Katarzyna Balbuza, Flavian Restitution Coins (nummi restituti). Memorative and Ideological Aspects, in: Meministine? Memory and Oblivion in the Ancient World — the Ancient World in the Memory and Oblivion, Poznań 2019, p. 73-102

Katarzyna  Balbuza

Nummi restituti (Restitution coins) appeared in Roman imperial mintage thanks to the Flavian mints, operating in the times of Titus and Domitian. The authoress shares the thesis that the Restitution coins, apart from their commemorative function, expressing the tribute to memory — of pre-Flavian members of the Roman imperial house, their successes and virtues, as well as the Roman senate or earlier coin types — served also as a medium of ideological contents. Their production might have fulfilled an ideologically justified political need — an intention of ensuring the continuity of the pre-Flavian emperors’ politics and the legitimization of the Flavian dynasty. The authoress looks for a selection criterion of the prototypes for the Restitution coins and points to the possible key of choosing those prototypes which may have been military successes of predecessors crowned by triumphal honours.

▼ ✁✂✄✂☎✆✂✄ ? Memory and Oblivion in the Ancient World — the Ancient World in the Memory and Oblivion ✝✞✟✠✡✠☛☞✠✡✞? Memory and Oblivion in the Ancient World — the Ancient World in the Memory and Oblivion edited by Katarzyna Balbuza, Maria Musielak, Krzysztof Królczyk Poznań 2019 ➞ ✌✍✎✏✑✒✓✔✕ ✖✏ ✗✘✒✙✚✑✛✏✕✚✕ ✒✜✢ ✣✤✥✜✥ ✦✒✧★✒✚✙✒✧✩✥ ✙ ✪✍✩✘✥✘✒✫✬ Instytut Historii UAM, Poznań 2019 REVIEWERS Anna KOTŁOWSKA Małgorzata PAWLAK CHIEF EDITORS Katarzyna BALBUZA Maria MUSIELAK Krzysztof KRÓLCZYK COVER Katarzyna BALBUZA and Piotr NAMIOTA COVER ILLUSTRATION Giovanni Battista Piranesi (1720–1778), Veduta dell’ Arco di Costantino (475×708 mm) from Vedute di Roma, ca. 1778 © Creative Commons ISBN 978-83-66355-05-7 INSTYTUT HISTORII UAM ul. Uniwersytetu Poznańskiego 7, 61-614 Poznań tel. 61 829 14 64, e-mail: history@amu.edu.pl www.historia.amu.edu.pl PRINT Zakład Graﬁczny UAM, ul. Wieniawskiego 1, 61-712 Poznań CONTENTS ❋✭✮✯✰✭✮✱ (Katarzyna Balbuza, Maria Musielak) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 Adam Pałuchowski, Spensithios — dépositaire de la mémoire collective et expression de l’immédiateté dans les relations intracommunautaires. Ou l’éloge de la simplicité . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13 Agata Aleksandra Kluczek, The Signiﬁcance of Roman Coins for the Preservation and Construction of Memory . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 53 Katarzyna Balbuza, Flavian Restitution Coins (nummi restituti). Memorative and Ideological Aspects . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 73 Katarzyna Maksymiuk, Alexander of Macedon in the Memory of Sasanian Iran . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 103 Anastasiya Baukowa, Увіковічнені сни. Мотив сну в античній літературі . . 113 Maria Musielak, Lost Biography: Plutarch’s Epaminondas . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 133 Tomasz Polański, Oblivion: The Experience of the Contemporary Traveller in the Orient . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 151 Oleh Petrechko, Condemnation of Memory in the Soviet Union from the Perspective of Ancient Rome . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 177 Foreword ➇✲✳✴✵✶✵✷✷✳ ✸ ✴✳✴✹✺✵✸✻ ✼ ✽✺✹✾✳ ✾✿✳ ❀✹✴✸✶ ✷❁✿✹❂✸✺ ✸✶❃ ✽✺✵✾✳✺ ✹❄ ❅✺✳✸✾ ✳✺❆- dition Marcus Terentius Varro in De lingua latina (6, 49), deﬁning the word meminisse as the ability to remember. The concepts of memory and oblivion are immutably associated with the function of the human mind, which can memorize, store, process and then reproduce everything that it experiences. The research on memory presented in this volume, however, is not only about the psychic’s ability or mental quality of the mind, but also about external factors, and thus all the socio-cultural conditions aﬀecting the process of memorizing. The phenomenon of memory accompanies man from the dawn of history in various aspects, scopes, and on various levels, in the social (personal, individual), cultural or political dimensions. For about a century, the phenomenon of memory has remained the subject of scientiﬁc discussion, in which the German theory of social and collective memory has played a signiﬁcant role. Its foundations were laid in the twentieth century by the German historian and art theoretician and cultural expert Aby Warburg, as well as by the French sociologist and philosopher Maurice Halbwachs — independently of each other. This issue was later developed in the research by a contemporary German Egyptologist and classical archaeologist, Jan Assmann — the ﬁrst researcher who used the term ‘cultural memory’ to describe the phenomenon he analysed. He developed his ideas in his books from 1992 and 2000 entitled: Das kulturelle Gedächtnis: Schrift, Erinnerung und politische Identität in frühen Hochkulturen1 ❇ J. Assmann, Das kulturelle Gedächtnis. Schrift, Erinnerung und politische Identität in frühen Hochkulturen, München 1992 (lots of editions: 1997, 1999, 2000, 2002, 2005, 2008, 2013; 8 ❈oreword and Religion und kulturelles Gedächtnis: Zehn Studien.2 In his view, ‘cultural memory’ is: a “collective concept for all knowledge that directs behaviour and experience in the interactive framework of a society and one that obtains through generations in repeated societal practice and initiation”.3 The terms ‘social memory’, ‘collective memory’ or ‘cultural memory’ have proved particularly useful in reﬂecting on the problem of remembering and reciting the past by ancient societies, which was noticed by Assmann and later historians, though the latter with some delay. Memory studies have been very popular in historical research on ancient societies recently, since the end of the twentieth century.4 Due to their interdisciplinary nature, they are currently integrating representatives of various scientiﬁc disciplines, not only historians. Martin Bommer wrote P❉❊●❍■ ❏❑●▲●❉◆❍❖ ◗❘ ❙❍❍❚❯◆◆❱ Pamięć kulturowa. Pismo, zapamiętywanie i polityczna tożsamość w cywilizacjach starożytnych, tłum. A. Kryczyńska-Pham, Warszawa 2008, 2015, 2016). 2 Idem, Religion und kulturelles Gedächtnis: Zehn Studien, München 2000. 3 J. Assmann, Collective Memory and Cultural Identity, transl. J. Czaplicka, New German Critique 65, 1995, p. 126 (p. 125–133). 4 The number of scientiﬁc works devoted to memory and oblivion in the ancient world is enormous. I will limit myself here to the following choice: R.L. Bates, Memoirs and the Perception of History in the Roman Republic, Phil. Diss. Pennsylvania 1983 (Microﬁlm); H. Cancik, H. Mohr, Erinnerung/ Gedächtnis, in: Handbuch religionswissenschaftlicher Grundbegriﬀe, Bd. II, Stuttgart 1990, p. 299–323; Mnemosyne. Formen und Funktionen der kulturellen Erinnerung, ed. by A. Assmann, D. Hardt, Frankfurt am Main 1991; J. Assmann, Das kulturelle Gedächtnis…; idem, Religion und kulturelles Gedächtnis, München 2000; idem, Cultural Memory and Early Civilization, Cambridge 2011 (Polish editions: J. Assmann, Pamięć kulturowa: pismo, zapamiętywanie i polityczna tożsamość w cywilizacjach starożytnych, przekł. A. Kryczyńska-Pham, red. R. Traba, Warszawa 2008, 2015, 2016); J. Le Goﬀ, Geschichte und Gedächtnis, Frankfurt am Main 1992; Restropektive. Konzepte von Vergangenheit in der griechisch-römischen Antike, hrsg. von M. Flashar, München 1996; G.S. Shrimpton, History and Memory in Ancient Greece, Montreal 1997; A. Assmann, Erinnerungsräume. Formen und Wandlungen des kulturellen Gedächtnisses, München 1999; E. Flaig, Soziale Bedingungen des kulturellen Vergessens, in: Vorträge aus dem Warburg-Haus, vol. III, Berlin 1999, p. 31–100; J.J. Berns, Gedächtnislehren und Gedächtniskünste in Antike und Frühmittelalter (5. Jahrhundert v. Chr. bis 9. Jahrhundert n. Chr.). Dokumentsammlung mit Übersetzung, Kommentar und Nachwort, hrsg. von J.J. Berns, unter Mitarbeit von R.G. Czapla, S. Arend, Tübingen 2003; U. Walter, Memoria und res publica. Zur Geschichtskultur im republikanischen Rom, Frankfurt am Main 2004; A. Gowing, Empire and Memory. The Representation of the Roman Republic in Imperial Culture, Cambridge 2005; M. Bommas, Cultural Memory and Identity in Ancient Societies, London 2011; idem, Memory and Urban Religion in the Ancient World, London 2012; Historical & Religious Memory in the Ancient World, ed. by B. Dignas, R.R.R. Smith, Oxford 2012; Memoria Romana. Memory in Rome and Rome in Memory, ed. by K. Galinsky, Ann Arbor 2014; Memory in Ancient Rome and Early Christianity, ed by. K. Galinsky, Oxford 2016. ❲oreword 9 ✐❳ ❨✐❩ ❬❭❪❫❴❵❪ ❛❜ ❛❨❪ ❝❭❩❛ ❞❜❡❢❣❪ ❜❫ ❛❨❪ ❳❪❤ ❩❪❭✐❪❩ Cultural Memory and Iden- tity in Ancient Societies: “The motor of cultural memory is actively practiced memory based on an agreed set of data, rather than tradition. In tracing shifts of meaning within ancient society, both cultural memory and cultural forgetting oﬀer purposeful tools to identify the courses of history through both elite and non-elite perspectives.”5 The Latin phrase in the title of this volume was inspired by a conversation between an unknown Roman and Tiberius6 which is quoted by Seneca the Younger in his De beneﬁciis. The conversation is thought to have taken place shortly after Tiberius took power. Roman, as is clear from the talk — the former companion of the emperor — intended to remind him of his earlier merits towards Tiberius. Therefore, he began a conversation from the word meministi (“do you remember…”). The emperor, apparently reluctant to talk, quickly interrupted his former companion and replied shortly — non memini […], quid fuerim (“I do not remember what I was”). Seneca’s comment on this situation is: optanda erat oblivion. The Emperor’s wish was to forget. This volume deals with the way in which, and in what form, the memory of the ancient world functioned within the framework of ancient societies and in later epochs (reception). Adam Pałuchowski (Spensithios — dépositaire de la mémoire collective et expression de l’immédiateté dans les relations intracommunautaires. Ou l’éloge de la simplicité), starting from a meticulous source analysis devoted to the Cretan inscription dated to the end of the 6th century (SEG XXVII, 1977, 631), considers the meaning of the wordings μναμονεῦϝην (to remember) and ποινικάζεν (to write in Phoenician letters). He shows what role was played at the interface between the writing and the oral tradition by Spensithios, ποινικαστάς (scribe), contracting with the Dataleis community. Finally, the author draws conclusions about the social and political order of the organization of human communities, not only the archaic polis on Crete. The problem of memory and commemoration in ancient literature can be found in two succeeding texts. Anastasiya Baukowa (Immortal dreams. The motive of dream in the ancient literature) writes about the dream motif in ancient texts, starting with the ❥ M. Bommas, Cultural Memory and Identity…, p. viii. 6 Sen. Ben. V, 25.2. 