and consular diptychs

(Consulardiptychen).174

Codicil diptychs were given by the emperor to titular dignitaries as an official decree of their appointment.175 These dignitaries would have held court titles, such as comes, or would have been upwardly-mobile provincial governors, with titles such as tribunus or notarius. Official diptychs were commissioned by state officials and were distributed to other officials at the accession of an office. Examples of these types of

173 The wood writing tablets found at Vindolanda in Britain, a mixture of tablets with ink writing and stylus tablets with wax coatings, serve as interesting comparanda for the ivory diptychs, although the tablets are singular pieces and unhinged. The stylus tablets at Vindolanda are legible due to the impressions left by the pressure of the stylus on wax (now gone), which then imprinted on the wood. Ivory‘s rigidity and hardness, however, has made it nearly impossible to discern any residual stylus impressions on the interior surface. 174 These categories, first constructed by Delbrueck, are maintained by Volbach, and Olovsdotter. For specific criteria according to each scholar, see Delbrueck 1929: 3-10; Volbach 1952: 21; Olovsdotter 2005: 1. 175 Codicils existed in two forms, diptych and scroll. According to Delbrueck, the functionality of the codicil would not have been affected by its from, although he does say that codicils of consuls and patricians were probably rolls (1929: 5). This difference also proves important in indentifying types of officials on diptychs and other materials.

81 officials include quaestor, urbis Romae, and patricius. Private diptychs, commissioned by members of prominent Roman aristocratic families, were issued to friends and colleagues of the family to commemorate births, marriages, promotions, and other special events.

With the aggrandizement of the priesthood from 382-394, pagan priests were able to extend their gift repertoire with diptychs. Priest diptychs would have been textually similar to other forms of diptychs. Stylistically, however, they seem to exhibit predominantly pagan religious motifs. After the decreased interest in the priesthood starting in 394, Christian priests took over the practice of giving diptychs to bishops, followers, and other important people. These priest diptychs became Christian diptychs.

The imagery was now Christian and the diptychs‘ text now included lists of bishops or saints.

Consular diptychs, the most abundant and best known example of the gift class, belong to a category of elite objects that saw an increase in production from the mid- fourth century through the end of the Western empire. Unlike coins which were distributed directly to the populace in bulk, consular diptychs were given individually and never to the average Roman citizen.176

Ivory diptychs augment a discussion of social memory and propaganda in two ways. First, unlike coins, ivory diptychs have come to signify a corpus of material culture created for and by Roman aristocrats at a time when the Roman aristocracy was undergoing great political and religious change. As gift objects whose sole purpose was

176 The individual nature of diptychs has been challenged by Anthony Cutler (1998: 17) the notion that multiples have been found for certain diptychs. The belief is that certain individuals would make more than one copy of a diptych to distribute to his friends and political comrades.

82 display, the iconography chosen for each panel helps elucidate the mores of Late Antique society. By showcasing images of consuls, allegorical situations, and religious figures, diptychs mirror the qualities valued by the honorand and his social group. Second, these diptychs, believed by Kim Bowes to have contained consular (and later Christian) lists on their inner wax tablets, demonstrate the Late Antique fixation with legitimacy and historical connections.177 Consular lists had been important in the Roman Republic and continued into the empire, with the reigning consuls‘ names used to date each year. The lists were not only a way to keep track of the office of consul, but also immortalized each man. The same fascination with immortality existed for both the patron and artist of the

Codex-Calendar. Indeed, the Calendar contained not only illustrated lists of emperors in the form of feast days, but also included non-illustrated lists of bishops and martyrs, effectively serving the same purpose as the secular consular lists. More abstractly, this preoccupation also was present in the obverses and reverses of the coinage minted in this period. In a world of increasing uncertainty, the reinstitution of power through past familial connections was essential to keep usurpers at bay. This recollection of past accomplishments and the convenient forgetting of past defeats is precisely the type of propagandistic behavior illustrated in the previously considered material types.

Diptychs played an important role in the maintenance of social hierarchy and the continuance of expected behaviors from Roman elites. As Cecelia Olovsdotter suggests, they most likely were intended as display gifts to be placed in public areas of the recipient‘s home.178 Roman elites chose subject matter that recalled past pagan

177 See Bowes 2001 for a thorough discussion of the possible contents of the interior wax surfaces. 178 Olovsdotter 2005: 1. Another comparable institution in Roman elite life was the imagines, the Roman funerary mask set u p in the atrium of the house. These masks, predecessors to the diptych, advertised the

83 affiliations, their current military prowess, their loyalty to the emperor and the people, as well as their adherence to the new Christian agenda. Although the political climate was tenuous in this period, elites could maintain job security through their own carefully considered propaganda channels, the ivory diptych.

THE ROMAN CORPUS

The city of Rome, as the seat of power for the imperial family, remained a vital production center for various types of ivory diptychs, including consular, official, and priest diptychs.179 While the number of extant diptychs created at Rome is small, each one attests to the socio-political relevance of gift-exchange in the changing persuasive climate of the late fourth and early fifth centuries at the symbolic capital of the Roman world. As in the Codex-Calendar of 354, images of coins appear on several diptychs.

These diptychs – although temporally, and in some cases geographically disparate from the intended period of study – are representative of the importance coins had attained by the late fifth century.

Symmachi and Nicomachi

The Symmachi and Nicomachi diptych shows a break with the more abstract contemporary carving style seen in other fourth century sculptures [102]. The realistic

cursus honorum of the owner‘s ancestors, and by extension, himself. The gift diptych served a similar purpose when set up in the household and particularly when gifted directly to the emperor. 179 Diptychs are thought to have been made in several geographical locations in the Late Antique period: Rome, Upper Italy, Gaul, and Constantinople. It should be noted that although there are quite a few Christian diptychs included in Volbach‘s study, the place of origin is unknown for all. As a result, these pieces have been excluded from this study.

84 rendering of the facial features, garments, and foliage all point to the Augustan period, and parallels can be seen on the south side of the Ara Pacis (Fig. 11). In the processional frieze, Augustus is shown as the high priest of the empire along with members of his family. The Symmachi priestess of Bacchus bears a resemblance to several of the women in the procession. The utilization of this style reminds the viewer of the old days when paganism helped the empire flourish. The insistence on pagan tradition is continued on the only extant panels that clearly show a scene situated in a natural setting. Sacred places, such as caves and groves, were important in cult worship in early Graeco-Roman religion. The inclusion of oak and pine trees on the panels not only connects the viewer to the tradition of pagan sacred place and the mystery of nature, but also to the physical location of the priestess standing before the temple at its altar. The general archaizing features of this diptych lead the viewer at last to the altars themselves. Upon first viewing, the altars seem insignificant. After all, the majority of both panels is taken up by the tree and priestess. Considering the commissioner of this diptych and the events that preceded its creation, however, that one iconographical element carries several subtle messages.

First, Quintus Aurelius Symmachus and Virius Nicomachus Flavianus were two affluent Roman patricians residing at Rome in the late fourth century. It is believed that their two families were pagan loyalists who ardently opposed the transition of the empire to Christianity.180 Symmachus was the same man who petitioned the Senate to have the

Altar of Victory restored to the Curia in 384 CE.181 It is not surprising then that the artist

180 It is possible that this diptych celebrates a wedding between the two families, but Williamson believes it celebrates Bacchus (1996: 30). 181 See Chapter 1, n. 3 for a summary of the Altar of Victory scandal.

85 chose to place two altars within an archaic scene. Their creation of a diptych showing priestesses before pagan altars supports pagan revivalism. We have seen scenes of pagan ritual previously in the Codex-Calendar (Fig. 1). The difference between the two renderings is the focus in the diptych on the religious protocol. Rather than showing a member of the family engaged in an innocuous rite (as in the Calendar), the artist chooses to depict an actual priestess of Bacchus. This priest diptych would have clearly expressed their political and religious leanings and served as a reminder to the recipient, and anyone else who saw it, of Rome‘s other important pre-Christian gods: Ceres,

Cybele, Bacchus, and Jupiter, igniting the classical memory of the viewer and recalling entrenched institutions that had formed the basis of Roman social life for more than ten centuries.

Asclepius and Hygieia182

The efficacy of this diptych‘s message delivery is due to its multivalent classical symbolism.183 The artist begins with archaic decorative and thematic touches before fleshing out the personifications in minute but subtle detail [103].184 The borders, which consist of floral motifs, demonstrate the classical focus on nature. The theme is continued within the borders in the form of garlands and other leaf-like decorations that hang from the ceilings and capitals. This natural focus, recalling the Augustan period,

182 Volbach believes this diptych was created in the West, and based on style comparisons with the Symmachi and Nicomachi diptych and Probianus diptych, tentatively assigns it to Rome (1952: 40). 183 It is important to note the distinction here between the cults of Asklepios, Hygieia, and Telesphoros and their Roman counterparts. The commissioner and artist of this diptych have chosen to illustrate the gods in their Greek forms with Greek attributes. Eventually these gods become syncretized with Roman gods, leading to the cult of Salus that trickles onto coin legends in the fourth and fifth centuries. 184 The date of 400 CE comes from Volbach. Delbrueck does not believe it can be securely dated to a specific year. He does, however, identify it as a priest diptych.

86 once more frames the main figures, two classical gods largely forgotten in Rome by the fourth century. An older, bearded Asclepius, wearing a chymation wrapped over his left shoulder, is shown in his traditional stance, leaning against a club with a bucranium finial encircled by a serpent. Hygieia, his daughter, leans against a table also entwined with a serpent. The garments and hairstyles of the main figures resemble those of the archaically-inspired Symmachi panel.

Telesphoros, the pseudo-son of Asclepius, is depicted near his right foot in his customary hooded cape. It is believed that Telesphoros, whose cult originated in

Pergamum, was the god of convalescence, although Wroth is quick to point out that the ascription comes solely from an etymological study.185 Nevertheless, he was a god of health and eventually was named a son of Asclepius even though they originated in different locations. As his son, Telesphoros is always depicted as a child and usually in the company of either Asclepius or Hygieia. Curiously, this is the only known depiction that features Telesphoros holding a scroll. His popularity was greatest in the 3rd century prompting a visit by Caracalla to Pergamum for healing purposes in 214, and the cessation of a pestilence in Athens attributed to him during the reign of Septimius

Severus.186 Although Telesphoros was not considered a significant god in the Roman world, there are several representations of him on Roman objects, namely the aurei of

Caracalla and a third century ivory tablet.187

Eborarii, however, did not rely solely on decorative features to draw the reader into the classical past. He also emphasized a common trait to extend the symbolic

185 Wroth 1882: 299. 186 Wroth 1882: 290. 187 Numismatic Chronicle, 3rd series, vol. ii., Pl. III, no. 3 and Pl. I, no. 21

87 significance of each god. The serpent features prominently in both panels. The cults of

Asclepius and Hygieia were popular in Greece and in Pergamum through the fifth century for their healing properties, particularly in the face of plagues and personal sickness.188 The sick would travel to a healing sanctuary, an Asklepieion, and sequester themselves while their illness was banished by healing dreams, the saliva of the ritual serpents, and other remedies. The benevolent snake, usually paired with Asclepius, appears most often on coins dating from the reigns of (180-192) and

Caracalla (211-217).189 Again, the eborarii are reaching back to a period far removed from the time of the diptych‘s creation.

Another interpretation of the serpent leads the viewer to Christianity and the new appropriation of the serpent in Christian iconography. Although the general perception of the serpent in Christian art is of a malevolent force, it is likely that in the late fourth century, Christian artists, offering Jesus as the new savior, subsumed this attribute of

Asclepius in an attempt to win over pagan skeptics and promote Jesus as a syncretized healer.190

The celebration of pagan efficiency is also born out in the placement of common ritual objects and in self-referential moments. In the top right corner of panel B, the artist has rendered the props for a libation ceremony, the patera and oinochoe. Libations were a distinctly pagan act that again returned the mind of the viewer to the classical past. In the top left corner of panel B, we see what appears to be a small figure holding an object with a serpent coiling its way towards Hygieia. The figure is too small to solidly identify,

188 In fact, the trio of Asclepius, Hygieia, and Telesphoros is commonly referred to as the Pergamene Triad. 189 Beatty 1974: 86. 190 Hart agrees that the serpent, at least, in the beginning was a positive force in Christianity (1966: 84).

88 but it may be either a smaller version of Hygieia holding a patera and turning a serpent out of a basket, or it may be a priestess of Hygieia. If it is a miniature Hygieia, it demonstrates a tension between action and passivity. The larger Hygieia represents general welfare, while the smaller Hygieia works for that welfare. The same tension can be seen in panel A. In Telesphoros, one perceives a miniature version of Asclepius who carries out the action at which his father only hints. Asclepius‘ scroll, rolled tightly in his hand, is unfurled in the hands of Telesphoros. The illegible text, which may have been spells or other ritual prescriptions, are shown directly to the viewer. Incidentally, the inscription planes which generally carry the name of the commissioner are blank, and the interior wax panels are also blank. It is also worth noting that again the artist has chosen to refer back to the classical past by placing archaic scrolls in the hands of characters that grace a modern codex.

In this diptych, then, there is a more demonstrative call to paganism than the one in the Symmachi and Nicomachi diptych. In contrast to the subject of the Symmachi and

Nicomachi diptych, the Asclepius and Hygieia diptych highlights a different political agenda. The attention given to Asclepius, Hygieia and Telesphoros, as gods and goddess of health, can be explained by the prevailing fear at Rome and the commissioner‘s belief that the invocation to these specific gods could help bring an end to that fear.191 By the fourth century, Asclepius and Hygieia had dominion over not only physical and mental health, but also the health of the empire and the emperor in their Roman incarnations as

Aesculapius and Salus.

191 The same motifs of health (salus) have been seen on coins of the same period. See Chapter VI for the link with Salus coinage and other events involving threats to the Roman West.

89

Probianus

The Probianus diptych illustrates the appointment of Rufius Probianus to the office of vicarius urbis Romae around 400 CE [104].192 The message driving the diptych points to the importance of communication, writing, and record-keeping, all presumably desirable in an effective governor. In panel A, Probianus communicates with his assistants (or colleagues) by holding his right hand in locutio, a gubernatorial gesture reserved for the emperor, consul, and other officials.193 They, in turn, communicate with him through a reciprocated gesture. These assistants appear to be shown either in the process of writing down his instruction (upper registers) or immediately preceding or following their duties as scribes (lower registers). The same flow of communication is evident in panel B as well. Probianus writes his desires for the empire (emperor?) on a scroll, while his assistants appear to be taking notes. It is interesting to note that the words Probianus writes on the unfurled scroll are the same size and style of his title in the inscription plane above him. It is almost as if the commissioner wants the words, clearly larger than typical writing on a scroll, to serve as a third inscription. Of course, the scrolls and codices on the diptych are representative of the diptych itself.

It should be noted that as with the Symmachi and Nicomachi and Asclepius and

Hygieia diptychs, there is a current of archaic idealization present in the Probianus diptych. In the upper registers, the assistants, presumably recording practical

192 While stylistically this diptych resembles the Symmachi and Nicomachi diptych, its dating remains unclear. Due to the tentative identification of Rufius Probianus in the Prosopography (Martindale 1980: 909), it may be more prudent to date this diptych broadly to the fifth century. 193 Olovsdotter (2005: 68,94) has identified these figures as thekophoroi, functionaries of the Roman emperor who served as supervisors for the emperor. She has argued that their presence indicates Probianus took office in the provinces

90 information, write in a codex, while the lower register assistants hold scrolls. The same can be said of Probianus‘ large scroll in panel B. The wish for prosperity is written on a scroll, an archaic form that would have reminded the viewer of the empire‘s more prosperous times.

