When observing the specifics of this bronze coin, two images are recognized on the obverse and reverse. A deity and a ship. The obverse, which bears the principal design of coins, illustrates Janus who is regarded as the two-headed god of all beginnings and endings (Mac Mahon Ardle 2003, 58). His symbolic role is emphasized in the opening book of Ovid’s Fastii where he clarifies his duty as a ‘door-keeper.’ He explains that his positioning near the threshold of the building he resides at enables him to witness both goings in and goings out (Mac Mahon Ardle 2003, 58-59). He has additionally been associated with the commencement and conclusion of military campaigns, offering the interpretation that he holds the authority to determine the outcome to soldiery operations.
Due to the close stylistic link with other coins administered during the Second Punic War, it can be inferred that both the image of Janus and minting of the coin is a tribute to the battles. To better understand the significance of employing the image of Janus, it is important to understand the context of the Second Punic War. The Second Punic War was the second of three wars fought between Carthage and Rome from 218 to 201 BCE. It was distinguished by effectively ending Carthage’s reign which once held the title of being one of the main military powers of the Western Mediterranean in the 3rd century BCE, therefore reinforcing Rome’s overwhelming influence. It is interesting to note here that the distinct off-struck detailing of Janus’ broad, square profiles suggests that it was struck at a different mint from the main bronze mint at Rome. The manufacturing techniques align with an engraver who used a completely opposed style to coins that appeared to be a continuous series from a Rome mint at that specific period (McCabe Andrew 2015, 141). It is possible that it was minted by one of the ‘provincial’ mints in the east including Alexandria, Antioch, and Caesarea in Cappadocia who produced silver and bronze coins on behalf of the central state. These mints did not conform to a uniform standard that would normally be seen in the main central mint located in the city of Rome (Noreña Carlos 2011, 258-260).
The reverse, more commonly known as the ‘tails’ side of coins, captures a prow that further mimics stylistic factors similar to other coins from the era of the Second Punic War. It additionally captures small flat-topped deck structures and curved keel lines with a downward pointing rostrum that acted as a ram to strike and sink enemy ships. Aside from these factors, the fundamental design of the prow underwent slight changes from previous coins to accommodate for the actual changes made on ships throughout time (McCabe Andrew 2015, 142-143).
Definitions:
- Prow: front part of the ship that cuts through the water
- Keel: reinforced metal plate on the sides that helps hold the ship’s structure together
- Deck: permanent covering over a compartment of a ship
The process of minting began with two dies being cut into, below the surface and one of the pieces, generally the one that displayed the head of a god or monarch, was secured in a hole in a small anvil. A piece of metal [flan] of the corresponding weight, which was heated to make it malleable, was put on top of it. The second die, placed in a hand-held punch, was placed on top of the flan. The process concludes with one or two blows with a hammer (Van Stekelenburg 2012, 10). Because the lower die was made slightly concave and the upper one slightly convex to guide the force of the hammer to the center of the flan, the coins appeared curved on one side and hollow on the other.
As in the modern age, the primary function of coinage in the ancient Roman world was for economic transactions. Still, it could additionally serve to accumulate material wealth, indicate value, or be an exchange for goods and services. Rome was prompted into issuing coins due to its conquests in central and southern Italy as a way to traditionally establish its independence and power (Van Stekelenburg 2012, 11). Compared to other fiscal systems, two distinct features differentiated ancient coins in Rome from other forms of money: their adherence to a monetary standard and the addition of designs that indicated a minting authority (Noreña Carlos 2011, 248). The revolutionary development of employing iconography to the coins to convey a wide range of messages became a defining characteristic of Roman coinage. These images acknowledged various factors of Rome’s identity such as military victories, successors to the throne, or immediate imperial predecessors.
In commemoration to Rome’s successful military expansion in the Mediterranean, this bronze coin captures two distinct images that emphasis the vital implications of conquering Carthage. The combination of a deity and a ship establishes a message that enforces the conception of Rome’s divine rise in power. It not only insinuates the empire’s growing influence in this era but serves as a reminder to what Rome is capable of achieving militarily.
Bibliography
- Loeb, James and Henderson, Jeffrey.1911 “Coins.” Loeb Classical Library.
- Mac Mahon, Ardle. 2003. “The Realms of Janus: Doorways in the Roman World.” Theoretical Roman Archaeology Journal 2002.
- McCabe, Andrew. 2015. “The Anonymous Struck Bronze Coinage of the Roman Republic in Essays in Honour of Roberto Russo, Witschonke Van Alfen Eds 2013.” Roman Republican Coins and Books: 1-20.
- Noreña, Carlos. 2011. “Social Relations in the Roman World.” Oxford University Press, Inc: 248-265.
- Unknown. “The Production of Ancient Coins.” Lawrence University.
- Van, Stekelenburg. 2012. “Coins of the Roman Republic from the Collection of the University of Stellenbosch, A Historical Description.” University of Stellenbosch: 9-23.
DePauw University Classics World 