What are They Doing Here? Flavian Colosseum Sestertii from Archaeological Contexts in Hessen and the Taunus-Wetterau Limes (with an Addendum to NC 2006) more

The Numismatic Chronicle VOLUME 169 LONDON THE ROYAL NUMISMATIC SOCIETY 2009 What are they doing here? Flavian Colosseum Sestertii from Archaeological Contexts in Hessen and the Taunus-Wetterau Limes (with an Addendum to NC 2006) NATHAN T. ELKINS1 Since publication of my die study and analysis of the Flavian Colosseum sestertii,2 I discovered that five specimens from three archaeological sites were overlooked. Remarkably, these five Flavian Colosseum sestertii are clustered around a rather tight geographical region in the area of modern Frankfurt am Main, Germany. The only other example of this type recorded from an archaeological context is Elkins lc which was recovered in Ptuj, Slovenia.3 An historical explanation for the presence of these five uncommon coin types in the area of modern Frankfurt is suggested below. At the end is an Appendix listing (i) specimens which were overlooked in the 2006 publication or have surfaced on the market since then, and (ii) corrections and further references for coins listed in 2006. The three sites where the five Colosseum sestertii were discovered are the forts and associated vici of Butzbach and Saalburg in the Taunus-Wetterau limes andNida- Heddernheim, which lies approximately 15-20 km behind the line of the limes.4 All 1 I am grateful to Hans-Markus von Kaenel, David Wigg-Wolf, and Helmut Schubert who kindly provided feedback on my initial research. All ideas and arguments are my own. Ted Buttrey kindly provided images from auction catalogues for the Appendix. 2 N.T. Elkins, 'The Flavian Colosseum sestertii: currency or largess?', NC 166 (2006), pp. 211-221. The four types distinguished in that study have been incorporated into the 2007 revision of RIC 2.1 by Ian Carradice and TV. Buttrey: Type A = RIC 2.1 (Titus), 186; Type B = RIC 2.1 (Titus), 185; Type C = RIC 2.1 (Titus), 184; Type D = RIC 2.1 (Domitian), 131. In the previous edition of RIC 2 all types were generally attributed to RIC (Titus) 110 or as a variant thereof. 3 The specimen is incorrectly recorded as 'Ljubljana 392' in Elkins, 'The Flavian Colosseum sestertii', P- 216. The museum number in Ljubljana is in fact 772. The number 392 was derived from the catalogue in P. Kos and A. Semrov, Roman Imperial Coins and Countermarks of the 1" Century (Ljubljana, 1995), P- 95. The coin is recorded in FMRSl IV (193 Ptuj, Einzelfunde), p. 458, no. 4. Corrections have been made in the addendum to the die study at the end of the present article. ■* For a thorough overview of these sites and their respective histories, see the relevant entries in D. Baatz and F.R. Herrmann (eds), Die Romer in Hessen (Stuttgart, 1989 second edition): D. Baatz, 'Butzbach. Limeskastell Hunneburg', pp. 246-248; id., 'Saalburg (Taunus)', pp. 469-473; I. Huld- Zetsche, 'Frankfurt am Main. Heddernheim, Nordweststadt, Praunheim: Militarlager und civitas- Hauptort', pp. 275-293. H. Schonberger, 'Die romischen Truppenlager der friihen und mittleren Kaiserzeit zwischen Nordsee und Inn', Berichte der Romisch-Germanischen Kommission 66 (1985), PP- 321-497 also provides an important survey of the area. H. Schonberger and H.-G. Simon, Das Kastell Okarben und die Besetzung der Wetterau seit Vespasian. Limesforschungen 19 (Berlin, 1980) >s a major contribution with regard to archaeological evidence attesting Flavian activity in the area. On the limes more generally, see D. Baatz, Der romische Limes. Archaologische Ausfliige zwischen Rhein 200 nathan t.elkins sites are clustered together within an area of approximately 25-30 km. The earliest military building phases at Nida-Heddernheim, which now lies in the urban area of modern Frankfurt, date to c. AD 75-79 and the town which later grew up around the military installations served as a Roman civitas capital from the Trajanic period onwards. Saalburg and Butzbach are cohort forts that lay directly on the limes, north of modern Frankfurt. The earliest military phases