This article was downloaded by: [University of Auckland Library]On: 05 December 2014, At: 15:33Publisher: RoutledgeInforma Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954 Registeredoffice: Mortimer House, 37-41 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH, UK

National IdentitiesPublication details, including instructions for authors andsubscription information:http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/cnid20

Money and proto-national identities inthe Greco-Roman cities of the first andsecond centuries ADConstantina KatsariPublished online: 22 Aug 2006.

To cite this article: Constantina Katsari (2006) Money and proto-national identities in theGreco-Roman cities of the first and second centuries AD, National Identities, 8:1, 1-20, DOI:10.1080/14608940600571156

To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/14608940600571156

PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE

Taylor & Francis makes every effort to ensure the accuracy of all the information (the“Content”) contained in the publications on our platform. However, Taylor & Francis,our agents, and our licensors make no representations or warranties whatsoever as tothe accuracy, completeness, or suitability for any purpose of the Content. Any opinionsand views expressed in this publication are the opinions and views of the authors,and are not the views of or endorsed by Taylor & Francis. The accuracy of the Contentshould not be relied upon and should be independently verified with primary sourcesof information. Taylor and Francis shall not be liable for any losses, actions, claims,proceedings, demands, costs, expenses, damages, and other liabilities whatsoeveror howsoever caused arising directly or indirectly in connection with, in relation to orarising out of the use of the Content.

This article may be used for research, teaching, and private study purposes. Anysubstantial or systematic reproduction, redistribution, reselling, loan, sub-licensing,systematic supply, or distribution in any form to anyone is expressly forbidden. Terms &Conditions of access and use can be found at http://www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-and-conditions

Money and proto-national identitiesin the Greco-Roman cities of the firstand second centuries ADConstantina Katsari

In this article, the author avoids assessing the levels of ‘Greekness’ or ‘Romanness’ of the

eastern Roman provinces; instead, she tries to evaluate the impact of the imperial and

civic ideology on the formation of two distinct and, yet, inter-related political identities.

The civic and State identities are made clear through the prism of modern theories of

nationalism. The manifestation of familiar national characteristics such as patriotism,

pride in one’s fatherland, the construction of an invented tradition and the issue of both

civic and ‘official’ coinages indicate the existence of two distinct proto-national identities

in the Roman Empire.

Keywords: Roman Empire; Greek provinces; Nationalism; Provincial and Imperial

Coinages; State Identity; Civic Identities; Comparative History

Introduction

The study of national identities has been largely restricted to the formation of nations

in Modern Europe and the development of contemporary nation-states. However, if

we accept that history is a process, then contemporary historical phenomena could be

observed for the first time in an ancient context. The possibility that national ideas

pre-existed modern national movements should not be dismissed out of hand. In

fact, there is enough evidence to demonstrate that political and cultural identities in

the ancient world were not only as strong as they are today but also defined the

thoughts and actions of ancient populations on an everyday basis. It is only

appropriate to mention the thoughts of Wolfgang Liebeschuetz (2001: p.342) on the

issue: ‘It is difficult to describe the complex of feelings and loyalties which the citizen

of the classical city felt for his city without using the anachronistic vocabulary of the

Constantina Katsari is in the Department of Archaeology and Ancient History at the University of Leicester.

Correspondence to: Constantina Katsari, Department of Archaeology and Ancient History, University of

Leicester, Leicester, LE1 7RH. Email Address: Ck82@le.ac.uk

ISSN 1460-8944 (print)/ISSN 1469-9907 (online) # 2006 Taylor & Francis

DOI: 10.1080/14608940600571156

National Identities

Vol. 8, No. 1, March 2006, pp. 1�20

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f A

uckl

and

Lib

rary

] at

15:

33 0

5 D

ecem

ber

2014

nation-states of modern Europe, that is words such as patriotism, national pride,

nationalism . . . ’. It is regrettable that Liebeschuetz did not elaborate on the nature of

these ideas but preferred to move on to the study of other aspects of the late Roman

city.

I would refrain from describing these identities as ‘national’ mainly because they

did not lead to the actual formation of nation-states; instead, I would use the term

‘proto-national’, which indicates the premature nature of these ideas and also their

direct connection with modern national feelings. Furthermore, I would emphasize

the patriotic feelings inspired by the institutions of the ancient polis and the general

uniformity of culture that characterised its citizens. The analysis of patriotic feelings

also permeates the writings of eighteenth century neo-classicists, such as Rousseau

and Herder, who tried to explain the phenomenon of nationalism referring to what

they believed was its earlier ideological phase. According to this view, the patriotism

and solidarity of Sparta, Athens and Republican Rome became models of heroic

virtue which were later copied by patriots of modern nations (Hutchinson and Smith,

1994: p.5). The patriotism of the polis in Classical antiquity in certain cases becomes

evident through the conflict between two or more city-states (Luginbill, 1999:

pp.14f). This conflict not only defines the ‘other’ but it also promotes a sense of pride

in one’s city, while it allows the manifestation of particular characteristics shared by

the members of the individual community. These characteristics could be part of a

proto-national identity and probably would have been expressed in the same forceful

way as today.

If there was a sense of proto-national identity among the citizens of the classical

city-states, then it is plausible that this sense continued to exist within the Grecoen

Roman cities even after the Romans annexed Greece and Asia Minor. The annexation

of the eastern provinces did not cancel out the sense of civic pride and duty towards

one’s city. There is an abundance of literary evidence from Rome’s eastern provinces

which indicates the development of a high level of patriotism within these poleis . In

this article, I intend to demonstrate that the political identity of the Greco-Roman

cities did not disappear but was transformed through the prism of the powerful

Roman State. The eastern populations of the Roman Empire seemed to be loyal

towards two political institutions: the centralized administration of Rome and the

city where they lived. The two loyalties complemented, rather than opposed, each

other; this way, they contributed to the stability of the system. The study of this

phenomenon could be further clarified, if we compare it with the national feelings of

the citizens of modern states. The historiography on nationalism and the various

theories provide adequate tools for the historical analysis of ancient phenomena, as

long as we keep in mind the differences between the two eras.

The Dual Nature of ‘Proto-National’ Political Identities

In general, modern historians suggest that nationalism was a movement which

originated and spread throughout Europe and the American continent only from the

2 C. Katsari

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f A

uckl

and

Lib

rary

] at

15:

33 0

5 D

ecem

ber

2014

second half of the eighteenth century. The current debate regarding the development

of modern nations focuses on the question whether their formation was a unique

outcome of modern capitalism, bureaucracy and secular utilitarianism or not. Yet,

despite the common view that modern nations were the direct result of moderniza-

tion and industrialization (Gellner, 1964: ch.7), a number of renowned scholars have

insisted that the seeds of national identities existed before the eighteenth century in

different forms depending on the historical context. The debate among historians

commenced as early as the nineteenth century and continued well beyond the Second

World War, but the idea of the continuity of nations in history is comparatively

recent (Doob, 1964). Max Weber (1968: p.923) spoke extensively of ‘pre-national

peoples’ and ‘potential nations’ � nations in which the ethnic element functioned as a

strong connective link � even though he did not refer specifically to the classical

world. Ernest Baker (1972: p.173) believed that nations existed long before the

eighteenth century in the forms of ‘national’ ideas, which developed first into

emotions and secondly into causes and actions; nevertheless, he avoided referring to a

specific era. On the other hand, an explicit connection between the classical tradition

and national ideas emerges from the work of several writers who, regrettably, have not

paid particular attention to the phenomenon but limited themselves to a few

remarks. Specifically, Hans Kohn (1945: p.18) asserted that both the idea and the

form of nationalism were developed before the age of nationalism. Especially the idea

of patriotism may be traced back to the ancient Hebrews and Greeks, although it was

revived in Europe at the time of Renaissance from the literati and later during the

Reformation.