One aspect of the communicative process cannot be fully explained: the matching outfits. On panel A, Probianus wears a toga contabulata, as do the patricians in the upper and lower registers. Likewise, on panel B, Probianus wears a chlamys and again the patricians follow suit. Perhaps this connection through cloth is meant to imply cooperation at all levels of government, and therefore a smooth administration, but it is hard to know with certainty.

The two panels of this diptych represent the tension between the active and the passive sides of governmental appointments. In Panel A, Probianus, as vicar, has his newly-conferred power, but he is shown inactive, passive. He is also beholden to the reigning emperors. The small portraits of Arcadius and Honorius to his right represent reminders and enforcers of his obligations. Panel B underscores the theme of official power by replacing the static posture with a dynamic action. The scroll, rolled up in its usual form, has been expanded literally and figuratively. It now plays an active role in

Probianus‘ appointment. By writing his wish for prosperity, he is actively assuming responsibility for his position as vicar.194 With this diptych, Probianus is showing a willingness to portray both sides of his position – humble servant to the emperor and well-intentioned official to the people.

194 According to William Sinnigen (1959: 100-1), some of the duties of the vicar were to collect taxes, organize the annona, and supervise the ―suburbicarian in the realms of finance, military recruiting, the state post, and law.‖ He also asserts that the position was more prominent than other vicars due to its new ―responsibilities to the urban prefecture at Rome.‖

91

Probus

The Probus diptych dates to 406 CE, the year Anicius Petronius Probus was consul in the West. It is entirely dissimilar to all other known diptychs [105].195

Thematically, it is the only known consular diptych that depicts the reigning emperor in lieu of the commissioning consul.196 It has long been understood that an image of the emperor was the emperor or at least carried his spirit and imperium wherever and whenever it was viewed. It is one of the reasons that the classical destruction of the image, the damnatio memoriae, was an effective tool against tyrannical emperors such as

Domitian and Commodus. The size of Honorius‘ portraits on this diptych as well as their apparent placement within a niche and on a platform suggest they were meant to resemble, if not mimic, large-scale statuaries that were erected in the city to inform the public of the likeness of the emperor and to preside over the city in his absence.

Stylistically, the diptych most closely resembles coins minted during the reign of

Honorius, the emperor who graces both panels.197 In the inscriptions, the pride of place is given to Honorius, while Probus positions his own title at the bottom of each panel.

Perhaps more significant is the self-deprecatory tone of the title. As the viewer reads it, he is struck by the order and force of the words – his name (Probus), his relationship to

195 Volbach believes the Probus mentioned is most likely Anicius Petronius Probus, who was consul in 371 (1952: 22), while Martindale cites a 406 consulship (1980: 913). It seems more likely given the similarities with the coinage of Honorius, that the consulship in 406 is the preferred appointment. 196 It should be noted that Olovsdotter has rejected this diptych from her study of consular diptychs because of the subject matter depicted. In her opinion, the fact that Honorius, and not Probus, appears on the depict excludes it from consular inclusion. I have decided to include it here as a consular diptych, however, because I believe that the subject matter plays only a part in the designation of use. We do not have a sufficient cache of extant diptychs to exclude it on the basis of subject alone. Variation, particularly in the late fourth and early fifth centuries, may have been quite common. 197 Although the transfer of motifs and types generally passed from larger to smaller objects, the fluidity of Late Antique policies could explain a reversed transmission.

92 the emperor (slave), and his office (consul). The combination of these three elements clearly demonstrates Probus‘ preoccupation with showing loyalty. The focus on

Honorius also highlights the qualities he values in an emperor (and presumably in himself as consul). Panel A shows the emperor in military dress holding a labarum and a

Victory-surmounted globe. It is similar to Honorius‘ gold VICTORIA AVG solidi minted in Rome in 404 CE, although the spurned captive motif is absent [16]. The message here is that of ultimate power. The globe shows dominion throughout the

Roman world, and the labarum, a Christianized military standard that would have been used on the battlefield, broadly indicates military leadership. Panel B resembles

Honorius‘ silver VIRTVS EXERCITVS miliarenses also minted at Rome around 404

CE [21]. It reinforces the idea of military leadership with the continuation of military dress and the substitution of alternate military objects, the scepter and shield.

The slight reference to Probus himself and the preference for Honorius may have been an attempt on his part to equate himself with the emperor. At the same time, the inclusion of statue replicas of Honorius illustrates an extreme case of humility on the part of Probus, as well as his allegiance to his emperor. Both programmatic objectives are woven together seamlessly in the two panels through the strategic placement of inscriptions and recognizable imperial portraiture.

Felix

The diptych of Fl. Constantius Felix, consul of the West, is dated to 428 CE

[106]. In this same year, Felix also held the positions of magister utriusque militiae and

93 patricius.198 The Felix diptych communicates its message of active and passive duty through the subtle juxtaposition of iconographic tropes. First the artist places the now standard scepter into Felix‘s hand. The scepter, seen in the Probus diptych, suggests an active military power often displayed by the reigning emperor, whose busts now serve as the scepter‘s finial.199 Unlike the Roman consular diptychs that precede and succeed the

Felix diptych, the consul does not stand before or inside a solid architectural structure. It is reminiscent of the background used in the Roma folio in the Codex-Calendar (Fig. 5).

Instead he may be before a military tent or some other temporary installation. In combination with his position as magister utriusque militiae, it would have been advantageous to Felix to show himself as a military presence. Finally we see that, as with

Honorius on the Probus diptych, Felix is bearded. A man‘s beard, with the exception of the philhellenic emperors of the second century, signified military service, one of the only states in which a Roman was allowed to neglect his depilatory duties. This practice of depicting Roman soldiers with beards is prevalent among the third century‘s soldier emperors, such as (Fig. 12).

The artist chose to include passive elements as well. For example, Felix is not dressed in the military garb of the campaign, but rather in a toga contabulata draped over a colobium and longer tunic, a symbol of official governing power.200 Felix also cups his right hand, which ―could signify formal reception, an appropriate and probably formalized gesture of solemn humility ceremoniously performed by one who has been

198 Martindale 1980: 461. 199 Olovsdotter (2005: 70) is right to suggest that the method of holding the scepter is similar to that of the emperor. Comparable instances of emperors holding scepters in the same manner can be seen on the Probus diptych, coins throughout the fourth and fifth centuries, and the consular plates in the Codex- Calendar. 200 Olovsdotter 2005: 71.

94 appointed to high office.‖201 The loss of panel B prevents a complete understanding of the complexity of presentation, but it is clear that the artist chose to portray Felix as a consul with duties on the battlefield and in the Senate.

Boethius

In 487, eleven years after was deposed, Fl. Nar. Manlius

Boethius was named consul of the West. The Boethius diptych is also concerned with active and passive duty [107]. By 487, however, the duties emphasized had changed.

Now the message to the recipient was that of effective governing through the production of consular games.

This latter focus is borne out in the mappa circensis, victory wreaths, and coin sacks. In both panels, Boethius holds the mappa, the official napkin dropped to start the consular games. The importance of the athletic contests is highlighted through three representations of wreaths. In the pediment of each panel is Boethius‘ monogram surrounded by a victory wreath. This same wreath can be seen on coins from previous periods [44, 57]. Next, the viewer‘s eye falls on the head of Boethius and the pearl diadem, an elaborate imperial victory wreath, common in this period. Finally, under

Boethius‘ feet, in both panels, lie palm branches, the main component of the victory wreaths distributed to winners at the games.202

The athletes were not the only winners. It was at these games that the consul distributed gifts to garner public support and loyalty. On this diptych, representations of

201 Olovsdotter 2005: 69. 202 Panel A may show an alternate version of a palm wreath, but it difficult to identify the circular object between the two palm branches.

95

Boethius‘ beneficence can be seen in the coin sacks that flank the palm branches at his feet.203 It is not insignificant that coins, distributed to the people, may have borne the same symbols of victory given to the victors.

Panels A and B are almost identical in their iconography. The main difference rests in the passive action, panel A, and the active action, panel B. In Panel A, Boethius holds the attributes of his position, but there is no agency. It is a static portrait. Panel B, however, shows a seated consul preparing to start the games with his right arm holding the mappa over his head. Boethius demonstrates here his effective planning and carrying out of consular games, aspects of his position that were imperative for his success.

It should also be mentioned that this diptych, the most focused on the games, differs significantly from comparable ones created outside of Rome. The Lampadiorum diptych, created in the West circa 400, has two registers.204 The top register includes the title plane and a scene of the consul seated at the games with two attendants. Below them, a scene of chariot races is shown. The tri-partite Halberstadt diptych, created in the

West circa 417, also depicts the consul with two attendants standing in the central plane.205 The upper register shows two figures, one of whom is probably the consul, seated between Roma and Constantinopolis, while captured enemies fill the lower registers. The Areobindus (East, 506), Anastasius (East, 517), Magnus (East, 518), and

Basilius (West, 541) diptychs all show the consul with his mappa and scepter in an upper register, while animal hunts, juggling scenes, and other contest takes place below.206 The

203 See Olovsdotter 2005: 129 for an alternate interpretation of the closed money sacks. 204 Olovsdotter 2005: Plate 1. 205 Olovsdotter 2005: Plate 2. 206 Olovsdotter 2005: Plates 9, 11, 12, 13, 8.

96 simplicity of message seen in the Boethius diptych seems to be an anomaly based on these other examples.

The Boethius diptych, then, highlights the fulfillment of Boethius‘ job through the production of games for the people. Noticeably lacking are any references to higher authorities which we saw in the other consular diptychs. The collapse of the Roman imperial system by this time prevented the inclusion of a reigning emperor. There simply was no higher Roman authority in the West and it is clear from this example that the consuls had not yet included the Ostrogothic rulers on their diptychs.

Orestes

The Orestes diptych was created at Rome in 530 CE to commemorate the consulship of Rufus Gennadius Probus Orestes [108]. This diptych is much more symbolically complex than the previous Roman diptychs. Unlike the two priest diptychs which essentially recall pagan practices and gods or the preceding consular diptychs that relied on a few motifs to communicate with the viewer, this diptych is much more closely related to the approach of the Probianus diptych. The artist has chosen to combine multiple motifs on one three-tiered panel: self reference, a monogram, clothing, a scepter, a mappa, sella curulis, beneficence, a crucifix, and Tyches.

First, the diptych is divided into three registers. The first register holds the royal portraits, the second the consular image, and the third the sparsio. No extant Roman diptych preceding this period is organized in this fashion. The Orestes diptych returns to the practice of referring to the reigning imperial (now royal) family through the addition of busts. Here we have portraits of Amalasuntha, the queen of the Ostrogoths at this

97 time, and her son Athalaric. Amalasuntha respected and admired Roman culture. Her desire to continue Roman traditions even extended to her son‘s education. It is reported in ‘ Wars that as a result of her Romano-centric views, she was an unpopular queen among her people.207 The inclusion of royal Ostrogothic portraits is fitting given her predilections, and Orestes‘ need for legitimacy. Indeed, the remainder of the diptych‘s motifs aim at convincing the viewer of his right to govern.

In addition to the inscription plane that identifies Orestes, his monogram is added directly above his head, perhaps as a type of halo. He is dressed in the toga contabulata worn by his predecessors Felix and Boethius. Orestes is also seated in a static position on a sella curulis decorated with lion heads, holding a lowered mappa and scepter. This portrait, although it shows Orestes with consular attributes, is important for the simple fact that in the West, the Roman government had been replaced with an Ostrogothic system based on Roman conventions. The convention of the sparsio is also added to the panel, with the coin sacks of Boethius now hoisted upon the shoulders of putti who actively pour out the gifts.

The commissioner is also careful to include subjects that would align the remaining Roman people with the new rulers. Between the royal portraits is a large cross. The Ostrogoths were Christians and wanted to demonstrate their compliance in the state religion, as well as distinguish themselves from other barbarian people looking to gain a foothold in the West. It should be noted that no reference to Christianity had been seen on diptychs created at Rome since the Probus diptych.208 Lastly, there is an attempt

207 Procopius, Wars, 5.2.6-18. 208 How much of this phenomenon is due to the limitation of the archaeological record and how much to preference or intention cannot be known presently.

98 by the commissioners to show concordia with the East by flanking Orestes with the tyches of Rome (on the right) and Constantinople (on the left). This was not a new measure, having been employed on coins throughout the fourth and fifth centuries. It is significant, however, in that it is the first known Western diptych to do so. Perhaps the tenuous position of Amalasuntha, and by extension her consul, led the commissioners of the Orestes diptych to attempt to broker peace through this particular gift.209 The inclusion of Roma and Constantinopolis may also have been a slightly altered carry-over of an Eastern convention seen on an earlier piece, the Clementinus diptych.

Clementinus

The Clementinus diptych, created for Clementinus Armonius Clementinus in Constantinople, precedes the Orestes diptych, dating to 513 CE (Fig. 13).210 The

Orestes diptych is almost a perfect replica of its layout and style.211 It too is divided into three registers, has busts of the royal (imperial) family, the inscription panel and the consul's monogram, the reigning consul seated on a sella curulis decorated with lion heads, holding a mappa and scepter, as well as the two figures in the lower register pouring out coins. More importantly, however, are the personifications of Roma and

Constantinopolis standing on either side of Clementinus. This diptych, made in

Constantinople, features Constantinopolis holding the fasces on Clementinus‘ right, while

Roma, holding a scepter, stands to his left. This observation is significant for two

209 According to Procopius, Amalasuntha had a deep respect for Roman traditions and customs which created conflict among her own people (Wars, V, 2). Without the support of other Ostrogothic elites, it would have been prudent to show deference to the stronger East. 210 Volbach 1952: No. 15. 211 Volbach also sees a correlation between the Orestes diptych and the Clementinus diptych (1952: 31).

99 reasons. The first is that right-hand side placement was privileged over the left. The fact that each commissioner made sure to place their city on the right hand side shows a level of oversight often ignored in the study of small objects. Also significant are the attributes each tyche carries in each diptych. When Roma is placed on the right on the Orestes diptych, she holds the fasces, a bundle of rods and an axe that symbolized Roman imperium. When placed on the left, however, as in the Clementinus diptych, she merely holds a scepter. This subtle detail is just one of the ways the rulers at Rome railed against the decline of their importance in the ever-changing landscape of Roman society.

CONCLUSION

It is difficult with a corpus of only seven objects to make any firm conclusions about patterning. It is possible, however, to make several preliminary comments. First, the methods of communication for each diptych were varied but effective. Whether the commissioner and artist focus on pagan subjects, writing, or consular attributes, their message is clear. Each diptych highlights the commissioner‘s perceived projected worth to the emperor or royal family. Second, each official, regardless of the overall message, focuses on the dress, attributes, and gesture of his position. These diptychs in essence serve as a type of self promotion to the recipient, where each official promises to fulfill his obligations through carefully considered iconography and inscriptions. Lastly, even though these diptychs may not have been gifted to the emperor, each panel (except those of Boethius) pays homage to the reigning imperial or royal family. The message is clear: regardless of the increased status of the honorand, public allegiance to the emperor or queen was no less important.

PROPAGANDA IN THE FIFTH CENTURY

In the face of hostilities from within and without, and the breakdown of traditional

Roman values, the government, the aristocracy, and the middle class utilized iconographic messages to present a stable empire to themselves, to the East, and to their enemies. In the preceding chapters, concepts concerning victory, political efficacy, imperial and consular duties, religion, and Rome‘s past virtues have been explored. In this chapter, the interrelatedness of the objects and the multimedia syncope of the themes is addressed.