10 ❦oreword ✇❧♠ ♥♦ ✇♣♥q♣ rst❧✉✈ ✇tst ①st✈t♦②tr ♥♦ Homer’s Iliad and Odyssey, as well as in Theogony by Hesiod. She juxtaposes these images with the picture of the cave inhabited by the personalized Dream (Somnus) and his sons who assume in human dreams the various ﬁgures depicted in Ovid’s Metamorphoses. The authoress draws attention to the treatment of dreams in Aristotle’s writings and the signiﬁcance of the ancient dream books, and then she focuses on the dreams described by Plutarch in his Lives and the motives that led him, while he was immortalizing these visions. Maria Musielak (Lost biography: Plutarch’s Epaminondas) also deals with the biographical books by Plutarch, namely his lost work dedicated to Epaminondas, the Boeotian Boeotarch of the 4th c. BC. She compiles preserved data related to this text, and some attempts to determine when and in what circumstances it could have been eliminated from the Parallel Lives series, the hitherto eﬀorts to reproduce its contents. The authoress considers the information contained in Plutarch’s other writings, which indicate what he could have been focusing on when writing about Epaminondas. The following two articles have been devoted to the problems of memory in the Roman numismatics of the empire period. Agata Aleksandra Kluczek (The Signiﬁcance of Roman Coins for the Preservation and Construction of Memory) discusses various forms of commemoration through Roman monetary issues and then focuses on mythical themes, coins with images related to constructed history: the tradition of the origins of Rome reduced to symbols. The authoress analyses the images placed on the reverses: of Aeneas with Anchises and the palladium, Romulus and Remus fed by a she-wolf — a variant with Roma sitting on shields and ﬂying birds interpreted as augurarium Romuli and a variant with Roma sitting on seven hills and personiﬁcation of the Tiber — and repeating these ideas in diﬀerent political and social conditions. Restoration coins form a basis of Katarzyna Balbuza’s considerations (Flavian Restoration Coins [nummi restituti]. Memorative and Ideological Aspects) on building memory in the Flavian emissions of Titus and Domitian. The analysis of ideas conveyed through the images and inscriptions on individual restoration coins of these emperors is aimed at establishing the criterion of selecting numismats constituting a prototype of these coins. The authoress presents the resulting guidelines as for the goals that were used to promote such and no other content, by referring to the political heritage of the predecessors. ③oreword 11 ④⑤⑥⑤⑦⑧⑨⑩⑤ ❶⑤❷❸⑨❹❺❻❷ ❼Alexander of Macedon in the Memory of Sasanian Iran) on the one hand shows Zoroastrian religious texts accusing Alexander the Great of destroying the copy of Avesta owned by Darius, and on the other — messages from the Sasanid court that legitimized the reign of this dynasty as the one rebuilding the Iranian tradition destroyed by Alexander, the main enemy of Iran. This set of texts constructs a negative memory about the Macedonian, contrary to his positive image, as part of the story about Eskandar–nāma built only later in the Arab culture. Tomasz Polański (Oblivion: The Experience of the Contemporary Traveller in the Orient), from the perspective of a traveller in the areas of Anatolia, writes about Phrygian, the late-Hittite, Kommagenian rulers, about history and places that have been completely or partially forgotten, and about ancient material remains, in the so-called Midasshehri, in Gordion, on inscriptions from Nisantaş and Beyköy, hierothesia in Nemrud Dağ, Kara Kuş or Sesönk, on the Hellenistic mausoleum in Belevi. The narrative ends with the memory of those destroyed and forgotten in places where they were once erected — once important early Christian places of worship, the Church of Divine Wisdom and Martyrion of Saint Thomas the Apostle in Urfa, the Koimesis Church with late Byzantine mosaics in Nikaia/Iznik, and the remains of the Armenian cemetery in Pazarcik. Also Oleh Petrechko, dealing with the oﬃcial condemnation of the political opponents by the rulers, devoted his article (Condemnation of Memory in the Soviet Union from the Perspective of Ancient Rome) to the problem of forgetting. It focuses on comparing the methods used by the Soviet regime against the “enemy of the people” with the Roman “damnatio memoriae”, showing the similarities and diﬀerences between them. The authors’ texts about remembering and forgetting are based on various groups and types of sources. They use inscriptions, literary texts, antique coins, and material remnants. The multi-faceted nature of the issues of memory and oblivion as a feature of human activity is presented here. Unless otherwise stated, the source abbreviations used in the book are consistent with The Oxford Classical Dictionary, while the abbreviations of journals and literature are according to L’année philologique. Katarzyna Balbuza, Maria Musielak Katarzyna Balbuza Adam Mickiewicz University in Poznań Uniwersytet im. Adama Mickiewicza w Poznaniu Flavian Restitution Coins (nummi restituti). Memorative and Ideological Aspects ❆ ✁✂✄☎✆✂ Nummi restituti (Restitution coins) appeared in Roman imperial mintage thanks to the Flavian mints, operating in the times of Titus and Domitian. The authoress shares the thesis that the Restitution coins, apart from their commemorative function, expressing the tribute to memory — of pre-Flavian members of the Roman imperial house, their successes and virtues, as well as the Roman senate or earlier coin types — served also as a medium of ideological contents. Their production might have fulﬁlled an ideologically justiﬁed political need — an intention of ensuring the continuity of the pre-Flavian emperors’ politics and the legitimization of the Flavian dynasty. The authoress looks for a selection criterion of the prototypes for the Restitution coins and points to the possible key of choosing those prototypes which may have been military successes of predecessors crowned by triumphal honours. Keywords: nummi restituti, Restitution coins, Roman coins, Roman ideology, consecration, memory, remembrance, viri triumphales, Flavian dynasty, Vespasian, Titus, Domitian Nummi restituti (Restitution coins) appeared in the Roman imperial mintage because of the Flavian mints operating in the times of Titus and Domitian. The thus initiated custom had been contitnued by the Antonine dynasty, mainly by Nerva and Trajan, as well as, to a lesser extent, by Hadrian, Marcus Aurelius and Lucius Verus.1 The common features of Restitution coins from the times ✯ I thank Classical Numismatic Group, Inc. for their consent to my using the photographs of the coins free of charge. This article is partially based on my previous ﬁndings, published in Polish as: K. Balbuza, Monety restytucyjne cesarza Tytusa. Kilka uwag o rzymskim mennictwie restytucyjnym, Ethos 31, 2018, p. 87–100. 1 On the discussion over etymological matters and the meaning of nummi restituti phrase, see the article K. Balbuza, Monety restytucyjne cesarza Tytusa…, p. 87. The Restitution coins 74 ❑✝✞✝✟✠✡☛✝ ☞✝✌✍✎✠✝ of Titus and Domitian consist in the fact that similarly to their prototypes they were struck in bronze and are signed with the names of their issuers — Titus and Domitian accordingly. Moreover, they bear extremely distinct, graphic or verbal allusions to the already dead representatives of the Roman imperial house.2 But their legends contain verbal information in the abbreviated or full form that they are restituted.3 Both Flavians commemorated the same predecessors, while Domitian narrowed their circle, having patterned himself upon the Restitution types of his elder brother. Nummi restituti became a subject of scholar reﬂection already in the 16th century. However, these coins, imitating the ones struck in the age of the early Roman Empire, and in the case of Trajan also of the Republic, still constitute a considerate challenge for the scholars as regards an interpretation (and not only).4 In the long discussion over the function of Restitution coins many suggestions have been proposed. In the beginning of the 21st century, they were summarised extensively and in details by Holger Komnick, who speciﬁed four main interpretational directions of the function of the described artifacts: ♦✏ Marcus Aurelius and Lucius Verus in veneration of Mark Antony from ca. 169 AD: RIC III, M. Aurelius 443. 2 I base on the current catalogue of Restitution coins in The Roman Imperial Coinage, vol. II.1: From AD 69–96, Vespasian to Domitian, ed. by I.A. Carradice, T.V. Buttrey, London 2007, p. 223–233 (restitutions of Titus) and p. 326–328 (restitutions of Domitian), in concordance with the catalogue of Holger Komnick, Die Restitutionsmünzen der frühen Kaiserzeit. Aspekte der Kaiserlegitimation, Berlin 2001. On the Flavian Restitution coins see especially H. Mattingly, The ‘Restored’ Coins of Titus, Domitian, and Nerva, NC 20, 1920, p. 177–207; idem, Coins of the Roman Empire in the British Museum, vol. II, p. lxxvii–lxxviii; J.E. Blamberg, The Public Image Projected by the Roman Emperors (A.D. 69–117) as Reﬂected in Contemporary Imperial Coinage [microﬁlm], Michigan 1976; P.N. Schulten, Die Typologie der römischen Konsekrationsprägungen, Frankfurt am Main 1979; H. Komnick, Die Restitutionsmünzen…, p. 9–99; RIC II.1, p. 191–193. 