Anthony D. Smith (1986; 1991) is probably the first scholar who has managed to

analyse in depth the historical continuity of the ancient ethnos, which according to

him, resulted in the development of modern nationalism and the formation of

nation-states. The widespread impact of his hypothesis becomes evident in the

subsequent works of scholars that attempt to interpret the phenomenon of

nationalism (Geary, 2002). Smith (1986: pp.21�22) maintains that the formation

of the Greek ethnos was based on the cultural similarities of the Greek people rather

than on their kinship or blood ties. These cultural similarities combined with the idea

of a common origin, as in the widespread myth of descent from Deukalion and

Pyrrha, created a sense of a unified historical community which shared the same

feelings and tastes (Smith, 1986: pp.24, 35). The idea of a common cultural, religious

and historical background was further enhanced by the creation of a united Greek

army which fought against the invading Persians. This conveyed a sense that the

soldiers depended upon the community and gave a decisive contribution to the

realization of a collective pan-Hellenic welfare (Smith, 1986: pp.38, 63). Although

Smith has attempted to trace the conception of the Greek ethnos to the Mycenaean

period, he still acknowledges the significance of the appearance of prevailing civic

identities from the eighth century BC, with the development of the city-state. Smith

accepts that ‘fifth century Hellenic ethnicism, then, was predominantly civic and

communal in character’, while the prevalent sentiment of the citizens was one of

National Identities 3

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f A

uckl

and

Lib

rary

] at

15:

33 0

5 D

ecem

ber

2014

loyalty towards their polis . However, the political institutions of the individual city-

states also contributed decisively to the idea of a united Greece which was superior to

foreigners who did not speak Greek or did not possess Greek liberties (Smith, 1986:

pp.63, 84; Smith, 1991: p.24).

The idea of a common Greek identity was not restricted to the Hellenistic and the

Classical period; it was equally important at the time of the Roman empire. A

number of historians of the Roman world (Bowersock, 1969; Bowie, 1991; C. Jones,

1971: pp.31�39; C. Jones, 1978: pp.124�131; Forte, 1972; Browning, 1989; Woolf,

1994; Swain, 1996) presented ideas similar to the ones analysed by Smith and Clifford

Geertz (1973) and have emphasised the continuation of the Greek cultural tradition

which flourished under the political power of the Romans. These studies acknowl-

edge the facts that the Greek language was predominant in the eastern provinces,

Greek civic institutions provided an administrative tool for the organization of the

individual cities, and the religious beliefs of the citizens were mainly based on the

Greek mythological tradition. Finally, it has been acknowledged that the foundation

of the Panhellenion represented the true expression of Hellenism during the second

century AD. Another group of scholars1 prefer, instead, to emphasise the power of

Rome and its cultural impact in the provinces of Greece and Asia Minor. The

Romanisation of the East, according to them, was an undoubted cultural reality,

despite the fact that the provincial populations in many cases tended to highlight

their Greek past rather than their Roman present. The main problems with both

hypotheses is that they lead to a polarized view of Greek and Roman identities within

the empire, in the same way that they used to juxtapose the notion of the civilized

Greeks against the barbarian Persians. Nevertheless, in the Roman Empire there did

not seem to be any visible cultural conflict between different identities and the

populations of the eastern provinces perceived themselves as much Greeks as

Romans. In an effort to obliterate the polarisation in modern scholarship, it has been

suggested that the widely popular Greek identity of the Second Sophistic was created

under the auspices of the Roman State and was further enhanced by Roman imperial

policy. Whitmarsh (2001: p.300) wisely acknowledges that ‘Roman is to Greek as

power is to culture, exploitation is to integrity, the spectacular is to the

contemplative’, thus asserting the necessity of the interconnected existence of the

two elements of Greco-Roman identity. Along these lines move other contemporary

historians who claim that the political Roman identity was not in any conflict with

the cultural Greek characteristics (Desideri, 2002: pp.220�224).

If, in cultural terms, the different elements of the Greco-Roman civilization were

closely tied together, then the construction of different identities within the Roman

Empire should have occurred in the political sphere. The theoretical tools for this

research can be borrowed from some of the most important theoretical writings on

the origins of modern nationalism, especially from the ideas presented in the path-

breaking collection of essays edited by Eric Hobsbawm and Terence Ranger, The

Invention of Tradition . In his introduction to the book, Hobsbawm has written that

4 C. Katsari

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f A

uckl

and

Lib

rary

] at

15:

33 0

5 D

ecem

ber

2014

‘Invented tradition’ is taken to mean a set of practices, normally governed by

overtly or tacitly accepted rules and of a ritual or symbolic nature, which seek to

inculcate certain values and norms of behaviour by repetition, which automatically

implies continuity with the past. In fact, where possible, they normally attempt to

establish continuity with a suitable historic past . . . . However, insofar as there is

such reference to a historic past, the peculiarity of ‘invented’ traditions is that the

continuity with it is largely fictitious. In short, they are responses to novel

situations which take the form of reference to old situations, or which establish

their own past by quasi-obligatory repetition. (Hobsbawn, 1983: ch.1).

Hobsbawm distinguishes between three types of invented traditions which have three

distinctive functions: a) those establishing or symbolizing social cohesion and

collective identities, b) those establishing or legitimizing institutions and social

hierarchies, and c) those socializing people into particular social contexts. The first

type has been most commonly referred to and often taken to include the two other

functions as well.2

By the first century BC the Romans were the unchallenged rulers of the

Mediterranean and, accordingly, they influenced all sorts of political, economic

and, at some level, cultural practices. The Hellenic identity that permeated the eastern

Mediterranean before the arrival of the Romans now had to serve the political

aspirations of the new governors. Thus, Hellenism became the ideological tool in the

hands of the educated elite of the eastern provinces that administered the cities and

their territories under the auspices of the emperor and his representatives

(Whitmarsh, 2001: p.299). At the same time, Greek culture reached the capital of

the empire, Rome, and was adopted by the imperial upper class (Rawson, 1985;

Griffin and Barnes, 1989; Edwards, 1993). It seems that both the imperial and the

provincial elites regarded themselves as the almost exclusive possessors of the Hellenic

identity, an identity which could be acquired only through education (paideia).

Rome’s central government acknowledged this reality and at the same time promoted

the idea of Hellenism throughout the empire in order to unite the provinces under a

single identity which would accept a single administration. It is not a coincidence that

during the second century AD Hadrian founded the Panhellenion (Spawforth and

Walker, 1985; Spawforth and Walker, 1986), an institution which defined the Greek

identity of the cities. In fact, this was the first time that the notion of Greekness was

subjected to authoritative criteria of definition (Whitmarsh, 2001: p.23). The ‘re-

invented tradition’ of Hellenism allowed Rome to maintain the Greco-Roman cities

within a wide-reaching imperial framework and under a unifying administration

which by-passed the isolationist attitudes of the individual polis (Salmeri, 2000;

Sheppard, 1984�86).