In lieu of the myriad reverse types we see in the early empire, fifth century coinage relied on a handful of types, while the makers of contorniates seemed to imitate existing obverses and classical numismatic reverses. In contrast, diptychs and the Codex-

Calendar contain predominantly unique iconographic representations as already detailed.

All these objects, however, worked in concert to provide a secure front to the populace.

The question of education, a valid concern in this period, can help elucidate the problem of reception of the complex themes found on the objects. In the fourth and fifth century, the traditional education system in the empire for elites had gradually been replaced by a lesser system that no longer relied on the classical canon. Thus, the classical allegory and political nuances abundant in the times of Augustus, Trajan, and even Constantine, became less and less recognizable to the illiterate masses as well as their governors. Since communication is only effective when understood, the official

100

101 imperial message that accompanied the monetary aspect of coinage in the fourth and fifth centuries was simplified so that the general public at large could understand its messages, however repetitive.212

A similar simplification can be seen on the contorniates although there is also a slight increase in sophistication not seen in the coinage. Fourth century and several of the fifth century contorniates can be traced back to the Julio-Claudian dynasty, and to even

Alexander, a Macedonian, for their obverses. While it is thought that their likenesses were used to recall their support for the games and the arts, there is the question of whether members of the middle class were well-versed enough in Graeco-Roman history to do so. Would they have understood the historical and social significance of portraits of

Alexander, Nero, and Trajan? Presumably yes. Would they have understood the obscure imagery that only hinted at their love of games? Probably not. Consequently the makers of the contorniates selected portraits of these rulers and contemporary reigning emperors on the obverses, and simple, identifiable motifs on the reverses.

The issue of complex images becomes even more illuminating when we ascend from lower and middle class objects. On the surface, the Codex-Calendar appears to be another repetitive document that reuses imagery. Filocalus used stock images of Tyches, emperors, and mythical persons to decorate its pages. As stated previously, however, the combination and renovation of these common themes is rather refined. References to earlier gods, such as Sol Invictus and Mercury are included to indicate the Constantinian dynasty and the sparsio. Roma is pictured in one of her earliest incarnations, and the

212 It has been shown however, that coin motifs did differ from emperor to emperor to highlight changes in policy or affiliation. It has also been suggested that different denominations, which may have circulated among different inhabitants at Rome, also could have different messages.

102 personification of July is completely reworked for fourth century relevance as a symbol of the consular games – a distinctly Roman event. Even the portraits of the emperor and his eastern counterpart were imbued with new meaning as coin bags were added to their compositions, again, to highlight fourth century (and later fifth century) political priorities. The Codex-Calendar does not suggest a lack of complexity, but rather an increased sophistication among a class that had cultivated its ability to identify and understand such nuances.

Finally, the diptychs should be viewed as the ultimate rejection of any notion that

Late Antique material culture was simplistic and derivative. The methods of communication used on each diptych have already been explored. Each aristocrat, official, or consul strove to present his message in a direct, but refined way. Since his audience consisted of his peers, such an individual could be assured that his message, regardless of its intricacy, would be received and understood. Indeed, the inclusion of pagan rituals and gods, elaborate consular costumes, and heavily abbreviated Latin inscriptions and additions demonstrate the diptychs‘ creation for persons steeped in the classical learning.

The complexity of the message, then, is commensurate with the object and its intended recipient, and it can be argued that these messages would be understood. It is also clear, based on these messages, that several specific concerns occupied the Romans in the fourth and fifth centuries –barbarians in the empire, the transition to Christianity, classical virtues, military and recreational victory, and effective governing. These concerns often were intertwined and affected the entire population in the City. The continuance of Roman military might was essential to combat the presence of barbarians

103 on the outskirts of the empire, who eventually threatened the City. The retention of pagan values as well as the promotion of Christianity were seen as ways to thwart these advances. And finally at Rome in particular, the lack of governing power and military strength, diverted from the city because of continuous wars, meant that the governors had to rely on public support and cooperation, fostered through the production of games and handouts, to maintain their positions, whereas previously they were able to parlay military victories and other strategic events to their benefit.

BARBARIANS IN THE EMPIRE

The Roman Empire had a contentious relationship with its barbarian neighbors.

As mercenaries and later permanent fixtures in the , the barbarians were an integral part of Roman military strategy. The average Roman would have been accustomed to seeing these wild soldiers throughout the empire, but the unpredictability of their compatriots led to periods of widespread panic, particularly on the periphery.

Mistrust, greed, and fear (on both sides) created conflict between groups of Visigoths,

Vandals, , Ostrogoths and the Roman government that adversely affected the city of

Rome.

One notable conflict can be traced to communication issues and failed negotiations between Honorius and the Visigoths, which lead to a Visigothic burning of

Rome in 410, the abduction of Honorius‘ half-sister, Galla Placidia, and the death of

Alaric. The two main motifs extolling this theme are the Emperor Spurning Captive reverse and the SALVS REIPVBLICA legend. Victory reverses and legends, however, could also stand in for the emperor and health. The only coinage that was minted at

104

Rome following the sack was Honorius‘ AE 4 double victory type [25, 26]. The promotion of Salus was gone, as was the hope in the city. It is interesting to note, however, that in cities like Ravenna and Arles, the image of Roma and the legend VRBS

ROMA was revived and placed on several denominations. It should also be mentioned that John minted the same coin type during his usurpation, but he reverted to the SALVS legend.

Valentinian III witnessed a dramatic shift in barbarian movement during his reign.

The Romans were finally free of the Visigoths, but other barbarian groups had risen in their stead. The Huns, allies of Valentinian‘s general Aetius grew steadily in power in the East. The death of Attila in 452 led to the disillusion of the Hunnic army and the rise of the Ostrogoths, the future rulers of Rome. The Franks moved into Gaul, and drove the

Visigoths further southward towards Spain. The Vandals, having already established a kingdom in Spain, had their sights set on Africa. Unfortunately, Valentinian‘s death in

455 led to a power struggle between Petronius Maximus and the Vandals. Broken marriage promises and a desire to rule, brought the Vandals to the City, which they pillaged until they had killed Petronius and abducted the imperial women. Perhaps in response to this latest affront, the Roman mints returned to the Salus motif on the semisses of Severus II and the solidi, semisses, and tremisses of Anthemius. Although the troubles for the City continued, these are the last coins minted at Rome that reference or depict Salus. In fact, the three main themes referenced above become rare on objects made at Rome.

105

TRANSITION TO CHRISTIANITY

Christianity became the official religion of the empire under Constantine. Under

Julian, in 361, the empire reverted back to paganism. Although Christianity prevailed once again in 363 with Julian‘s death, internal bickering threatened it as numerous heresies cropped up. The principal argument amongst Christians was whether Jesus was the same as God or similar to God, his father. Although the distinction seems minor, this was a cause of disagreement that endangered the solidarity of the empire. Theodosius I, recognizing the fragility of the situation, declared Trinitarianism, the belief in the equality of the Holy Ghost, God, and Jesus, the only recognized form of Christianity in 380.

Christianity, however, did not seem to direct imperial policy. Theodosius‘ faith did not stop him from massacring 7,000 civilians after his official in Thessalonica was murdered in 390. His actions could be perceived as a typical Roman response to disorder that happened to conflict with his personal faith. It is also possible that Theodosius was more religious than this episode gives him credit for. After Ambrose of Milan excommunicated him from the church that same year, Theodosius made amends, officially closed all pagan temples in 391, and converted un-Christianized feast days to work days. He also reiterated the illegality of sacrifices, haruspicy, and other pagan practices. Thus, at the end of the century, Christianity finally gained the footing that it had tenuously placed in the beginning.

One would expect this tension to be born out in the material record, each side advertising their allegiance to Trinitarianism or one of the heresies. On the contrary,

106 during the second half of the fourth century artists and their patrons were reluctant to employ Christian symbols broadly until full acceptance began to permeate all levels of society from the top down. One notable exception is the lists of bishops and martyrs found in the Codex-Calendar. Towards the end of the century, several common themes –

Emperor and Human-headed Serpent, Cross or Chi-Rho, and Christian inscriptions – began to appear on coins, contorniates, and eventually diptychs.

The ruling by Theodosius I in 391 seems to have been the action needed to begin the trickle of Christian icons onto objects created at Rome. Honorius‘ tremisses made between 394-408, include the globus cruciger, while the Chi-Rho graces his AE 2 coins.

On the Probus diptych, the military iconography known from coinage is accompanied by two notable Christian motifs. Honorius, his head encircled by a halo, is shown holding a labarum with a Latin inscription that offers the wish, ―may you always conquer in the name of Christ.‖ No solidi were made at Rome with Christian symbols beyond the labarum.213

John also includes a Chi-Rho in his numismatic program, but his AE 4 is essentially a copy of Honorius‘ AE 2. Not until the 30-year reign of Valentinian III do we see an explosion of Christian-focused motifs on major coin types. His solidi, which combine the long cross and the human-headed serpent, were minted throughout his reign.

This type was copied by Petronius Maximus and Severus II. There are also solidi showing the emperor holding a cross-scepter for both of his commemorative issues as well as a shield with Chi-Rho and long cross in 455. Valentinian‘s tremisses, the Cross

213 The labarum shows up on the AE 3 coins of Valentinian I and the AE 2 of Theodosius I. At this scale, however, it hardly differs from a regular standard.

107 in Wreath type, became the standard for the rest of the fifth century. It was copied by

Majorian, Severus II, Anthemius, and Julian Nepos. A contorniate in Majorian‘s name also shows him holding a cross-scepter.

Severus also included the Chi-Rho in Wreath type on his semisses and half- siliquae, which were imitated by Anthemius. Anthemius‘ solidi broke with tradition by including the globus cruciger between two figures or a cross above a banner with the word PAS. These were types never minted previously at Rome. Likewise, Julius Nepos resurrected the Victory with Long Cross type for his solidi, which also had not been created at Rome.214

By 530, the cross has become a prominent motif on objects made in the City. The

Orestes diptych, with its tri-register design and muddled compositional style, is notable as an example of a Christian-focused object because of the treatment of the cross. The first register features a large crucifix centered between two spandrels with portraits of Orestes‘ queen and her son. The stand-alone cross was now the same size as other important images instead of a miniscule addition to another object or the interior decoration of a wreath.

Although the transition from paganism to Christianity was a bi-lateral process that took place over an extended time period, the gradual inclusion of Christian motifs on each material type expresses the sensitivity of the commissioners. The material culture created at Rome reveals a diplomatic flair that catered to both pagans and Christians by erasing the most offensive of pagan iconographic stalwarts and slowly integrating key

Christian symbols.

214 It had been minted in the name of Honorius at Constantinople in 420 (DOC 789).

108

CLASSICAL VIRTUES

In addition to the religious struggle taking place in Rome, there was also a struggle for its past virtues. The traditional Roman society that had sustained the empire for nearly 400 years was degrading. Besieged by hostile foreigners and disgruntled citizens, the core values of loyalty, pride, and respectability arguably had begun to falter from the third century and into the fourth. This lack of stability added to the religious struggle and incessant threats to the empire created still further discord in the capital, as the aristocracy struggled to maintain some semblance of relevance. Pagan religion, then, was seen as a last stand against the complete breakdown of Roman society. The reduction in consequential duties for the emperor resulted in the aristocracy turning to each other and the people to maintain its prestige. We see this plea for continuity in the material culture of the time and the dogged reliance on classical themes and virtues.

Several classical themes appear on the coinage and other material types of the period. The GLORIA ROMANORVM legend goes out of use by the reign of

Theodosius, while the INVICTA ROMA AETERNA legend is used by John and then the

Ostrogothic kings. The abstract concept of Victory, however, appears on each material type. Victory is shown as an attribute of Roma and Gallus in the Codex-Calendar.

Victory motifs and legends grace the reverses of coins minted during the reigns of

Honorius, John, Valentinian III, Petronius Maximus, Severus, Julius Nepos, Odovacar, and the Ostrogoths. One of the main themes on contorniates, Victory is represented as a wreath or palm. Even the Probus diptych features Honorius holding a globus Victoriae.

It is clear that the motif was a long-lived symbol of Romanitas that continued to be exploited well into the sixth century.

109

Pagan gods and rites also appear on most materials. That a pagan revival was thought to have occurred in the late fourth century has been examined previously.

Although there was no strong Christian sentiment to accompany the insistence on pagan retention, the inclusion of an array of pagan gods and rites across the material field does suggest nostalgia for times past. In the Codex-Calendar, illustrations of Sol Invictus and

Mercury are included, while a personified January burns incense. Contorniates also include depictions of or invocations to Artemis, Athena, and Hercules. Most notably, two priestess scenes are displayed on the Symmachus and Nicomachus diptych, while the god Asclepius and goddess Hygieia form the subject of their own diptych. This cross- material focus on paganism, in the face of changing religious priorities is striking, and highlights the importance of these objects.

MILITARY AND RECREATIONAL VICTORIES

With the empire under constant attack from all directions, the military had been forced outside the City, dispersed throughout the frontier in an effort to keep the ex- capital safe and protect strategic trade routes to Spain and Africa. The Roman military was stretched thin, and had difficulty mustering sufficient troops to successfully combat often larger barbarian forces. Although the Roman military won some battles, it was mostly defeated during fourth and fifth centuries. Nevertheless, at Rome, the message was one of defiance, as portable objects and gifts continued to extol the might of the military and the comfort of the games.

The message of Rome‘s military supremacy appears most widely on coinage.

The first instance comes during the conflict between Constantius II and Magnentius, with

110 both men shown on horseback spearing a kneeling foe, his spear and shield broken under the horse. The Codex-Calendar, during this period, does not have any overt imagery related to military victories. The text of the calendar, however, details these victories, and many of them would have been celebrated with games. Under Valentinian I, the motif of the emperor dragging a captive by the hair is produced. It is not until Honorius‘ tremissis issues starting in 394, however, that Victory appears on coins minted at Rome.

She is shown holding her attributes, a wreath or trophy and a palm or a globe with either a cross or a smaller version of herself.215 She is also drags captives, an aspect

Valentinian III revisits on his AE3 coins.

The emperor is removed from his horse in coinage created during the reign of

Honorius, and now uses his own feet to trample captives. The traditional military tropes appear in abundance on most objects bearing his likeness. He is portrayed on his coins and contorniates wearing armor and the paludamentum, and his reverse legends indicate victory and the army‘s virtue. On the Probus diptych, we also see Honorius shown in what appears to be a triumphal arch, in full military costume holding a labarum, Victory on globe, or scepter and leaning on a shield. The fact that Honorius never led his troops into battle is disregarded. Instead, the imperial image makers recast him as a strong, virile emperor who is capable of protecting the Western empire through successful military campaigns.

The promotion of victory can also be seen on Priscus Attalus‘ ROMA INVICTA

AETERNA coins. The battle between Honorius and Ataulf played out to the Visigoth‘s

215 Roma is shown in similar fashion.

111 advantage, and coins marking the victory of the city show the attitude of the conquerors.

They demonstrated their ability to conquer Rome, while declaring her unconquerable.

John, a usurper who seized power after Honorius‘ death, revived the Victory dragging captive type not seen since Honorius‘ AE2 coins and added a bearded obverse portrait recalling the days of the soldier emperors. He too was ultimately unsuccessful, retaining control of the West for only two years. Valentinian III alters Honorius‘

Emperor Spurning Captive type by replacing the captive with a human-headed serpent, an insidious enemy that had to be tamped down. The legend that surrounds the image also declares victory.