3 There are the following versions of the abbreviations of restituit on coins: RES (Titus), REST (Titus, Domitian), RESTIT (Titus), RESTITV (Titus), RESTITVT (Titus, Domitian). 4 See. S. Erizzo, Discorso sopra le medaglie degli antichi, con la dichiaratione delle monete consulari & delle medaglie degli imperatori Romani, Vinegia 21571 (1st ed. 1559), p. 5, 86; F. Gnecchi, Appunti di numismatica romana. XLIV. Sulle restituzioni, RIN 10, 1897, p. 123–157. The summerized discussion over the Restitution coins: H. Komnick, Die Restitutionsmünzen…, p. 9–26, 158–178. I am interested here in the authority, typology and iconography of the Restitution coins. I shall not be dealing, however, with the studies, mints, weight standards, or coin circulation. These matters were elaborated by Komnick (Die Restitutionsmünzen…, passim). On the mints see especially RIC II.1, p. 191–193. ❋lavian Restitution Coins (nummi restituti)… 75 (1) Restitution coins reminded about earlier, original pre-Flavian imperial issues, that were worn by use and therefore melted down and withdrawn from circulation; at the same time, metal from these melted coins was to be used for the production of new ones;5 (2) Restitution coins were struck as an answer to antiquarian interests or resulted from the request for old coin types; (3) Restitution coins were struck as a commemoration of important historical events or persons, and also to honour the latter; (4) Restitution coins were struck as a result of propagandistic actions, to present individual issuers as legal and ideal rulers.6 Having taken into account the aforementioned trends in interpretation, I will focus on the two latter, in my opinion — the most convincing ones. After Sebastiano Erizzo in the 16th century, the thesis about the comemmorative function of the Restitution coins was followed up eg. by Harold Mattingly, whose paper, published in 1920, remains a springboard for any kind of discussions over the Flavian Restitution coins.7 Not only did this historian believe that these coins were to commemorate the personalities depicted on the obverses (“I regard the ‘restored’ coins as having been deliberately issued by the reigning emperor to revive in the popular mind the memory of earlier princes”), but also he had no doubts that these issues must have been ideologically bound to the issuers (“the lack of any close personal connection with the dead led Titus to ‘restore’ their memories in this form, instead of simply striking coins with their name and portrait”).8 He also asserted that male and female predecessors were honoured (“deemed worthy”) with this group of restitutions. On another ocassion he expressed an opinion that the Restitution coins were meant also to commemorate old types of coins.9 Up till now, researchers identify themselves ✺ This view, known to the academic research even earlier, based on the source of Cassius Dio (Cass. Dio Epit. 68, 15, 31), was spread by H. Mattingly, The Restored Coins of Trajan, NC 6, 1926, p. 232–278. Recently: RIC II.1, p. 192. As I.A. Carradice and T.V. Buttrey write: “It is tempting to link the series to a systematic withdrawal of the original issues being restored, especially since this seems to be what happened with Trajan’s later restoration of precious metal coins.” The summarized discussion on this subject: H. Komnick, Die Restitutionsmünzen…, p. 17–26. 6 H. Komnick, Die Restitutionsmünzen…, p. 26. 7 H. Mattingly, The ‘Restored’ Coins of Titus…, p. 177–207. 8 Similarly, F. Panvini Rosati in: La moneta romana imperiale da Augusto a Commodo, a cura di F. Panvini Rosati, Bologna 1981, p. 82, No. 247. 9 H. Mattingly, Coins of the Roman Empire…, p. lxxvii. 76 ✑✒✓✒✔✕✖✗✒ ✘✒✙✚✛✕✒ with the view about the commemorative function of restitution in various contexts.10 Typological analysis of Titus’ and Domitian’s Restitution coins, taking into consideration the forms of their legend and iconography, points out the proﬁle of a speciﬁc group of predecessors favoured by the Flavians as well as the aspects of their activity. In the case of Titus, the bronze coins struck in the times of Tiberius, Caligula, Claudius and Galba were restituted. Already at that time some of them passed as the issues of being an honoriﬁcation of the living or the deceased members of the imperial family. In Tiberius’ days, these were the coins commemorating the departed Divus Augustus (d. 14 AD),11 and the then still living Livia Drusilla (d. 29 AD) or Drusus Caesar (d. 23 AD).12 During the reign of Caligula only the dead — Marcus Agrippa (d. 12 BC) and Germanicus (d. 19 AD) — were honoured in this way,13 and in the times of Claudius also the dead — Nero Drusus (d. 9 BC), Germanicus again and Agryppina I (d. 33 AD).14 However, also these types of coins would be restituted, which were in circulation during the reigns of Tiberius, Claudius, Galba and honoured no one else but the issuer, commemorating particular events, deities or the virtues possesed by these emperors. ✶✜ Idem, The ‘Restored’ Coins of Titus…, p. 183. Similarly, M. Bernhart, Handbuch zur Münzkunde der römischen Kaiserzeit, Halle (Saale) 1926, p. 265; H. Mattingly, Coins of the Roman Empire…, p. lxviii; K. Regling, Restituierte Münzen, in: F. v. Schrötter, Wörterbuch der Münzkunde, Berlin 1930, p. 563–564 (the commemoration of the pre-Flavian emperors and members of the imperial family); A.N. Zadoks-Josephus Jitta, W.A. van Es, Muntwijzer voor de Romeinse tijd, ’s-Gravenhage 1962, p. 47; W. Weiser, S C als Revers einer Münze der ersten Emission aus Neokaisareia in Galatia unter Traianus, SMB 38, 1988, p. 9–12; O. Hekster, Emperors and Ancestors. Roman Rulers and the Constraints of Tradition, Oxford 2015, p. 56. Restitution coins as a commemoration of signiﬁcant historic events: eg. F. Gnecchi, Appunti di numismatica romana..., p. 134; S. Mirone, Numismatica, Milano 1930, p. 183–184; M. Grant, Roman Anniversary Issues. An Exploratory Study of the Numismatic and Medallic Commemoration of Anniversary Years 49 B.C.–A.D. 375, Cambridge 1950, p. 92 (Titus) and p. 96–97 (Domitian). 11 RIC I2, Tib. 49 (Sestertius from 22/ 23 AD, Divus Augustus on the obverse); 77 (Dupondius from 22/ 23 AD); 80–81 (Asses from 22/ 23–30 (?) AD); 82 (As from 34–37 AD). 12 RIC I2, Tib. 43 and 46 (Dupondius from 22/ 23 AD with Iustitia and Pietas on the obverse, for Livia Drusilla); 45 (As from 22/ 23 AD, Drusus Caesar on the obverse). 13 RIC I2, Calig. 58 (As from 37/ 41 AD, for Marcus Agrippa); 43 (As from 39/ 40 AD, for Germanicus). 14 RIC I2, Claud. 93, 109 (Sestertii from ca. 41/ 50 (+?) and ca. 50 (+?)/ 54 AD accordingly, for Nero Drusus); 106 (As from ca. 50 (+?)/ 54 AD, for Germanicus); 102 (Sestertius from ca. 50 (+?)/ 54 AD, for Agrippina I). ✢lavian Restitution Coins (nummi restituti)… 77 ❚aking into account the reverse legends of Titus’ Restitution coins, composed of the imperial titulature of this emperor, Komnick has divided them into two groups: Komnick Group I.1–I.2 and Komnick Group II. The coins in the ﬁrst group have been additionaly divided into two subgroups.15 The reverses of the ﬁrst subgroup (Komnick, Titus 1.0–14.1) contain the full titulature of Titus, which consists of the following elements: the ﬁliation Divi ﬁlius (DIVI VESP(asiani) F(ilius)) as well as the numbering of his consulship (COS VIII) (the latter enables the precise dating of the coins to 80/ 81 AD).16 The second subgroup lacks part of the titulature elements, including the numbering of the consulship; however, it maintains the ﬁliation Divi ﬁlius.17 The obverses of the coins described like this, on which Titus informs about his exceptional status, as a son of Divus Vespasianus, are decorated with images of Divus Augustus, ‘Livia’ as Justitia, Pietas or Salus, Tiberius, Drusus Caesar, Nero Drusus, Germanicus, Agrippina I, Claudius or Galba. The reverses of these issues contain no iconographic motifs. Apart from the legends, their only visual element comes down to the abbreviation S(enatus) C(onsulto) placed in the centre of the ﬁeld (Fig. 1–11).18 The second group of Titus’ Restitution coins (Komnick Group II) neither shows the ﬁliation Divi ﬁlius in the titulature, nor the dating element in the form of numbering of the consulship. The reverses here, however, are iconographically interesting19 — the representations of deities and virtues: Victory ﬂying with shield inscribed S(enatus) P(opulus) / Q(ue) R(omanus) (Divus Augustus) (Fig. 12),20 Neptune with dolphin and trident (Marcus Agrippa),21 Ceres with corn ears and torch (Claudius, Titus, Julia Titii, Domitian Caesar), Spes with ✣✤ RIC II.1, Titus 399–444 = Komnick, Titus 1.0–29.0. 16 RIC II.1, Titus 399–423 = Komnick, Titus 1.0–14.1. Dated to 80/ 81 AD: H. Mattingly, The ‘Restored’ Coins of Titus…, p. 184; H. Komnick, Die Restitutionsmünzen…, p. 66–71; RIC II.1, p. 191, 223. 17 RIC II.1, Titus 424–444 = Komnick, Titus 15.0–29.0. 18 With two exceptions, where between the letters S and C (in ﬁeld) is the winged caduceus (RIC II.1, Titus 435–436 = Komnick, Titus 22.0 i 23.0). 19 Reverses lacked the ﬁliation Divi Filius of Titus in the titulature: RIC II.1, Titus 445–497 = Komnick, Titus 30.0–62.0. 20 RIC II.1, Titus 445–448 = Komnick, Titus 35.0–37.1. 