of construction at Saalburg and Butzbach date to c. AD 85/90;5 there is good evidence for the development of the vicus at Saalburg in the early second century AD, while the vicus at Butzbach would have developed from the late Flavian period or in the Trajanic period.6 The founding of the cohort forts at Saalburg and Butzbach follow Domitian's campaign against the Chatti, a Germanic people who lived north of the Wetterau (now North Hessen), launched inc. AD 82/83.7 Two Colosseum sestertii were recovered at Butzbach: one comes from the vicus that grew up around the fort and the other does not have an exactly recorded find spot.8 Two more specimens were found in the vicus of Saalburg within a close proximity to the fort there,9 while one specimen was discovered at Nida-Heddernheim.10 All the coins in question appear to be of Elkins Type C, struck under Titus, with the obverse depicting the Meta Sudans to the left of the Colosseum and the porticus of the Baths of Titus to the right, though personal examination of the coins from Butzbach showed them to be so worn that they could also be of Elkins Type D, struck under Domitian for Divus Titus. All the coins are well worn except for the und Donau (Berlin, 2000 fourth edition), esp. pp. 127-142 on the area in question. On Butzbach, see also J. Lindenthal, Die landliche Besiedhmg der nordlichen Wetterau in romischer Zeit. Materialien zur Vor-und Friihgeschichte von Hessen 23 (Wiesbaden, 2007), pp. 112-131. A good general volume on Nida-Heddernheim is I. Huld-Zetsche, Nida — Eine romische Stadt in Frankfurt am Main. Schriften des Limesmuseum 48 (Stuttgart, 1994). For basic treatments of the coin finds from Nida-Heddernheim (Frankfurt am Main) and Saalburg, see: H. Schubert, Romische Fundmiinzen aus Nida-Heddernheim. Archaologische Reihe 2 (Frankfurt am Main, 1984); J. Gorecki, '«Seid einig, bereichert die Soldaten, alles andere verachtet!». Der romische Staatshaushalt und die Kosten der militarischen Besatzung der Saalburgkastelle', in E. Schallmayer (ed.), Hundert Jahre Saalburg. Vom romischen Grenzposten zum europdischen Museum (Mainz, 1997), pp. 147-154. 5 The traditional chronology is accepted here, but it should be noted that K. Kortiim, 'Zur Datierung der romischen Militaranlagen im obergermanisch-ratischen Limesgebiet. Chronologische Untersuchungen anhand der Miinzfunde', Saalburg Jahrbuch 49 (1998), pp. 5-65, argues that this limes system was not established until Trajanic times. 6 Saalburg: C.S. Sommer, 'Der Saalburg-Vicus. Neue Ideen zu alten Planen', in Schalmayer (ed.), Hundert Jahre Saalburg, pp. 155-165. On Butzbach, see references in n. 4 above. 7 B.W. Jones, The Emperor Domitian (London and New York, 1992), pp. 128-131, with further references, argues for a start date in AD 82. A date of AD 83 is preferred by most scholars. Jones relied heavily on Domitian's titulature on coins, his use of which is problematic: see A. Becker, Rom und die Chatten (Darmstadt and Marburg, 1992), pp. 265-268; Schonberger, 'Die romischen Truppenlager', pp. 369-370. Becker's monograph is presently the authoritative reference on the Chatti, though another useful reference is K. Strobel, 'Der Chattenkrieg Domitians. Historische und politische Aspekte', Germania 65 (1987), pp. 423-452. 8 FMRD V. 2,1 (Butzbach 2108, Einzelfunde aus dem Vicus), p. 140, no. 40, and (Butzbach 2109, Einzelfunde ohne genauere Fundstellen), p. 163, no. 31. 9 FMRD V. 1,1 (Kastell Saalburg 1162, Einzelfunde der naheren Umgebung des Kastells (Vicus)), p. 422, nos 42-43. 