I seem to really enjoy coins from the glory days of the Roman empire, with images referring to games. I also admire elephants, so obviously this coin was high on my want list. (I have yet to crack it out of it's tomb!) During the attribution party, I found different explanations of the reverse image, explaining the occasion for which the games were held. Now, I don't have en extensive library to fully explain the meaning of the coin, and I was wondering if someone from this board could share some more insights or perhaps more recent information. The various explanatons: 1. Sear mentions that the coin 'commemorates the emperor's provision of public spectacles for the amusement of the Roman populace'. 2. Van Meter states that the 'coin refers to games held to celebrate the victory over Albinus'. 3. Some auction houses, such as Berk, state that the coin 'commemorates the games also mentioned in the Historia Augusta that were given by Severus in mid 197 prior to his departure on his second Parthian expedition'. Regarding the latter explanation, I was able to find the following passage in the Historia Augusta in relation to games and the Parthian war: "He bestowed the toga virilis on his younger son, 99 100 11 Then, after giving a gladiatorial show and bestowing largess upon the people, he set out for the Parthian war." (chapter or book (?) 14). I can relate explanation no. 3 to the passage in the Historia Augusta, but where do the other explanations come from? Am I missing something here? What do you think? Which is the most likely explanation? And please show your 'games-coins'!
I have mine cataloged with the explanation you mention in number 3 from the Historia Augusta. Nice coin BTW. SEPTIMIUS SEVERUS AR Denarius OBVERSE: L SEPT SEV PERT AVG IMP VIIII, laureate head right REVERSE: MVNIFICENTIA AVG, Elephant wearing cuirass walking right Struck at Rome, 196 197 AD 3.63g, 17mm RIC 100, RSC 349
The are Severan experts in this group, so hopefully you will get a satisfactory answer, but I can't see why all three explanations can't be correct. Beautiful coin, BTW. Congratulations.
I'm with gsimonel on this matter. Septimius had a lot to celebrate that year. I see no reason that game would have to have been single purpose. The Emperor was in town, victorious, and about to set out on a measure to punish those evil Parthians. He was solidly in charge with an heir and a spare. All was good; trot out the elephants. That particular type was produced at what I would call a low point of Rome mint quality. Many of these have small and irregular flans. Yours is very nice. As noted in your photo label, the coins were made in both IMP VIII and IMP VIIII versions. Traditionally these are assigned (VIII) to the fall of Byzantium which had supported Pescennius Niger and not surrendered following his death and (VIIII) the defeat of Albinus shortly thereafter. I don't know if recent revisionists have changed any of this. 8 9
Doug, If you search for Battle of Lugdunum in the Forum discussion group, you will find a detailed summary of my arguments that that battle apparently took place not on 19 Feb. 197 (IMP VIIII) as traditionally believed, but rather one year earlier, on 19 Feb. 196 (IMP VIII). If you have a little time to consider the problem, I would be interested to hear whether or not you are convinced. As to the IMP VIII-VIIII Elephant type, I showed in my Oxford B.Litt. thesis of 1972 that it was introduced in spring 197 along with four other types, including LIBERALITAS AVG II (second largesse) and PROFECTIO AVG (departure of the emperor on expedition). So the coins tell exactly the same story as Septimius' vita, quoted by Limes above: the emperor before leaving Rome for the East distributed a largesse and presented games to the Roman people. Clearly the MVNIFICENTIA type refers to precisely the same games of spring 197 that are mentioned in the vita, as I stated in the Berk descriptions that Limes found on the internet.
I have accepted the redating to Feb. 196 for several years now and see no reason not to push IMP VIII back with it. I am completely unschooled in what is to be considered for IMP VIIII but some early Parthian event seems reasonable. I suppose a coin count of elephants might suggest how long the type was used for each but I don't see that being useful in the question since we don't know how long after VIII the elephants were first issued or how long after VIIII they continued. I have a little trouble with the long issue of elephant types unless they referred to more than one set of games. I see no benefit in reminding people about the games from last year long after they were finished unless you were doing more games at that time. It is natural for people to ask 'what have you done for me lately' and for rulers to advertise the present, ongoing generosity. It is dangerous to try to think like a Roman but I have trouble seeing how Septimius thought he benefited taking an IMP for Byzantium. Taking so long to put down this 'problem' and admitting that there were still people supporting Pescennius that long after he was gone hardly seems like something to advertise with pride. I suppose it might serve to warn all cities against betting on the wrong horse but I would probably spin the history to draw attention to things everyone would agree were great accomplishments certainly including defeating Parthians. For that reason, I like your suggestin that VIIII was some unknown victory in Parthia rather than a long overdue clean-up of old business. I have never been interested in the history after the closing of the COS II mint(s) so any opinion I have is worthless. We see today people claiming that Septimius restored Antioch the favor of a mint stripping it from competing cities. If this were true, I would almost expect that there would have been a Restituo coin or some document/inscription honoring the emperor's benevolence. Weer I Septimius, I might have announced that Antioch was restored to favor on the request of his son(s) rather than just letting it go without notice. I see no way this question can be answered. For the record, I started believing in the idea of a travelling mint system that includes all the 'Old Style' coins. I still lack being convinced as to where the New Style coins were made. Is there sufficient die evidence to suggest that they were all in one location? I was hoping to read all about this in your book. I stopped following the question in 2003 when I retired on fixed income and stopped chasing dies I might have a decade earlier so I probably missed anything you said in the first 4-5 years of Forvm.
Doug, In the Reka Devnia hoard, there were 27 denarii of the Elephant type with IMP VIII and 30 denarii with IMP VIIII, allowing us to estimate that the type was introduced maybe a couple of months before news of IMP VIIII reached Rome, and that it continued for about the same length of time after that news had arrived. I see no difficulty at all in supposing that the elephant type and its companion PROFECTIO AVG were produced continuously over a period of about four months, of course always referring to the same upcoming and then actual departure of the emperor from Rome and the same games that he held to celebrate that departure. The most likely occasion for Septimius' IMP VIIII, as I explained on Forum: his general Laetus' breaking of the Parthian siege of Nisibis, accomplished before the emperor himself arrived in the East. It's obvious that Septimius was accepting imperatorial acclamations for each of his victories over Niger and then Albinus, so of course he would also accept one for his capture of Byzantium, his final victory over the two pretenders and then Niger's hangers-on in Byzantium.