21 RIC II.1, Titus 470 = Komnick, Titus 52.0. ★✩✪✫ ✬✫ Divus Augustus. Æ Sestertius. Rome mint. Restitution issue struck under Titus, 80–81 AD ✭✮✰✱ ✲✱ Divus Augustus. Æ Sestertius. Rome mint. Restitution issue struck under Titus, 80–81 AD ✭✮✰✱ ✳✱ ✴✮✵✮✷ ✸✹✻✼✮✽✽✷✱ Æ Dupondius. Rome mint. Restitution issue struck under Titus, 80–81 AD ❬✥✦✧ ❂❃❄❅ ❇❅ ❈❃❉❃❊ ●❍■❏❃▲▲❊❅ ▼◆❖P ◗P ❘◆❙❯❱◆❲❳P Æ Dupondius. Rome mint. Restitution issue struck under Titus, 80–81 AD Æ Sestertius. Rome mint. Restitution issue struck under Titus, 80–81 AD ▼◆❖P ❨P ❘◆❙❯❱◆❲❳P Æ As. Rome mint. Restitution issue struck under Titus, 80–81 AD ✾✿❀❁ ❴❵❛❜ ❝❜ ❞❵❡❢❣❵❤✐❜ Æ As. Rome mint. Restitution issue struck under Titus, 80–81 AD ❥❦❧♠ ♥♠ ♣qrsrs t✉✈s✉q♠ ❥❦❧♠ ✇♠ ①✈q②✉③❦④rs♠ Æ As. Rome mint. Restitution issue struck under Titus, 80–81 AD Æ As. Rome mint. Restitution issue struck under Titus, 80–81 AD ❩❭❪❫ ⑨⑩❶❷ ⑦❸❷ ❹❶❺⑩❻❻⑩❼❽ ❾❷ ❿ ➀➁➂➃ ➄➄➃ ➅➆➇➈➆➃ ➉ ➀➁➂➃ ➄➊➃ Sestertius. Rome mint. Restitution issue struck under Titus, 80–81 AD Sestertius. Thracian mint (?). Restitution issue struck under Titus, 80–81 AD Divus Augustus. Æ Dupondius. Rome mint. Restitution issue struck under Titus, 80–81 AD ⑤⑥⑦⑧ 82 ➋➌➍➌➎➏➐➑➌ ➒➌➓➔→➏➌ ➣↔↕➙➛ ↔➛ Constantia Augusti with a spear (Claudius) (Fig. 13),22 Minerva with spear and shield (Claudius, Domitian Caesar) (Fig. 14),23 and Libertas and Pax (Galba) (Fig. 15).24 This group includes the restitutions devoted to Divus Augustus Pater, the reverses of which contain the images of an altar with the inscription PROVIDENT(ia)25 and an eagle standing the front on a globe with spreading wings (Fig. 16)26 or of an eagle standing front on a thunderbolt with spreading wings (Divus Augustus) (Fig. 17).27 The restitutions for Tiberius in turn present a rudder and globe.28 The reverse iconography of the coins belonging to the second group indicates varied services to the state and society as well as it deﬁnes the status and position of the persons depicted on the obverses. These human depictions are fewer here than in the ﬁrst group, as there are ﬁve only: Divus Augustus, Marcus Agrippa, Tiberius, Claudius and Galba. The Restitution coins of Titus’ successor, Domitian, fail in introducing new heroes, as they repeat Titus’ restitutions, except that this group is decidedly more modest — resulting in the narrower set of honoured predecessors. There are merely ten types of coins which on their obverses commemorate Divus Augustus (Fig. 18), Marcus Agrippa, Tiberius, Drusus Caesar, Germanicus and Claudius (in relations to the heroes and heroins honoured in the restitutions of Titus, we lack here Nero Drusus, Galba, Livia and Agrippina I). Contrary to Titus’ restitutions, the coins of Domitian represent just ﬁve variants of reverse legends, including scarcely one with the ﬁliation Divi ﬁlius, occurring on three types of coins, commemorating three representatives of the preceding dynasty — Tiberius, Drusus Caesar and Germanicus.29 ➜➜ Ceres Augusta: RIC II.1, Titus 478–479 = Komnick, Titus 57.0–57.1; mules with Flavian obverses, reverses of Claudius: RIC II.1, Titus 491–494 = Komnick, Titus H b–d. Spes Augusta: RIC II.1, Titus 472–477 = Komnick, Titus 53.1–56.0; Constantiae Augusti: RIC II.1, Titus 480–482 = Komnick, Titus 58–V.58.1. 23 RIC II.1, Titus 483–490 = Komnick, Titus 59.0–60.3; a mule with Flavian obverse, reverse of Claudius: RIC II.1, Titus 495 = Komnick, Titus H e. 24 RIC II.1, Titus 496–497 = Komnick, Titus 61.0–62.0. 25 RIC II.1, Titus 449–457 = Komnick, Titus 30.0–32.1, 38.0–40.0. 26 RIC II.1, Titus 458–467 = Komnick, Titus 33.0–34.0, 41.0–49.1. 27 RIC II.1, Titus 468–469 = Komnick, Titus 50.0–51.0. 28 RIC II.1, Titus 471 = Komnick, Titus — no entry. 29 Reverse legends on restitutions of Domitian: (1) IMP D VESP AVG REST (RIC II.1, Dom. 88 = Komnick, Dom. 1.0), (2) IMP D CAES DIVI VESP F AVG REST (RIC II.1, Dom. 826–828 = Komnick, Dom. 5.0–7.0), (3) IMP D CAES AVG RESTITVIT (RIC II.1, Dom. 824 = Komnick, ➝lavian Restitution Coins (nummi restituti)… 83 ➞he interpretation of the Flavian restitutions is not an easy task due to the unique selectiveness of restituted prototypes in terms of their subjects. It is hard to give a reason why these and not the other persons, deities, virtues, or motifs were recreated on the coins in Flavians’ times and why in a given and not another conﬁguration, since it is diﬃcult to assume that the restitutions are a collection of coin prototypes selected at random. Thus, let us search again into the Flavian Restitution coins in the context of their commemorative as well as their ideological signiﬁcance. The consecration constitutes one of the subjects picked up most often as regards the Flavian Restitution coins; this matter appears not only in the age of both the Flavians but also of Nerva (then the only theme applied)30 and Trajan.31 As it was observed earlier, the Titus restitutions fall into two categories owing to the form of the imperial titulature put on the reverses. Interesting enough, each of the categories deals with a question of consecration, both in words and in visual form. It occurs also on the reverses of Domitian’s Restitution coins, yet to a modest extent. Out of ﬁve forms applied there, only one contains information about the ﬁliation Divi ﬁlius and occurs on three types of Domitian’s coins.32 As it was noticed above, the restitution types of Titus, referring by means of the ﬁliation Divi ﬁlius to the subject of Vespasian’s consecration (DIVI VESP(asiani) F(ilius)),33 make up the ﬁrst group of Titus’ restitutions. This group contains also issues whose theme is directly dedicated to the consecration of Augustus. These coins depict the dead and consecrated emperor sit- ➟➠➡. 3.0–3.1), (4) IMP D CAES AVG REST (Komnick, Dom. 8.0 = RIC II.1, Dom. — no entry), (5) IMP D AVG REST (RIC II.1, Dom. 823, 825, 829, 830 = Komnick, Dom. 2.0, 4.0, 9.0, 10.0). 30 Komnick, Nerva 1.0–11.1. 31 The group of Trajan’s restitutions is the biggest and consists of as many as 74 coin types, ten out of which are consecration types: Divus Iulius Caesar (Komnick, Trajan 54.0), Divus Augustus (Komnick, Trajan 57.0), Divus Claudius (Komnick, Trajan 60.0–61.0), Divus Vespasianus (Komnick, Trajan 66.0–67.0), Divus Titus (Komnick, Trajan 70.0) and Divus Nerva (Komnick, Trajan 73.0–74.0, *H.d). 32 Komnick, Dom. 5.0–7.0. Legends on Domitian’s restitutions are as follows: IMP D VESP AVG REST (Komnick, Dom. 1.0), IMP D CAES DIVI VESP F AVG REST (Komnick, Dom. 5.0, 6.0, 7.0), IMP D CAES AVG RESTITVIT (Komnick, Dom. 3.0)/ IMP D IVIVI(?) AVG RESTITVIT (Komnick, Dom. 3.1), IMP D CAES AVG REST (Komnick, Dom. 8.0), IMP D AVG REST (Komnick, Dom. 2.0, 4.0, 9.0, 10.0). 33 H. Mattingly, Coins of the Roman Empire…, vol. II, p. lxxviii. ➢➤➥➤➦➧➨➩➤ ➫➤➭➯➲➧➤ 84 ➳➵➸➺ ➻➸ ➳➼➽ ➳➼➾➻➸➽➚ ➼➻➪➶➵➸➺ ➹ branch or patera. The legend surrounding this image — DIVVS AVGVSTVS PATER — undoubtedly identiﬁes a hero of an iconographic motif (Fig. 1–2). The matter of Augustus’ consecration is also the leitmotif of restitutions rating among the second group of Titus’ Restitution coins, deprived of the ﬁliation Divi ﬁlius in the reverse titulature. Almost half of the obverses of the restitution types commemorate as a whole Divus Augustus (legend: DIVVS AVGVSTVS PATER and radiate the head of Augustus). Their reverses show a motif of an altar inscribed PROVIDENT(ia), images of an eagle standing on a globe or on a thunderbolt (Fig. 17), or Victory ﬂying with a shield inscribed S(enatus) P(opulus) Q(ue) R(omanus) (Fig. 12). However, similarly as on Titus’ coins of the discussed category, also Domitian’s ones contain restitutions commemorating Divus Augustus (DIVVS AVGVSTVS PATER).34 These are duplicated restitution issues of Titus presenting Victory with a shield, an altar inscribed PROVIDENT(ia) and an eagle standing on a globe (Fig. 18). The question arises, why Titus, and then Domitian, decided to commemorate barely two consecrated predecessors (skipping the consecration of Claudius, the deceased imperial wives and other male and female members of the dynasty). To compare: in the aforementioned group of Trajan’s restitutions each consecrated emperor had been commemorated (Divi: Augustus, Claudius, Vespasianus, Titus, Nerva), and even deiﬁed Julius Caesar (divus Iulius). It is worth paying attention to the fact that those of Trajan’s restitutions which contain simultaneous reference to the consecrations of both predecessors and founders of the dynasty — Augustus and Vespasian (information about divus Vespasianus in the titulature of Titus on the reverse and the monumental motto DIVVS AVGVSTVS PATER in the obverse legend) — could have been aimed at placing Titus in an analogous relation to Vespasian as once (that is after Augustus’ death) Tiberius presented himself towards his consecrated father.35 In turn, the Restitution coins lacking the ﬁliation Divi ﬁlius, hence not mentioning Divus Vespasianus, but recollecting Divus Augustus, would place Titus in unambiguous, i.e. without the agency of the deiﬁed Vespasian, relations towards the ﬁrst Princeps. Therefore, Titus, similarly to Vespasian before him, created himself as a continuator of a vision of the state and power represented ➘➴ Komnick, Dom. 1.0–3.1. 35 See W.H. Gross, Augustus als Vorbild, ANRW II, 12.2, 1981, p. 603–605. ➷lavian Restitution Coins (nummi restituti)… 85 ➬➮ Augustus.36 In the light of Restitution coins bearing consecration subjects, Titus appears both in the tradition of the deiﬁed Augustus and of Vespasian. It is possible that it was not as much about the theme of consecration itself but rather — as it can be assumed — about political ideas, especially the ones of succession to the throne and political continuity. And ideologically, Titus was in the more proﬁtable situation. Tiberius became a heir of Augustus as a result of political adoption, whereas Titus inherited power from his biological father. Hence, on the coins of the ﬁrst group the latter depicts himself as a continuator of Divus Augustus within the framework of political succession sanctioned by the Senate and people, achieved through the agency of Vespasian, the deiﬁed father. On the Restitution coins from the second group, however, he evokes immediate associations with Augustus, as if he created himself the direct heir of the ﬁrst Princeps as far as ideology is concerned. Such interpretation might be hiding an answer to the question of the absence of the consecrated Claudius on the Restitution coins as well as other deiﬁed male and female members of the dynasty. The conclusion suggests that thanks to the consecration, both Titus and Domitian were interested in sanctioning the political legacy, after the founders of the two ﬁrst imperial dynasties in Rome. The idea of political continuity and care for the legitimization of dynasty are visible in the Restitution coins showing the consecration theme. However, they were also indicated by the very choice of outstanding predecessors, honoured in all the Restitution issues, not only the ones with a consecration subject. The interpretation of the Restitution coins induces some questions about the criteria according to which the Flavians acknowledged a given person worthy or unworthy of being remembered, as well as about the kind and signiﬁcance of services contributed to the state by the favoured persons. Limiting the circle of people commemorated in the Restitution coins to the speciﬁc group of carefully selected foregoers enables to conclude about the purposefulness and consciousness of taking such a decision. The analysis of the list of ﬁgures favoured on the Restitution coins stimulates questions about the causes of passing over such emperors as eg. Caligula, Nero, Otho and Vitellius. The answer ➱✃ Attention to the ideological connection between the divine Vespasian and the divine Augustus, visible in the mintage, is paid also by T.V. Buttrey, Vespasian’s Consecratio and the Numismatic Evidence, Historia 25, 1976, p. 455–457; see also: H. Komnick, Die Restitutionsmünzen…, p. 24. 