Franz Steiner Verlag Historia: Zeitschrift Für Alte Geschichte

Denigration of Predecessor under Claudius, Galba, and Vespasian
Author(s): Edwin S. Ramage

Source: Historia: Zeitschrift für Alte Geschichte, Bd. 32, H. 2 (2nd Qtr., 1983), pp. 201-214
Published by: Franz Steiner Verlag
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/4435844
Accessed: 05-11-2016 16:23 UTC
JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted
digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about
JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.
Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at
http://about.jstor.org/terms
Franz Steiner Verlag is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Historia:
Zeitschrift für Alte Geschichte
This content downloaded from 149.157.108.227 on Sat, 05 Nov 2016 16:23:00 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
DENIGRATION OF PREDECESSOR UNDER CLAUDIUS, GALBA,
AND VESPASIAN
The ancient sources show clearly that Claudius and Vespasian carried out a
systematic denigration of their predecessors, Gaius and Nero, in order to
disassociate themselves from their unattractive habits and policies. While
Claudius seems to have organized no official damnatio memoriae of Gaius, he
took many of the steps that would have been part of such an action.' Seneca
describes the situation in the Apocolocyntosis (11): C. Caesarem non desiit
mortuum persequi. Vespasian, on the other hand, promoted a formal, official
damnatio memoriae of Nero, apparently following the policy of Galba.2 What
follows is an attempt to show how the virtues and mottoes that appear on the
coins of Claudius, Galba, and Vespasian contributed to this process of
denigration.'
Such an interpretation of the coinage of Vespasian, at any rate, runs counter
to the views of scholars like Buttrey who believes that the emperor's types
derived from convenience and "an antiquarian fascination with old coins" on
the part of Vespasian and his moneyers, "rather than an obsession with
historical parallels cultivated to political ends." He sees in this coinage "a
continuity not of historical reference as elicited from the various types and
legends, but of the coins as artifacts." While such factors as convenience and
antiquarian interest no doubt exerted an influence, it is difficult to believe that
they were the only or even the major motives behind Vespasian's issues.4 The
correlation between the coin mottoes and the literary, epigraphical, and
architectural evidence for denigration of predecessor that is outlined below
suggests that, to the contrary, historical reference in a broad sense was an
important consideration in the emperor's choice of coin types.
' CAH 10, p. 669; J.P.V.D. Balsdon, The Emperor Gaius (Caligula) (Oxford, 1934), pp.
218-19; A. Garzetti, From Tiberius to the Antonines, transl. J. R. Foster (London, 1974), pp.
108-109.
2 Tac., Hist. 1.16.2, 1.78; cf. J. Gage, "Vespasien et la memoire de Galba," REA 54 (1952), 295.
See below, note 22.
3 Denigration of predecessor as a propaganda device had a long history, going back at least to
Ciceronian times. It has a kind of culmination in Pliny's Panegyric where blackening Domitian's
reputation is an important element in the eulogy of Trajan. Cf. E. S. Ramage, "Velleius Paterculus
2.126.2-3 and the Panegyric Tradition," Classical Antiquity 1 (1982), 266-271, esp. n. 12.
4 T. V. Buttrey, "Vespasian as Moneyer," NC 12 (1972), 89-109; quotes, pp. 96, 109. Buttrey
is probably right in thinking that it is impossible to find a specific reference to Actium in certain of
Vespasian's coins. This does not, however, warrant the rejection of historical reference generally,
as the work of Fears, Stylow, Bianco, and Weynand shows (see below, notes 5, 6, 29, 31).
Historia, Band XXXII/2 (1983) ? Franz Steiner Verlag GmbH, D-6200 Wiesbaden
202 EDWIN S. RAMAGE
Claudius
Most of Claudius' coin types repeat those of Augustus with the obvious
purpose of relating Claudius directly to the empire's founder. Libertas,
Victoria, Pax, and perhaps Spes along with Ceres and Ob Cives Servatos are
the most important of these.5 But each of these types may also be construed as
negative commentary on the reign of his immediate predecessor, Gaius.
Constantia, which appears exclusively on Claudius' coins and so must
represent the special image that the emperor wanted to project, was also
designed to provide this kind of subtle criticism.
By adopting Libertas as a virtue, as Gnecchi says, Claudius "protested
against the fanatical absolutism of his predecessor Caligula." Mattingly puts it
positively: "The type is a promise of constitutional government under the
Emperor."6 If Josephus' report of Saturninus' speech to the senate immedi-
ately after Gaius' death is to be trusted (AJ19.167-84), then it is possible to see
how important the idea of libertas was at this time. As the senate debates what
course it should now follow, Saturninus speaks out against the kind of tyranny
that the Romans have experienced under Gaius, using words for freedom no
fewer than nine times. Josephus goes on to say that "liberty" was adopted as
the watchword at this juncture by Chaerea and the consuls (186). Claudius'
choice of libertas as one of his virtues, then, seems to have suited this mood of
