BMCR 2009.03.11, Ragnar Hedlund, "...Achieved Nothing Worthy of Memory"

Ragnar Hedlund, "...Achieved Nothing Worthy of Memory". Coinage and
Authority in the Roman Empire c. AD 260-295. Studia Numismatica
Upsaliensia 5.  Uppsala:  Uppsala Universitet, 2008.  Pp. ix, 267.
ISBN 9789155471200.  $89.50.

Reviewed by Clare Rowan, Macquarie University
([email protected])
Word count:  2174 words
-------------------------------
To read a print-formatted version of this review, see
http://ccat.sas.upenn.edu/bmcr/2009/2009-03-11.html
To comment on this review, see
http://www.bmcreview.org/2009/03/20090311.html
-------------------------------

[Table of Contents is listed at the end of the review.]

This book is available  online for free download
(http://publications.uu.se/theses/abstract.xsql?dbid=8511) .

Hedlund's book is a published form of his doctoral thesis, submitted at
Uppsala University in 2008. Taking the interregnum of AD 275 as a
starting point, Hedlund explores the relationship between the emperor,
the Senate and the army in the period AD 260-295, which he labels 'the
age of the later soldier emperors'. Given the paucity of literary
evidence, Hedlund's main source material is coinage, and his aim is to
provide a numismatic study of the period aimed at the non-numismatist.
The great strength of the work lies in its discussion of the
portraiture of the emperor; Hedlund suggests the elaborate way in which
the emperor was represented on coinage reflects the fact that focus
increasingly centered on the role of the emperor, rather than on his
person (p. 35).[[1]] Here Hedlund provides a service similar to that of
Bastien's work on imperial portraiture,[[2]] but with the advantage
that the discussion is focused on a specific time period and context.

The first chapter provides a theoretical and methodological framework
for the study. Hedlund adopts the now prevailing view that the third
century did not experience a 'great crisis', but rather a series of
them. He focuses on one crisis in particular, the alleged crisis of
imperial authority, and sets out to explore how emperors in this period
emphasized their legitimacy. This was done through the communication of
shared values, which Hedlund connects to 'the military' and 'the city
of Rome'. His vision of Roman society in this period is heavily
influenced by Winterling[[3]]: a triangle-like structure with the
emperor at the top, and his court (the army) and the senate as the two
lower corners (p.20). The relationship of the emperor to these
foundations of power forms the focus of Hedlund's study. The approach
is influenced by the works of Hoelscher[[4]] and Zanker[[5]], but given
the paucity of other evidence, Hedlund's analysis is restricted to the
imagery that survives on coinage. His 'language of images' stresses the
use of simplicity, abstraction, ambiguity and repetition (p. 23-24).
The chapter includes a useful overview of current ideas about the use
and interpretation of coinage, and modern scholarship on the third
century. Unfortunately this chapter, and the introduction, are riddled
with grammatical errors and spelling mistakes, too numerous to
reiterate here (e.g. p. 2 'which was the relationship between the
emperor, the army and the senate during this age?', p.12 'somewhat more
difficult to asses', p. 13 'seems to have been seems remarkably
prosperous', p. 13 'prosophographical').

The second chapter proceeds to examine the military image of the
emperor.  Hedlund argues that, in the absence of such larger monuments
as arches and statuary, coins were adapted to function as 'monuments in
miniature' (p.51). Numismatic imagery in this period was modified to
express ideas normally contained in more 'traditional' monuments.
Hedlund's perspective provides a useful approach to the evidence, but
his argument implies that coins had not functioned in this manner
previously. Recent scholarship on the Republican and earlier imperial
period has illustrated that coins did operate as 'monuments in
miniature', and it is this scholarship that has influenced Hedlund's
approach.[[6]] Though perhaps fewer in quantity than previous periods,
statuary and other large scale monuments are known for emperors of late
third century: an arch of Augustus was rededicated to Gallienus and his
wife, and Aurelian built a temple to Sol in Rome.[[7]] The building
activities of the tetrarchy also illustrate that the mentality of
monumentality in this period had not changed: if the later soldier
emperors could have built monuments (unencumbered by the brevity of
their reigns), they would have. It is difficult to envision that the
imagery on coinage was actively altered as an intended replacement for
other monumental forms. The portraits of the emperor certainly became
more elaborate on coinages in this period, but it is not certain
whether this was the direct result of a decline in other avenues of
imperial expression.