A brief analysis of the political role of the cities in the Roman Empire will help to

clarify the internal workings of the complex political system and the ideological

spectrum which eventually developed from it. The classical polis or city-state was

based on a sense of political independence, social homogeneity and respect for law

and order. The institution of the polis arose already in the Greek Dark Ages and it was

National Identities 5

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f A

uckl

and

Lib

rary

] at

15:

33 0

5 D

ecem

ber

2014

fully developed by the sixth century BC, by which time each city-state controlled the

urban core as well as a wider territory surrounding the centre. However, the polis

referred to three different realities: firstly, it referred to the people who lived in the

area; secondly, it referred to the political institutions; and, thirdly, it referred to its

territory (Hansen, 1993: p.9). The members of these communities enjoyed the right

of citizenship, which implied equality and participation in all political, judicial and

governmental activities. In fact, the political organization of the city-states was so

significant that it eventually affected all aspects of daily life including family relations,

social structures and religious rituals. The character of the polis gradually changed

during the Hellenistic period, when the power of a wealthy upper class substituted the

assembly of the people. The criterion of citizenship became the education at the

gymnasium and the concept of the polis assumed cultural, as well as political,

characteristics. At the same time, it became usual for an individual to hold citizenship

in more than one city, a fact that facilitated the acceptance of double citizenship

during the Principate (Hornblower & Spawforth, 1998: pp.549�550). In the Roman

period, the political and cultural functions of the city-state were reinvented under the

external influence of Rome, while the inhabitants of the eastern provinces not only

assumed a new Greco-Roman identity but many of them also acquired Roman

citizenship. By 212 AD the right to Roman citizenship was granted universally to all

provincials; this benefit did not rule out but complemented the local citizenship. One

of the consequences of this situation was probably the development of more than one

political identity existing in harmony with each other.

By the time the Romans invaded Greece, Asia Minor and Syria, an extensive

network of Greek cities was already established in the area. Building on the structures

of Hellenistic kingdoms, Rome refrained from direct intervention in the local

administration, although the Greek cities became an undisputed part of the unified

Roman bureaucratic system (Salmeri, 2000: p.55). The main responsibility of the city

was the collection of taxes and other dues to Rome, the policing of its territory, the

organization of the local economy and the negotiation with the central authorities (A.

Jones, 1940; Vittinghoff, 1982). Although the Romans supported the existing

administrative structures based on the established poleis , they were not interested

in changing the institutions as long as the system worked in their favour (Mitchell,

1999: p.31). The somewhat independent economic and social status of the cities,

though, did not necessarily imply that they had an independent political status. In

reality, the Greco-Roman city existed only under the military and political control of

the Roman State throughout the empire. And yet, the lack of political autonomia did

not disrupt the function of the polis as an administrative institution or the dedication

of its people to their civic duties. As for the reasons for this attitude, we could

speculate that independence was never an essential characteristic of the concept of the

Classical, Hellenistic or Greco-Roman polis . Although ideologically every city wanted

to be eleuthera (free) and autonomos , losing this autonomy did not affect the

community’s identity as long as the civic institutions were allowed to work.

Furthermore, the polis should not be connected with modern notions of statehood,

6 C. Katsari

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f A

uckl

and

Lib

rary

] at

15:

33 0

5 D

ecem

ber

2014

while its autonomia should not be compared with our ideas of autonomy; rather we

should speak of self-governing city-states which may or may not be independent

(Hansen, 1993; Hansen, 1995).

The individual character of the polis under the Roman Empire emerged with

particular strength in the not so rare instances of hostility between neighbouring

cities, as they struggled to establish their unique identity. The pride of the community

and the formation of a distinct civic identity became evident in the demonstration of

the existing differences and the antagonism against other urban centres (Mitchell,

1984: p.121). One of the best attested cases is that of the rivalry between the cities of

Nicaea and Nicomedeia in Asia Minor (Robert, 1977). Both cities strived to surpass

the other in honorary titles by lobbying the emperor, who was responsible for the

dispensation of titles. The orator Dio3 tried to reconcile the two cities delivering a

speech about the benefits of abandoning the contest for the title of prote (first), but

failed bitterly. The situation declined even further when Nicaea sided with Pescenius

Niger against Septimius Severus during the civil wars at the end of the second century

AD. The result was that Nicaea’s titles were stripped from her and were systematically

defaced from all inscriptions once Septimius Severus became the undisputed

emperor. It is clear that city rivalry focused mainly on the issue of titles which

could only be dispensed by the Roman authorities. All poleis in the eastern provinces

acknowledged the Roman political power and craved to be part of the Roman

network of urban administration, even if the differences between individual cities

were sometimes overwhelming. In fact, many of the poleis described themselves as

‘friend’ and ‘ally of the Romans’ both on civic coins and inscriptions, in order to

assert their connection with Rome (Nolle, 1995: p.362), while ancient philosophers

and historians admitted that their personal fortunes rested on the benefits of pax

romana (Salmeri, 2000: p.88).

Philosophers and historians, along with other wealthy men, formed the corpus of

the small provincial elite, which seemed to be loyal both to the Greco-Roman city and

to the Roman state. In order to assert their loyalty and patriotism towards their

patria ,4 the elite provided the means for the construction of public works and

buildings, the celebration of festivals, the practice of handouts to the poor etc. in its

celebrated role as euergetes (benefactor). The particular euergesiae (benefactions) and

the honours that the benefactors received are amply attested by thousands of

inscriptions of the Roman period found in both Greece and Asia Minor. The rich

citizens seemed to have been an essential part of the city, since they contributed large

sums of money for its prosperity and its financial stability under the unwritten

agreement that they eventually would reap the appropriate political benefits in the

form of magistracies. The political and economic significance of the benefactors for

the community should not be doubted, especially since the finances of the cities were

not systematically organized (Eck, 1997: pp.309�310). The only plausible modern

correspondents of Greco-Roman euergetai (benefactors) are the euergetai tou ethnous

(benefactors of the nation) as they appeared for the first time in nineteenth century

Greece. The latter came from affluent families of Greek origin which held large

National Identities 7

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f A

uckl

and

Lib

rary

] at

15:

33 0

5 D

ecem

ber

2014

properties and businesses abroad. After the victorious revolution against the Turks,

the euergetai tou ethnous provided the means for the construction of public buildings

and supplied other funds for the restoration of the newly-born Greek nation-state.

Their patriotism is still celebrated, even if their political motives were somewhat

dubious. On the other hand, the function of the Greco-Roman benefactors remained

dual throughout the Roman period mainly because one of their obligations was to

prove their loyalty also to the Roman State. For example, Asia Minor’s leading Greek

families not only governed their poleis but also functioned as high priests of the

imperial cult while they played an important part in the administration of the empire

(Salmeri, 2000: p.58). Their participation in the central government and their

undoubted loyalty ensured the continuation of Roman imperial rule through the

centuries.