The year before the end of the Western empire, Julius Nepos minted a coin showing him in armor with an inscription of victory. The quick turnover of emperors after the death of Valentinian III and the successful invasions of the Visigoths, Vandals, and Huns make this coin type particularly deceptive. Even the end of the Western empire could not keep the Victory motif down. Sometime after, German king Odovacar and

Ostrogothic king Theodoric minted XL-nummi with Victory types unknown to Roman mints [61-70]. The false proclamations of military victories were augmented by supposed actual victories at the games.

Although the Roman emperors did not always have military victories to celebrate, they could produce games for the people and, ultimately, recreational victories that would substitute for losses on the battlefield. The Driver in Quadriga type, found on contorniates and mosaics, had its roots in the military sphere, while the nude athlete can be equated with heroes from Graeco-Roman tradition. Contorniates proclaiming the winners of the pantomime and other artistic contests also emphasize the importance of

112 winning in Roman society. For Romans, where real battles were lost, replacement battles could be won.

EFFECTIVE GOVERNING

Barbarian aggression, the tension between pagan and Christian priorities, and the waning military in the West left emperors, consuls, and local governors with little more than a shell of their previous responsibilities at Rome. The only tangible powers they had left was the advertisement of their autonomy from the East, their ability to communicate and cooperate amongst themselves, and their faithful carrying out of their most important duty in the eyes of the public – the production of games and the redistribution of wealth.

As Rome was neglected by the imperial family in favor of Ravenna or other

Western cities, Rome turned its attention inward. Although several fifth century emperors were officially recognized by the East, coinage minted at Rome bears little indication of cooperation with the Eastern government. Outside the capital city, the

CONCORDIA type was a popular way to signal harmony at a time of political discord.

At Rome, however, the numismatic record shows a decidedly internal focus.

As has been mentioned above, the focus was on victory, health and safety,

Christianity (later), and the City itself. Only at the very beginning of our time period with Constantine II‘s FELICITAS ROMANORVM issue [4] and Theodosius‘ Concordia type [6] and towards the end with Anthemius‘ SALVS REIPVBLICAE solidi [45-53] do we see any attempt to show cooperation from the Roman mint. Of course, Constantius II and Theodosius reigned before the division of the empire, and Anthemius was hand- selected by Leo, Eastern emperor, to rule in the West. Also before the division,

113 cooperation is suggested by the inclusion in the Codex-Calendar of the other city Tyches

– Constantinopolis, Antioch, and Trier – as well as the Constantius II‘s Caesar, Gallus.

The inclusion of Constantinople on the Orestes diptych [108] in 530 also shows a return to cooperation with the East. These are the only examples of cooperation, however, in this period. This stubbornness or pride shown by the creators of coins, contorniates, and diptychs hearkens back to the beginning when Rome was the sole conqueror of the known world. By keeping the focus on Rome alone, the government made a statement about its ability to govern without assistance from other Western provinces or the East.

The ability to communicate among the nobility is subtle in the material record as it is often hidden within other messages. For example, the coinage, as has been shown, was able to convey numerous messages to every strata of society, while the Codex-

Calendar and the diptychs were reserved for the governing classes. Although some messages on coins undoubtedly presumably were seen by the colleagues of the emperor, it is certain that the Codex-Calendar and the diptychs were.216 For example, when

Probianus is shown writing and speaking to the thekophoroi who mimic his gestures, the viewer, himself a friend and possibly a colleague, understands the implications of such a scene. Probianus is able to do his job well because of his ability to rally his troops around him. Likewise, the classicizing elements present on the diptych are meant to recall earlier times when the government was less dysfunctional and operated from

Rome. Venantius, upon flipping through the Codex-Calendar, would have been aware of the historical figures, pagan gods, but especially imperial contemporary events he was

216 To what extent they were shared beyond the recipient and his immediate circle of friends is unclear.

114 meant to celebrate. The events could not be celebrated if the local officials could not communicate and cooperate with each other.

The main events of Late Antiquity were the New Year‘s games and their associated public vows in January and the ludi Apollinaris in July. The significance of the sparsio and the games is prevalent on every material type, throughout the period of study. It is first depicted in the Codex-Calendar, which is more focused on the benefaction of Roma and the emperor, and less on the contests themselves. The suggestion of distribution can also be seen in the Mercury, July, and Gallus folios. The active distribution, however, is explicit in the Constantius II and Roma folios, express representations of the emperor and empire.

During the reign of Honorius, contorniates were created showing the victorious charioteer, a symbol of the most popular contest. Valentinian III continued that symbol, and adds the nude athlete, pantomimes, and other performers, the organ, and the sitting consul himself. The sparsio also appears on his AE4 VOTA coins. He then combines the games and the sparsio in 435 on his solidi celebrating his ten year imperial anniversary. On the obverse and reverse, he is shown in consular garb, holding the mappa and scepter, while the reverse legend informs the viewer of the vows and the accompanying distribution. In 455, another commemorative solidus was issued. The rhetoric of the coin was increased, as Valentinian III, in consular costume, shows himself now offering (monetary) assistance to a kneeling woman. The vows and sparsio are still indicated on the reverse. Even after the Vandalic in 455, the production of games remained an important priority. In fact, a contorniate from the reign of

Majorian shows him in triumphal wear with the mappa and scepter.

115

The collapse of the Western government in 476 was unable to deter the importance, popularity, and necessity of the production of the games and the distribution of largesse. Indeed, the Boethius diptych shows him in consular costume wielding the mappa and scepter with bags of coins at this feet. Nearly 50 years later, when Rome was firmly under the influence of the Ostrogoths, the same motifs are seen in the Orestes diptych.

CONCLUSION

The fourth and fifth centuries were a turbulent time in Roman history. The struggles at the ex-capital, Rome, led to a shift in material CULTURE production commensurate with changing ideals and ideas. The focus at the City on barbarians, transitioning to Christianity, retaining classical virtues, and showing competency in the government became the main concern for the middle class, aristocracy, and emperor.

Propaganda and social memory manipulation was utilized by these various classes to present a thriving city as Rome slipped further from the status it had once boasted. The question remains as to what extent these messages were believed. Often, reality and the message are at odds, and it seems difficult to believe the populace would have been so easily deceived by a small piece of metal or ornately carved ivory. But times were different then. The mechanisms of communication were not as immediate as they are today, but taking all the evidence together, a clear picture of manipulation takes shape.

Perhaps it was not essential for every member of the population to believe the city was still significant. The act of persuading may have been sufficient in the eyes of the people to keep them content until the city could actually rebound. The profusion of games,

116 distributions, and personal gifts all served to create an alternate universe where the cold, hard reality of daily life and the fiction of past grandeur could coexist.

117

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Corpus inscriptionum Latinarum. Berlin: Akademie der Wissenschaften.

Congres International de numismatique. 1953. Paper read at Congres International de numismatique, at .

Becoming Roman, writing Latin? : literacy and epigraphy in the Roman West. 2001. Paper read at International Roman Archaeology Conference, at Glasgow.

Alchermes, J. 1994. Spolia in Roman Cities of the Late Empire: Legislative Rationales and Architectural Reuse. Dumbarton Oaks Papers 48:167-178.

Alföldi, A. 1976. Die Kontorniat-Medaillons: Katalog. 2 vols. Vol. 1. Berlin: W. de Gruyter.

———. 1976. Die Kontorniat-Medaillons: Text. 2 vols. Vol. 2. Berlin: W. de Gruyter.

Anderson, W. 2004. An Archaeology of Late Antique Pilgrim Flasks. Anatolian Studies 54:79- 93.

Ando, C., ed. 2003. Roman Religion. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.

Arnold, B. 2008. The Past as Propaganda: Totalitarian Archaeology in Nazi Germany. In Histories of Archaology, edited by T. Murray and C. Evans. Oxford.

Barnes, T. D. 1995. Statistics and the Conversion of the Roman Aristocracy. Journal of Roman Studies 85:135-147.

Bastien, P. 1964. Le monnayage de Magnence (350-353). Wetteren: Éditions cultura.

———. 1988. Monnaie et Donativa au Bas-Empire. Wetteren.

———. 1992. Le Buste monetaire des empereurs romains I. Wetteren.

Baynes, N. H. 1943. The Decline of the Roman Power in Western Europe. Some Modern Explanations. The Journal of Roman Studies 33: 29-35.

Beard, M., ed. 1998. Religions of Rome. 2 vols. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Beatty, W. K. 1974. Medical numismatic notes. XV. Some medical aspects of Greek and Roman coins. Bulletin of the New York Academy of Medicine 50 (1):85-95.

118

Beck, R. 2006. The Religion of the Mithras Cult in the Roman Empire. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Bellinger, A. R., and M. A. Berlincourt. 1962. Victory as a Coin Type. Vol. 149, Numismatic Notes and Monographs. New York: The American Numismatic Society.

Bloch, H. 1945. A New Document of the Last Pagan Revival in the West, 393-394 AD. Harvard Theological Review 38 (4):199-244.

Bowersock, G.W., P. Brown, and O. Grabar, eds. 1999. Late antiquity : a guide to the postclassical world. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.

Bowes, K. 2001. Ivory Lists: Consular diptychs, Christian appropriation and polemics of time in Late Antiquity. Art History 24 (3):338-357.

Bowman, A. K., and J. David Thomas. 1975. The Vindolanda Writing Tablets and Their Significance: An Interim Report. Historia: Zeitschrift für Alte Geschichte 24 (3):463-478.

Brown, K. R. 1967. Consular Diptychs with Circus Scenes: Rome and New Rome. New York: New York University, Institute of Fine Arts.

Brown, P. 1969. The Diffusion of Manichaeism in the Roman Empire. Journal of Roman Studies 59 (1/2):92-103.

Brown, P. R. L. 1961. Aspects of the Christianization of the Roman Aristocracy. Journal of Roman Studies 51:1-11.

Bruggisser, P. 1989. Symmaque et la memoire d'Hercule. Historia: Zeitschrift für Alte Geschichte 38 (3):380-383.

Burgess, R. W. 1988. Quinquennial Vota and the Imperial Consulship in the Fourth and Fifth Centuries, 337-511. Numismatic Chronicle 148:77-96.

Burrus, V. 1995. The making of a heretic : gender, authority, and the Priscillianist controversy. Berkeley: University of California.

Cameron, A. 1982. A Note on Ivory Carving in Fourth Century Constantinople. American Journal of Archaeology 86 (1):126-9.

———. 1984. A New Late Antique Ivory: The Fauvel Panel. American Journal of Archaeology 88 (3):397-402.

Cameron, A. 1985. Polyonomy in the Late Roman Aristocracy: The Case of Petronius Probus. Journal of Roman Studies 75:164-182.

Cameron, A., and D. Schauer. 1982. The Last Consul: Basilius and His Diptych. Journal of

119

Roman Studies 72:126-145.

Capps Jr, E. 1927. The Style of the Consular Diptychs. Art Bulletin 10 (1):60-101.

Carson, R. A. G. 1978. The Republic. Edited by R. A. G. Carson. 3 vols. Vol. 1, Principal Coins of the Romans. London: British Musuem Publications.

———. 1978. The Principate. Edited by R. A. G. Carson. 3 vols. Vol. 2, Principal Coins of the Romans. London: British Musuem Publications.

———. 1978. The Dominate. Edited by R. A. G. Carson. 3 vols. Vol. 3, Principal Coins of the Romans. London: British Musuem Publications.

Carson, R. A. G., P. V. Hill, and J. P. Kent. 1965. Late Roman bronze coinage, A.D. 324-498. London: Spink.

Carson, R. A. G., and C. M. Kraay, eds. 1978. Scripta nummaria romana. London: Spink & Son.

Casey, P. J. 1986. Understanding Ancient Coins. Norman: University of Oklahoma Press.

Comstock, M. B. 1968. Roman Medallions and Contorniates. Boston Museum Bulletin 66 (343):28-40.

Crawford, M. 1970. Money and Exchange in the Roman World. Journal of Roman Studies 60:40-48.

Crawford, M. H. 1983. Roman Imperial Coin Types and the Formation of Public Opinion. In Studies in Numismatic Method, edited by C. N. L. Brooke, J. G. Pollard, B. H. I. H. Stewart, and T. Volk. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Cunnally, J. 1986. Nero, Seneca, and the Medallist of the Roman Emperors. The Art Bulletin 68 (2):314-317.

Curran, J. 2000. Pagan City and Christian Capital: Rome in the Fourth Century. Oxford: Clarendon Press.

Cutler, A. 1984. The Making of the Justinian Diptychs. Byzantion: Revue Internationales des Études Byzantines 54:75-115.

———, ed. 1998. Late Antique and Byzantine Ivory Carving. Aldershot: Ashgate.

Delbrueck, R. 1929. Die Consulardiptychen und Verwandte Denkmäler. Berlin: Walter De Gruyter & Co.

Depeyrot, G. 1987. Le Bas-Empire Romain: économie et numismatique. Paris: Éditions errance.

120

———. 2006. La Monnaie Romaine: 211 av. J.-C. - 476 apr. J.-C. Paris: Éditions errance.

Dill, S. 1958. Roman Society in the Last Century of the Western Empire. New York: Meridian Books.

Dunbabin, K. M. D. 1982. The Victorious Charioteer on Mosaics and Related Monuments. American Journal of Archaeology 86 (1):65-89.

Duncan-Jones, R. 1989. Mobility and Immobility of Coin in the Roman Empire. Annali dell'Istituto Italiano di Numismatica:121-37.

———. 1994. Money and government in the Roman empire. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Durkheim, E. 1915. The Elementary Forms of the Religious

Life. Translated by J. W. Swain. New York: Free Press.

Duval, Y.-M. 1998. L'extirpation de l'Arianisme Italie du Nord et en Occident: Rimini (359/60) et Aquilée (381) Hilaire de Poitiers (+367/8) et Ambroise de Milan (+397). Brookfield: Ashgate Publishing.

Edbrooke, Jr., R. O. 1976. The Visit of Constantius II to Rome in 357 and Its Effect on the Pagan Roman Senatorial

Aristocracy. American Journal of Philology 97 (1):40-61.

Edmonson, J. C. 1989. Mining in the Later Roman Empire and Beyond: continuity or disruption? Journal of Roman Studies (84-102).

Ellis, S. P. 1988. The End of the Roman House. American Journal of Archaeology 92 (4):565- 576.

Elsner, J. 1995. Art and the Roman viewer : the transformation of art from the Pagan world to Christianit. Cambridge.

———. 1998. Imperial Rome and Christian Triumph: The Art of the Roman Empire AD 100- 450. Oxford.

Evans-Pritchard, E. E. 1940. The Nuer : a description of the modes of livelihood and political institutions of a Nilotic people. Oxford: Clarendon Press.

Fentress, J. and C. Wickham. 1992. Social Memory. Oxford.

Finkelstein, N. G. 2003. The Holocaust Industry. London: Verso.

121

Fisher, C. D., ed. 1992. Cornelii Taciti Annalium Ab Excessu Divi Augusti Libri. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Flower, H. I. 1996. Ancestor masks and aristocratic power in Roman culture. Oxford: Clarendon Press.

———. 2006. The Art of Forgetting: Disgrace and Oblivion in Roman Political Culture. Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press.

Forsyth, N. R. 1981. The Punishment of Dirce and the Death of Laocoön on Contorniate Reverses. RevNum 23:80-95.