86 ❐❒❮❒❰ÏÐÑ❒ Ò❒ÓÔÕÏ❒ seems obvious — neither these emperors themselves nor their style of being in authority can enjoy a good reputation in the ancient historiography.37 However, on the other hand, it cannot be precluded that there was more behind this than merely the ruined reputation. The group of male representatives of the ruling dynasty, commemorated in the Restitution coins, consists of viri triumphales appreciated by the Roman Senate in various periods of their political career.38 And although absent on the Restitution coins, such emperors as Caligula and Nero celebrated ovations (accordingly in 40 and 55 AD), and one must not ignore the absurd character and circumstances of these ceremonies.39 Thence, one of the probable selection criterion while choosing the prototypes might have been momentous military successes crowned with the highest triumphal honours in the state. Their signiﬁcance for the legitimization of power in Rome was indisputable. The triumphal honours awarded by the Senate played a role of an eﬀective and thoroughly convincing tool used by the candidates to the imperial red or other members of the imperial family in varied ﬁelds of the contemporary politics.40 They were of no less meaning to each emperor of the Flavian dynasty who may be rated among the viri triumphales. All the three of them held triumphs — Vespasian and Titus together in 71 AD, whereas Domitian three or even four times (in 83 AD over Germans, in 86 AD over Dacians, in 89 AD over Dacia and Germany, and in 93 AD he celebrated an ovation over the Sarmatians). Moreover, in 43 AD, under Claudius, Vespasian was honoured with the ornamenta triumphalia for successes in Britain.41 The im- Ö× See F. Sittig, Psychopathen in Purpur. Julisch-claudischer Caesarenwahnsinn und die Konstruktion historischer Realität, Stuttgart 2018. 38 On their military achievements and the circumstances of being granted various triumphal honours, see: K. Balbuza, Monety restytucyjne cesarza Tytusa…, p. 91–94, n. 28. See also references to sources and literature there. List of viri triumphales, see K. Balbuza, Triumfator. Triumf i ideologia zwycięstwa w Rzymie epoki cesarstwa, Poznań 2005, p. 239–248. 39 Currently, scientists treat such awards as triumphal aberrations. See eg. F. Goldbeck, J. Wienand, Der römische Triumph in Prinzipat und Spätantike. Probleme — Paradigmen — Perspektiven, in: Der römische Triumph in Prinzipat und Spätantike, hrsg. von F. Goldbeck, J. Wienand, Berlin 2017, p. 13. 40 Broadly on the subject as regards the Principate: K. Balbuza, Die Siegesideologie des Octavian/ Augustus, Eos 86 (2), 1999, p. 267–299; eadem, Triumfator…, passim; Der römische Triumph..., passim. 41 On the triumphal honours obtained by the emperors of the Flavian dynasty and their signiﬁcance in the ideology of power, see e.g.: M. Beard, The Triumph of Flavius Josephus, in: Flavian Rome: Culture, Image, Text, ed. by A.J. Boyle, W.J. Dominik, Leiden 2003, p. 543–558; Ølavian Restitution Coins (nummi restituti)… 87 pressive range and intensity of the Flavian victory propaganda can be proved for instance by the extraordinarily large-scale (especially on the coins) action of hyping up the victory over the Jews.42 During the age of the Principate, the triumphal honours used to be a convincing argument for the legitimization of imperial power as well as a useful and practical instrument of shaping the dynastic politics.43 So, it is not inconceivable that Titus, and later Domitian as well, selected a circle of predecessors honoured on the Restitution coins having used namely this key among others. This is the more so considering that the similar composition of characters, that is, according to the same key, occurs also on the later Restitution coins.44 Such a conclusion is given an appearance of being the truth also by the fact that some types of the Restitution coins stress the military activities of emperors and members of the imperial families as well as the context of military victory.45 The Restitution coins of Titus and Domitian honouring Marcus Agrippa46 are copies of an as struck in a Roman mint in the times of Caligula with Neptune holding a small dolphin and trident (Fig. 19–20),47 referring in this way to the naval military successes of this apt ÙÚ Balbuza, The Aspects of Domitian’s Ideology of Victory, in: Orbis Antiquus. Studia in Honorem Ioannis Pisonis, ed. L. Ruscu, C. Ciongradi, R. Ardevan, C. Roman, C. Gazdac, Cluj Napoca 2004, p. 25–33; eadem, Triumfator…, p. 95–101. Recently: K. Balbuza, Der Triumph im Dienste dynastischer Politik, in: Der römische Triumph…, p. 268–271 (in the context of dynastic politics); S. Mason, Josephus’ Portrait of the Flavian Triumph in Historical and Literary Context, in: Der römische Triumph…, p. 125–175. 42 There is a huge literature on the subject. See eg. J.M. Cody, Conquerors and Conquered on Flavian Coins, in: Flavian Rome: Culture, Image, Text, ed. by A.J. Boyle, W.A. Dominik, Leiden– Boston 2003, p. 103–123; K. Balbuza, Triumfator…, p. 95–101; D. Hendin, Echoes of Judaea Capta: The Nature of Domitian’s Coinage of Judea and Vicinity, Israel Numismatic Research 2, 2007, p. 123–130. 43 K. Balbuza, Der Triumph im Dienste…, p. 268–271. 44 These Restitution coins refer almost exclusively to those members of the ruling families who could be deﬁned by the present-day name viri triumphales. Although the Restitution coins of Nerva encompass only Divus Augustus, Trajan’s nummi restituti contains more names of predecessors of oustanding merit. For the catalogue of all Restitution coins along with the commentary, see: H. Komnick, Die Restitutionsmünzen…, p. 28–138. 45 See W.H. Gross, Augustus als Vorbild…, p. 604 who deﬁnes the Restitution coins as “Verehrung für des Staatsgott und Dynastiegründer in gutem Einvernehmen mit dem Senat, Sieg (Author’s boldface — K.B.) und Voraussicht als kaiserliche Eigenschaften, Betonung der römischen Weltherrschaft”. 46 Komnick, Titus 52.0; Dom. 4.0. 47 RIC I2, Calig. 58. Þßàá âãá äåæçèßçéá Æ Sestertius. Rome mint. Restitution issue struck under Titus, 80–81 AD Þßàá âêá äåæçèßçéá Æ As. Rome mint. Restitution issue struck under Domitian, 81–82 AD Þßàá âëá ìæåíæá Æ As. Rome mint. Restitution issue struck under Titus, 80–81 AD ÛÜÜÝ òóôõ ö÷õ Divus Augustus. Æ As. Rome mint. Restitution issue struck under Titus, 80–81 AD øùúû üýû Divus Augustus. Æ As. Rome mint. Restitution issue struck under Titus, 80–81 AD øùúû üþû Divus Augustus. Æ As. Rome mint. Restitution issue struck under Domitian, 81–82 AD îïðñ ÿ 90 ❑ ❑✁✂✄☎❑ ✆❑✝✞✟✂❑ ❋✠✡☛ ☞✌☛ ✍✎✏✑✒✓ ✔✡✏✠✕✕✎☛ ❋✠✡☛ ✖✗☛ ✍✎✏✑✒✓ ✔✡✏✠✕✕✎☛ Æ As. Rome mint. Restitution issue struck under Titus, 80–81 AD Æ As. Rome mint. Restitution issue struck under Domitian, 81–82 AD leader of Augustus. The Restitution coins for Divus Augustus, renewing the Roman issues of Tiberian dupondii from 22/ 23 AD,48 remind of the godiness of victory with clipeus virtutis (Fig. 12),49 while the Restitution coins for Claudius are copies of Claudius’ asses50 with Minerva holding a spear and shield, 48 49 50 Ibidem, Tib. 77. Komnick, Titus 35.0, 35.1, 35.2, 36.0, 37.0, 37.1; Dom. 1.0. RIC I2, Claud. 100, 116. ✘lavian Restitution Coins (nummi restituti)… 91 ❝✙✚✛✜✢✣✤✣✢ ✣✥✦ ✧✛ ✧ deity favourable as to achieving victories and watching over the tactics of military operations (Fig. 14).51 Besides the deities expressing the Roman idea of victory, other deities, virtues and symbols of imperial power were reminded by means of the Restitution coins.52 On the Restitution coins without the ﬁliation Divi ﬁlius of Titus, the images of Ceres Augusta (Titus), Spes Augusta (Titus, Domitian) or Constantia Augusti (Titus) were depicted (Fig. 13), as well as Libertas (Fig. 15) and Pax Augusti (Titus). The representations of both the ﬁrst mentioned personiﬁcations — of hope and prosperity — appear on Restitution coins with the head of Claudius on the obverse, which obviously was nothing of a coincidence. Namely during the reign of this emperor did these deities obtain an epithet augusta, which was meticulously recorded by the contemporary coins — prototypes for the Restitution coins.53 The epithet Augusta (derived from an adjective) bore in the Roman times a special undertone — in the context of the imperial cult, it expressed a particularly close connection between a deity/ virtue and the deiﬁed representatives of the imperial house. A somewhat diferrent meaning was more often applied to the epithet Augusti (derived from a noun), which in turn would accentuate the values and virtues of an emperor inherent to his earthly nature.54 The latter epithet was used on the coins of Claudius in relations to eg. Constantia,55 embodying steadiness ✺★ Komnick, Titus 59.0, V. 59.0, 60.0, 60.1, 60.2, 60.3, V. 60.0; Dom. 9.0. 52 Attention to the role of the commemorating of virtues in the Restitution coins was paid by J.E. Blamberg, The Public Image…, p. 33–37, 104–105 however in the context of Restitutions of Trajan. 53 Ceres Augusta: RIC I2, Claud. 94, etc. Spes Augusta: RIC I2, Claud. 99, etc. Ceres Augusta was popular not only in the mintage of Claudius but also of Galba, Vespasian and Titus. Ceres Augusta: RIC I2, Galba 291, etc.; RIC II.1, Vesp. 261, etc.; RIC II.1, Titus 191, etc. Ceres was also propagated on Domitian’s coins; however, it is hard to state unambiguously in what form as Ceres in the times of Domitian has an unsolved abbreviation of the epithet AVGVST (i) or (a): RIC II.1, Domit. 