This aside, Hedlund provides a useful summary of the imperial portraits
and their variations, as well as reverse types of military
significance, making this information accessible to the
non-numismatist. Hedlund chooses not to use Roman Imperial Coinage as
his main reference work, but the studies of Bastien, Estiot and Goebl
among others.[[8]] This decision may affect the ability of those
without access to a specialist numismatic library to approach the
material for themselves. Hedlund stresses the significance of combining
'campaign portraits' of the emperor with reverse types of military
significance, but does not account for the fact that 'campaign'
portraits were also paired with reverses that did not have overt
military connotations,[[9]] and that reverse types containing military
imagery could be combined with a variety of obverse portraits.[[10]]
Nonetheless, Hedlund's presentation of the coins as a total 'monument'
(considering obverse and reverse together) avoids the trap of only
considering reverse types.  His suggestion that the multi-layered
nature of the imagery in this period meant that one image could
function as a visual shorthand for a whole campaign, or triumph, is
thought-provoking.

In the third chapter, Hedlund connects the developments in imperial
portraiture to the increasing importance of the army, and the need of
the emperor to be seen as 'one of the men'. Hedlund particularly
focuses on the rise of the cavalry, and the innovations to imperial
portraiture that resulted. His detailed discussion of the additions and
changes to obverse portraiture, and the significance of these
alterations to particular groups in the late third century, is
extremely useful and should prove of assistance to the historian not
trained in numismatics.

The fourth chapter focuses on the public connection between the emperor
and the city of Rome. In a period when the emperor was often absent
from the city, Hedlund suggests that coin imagery let these rulers
cling to the legitimizing image of Rome when no other means of
communicating this connection was available. Once again the strength of
the work lies in Hedlund's analysis of the obverse portraiture, which
came to depict the emperor explicitly as consul. Hedlund's
consideration of the imagery of Roma Aeterna, and its use in the mints
outside Rome, underlines the importance of the concept in this period.
This exploration encompasses the imperial mints in the provinces as
well as the mints used by usurpers in Gaul and Britain. The adoption
and manipulation of Rome and her culture in the provinces (notably with
a coin of Carausius which may bear a quote from Virgil) highlights the
decentralization of the Empire in this period from a numismatic
perspective.

The fifth chapter focuses on religion and in particular the association
of the emperor with a variety of deities. Hedlund joins the growing
number of scholars who believe that the significance of the cult of Sol
has been exaggerated, and contextualizes the god's appearance to a
specific timeframe: Aurelian's campaign against Palmyra. Hedlund also
considers the continuing importance of the emperor's pietas in this
period, particularly within the ritual of consecratio. An overview of
the Jovian iconography is also provided, as well as a discussion of
other deities. Hedlund then turns to the appropriation of divine
iconography by the emperors. Here he is influenced by Bergmann's
conclusion that this iconography signals that the emperor is like the
gods, not one of them.[[11]] A variety of portrait types are discussed,
but easily the most interesting is the iconography of Gallienus,
accompanied by the legend GALLIENAE AVGVSTAE. Hedlund interprets the
type as signaling an association between Gallienus and Ceres, and
contextualizes it with the recently discovered coin type showing
Gallienus with a Janiform portrait, and another that shows the emperor
in the guise of Mercury.  The acclamation of Aurelian as deus et
dominus is also discussed, and Hedlund follows Estiot[[12]] in
downplaying the significance of the legend, which is only known from
three coins struck for the emperor at the mint at Serdica.