Money and Proto-National Identities

The connection of money with national identity is a comparatively recent theme in

historiography. In a relatively few years, thorough studies have replaced what used to

be passing comments about the emergence of national currencies alongside that of

the modern nation-states. These studies attempt to demonstrate that territorial

currencies emerged for the first time during the nineteenth century and that they

became standard monetary cultures which survived at least until the creation of the

European Monetary Union. The issue of these currencies was part of a political

process both in the domestic and the international sphere � a process which was very

much tied to the construction and strengthening of national identities. The principal

way in which a state advertised its political ideology was primarily through the

imagery emblazoned on its coins or on its banknotes. Equally, a country proclaimed

its sovereignty ensuring the circulation of its national currencies as widely as possible

throughout the territory it governed. Policy makers aimed to cultivate national

identities by fostering economic communication and interaction among the citizens

(Helleiner, 2003: pp.2�3, 110�113).

Nevertheless, a common mistake that modern historians make is to believe that

sovereign territorial currencies did not exist before the nineteenth century � that is

before the first ‘wave’ of modern nation-states came into being. Among the most

widespread explanations for this supposed ‘failure’ is the assumption that within pre-

industrial contexts the poor used low denomination coins often privately issued,

which were not easily convertible into official monies, or that official state currencies

were contested by other monies within their own borders, or, again, that money

(silver and gold coins) were not homogeneous since the exchange rate was not stable

(Gilbert and Helleiner, 1999: pp.3�5). Even though such general explanations may

certainly fit the economy of some of Europe’s medieval states, they cannot apply to

the monetary system of the Roman Empire.

One of the first decisions that Augustus took when he became emperor in 27 BC

was the radical reform of the Roman Republican monetary system. Specifically, he

8 C. Katsari

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f A

uckl

and

Lib

rary

] at

15:

33 0

5 D

ecem

ber

2014

restored the purity of the debased silver denarius , he expanded the production of gold

aurei and bronze asses , he reorganized the mints and he resumed large scale minting.

From the reign of Augustus until the reign of Diocletian, at the beginning of the

fourth century AD, the Roman monetary system was based on the function of three

different coined metals � gold, silver and bronze � which complemented each other

in the markets (Harl, 1996). The two precious metals, gold and silver, were used

mainly for major commercial dealings because of their higher value, while the bronze

coins served the need of small-scale retail transactions which took place on a daily

basis. The relationship between gold and silver currencies functioned according to the

rules of modern bimetallism, where the stability of gold is used in order to guarantee

the nominal value of the other denominations; this happened even if the silver coins

became debased over the centuries (Katsari, 2003). Likewise, the value of bronze

coinages was defined by their relationship to the precious metal currencies, albeit the

fact that the legal value of the smaller denominations never coincided with their

intrinsic value. The guarantee of the Roman state was enough for the acceptance of

these coins in the local markets and for the population to trust their set value. The

imperial administration’s tight control over the currency resulted in the imposition of

an elaborate system of exchange rates, which survived intact at least until the 230s

AD,5 or until a slightly later date (Lo Cascio, 1997). Until the exchange rates were

irreversibly altered, a gold coin was still worth 25 denarii as it did during the reign of

Augustus. The unification of the Roman monetary economy resembled the attempt

of modern national states to impose territorial currencies within the region of their

sovereignty. In a similar mode the Roman State � Augustus and his successors �guaranteed the currency in circulation and enhanced the common monetary identity

of the diverse populations of the empire.

Although there was only one monetary system whose stability was guaranteed by

the Roman state, the minting activity and the imposition of different weight

standards were in the hands of two distinct authorities � the state and the cities. The

Imperial/State mints minted coins in all three metals but their production mostly

aimed at the increase of the number of the precious coinages in circulation. Two

different types of weight standards were employed in this process: a) the official

Roman denarial standard which was used in the ‘official’ mints (including Rome),

and b) the various Hellenistic standards used mainly in the eastern provincial mints,

which were also under imperial authority. All of these silver and gold currencies,

irrespective of the type of standard, were destined for payments to the army or to the

administrators of the empire (Rodewald, 1976). It is not a coincidence that large

numbers of tetradrachms minted in Antioch (based on the Hellenistic standard) were

recovered during the excavations of the Roman fort of Dura Europos in Syria

(Bellinger, 1949). For this reason, the imperial control over all the mints remained

tight throughout the imperial period. Interestingly, the circulation of coins of

different weight standards did not confuse the population or inhibit the successful

functioning of the local markets. It seems that the imperial authorities took into

consideration these differences and incorporated them effectively into the state’s

National Identities 9

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f A

uckl

and

Lib

rary

] at

15:

33 0

5 D

ecem

ber

2014

exchange system. Remarkably, whenever the fineness of the denarius minted in Rome

changed, the fineness of the coins which belonged to the Hellenistic weight standards

changed as well in order to comply with the new monetary reforms (Burnett, 1987:

p.30). The need for a central control over the minting of all the silver and gold

coinages resulted in the administrative co-operation of some of the provincial mints.

For example, during the reign of Gordian, the mint of Caesarea Cappadociae used the

same workers as the distant mint of Antioch. Similarly, some Syrian silver coins of the

end of the first century and the beginning of the second century AD were probably

minted at Alexandria (Bland, 1991: pp.229, 231); Burnett, 1987: pp.30�31), while in

other cases the mint of Rome itself undertook the production of provincial coinages

(Butcher and Ponting, 1995; Carradice, 1998: p.95). The insistence of the imperial

authorities on retaining under unified control the entire production of precious metal

coinages resulted in the creation of a stable system that promoted the trust of the

Roman ‘nation’ towards the different currencies. Whether the weight standards

resemble the Hellenistic or the Roman ones did not make any difference since the

authorities had the political and economic power to guarantee both of them, thus

causing a sense of stability.

On the other hand, the emperor did not seem to control as tightly the production

of civic issues in the eastern provinces; this way, allowing the manifestation of

separate proto-national identities. The central administration of more than 530 civic

mints in Greece, Asia Minor and Syria (T. Jones, 1965) would have been a daunting if

not an impossible task for any government. Consequently, the Roman state allowed

those cities which already produced their own coinages during the Hellenistic period

to continue the production of low denominations also under imperial rule (Butcher,

1988: p.15). Inscriptions on these coins allow us to identify the authorities

responsible for both the funding and the minting of civic issues. It seems that local

magistrates who played the role of the civic benefactor in the construction of public

buildings or the distribution of handouts were also in charge of the production of

local currencies, as their names on coin inscriptions indicate (Burnett, Amandry and

Carradice, 1999: pp.4�5). Furthermore, a few rare inscriptions on coins provide

additional evidence for the organisation of minting; in certain cases, the word

epimeleia (care) is mentioned in association with the person who undertook the

organisation (Howgego, 1985: p.85). The use of this word implies that the city

authorised and/or appointed a person to take care of the production of coinage

(Burnett, Amandry and Carradice, 1999: p.4). In another instance, a magistrate, the

general Apollodotos, is specifically mentioned for having struck coins during the

period of his magistracy.6 It would be fair to assume that the benefactors undertook

their task only after they secured the authorisation of the city. Coin inscriptions

indicate that the civic body responsible for decisions relevant to the issue of coinage

was the city council. The citizens brought forward the motion to undertake minting

activity, but permission was given only after the council voted affirmatively on the

issue (Robert, 1967: pp.54f; Robert, 1966: p.86, n.3). The patriotism these civic

benefactors felt becomes evident from the flowery expressions of the above

10 C. Katsari

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f A

uckl

and

Lib

rary

] at

15:

33 0

5 D

ecem

ber

2014

inscriptions but we may assess its importance even better if we take into

consideration the vast amount of money spent for the minting of coins as well as

the fact that no personal profit (in financial terms) would ensue from this process.