834, etc. 54 On the epithet Augusti or Augusta accompanying virtues, qualities and values or deities see P. Strack, Untersuchungen zur römischen Reichsprägung des zweiten Jahrhunderts. Die Reichsprägung zur Zeit des Traian, Stuttgart 1931, p. 51–52. Recently: A.A. Kluczek, VNDIQVE VICTORES. Wizja rzymskiego władztwa nad światem w mennictwie złotego wieku Antoninów i doby kryzysu III wieku — studium porównawcze, Katowice 2009, p. 182, ft. 182; K. Balbuza, Aeternitas Avgvsti. Kształtowanie się koncepcji wieczności w (auto)prezentacji władzy cesarza rzymskiego (od Augusta do Sewera Aleksandra), Poznań 2014, p. 16. 55 RIC I2, Claud. 2, etc. 92 ✩✪✫✪✬✭✮✯✪ ✰✪✱✲✳✭✪ ♦✴ ✵✶✴✷✶✸✶✴✹✻✼✶✽ ✾✿❀✷ ❁✶❀✾❂ ❀✷ ✴✶✼♦✴❁✶❁ ♦✻❃❂ ❀✻ ✾✿✶ ❀❄✵✶✴❀✹❃ ❄❀✻✾✹❅✶ ♦❆ ❇❃✹❈dius (and obvioulsy later, on the Restitution coins of Titus discussed in this article). Constantia indicated “an ability to remain steady in one’s own judgment, steadfastness in being true to one’s conscience”, to cite here the words of Catalina Balmaceda.56 The images of the aforementioned deities and virtues referred to these spheres of the then life which they looked after and were ideologically connected to — in the context of Divus Augustus, Marcus Agrippa, Claudius or Galba. They symbolized also that the Flavian dynasty accepted the thus depicted values and followed their tradition. In particular, they were close to Titus. Let us remind that Domitian restituted barely few selected types of Restitution coins of Titus, among which both Claudius’ motifs of Ceres Augustae and Constantiae Augusti as well as Libertas and Pax Augusti coming from Galba’s mintage, are lacking. In light of the Restitution coins, both Titus and Domitian are portrayed as the rulers who renew or restitute the services paid to the state and its citizens by the previous politicians depicted on obverses, but at the same time the ones who identify themselves with the virtues and values represented by their predecessors.57 The already discussed group of Restitution coins of Titus and Domitian, which originated according to the sample of prototypes struck in the times of Tiberius, after the death and consecration of Augustus in the 20s AD, must have also had a deﬁnite signiﬁcance and symbolism. The obverses of these consecration coins are dedicated to Divus Augustus (legend: DIVVS AVGVSTVS PATER). Their reverses show images (representations) of ara Providentiae with an inscription PROVIDENT(ia), an eagle standing on a globe or a thunderbolt (Fig. 17), and Victory with a shield (probably clipeus virtutis) (Fig. 12). Despite the consecration of the obverses, their iconographic motifs most probably lack such attribution. It is diﬃcult to interprete them, because there are no inscriptions to explain directly their usage. Although the connotation of the iconography of these coins with a consecration subject matter seems attractive, ❉❊ C. Balmaceda, Virtus Romana. Politics and Morality in the Roman Historians, Chapel Hill 2017, p. 227. 57 On symbolism of individual iconographical motifs on Augustus’ consecration coins see P.N. Schulten, Die Typologie…, p. 22–25 (eagle), p. 37–39 (altar). ●lavian Restitution Coins (nummi restituti)… 93 t❍■ ❏▲▼◆■❖ P t❍■ ▼◗t▼❘ ❙❚ Providentia, Victory with a shield and the eagle — symbolized probably the status, power and authority of the emperor.58 Another feature of the Restitution issues consists in the fact that apart from Trajan, all the earlier issuers of Restitution coins, that is the Flavians and Nerva, struck these coins according to the bronze prototypes in every possible nominal value. The issuers were interested solely in the coins which originated on the Senate’s initiative, which meant not only the kind of metal used by minters but also the appearance of the abbreviation “S C” (Senatus Consulto) on their reverses, standing for the responsibility of the Senate for the proccess of minting. As it was observed earlier, sometimes the abbreviation provided the main visual element of the reverses (the letters would acquire then the appropriate size so as to ﬁll the ﬁeld of the reverse), and sometimes it accompanied various iconographic motifs. Titus was particularly fond of the reverses from the ﬁrst group of Restitution coins (with the ﬁliation Divi ﬁlius), where the abbreviation “S C” appears in the centre and symbolizes the Senate’s responsibility for striking the coins (Fig. 1–11).59 This abbreviation can be found on the Restitution coins of Titus that honoured Divus Augustus, Tiberius, Drusus Caesar, Nero Drusus, Germanicus, Claudius and Galba as well as two imperial women: Livia Drusilla and Agrippina I.60 Furthermore, it occurs on three types of the Domitian’s coins commemorating Divus Augustus, Tiberius, Drusus Caesar and Germanicus.61 However, the abbreviation “S C” appears also on the Restitution coins of Titus and Domitian in the second of the described ❯❱ Cf. H. Komnick, Die Restitutionsmünzen…, p. 170. An eagle or altar motifs on coins became symptomatic for consecration not earlier than about the 2nd century AD. See P.N. Schulten, Die Typologie…, p. 23–24 and 37–38. On the symbolism of Victory on the posthumous coins of Tiberius in veneration of Augustus see M. Grant, Roman Anniversary Issues…, p. 34–35. 59 The discussion over the meaning of “S C” was summarized in R. Wolters, Nummi signati. Untersuchungen zur römischen Münzprägung und Geldwirtschaft, München 1999, p. 115–170; cf. also: D. Mannsperger, ROM. ET AVG. Selbstdarstellung des Kaisertums in der römischen Reichsprägung, ANRW II.1, 1974, p. 937. 60 Komnick, Titus 1.0–29.0. The Restitution coins of Titus, that are in the discussed group, recreate these prototypes of ancient coins, the reverses of which included the capital letters S and C. Therefore — I suppose — the lack of commemoration of eg. Antonia Minor on Restitution coins can be hypothetically explained not as much by the fact that the individual Restitution coins were not preserved till the present day (see H. Mattingly, The ‘Restored’ Coins of Titus…, p. 183), but rather by the lack of the prototypes with a motif of the capital S and C in the issues minted in the name of Antonia during the times of Claudius. 61 Komnick, Dom. 5.0, 6.0, 7.0. 94 ❲❳❨❳❩❬❭❪❳ ❫❳❴❵❛❬❳ conﬁgurations, that is, as a sign accompanying other iconographic motifs — symbols, deities or virtues. In the course of the hitherto discussion over the meaning of reverses deprived of iconography with the abbreviation “S C”62, Harald Mattingly expressed his opinion for instance, and he observed that the Senate and the emperor cooperated closely as to the choice of monetary motifs.63 According to the foregoing, if the emperor stood behind the production of Restitution coins, he might have intended to use these coins to emphasize harmonious cooperation with the Senate. A similar point of view was presented in 1954 by M.A. Levi, who stated that the production of Restitution coins was destined as an expression of the politics of balance and friendly coexistence with the Senate.64 In this way, the emperor could have gained an authorization of his politics thanks to this institution as a guarantee of the legality of all political moves.65 When the abbreviation “S C” decorates the reverses of Restitution coins in relation to varied images, it accompanies the themes presenting various spheres of the Senate’s activity — for example deciding about the foreign policy and rewarding the military successes (with iconography referring to the latter). It is interesting that one type of Restitution coins recreates the issue of the sestertii of Tiberius from 22 AD, commemorating the rebuilding of cities in Asia at the cost of the emperor — with the legend on the obverse: CIVITATIBVS ASIAE RESTITVT (Fig. 5).66 The issue of this kind created an emperor as a “thronenden Stadtgründers”, who could have been equated to Romulus or Augustus.67 ❜❞ For a review of ideas on this subject, see: K. Balbuza, Monety restytucyjne cesarza Tytusa…, p. 98–100. 63 H. Mattingly, The ‘Restored’ Coins of Titus…, p. 182. 64 M.A. Levi, La clemenza di Tito, PP 9, 1954, p. 292. 65 Unfortunately, this view is hardly defensible in the case of the Domitian’s Restitution coins with a motif of “S C”, as it is doubtful indeed that this emperor would have cooperated with the Senate harmoniously. See H. Komnick, Die Restitutionsmünzen…, p. 17, ft. 135. 66 Komnick, Titus 6.0. See Tac. Ann. II, 47. 67 D. Mannsperger, ROM. ET AVG…, p. 948. ❡lavian Restitution Coins (nummi restituti)… 95 ❢ The Restitution coins of Titus and Domitian constitute a homage paid both to the memory of the outstanding male and female members of the imperial house and to the institution of the Roman Senate or to the coins issued in the times of the Early Empire themselves. Such a tribute to remembrance was not a selﬂess initiative. Restitution coins could have played a role of a symbolic but — as is the case of other coins — eloquent and ubiquitous instrument in the ideology of power and the autopresentation of both emperors. The prototypes for Restitution coins originated in honour of already dead or still alive members of the dynasty and at times recorded various elements of the self-presentation of the currently ruling emperor. Hence, pointing out to the speciﬁc predecessors of the ruling house and adopting some aspects of their self-presentation, both in the context of religion and politics, the issuers of Restitution coins not only preserved the memory about the distinguished ancestors, their achievements or crucial events from the past of Rome, deities and religious rituals, but also evidently identiﬁed with the above. The memorative and ideological function of Restitution coins was not limited just to persons, gods, ceremonies or occurrences. It concerned also the past types of coins dating back to the times of the Julio-Claudian dynasty and Galba.68 The Restitution coins of Titus and Domitian would bring to mind two consecrated forefathers on the imperial throne, at the same time founders of the ﬁrst dynasties in the age of the Principate. Linking their names and the whole connected ideological tradition with the then currently ruling emperors — Titus and Domitian — must have evoked unambiguous associations in view of the legitimization of assuming power or their position in the state, sanctioned by the Roman Senate. With the help of Restitution coins and through the agency of Divus Augustus, Titus and Domitian emphasized the status and role of the emperor on earth, his foresight (the motif with Ara Providentiae), victoriousness and fruitful cooperation with the Senate (Victoria with clipeus virtutis). Furthermore, with no need to refer to the earlier Divi, both Flavians accentuated the signiﬁcance of the military successes (Neptune in the context of Marcus Agrippa, Minerva regarding Claudius). The Restitution coins of both emperors make reference to the Claudian ❣❤ Cf. H. Mattingly, The ‘Restored’ Coins of Titus…, p. 177–207; idem, Coins of the Roman Empire…, p. lxxvii. 