Reply to Thread

Message:: [QUOTE="Gavin Richardson, post: 3236586, member: 83956"]On Monday, November 5, I was pleased to host [USER=10613]@Victor_Clark[/USER] and his wife at Union University. Victor gave a substantial illustrated lecture on Constantinian coinage beginning with the tetrarchic period and extending deep into Constantine’s career. I regret that we didn’t have more time for him; Victor had plenty of more coins to show. [ATTACH=full]846318[/ATTACH][ATTACH=full]846319[/ATTACH] After the lecture, I took Victor, his wife, two students, and another faculty member to dinner. At dinner Victor pulled out a stack of VF-EF Constantine coins and let each guest pick a favorite—a generous keepsake of a nice evening. And speaking of generous, before Victor’s talk, I awarded a student a prize for giving the finest classical numismatic presentation in the course. (See this thread on my <a href="https://www.cointalk.com/threads/the-roman-coin-class-project.324212/" class="internalLink ProxyLink" data-proxy-href="https://www.cointalk.com/threads/the-roman-coin-class-project.324212/">ROMAN COIN PROJECT</a>.) Here’s me awkwardly making the presentation to Shea McCullough. The fact that he cited me in his write-up in no way won him the prize. But it didn’t hurt. [ATTACH=full]846320[/ATTACH] The prize was a silver denarius of Septimius Severus donated by our own [USER=19463]@dougsmit[/USER].  Doug actually donated two coins; one was a very nice Julia Domna that ended up being written about by the student runner-up, Katie Chappell. I may post her write-up a bit later, with permission. Katie really wanted to win that Septimius Severus denarius and accused Shea of being a “homewrecker” for separating SS and Julia Domna. Here are Doug's kind donations: [ATTACH=full]846321[/ATTACH][ATTACH=full]846322[/ATTACH] There’s actually one more CoinTalk connection. The coin Shea wrote about was a Constantius II “Barbarian and Hut” centenionalis that I picked out of [USER=44316]@Valentinian[/USER]'s  pick bin. Warren actually sent the wrong coin at first (a different “Barbarian and Hut” centenionalis), and just told me to keep it. That coin went to another student for her project. (Shea's coin has a little verdigris; I don't think it's BD.) Anyway, below is Shea’s winning write-up. He also gave an illustrated oral presentation that was part of his project. Shea has really good Latin skills and hopes to go to grad school in medieval studies. In January he will travel to Rome for the first time. I’m excited for him. He may not “read” the coin the way typical numismatists do, but sometimes it’s nice to hear how a novice sees a coin. One can still learn something. Thanks to Victor, Doug, and Warren for supporting this project in their own ways. Feel free to pile on with Constantines, or better yet, pics of numismatists that you finally got to meet in real life. I very much enjoyed my time meeting Victor and his wife Dawn. ------------------------------------------------- [ATTACH=full]846328[/ATTACH]Shea McColloughDr. Gavin RichardsonENG 43030 October 2018Constantius II (AD 337-361); AD 348-350; AE-2; 21mm; 4.0g; 0° OBV: Laurel and rosette diademed, draped, cuirassed bust facing left, globe in right hand; D[OMINUS] N[OSTER] CONSTAN—TIVS P[IUS] F[ELIX] AVG[USTUS]; “Our Lord Constantius, Dutiful and Happy Augustus (Emperor).” REV: Helmeted soldier, spear in left hand, advancing right with head facing left; leading a small figure from a hut beneath a tree. The spear points downwards, between the soldier's legs; FEL[ICIUM] TEMP[ORUM] REPA—RATIO ; “Happy Times Restored.” ALEA in exergue, Alexandria mint, 1st officina RIC VIII Alexandria 59 Constantius II was born the third son of Constantine the Great and Fausta in AD 317, and he ruled as the emperor of Rome from AD 337-361. Constantius II originally served as Caesar under his father in AD 324, but, when his father died in AD 337, he began to share rule of the empire with his brothers, Constantine II and Constans I. At the death of Constantine the Great, the military murdered many of Constantine’s relatives, including his brother Constantius I, father of Julian, the future emperor of Rome. Julian would later blame Constantius II for orchestrating these murders of his cousins and uncles, an unprecedented degree of slaughter for the imperial family. However, this massacre did establish a clear line of rule for Constantine I’s sons, leaving only the cousins Julian and Gallus as survivors with imperial claims. Constantius II divvied up the empire with his two brothers, keeping for himself the most prized provinces in the east, as well as the new capital Constantinople. After the death of his brothers, Constantius II became sole ruler of the Empire in AD 353. He quickly learned that he could not rule the entirety of