the times and to have been designed as a clever reinforcement of assurances
that he apparently gave the senate that he would not be another Gaius.
Claudius' coin types are to be found in BMC 1, pp. clii-clix; HCC 1, pp. lxxi-lxxviii; F.
Gnecchi, The Coin-Types of Imperial Rome (Chicago, 1978, repr.), p. 29. J. R. Fears, "The Cult of
Virtues and Roman Imperial Ideology," in Aufstieg und Niedergang der romischen Welt 2, 17, 2,
pp. 827-948, is also valuable for anyone studying the virtues as they appear on the coins. Cf. A.
Wallace-Hadrill, "The Emperor and His Virtues," Historia 30 (1981), 298-323.
Augustus' types are to be found in BMC 1, pp. xcix-ccxxvii; HCC 1, pp. xxxii-liv; Gnecchi, p.
29; cf. Fears, pp. 884-89. Spes is generally taken as first appearing as a virtue with Claudius, but M.
Clark in his unpublished dissertation, The Evidence for Spes as an Early Imperial Idea
(Bloomington, Ind., 1981), pp. 63-78, has suggested that Augustus used it in his propaganda.
Indeed, it appears on an early coin of Augustus from Pella, though it does not appear elsewhere in
his coinage (Clark, pp. 74, 162; H. Gaebler, Die antiken Munzen von Makedonia und Paionia
[Berlin, 1935], 2, p. 97, No. 20).
6 Gnecchi (above, note 5), p. 50; BMC 1, p. clvii. On libertas see A. U. Stylow, Libertas und
Liberalitas: Untersuchungen zur innenpolitischen Propaganda der Romer (Munich, 1972, diss.),
esp. pp. 46-54 and C. Wirszubski, Libertas as a Political Idea at Rome during the Late Republic
and Early Princapate (Cambridge, 1950).
' Jos., BJ 2.208. There may be more to Claudius' use of libertas on his coins than is
immediately apparent. A. U. Stylow, "Die Quadranten des Caligula als Propagandaminzen,"
Chiron 1 (1971), 287-88, has suggested that the pileus on Gaius' coins was meant to emphasize a
libertas under him that had been lacking under Tiberius. If this is the case, then this type of Gaius
could be the prototype for the use of coinage to denigrate a predecessor, a device that Claudius
exploited more fully and with less subtlety.
Denigration of Predecessor under Claudius, Galba, and Vespasian 203
Seneca provides collateral evidence that Gaius and his regime were linked
with a lack of freedom in contemporary thinking, when he asserts that the
emperor was afraid of people speaking freely (Ira 3.19.3: liberiorem vocem). A
few sentences later he ironically provides an idea of Gaius' conception of
libertas when he describes him as freeing a group of fathers from their grief
over their executed sons by putting them to death also (3.19.5: homo misericors
luctu liberavit). Such public statements as this would underline the fact that
Claudius' virtue Libertas was meant to serve as "a tacit condemnation of
Caligula's mad despotism."8
Pax as a Claudian virtue carried many of the same overtones. It is very
common on Claudius' coins, and the contrast with Gaian policy is to be seen in
the fact that this virtue embodied or implied a whole series of virtues
(Concordia, Felicitas, Victoria, Salus, Pudicitia), none of which was promoted
by the earlier emperor.9 Pax existed on two levels - the civil and military.
Gaius' times are represented by Seneca as being a period of civil turbulence.
Under him men's affairs collapsed (Polyb. cons. 16.6: lapsis hominum rebus);
nature produced him for the destruction and scandal of the human race and
during his regime the empire experienced complete upheaval and was burned
to the ground (Polyb. cons. 17.3). Claudius' Pax, then, would stand for a return
to peace, quiet, and normaly in the city based on "a wise self-restraint in the
use of triumph."'0 This policy was evident in such actions as Claudius'
promise of moderation before the senate, the annullment or repeal of many of
Gaius' acts, the return of exiles, the granting of amnesty to political opponents,
and in the new emperor's refusal to act precipitately in the matter of Gaius'
assassination." Victoria, which also appears on Claudius' coins, was therefore
as much victory over tyranny as it was anything else. The result for someone
like Seneca, even though he was in exile, was a more peaceful life and a calm
and quiet fortune as opposed to one that earlier had been "savage" and
tyrannical (Polyb. cons. 13.4: quietiorem. . . vitam; fortunae saevientis
... praesentis quietem).
On the second level Pax and Victoria signified military success. That this
was important to Claudius is once again suggested by Seneca who in a brief
panegyric of the emperor prays that he may pacify Germany and open up
Britain as part of his ministrations to "the human race now long sick and
afflicted" (Polyb. cons. 13.1-2). Thus Pax and Victoria should be taken with
x BMC 1, p. civii. H. Bardon, Les empereurs et les lettres latines d'Auguste a Hadrien (Paris,
1968), p. 182, uses Ira 1.20.8 and Polyb. cons. 17.4-6 to suggest that Claudius encouraged Seneca in
his hostility to the memory of Gaius.
9 Fears (above, note 5), p. 894; C. H. V. Sutherland, The Emperor and his Coinage (London,
1976), p. 114.
BMC 1, p. c.iii.
! Jos., BJ2.208; Suet., Claud. 11.1, 11.3; Cass. Dio 60.3.4-5, 60.4.1, 60.5.1.
204 EDWIN S. RAMAGE
mottoes celebrating Claudius' victories in Germany and Britain which would