10 FMRD V. 2,2 (Nida 2259, Areal des Steinkastells), p. 44, no. 37. flavian colosseum SESTERTII from archaeological contexts 201 specimen from Nida-Heddernheim, which is now on display in the Archaologisches Museum in Frankfurt." The high degree of wear on these coins may indicate they circulated locally well into the second century AD; indeed, one specimen (FMRD V. 2,1 (Butzbach 2108, Einzelfunde aus dem Vicus), p. 140, no. 40) was found together with an Hadrianic as. In the western Roman world, once bronze coins were introduced into a region they tended to stay there and circulate locally, unlike silver and gold coins which had a greater degree of mobility.12 While it has long been recognised that bronze coins circulated regionally and were supplied to certain regions intermittently, it has been more recently discovered that the Roman state sometimes deliberately supplied certain populations with coins bearing images relevant to their station in Roman society. This was one of the innovations in Fleur Kemmers' work on the coin finds from Nijmegen which attested a deliberate and regular supply of coin to the Flavian legionaries and a demonstrably higher concentration of military types in contrast to the finds from neighbouring civilian settlements and Rome.13 Although it is increasingly clear that the Roman state deliberately supplied certain regions and groups with coins bearing certain designs, we may assume that the five Colosseum sestertii in question would not have arrived in the Taunus-Wetterau limes as a matter of deliberate policy with respect to their iconography. The imagery on the coins and the scarcity of the type would suggest they were best suited for an audience in Rome itself, and probably served as commemorative pieces for the dedication of the Colosseum under Titus, with an additional striking for Divus Titus under Domitian after Titus' death.14 " The specimens from Saalburg are available for study in the museum archive there and the specimens from Butzbach now reside in the Hessiches Landesmuseum in Darmstadt. I am grateful to Peter Fasold and Monika Burgermaier (Archaologisches Museum, Frankfurt), Gottfried Kleiner (Hessisches Landesmuseum - Darmstadt), and Carsten Amrhein (Saalburg Museum) for allowing me to personally examine the Colosseum sestertii now in their respective collections 12 Duncan-Jones has demonstrated much in this area: e.g. R.P. Duncan-Jones, 'Mobility and Immobility of Coin in the Roman Empire', AIIN36 (1989), pp. 121-137; id., Money and Government in the Roman Empire (Cambridge, 1994), pp. 172-179; id, 'The monetization of the Roman Empire: regional variations in the supply of coin types', in G.M. Paul and M. Ierardi (eds), Roman Coins and Public Life under the Empire. E. Togo Salmon Papers II (Ann Arbor, 1999), pp. 61 -82. A. Hobley, An Examination of Roman Bronze Coin Distribution in the Western Roman Empire. BAR 688 (Oxford, 1998), further demonstrated regional bronze coin distribution, though his study is methodologically limited. Fleur Kemmers is conducting new investigations in coin supply and circulation in the northwestern provinces, e.g. F. Kemmers, 'Not at random: evidence for a regionalised coin supply?' in J. Bruhn, B. Croxford and D. Grigoropoulos (eds), Proceedings of the Fourteenth Annual Theoretical Roman Archaeology Conference, which Took Place at the University of Durham, 26-27 March 2004 (Oxford, 2005), pp. 39-49; id., Coins for a Legion: An Analysis of the Coin Finds from the Augustan Legionary Fortress and Flavian canabae legionis at Nijmegen. SFMA 21 (Mainz, 2006); id., 'Sender or receiver? Contexts of coin supply and coin use', in H.-M. von Kaenel and F. Kemmers (eds), Coins in Context I: New Perspectives for the Interpretation of Coin Finds. SFMA 23 (Mainz, 2009), pp. 137-156. 13 Kemmers, Coins for a Legion, pp. 189-244, esp 219-244. N.T. Elkins, 'Coins, contexts, and an iconographic approach for the 21s1 century', in von Kaenel and Kemmers (eds), Coins in Context I, pp. 25-46, esp. 42-46, highlights the potential for studying the regional distribution of coin types according to their iconography and semantic value. 