the Roman world alone, though, and eventually appointed his two surviving male cousins, Julian and Gallus, as Caesars under him. The was a unique time of unrest for the empire, coming from both within and without. For more than ten years, Constantius II fought an inconclusive war with the Persians, under the leadership of king Shāpūr II. However, he also faced internal conflicts, quelling many civil wars during his time as emperor, most famously the war with Magnentius, a military leader from Gaul, to avenge the murder of his brother Constans I. Even his two cousins, whom he had appointed Caesars, rebelled against him, resulting in another civil war, which ended with the defeat of Gallus. Constantius II was quite the paranoid leader, and his foreign policy is often deemed weak and cautious. Even though he was not incredibly focused on the outside world, he did work for reform within the empire, enacting many laws which encouraged Christianity and forbade the worship of the pagan deities that still had a hold in the West. Near the end of Constantius II’s life, he faced more internal unrest at the hands of his cousin Julian. However, as he journeyed to the Western part of the empire to face his cousin, he became ill and ultimately died, leaving the empire to Julian, Caesar of Gaul.   The legends and iconography on this coin come from an interesting grouping of mints issued by Constans I and Constantius II. On the obverse of this coin, we see a traditional depiction of the bust of Constantius as it is on many coins and medallions. The legend is also fairly straightforward and generic, seeing that Constans I had coins struck with the exact same legend, only altered to represent the specific names of each ruler. However, the two descriptions of the Emperor, felix and pius (F P), are interesting in light of our class discussions concerning the critical concept of pietas in works such as the Aeneid. Even more, the description of the emperor as pius, or dutiful, seems to stand in stark contrast to the actions of the emperor. Perhaps this description is commonplace for emperors, acting as a general title that comes along with the position. I cannot help but simultaneously see this as an act of propaganda, though—an act of aligning an emperor who celebrated the death of his father by massacring his competing family members with the age-old concept of duty to father, gods, and homeland. Perhaps this observation is overstated because the Romans seemed to have at least some level of comfortability with fratricide, seeing that their myth of national origin features Romulus’ murder of Remus. However, the description remains as a tension between a ruler who would see or oversee the deaths of his two brothers and multiple cousins during his lifetime, as well as an emperor who rejected the example of Octavian, boasting in his triumph in civil war rather than distancing himself from it. The Aeneid-esque imagery does not stop on the obverse though, as the reverse of the coin also bears strong ties to the renowned epic. The legend of the reverse reads FEL TEMP REPA–RATIO, translating as “Happy times restored” or “The return of happy times;” accordingly, the obverse iconography features a Roman soldier leading a young, presumably barbarian, boy from a hut under a tree. This iconography is one of four images that often appeared on coins with the obverse legend FEL TEMP REPA—RATIO, more than likely as a part of commemorations for Rome’s 1100th anniversary in AD 348. But, this image definitely differs from the rest, depicting a humane scene rather than one of defeat and conquest. In some ways, this image represents the Roman affinity for syncretism, conveying the message that the Roman way is available for all who will accept it, especially little children who will be raised up in it. However, as Gavin Richardson discusses in his essay entitled “The ‘Barbarian/ Hut’ Centenionalis and Vergilian Iconography,” the iconography bears incredible similarity to the classical numismatic motif of Aeneas fleeing Troy. This artistic similarity, he asserts, works to align the Vergilian model of assimilation found in book XII of the Aeneid with the ever-increasing struggle to assimilate the barbarians to Roman ideals and destiny (92-93). In a similar way, this icon also displays an instance of Anchises’ book VI command to “spare the conquered and battle down the proud.” Ultimately, even though Constantius II’s rule represents some of the earliest shifting towards anti-paganism in the Roman world, this coin is rife with traditional Roman heritage and history, and uses these familiar images to relate to an empire that seems so far removed from its foundation eleven-hundred years prior.[/QUOTE]

Create my FREE Account!

Log in or Sign up

Reply to Thread

Useful Searches