naturally be contrasted with Gaius' largely ineffectual operations in the field."2
In view of what has been said about Libertas, Pax, and Victoria in
relationship to the tyrannical and disruptive rule of Gaius, it is not difficult to
see how Ob Cives Servatos on Claudius' coins could reflect negatively on his
predecessor. In spite of its being by now a traditional and honorary legend, it
could easily be taken as referring to Claudius' saving the citizens from Gaius'
oppressive rule. In fact, Gaius was the only enemy from which the new
emperor could have saved the Romans in A. D. 41 when this motto first
appeared on his coins. The man in the street, with clouds of anti-Gaian
propaganda swirling around him, would naturally interpret the motto in this
way.
The appearance of Ceres on Claudius' coins was meant to emphasize the
emperor's strong interest in the grain supply of Rome."3 This was apparently in
sharp contrast to the point of view of Gaius who Seneca indicates had no
interest in this matter. Not only was he not bothered by an alimentorum
egestas, but he was actually an obstacle to those officials who where attempting
to solve the problem (Brev. vit. 18.5-6). Once again the propaganda is two
pronged."
Mattingly calls Constantia an unusual personification and says that it
represents "'courage' or 'resolution' in civil life" on the part of Claudius;
Fears suggests that it stands for "stability" in opposition to the "excesses of the
arbitrary rule of a tyrant. "15 Both point out that the other personifications
appear on Claudius' coins with the epithet Augusta which relates them to the
office of the emperor, while this appears as Constantia Augusti and so is to be
connected with Claudius himself. Once again Seneca provides insights into the
emperor's purposes in adopting this virtue. When speaking of Gaius' irrational
behavior (intemperies animi) after the death of Drusilla, he describes him as
showing a furiosa inconstantia, an inconsistency, then, stemming from his
madness (Polyb. cons. 17.5). This contrasts rather strikingly with Constantia
promoted by Claudius. Since the description follows closely upon a eulogistic
comment about Claudius (1 7.3), it seems distinctly possible that Seneca has the
12 E.g., BMC 1, Nos. 36, 95-107, 241 (De Germanis); 29, 32-36, 49-50, 237-39 (De Britannis);
cf. R.R. Rosborough, An Epigraphic Commentary on Suetonius' Life of Gaius Caligula
(Philadelphia, 1920, diss.), p. 42; J. Janssen, "Ad expeditionem Gai principis in Germaniam," Mn
48 (1920), 205-206.
13 Suet., Claud. 18.1; Tac., Ann. 12.43; Cass. Dio 60.11.1-3; cf. M. E. Blake, Roman
Construction in Italy from Tiberius through the Flavians (Washington, 1959), p. 28 (Carnegie
Institute of Washington Publication 616).
1 T. S. Jerome, Aspects in the Study of Roman History (N.Y., 1962), p. 391, has expressed
skepticism about the truth of this account. If it is untrue, it makes the denigration even more
pointed and obvious.
15 BMC 1, p. clii; Fears (above, note 5), p. 894.
Claudian virtue in mind as he writes. However this may be, the passage shows
how Constantia could denigrate Gaius: it reflected Claudius' sane, consistent,
predictable approach to ruling Rome and the empire in contrast to that of
Gaius who was mentally unstable.
There is enough evidence to suggest that Claudius promoted this image of a
mad Gaius, and, as the furiosa inconstantia of the Ad Polybium shows, his
madness in more than one instance is designated as being the opposite of
constantia. Cicero lists furor as an antonym of constantia,16 and Seneca uses the
word twice to refer to Gaius' irrational behavior (Polyb. cons. 13.1; Ira 3.21.5).
Elsewhere the philosopher says that Gaius had imitated a mad (furiosl) foreign
king while ignoring problems with Rome's grain supply (Brev. vit. 18.5-6).17
Claudius also went about building this image of Gaius more directly.
Josephus, for example, quotes from one of his edicts in which Gaius' madness
is twice mentioned (AJ 19.284, 285). Again, constantia was visibly present in
Claudius' building program where his "contributions were utilitarian or of
minor importance," contrasting with Gaius' more "frivolous" approach."8
Giving Castor and Pollux back their temple which Gaius had incorporated
into his palace (Cass. Dio 60.6.8) and leaving his predecessor's amphitheater
incomplete (Suetonius, Cal. 21, says that it was "abandoned" [omissum].)
would stand as clear examples of a conservatism and a stability that had not
existed earlier.
The inscription that commemorates Claudius' rebuilding of the Aqua Virgo
(ILS 205) is a public and permanent condemnation of Gaius' approach to
matters of building: Ti. Claudius ... /arcus duaus aquae Virginis disturbatos
per C. Caesarem/ a fundamentis novos feat ac restituit. The clear antithesis
here between disturbatos and a fundamentis novosfecit ac restituit may be read
as a subtle opposition between the inconstantia that could destroy an aqueduct
for the purpose of building an amphitheater and the constantia which could
restore that aqueduct systematically from bottom to top and ignore the
amphitheater. This effect was naturally reinforced by the visual impression
that the rusticated masonry of the reconstruction left. This building style not
only produced a structure that looked firm and solid, but it was also a
conservative form that recalled Augustan and late Republican techniques. In
these respects it contrasted with the more "modern" impression left by Gaius'
' Cic., Cat. 2.25; cf. Nep., Thras. 1.1, where constantia along with libertas stands in
opposition to tyranny.
'7 In Ira 1.20.8-9 Seneca speaks of Gaius' dementia and at 3.19.1 he refers to Gaius' irae super
solita saevientis, where the philosopher goes on to provide examples of this emperor's monstrous
behavior. Gaius' treatment of Pastor (2.33.3-6) and his hurried execution of Roman senators and
knights (3.18.3-4) are also the acts of a mad tyrant, though Seneca does not stress the irrational
attitude that lies behind them.
lx Blake (above, note 13), p. 25; A. Boethius, J. B. Ward-Perkins, Etruscan and Roman
Architecture (Harmondsworth, 1970), p. 208.
206 EDWIN S. RAMAGE
buildings. This was also true of the ot