The Roman state intervened only in very few rare cases during the first two

centuries AD. Specifically, it may have been customary for Roman colonies to ask

Rome for permission to produce their own civic coinage � a fact which was

advertised with a sense of pride in the coins (Burnett, Amandry and Ripolles, 1992:

pp.3�4; Burnett, Amandry and Carradice, 1999: pp.2�3; Howgego, 1985: p.88; Levy,

1987). The custom of asking the emperor for special permission may have been also

extended to other Greco-Roman cities, although imperial authorisation was probably

not essential for the actual minting of bronze coins. Specifically, Lucian7 mentions the

petition of the citizens of Abonuteichus for the depiction of Glykon on their coins.

Even if the story is not a true historical event, it is possible that such a practice was

widespread in the Roman Empire (C. Jones, 1988; Miron, 1996). The emperor may

have retained the moral responsibility for the production of smaller denominations,

but his consent was not always sought. This approach complied with the general

attitude of the imperial administration towards the provinces, an attitude according

to which the emperor intervened only in cases of emergency and not on an every day

basis (Millar, 1977). The distance of the central administration from the provinces

could indicate that the inclusive Roman identity was not in any way threatened by the

existence of the civic ‘proto-national’ identities, which were developed only at a local

level and not at the expense of Rome.

Even if the production of bronze coins in the eastern part of the Roman Empire

relied on the will and financial capacity of the cities and their liberal magistrates, the

overall effectiveness of the system was guaranteed by the state. The main problem

which arose from the existence of multiple civic authorities was the use of different

weight standards for each city or groups of cities (Burnett, Amandry and Ripolles,

1992: p.36; Howgego, 1985: p.60), apart from the colonies which employed the

‘official’ Roman weight standard (Kroll, 1996: p.54). However, this metrological

diversity did not necessarily lead to metrological anarchy, as the general lack of value

marks on these civic issues shows. The citizens were obviously capable of recognizing

the value of an individual coin even if it came from a distant city and they did not

hesitate to use it in the local markets. The ability to assess the value of the coinage was

an essential one, especially since civic coins circulated as far as one hundred km or

more from the city where they were minted. The study of excavation finds and coin

hoards from Greece, Asia Minor and Syria indicates that civic currencies circulated

not only within the province of their origin but also in neighbouring provinces and

beyond (Katsari, 2001: ch.4). The only way for the population to estimate the exact

value of these coins was through comparison with the ‘official’ Roman bronze asses .

The bankers in the market could easily assess the weight of the civic coins and

subsequently compare it with the weight of the as . Once the exchange rate was firmly

established, these civic denominations took their appropriate place within the Roman

monetary system.

National Identities 11

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f A

uckl

and

Lib

rary

] at

15:

33 0

5 D

ecem

ber

2014

If we assume that coinages represented the sovereign authority in the Roman

world, then we should accept the fact that there existed two different authorities

which co-operated with each other for the benefit of the semi-autonomous city and

for the common good of the empire; thus creating two different types of non-

conflicting ‘proto-national identities’. At a local level, the civic magistrates were

responsible for the production of small denominations which would circulate in the

regional markets. We cannot deny that there were obvious financial reasons with

regard to the minting of bronze coinages (Martin, 1996). In particular, bronze

currency seemed to be profitable for the city when it was exchanged for silver, since

the moneychangers sold 1 denarius for 18 asses , while they bought the same denarius

for 17 asses (Macro, 1976; Oliver, 1989: pp.208�15, no.84). In all likelihood, part of

these profits ended up in the civic treasury, while the city ensured a regular income by

leasing the monopoly of the exchange of coins to a single contractor.8 Apart from the

economic motives there was also a political and ideological rationale. An earlier

Hellenistic inscription from Sestos indicates that one of the two main reasons for the

production of local coins was the fact that the people would, thus, be able to use coins

bearing the type/symbol of the city.9 As we have already seen in the case of the

benefactors, the prestige of the city was so important that individuals did not hesitate

to contribute financially towards the enhancement of civic institutions, the

construction of public buildings and, in general, any activity which would improve

the reputation (fama) of their polis . Such declarations of patriotism (philopatria) and

magnanimity (philotimia) were common practice on the Roman inscriptions,

referring to the city’s god, or public monuments or political institutions, and were

accepted with gratitude by the rest of the citizens (Harl, 1987: p.20), almost in the

same way as similar phenomena occur in the modern national countries. We should

not forget, though, that the same benefactors who helped the city remained also loyal

to the Roman state. The acknowledgement of the sovereignty of the central

government was never in doubt; consequently, the local coinages became an essential

part of the Roman monetary system and their value was always guaranteed by the

state. The populations of the empire in the first instance showed their appreciation

for their civic currencies and at a second instance eagerly accepted the ‘official’

coinages, thus adopting both civic and state ‘proto-national’ identities as they were

formed by the higher political authorities.

Several hypotheses have been developed as to the explanation of the messages

depicted on the different types of coinages and to the audience they allegedly

addressed. In the first instance, Michael Crawford (1983) has suggested that the mint

masters were responsible for the invention of types and that the emperor was the only

person who was being addressed and flattered. His hypothesis has been further

developed by A. Wallace-Hadrill, who initially accepted the idea that the mint masters

paid special attention to the wishes and views of the emperor. However, Wallace-

Hadrill (1986) has also insisted that the message on the coin is part of its

legitimization. Therefore, the images on the Roman coinage commanded respect

for the emperor and for the political authority he represented. Furthermore, it has

12 C. Katsari

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f A

uckl

and

Lib

rary

] at

15:

33 0

5 D

ecem

ber

2014

been suggested that is impossible to know whether the population was able at all

times to say what the types and legends meant (Levick, 1999). Although the above

hypotheses seem to be valid, we should acknowledge that the types might have

involved a wider audience than initially supposed and/or that the emperor projected

on the coinage his legitimate political power. In the following section, we will focus

on our understanding of how the people actually allocated their loyalties, as these

loyalties were perceived from the political authorities: the emperor and the

magistrates of the city.

As we have already seen, the imperial coinages were directly administered by the

central authorities in order to safeguard the financial interests of the emperor. On the

obverse of these imperial coins, we can see the portrait of the emperor or of a

member of his family, which was usually accompanied by a legend describing his titles

and achievements. The reverse types display a number of common themes, such as

military events (including the Victoria , legionary symbols, or the mention of battles),

political changes (accession to the throne, deification), symbols of prosperity, the

personified virtues of the emperor and religious designs (temples, gods). In all of the

above cases, the emperor is presented as the ultimate authority, the charismatic leader

and the legitimate successor to the throne of the Roman Empire. The personifications

(clementia, iustitia, pietas, etc.) represented on the coins recur in all emperors’ reigns.