Fulford, M. 1978. Coin Circulation and Mint Activity in the Late Roman Empire: some economic implications. Archaeological Journal:67-114.

Futrell, A. 2001. Blood in the Arena: The Spectacle of Roman Power. Austin: University of Texas Press.

———. 2006. The Roman Games. Malden.

Galinsky, K. 1996. Augustan Culture. Princeton: Princeton University Press.

Gardner, I., and S. N. C. Lieu, eds. 2004. Manichaean texts from the Roman Empire. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Gergel, R. A. 1986. An Allegory of Imperial Victory on a Cuirassed Statue of . Princeton: Record of the Art Museum, Princeton University.

Giroire, Cécile, and Daniel Roger. 2007. Roman art from the Louvre. Paris.

Goffart, W. A. 1980. Barbarians and Romans, A.D. 418-584 : the techniques of accommodations. Princeton: Princeton University Press.

Goodacre, H. 1928. A Handbook of the Coinage of the . 2 vols. Vol. 1. London: Spink and Son Ltd.

Grierson, P., and M. Mays. 1992. Catalogue of Late Roman Coins. Washington, D. C.: Dumbarton Oaks Research Library and Collection.

Halbwachs, M. 1980. The Collective Memory. New York: Harper & Row.

Halsberghe, G. H. 1972. The Cult of Sol Invictus. Leiden: Brill.

Hands, A. R. 1963. The Fall of the Roman Empire in the West: A Case of Suicide or 'Force Majeure?' Greece & Rome 10 (2):153-168.

122

Hanson, R. P. C. 1988. The search for the Christian doctrine of God : the Arian controversy 318- 381. Edinburgh: T. & T. Clark.

Harl, K. 1996. Coinage in the Roman economy, 300 B.C. to A.D. 700. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press.

Harris, W. V. 1991. Ancient Literacy. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.

Harris, W. V., and J. Arce. 1999. The Transformations of Vrbs Roma in Late Antiquity. Journal of Roman Archaeology Supplement 33.

Hart, G. D. 1966. Ancient coins and medicine. Canadian Medical Association Journal 94 (2):77- 89.

Heather, P. 1999. The Visigoths from the Migration Period to the Seventh Century: an Ethnographic Perspective. Woodbridge.

Heather, P. J. 2006. The fall of the Roman Empire : a new and the Barbarians. New York: Oxford University Press.

Hendy, M. F. 1972. Aspects of Coin Production and Fiscal Administration in the Late Roman and Early Byzantine Period. Numismatic Chronicle 7th series, 12:117-39.

———. 1985. Studies in the Byzantine Monetary Economy. Cambridge.

Hingley, R. 2005. Globalizing Roman culture : unity, diversity and empire. London: Routledge.

Hodgkin, K., and S. Radstone, eds. 2003. Contested Pasts: The Politics of Memory. London: Routledge.

Holden, A. 2008. The Abduction of the Sabine Women in Context: The Iconography on Late Antique Contorniate Medallions. American Journal of Archaeology 112 (1).

Hopkins , K. 1980. Taxes and Trade in the Roman Empire (200 B.C.-A.D. 400). Journal of Roman Studies 70:101-125.

Howgego, C. J. 1994. Coin circulation and the integration of the Roman economy. Journal of Roman Archaeology 7:5-21.

———. 1995. Ancient history from coins. London: Routledge.

Israeli, Y., and D. Mevorah, eds. 2000. Cradle of Christianity. Jerusalem: Israel Museum.

Janet, P. 1928. L'Evolution de la mémoire et de la notion du temps. Paris: A. Chahine.

Jones, A. H. M. 1964. The Later Roman Empire, 284-602: a Social, Economic, and

123

Administrative Survey. 2 vols. Norman: University of Oklahoma Press.

———. 1966. The Decline of the Ancient World. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston.

Jory, E. J. 1996. The Drama of the Dance: Prolegomena to an Iconography of Imperial Pantomime. In Roman Theater and Society, edited by W. J. Slater. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.

Joye, S., and A. Knaepen. 2005. L'Image d'Amalasonthe. Le Moyen âge: Revue d'histoire at de philologie 111 (2):229-257.

Kaegi, W. E. 1968. Byzantium and the decline of Rome. Princeton: Princeton University Press.

Kagan, D., ed. 1978. The end of the Roman Empire : decline or transformation? Lexington: Heath.

Kent, J. P. 1977. Wealth of the Roman World. London.

Kent, J. P. C. 1994. The Divided Empire and the Fall of the Western Parts. Edited by R. A. G. Carson, J. P. C. Kent and A. M. Burnett. Vol. X, The Roman Imperial Coinage. London: Spink and Son Ltd.

Lacam, G. 1994. La 'Main de Dieu': son origine hébraïque, son symbolisme monétaire. Paris.

Lafaurie, J. 1953. La chronologie des monnaies de Constantin III et de Constant II. Revue numismatique 15:37-65.

Lançon, B. 2000. Rome in late antiquity : everyday life and urban change, AD 312-609. New York: Routledge.

Laurence, R., and J. Berry. 2001. Cultural identity in the Roman Empire. New York: Routledge.

Lebecq, S. 1997. Routes of change: Production and distribution in the West (5th-8th century). In The Transformation of the Roman World AD 400-900, edited by L. Webster and M. Brown. Berkeley: University of California Press.

Liebeschuetz, J. H. W. G. 1979. Continuity and Change in Roman Religion. Oxford: Clarendon Press.

———. 2001. Decline and Fall of the Roman City. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Lieu, S. N. C. 1992. Manichaeism in the later Roman Empire and medieval China. Tübingen: J.C.B. Mohr.

Long, C. R. 1989. The Gods of the Months in Ancient Art. American Journal of Archaeology 93 (4):589-595.

124

MacCormack, S. 1975. Roma, Constantinopolis, the Emperor, and His Genius. The Classical Quarterly 25 (1):131-150.

———. 1981. Art and ceremony in late antiquity. Berkeley: University of California Press.

MacMullen, R. 1988. Corruption and the Decline of Rome. New Haven: Yale University Press.

Mango, C. 1963. Antique Statuary and the Byzantine Beholder. Dumbarton Oaks Papers 17:53- 75.

Martindale, J. R. 1980. The Prosopography of the Later Roman Empire. III vols. Vol. II. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Marwood, M. A. 1988. The Roman Cult of Salus. Edited by A. R. Hands and D. R. Walker, BAR International Series. Oxford: BAR.

Mathisen, Ralph W. 1988. The Theme of Literary Decline in Late . Classical Philology 83 (1):45-52.

Mathisen, R. W. 1989. Eccelesiastical Factionalism and Religious Controversy in Fifth-Century Gaul. Washington, D. C.: Catholic University of America Press.

Matthews, J. 1975. Western Aristocracies and Imperial Court A.D. 364-425. Oxford.

Mazzarino, S. 1951. La propaganda senatoriale nel tardo impero. Doxa 4:127-141.

Mellor, R. 1981. The Goddess Roma. Aufstied und Niedergang der römischen Welt 17 (2):950- 1030.

Metcalf, W. E. 1977. American Journal of Archaeology 81 (3):406-407.

Michels, A. K. 1967. The Calendar in the Roman Republic. Princeton: Princeton University Press.

Middleton, D. and D. Edwards, ed. 1990. Collective Remembering. London.

Mitchell, S. 2000. Ethnicity, acculturation and empire in Roman and late Roman Asia Minor. In Ethnicity and culture in late antiquity, edited by S. Mitchell and G. Greatrex. London: Duckworth and The Classical Press of Wales.

Mitchell, S., and G. Greatrex, eds. 2000. Ethnicity and culture in late antiquity. London: Duckworth and The Classical Press of Wales.

Momigliano, A. 1964. The conflict between paganism and Christianity in the fourth century. Oxford: Clarendon Press.

125

Mommsen, T. 1981. Monumenta Germaniae Historica. Auctores Antiquissimi. Vol. 9. München: Monumenta Germaniae Historica. Original edition, Monumenta Germaniae Historica inde ab anno Christi Quingentesimo usque ad annum millesimum et quingentesimum.

Mommsen, T., and P.M. Mayer, eds. 1905. Codex Theodosianus. 2 vols. Berolini: Weidmannos.

Morey, C. R. 1941. The Early Christian Ivories of the Eastern Empire. Dumbarton Oaks Papers 1:41-60.

Morrison, C. 1983. The Re-Use of Obsolete coins: the Case of Roman Imperial Bronzes Revived in the Late Fifth Century. In Studies in Numismatic Method presented to Philip Grierson, edited by C. N. L. Brooke, J. G. Pollard, B. H. I. H. Stewart, and T. Volk. Cambridge.

Nelson, R. S, and M. Olin, eds. 2003. Monuments and Memory, Made and Unmade. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

Norena, C. F. 2001. The Communication of the Emperor's Virtues. Journal of Roman Studies 91:146-168.

Olovsdotter, C. 2005. The Consular Image: An Iconological Study of the Consular Diptychs. Vol. International Series 1376. Oxford: British Archaeological Reports.

Oost, S. I. 1968. Galla Placidia Augusta. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

Pearce, J. W. E. 1933. The Roman Coinage from A.D. 364 to 423. London.

Pflaum, H.-G. 1982. Les carrières procuratoriennes équestres sous le Haut-Empire Romain. Paris: P. Geuthner.

Pratt, K. J. 1965. Rome as Eterna. Journal of the History of Ideas 26 (1):25-44.

Rapaport, L. 1997. Jews in Germany after the Holocaust: Memory, identity, and Jewish-German relations. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Reece, R. 1973. Roman Coinage in the Western Empire. Britannia 4:227-251.

Robert, C. 1887. Formes et caractères des médaillons antiques de bronze relatifs aux jeux. Mélanges d'archéologie et d'histoire 7:39-52.

Roberts, M. 2001. Rome Personified, Rome Epitomized: Representations of Rome in the Poetry of the Early Fifth Century. American Journal of Philology 122 (4):533-565.

Robertson, A. S. 1982. Roman Inperial Coins in the Hunter Coin Cabinet. New York: Oxford University Press.

126

Rostovtzeff, M. I. 1998. The Social and Economic History of the Roman Empire. 2 vols. Vol. 1. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Roth, R., and J. Kelle, eds. 2007. Roman by integration : dimensions of group identity in material culture and text. Portsmouth: Journal of Roman Archaeology.

Ryberg, I. S. 1955. Vota Publica. Memoirs of the American Academy in Rome 22:120-140.

Salzman, M. R. 1990. On Roman Time: The Codex-Calendar of 354 and the Rhythms of Urban Life in Late Antiquity. Berkeley: University of California Press.

Schauer, D. 1987. Late Roman and Byzantine Consular Coins Commemorating Giving Gifts and Public Games. Celator Feb/Mar:I, VIII.

Scherrer, S. J. 1984. Signs and Wonders in the Imperial Cult: A New Look at a Roman Religious Institution in the Light of Rev 13:13-15. Journal of Biblical Literature 103 (4):599-610.

Seeck, O. 1964. Regesten der Kaiser und Päpste für die Jahre 311 bis 476 n. Chr. Vorarbeit zu einer Prosopographie der christlichen Kaiserzeit,. Frankfurt am Main: Minerva GMBH.

Seyfarth, W., ed. 1978. Ammiani Marcellini Rerum gestarum libri qui supersunt. Leipzig: Bibliotheca scriptorum Graecorum et Romanorum Teubneriana.

Shotter, J. 1990. The Social Construction of Remembering and Forgetting. In Collective Remembering, edited by D. Middleton and D. Edwards. London: Sage Publishers.

Sinnigen, William G. 1959. The Vicarius Urbis Romae and the Urban Prefecture. Historia: Zeitschrift für Alte Geschichte 8 (1):97-112.

Slater, William J., ed. 1996. Roman theater and society : E. Togo Salmon papers I. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.

Smith, R. R. R. 2002. The Statue Monument of Oecumenius: A New Porrait of a Late Antique Governor from Aphrodisias. Journal of Roman Studies 92:134-156.

Spiro, M. 1961. Ornamental Plaques of Ivory Diptychs Fifth-sixth Centuries. New York: New York University, Institute of Fine Arts.

St. Clair, A. 1996. Imperial Virtue: Questions of a Form and Function in the Case of Four Late Antique Statuettes. Dumbarton Oaks Papers 50:147-162.

Stein, E. 1949-1959. Histoire du Bas-Empire. 2 vols. Vol. 2. Paris: Desclée de Brouwer.

Stern, H. 1953. Le Calendrier de 354. Etude sur son texte et ses illustrations. Paris.

Storch, R. H. 1970. The Trophy and the Cross: Pagan and Christian Symbolism in the Fourth and

127

Fifth Centuries. Byzantion:105-117.

Strzygowski, J. 1888. Die Calenderbilden des Chronographen vom Jahre 354. Berlin: Druck and Verlag von Georg Reimer.

Stuart, M. 1939. How Were Imperial Portraits Distributed throughout the Roman Empire? American Journal of Archaeology 43 (4):601-617.

Sumruld, W. A. 1994. Augustine and the Arians : the Bishop of Hippo's encounters with Ulfilan Arianism. Selinsgrove: Susquehanna University Press.

Sutherland, C. H. V. 1959. The Intelligibility of Roman Imperial Coin Types. Journal of Roman Studies 49 (1/2):46-55.

———. 1961. Denarius and Sestertius in 's Coinage Reform. Journal of Roman Studies 51 (1 and 2):94-97.

Swain, S., and M. Edwards, eds. 2004. Approaching Late Antiquity: the Transformation from Early to Late Empire. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Tanner, J. 2000. Portraits, Power, and Patronage in the Late Roman Republic. Journal of Roman Studies 90:18-50.

Taylor, J. E. 1993. Christians and the Holy Places: The Myth of Jewish-Christian Origins. Oxford: Clarendon Press.

Taylor, Rabun. 2008. The Moral Mirror of Roman Art. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Thompson, E. A. 1966. The Visigoths in the time of Ulfila. Oxford: Clarendon Press.

Thompson, K. 2002. Emile Durkheim. London: Routledge.

Toynbee, J. M. C. 1945. Journal of Roman Studies 35:115-121.

———. 1947. Roma and Constantinopolis in Late-Antique Art from 312 to 365. Journal of Roman Studies 37 (Parts 1 and 2):135-144.

———. 1986. Roman Medallions. New York.

Trapero, M. R. 2000. Writing and Currency as Historical Documents in the Service of Social Communication. Journal of Spanish Research on Information Science 1 (2).

Van Dam, R. 1985. Leadership and community in late antique Gaul. Berkeley: University of California Press.

Vermeule, C. C. 1958. Aspects of Victoria on Roman coins, Gems, and in Monumental Art.

128

London.

———. 1959. The Goddess Roma in the Art of the Roman Empire. Cambridge.

———. 1987. The Cult Images of Imperial Rome. Rome: G. Bretschneider.

Volbach, W. F. 1952. Elfenbeinarbeiten der spätantike und des frühen mittelalters. : Römisch-Germanischen Zentralmuseums.

Wand, J. W. C. 1975. A History of the Early Church to AD 500. New York: Routledge.

Ward-Perkins, B. 2005. The fall of Rome: and the end of civilization. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Weissenborn, W., ed. 1908. Livy: Ab urbe condita libri. Berlin: Weidmann.

Wells, B. W. 1923. Trade and Travel in the Roman Empire. The Classical Journal 19 (1):7-16.

West, L. C. 1932. The Economic Collapse of the Roman Empire. The Classical Journal 28 (2):96-106.

Widengren, G. 1965. Mani and Manichaeism. London: Weidenfeld and Nicolson.