In the final chapter, Hedlund provides a summary of his conclusions and
returns to the thorny question of who actually chose and directed coin
types. Rather than seeing the products of imperial mints outside Rome
as empty mimicry, Hedlund suggests that the imperial provincial mints
actively shaped imperial propaganda and adapted it to local needs.
Distancing himself from Pink,[[13]] Hedlund suggests that the mints
employed creative imagery in the absence of the emperor, in what
Hedlund describes as 'a virtual panegyric environment' (p. 240).
Employing Hoelscher's ideas about transgression in art,[[14]] Hedlund
suggests that much of the more extreme imagery in this period (for
instance, Aurelian's acclamation as deus et dominus) is created at the
instigation of the provincial mints, which used iconography that
contravened the norm in competition for the attention of the emperor.
This may provide a better avenue for interpreting the increasingly
complex imperial portraiture of this period than the suggestion that
coins had to function in lieu of larger monuments.  If these mints were
competing for the attention of the emperor, then one would imagine the
imperial image would become as overloaded as Aurelian's proclamation as
lord and god.

Hedlund's book supplies a numismatic perspective to studies of the late
third century. He concludes that the coin imagery points to a
continuity of empire, not to military anarchy. And yet some might see
the continued and repeated emphasis on the military valor of the
emperor, his connection to Rome and the gods, as symbolic of a crisis
of power, where the emperor felt a greater need to justify his
position. (In much the same way as on Severan coinage the concordia of
Caracalla and Geta was greatly emphasized just prior Geta's murder).
This alternative perspective is never addressed by Hedlund. This is not
to suggest that Hedlund's vision of coinage as a repeated and necessary
demonstration of legitimacy is not a valid interpretation; indeed it
provides a lively avenue for investigation and further research.

The book contains detailed summaries of the coin types of this period,
which will prove useful to the non-specialist. Excellent color images
are included to illustrate significant coin types, but these are not to
scale, and no indication of their original size is provided. For the
non-numismatist, this may have been a useful addition. A map of the
imperial mints and a short chronology are also included.
Overall, Hedlund achieves his purpose, by producing a study of
numismatics, written for non-numismatists, and a discussion of recent
theories of interpretation, aimed at the non-historian (p 4). He
provides a solid overview of imperial portraiture and its developments,
tying it closely to contemporary contexts. Hedlund's book also offers
several avenues of interpretation for coinage in this period, drawing
on influential modern works in Roman art and history, which will, one
hopes, influence future numismatic research in the area.

Table of Contents

INTRODUCTION: "ONE OF THE BEST ATTESTED, BUT MOST IMPROBABLE EVENTS..."
1. APPROACHING THE THIRD CENTURY
1.1. "By the weakness of the emperors"
1.2. The crises of the third century: departure points
1.3. Remnants of a narrative--written sources (or, the lack thereof)
1.4. Communication and legitimacy: towards a theoretical framework
1.5. Introducing a 'language of images'
1.6. Imperial coinage as a visual medium
1.7. Grammar and syntax of a 'language of coin-images'
1.8. Crossing boundaries: chronological scope of the thesis
1.9. Patchwork: research on third century coinages
2. VIRTUS AUGUSTI: THE EMPEROR GOES TO WAR
2.1. The year 260: year zero in the Roman empire
2.2. The image of military power
2.3. The virtus of a soldier-emperor
2.4. ...that leads to victory
2.5. The importance of being invictus
2.6. 'Waging peace'
2.7. A promise of order
2.8. Restoring the world
2.9. War as ritual and monuments of war
3. ...ET FRATRES SUI: EMPERORS, SOLDIERS AND OFFICERS
3.1. "Be harmonious, enrich the soldiers..."
3.2. Being one of the men
3.3. The legions: an armed society?
3.4. 'From the curule seat to the horseback'
3.5. Conceiving a 'military court'
3.6. Colleagues in arms?
4. ROMAE AETERNAE: THE EMPEROR AND THE URBS AETERNA
4.1. All roads lead
4.2. The gorgeous palaces, the solemn temples: searching for the
soldier-emperors in the city of Rome
4.3. Providentia Augusti: coins for the city of Rome
4.4. Paying tribute to Roma Aeterna
4.5. "...the place, to which each emperor had come..."
4.6. The revolt of the moneyers: a counter-reaction?
4.7. Salus provinciarum - imperial coinage in Gaul
4.8. Maintaining Roman order in Britain
5. DEO ET DOMINO AVG: DYNASTIC POLICIES, DEITIES, AND DIVINITY
5.1. A death in the family...
5.2. A god in death: consecratio and pietas
5.3. (Attempts at) founding new dynasties
5.4. The 'cult of Sol Invictus'
5.5. Receiving the world from Jupiter
5.6. The other gods
5.7. Being like the gods...
5.8. ...and being a god.
6. ON THE THRESHOLD TO THE FOURTH CENTURY
6.1. 'Neque quicque dignum memoria egit'?
6.2. Summary: coinage and authority
6.3. The creation of a language of empire
APPENDIX: A BRIEF CHRONOLOGY, c. AD 260-295.
------------------
Notes:


1.   Hedlund here acknowledges his debt to C.E. King (1999), 'Roman
Portraiture: Images of Power?', Roman Coins and Public Life under the
Empire, ed. G.M. Paul and M. Ierardi, (Ann Arbor) pp. 123-136.  King
linked the number and complexity of bust types in the third century to
the fact that the effectiveness of imperial power in this period must
have struck many as minimal.

2.   P. Bastien (1992-1994), Le buste mone/taire des empereurs romains,
(Wetteren)

3.   A. Winterling ed. (1997), Zwischen 'Haus' und 'Staat' : antike
Hoefe im Vergleich, Muenchen ; A. Winterling (2001), 'Staat,
Gesellschaft und politische Integration in der roemischen Kaiserzeit',
Klio 83 : 93-112

4.   T. Hoelscher (1987), Roemische Bildsprache als semantisches
System, Heidelberg

5.   P. Zanker,  Augustus und die Macht der Bilder, Muenchen

6.   A. Chueng (1998), 'The Political Significance of Roman Imperial
Coin Types', SM 191:53-61, and A. Meadows and J. Williams (2001),
'Moneta and the Monuments: Coinage and Politics in Republican Rome',
JRS 91:27-49

7.   For a brief overview see J. Huskinson (2005), 'Art and
Architecture, AD 193-337', CAH XII2, ed. A.K. Bowman, P. Garnsey and A.
Cameron, (Cambridge) pp. 672-703

8.   P. Bastien (1967), Le monnayage de bronze de Postume, Wetteren; P.
Bastien (1976), Le monnayage de l'atelier de Lyon:de la re/couverte de
l'atelier par Aure/lien a\ la mort de Carin (fin 274-285), Wetteren; S.
Estiot (2004), Catalogue des monnaies de l'Empire romain, 12:1
D'Aure/lien a\ Florien (270-276 apre\s J.-C.), Paris; R. Goebl (1993),
Die Muenzpraegung der Kaisers Aurelianus, Wien; R. Goebl, Die
Muenzpraegung der Kaiser Valerianus I., Gallienus, Saloninus (253/268),
Regalianus (260) und Macrianus, Quietus (260/262), Wien; B. Schulte
(1983), Die Goldpraegung der gallischen Kaiser von Postumus bis
Tetricus, Aarau

9.   For instance, RIC V.1 Gallienus 54, displays a 'campaign' portrait
with a reverse alluding to laetitia. RIC V.1 Gallienus 136 is a silver
medallion with a 'campaign' portrait and a reverse displaying Moneta.

10.   For example, RIC V.1 Gallienus 361-362 displays a laureate
portrait of Gallienus, combined with a reverse of Victory. RIC V.1
Gallienus 325 is a virtus type (associated with military valor),
combined with four different portrait types.

11.   M. Bergmann (1998), Die Strahlen der Herrscher: theomorphes
Herrscherbild und politische Symbolik im Hellenismus und in der
roemischen Kaiserzeit, Mainz

12.   S. Estiot (2004), Catalogue des monnaies de l'Empire romain, 12:1
D'Aure/lien a\ Florien (270-276 apre\s J.-C.), Paris, p. 102ff

13.   K. Pink (1949), 'Der Aufbau der roemischen Muenzpraegung in der
Kaiserzeit, VI.1. Probus', NZ 73:13-74; K. Pink (1963), 'Der Aufbau der
roemischen Muenzpraegung in der Kaiserzeit, VI.2. Carus und Soehne', NZ
80:5-68

14.   T. Hoelscher, 'Provokation und Transgression als politischer
Habitus in der spaeten roemischen Republik', RM 111:83-104