Artists focus on themes such as possession of power, military victories, and on the

stability and prosperity which derived from them, together with the distribution of

largesse. The personifications identify the various aspects of the use of power under

the ultimate control of the emperor, who had almost a mythical strength to grant his

people what they needed. Only the morally best man was fitted to rule and only

virtue in the moral sense, not power or wealth of fortune, elevated men above the

human level (Wallace-Hadrill, 1981: pp.315, 319). The person who possessed superior

authority, benevolence, charisma and capabilities and who enjoyed the favour and

assistance of the gods gradually became recognized as the Benefactor of the whole

empire. In the imperial age, it is clear that such actions were attributes of the

emperor, whose ‘supernatural’ side emerged to give religious legitimization to his

power (Burazelis, 1989: pp.32�33). The significance of coinage in regard to the

assertion of imperial power was such that, when a knight carried a coin bearing the

portrait of the emperor into a brothel, he was imprisoned.10 The widespread use of

the official coinage probably ensured the advertisement of the current political

‘proto-national’ ideology, informed about major military events and, finally, formed

the opinions of the citizens with regard to the essential nature of the Roman Empire

itself. Since the imperial currency circulated throughout the empire, the populations

in the provinces had to accept its ideological significance, which eventually

guaranteed its fiscal value, and comply with the monetary regulations set by the

central government.

On the other hand, the minting of civic coinages presents a more complicated

picture in terms of identities that needs to be interpreted. The local elites responsible

for the production of bronze coinages were at the same time magistrates of the polis

National Identities 13

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f A

uckl

and

Lib

rary

] at

15:

33 0

5 D

ecem

ber

2014

and loyal inhabitants of the Roman Empire, while in some cases they also became an

indispensable part of the imperial bureaucratic mechanism. The most striking

characteristic of the civic issues was the inscription with the ‘ethnic’ of the citizens in

the genitive plural case, such as of the Ephesians (EFESIVN), or of the Athenians

(AUHNAIVN) etc. This formula includes the magistrates, the council and the people

of Ephesus (or of Athens), all of whom formed the city (Harl, 1987: p.20) and it

resembles the modern writings on banknotes that declare the sovereign authority of

the national state which guarantees their value. So, the majority of coins were

produced in the name of the polis , although a few issues were minted by independent

tribal groups which strove to form city governments (Mitchell, 1993: pp.87, 95, 113,

176). The magistrates’ intention to uphold the status of the polis through its bronze

coinage is clear; the ‘ethnic’ of the city in many cases was accompanied by other

inscriptions indicating the superior rank of the polis amidst neighbouring urban

centres. The most common titles are ‘autonomous’, ‘free’, ‘best of all’, ‘inviolate’, while

several other titles proclaimed the special association of the city with the emperor or

its coveted standing within the province or its piety (Harl, 1987: p.22). All these

inscriptions may have described the cherished autonomia of the polis through its

coinage, but this autonomia always existed under the protective administration of the

central government.

Researchers have divided local coinages in two distinct categories in relation to

their types: a) ‘the portrait issues’, which normally have the portrait of an emperor

with his name and titles on the obverse and a type usually of local significance on the

reverse; and b) the ‘pseudo-autonomous’ series, otherwise called the ‘issues without

imperial portrait’ (Johnston, 1985: p.89). In fact, it seems that the portraits of

emperors or other members of the imperial family dominated the obverses of the

majority of civic coinages in the eastern provinces. These images were the expression

of personal power, which could be enhanced through the use of the legend or of

symbols in the field of the coin. In the early imperial period, portraits tended to

emphasize the ruler’s claim to be primus inter pares (first among equals) because of

his unique charisma. After the end of the second century AD, a variety of busts

appeared on the coins; these did not focus so much on the representation of the

individual emperor as on the variety of roles he played � roles such as the ones of

general, consul, priest, or god (King, 1999). In all cases, the types certainly furthered

the flattering attitude of the magistrates toward the person of the emperor, while it

also confirmed the provincial elites’ acknowledgment of the strength of the imperial

power which eventually legitimized the bronze coins. Even though the provincial

elites had the moral and legal power to mint their own coinages, they never forgot

that they belonged to one ‘nation’, whose father was the emperor (pater patriae).

Despite the fact that the image of the emperor could be found on the majority of

civic issues, equally important was the simultaneous representation of a variety of

local themes either on the obverse or on the reverse, as the study of the extensive

catalogues of Roman Provincial Coinage indicates (Burnett, Amandry and Ripolles,

1992; Burnett, Amandry and Carradice, 1999). For example, standardized themes �

14 C. Katsari

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f A

uckl

and

Lib

rary

] at

15:

33 0

5 D

ecem

ber

2014

such as the Assembly, the Local Parliament and the Local Senate � reflected how the

higher political classes viewed themselves and the institutions of their cities. It is

surprising that, although Roman rule was indisputable in the East, the Greek cities

still styled themselves as democracies. Respect for the popular Assembly, even if

merely a token gesture, was reflected in numerous local coinages especially during the

second century AD. The typology of civic coins also emphasized the illustrious past of

the polis , irrespectively of whether it referred to the Classical, the Hellenistic or the

Roman period. Apparently, it was very important for a political institution to

establish a religious tradition in order to form a contemporary identity which would

have bound all its members together. The invented tradition of modern nations, as it

was described in the works of Hobsbawn, reveals exactly these tendencies. In

accordance with Hobsbawm’s ideas, both the European and Asiatic Greeks felt an

acute need to stress the significance of antiquity through the representation of

eponymous heroes, mythological scenes and famous visitors who were presented as

progenitors. Such scenes aimed at the visualization of the link of the cities with their

past and at the creation and celebration of a prestigious tradition and a ‘proto-

national’ civic identity. Furthermore, the virtues and achievements of the individual

cities were also represented on the bronze coins in a variety of ways, one of which was

the depiction of temples or other public monuments. Several ancient authors

elaborated on the importance of public buildings in the construction of civic identity,

especially because the cities defined themselves through the creation of civic space.11

Probably the most famous passage from an ancient author is the one in which

Pausanias12 described the small city of Panopaeus in Phocis as the exception that

proved the rule: ‘if you can call it a city when it has no state buildings, no training

ground, no theatre, and no market square, when it has no running water at a water

head and they live on the edge of a torrent in hovels like mountain huts’.

Conclusions

The phenomenon of ‘proto-national’ identities in the Roman Empire is a complex

one and could be studied from several aspects, one of which is the minting of

currency. The precious metal coinages issued in mainstream mints were the accepted

commercial medium whose value was guaranteed by the state and thus circulated

throughout the empire. The acceptance of the official coinages in connection with the

connotations of the ‘official’ obverse and reverse types could indicate the central

authorities’ use of power to impose from above a common ‘proto-national’ Roman

identity. On the other hand, the individual cities issued their own bronze coinages,

which, though based on a variety of weight standards, became part of the unified

Roman monetary system as early as the Augustan period. The individuality of the

denominations and the combination of ‘official’ and civic types on the bronze coins

demonstrates the existence of a separate civic identity which complemented the

official one. No confusion or conflict seemed to occur with regard to the use of

different coinages based on different weight standards issued by different authorities,

National Identities 15

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f A

uckl

and

Lib

rary

] at

15:

33 0

5 D

ecem

ber

2014

since they were all united under the integrated Roman monetary system. This way the

inhabitants of the empire were free to adopt more than one identity and managed to

maintain their loyalty both towards their city and towards their emperor.