14 Elkins, 'The Flavian Colosseum sestertii'. N.T. Elkins, Architectural Coin Types: Reflections of Roman Society (Ph.D. Diss, in preparation, University of Missouri), contains a chapter on the find spots 202 nathan t. elkins The remarkable presence of five Colosseum sestertii in this small geographical area may be accounted for by local historical events and the light that has been shed on coin supply by archaeological inquiry. Three historical factors can be associated with the supply of coin to the Taunus-Wetterau area: the presence of the emperor in the region (Mainz) at the start of the war against the Chatti,15 the final Roman domination of the Wetterau after the campaign against the Chatti, and the subsequent establishment of defences along Taunus-Wetterau limes along with the founding of the province of Germania Superior after the war. The archaeological record confirms a substantial presence of Flavian coinage - in contrast to earlier imperial coins - in the region, introduced during and/or shortly after the campaign. The physical presence of the emperor (as well as his Praetorian Guard and entourage) at the outset of the war is also noteworthy since the imperial presence has been associated with peculiarities in the coin supply along the Middle Rhine and at Nijmegen. Domitianic quadrantes, which normally circulated in Italy, were found at the military centres at Nijmegen and along the Rhine frontier and were probably introduced as a direct result of the emperor's presence: 'A solution [to explain the presence of quadrantes at Nijmegen] is perhaps to be found in the war against the Chatti in 83, in which all the legions of Upper Germany and detachments of all the Lower Rhine legions were involved. Though this in itself was not a remarkable feat, the war was deemed important enough for the emperor to come to the troubled area himself. Domitian, and no doubt his imperial staff, set up their headquarters at Mainz and stayed there for several months. It was the first time since Caligula had led his troops to the Rhine in 39 that a reigning emperor had come to the region personally to lead the armies of the Upper and Lower Rhine into war. Furthermore, it is very likely that the quadrantes were struck around 83 (certainly before the imperial acclamation of Domitian) and that there was a need for small change in both the Upper and Lower Rhine areas. These three pieces of evidence together seem to lead to the conclusion that the presence of the imperial authorities in the area is related to the consignment of quadrantes there. The coin finds from the legionary fortress at Mirebeau, in particular, are important confirmation of this theory..."16 of Flavian and Trajanic architectural coin types: types celebrating the construction or reconstruction of specific monuments tend to be found more commonly in Rome and Italy while architectural types that evoke ideals (such as Flavian coins depicting the Ara Providentia which refers to the emperor's foresight in choosing an heir) are more abundantly and regularly found throughout the western provinces. At present, the only significant anomaly is the concentration of Colosseum sestertii in the neighborhood of modern Frankfurt am Main. Another example of an unexpected and rare Flavian architectural type appearing on the frontier is a sestertius in a medallic frame, depicting what is believed to be the Domus Flavia, coming from a grave in Bonn: see I. Carradice, 'Coins, monuments and literature: some important sestertii of Domitian', in T. Hackens and R. Weiller (eds), ProcINC 9 (Berne, September 1979), pp. 377-378, with further bibliography. 15 On Domitian at Mainz, see L. Schumacher, Romische Kaiser in Mainz im Zeitalter des Principals (27 v. Chr. - 284 n. Chr.) (Bochum, 1982), pp. 33-47. 16 Kemmers, Coins for a Legion, pp. 218-219 with further references and discussion. See also id., 'Quadrantes from Nijmegen: small change in a frontier province', SNR 82 (2003), pp. 17-34; page 30 flavian colosseum SESTERTIIfrom archaeological contexts 203 A detailed study of Roman period coin finds in the area of the Taunus-Wetterau limes has yet to be conducted, but could well shed further light on the circulation pool of Flavian-era coins in the region, from where the coins were introduced, and what specific mechanisms brought Flavian coinage to the region. All three sites under consideration here have yielded respectable quantities of Flavian coinage. At this stage, we may postulate that the emperor's presence on the frontier, and a pronounced increase in military activity in the area during the war against