96 ✐❥❦❥❧♠♥♣❥ q❥rs✉♠❥ ✈✇①②③④✇✈⑤⑥ ②⑦ ⑧②⑨✈⑩ Spes Augusta, which expressed itself through the emperor’s ability of ensuring the state “blessed conditions”, as Rufus Fears has claimed.69 The Restitution coins of Titus in turn, remind of the Claudian Ceres Augusta or a genuinely stoic virtue — Constantia. These images, enunciating hope, prosperity and constancy, all guaranteed by the emperor, must have elicited exclusively positive reactions, similarly to Libertas and Pax, depicted on the restitutions of Galba’s coins struck by Titus. Henceforth, on the one hand, the Restitution coins are an intentional or involuntary tribute paid to memory. On the other hand, they perfectly matched the contemporary politics of remembrance, which was of tremendous meaning in the context of the Flavian ideology of power. In the case of Titus and Domitian, following the tradition of eminent forerunners of the imperial house could have been a political measure, useful in the proccess of the legitimization of a new dynasty.70 Plus, it might have proved helpful in articulating an idea of political continuity.71 By means of the Restitution coins and through the agency of standout predecessors, Titus and Domitian made themselves clear as regards the tradition of particular antecedents who they wished to be associated with. Thanks to the Restitution coins, Titus, and to a certain extent Domitian too, placed themselves, or would like to have been placed, within the tradition of the illustrious pre-Flavian representatives of the imperial house, who justiﬁed their status in Rome in a constitutional manner, by virtue of a decision of the Senate about honourable distinctions for their military activity or legal succession. ❶❷ R. Fears, The Theology of Victory at Rome: Approaches and Problem, ANRW II, 17.2, 1981, p. 812. 70 Attention to the dynastic aspect of restitutions was paid by J. Béranger, Idéologie impériale et épopée latine, in: Mélanges d’archéologie, d’épigraphie et d’histoire: oﬀerts à Jérome Carcopino, éd. par J. Heurgon, W. Seston, G. Charles-Picard, Paris 1966, p. 110; idem, Principatus. Études de notions et d’histoire politiques dans l’antiquité gréco-romaine, Genève 1973, p. 310. See also: J.E. Blamberg, The Public Image…, p. 33–37, 104–105 (in the context of Restitutions of Trajan); J.P Martin, Providentia Deorum. Recherches sur certains aspects religieux du pouvoir imperial romain, Rome 1982, p. 218. On the context of legitimization of a dynasty through reference to the members of Julio-Claudian dynasty, see W.H. Gross, Augustus als Vorbild…, p. 603–605. 71 T.V. Buttrey, Vespasian’s Consecratio…, p. 455–457. See also D. Mannsperger, ROM. ET AVG…, p. 964. ❸lavian Restitution Coins (nummi restituti)… 97 ❹❺❻❺❼❺❽❾❺ ❿➀➁➂ Abbreviations ANRW = Aufstieg und Niedergang der römischen Welt Komnick = H. Komnick, Die Restitutionsmünzen der frühen Kaiserzeit. Aspekte der Kaiserlegitimation, Berlin 2001. RIC I2 = The Roman Imperial Coinage, vol. I: From 31 B.C. to A.D. 69, ed. by C.H.V. Sutherland, R.A.G. Carson, London2 1984. RIC II.1 = The Roman Imperial Coinage, vol. II.1: from AD 69–96. Vespasian to Domitian, ed. by I.A. Carradice and T.V. Buttrey, London 22007. RIC III = The Roman Imperial Coinage, vol. III: Antoninus Pius to Commodus, ed. by H. Mattingly, E.A. Sydenham, London 1930. Woytek = B. Woytek B., Die Reichsprägung des Kaisers Traianus (98–117), Wien 2010. Studies Balbuza K., Aeternitas Avgvsti. Kształtowanie się koncepcji wieczności w (auto)prezentacji władzy cesarza rzymskiego (od Augusta do Sewera Aleksandra), Poznań 2014. Balbuza K., Der Triumph im Dienste dynastischer Politik; Der römische Triumph in Prinzipat und Spätantike, in: Der römische Triumph in Prinzipat und Spätantike, hrsg. von F. Goldbeck, J. Wienand, Berlin 2017, p. 255–282. Balbuza K., Die Siegesideologie des Octavian/ Augustus, Eos 86 (2), 1999, p. 267–299. Balbuza K., Monety restytucyjne cesarza Tytusa. Kilka uwag o rzymskim mennictwie restytucyjnym, Ethos 31, 2018, p. 87–100. Balbuza K., The Aspects of Domitian’s Ideology of Victory, in: Orbis Antiquus. Studia in Honorem Ioannis Pisonis, ed. L. Ruscu, C. Ciongradi, R. Ardevan, C. Roman, C. Gazdac, Cluj Napoca 2004, p. 25–33. Balbuza K., Triumfator. Triumf i ideologia zwycięstwa w Rzymie epoki cesarstwa, Poznań 2005. Balmaceda C., Virtus Romana. Politics and Morality in the Roman Historians, Chapel Hill 2017. Beard M., The Triumph of Flavius Josephus, in: Flavian Rome: Culture, Image, Text, ed. by A.J. Boyle, W.J. Dominik, Leiden 2003, p. 543–558. Béranger J., Idéologie impériale et épopée latine, in: Mélanges d’archéologie, d’épigraphie et d’histoire: oﬀerts à Jérome Carcopino, éd. par J. Heurgon, W. Seston, G. Charles-Picard, Paris 1966. Béranger J., Principatus. Études de notions et d’histoire politiques dans l’antiquité gréco-romaine, Genève 1973. Bernhart M., Handbuch zur Münzkunde der römischen Kaiserzeit, Halle (Saale) 1926. Blamberg J.E., The Public Image Projected by the Roman Emperors (A.D. 69–117) as Reﬂected in Contemporary Imperial Coinage [microﬁlm], Michigan 1976. Buttrey T.V., Vespasian’s Consecratio and the Numismatic Evidence, Historia 25, 1976, p. 449– 457. Cody J.M., Conquerors and Conquered on Flavian Coins, in: Flavian Rome: Culture, Image, Text, ed. by A.J. Boyle, W.A. Dominik, Leiden–Boston 2003, p. 103–123. Der römische Triumph in Prinzipat und Spätantike, hrsg. von F. Goldbeck, J. Wienand, Berlin 2017. 98 ➃➄➅➄➆➇➈➉➄ ➊➄➋➌➍➇➄ ➎rizzo S., Discorso sopra le medaglie degli antichi, con la dichiaratione delle monete consulari & delle medaglie degli imperatori Romani, Vinegia 21571. Fears R., The Theology of Victory at Rome: Approaches and Problem, ANRW II, 17.2, 1981, p. 736–826. Gnecchi F., Appunti di numismatica romana. XLIV. Sulle restituzioni, RIN 10, 1897, p. 123–157. Goldbeck F., Wienand J., Der römische Triumph in Prinzipat und Spätantike. Probleme — Paradigmen — Perspektiven, in: Der römische Triumph in Prinzipat und Spätantike, hrsg. von F. Goldbeck, J. Wienand, Berlin 2017, p. 1–26. Grant M., Roman Anniversary Issues. An Exploratory Study of the Numismatic and Medallic Commemoration of Anniversary Years 49 B.C.–A.D. 375, Cambridge 1950. Gross W.H., Augustus als Vorbild, ANRW II, 12.2, 1981, p. 599–611. Hekster O., Emperors and Ancestors. Roman Rulers and the Constraints of Tradition, Oxford 2015. Hendin D., Echoes of Judaea Capta: The Nature of Domitian’s Coinage of Judea and Vicinity, Israel Numismatic Research 2, 2007, p. 123–130. Kluczek A.A., VNDIQVE VICTORES. Wizja rzymskiego władztwa nad światem w mennictwie złotego wieku Antoninów i doby kryzysu III wieku — studium porównawcze, Katowice 2009. Komnick H., Die Restitutionsmünzen der frühen Kaiserzeit. Aspekte der Kaiserlegitimation, Berlin 2001. La moneta romana imperiale da Augusto a Commodo, a cura di F. Panvini Rosati, Bologna 1981. Levi M.A., La clemenza di Tito, PP 9, 1954, p. 288–293. Mannsperger D., ROM. ET AVG. Selbstdarstellung des Kaisertums in der römischen Reichsprägung, ANRW II, 1, 1974, p. 919–996. Martin J.P., Providentia Deorum. Recherches sur certains aspects religieux du pouvoir imperial romain, Rome 1982. Mason S., Josephus’ Portrait of the Flavian Triumph in Historical and Literary Context, in: Der römische Triumph in Prinzipat und Spätantike, hrsg. von F. Goldbeck, J. Wienand, Berlin 2017, p. 125–175. Mattingly H., The ‘Restored’ Coins of Titus, Domitian, and Nerva, NC 20, 1920, p. 177–207. Mirone S., Numismatica, Milano 1930. Regling K., Restituierte Münzen, in: Wörterbuch der Münzkunde, hrsg. von F. v. Schrötter, Berlin 1930, p. 563–564. Schulten P.N., Die Typologie der römischen Konsekrationsprägungen, Frankfurt am Main 1979. Sittig F., Psychopathen in Purpur. Julisch-claudischer Caesarenwahnsinn und die Konstruktion historischer Realität, Stuttgart 2018. Syme R., Tacitus, vol. I, Oxford 1958. Weiser W., S C als Revers einer Münze der ersten Emission aus Neokaisareia in Galatia unter Traianus, SMB 38, 1988, p. 9–12. Wolters R., Nummi signati. Untersuchungen zur römischen Münzprägung und Geldwirtschaft, München 1999. Zadoks-Josephus Jitta A.N., Es W.A. van, Muntwijzer voor de Romeinse tijd, ’s-Gravenhage 1962. ➏lavian Restitution Coins (nummi restituti)… 99 ➐➑➒➓ ➔→ ➣➑↔↕➙➛➒ Fig. 1. Divus Augustus. Æ Sestertius. Rome mint. Restitution issue struck under Titus, 80–81 AD. Obv.: DIVVS AVGVSTVS PATER; Divus Augustus, radiate, seated left on sella curulis, feet on stool, holding branch and long vertical sceptre; altar to left. Rev.: IMP(erator) T(itus) CAES(ar) DIVI VESP(asiani) F(ilius) AVG(ustus) P(ontifex) M(aximus) TR(ibunicia) P(otestas) P(ater) P(atriae) CO(n)S(ul) VIII REST(ituit); legend surrounding large S(enatus) C(onsulto). Komnick, Titus V. 1.0 = RIC II.1, Titus 401. Source: http://www.cngcoins.com Fig. 2. Divus Augustus. Æ Sestertius. Rome mint. Restitution issue struck under Titus, 80–81 AD. Obv.: DIVVS AVGVSTVS PATER; Divus Augustus, radiate, seated left on curule chair, feet on stool, holding patera and long vertical sceptre: altar to left. Rev.: IMP(erator) T(itus) CAES(ar) DIVI VESP(asiani) F(ilius) AVG(ustus) P(ontifex) M(aximus) TR(ibunicia) P(otestas) P(ater) P(atriae) CO(n)S(ul) VIII REST(ituit); legend surrounding large S(enatus) C(onsulto). Komnick, Titus 3.0 = RIC II.1, Titus 403. Source: http://www.cngcoins.com Fig. 3. Livia Drusilla. Æ Dupondius. Rome mint. Restitution issue struck under Titus, 80–81 