this style, and together they served
which was advertised on Claudius' coins.19
Finally there is Spes, which is generally taken as making its first appearance
on coins with Claudius. This certainly was a "dynastic type," representing
hope for the continuation of the reigning imperial family via its progeny.20 It is
also possible, however, that part of this hope connected with the Caesar was
for a better future under the new emperor. Seneca expresses this idea in a
passage discussed earlier, where the contrast with Gaius is quite explicit
(Polyb. cons. 12.3-13.4). Because of Claudius' lenient ways, exiles have hope of
a better fortune (13.4: fortunae. . . spem . .. melioris); peace (quietiorem
... vitam, quietem), which had not existed under Gaius, a lack of fear (non
trepidant ... nec ... pavent), and justice (iustissima) constitute this hope. Spes
Augusta on the coins was an official advertisement of this new optimism.
There is one additional point that should be made about the appearance of
these Claudian coin types. For the first time in the empire they appear in the
first year of the emperor's reign. Thus it is clear that Claudius wasted no time
in going about creating a positive and popular image for himself. From the first
day of his reign his propaganda machine was apparently associating him with
his great predecessor Augustus and disassociating him from the undesirable
Gaius.
Galba
None of Nero's coin types may be taken as reflecting negatively on Claudius

and his policies, and this fact makes the denigratory purposes of Claudius' and
Galba's coinage all the more striking.21 Galba not only adopted Claudius'
19 Blake (above, note 13), p. 158. Boethius, Ward-Perkins (above, note 18), p. 209, call it "old
fashioned." Other Claudian structures in the rusticated style: Porta Praenestina (Maggiore), a
building beneath Santa Maria in Via Lata, another under San Clemente, the Temple of Claudius,
the Grandi Horrea, the Aqua Claudia, the Anio Novus, the facade of the emissarium at the F.ucine
Lake (Blake, pp. 26, 28, 32, 65, 81, 85; Boethius, Ward-Perkins, p. 565, n. 7).
Another instance of anti-Gaian architectural propaganda may perhaps be seen in Claudius'
putting on display the huge ship which Gaius had used to transport an obelisk from Egypt to
Rome and then sinking it to make part of the substructures of the new harbor at Ostia (Pliny, NH
36.70). It is at least possible that Claudius' purpose was to highlight Gaius' expensive frivolity and
to underline his own more conservative and practical approach to such matters-inconstantia vs
constantia again.
20 BMC 1, p. clvi; Gnecchi (above, note 5), pp. 60-61.
21 There seems to have been no official campaign against Claudius, so that it is not surprising
that Nero's coin types do not reflect negatively on him. It is clear, however, that Nero promoted
an informal, though quite outspoken, rejection of his predecessor. Neglect of the worship of the
deified Claudius, the Apocolocyntosis, and the stories of how Nero mistreated Claudius' memory
(Suet., Nero 33.1; Tac., Ann. 13.4.2, 14.11.2) together suggest the broad front on which this
unofficial denigration was carried out. On Nero's propaganda see W. Huss, "Die Propaganda
Neros," AC47 (1978), 129-48.
methods of using coin mottoes and virtues to denigrate his immediate

predecessor, but he also extended and refined these techniques.22
Galba was a revolutionary, and his coinage could be expected to show a
rejection of what he was fighting against. Libertas Populi Romani, Libertas
Publica, Libertas Restituta, Adsertor Libertatis, and Liberator Urbis portray
him as the restorer of freedom to the Roman people, but they also serve as
reminders that the tyrannical Nero had not allowed this freedom.23 This is one
respect, then, in which the new regime is to be "the antithesis of Nero's
arbitrary rule."24 The parallel with the Claudian Libertas, which has already
been noted as reflecting negatively on Gaius, is perfectly clear. In much the
same way Felicitas Publica, Fides Publica, Salus Publica, and Securitas Populi
Romani are meant to signify the good luck and happiness, the confidence, the
general well-being, and the freedom from worry and fear that the populace can
now expect to enjoy in contrast to the opposite ills that they had experienced
under Nero's oppression. And, as was the case with Claudius, the legend Ob
Cives Servatos is almost certainly meant to underline the fact that Galba had
saved the citizens from the tyrant.
On a more general level, Roma Victrix, Roma Restituta, and Roma
Renascens have the same general connotations. With Galba Rome has been
victorious over Nero; she has been restored from the earlier tyranny and is
experiencing a welcome rebirth. The various manifestations of Victoria are to
be included here, especially Victoria Populi Romani and Mars Victor which
celebrate the victory of Galba and the Roman people over a dangerous enemy.
The only enemy in sight is Nero. On the universal level is the rallying cry of
22 There are a number of indications that Galba carried out a damnatio memori.ae of Nero
(Suet., Otho 7.1; Tac., Hist. 1.16.2, 1.78; Plut., Otho 3.1) and that he tried to remedy the situation
that he had inherited in much the same way as Claudius had (Suet., Galba 15.1 ; Tac., Hist. 1.20;
Plut.,Galba 16.1-2; Cass. Dio 64.3.4c). Cf. C. H. V. Sutherland, "A Coin of Nero Overstruck for
Galba," NC 20 (1940), 265-66.
23 Galba's coin types are to be found in BMC 1, pp. ccii-ccxviii; HCC 1, pp. xciv-cv; Gnecchi
(above, note 5), p. 30. Cf. Fears (above, note 5), pp. 897-98. In the following discussion the types
of the Civil Wars that are related to Galba will also be treated as belonging to him (BMC 1, pp.
clxxxix-cci; HCC 1, pp. xcii-xciv). On these issues see P. H. Martin, Die anonymen Minzen des
Jahres 68 n. Chr. (Mainz, 1974) and E. Nicolas, De Neron a Vespasien (Paris, 1979), 2, pp.
1299-1461.
Mattingly has attempted to make a case for many of Galba's types being posthumous, struck by
Vespasian (BMC 1, pp. ccxii-ccxviii). His ideas have not met with general acceptance (e.g., C. M.
Kraay, The Aes Coinage of Galba [N.Y., 1956], p. 47 [Numismatic Notes and Monographs 133];
HCC 1, pp. xcv-xcvii), and all of Galba's coin types are taken here as coming from his lifetime.
24 J. P. C. Kent, Roman Coins (London, 1978), p. 25. In ILS 238 Galba is closely connected
with a statue of Libertas Restituta. Libertas seems to have been one of the battle cries of the Civil
War as Galba fought it (Tac., Hist. 1.4; Plut., Galba 5.1 ; cf. Stylow [above, note 6], pp. 48-52).
208 EDWIN S. RAMAGE
the Civil War, Salus Generis Human