Wieseler-Müller, ed. 1854. Denkmäler der alten Kunst; nach der auswahl und anordnung von C.O. Müller. Vol. II. Göttingen.

Wigg, D. G. 1995. Contorniates and the Pagan Revival. Journal of Roman Archaeology 8:525- 529.

Wilkinson, B. 1947. An Aspect of the Decline of Citizenship in the Later Roman Empire. Phoenix 1:19-29.

Williams, D. H. 1995. Ambrose of Milan and the end of the Nicean-Arian conflicts. Oxford: Clarendon Press.

Williamson, Paul, ed. 1996. European sculpture at the Victoria and Albert Museum. London: The Museum.

Wolters, R. 1999. Nummi Signati: Untersuchungen zur Römischen Münzprägung unde Geltwirtschaft. Munich: C. H. Beck.

Woods, D. 2002. A Misunderstood Monogram: Ricimer or Severus? Hermathena 172:5-21.

Woolf, G. 1992. Imperialism, Empire and the Integration of the Roman Economy. World Archaeology 23 (3):283-293.

129

Wroth, W. 1882. Telesphoros. The Journal of Hellenic Studies 3:283-300.

Zadoks, A. N. , and J. Jitta. 1951. The Contorniates in the Royal Coin Cabinet at the Hague. Mnemosyne 4 (Fourth Series) (1):81-92.

130

Figure 1. January. Vindobonensis ms., MS. 3416, fol. 2v. Österreichische Nationalbibliothek, Vienna.

131

Figure 2. Natales Caesarum. Romanus 1 ms., Barb. lat. 2154, fol. 7. Biblioteca Vaticana, Rome

132

Figure 3. Mercury. Romanus 1 ms., Barb, lat, 2154, fol. 10. Biblioteca Vaticana, Rome.

133

Figure 4. July. Vindobonensis ms., MS. 3416, fol. 8v. Österreichische Nationalbibliothek, Vienna.

134

Figure 5. Roma. Romanus 1 ms., Barb. lat. 2154, fol. 2. Biblioteca Vaticana, Rome.

135

Figure 6. Constantinoplis. Romanus 1 ms., Barb. lat. 2154, fol. 4. Biblioteca Vaticana, Rome.

136

Figure 7. Constantius II. Romanus 1 ms., Barb. lat. 2154, fol. 13. Biblioteca Vaticana, Rome.

137

Figure 8. Gallus. Romanus 1 ms., Barb. lat. 2154, fol. 14. Biblioteca Vaticana, Rome.

138

Figure 9. Prima Porta Augustus.

139

Figure 10. Commodus as Hercules.

140

Figure 11. Ara Pacis.

141

Figure 12. Philip the Arab.

142

Figure 13. Orestes Diptych.

143

APPENDIX: THE CATALOG

Constantius II

1 AE 2 AE Rome 350 - 350 CE

Obv: DNCONSTAN - Laureate bust r. (rosette diadem); globe TIVSPFAVG in r. hand, A behind bust

Rev: GLORIARO - MANORVM Constantius II in military dress, arms raised , shield(?) on l. arm; on horse galloping r.; spearing foe kneeling l.; broken spear and shield below horse

Exergue: RB Field: star, r. 5.46 g 26 mm

Reference: HCC, V, p. 307, 37

Magnentius

2 AE 2 AE Rome 350 - 351 CE

Obv: DNMAGNEN - Bare-headed bust r., A behind TIVSPFAVG

Rev: GLORIA - ROMANORVM Magnentius in military dress, arms raised, shield on l. arm; on horse galloping r.; spearing foe kneeling l.; broken spear and shield below horse

Exergue: Rε Field: star, r. 4.16 g 25 mm

Reference: HCC, V, p. 339, 65 Nepotian

3 AE 2 AE Rome 350 - 350 CE

Obv: FLPOPNEPOT - Bare-headed, draped, cuirassed bust, r. IANVSPFAVG

Rev: VRBS - ROMA Roma seated l. on shield; holding gl. Vict. and spear

Exergue: RQ Field: 4.80 g

Reference: PCR III.1380

Constantius II

4 Solidus AV Rome 357 - 357 CE

Obv: FLIVLCONSTAN - Mantled bust, l. (pearl-diadem); holding TIVSPERPAVG mappa and sceptre

Rev: FELICITAS - RO - Roma seated facing; Constantinopolis MANORVM seated l. holding sceptre, foot on prow; together holding wreath with VOT/XXXV/MVLT/XXXX

Exergue: RSMΕ Field: 4.44 g

Reference: PCR III.1384 Valentinian I

5 AE 3 AE Rome 364 - 367 CE

Obv: DNVALENTINI - Bust r. (pearl diadem) ANVSPFAVG

Rev: GLORIARO - MANORVM Valentinian I in military dress, advancing r.; head l.; labarum in l. hand; dragging by the hair kneeling captive with hands tied behind back with r.

Exergue: RT Field: 1.89 g 19 mm

Reference: HCC, V, p. 370, 31

Theodosius I

6 AE 3 AE Rome 383 - 388 CE

Obv: DNTHEODO - Bust r. (pearl diadem) SIVSPFAVG

Rev: CONCOR - DIAAVGGG Constantinopolis, turreted, draped, seated front on throne; head r.; holding sceptre (and globe?); r. foot on prow

Exergue: SMR(B)? Field: 2.16 g 18 mm

Reference: HCC, V, p.413, 15 Theodosius I

7 AE 2 AE Rome 383 - 388 CE

Obv: DNTHEODO - Bust r. (pearl diadem) SIVSPFAVG

Rev: GLORIARO - MANORVM Theodosius I in military dress, cloaked, advancing r.; head l.; labarum in l. hand; dragging by the hair kneeling captive with hands tied behind back with r.

Exergue: RQ Field: 2.41 g 18 mm

Reference: HCC, V, p. 413, 16

Honorius

8 Tremissis AV Rome 394 - 395 CE

Obv: DNHONORI - VSPFAVG Draped and cuirassed bust, r. (diadem)

Rev: VICTORIA - Victory, draped, advancing r.; holding AVGVSTORVM wreath and gl. cr.

Exergue: COM Field: R M 1.45 g 14 mm

Reference: HCC, V, p. 438, 13 Honorius

9 AE 3 AE Rome 394 - 395 CE

Obv: DNHONOR - IVSPFAVG Bust r. (pearl diadem)

Rev: VRBSRO - MAFELIX Roma standing facing, looking r.; holding trophy on spear and gl. Vict.; shield at l. foot

Exergue: SMROM Field: OF P 2.52 g 17 mm

Reference: HCC,V, p. 437, 10

Honorius

10 Tremissis AV Rome 394 - 408 CE

Obv: DNHONORI - VSPFAVG Bust r. (pearl diadem)

Rev: VICTORIA - Victory advancing r.; holding wreath and AVGVSTORVM gl. Cr.

Exergue: COM Field: R M 1.52 g 13 mm

Reference: DOC 727; C 47 Honorius

11 AE 2 AE Rome 395 - 402 CE

Obv: DNONORI - VSPFAV Bust r. (pearl diadem)

Rev: SALVS - REIPVBLICAE Victory advancing l.; holding trophy over shoulder with r.; dragging captive with l.

Exergue: RT Field: Chi-Rho, l. 1.28 g

Reference: PCR III.1497

Honorius

12 Tremissis AV Rome 395 - 408 CE

Obv: DNHONOR - IVSPFAVG Draped and cuirassed bust, r. (diadem)

Rev: VICTORIA - Victory, draped, advancing r., holding AVGVSTORVM wreath and gl. cr.

Exergue: COMOB Field: R M 1.49 g 14 mm

Reference: HCC, V, p. 438, 12 Honorius

13 AE 3 AE Rome 402 - 409 CE

Obv: ]OR[ Bust r. (pearl diadem)

Rev: ]RB[ Roma standing facing; looking r.; holding trophy on spear and gl. Vict.

Exergue: Field: OF S[?] 1.89 g 12 mm

Reference: DOC 730; C 72; LRBC 816; PCR III.1500

Honorius

14 AE 3 AE Rome 402 - 409 CE

Obv: ]VC Bust r. (pearl diadem)

Rev: VRBSRO - MAFELIX Roma standing facing; looking r.; holding trophy on spear and gl. Vict.

Exergue: ]M[ Field: OF S 2.28 g 16 mm

Reference: DOC 729; C 72; LRBC 816; PCR III.1500 Honorius

15 AE 3 AE Rome 402 - 409 CE

Obv: DNHONO[ Bust r. (pearl diadem)

Rev: ]BSRO[ Roma standing facing, looking r.; holding trophy on spear and gl. Vict.

Exergue: ]MRO[ Field: OF P 1.92 g 15 mm

Reference: DOC 728; C 72; LRBC 816; PCR III.1500

Honorius

16 Solidus AV Rome 404 - 404 CE

Obv: DNHONORI - VSPFAVG Bust r. (pearl diadem)

Rev: VICTORI - AAVGGG Emperor standing r.; holding labarum in r. and gl. Vict. in l.; spurning captive with l. foot

Exergue: COMOB Field: R M 4.45 g 20 mm

Reference: DOC 724; C 44; PCR III.1498 Honorius

17 Solidus AV Rome 404 - 404 CE

Obv: DNHONORI - VSPFAVG Bust r. (pearl diadem)

Rev: VICTORI - AAVGGG Emperor standing r.; holding labarum in r. and gl. Vict. In l.; spurning captive with l. foot

Exergue: COMOB Field: R M 4.45 g

Reference: PCR III.1498

Honorius

18 Solidus AV Rome 404 - 404 CE

Obv: DNHONORI - VSPFAVG Bust r. (pearl diadem)

Rev: VICTORI - AAVGGG Emperor standing r.; holding labarum in r. and gl. Vict. in l.; spurning captive with l. foot

Exergue: COMOB Field: R M 4.49 g 21 mm

Reference: DOC 725; C 44; PCR III.1498 Honorius

19 Solidus AV Rome 404 - 404 CE

Obv: DNHONORI - VSPFAVG Bust r. (pearl diadem)

Rev: VICTORI - AAVGGG Emperor standing r.; holding labarum in r. and gl. Vict. in l.; spurning captive with l. foot

Exergue: COMOB Field: R M 4.42 g 20 mm

Reference: DOC 723; C 44; PCR III.1498

Honorius

20 Semissis AV Rome 404 - 404 CE

Obv: DNHONORI - VSPFAVG Bust r. (pearl diadem)

Rev: VICTORIAAVGVSTORVM Victory seated r.; inscribing VOT/X/MVLT/XX on shield supported by Genius

Exergue: COMOB Field: R M 2.20 g 12 mm

Reference: DOC 726; C 51 Honorius

21 Miliarensis AR Rome 404 - 404 CE

Obv: DNHONORI - VSPFAVG Bust r. (pearl diadem)

Rev: VIRTVS - EXERCITVS Emperor standing r., head l.; holding spear in r. and resting l. on shield

Exergue: RMPS Field: 3.81 g

Reference: PCR III.1499

Honorius

22 AE 3 AE Rome 404 - 404 CE

Obv: ]ONOR IVSPFAVC Bust r. (pearl diadem)

Rev: VR [ ] MAFELIX Roma standing facing; holding trophy on spear in r. and gl. Vict. in l.

Exergue: SMROM Field: OF T 2.49 g

Reference: PCR III.1500 Priscus Attalus

23 Solidus AV Rome 409 - 410 CE

Obv: PRISCVSΛTTA - Bust r. (pearl diadem) LVSPFΛVC

Rev: INVICTARO - Roma enthroned facing MAAETERNA

Exergue: COMOB Field: R M 4.43 g 21 mm

Reference: DOC 812; C 3

Priscus Attalus

24 Solidus AV Rome 409 - 410 CE

Obv: PRISCVSΛTTA - Bust r. (rosette diadem) LVSPFΛVC

Rev: INVICTARO - Roma enthroned facing MAAETERNA

Exergue: COMOB Field: R M; star 4.43 g 20 mm

Reference: DOC 813; C 3 Honorius

25 AE 4 AE Rome 410 - 423 CE

Obv: DNHONORI[ Bust r. (pearl diadem)

Rev: ]OR[ Victory advancing l.; holding wreath and palm

Exergue: Field: S 1.44 g 9 mm

Reference: DOC 732; C 39; LRBC 828-30

Honorius

26 AE 4 AE Rome 410 - 423 CE

Obv: ]ORI - VSPFΛVC Bust r. (pearl diadem)

Rev: ]ΛΛVCC Victory advancing l.; holding wreath and palm

Exergue: R M Field: P 1.37 g 11 mm

Reference: DOC 731; C 39; LRBC 828-30 John

27 AE 4 AE Rome 423 - 425 CE

Obv: DNIOHANN [ Bearded bust r. (rosette diadem)

Rev: SALVSR[ ]PVBLICE Victory advancing r; with trophy on shoulder, dragging captive

Exergue: R M Field: Chi-Rho, l. 1.50 g 12 mm

Reference: DOC 822; C 1v; LRBC 837

John

28 AE 4 AE Rome 423 - 425 CE

Obv: DNIOHAN N [ ] FAVC Bearded bust r. (rosette diadem)

Rev: ] PVBLICE Victory advancing r.; with trophy on shoulder, dragging captive

Exergue: R M Field: T, l. 1.18 g 12 mm

Reference: DOC 823; LRBC 833 Valentinian III

29 Solidus AV Rome 425 - 455 CE

Obv: DNPLΛVALENTI - Bust r. (rosette diadem) NIANVSPFAVG

Rev: VICTORI - AAVGGG Emperor standing facing; holding long cross in r. and gl. Vict. in l.; r. foot on head of human-headed serpent

Exergue: Field: R M 4.45 g 21 mm

Reference: DOC 849; C 19

Valentinian III

30 Solidus AV Rome 425 - 455 CE

Obv: DNPLΛVALENTI - Bust r. (rosette diadem) NIANVSPFAVG

Rev: VICTORI - AAVGGG Emperor standing facing; holding long cross in r. and gl. Vict. in l.; r. foot on head of human-headed serpent

Exergue: Field: R M 4.47 g 21 mm

Reference: DOC 850; C 19 Valentinian III

31 Tremissis AV Rome 425 - 455 CE

Obv: DNPLΛVΛLENTINIANVSP Bust r. (pearl diadem) ΓΛVG

Rev: Cross in wreath

Exergue: COMOB Field: 1.46 g 14 mm

Reference: DOC 851; C 49ff

Valentinian III

32 AE 4 AE Rome 425 - 455 CE

Obv: DNVΛLENTINIANSPFAV Bust r. (pearl diadem) C

Rev: VOT - PVB Camp gate with turrets; above, officina initial

Exergue: RM Field: 1.23 g 12 mm

Reference: DOC 852; C 37; LRBC 853 Valentinian III

33 AE 4 AE Rome 425 - 455 CE

Obv: DNVΛL [ Bust r. (pearl diadem) ENTINIANVSPFAVC ?]