AD. Obv.: IVSTITIA, bust of Livia as Justitia, draped, right; wearing stephane. Rev.: IMP(erator) T(itus) CAES(ar) DIVI VESP(asiani) F(ilius) [AVG(ustus)] P(ontifex) M(aximus), TR(ibunicia) P(otestas) P(ater) P(atriae) CO(n)S(ul) VIII RESTITV(it); legend surrounding large S(enatus) C(onsulto). Komnick, Titus 4.1 = RIC II.1, Titus 405. Source: http://www.cngcoins.com Fig. 4. Livia Drusilla. Æ Dupondius. Rome mint. Restitution issue struck under Titus, 80–81 AD. Obv.: PIETAS, Bust of Livia as Pietas, draped and veiled, right; wearing stephane. Rev.: IMP(erator) T(itus) CAES(ar) DIVI VESP(asiani) F(ilius) AVG(ustus) REST(ituit); legend surrounding large S(enatus) C(onsulto). Komnick, Titus 17.0 = RIC II.1, Titus 426. Source: http:// www.cngcoins.com Fig. 5. Tiberius. Æ Sestertius. Rome mint. Restitution issue struck under Titus, 80–81 AD. Obv.: CIVITATIBVS ASIAE RESTITVT(is); Tiberius seated left on curule chair, holding patera and scepter. Rev.: IMP(erator) T(itus) CAES(ar) DIVI VESP(asiani) F(ilius) AVG(ustus) P(ontifex) M(aximus), TR(ibunicia) P(otestas) P(ater) P(atriae) CO(n)S(ul) VIII REST(ituit); legend surrounding large S(enatus) C(onsulto). Komnick, Titus 6.0 = RIC II.1, Titus 410. Source: http:// www.cngcoins.com Fig. 6. Tiberius. Æ As. Rome mint. Restitution issue struck under Titus, 80–81 AD. Obv.: TI(berius) CAESAR DIVI AVG(usti) F(ilius) AVGVST(us) IMP(erator) VIII; head of Tiberius, left. Rev.: IMP(erator) T(itus) CAES(ar) DIVI VESP(asiani) F(ilius) AVG(ustus) REST(ituit); legend surrounding large S(enatus) C(onsulto). Komnick, Titus 19.0 = RIC II.1, Titus 432. Source: http://www.cngcoins.com Fig. 7. Tiberius. Æ As. Rome mint. Restitution issue struck under Titus, 80–81 AD. Obv.: TI(berius) CAESAR DIVI AVG(usti) F(ilius) AVGVST(us) IMP(erator) VIII; head of Tiberius, 100 ➜➝➞➝➟➠➡➢➝ ➤➝➥➦➧➠➝ ➨➩➫➭➯ Rev.: IMP(erator) T(itus) CAE[S](ar) DIVI VESP(asiani) F(ilius) AVG(ustus) P(ontifex) M(aximus) TR(ibunicia) P(otestas) P(ater) P(atriae) [CO(n)S(ul) VIII] RESTITVIT; legend surrounding large S(enatus) C(onsulto). Komnick, Titus 7.0 = RIC II.1, Titus 413. Source: http:// www.cngcoins.com Fig. 8. Drusus Caesar. Æ As. Rome mint. Restitution issue struck under Titus, 80–81 AD. Obv.: DRVSVS CAESAR TI(berii) AVG(usti) F(ilius) DIVI AVG(usti) N(epos); head of Drusus Caesar, left. Rev.: IMP(erator) T(itus) CAES(ar) DIVI VESP(asiani) F(ilius) AVG(ustus) REST(ituit); legend surrounding large S(enatus) C(onsulto). Komnick, Titus 24.0 = RIC II.1, Titus 437. Source: http://www.cngcoins.com Fig. 9. Germanicus. Æ As. Rome mint. Restitution issue struck under Titus, 80–81 AD. Obv.: GERMANICVS CAESAR TI(berii) AVG(usti) F(ilius) DIVI AVG(usti) N(epos); head of Germanicus, left. Rev.: IMP(erator) T(itus) CAES(ar) DIVI VESP(asiani) F(ilius) AVG(ustus) REST(ituit); legend surrounding large S(enatus) C(onsulto). Komnick, Titus 25.0 = RIC II.1, Titus 442. Source: http://www.cngcoins.com Fig. 10. Agrippina I. Æ Sestertius. Rome mint. Restitution issue struck under Titus, 80–81 AD. Obv.: AGRIPPINA M(arci) F(ilia) GERMANICI CAES[ARIS]; bust of Agrippina, right. Rev.: IMP(erator) T(itus) CAES(ar) DIVI VESP(asiani) F(ilius) AVG(ustus) P(ontifex) M(aximus), TR(ibunicia) P(otestas) P(ater) P(atriae) CO(n)S(ul) VIII REST(ituit); legend surrounding large S(enatus) C(onsulto). Komnick, Titus 11.0 = RIC II.1, Titus 419. Source: http://www.cngcoins. com Fig. 11. Galba. Æ Sestertius. Thracian mint (?) Restitution issue struck under Titus, 80–81 AD. Obv.: IMP SER(vius) SVLP(icius) GALBA CAES(ar) AVG(ustus) TR(ibunicia) P(otestas); head of Galba, laureate, right. Rev.: IMP(erator) T(itus) CAES(ar) DIVI VESP(asiani) F(ilius) AVG(ustus) P(ontifex) M(aximus), TR(ibunicia) P(otestas) P(ater) P(atriae) CO(n)S(ul) VIII REST(ituit); legend surrounding large S(enatus) C(onsulto). Komnick type, Titus 13.0 = RIC II.1, Titus 421 var. = RPC II, Titus 524. Source: http://www.cngcoins.com Fig. 12. Divus Augustus. Æ Dupondius. Rome mint. Restitution issue struck under Titus, 80–81 AD. Obv.: DIVVS AVGVSTVS [PAT]ER; head of Divus Augustus, radiate, left, star above. Rev.: IMP(erator) T(itus) VESP(asianus) AVG(ustus) REST(ituit), S(enatus) C(onsulto) (in ﬁeld); Victory ﬂying left, with shield inscribed S(enatus) P(opulus) / [Q(ue) R(omanus)]; S(enatus) C(onsulto) (in ﬁeld). Komnick, Titus 37.0 = RIC II.1, Titus 448. Source: http://www.cngcoins.com Fig. 13. Claudius. Æ Sestertius. Rome mint. Restitution issue struck under Titus, 80–81 AD. Obv.: TI(berius) CLAVDIVS CAESAR AVG(ustus) P(ontifex) M(aximus) TR(ibunicia) P(otestas) P(ater) P(atriae); head of Claudius, laureate, right. Rev.: IMP(erator) T(itus) VESP(asianus) AVG(ustus) REST(ituit), S(enatus) C(onsulto) (in ﬁeld); Spes standing left, holding ﬂower. Komnick type, Titus 54.0 (unlisted dies) = RIC II.1, Titus 472. SSource: http://www.cngcoins.com ➲lavian Restitution Coins (nummi restituti)… 101 ➳➵➸➺ ➻➼➺ Claudius. Æ As. Rome mint. Restitution issue struck under Domitian, 81–82 AD. Obv.: TI(berius) CLAVDIVS CAESAR AVG(ustus) P(ontifex) M(aximus) TR(ibunicia) P(otestas) IMP(erator) P(ater) P(atriae); head of Claudius, left. Rev.: IMP(erator) D(omitianus) AVG(ustus) REST(ituit), S(enatus) C(onsulto) (in ﬁeld); Minerva advancing right, holding spear and shield. Komnick, Dom. 9.0 = RIC II.1, Dom. 829. Source: http://www.cngcoins.com Fig. 15. Galba. Æ As. Rome mint. Restitution issue struck under Titus, 80–81 AD. Obv.: [SER(vius) GALBA] IMP(erator) CAES(ar) AVG(ustus) T[R(ibunicia) P(otestas)]; head of Galba, laureate, right. Rev.: IMP(erator) T(itus) V[ESP(asianus)] AVG(ustus) RES[T(ituit)], S(enatus) C(onsulto); Libertas standing left, with pileus and rod. Komnick, Titus 61.0 = RIC II.1, Titus 496. Source: http://www.cngcoins.com Fig. 16. Divus Augustus. Æ As. Rome mint. Restitution issue struck under Titus, 80–81 AD. Obv.: DIVVS AVGVSTVS PATER; head of Augustus, radiate, left, star above. Rev.: IMP(erator) T(itus) CAES(ar) AVG(ustus) RESTITVIT, S(enatus) C(onsulto) (in ﬁeld); eagle standing front on globe, wings spread, head turned right. Komnick type, Titus 33.0 = RIC II.1, Titus 456. Source: http:// www.cngcoins.com Fig. 17. Divus Augustus. Æ As. Rome mint. Restitution issue struck under Titus, 80–81 AD. Obv.: DIVVS AVGVSTVS PATER; head of Augustus, radiate, left. Rev.: IMP(erator) T(itus) VESP(asianus) AVG(ustus) REST(ituit), S(enatus) C(onsulto) (in ﬁeld); eagle standing front on thunderbolt, wings spread, head turned left. Komnick, Titus 50.0 = RIC II.1, Titus 469. Source: http://www.cngcoins.com Fig. 18. Divus Augustus. Æ As. Rome mint. Restitution issue struck under Domitian, 81–82 AD. Obv.: DIVVS AVGVSTVS PATER; head of Augustus, radiate, left, star above. Rev.: IMP(erator) D(omitianus) CAES(ar) AVG(ustus) RESTITVIT, S(enatus) C(onsulto); eagle standing, front, on globe, with open wings, head turned right. Komnick, Titus 3.0 = RIC II.1, Dom. 824. Source: http://www.cngcoins.com Fig. 19. Marcus Agrippa. Æ As. Rome mint. Restitution issue struck under Titus, 80–81 AD. Obv.: M(arcus) AGRIPPA L(ucii) F(ilius) CO(n)S(ul) III; head of Agrippa, left, wearing rostral crown. Rev.: IMP(erator) T(itus) VESP(asianus) AVG(ustus) REST(ituit), S(enatus) C(onsulto) (in ﬁeld); Neptune standing left, holding small dolphin and trident. Komnick, Titus 52 = RIC II.1, Titus 470. Source: http://www.cngcoins.com Fig. 20. Marcus Agrippa. Æ As. Rome mint. Restitution issue struck under Domitian, 81–82 AD. Obv.: M(arcus) AGRIPPA L(ucii) F(ilius) CO(n)S(ul) III; head of Agrippa, left, wearing rostral crown. Rev.: IMP(erator) D(omitianus) AVG(ustus) [RE]ST(ituit), S(enatus) C(onsulto); Neptune standing left, holding small dolphin and trident. Komnick, Dom. 4.0 = RIC II.1, Dom. 825. Source: http://www.cngcoins.com ➽➾➚➾➪➶➹➘➾ ➴➾➷➬➮➶➾ 102 Flawijskie nummi restituti. Aspekty memoratywny i ideologiczny Streszczenie W artykule poddano analizie zespół nummi restituti z okresu Tytusa i Domicjana pod kątem ich memoratywnego i ideologicznego znaczenia dla dynastii Flawiuszy. Jest to kolejny głos w toczącej się od dawna dyskusji nad tymi zagadkowymi numizmatami. Autorka zgadza się z tezą, że za produkcją tych monet — które w sposób oczywisty oddawały hołd samej pamięci o poprzednikach z domu cesarskiego, ich dokonaniach i cnotach, jak również senatowi rzymskiemu czy dawnym typom monet — mogła kryć się ideologicznie uzasadniona potrzeba polityczna. Troska o autoprezentację Flawiuszy oraz, co ważniejsze, uzasadnioną ideologicznie legitymizację ich władzy musiała mieć niebagatelne znaczenie dla przedstawicieli dynastii założonej przez „Sabine parvenu”, jak niegdyś określił Wespazjana Ronald Syme72. Autorka stoi na stanowisku, że restytucje były jednym z wielu ówczesnych środków kształtowania opinii publicznej o aktualnie rządzącej dynastii. W artykule zwrócono uwagę na to, że jednym z kryteriów selekcji prototypów dla restytucji mogły być sukcesy militarne poprzedników i wieńczące je nagrody o charakterze triumfalnym. Wskazuje na to m.in. lista upamiętnionych poprzedników, oczywiście z pominięciem uhonorowanych kobiet. Niemniej istotne mogły być takie wątki jak konsekracja, dobra współpraca z senatem czy cnoty i bóstwa związane z konkretnymi członkami domu cesarskiego. Utożsamianie się z tradycją triumfalną — której istotnym elementem były nagrody triumfalne poprzedników, nierzadko konsekrowanych — z tradycją legalnego następstwa tronu, tudzież samych godnych poprzedników musiało mieć duże znaczenie dla ideologii i autoprezentacji nowej dynastii oraz jej legitymizacji na tronie rzymskim, których istotnym elementem była idea kontynuacji politycznej i dynastycznej. 72 R. Syme, Tacitus, vol. I, Oxford 1958, p. 213: “Sabine parvenu”.

RELATED PAPERS

RELATED TOPICS

Log In

Katarzyna Balbuza, Flavian Restitution Coins (nummi restituti). Memorative and Ideological Aspects, in: Meministine? Memory and Oblivion in the Ancient World — the Ancient World in the Memory and Oblivion, Poznań 2019, p. 73-102

Katarzyna Balbuza, Flavian Restitution Coins (nummi restituti). Memorative and Ideological Aspects, in: Meministine? Memory and Oblivion in the Ancient World — the Ancient World in the Memory and Oblivion, Poznań 2019, p. 73-102

Related Papers

RELATED PAPERS

RELATED TOPICS