influence and the broad front on w
Many of Galba's mottoes and virtues
disassociate the reigning emperor from his tyrannical predecessor. But they
reflect on Nero in even more subtle and less direct ways. In most cases, for
example, these coin types were not among those adopted by Nero, so that
Galba's use of them makes their earlier absence more noticeable. Libertas had
appeared very seldom, if at all, in Nero's coinage,26 while Fides and Felicitas
appear for the first time with Galba. The more personal Virtus, Honos et
Virtus, and Aequitas with their connotations of integrity and fairness had also
not been used by Nero, and their sudden appearance on Galba's coins not only
points up this fact, but also hints that the opposite vices had existed under the
earlier tyranny.27
Galba disassociates himself from Nero in yet another subtle way by
changing and adapting some of Nero's coin types. Ceres Augusta not only
provides a direct connection with Claudius, but it also stands in clear contrast
to Nero's Annona Augusti Ceres. Galba has carefully avoided Annona, which
had been exclusively Nero's to this point, and with the epithet Augusta he has
in essence taken the provisioning of the city from the emperor himself and
returned it to the office of emperor.
Again, while Nero's Victoria Augusti is roughly paralleled by Victoria
Galbae Augusti and Victoria Imperatoris Galbae Augusti, victory also appears
now as Victoria Imperi Romani and Victoria Populi Romani. Salus was used
by itself by Nero in the usual sense of the safety of the emperor's person,28 and
it does appear on Galba's coins as Salus Augusta and Salus Augusti with the
same connotations. But Salus Generis Humani and Salus Publica also occur. It
25 p. A. L. Greenhalgh, The Year of the Four Emperors (N. Y., 1975), p. 19. ILS 3827 and the
Acta Frat. Arv. for 10 and 16(?) Jan., 69 (the latter quoted by M. McCrum, A. G. Woodhead,
Select Documents of the Principates of the Flavian Emperors Including rhe Year of Revolution A.
D. 68-96 [Cambridge, 1961], pp. 12-13, No. 2) suggest that such ideas as salus generis bumani,
salus publica, securitas, and felicitas were current in the propaganda generally. See also C. M.
Kraay, "The Coinage of Vindex and Galba, A.D. 68, and the Continuity of the Augustan
Principate," NC 9 (1949), 138.
26 It is not found in BMC, RIC, or HCC, although Gnecchi attributes it to Nero on his chart
and later says "Nero only promised liberty of speech, and upon his coins her head appears only
once." (above, note 5, pp. 30, 50). Fears (above, note 5), p. 895, does not list it under Nero. Cohen
lists one example of Leibertas [sic] on a coin of Nero (1, p. 288, No. 125; cf. No. 124: luppiter
Liberator), and it must be this that Gnecchi has in mind.
27 The Octavia, which probably comes from the time of Vespasian (see below, note 32), shows
that shortly after this time Nero was viewed as having all the vices of the tyrant: scelus, luxuria,
avaritia, saevitia, crudelitas, impietas, violentia, and libido. This image of his predecessor was
almost certainly promoted by Galba, though there is no evidence other than these coin types and
an inscription or two that bears this out.
2 BMC 1, p. clxxv; HCC 1, p. lxxxiii; Fears (above, note 5), p. 895.
is clear, then, that Galba has made two changes in the types of Victoria and
Salus: first, when using them in their traditional applications he has adapted
the forms to differentiate his types from those of Nero; secondly, he has
extended these virtues to the Roman people. The latter change is important,
since the emperor is no longer the exclusive focus as he was in Nero's time, but
the people have come to share the spotlight with their benefactor. This change
of emphasis is even clearer in the case of Galba's Genius Populi Romani and
Securitas Populi Romani which contrast strikingly with Nero's Genius
Augusti and Securitas Augusti. This is part of a new, more general emphasis on
the well-being of the populace that is also evident in Felicitas Publica, Fides
Publica, Libertas Publica, and Libertas Populi Romani. All of these types serve
to stress the wide difference that Galba wishes his public to feel between
himself as a successful revolutionary working for the people and his
predecessor who had shown the basically self-centered outlook characteristic
of a tyrant. In a number of respects, then, Galba's use of coins to denigrate his
predecessor represents a refinement and extension of Claudius' methods.
Vespasian
Almost half of the fifty or so mottoes and virtues that appear on Vespasian's
coins are adopted or adapted from Galba.29 These personifications contribute
to the emperor's larger purpose of promoting himself as the avenger of Galba,
resurrecting his predecessor, and aligning himself with him as his constitutio-
nal successor and the legitimate continuer of the empire. But, as Gag6 has
pointed out, this pro-Galba stance is also tantamount to condemning Nero
whom Galba had dethroned and against whom he had brought a damnatio
memoriae.30 In his coinage Vespasian extends this condemnation of Nero into
his times by employing many of the personifications that had been used by
Galba to reflect negatively on his predecessor. Libertas Publica and Libertas
Restituta on Vespasian's coins served as a reminder of Galba's establishing
freedom after dethroning the tyrant just a year or so earlier. And just as Galba
meant Felicitas Publica, Fides Publica, and Securitas Populi Romani to
contrast with conditions existing under Nero, so Vespasian could expect such
4 Vespasian's coin types are to be found in BMC 2, pp. xxxi-lxix; HCC 1, pp. cxii-cxi;
Gnecchi (above, note 5), p. 30; cf. Fears (above, note 5), pp. 899-901, On his use of coins for
propaganda purposes see E. Bianco, "Indirizzi programmatici c propagandistici nella monetazione
di Vespasiano," RIN 70 (1968), 145-230.
The list of adoptions from Galba is a long one: Aequitas, Ceres Augusta, Concordia Augusta,
Felicitas Publica, Fides Exercituum, Fides Publica, Fortuna Augusta, Genius Populi Romani,
Honos et Virtus, Libertas Augusta, Libertas Publica, Libertas Restituta, Mars Victor, Ob Cives
Servatos, Pax Augusti, Providentia, Roma, Roma Victrix, Salus Augusta, Salus Augusti, Securitas
Populi Romani, Vesta, Victoria. Some of thesc wcre, of course, shared with emperors before
Galba.
3c Above, note 2, p. 295.
14
210 EDWIN S. RAMAGE
connotations and associations to acc

