For a Flavian collector, Domitian's 'PONT' denarii are really quite exciting! They offer a fascinating window into the mind of an emperor and the inner workings of a mint. Here is my latest one. Domitian AR Denarius, 2.62g Rome mint, 81 AD RIC 52 (R2), BMC p. 299 ‖ , RSC - Obv: IMP CAES DOMITIAN AVG PONT; Head of Domitian, laureate, bearded, r. Rev: TR P COS VII DES VIII P P; Dolphin coiled around anchor Acquired from Lanz (eBay), February 2017. Nothing more quite shows how much of a stickler Domitian was for keeping to the letter of the law than the 'PONT' denarii struck very early in his reign. Domitian would not call himself by the full title Pontifex Maximus until the proper religious ceremonies voting him as such were concluded. The PONT denarii provide numismatic evidence for Suetonius' claim that Domitian scrupulously observed the proper formalities (Dom. VII - IX). The coins themselves are quite rare, struck in a brief window of time while Domitian was being awarded his full titles.The resulting sequence of titles is quite fascinating! Interestingly, the 'V' in AVG here looks more like a 'Y'. Some have speculated that this shows evidence of a Greek engraver working at the mint early in Domitian's reign.
This is an interesting insight into Domitian's thinking. One has to wonder, therefore, if his strict observance of the Ludi Saeculares, is further evidence of his traditional views. It stands to reason. A great coin and a nice addition to your collection, David!
Oh, undoubtedly! Not to mention his improvements of the coinage by increasing the fineness of the denarius and the weight of the aureus.
Another superb Flavian example. One of these days Oki will run out of Hadrian's and you Flavian's to collect. Excellent information. As a note: Am I correct that Domitian was notorious for his reign of excesses and terror?
Oh, perish the thought! LOL. Now that I'm collecting interesting duplicates, the danger of me having nothing to acquire has greatly diminished! Domitian's reign as recorded by the senatorial writers Tacitus and Pliny the Younger, and the equestrian Suetonius is deeply biased against him. The Senate and the upper classes despised Domitian for his autocratic ways, so the histories written by them reflect that. I'm not a Domitian apologist (I fear many grains of truth in the written accounts that have survived), but I do think the 'terror', so called, was an isolated event that affected a handful of elites, unfortunately they wrote the history of his reign. It's interesting to note Domitian was taken out by a palace conspiracy, not by the military or the plebs who adored him.
I'm reading a fiction (I know it's fiction) at the moment that reflects him as a depraved young Domitian. The story line fits with what I have read in Suetonius' account of him. He's not a main character yet, but the writer depicts him as pocked faced, obsessed and depraved young man during the time his father was waging civil war against Vitellius.
It's a series of 8 books. The story line begins during the reign of Nero. I'm on book 5 at the moment. The Gaius Valerius Verrens Adventures by Douglas Jackson
Somehow, that author has totally passed me by. Viewing the series on Amazon, it looks to be very interesting! One of my other hobbies is collecting fiction set during the Flavian era. Thanks for the heads up!
I am no specialist but these coins show I have been mistaken in my analysis of the denarius below. It has PM so should be later than the OP coin. It has COS VII DES VIII PP as does the OP but I have no TRP. I had assumed that my coin was made before the date in 81 AD when he assumed TRP but after Titus died making him PM and PP. The PONT coin makes this seem not to be correct. What is going on here?
It's a good series beginning with Boudica's revolt in Britannia. I'm not sure what time frame the last book in the series takes place, but I have a feeling it will be about the reign of Domitian.
Domitian assumed IMP, AVG and TRP immediately upon Titus' death. The earliest coins show these titles (RIC 1-6). PM and PP would be added later after these titles were voted (awarded?) to him. Your coin shows that TRP was haphazardly included (or not), even though Domitian possessed the title from day one. I do not know why it was omitted on some issues. It is a neat curiosity.
I've used this website's database to help me track down books. https://intraweb.stockton.edu/eyos/page.cfm?siteID=78&pageID=1 You can filter by time period and reign.