In fact, the dual ‘proto-national’ identities of the Roman state and the Greco-

Roman cities of the eastern provinces were strong enough to cause the resurgence of

patriotism among the inhabitants of the eastern provinces. The loyal disposition of

the population towards the emperor and the civic institutions were not in conflict

with each other but both served the aims of imperial ideology. The Roman

administrative mechanism considered the Greco-Roman cities as the backbone of its

existence; therefore, it allowed the continuation of a semi-autonomous mechanism

which was responsible for the organization of the empire at a local level. The

maintenance of such a system would not have been attained only on the basis of the

political and military will of the central administration but it needed the co-operation

of the inhabitants and their elites. In order to achieve the loyalty of the citizens

towards the institutions of their city and towards Rome, the imperial authorities

accepted the development of two ‘proto-national’ identities that complemented each

other. On one hand, the local elites became responsible for the government of their

city, while they developed a sense of patriotism and a feeling of ‘national’ pride that

compensated for the money and effort they invested as benefactors. At the same time

they actively showed their loyalty towards Rome mainly because they realized that the

central authorities guaranteed the peace and prosperity of the empire. Eventually,

state and civic ‘proto-national’ identities became part of the life of the city and its

citizens in the Greco-Roman world and were manifested through the medium of

coins.

Acknowledgements

This article would not have been possible without Dr. Enrico Dal Lago’s useful

comments on modern nationalist theories, the constructive criticism of Prof. Stephen

Mitchell and, finally, the support I received from the researchers of the Centre for the

Study of Human Settlement and Historical Change, National University of Ireland,

Galway.

Notes

[1] See Ando (2000); MacMullen (1990); MacMullen (2000); Freeman (1993); Hoff and Rotroff

(1997); Gruen (1992). Of course, all of the above researchers present different models of

romanisation that will not be analysed in detail in this article.

[2] An application of this theory has been recently attempted in some of the essays in the edited

collection, Citroni (2003).

[3] Dio Chrysostom. Orationes. 38.1.

[4] The usual translation of this term is fatherland; patria describes the city of origin of a person.

[5] Dio Cassius, Historia Romana. 55.12.5; Buttrey (1961).

[6] R. Cagnat (ed.), (1964). Inscriptiones Graecae ad res Romanas Pertinenentes . Roma: L’ Erma

di Bretschneider 4, 769.

16 C. Katsari

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f A

uckl

and

Lib

rary

] at

15:

33 0

5 D

ecem

ber

2014

[7] Lucian, Life of Abonuteichus, 43.

[8] W. Dittenberger (ed.), (1905). Orientis Graeci Inscriptiones Selectae, Lipsiae: Hirzel, no. 525,

pp.160�165.

[9] OGIS, 1, 339; [see above] See also Austin (1981: no. 215); Carradice and Price (1988: p.122);

Martin (1985: pp.238�241); Melville-Jones (1972: p.43); Howgego (1990: p.20); Martin

(1996: pp.262�264).

[10] Dio 78.16.5.

[11] See Mitchell (1993: pp.212f).; For the opposite view see Burnett (1999: p.155).

[12] Pausanias, 10.4.1.

References

Ando, C. (2000). Imperial Ideology and Provincial Loyalty in the Roman Empire . Berkeley, CA:

University of California Press.

Austin, M. (1981). The Hellenistic World from Alexander to the Roman Conquest. A Selection of

Ancient Sources in Translation . Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Baker, E. (1972). National Character and the Factors in its Formation . London: Methuen.

Bellinger, A. (1949). The Coins. Final Report . VI, In the series of M.I. Rostovtzeff, A.R. Bellinger, F.E.

Brown, N.P. Toll & C.B. Welles (Eds.). The Excavations at Dura . New Haven, CT: Yale

University Press.

Bland, R. (1991). The last coinage of Caesarea in Cappadocia. In R. Martini & N. Vismara (Eds),

Glaux: Collana di Studi e Ricerche di Numismatica, Ermanno A. Arslan Studia Dicata (pp.

214�231). Milan: Ennere.

Bowersock, G. (1969). Greek Sophists in the Roman Empire . Oxford: Clarendon Press.

Bowie, E. (1991). Hellenes and Hellenism in writers of the early Second Sophistic. In S. Said (Ed.),

ELLHNISMOS: Quelques jalons pour une histoire de l’identite greque (pp.183�204). Leiden:

Brill.

Browning, R. (1989). Greeks and others from antiquity to the renaissance. In R. Browning (Ed.),

History, Language and Literacy in the Byzantine World, II (pp.1�26). Northampton: Variorum

Reprints.

Burazelis, K. (1989). Theia Dorea: Meletes pano stin politiki tis dynasteias ton Severon kai tin

Constitutio Antoniniana . Athens: Academy of Athens.

Burnett, A. (1987). Coinage in the Roman World . London: Seaby.

Burnett, A. (1999). Buildings and monuments on Roman coins. In G. M. Paul & M. Ierardi (Eds),

Roman Coins and Public Life under the Empire, E. Togo Salmon Papers II (pp.137�164). Ann

Arbor, MI: Michigan University Press.

Burnett, A., Amandry, M. & Carradice, I. (1999). Roman Provincial Coinage, II, Part I . London:

British Museum Press.

Burnett, A., Amandry, M. & Ripolles, P. (1992). Roman Provincial Coinage: from the Death of Ceasar

to the Death of Vitellius . I London: British Museum Press.

Butcher, K. (1988). Roman Provincial Coins . London: Seaby.

Butcher, K. & Ponting, M. (1995). Rome and the East. Production of Roman Provincial silver

coinage for Caesarea in Cappadocia under Vespasian, AD 69�79. Oxford Journal of

Archaeology, 14 , 63�77.

Buttrey, T. (1961). Dio, Zonaras and the value of the Roman aureus . Journal of Roman Studies. , 51 ,

40�45.

Carradice, I. (1998). A new introduction to the Flavian coinage. In M. Austin, J. Harries & C. Smith

(Eds), Modus Operandi: Essays in Honour of Geoffrey Rickman (pp.93�117). London: BICS

Suppl.

Carradice, I. & Price, M. (1988). Coinage in the Greek World . London: Seaby.

National Identities 17

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f A

uckl

and

Lib

rary

] at

15:

33 0

5 D

ecem

ber

2014

Citroni, M. (Ed.). (2003). Memoria e Identita. La cultura romana costruisse la sua imagine . Firenze:

Universita degli studi di Firenze.

Crawford, M. (1983). Roman imperial coin types and the formation of public opinion. In C.

Brooke, B. H. I. H. Stewart, J. G. Pollard & T. R. Volk (Eds), Studies in Numismatic Method

Presented to Philip Grierson (pp.47�64). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Desideri, P. (2002). The meaning of Greek historiography of the Roman Imperial Age. In E. Nis

Ostenfeld (Ed.), Greek Romans and Roman Greeks: Studies in Cultural Interaction (pp.216�224). Aarhus: Aarhus University Press.

Doob, L. (1964). Patriotism and Nationalism: their Psychological Foundations . New Haven, CT: Yale

University Press.

Eck, W. Der Euergetismus im Funktionzusammenhang der kaiserzeitlichen Stadte. In M. Christol &

O. Masson (Eds.). Actes du Xe Congres International d’ Epigraphie Grecque et Latine, Nimes 4�9 Oct. 1992 . (pp.305�331). Paris: Sorbonne.

Edwards, C. (1993). The Politics of Immorality in Ancient Rome . Cambridge: Cambridge University

Press.

Forte, B. (1972). Rome and the Romans as the Greeks Saw Them . Rome: American Academy in

Rome.

Freeman, P. (1993). Romanization and Roman material culture. Journal of Roman Archaeology, 6 ,

438�445.