work in his propaganda.3"
The Octavia, which was probably written early in Vespasian's reign,
suggests the part that these personifications were meant to play in the anti-
Neronian propaganda of the period.32 On one level the play is a detailed study
of the relationship between the tyrant and his subjects. Under Nero there is no
freedom in Rome: the members of the Claudian house are slaves to the
emperor (32-33), and Nero insists that the senate is subservient to him
(492-93). As far as the people are concerned, while their power is great, that of
the princeps is greater.33 Octavia describes him as a tyrant, making the world
submit to a shameful yoke (250). The situation is so bad that Seneca in his first
appearance observes with some irony that his exile in Corsica was better
because there his mind had been free (383: ubi liber animus). There is no
freedom under Nero, then, and the situation naturally contrasts with the image
of libertas that Vespasian is creating with his coins.34
The Octavia also shows how Fides, Felicitas, and Securitas served as
important elements in Vesoasian's anti-Neronian propaganda. When Nero
3X Mattingly suggests that Libertas Restituta "recalls the war-cry of Galba in 68" (BMC2, pp.
lix-lx). Vitellius had also used this motto (BMC 1, pp. ccxxiv, ccxxix; HCC 1, pp. cviii, cix, cx).
Vespasian's Adsertor Libertatis Publicae would recall Galba's Libertas Publica, but would provide
an even closer connection with anti-Neronian attitudes if, as Mattingly suggests, adsertor equals
vindex (BMC 1, p. cxcv). Pliny speaks of Vindicem adsertorem illum a Nerone libertatis (NH
20.160), thus showing that the Romans in Vespasian's time were thinking in these terms. Cf.
Augustus' Libertatis Vindex (Gnecchi [above, note 5], p. 50). Donatus, ad Ter. Ad. 2. 1.40, makes a
connection between vindex, adsertor, and libertas: adsertores dicuntur vindices alienae libertatis.
Weynand, RE 6, cols. 2676-77, briefly remarks that Adsertor Libertatis Publicae, Libertas
Restituta, Libertas Publica, Libertas Augusti, Aequitas Augusti, and Concordia Senatui were all
adopted by Vespasian gegenuber der Tyrannis des Nero.
312 Various dates have been suggested for the Octavia. (M. Coffey, "Seneca Tragedies,"
Lustrum 2 [1957], 178-84). C. J. Herington, "Octavia Praetexta: A Survey," CQ 55 (1961), 29,
wants to put it "some time following the death of Nero" with the author having lived through the
events he writes about. E. Cizek, L'epoque de Neron et ses controverses ideologiques (Leiden,
1972), pp. 7-8, suggests that the play was written under Otho or in the early years of Vespasian's
reign (A.D. 69-72). Even if it was earlier or later than Vespasian, the play shows the feelings which
were current in the period and on which Vespasian was trading in promoting his propaganda.
Certainly it fits neatly with the anti-Neronian propaganda of both Galba and Vespasian. The
possibility that it was quickly written by a second-rate poet under Galba is thus worth
considering.
On anti-Neronian propaganda in literature under Vespasian, see Bardon (above, note 8), pp.
296-97, 300, 303.
1 Oct. 185: Nutr: Vis magna populi est. 0: Principis maior tamen. The relation between
people and princeps is an important focus of the play. The populace is mentioned or discussed at
185, 455-61, 495, 574-83, 676-89, 704, 780-805, 820-69, 877-98, 983.
34 See note 31 above and Oct. 255-56 (forsitan vindex deus/existet aliquis), where it is possible
that there is a reference to Vindex the revolutionary. Both the Octavia and Pliny's reference to
Vindex (NH 20.160) suggest that Libertas Publica and Libertas Restituta were themes occurring
generally in Vespasian's propaganda.
insists that it is the sword that protects the princeps, Seneca counters with th
observation that fides is a better protection (456). Nero cannot see this. And so
when the populace starts agitating against him on behalf of Octavia, he lashes
out at them. He will bring fire, collapse, want, and savage hunger down on
them; there will be no clementia or pax; they must be tamed (domanda) and
held in check (reprimenda); they must be broken by fear of punishment and in
this way learn to obey the emperor's will (820-43). Libertas Publica, Fides
Publica, Felicitas Publica, and Securitas Populi Romani are all involved here,
and the passage shows how Vespasian's adoption of these virtues was meant to
disassociate him from his predecessor.
Ob Cives Servatos appears on Vespasian's coins as it had on Galba's and
Claudius' before him. Through this motto the emperor certainly meant to
indicate that he had saved the populace from Vitellius, but anti-Neronian
connotations were probably also present. Once again, the Octavia suggests
this. In answer to Nero's statement that defeating the enemy is the greatest
virtue of a leader (443), Seneca replies that saving the citizens is a greater one
(444: Servare cives maior [virtus] est patriae patri). This is an important
statement, and the last line of the play shows what happens when the emperor
does not follow this advice: civis gaudet Roma cruore. The two passages
together suggest the special anti-Neronian meaning that lies behind Vespa-
sian's Ob Cives Servatos.
Roma Victrix, Mars Ultor, and Mars Victor also appear again on Vespasian's
coins. They applied naturally to his defeating Vitellius, but the anti-Neronian
connotations probably remained with them. Each implies victory over an
enemy of the state, and Nero is depicted as such an enemy in the Octavia and
in Pliny's Natural History. He is an enemy of the house of Claudius (Oct. 150)
and of gods and men (240-41). Pliny calls him an enemy of mankind and
significantly couples him with Gaius as he describes them as two firebrands of
the human race (NH 7.45-46: faces generis humani; hostem generis humani).
Both of these phrases contrast strikingly with Galba's battle cry, Salus Generis
Humani.3
Pax is a dominant theme in Vespasian's propaganda, and it appears in six
different forms on his coins (Pax, Pax Augusta, Pax Augusti, Pax Orbis
Terrarum Augusta, Pax Populi Romani, Pacis Eventum). It had been used in
some of these forms and in others as well by all the earlier emperors except
Tiberius, so that by now it is a thoroughly traditional adoption in imperial
coinage. Pax Populi Romani, however, takes on special significance because it
is new with Vespasian and clearly represents an extension of Galba's tendency
to relate at least some virtues to the Roman people.
35 In Oct. 487-91 Seneca tells Nero that thc empcror should be the generis humaniarbiter(488)
to whom Rome entrusts her citizens. Nero, of course, does not take this advice to heart.
14,~
212 EDWIN S. RAMAGE
It is difficult to say to what extent