Rev: VOT XX in wreath

Exergue: Field: 0.83 g 12 mm

Reference: DOC 853; C -; LRBC 847 or 856

Valentinian III

34 Solidus AV Rome 435 - 435 CE

Obv: DNPLAVALENTI - Consular bust, l.; holding mappa and NIANVSPFAVG cross-scepter

Rev: VOTX/MVLTXX Facing consular image enthroned; holding mappa and cross-scepter

Exergue: COMOB Field: R M 4.42 g 22 mm

Reference: DOC 856; C 41 Valentinian III

35 Solidus AV Rome 455 - 455 CE

Obv: DNPLAVALENTI - Consular bust, l.; holding mappa and NIANVSPFAVG cross-scepter

Rev: VOTXXXMVLTXXXX Emperor standing in consular costume; holding cross-scepter in l.; holding out r. to kneeling woman

Exergue: COMOB Field: R M 4.49 g 22 mm

Reference: DOC 858; C 44; Lacam pl. 10, Class 1, var. a.2; (x 5) pl. 11

Valentinian III

36 Solidus AV Rome 455 - 455 CE

Obv: DNPLAVALENTI - Armored bust facing; holding spear and NIANVSPFAVG shield inscribed with Chi-Rho

Rev: VOTXXXM/V/LTXXXX Emperor standing facing; holding long cross in r. and gl. Vict. in l.; r. foot on head of human-headed serpent

Exergue: COMOB Field: R M 4.48 g 21 mm

Reference: DOC 859; C 45 Petronius Maximus

37 Solidus AV Rome 455 - 455 CE

Obv: DNPETRONIVSM - Bust r. (pearl diadem) AXIMVSPFAVC

Rev: VICTORI - AAVCCC Emperor standing facing; holding long cross in r. and gl. Vict. in l.; r. foot on head of human-headed serpent

Exergue: COMOB Field: R M 4.43 g 21 mm

Reference: DOC 874; C 1

Majorian

38 Tremissis AV Rome 457 - 461 CE

Obv: DNIVL • - Bust r. (pearl diadem) MAIORIANVSPFAVC

Rev: Cross in wreath

Exergue: COMOB Field: 1.48 g 13 mm

Reference: DOC 886; C 19 Severus III

39 Solidus AV Rome 461 - 465 CE

Obv: DNLIBIVSSEVE - Bust r. (squares diadem) RVSPPPFAVG

Rev: VICTORI - AAVGGG Emperor standing facing; holding long cross in r. and gl. Vict. in l.; r. foot on head of human-headed serpent

Exergue: COMOB Field: R M 4.43 g 21 mm

Reference: DOC 895; C 8; Lacam p. 338, pl. 88, Type C, var. a.5

Severus III

40 Semissis AV Rome 461 - 465 CE

Obv: DNLIBIVSSEVE - Bust r. (pearl diadem) RVSPPPFAVG

Rev: SALVSREIPVBLICAE Chi-Rho in wreath

Exergue: COMOB Field: 2.17 g 16 mm

Reference: DOC 896; C 2; Lacam p. 360, pl. 96, Type B, var. b.1 Severus III

41 Tremissis AV Rome 461 - 465 CE

Obv: DNLIBSEVE - Bust r. (squares diadem) RVSPFAVC

Rev: Cross in wreath

Exergue: COMOB Field: 1.43 g 13 mm

Reference: DOC 897; C 19; Lacam p. 363, pl. 97, Type B, var. 2.4

Severus III

42 Tremissis AV Rome 461 - 465 CE

Obv: DNLIBSEVERVSPFAVC Bust r. (dotted diadem)

Rev: Cross in wreath

Exergue: COMOB Field: 1.46 g 13 mm

Reference: DOC 898; C 19; Lacam p. 361, pl. 97, Type A, var. 2.2 Severus III

43 Half-siliqua AR Rome 461 - 465 CE

Obv: DNLIBIVSSEVERVSPFAV Bust r. (squares diadem) G

Rev: SALVSREIPVBLICAE Chi-Rho in wreath

Exergue: R M Field: 0.95 g 12 mm

Reference: DOC 899; C 16

Severus III

44 AE 4 AE Rome 461 - 465 CE

Obv: DNLIBIVSSEVERVSPFAV Bust r. (pearl diadem) G

Rev: Monogram of Ricimer in wreath

Exergue: Field: 0.95 g 10 mm

Reference: DOC 900; C 18(?); LRBC 871 Anthemius

45 Solidus AV Rome 467 - 472 CE

Obv: DNΛNTHEMI - V - Facing armoured bust with shield and SPFΛVG spear

Rev: Two standing figures in military costumes, clasping hands; between them an oval banner with PΛS and surmounted by cross

Exergue: Field: R M 4.38 g 20 mm

Reference: DOC 908; Lacam pl. 111, Type I (IV) , var. 3 (p. 444)

Anthemius

46 Solidus AV Rome 467 - 472 CE

Obv: DNANTHEMI - Armored bust facing VSPERPETAVC

Rev: SALVSR - EIP - Two standing figures in military costume VBLICAE facing, clasping hands and having between them a gl. cr. and in their other hand a spear. The figure on the l. (Leo) has his r. on his breast, the one on the r. (Anthemius) has a gl. Vict.

Exergue: Field: RM 4.49 g 19 mm

Reference: DOC 915; C 7; Lacam pl. 117, Type III (VI), Class II, var. 1 (p. 457) Anthemius

47 Solidus AV Rome 467 - 472 CE

Obv: DNANTHEMI - Armored bust facing VSPERPETAVC

Rev: SALVSR - EIP - Two standing figures in military costume VBLICAE facing, clasping hands and having between them a gl. cr. and in their other hand a spear. The figure on the l. (Leo) has his r. on his breast, the one on the r. (Anthemius) has a gl. Vict.

Exergue: Field: IX 4.43 g 21 mm

Reference: DOC 916; C 7; Lacam pl. 117, Type III (VI), Class III, var. 2.3 (wrongly as BM) (p. 458)

Anthemius

48 Solidus AV Rome 467 - 472 CE

Obv: DNANTHEMI - Armored bust facing VSPERPETAVC

Rev: SALVSR - EIP - Two standing figures in military costume VBLICAE facing, clasping hands and having between them a gl. cr. and in their other hand a spear. The figure on the l. (Leo) has his r. on his breast, the one on the r. (Anthemius) has a gl. Vict.

Exergue: CORMOB Field: IX 4.47 g 21 mm

Reference: DOC 917; C 7; Lacam pl. 119, Type III (VI), Class III, var. 2.2 (p. 461) Anthemius

49 Solidus AV Rome 467 - 472 CE

Obv: DNANTHEMI - Armored bust facing VSPERPETAVC

Rev: SALVS - REI - PV - Two standing figures in military costume BLICAE facing, clasping hands and having between them a gl. cr. and in their other hand a spear. The figure on the l. (Leo) has his r. on his breast, the one on the r. (Anthemius) has a gl. Vict.

Exergue: Field: 8-pointed star 4.32 g 21 mm

Reference: DOC 918; C 7; Lacam pl. 124, Type III (V), "Hors serie" (p. 480)

Anthemius

50 Solidus AV Rome 467 - 472 CE

Obv: DNANTHEMI - Armored bust facing VSPERPETAVC

Rev: SALVSR - EIP - Two standing figures in military costume VBLICAE facing, clasping hands and having between them a gl. cr. and in their other hand a spear. The figure on the l. (Leo) has his r. on his breast, the one on the r. (Anthemius) has a gl. Vict.

Exergue: Field: Chi-Rho 4.49 g 20 mm

Reference: DOC 919; C 7; Lacam pl. 117, Type III (VI), Class II, var. 3 (p. 457) Anthemius

51 Solidus AV Rome 467 - 472 CE

Obv: DNANTHEM - Bust three-quarters facing; wearing IVSPFAVG paludamentum and holding spear

Rev: SALVSR - EIP - Two standing figures in military costume VBLICAE facing, clasping hands and having between them a gl. cr. and in their other hand a spear. The figure on the l. (Leo) has his r. on his breast, the one on the r. (Anthemius) has a gl. Vict.

Exergue: Field: RMA 4.44 g 21 mm

Reference: DOC 923; Lacam pl. 112, Type II (V), Class III, var. 1.8 (p. 448)

Anthemius

52 Solidus AV Rome 467 - 472 CE

Obv: DNANTHE - Bust three-quarters facing; wearing MIVSPFAVG paludamentum and holding spear

Rev: SALVSR - EIP - Two standing figures in military costume VBLICAE facing, clasping hands and having between them a gl. cr. and in their other hand a spear. The figure on the l. (Leo) has his r. on his breast, the one on the r. (Anthemius) has a gl. Vict.

Exergue: Field: RMA 4.45 g 20 mm

Reference: DOC 924; Lacam pl. 112, Type II (V), Class III, var. 1.7 (p. 448) Anthemius

53 Solidus AV Rome 467 - 472 CE

Obv: DNANTHE - Bust three-quarters facing; wearing MIVSPFAVC paludamentum and holding spear

Rev: SALVSR - EIP - Two standing figures in military costume VBLICAE facing, clasping hands and having between them a gl. cr. and in their other hand a spear. The figure on the l. (Leo) has his r. on his breast, the one on the r. (Anthemius) has a gl. Vict.

Exergue: Field: RMA, • below 4.49 g 21 mm

Reference: DOC 925; Lacam pl. 113, Type II (V), Class III, var. 2.5 (p. 448)

Anthemius

54 Semissis AV Rome 467 - 472 CE

Obv: DNANTHEM - Bust r. (pearl diadem) IVSPFAVG

Rev: SALVSREIPVBLICAE Chi-Rho in wreath

Exergue: COMOB Field: 2.19 g 17 mm

Reference: DOC 926; C 15; Lacam pl. 131, Class II, var. 3.1 (p. 506) Anthemius

55 Tremissis AV Rome 467 - 472 CE

Obv: DNANTHE - Bust r. (pearl diadem) MIVSPFAVG

Rev: SALVSREIPVBLICAE Cross in wreath

Exergue: Field: 1.43 g 13 mm

Reference: DOC 928; Lacam pl. 132, Type II, var. 4.2 (p. 510)

Anthemius

56 Tremissis AE Rome 467 - 472 CE

Obv: DNANTHEM - Bust r. (pearl diadem) IVSPERPETΛVG

Rev: SALVSREIPVBLICAE Cross in wreath

Exergue: Field: 1.46 g 14 mm

Reference: DOC 929; Lacam pl. 132, Type I.1 (p. 508) Anthemius

57 AE Rome 467 - 472 CE

Obv: DNANTHEMIVS[ Bust r. (pearl diadem)

Rev: Monogram of the letters ANTHE in wreath

Exergue: RM Field: 1.53 g 12 mm

Reference: DOC 930; C 1; LRBC 874

Anthemius

58 Nummus AE Rome 467 - 472 CE

Obv: DNANTHEMIVS[ Bust r. (pearl diadem)

Rev: Monogram of the letters ANTHE in wreath

Exergue: RM Field: 1.38 g 12 mm

Reference: DOC 931; C 1; LRBC 874 Julius Nepos

59 Solidus AV Rome 474 - 475 CE

Obv: DNIVLNE - POSPFAVC Armored bust three-quarters facing

Rev: VICTORI - AAVCCC Victory standing l.; holding long cross with R V

Exergue: COMOB Field: *, r. 4.34 g 19 mm

Reference: DOC 946; C 6; Lacam p. 605, pl. 147a, Type 3.1

Julius Nepos

60 Tremissis AV Rome 474 - 475 CE

Obv: DNIVLNE - POSPFAVC Bust r. (pearl diadem)

Rev: Cross in wreath

Exergue: COMOB Field: 1.46 g 12 mm

Reference: DOC 947; C 16 ff; Lacam p.683, pl. 171, as Ravenna Group I, Type 1.1 Odovacar

61 XL-nummi AE Rome 477 - 491 CE

Obv: [I]MPZENOFEL [ICISSI?] Bust of Zeno r., bearded, laureate NOSENΛVC

Rev: IMVICT - Λ - ROMA Victory in girdled chiton advancing r., in r., wreath; in l., trophy resting on shoulder; border of dots

Exergue: • XL • Field: S C

Reference: Wroth p. 100, 1; pl. xii.20

Theodoric

62 XL-nummi AE Rome 493 - 493 CE

Obv: INVICT - Λ - ROMΛ Bust of Roma, r., wearing crested helmet, pendant earring, necklace, and drapery; long hair

Rev: Victory in girdled chiton standing r. on prow; in r. wreath; in l. palm-branch resting on her shoulder; in front, lighted altar; beneath, | |; behind, backwards L and X; border of dots

Exergue: Field:

Reference: Wroth p. 101; pl. xiii.1 Theodoric

63 Quarter Siliqua AR Rome 493 - 518 CE

Obv: DNΛNΛSTΛSIVS [PΛVC] Bust of Anastasius I, r.; beardless, wearing diadem and cuirass

Rev: INVIC - TΛROMΛ Monogram of Theodoric; cross above; star below

Exergue: Field: 13.7 gr

Reference: Wroth p. 57, 74, pl. vii.6

Theodoric

64 Half Siliqua AR Rome 493 - 518 CE

Obv: DNΛNΛSTΛ - SIVSPΛVC Bust of Anastasius I, r.; beardless, wearing diadem, paludamentum, and cuirass

Rev: INVIC[TΛ] - ROMΛ Victory in chiton and peplos, advancing r.; in r., wreath; in l., trophy resting on shoulder

Exergue: Field: S C 15 gr

Reference: Wroth p. 57, 73, pl. vii.5 Ostrogothic

65 XL-nummi AE Rome 494 - 534 CE

Obv: INVIC - TAROMA Bust of Roma, r., wearing crested helmet, pendant earring, necklace, and drapery

Rev: Eagle with spread wings, standing l.; border of dots

Exergue: Field:

Reference: Wroth p. 102, 6-18; pl. xiii.2-8

Ostrogothic

66 XL-nummi AE Rome 494 - 534 CE

Obv: INVICT - AROMA Bust of Roma, r., wearing crested helmet, pendant earring, necklace, and drapery

Rev: Fig tree and two eagles below with head turned back; border of dots

Exergue: XX Field:

Reference: Wroth p. 103, 19; pl. xiii.9 Ostrogothic

67 XL-nummi AE Rome 494 - 534 CE

Obv: IMVICT - AROMA Bust of Roma, r., wearing crested helmet, pendant earring, necklace, and drapery; long hair

Rev: Wolf, l., with head turned r., suckling the twins; above XL; border of dots

Exergue: Field:

Reference: Wroth p. 104, 24-29; pl. xiv.1-3

Ostrogothic

68 XX-nummi AE Rome 494 - 534 CE

Obv: IMVIC - TΛROMΛ Bust of Roma, r., wearing crested helmet, pendant earring, necklace, and drapery; long hair

Rev: Wolf, l., with head turned r., suckling the twins; above two stars; border of dots

Exergue: • X • X • Field:

Reference: Wroth p. 105, 30-33; pl. xiv.4-7 Athalaric

69 X-nummi AE Rome 526 - 526 CE

Obv: INVICT - AROMA Bust of Roma r.; wearing helmet with plume, circular earring with pendant, necklace of two rows, and drapery; long hair

Rev: DNATAL - ARICVS Athalaric standing r.; wearing helmet, cuirass, and paludamentum; holding spear in r., in l. oval shield with center pellet

Exergue: Field: S C X

Reference: Wroth p. 69-70, 62-71, pl. viii.21-25

Theodahad

70 X-nummi AE Rome 534 - 536 CE

Obv: INVICT - AROMA Bust of Roma r.; wearing crested helmet, earring, necklace , and drapery; hair long

Rev: DN - THEODA - HATHVS - REX in wreath

Exergue: Field: X

Reference: Wroth p. 74-75, 16-18, pl. ix.12 Honorius

71 Contorniate AE Rome 395 - 423 CE

Obv: HONORIO - AVGVSTO Bust to r. with jeweled wreath; wearing armor and paludamentum; palm branch to r.

