M. examines the diachronic development of imperial self-representation in the third century (Septimius Severus to Numerian) by focussing on the information provided by imperial coinage. By assessing changes in reverse coin types, M. seeks to uncover broader developments in the presentation of the emperor. The project is an ambitious one, providing an overview of all imperial coin types struck over a period of almost one hundred years and collected within five volumes of the Roman Imperial Coinage (RIC) catalogues.
M. takes a quantitative approach, but one different from recent hoard based analyses (e.g. Noreña, JRS 91 [2001], 146–68). Recent scholarship within numismatics has focussed on coin hoards and finds as a tool to uncover the relative quantities of different coin types, a trend emerging from an acceptance that traditional catalogues like the RIC do not accurately reflect what coinage was circulating in the Roman Empire. M. instead argues that the RIC can provide a reliable, if rough, guide to relative quantity. M. admits that for the most part the RIC and coin hoards do not wholly correspond with each other, but that, for the category of divine associations, ‘one sees similar fluctuations in the percentages of coin types listed in the RIC and in the number of coins stemming from the hoards’ (p. 61). The problem is that M. only compares silver coin types and silver hoards that bear ‘divine associations’. There is no discussion of how the RIC catalogue compares with rarer gold or bronze hoards (arguably much more problematic), or how other categories of iconography (e.g. military) fare with this method. Given that M. seeks to challenge current orthodoxy, a more detailed discussion of the merit of the methodology might have been beneficial.
The decision only to examine reverse types recorded in the RIC none the less has benefit, since at some point a conscious decision was made to join a particular image to the emperor's portrait, resulting in an official statement of the regime. However, it becomes clear throughout the book that M. not only counts each reverse type in the RIC, but each obverse/reverse combination. For example, M. writes that twelve libertas types were struck for Caracalla after the murder of Geta in a.d. 213 (p. 245). The type of libertas was struck on gold, silver and bronze coinage in this year, with the same reverse type being combined with different obverse imagery. Each combination of obverse and reverse imagery is recorded in the RIC, but it is unclear whether these variations can be used to uncover the relative frequency of imagery in the Roman world. It is generally thought that within the Roman mint obverse dies could move from workshop to workshop. Thus the number of reverse/obverse combinations in Roman coinage may reflect more on daily mint operations than the relative quantities of coin types struck.
In order to facilitate comparisons across the period, M. places coin types into the categories ‘dynastic representation’, ‘military representation’, ‘divine association’, ‘saeculum aureum’, ‘euergesia’, ‘paradeigmata’, ‘restitutor-messages’, ‘elevation’, ‘non-specific representation’, ‘virtues’, ‘geographical messages’ and ‘unica’. Placing reverse types, which often carry a variety of imagery and associations, into a single category is tricky, and M. admits that the result is a ‘simplified rendering of the representation of third-century emperors on coins’ (p. 52). Types that may have been better grouped together are placed in separate categories (e.g. types referring to Moneta are in both the category ‘euergesia’ and ‘restitutor-messages’, Pax is placed in ‘military representation’ and ‘saeculum aureum’). The complex messages carried by coinage do not sit easily within these groups and M. often abandons the scheme in her discussion (e.g. the chapter on ‘divine association’ discusses the representation of Jupiter on all coin types, not only those types categorised by M. as such).
M. charts the ebb and flow of different messages on imperial coins across the third century. Gold, silver and bronze coins are grouped together, which unfortunately means that any difference in message between the metals is lost. Given that it is often thought that different denominations carried different messages for different audiences, the loss in information here is a significant one. The pie charts are at times difficult to read, since the small size of the key often means that two or three different categories are inadvertently assigned the same colour (e.g. both ‘divine association’ and ‘geographical messages’ are black according to the key on pp. 49, 231, 256). This, in addition to some oddities of English expression (e.g. ‘according to authors that hold this opinion, under whom Wallace-Hadrill and Wolters’, p. 32) suggest that the book might have benefitted from closer proofing.
However, there is much of interest for the student of the third century. The most common categories of representation are identified as military representation, divine association, virtues and saeculum aureum, each of which M. analyses in turn. The long-term perspective on military representations of the emperor uncovers many points that may repay closer analysis in the future: oddly, no military coin types were struck for Pertinax, profectio types appear to be limited to the reigns of Severus, Caracalla and Severus Alexander, and Maximinus Thrax appears to form a peak in numismatic military representation. In the third chapter divine propaganda is examined, and M. explores the foundations of the Jupiter/Hercules ideology that would later prove popular under the tetrarchy. M.'s approach suggests that Jupiter becomes a more frequent type from a.d. 253, and that Hercules becomes more common from the reign of Aurelian. Representations of the emperor as sacerdos fall as the century progresses and references to the title pontifex maximus decrease after Claudius Gothicus. M. links these developments to the emperor's gradual withdrawal from priestly colleges as Rome lost importance as an imperial centre. The connection is an intriguing one, and it would be of interest to know if the presentation of the emperor also changed in other media. M. then turns to a study of virtues, and notes that the most prominent were prouidentia, liberalitas, uirtus, pietas and aequitas. In the fifth chapter M. examines the theme of the saeculum aureum, focussing on the personifications Felicitas, Pax, Securitas and Salus.
The second half of the book presents three detailed case studies: Caracalla, Gallienus and Decius. M. demonstrates the radical change to Caracalla's numismatic image after he became sole ruler, which she connects to the fact that Severus, as the senior Augustus, controlled Caracalla's representation (p. 232). M. connects the appearance of Pluto on Caracalla's coins with the Constitutio Antoniniana (pp. 239–40). Further discussion is needed here: the identification of the god as Pluto is a disputed one, and simply because both the coin and the edict only appear in Caracalla's reign does not necessarily mean they were connected with one another. The analysis of Decius emphasises his stark military self-representation, and M. suggests that the relative absence of religious types in his reign indicates that Decius' famous edict was intended more to cement loyalty than to form part of a comprehensive religious programme (pp. 262–7). Finally, Gallienus' coin types appear to conform to the ‘general third-century picture’ (p. 272).
M. succeeds in highlighting the changing numismatic ideology of emperors throughout the third century. This changing array of imagery from emperor to emperor underlines the importance of coin evidence to any study of imperial representation.