but once again the Octavia suggests t
promoting, especially as far as the po
of the princeps, according to Seneca,
peace to his age (475: orbi quietem, sa
peace (488: paa's auctor). The philosopher has already praised Augustus for
being this kind of ruler (477-81). Nero's reply, as usual, reveals a diametrically
opposed point of view (492-532). Saving citizens that are a problem for the
emperor is sheer madness (495: servare cives principi etpatriae graves). Nero,
then, has interpreted peace in terms of the citizenry which pose problems for
him. From his point of view Augustus' activities constituted a steady stream of
fire, sword, and civil war followed by rule by fear. Not only does Nero
advocate the latter (492-94), but he insists that he too will use the sword to deal
with whatever is hostile to him (530-32). All of this is couched in terms of civil
war; peace for Nero is based on the citizens' being slaves and being in constant
fear of the princeps.
A little later in the Octavia, Nero provides a practical example of how his
program works when he in essence threatens to wage war on the populace
which is supporting Octavia (820-43). Where there is such war, of course,
there can be no pax, and so it is more than a little ironic that Nero believes that
the mob (835: turba) has been corrupted by clementia and pax, which he sees
as two of the advantages of his reign (834-36). Thus his attitude and actions are
completely antithetical to those implied in Vespasian's Pax Populi Romani.
Pliny also suggests this contrast when in almost the same breath he speaks of
Vespasian's Temple of Peace and Nero's violentia (NH 34.84). And it is clear
that Pliny is thinking here in terms of Pax as a benefit for the populace, for
behind what he says is the idea that Vespasian has put on public view in this
temple and in other buildings (in templo Pacis aliisque eius operibus) objects
that had been kept by Nero in his Domus Aurea for his private viewing.36 The
connection with Pax Populi Romani is clear.
Vespasian chose not to use Galba's Roma Renascens and Roma Restituta,
possibly because Vitellius had adopted the former and had used the latter in an
adapted form, Urbem Restituit.37 Instead he created his own legend, Roma
Resurgens, which was no doubt meant to recall the other two, but which also
served to underline the special character of Vespasian's attempts at moral,
economic, and material recovery in Rome.
Vespasian's rebuilding of the city provided the populace with clear and
immediate evidence of Roma Resurgens;38 Rome was literally rising from the
36 At NH 35.120 Pliny describes the Domus Aurea as the carcer of Famulus' art.
37 Cf. BMC 1, pp. ccxvi, ccxxvi.
3 H. Grassl, Untersuchungen zum Vierkaiserjahr 68/69 n. Chr. (Vienna, 1973), pp. 1C2-103,
relates Roma Resurgens to Roma Perpetua and Mars Conservator on Vespasian's coins as part of
the propaganda of the rebuilding of Rome. Cf. CIL 5, 6653: Deo Marti/Conservatori.
ruins of the Civil Wars. But Vespasian took advantage of the situation to
incorporate anti-Neronian prejudices in his building program so that Roma
Resurgens also connoted the physical restoration of the city from the
tyrannical influence of Nero. In the first place, the Romans could not miss the
contrast between Vespasian's practical and conservative approach to recon-
struction and Nero's "passion for building."39 Moreover, many of the
individual projects that he undertook had anti-Neronian overtones. His
rebuilding of the Temple of the Deified Claudius was a rejection of Neronian
policy under which the worship of Claudius had been ignored and his temple
dismantled.40 And the fact that Vespasian rebuilt it in the heavily rusticated
style that was peculiar to Claudian times not only provided a connection with
Claudius, but also served as a contrast with and a tacit rejection of the more
modern Neronian methods that had intervened.
Restoration of the Temple of Claudius was just one of a number of projects
designed to replace Nero's Domus Aurea. The Colosseum, the adapted
colossus of Nero, and perhaps the Horrea Piperataria also represented
replacement and rejection of Nero.4" In all these instances Roma Resurgens
also meant restoring this area to the people.
As Claudius had before him, Vespasian reinforced this theme in his building
inscriptions. Two texts with anti-Neronian sentiments have survived, and both
come from A. D. 71, early in Vespasian's reign. One is a dedication by an
unidentified official to Vespasian (ILS 245) in which the emperor's restoration
of the streets of the city (vias urbis. . .restituit) is neatly balanced against the
fact that they have been allowed to deteriorate because of Nero's neglect
(neglegentia superiorum temporum corruptas). The same kind of antithesis
appears in the second inscription (ILS 218), where Vespasian's restoration of
the Curtia and Caerulea (aquas Curtiam et Caeruleam . . . urbi restituit) is
described as following nine years of neglect and deterioration under Nero
(intermissas dilapsasque/per annos novem). In both inscriptions, then, Vespa-
sian's Roma Resurgens stands opposed to Roma negleaa et dilapsa of the
earlier era. Here is another level of anti-Neronian propaganda in Vespasian's
39 Blake (above, note 13), p. 33; Boethius, Ward-Perkins (above, note 18), pp. 211, 2'7. Nero's
and Gaius' interests converged strikingly in the case of the circus which Gaius began and Nero
finished and named Circus Gai et Neronis (Blake, p. 36).
40 Blake (above, note 13), pp. 52, 90; Boethius, Ward-Perkins (above, note 18), pp. 210-11; M.
P. Charlesworth, "Flaviana," JRS 27 (1937), 57-60.
41 Martial, Spect. 2, shows clearly that denigration of Nero lay behind Vespasian's replacing the
Domus Aurea. The Horrea Piperataria have been generally attributed to Domitian, but H. J.
Loane, "Vespasian's Spice Market and Tribute in Kind," CP39 (1944), 10-21, has suggested rather
convincingly that it was built by Vespasian. On the rebuilding of this area under Vespasian, see
also E. B. van Deman, "The Neronian Sacra Via," AJA 27 (1923), 423-24.
214 EDWIN S. RAMAGE, Denigration of Prodecessor
building program, and it helps to show that one of the purposes of the coin
type was rejection and denigration of Nero.42
By now it is amply clear that Vespasian followed the lead of Claudius and
Galba in using coin types for purposes of denigration. While other of his
virtues and mottoes may have had similar anti-Neronian connotations, such an
association is less easily proved in their case and it is perhaps better not to press
the point.43 Before leaving the subject, however, it is important to notice that
Vespasian worked a few subtle refinements of his own into the process as
Galba had before him. He added at least one type, Roma Resurgens, to the
anti-Neronian canon and with his Pax Populi Romani he extended Galba's
policy of relating the types to the people. At the same time he seems to have
adapted at least one Neronian type for his own purposes, for, as Mattingly has
pointed out, he changed Iuppiter Custos, which was not used by Galba, to
lovis Custos, "probably ... to avoid too direct an echo of the Neronian
type."44
Claudius, Galba, and Vespasian, then, made subtle use of their coin types to
denigrate their immediate predecessors. Claudius set the pattern and Galba and
Vespasian refined the process. In each case this was part of a general program
of propaganda in which denigration of predecessor was one element used to
enhance the image of the ruling emperor.45
Indiana University Edwin S. Ramage
42 ILS 986, in which Vespasian's words honoring Pla