Rev: SPECIOSVS - Driver in Quadriga facing; holding wreath DIGNVS - EVGENIVS - and palm ACHILLES SIDEREVS

Exergue: Field:

Reference: Alföldi 448.3 Honorius

72 Contorniate AE Rome 395 - 423 CE

Obv: HONORIO - AVGVSTO Bust to r. with jeweled wreath; wearing armor and paludamentum; PE monogram engraved in silver to r.

Rev: Driver in Quadriga facing; holding wreath and palm

Exergue: Field:

Reference: Alföldi 449 Honorius

73 Contorniate AE Rome 395 - 423 CE

Obv: HONORIO - AVGVSTO Bust to r. with jeweled wreath; wearing armor and paludamentum

Rev: ARTEMI VINCAS Driver in Quadriga facing; holding wreath INVNDATOR PENNA and palm

Exergue: Field: 23.57 g

Reference: Alföldi 450.1 Honorius

74 Contorniate AE Rome 395 - 423 CE

Obv: HONORIO - AVGVSTO Bust to r. with jeweled wreath; wearing armor and paludamentum; PE monogram to r.

Rev: ARTEMI VINCAS Driver in Quadriga facing; holding wreath INVNDATOR PENNA and palm

Exergue: Field:

Reference: Alföldi 450.5 Honorius

75 Contorniate AE Rome 395 - 423 CE

Obv: HONORIO - AVGVSTO Bust to r. with jeweled wreath; wearing armor and paludamentum; palm branch to r.

Rev: ARTEMI VINCAS Driver in Quadriga facing; holding wreath INVNDATOR PENNA and palm

Exergue: Field: 31.70 g

Reference: Alföldi 450.7 Honorius

76 Contorniate AE Rome 395 - 423 CE

Obv: HONORIO - AVGVSTO Bust to r. with jeweled wreath; wearing armor and paludamentum; palm branch to r.

Rev: VINICAS Driver in Quadriga facing; holding wreath (?) and palm (?)

Exergue: Field: 26.95 g

Reference: Alföldi 451 Honorius

77 Contorniate AE Rome 395 - 423 CE

Obv: HONORIO - AVGVSTO Bust to r. with jeweled wreath; wearing armor and paludamentum; racehorse/stag to r.

Rev: Smooth surface with Concentric Circles

Exergue: Field: 33.45 g

Reference: Alföldi 452 Honorius

78 Contorniate AE Rome 395 - 423 CE

Obv: D N HONORI - VS P F Bust to r. with laurel wreath; wearing AVG armor and paludamentum; palm branch to l.

Rev: ARTEMI VINCAS Driver in Quadriga facing; holding wreath INVNDATOR PENNA and palm

Exergue: Field:

Reference: Alföldi 453 Honorius

79 Contorniate AE Rome 395 - 423 CE

Obv: D N HONORI - VS P F Bust to r. with laurel wreath; wearing AVG armor and paludamentum; sun to r.

Rev: Athena-Sapientia

Exergue: Field:

Reference: Alföldi 454 Valentinian III

80 Contorniate AE Rome 425 - 455 CE

Obv: DNPLAVALENTI - Bust to r. with diadem; wearing armor and NIANVSPFAVG paludamentum; palm branch to r.

Rev: PETRONIVSMAX - Consul seated with mappa and scepter IMVSCONS

Exergue: Field: 42.75 g

Reference: Alföldi 461.2 Valentinian III

81 Contorniate AE Rome 425 - 455 CE

Obv: DNPLAVALENTI - Bust to r. with diadem; wearing armor and NIANVSPFAVG paludamentum; palm branch to r.

Rev: BO - NIF - ATI - VS Driver in Quadriga facing; holding wreath and palm

Exergue: Illegible Field: 38.17 g

Reference: Alföldi 462.2 Valentinian III

82 Contorniate AE Rome 425 - 455 CE

Obv: DNPLAVALENTI - Bust to r. with diadem; wearing armor and NIANVSPFAVG paludamentum; arrow to r.

Rev: ΘΕΩΦΙ ΛΕΝΙΚΑ Nude athlete standing with wreath and palm; l. a boy; r. an urn with palm branches

Exergue: Field: 45.37 g

Reference: Alföldi 463.1 Valentinian III

83 Contorniate AE Rome 425 - 455 CE

Obv: DNPLAVALENTI - Bust to r. with diadem; wearing armor and NIANVSPFAVG paludamentum; palm branch engraved in silver to r.

Rev: Nude athlete standing with wreath and palm; l. a boy; r. an urn with palm branches

Exergue: Field:

Reference: Alföldi 463.2 Valentinian III

84 Contorniate AE Rome 425 - 455 CE

Obv: DNPLAVALENTI - Bust to r. with diadem; wearing armor and NIANVSPFAVG paludamentum; PE monogram engraved in silver to r.

Rev: Athlete standing with boy

Exergue: Field: 45.73 g

Reference: Alföldi 464.1 Valentinian III

85 Contorniate AE Rome 425 - 455 CE

Obv: DNPLAVALENTI - Bust to r. with diadem; wearing armor and NIANVSPFAVG paludamentum; monogram to r., palm to l.

Rev: Figure in long garment with 6 companions

Exergue: Field:

Reference: Alföldi 465.2 Valentinian III

86 Contorniate AE Rome 425 - 455 CE

Obv: DNPLAVALENTI - Bust to r. with diadem; wearing armor and NIANVSPFAVG paludamentum; PE monogram to r.

Rev: Figure in long garment with 6 companions

Exergue: Field:

Reference: Alföldi 465.3 Valentinian III

87 Contorniate AE Rome 425 - 455 CE

Obv: DNPLAVALENTI - Bust to r. with diadem; wearing armor and NIANVSPFAVG paludamentum; swastika to r.

Rev: Figure in long garment with 6 companions

Exergue: Field:

Reference: Alföldi 465.5 Valentinian III

88 Contorniate AE Rome 425 - 455 CE

Obv: DNPLAVALENTI - Bust to r. with diadem; wearing armor and NIANVSPFAVG paludamentum; sun to r.

Rev: MARGARI - TAVINCAS Figure in long garment; l. Eros

Exergue: Field: 50 g

Reference: Alföldi 466 Valentinian III

89 Contorniate AE Rome 425 - 455 CE

Obv: DNPLAVALENTI - Bust to r. with diadem; wearing armor and NIANVSPFAVG paludamentum; palm to r.

Rev: Smooth with scratched circle

Exergue: Field: 37.17 g

Reference: Alföldi 467.1 Valentinian III

90 Contorniate AE Rome 425 - 455 CE

Obv: DNPLAVALENTI - Bust to r. with diadem; wearing armor and NIANVSPFAVG paludamentum; rotated cross to r.

Rev: Smooth with circle

Exergue: Field: 36.78

Reference: Alföldi 467.3 Valentinian III

91 Contorniate AE Rome 425 - 455 CE

Obv: DNPLAVALENTI - Bust to r. with diadem; wearing armor and NIANVSPFAVG paludamentum

Rev: Smooth with embossed ring around sunken middle point

Exergue: Field:

Reference: Alföldi 467.4 Valentinian III

92 Contorniate AE Rome 425 - 455 CE

Obv: DNPLAVALENTI - Bust to r. with jeweled wreath; wearing NIANVSPFAVG armor and paludamentum

Rev: MARGARITA VINCAS Figure in long garment; l. Eros

Exergue: Field: 28.70 g

Reference: Alföldi 470 Valentinian III

93 Contorniate AE Rome 425 - 455 CE

Obv: DNPLAVALENTI - Bust to r. with jeweled wreath; wearing NIANVSPFAVG armor and paludamentum

Rev: Figure in long garment with 6 companions

Exergue: Field: 38.27 g

Reference: Alföldi 471 Valentinian III

94 Contorniate AE Rome 425 - 455 CE

Obv: DNPLACIDVSVALENTINI Bust to r. with jeweled wreath; wearing ANVSPFAVG armor and paludamentum; PE monogram to r.

Rev: MARGARI - TAVINCAS Figure in long garment; l. Eros

Exergue: Field: 33.51 g

Reference: Alföldi 474.2 Valentinian III

95 Contorniate AE Rome 425 - 455 CE

Obv: DNPLACIDVSVALENTINI Bust to r. with jeweled wreath; wearing ANVSPFAVG armor and paludamentum; ivy leaf to r.

Rev: Smooth

Exergue: Field: 30.95 g

Reference: Alföldi 475.1 Valentinian III

96 Contorniate AE Rome 425 - 455 CE

Obv: DNPLAVALENTI - Bust to r. with jeweled wreath; wearing NIANVSPFAVG armor and paludamentum

Rev: BONIF - ATIVS Driver in Quadriga facing; holding wreath and palm

Exergue: Illegible Field: 36.27 g

Reference: Alföldi 476.1 Valentinian III

97 Contorniate AE Rome 425 - 455 CE

Obv: DNPLAVALENTI - Bust to r. with jeweled wreath; wearing NIANVSPFAVG armor and paludamentum; PE monogram engraved in silver to r.

Rev: BONIF - ATIVS Chlamydatus holding wreath in r. and whip in l.; to r., boy, to l., container with palms

Exergue: Field: 46.70 g

Reference: Alföldi 477.2 Valentinian III

98 Contorniate AE Rome 425 - 455 CE

Obv: DNPLAVALENTI - Bust to r. with jeweled wreath; wearing NIANVSPFAVG armor and paludamentum

Rev: KARAMAL - LENICAS Chlamydatus holding wreath in r.; figure to r.

Exergue: Field:

Reference: Alföldi 478 Valentinian III

99 Contorniate AE Rome 425 - 455 CE

Obv: DNPLAVALENTI - Bust to r. with jeweled wreath; wearing NIANVSPFAVG consular garment; palm branch to r.

Rev: Organ with 3 surrounding figures

Exergue: Field: 59.36 g

Reference: Alföldi 480 Majorian

100 Contorniate AE Rome 457 - 461 CE

Obv: DNIVLIVSM - Bust to r. with jeweled wreath; wearing AIORIANVSFAVG triumphal toga with mappa and cross on scepter; PE monogram to r.

Rev: Erased

Exergue: Field: 64.25 g

Reference: Alföldi 481 Anthemius

101 Contorniate AE Rome 467 - 472 CE

Obv: DNANTHEMI - Bust to r.; wearing armor and VSPERPAVG paludamentum

Rev: (H)IPODROMOSH - E - Hercules to r.; leaning on a club; holding RACLEOS a child in r.

Exergue: ANDREAS Field: 44.81 g

Reference: Alföldi 482 102 Symmachi and Nicomachi Rome 400 CE H: 29.9 cm W: 12.4 cm

Panel A (left): A priestess of Ceres standing before an altar of Cybele, wearing a sleeveless chiton and holding a lowered torch. In the background, a pine tree hangs on two cymbals. Above is the word NICOMACHORVM.

Panel B (right): A priestess of Bacchus standing before a four-cornered altar of Jupiter, wearing a chymation over a sleeveless chiton. She sprinkles incense on a sacrificial fire, while a small servant raises a bowl and kantharos. An oak tree stands behind them. Above is the word SYMMACHORVM.

Reference: Delbrueck 1929: No. 54; Volbach 1952: No. 55.

103 Asclepius and Hygieia Rome 400 CE H: 31.3 cm W: 13.9 cm

Panel A: Asclepius, inclined to the right, with long hair and a full beard, leans on his club with a bucranion on the end and a snake encircling it. Holding a scroll, he rests his left hand on his chin, and his right hand on his hip. Telesphorus, who wears a hooded garment, opens a scroll to the viewer. Both inscription panels are blank.

Panel B: Hygieia leaning against a tripod with a snake encircling it and her shoulders. She holds an egg in her right hand, with her chiton slipping off her left shoulder. In the top right corner, a patera and oinochoe sit on a ledge. A naked Eros stands nearby. Both inscription panels are blank.

Reference: Delbrueck 1929: No. 55; Volbach 1952: No. 57.

104 Probianus Rome 400 CE H: 31.6 cm W: 12.9 cm

Panel A: Probianus sits on a cathedra with a double foot-rest and a high back. He raises his right hand in locutio, and rests his left hand on a scroll. Patricians wearing togae contabulatae stand near him. A wall panel with imperial portraits of Arcadius and Honorius hangs to his right. The words RVFIVS PROBIANVS V C are inscribed on the inscription plane.

Panel B: Probianus writes the words PROBIANE FLOREAS on a scroll. Each subject wears a chlamys, slipping off the right shoulder, over a tunic. The words VICARIVS VRBIS ROMAE are inscribed above.

Reference: Delbrueck 1929: No. 65; Volbach 1952: No. 62.

105 Probus Rome 406 CE H: 29.9 cm W: 13.1 cm

Panel A: Honorius stands as emperor beneath an arch, possibly triumphal. He wears a diadem and armored tunic with Gorgon’s head. The paludamentum hangs loosely from his l. shoulder. He holds a gl. Vict. in l. and in r. a labarum with IN NOMINE XPI VINCAS SEMPER, and a halo encircles his head. The upper inscription reads DN HONORIO SEMP AVG. The inscription PROBVS FAMVLVS VC CONS ORD is below.

Panel B: Honorius, in the same imperial dress, holds a spear in his left hand and rests his right hand on a shield. The upper inscription reads DN HONORIO SEMPER AVG. Below is the inscription PROBVS FAMVLVS VC CONS ORD.

Reference: Delbrueck 1929: No. 1; Volbach 1952: No. 1.

106 Felix Rome 428 CE H: 29 cm W: 13.6 cm

Panel A: Felix wears a tunica palmata over a tunica talaris. He holds a scepter with busts of Theodosius II and Valentinian III in his left hand and rests his right hand on his breast.

Panel B: It is now lost. Felix stands under a portal, dressed as a patricius in a chlamys. He holds a codicil scroll in front of his chest. The inscription tablet reads VTR Q MIL PATR ET CO S ORD.

Reference: Delbrueck 1929: No. 3; Volbach 1952: No. 2; Olovsdotter 2005: No. 3.

107 Boethius Rome 487 CE H: 35 cm W: 12.6 cm

Panel A: Boethius stands before two Corinthian columns supporting the inscription tablet, holding an eagle-tipped scepter in l. and in lowered r., a mappa. At his feet lies palm branches and sacks of coins. On the inscription tablet are the words N AR MANL BOETHIVS V C ET INL.

Panel B: Boethius dressed in triumphal clothing and enthroned on a sella curulis before two Corinthian columns supporting the inscription tablet. He lifts a mappa with r, and in l., he holds an eagle-tipped scepter. At his feet lies palm branches and sacks of coins. On the inscription tablet are the words EX P P P V SEC CONS ORD ET PATRIC.

Reference: Delbrueck 1929: No. 7; Volbach 1952: No. 6; Olovsdotter 2005: No. 7.

108 Orestes Rome 530 CE H: 33.4 cm W: 12 cm

Panel A: The upper register displays the inscription RVF CENN PROB ORESTIS and a central cross. To either side of the cross are the portrait busts of Amalasuntha and her son Athalarich. Athalarich wears a Germanic costume, while Amalasuntha wears a chlamys and imperial diadem. Orestes, as consul, sits on a sella curulis holding a mappa and scepter. Roma stands to his left with the fasces, and Constantinopolis stands to his right with a scepter and a disk with the letter 'A' inscribed on it. Below the sella, two small figures dispense coins from sacks.

Panel B: It is now lost. The inscription read V C ET INL CONS ORD.

Reference: Delbrueck 1929: No. 32; Volbach 1952: No. 31.