the Chatti and afterwards as the limes were organised, would have necessitated the consignment of large quantities of coin to the region. The Colosseum sestertii would have arrived in conjunction with that large influx of coinage. APPENDIX A. New coins recorded since NC 2006 The numbering scheme follows the 2006 die study. Dies 6. A4/P6 m. n. 7.A5/P6 1: m. n. o. Wt. (g.) 24.49 23.66 24.16 24.22 22.80 20.24 P- 9.A5/P8 g. 24.83 23.10 F4 e. Not fully attributable Axis (h.) 6 Miinzkabinett der Staatlichen Museen Berlin, Objektnummer 18200446 6 CNG 76 (12 September 2007), 3294 6 Archaologisches Museum Frankfurt Inv. 4403 = FMRD V. 2,2 (Nida 2259, Areal des Steinkastells), p. 44, no. 37 6 Miinzkabinett der Staatlichen Museen Berlin, Objektnummer 18212634 6 Numismatica Ars Classica 45 (2 April 2008), 108 = Harlan J. Berk Buy or Bid Sale 162 (15 January 2009), 218 Helios Numismatik 1 (17 April 2008), 242 6 Saalburg S 46 = FMRD V. 1,1 (Kastell Saalburg 1162, Einzelfunde der naheren Umgebung des Kastells (Vicus)), p. 422, no. 42 6 Saalburg S 908 = FMRD V. 1,1 (Kastell Saalburg 1162, Einzelfunde der naheren Umgebung des Kastells (Vicus)), p. 422, no. 43 Miinzkabinett der Staatlichen Museen Berlin, Objektnummer 18204487 6 Private Collection Curtis Clay; acquired from S. Boutin, Jan. 1972; ex Dutch Royal Collection, J. Schulman 254, Nov. 1971, part of lot 3409. 6 Miinzhandlung Basel 1 (28 June 1934), 414 also notes a concentration of quadranles at Nida-Heddernheim, a site which also yielded a Colosseum sestertius. 17 This specimen is accompanied by a note from Dr Heinrich Dressel condemning it as a forgery. It is in fact ancient. 204 nathan t. elkins 8. or 9. A5/P6(?) or P7(?) 8. or 9. A5/? Dies a. Wt. (g.) Axis (h.) 17.59 6? Kiinker 133 (11 October 2007), 8749 b. 22.91 Numismatic Ars Classica 2 (21-22 February 1990), 594 (reverse not illustrated) Unattributable due to wear Type C/D Landesamt fur Denkmalpflege Darmstadt 1658 = Hessiches Landesmuseum Darmstadt A 1956: 2794 (1 -2) = FMRD V. 2,1. (Butzbach 2108, Einzelfunde aus dem Vicus), p. 140, no. 40 Landesamt fur Denkmalpflege Darmstadt 1075 = Hessiches Landesmuseum Darmstadt A 1956: 27501 = FMRD V. 2,1. (Butzbach 2109, Einzelfunde ohne genauere Fundstellen), p. 163, no. 31. Type C/D B. Corrigenda and additional references for coins already recorded in NC 2006 lb = Miinzkabinett der Stadt Winterthur lc = LJ 772 (not LJ 392) FMRSl IV (193 Ptuj, Einzelfunde), p. 458, no. 4. 22.87, 7h 4a = Numismatica Ars Classica 5 March 2009, 234 6i = Leu 18 (5 May 1977), 315 = Sotheby's 21/6/1990 (Nelson Bunker Hunt Collection), 707 = CNG Triton XII (6 Jan. 2009), 582 7 j = Gorny & Mosch 151 (9 Oct. 2006), 417 9c = ex Ives Collection = Christie's 30 May 1949, 6618 BNF, Paris; BNC (Domitien) 543 was erroneously listed as 9a in the original catalogue. It should become 8e since the reverse die is in fact P7.19 Fla (Stack's 5/12/2000, 304) was labelled 'dubious' in NC 2006. Curtis Clay has suggested to me in private correspondence that, on the grounds of the serifs on the lettering, this coin may be a genuine product of a Balkan mint. If Mr. Clay is correct, this unique coin would add a new set of dies to those previously recorded for Type A. F2d = Naville XVI (3 July 1933), 517 F2e = J. Hirsch VII (2 June 1902), 1203 F4d = Sotheby's (16 May 1906), 76 (Mackerell Collection) = Naville XVII (3 October 1934), 1329 = Sotheby's 19/6/1990 (Nelson Bunker Hunt Collection), 13120 181 am grateful to Rick Witschonke (ANS) for confirming that this specimen is identical to the Ives coin in the ANS collection since 1954. The tooling and smoothing apparent on the coin itself cannot be seen on Christie's photograph, which was taken from a plaster cast of the coin. 191 am grateful to Curtis Clay for calling this to my attention. 20 The Bunker Hunt catalogue lists a number of previous auctions in which the coin was sold. It also states that the coin was found at Pompeii, which can be dismissed as fantasy since Pompeii was destroyed before the Colosseum types were struck and since the specimen itself is a Renaissance forgery.