his criticism of Nero's neglect appeared in other conte
non debuerit in/me differri honor triumphalium ei
1, p. 215, n. 15): Notanda in oratione Vespasiani insectatio Neronis. Cf. L. Halkin, "Tiberius
Plautius Aelianus, legat de Mesie sous Neron," AC 3 (1934), 125-27, 160; Weynand, RE 6, cols.
2656, 2677.
43 Spes and iustita, for example, are antithetical to the fear and injustice that characterised a
tyranny such as Nero's, so that it is at least possible that Vespasian's Spes Augusta and Iustitia
were meant to reflect negatively on Nero. Metus and timor are frequently used as opposites of spes
by the Roman writers: e.g., Cic., Tusc. 4.80; Varro, LL 6.73; Livy 8.13.17; Sall., Jug. 105.4; Sen.,
Ben. 4.11.5, 7.1.7; Clem. 1.12.5; Ep. 82.18; Vit. beat. 15.5; Plin., Pan. 90.5. For Tacitus, see A.
Gerber, A. Greef, Lexicon Taciteum (Leipzig, 1908), p. 1536 (entry spes). Clark (above, note 5),
pp. 5-6, 123-24, has dealt with this. Fear is constantly present in the Octavia. It is Nero's byword
(457-58, 492-94, 842-43, 870-73) and because of him the other characters experience it (66,
106-107, 123-24, 154, 289-90, 380, 659-60, 928). Thus Octavia loses any hope of being saved (130,
906: spes salutis; cf. 68, 331).
lustitia had left earth long before the reign of Nero (423-25), and his reign is the culmination of
lawlessness with its scelera, impietas, libido, luxuria, and avaritzia (431-35). Elsewhere, Seneca
speaks for true justice and Nero speaks against it (459-60).
4 BMC 2, p. xxxix.
4 I wish to thank my colleague, Professor Rufus Fears, for reading this manuscript and
suggesting a number of improvements.

Franz Steiner Verlag Historia: Zeitschrift Für Alte Geschichte

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Franz Steiner Verlag Historia: Zeitschrift Für Alte Geschichte

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Denigration of Predecessor under Claudius, Galba, and Vespasian

Author(s): Edwin S. Ramage

mottoes celebrating Claudius' victories in Germany and Britain which would

buildings. This was also true of the ot

None of Nero's coin types may be taken as reflecting negatively on Claudius

methods of using coin mottoes and virtues to denigrate his immediate

the Civil War, Salus Generis Human

connotations and associations to acc

It is difficult to say to what extent

Indiana University Edwin S. Ramage

42 ILS 986, in which Vespasian's words honoring Pla

You might also like