Geary, P. (2002). The Myth of Nations: The Medieval Origins of Europe . Princeton, NJ: Princeton

University Press.

Geertz, C. (1973). The Interpretation of Cultures . New York: Basic Books.

Gellner, E. (1964). Thought and Change . London: Weidenfeld and Nicolson.

Gilbert, E. & Helleiner, E. (1999). Introduction � nation-states and money. In E. Gilbert & E.

Helleiner (Eds), Nation-States and Money: The Past, Present and Future of National Currencies

(pp.1�22). London: Routledge.

Griffin, M. & Barnes, J. (Eds.). (1989). Philosophia togata: Essays on Philosophy and Roman Society.

Oxford: Clarendon Press.

Gruen, E. (1992). Culture and National Identity in Republican Rome . London: Duckworth.

Hansen, M. (1993). The polis as a citizen-state. In M. Hansen (Ed.), The Ancient Greek City-State:

Symposium on the occasion of the 250th Anniversary of The Royal Danish Academy of Sciences

and Letters. (1992 July 1�4) (pp.7�29). Copenhagen: Munksgaard.

Hansen, M. (1995). The ‘autonomous city-state’. Ancient fact or modern fiction? In M. Hansen &

K. Raaflaub (Eds), Studies in the Ancient Greek Polis (pp.21�43). Stuttgart: Steiner.

Harl, K. (1987). Civic Coins and Civic Politics in the Roman East AD 180�275 . Berkeley: California

University Press.

Harl, K. (1996). Coinage in the Roman Economy, 300 BC to AD 700 . Baltimore: Johns Hopkins

University Press.

Helleiner, E. (2003). The Making of National Money: Territorial Currencies in Historical Perspective .

Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.

Hobsbawm, E. (1983). Inventing Traditions. In E. Hobsbawm & T. Ranger (Eds), The Invention of

Tradition (p. 1 ff). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Hoff, M. & Rotroff, S. (Eds.). (1997). The Romanization of Athens: A Proceedings of an International

Conference Held at Lincoln, Nebraska, April 1996 . Oxford: Oxbow.

Hornblower, S. & Spawforth, A. (Eds.). (1998). The Oxford Companion to Classical Civilisation .

Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Howgego, C. (1985). Greek Imperial Countermarks . London: Royal Numismatic Society.

Howgego, C. (1990). Why did ancient states strike coins. Numismatic Chronicle , 150 , 1 ff.

Hutchinson, J. & Smith, A. (Eds.). (1994). Nationalism . Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Johnston, A. (1985). The so-called ‘pseudo-autonomous’ Greek Imperials. American Numismatic

Society, Museum Notes , 30 , 89�112.

18 C. Katsari

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f A

uckl

and

Lib

rary

] at

15:

33 0

5 D

ecem

ber

2014

Jones, A. (1940). The Greek City. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Jones, C. (1971). Plutarch and Rome . Oxford: Clarendon Press.

Jones, C. (1978). The Roman World of Dio Chrysostom . Cambridge MA: Harvard University Press.

Jones, C. (1998). A follower of the god Glykon? Epigraphica Anatolica. , 30 , 105�109.

Jones, T. (1965). Greek Imperial coins. The Voice of the Turtle , 4 (12), 295�301.

Katsari, C. (2001). The Monetary Economy of the Eastern Mediterranean: from Trajan to Gallienus .

Ph.D. Thesis, University College London.

Katsari, C. (2003). Bimetallism and the circulation of gold coins during the third and the fourth

centuries AD. Munstersche Beitrage zur Antiken Handelsgeschichte , 22 (1), 22�41.

King, C. (1999). Roman portraiture: Images of power? In G. M. Paul & M. Ierardi (Eds), Roman

Coins and Public Life under the Empire: E. Togo Salmon Papers II (pp.123�136). Ann Arbor,

MI: Michigan University Press.

Kohn, H. (1945). The Idea of Nationalism . New York: Macmillan.

Kroll, H. (1996). Hemiobols to assaria: the bronze coinage of Roman Aigion. Numismatic

Chronicle , 156 , 49�78.

Levick, B. (1999). Messages on the Roman coinage. In G. M. Paul & M. Ierardi (Eds), Roman

Coins and Public Life under the Empire, E. Togo Salmon Papers II (pp.41�60). Ann Arbor, MI:

University of Michigan Press.

Levy, B. (1987). Indulgentiae Augusti Moneta Inpetrata: A Flavian episode. In H. Huvelin, M.

Christol & G. Gautier (Eds), Melanges de Numismatique offerts a Pierre Bastien a l’occasion de

son 75e anniversaire . Wetteren-Belgium: Editions NR.

Liebeschuetz, J. (2001). Decline and Fall of the Roman City. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Lo Cascio, E. (1997). Prezzi in oro e prezzi in unita di conto tra il III e il IV sec. d.C. In J. Andreau,

P. Briant & R. Descat (Eds), Economie antique: Prix et formation des prix les economies

antiques, Entretiens d’archaeologie et d’ histoire (pp.161�182). Saint-Bertrand-de-Comminges:

Musee Archeologique Departmental.

Luginbill, R. (1999). Thucydides on War and National Character. Oxford: Westview Press.

MacMullen, R. (1990). Changes in the Roman Empire . Princeton: Princeton University Press.

MacMullen, R. (2000). Romanization in the Time of Augustus . New Haven, CT: Yale University

Press.

Macro, A. (1976). Imperial Provisions for Pergamum: OGIS 484. Greek, Roman and Byzantine

Studies , 17 , 169�179.

Martin, T. (1985). Sovereignty and Coinage in Classical Greece . Princeton, NJ: Princeton University

Press.

Martin, T. (1996). Why did the Greek ‘polis’ originally need coins? Historia , 45 , 257�283.

Melville-Jones, J. (1972). Epigraphical notes on Hellenistic bronze coinage. Numismatic Chronicle. ,

132 , 39�43.

Millar, F. (1977). The Emperor in the Roman World . London: Duckworth.

Miron, A. (1996). Alexander von Abonuteichos: Zur Geschichte des Orakels des Neos Asklepios

Glykon. In W. Leschhorn, V. B. Miron & A. Miron (Eds), Hellas und der griechishe Osten:

Studien zur Geschichte und Numismatik der griechischen Welt. Festschrift fur Peter Robert

Franke zum 70. Geburtstag (pp.152�188). Saarbrucken: SDV Saarbrucker Druckerei und

Verlag Gmbh.

Mitchell, S. (1984). The Greek city in the Roman world � The case of Pontus and Bithynia. In C.

Pelekides, D. Peppa-Delmouzou & B. Petrakos (Eds), Proceedings of the Eighth Conference in

Greek and Latin Epigraphy, Athens 3�9 Oct. 1982 (pp.120�133). Athens: Ethniko kai

Kapodistriako Panepistemio Athenon.

Mitchell, S. (1993). Anatolia: Land, Men and Gods in Asia Minor, I . Oxford: Clarendon Press.

Mitchell, S. (1999). The administration of Roman Asia from 133 BC to AD 250. In W. Eck (Ed.),

Lokale Autonomie und romische Ordungsmacht in der kaiserzeitlichen Provinzen von 1. bis 3.

Jahrhundert (pp.17�46). Munich: Oldenbourg.

National Identities 19

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f A

uckl

and

Lib

rary

] at

15:

33 0

5 D

ecem

ber

2014

Nolle, J. (1995). Colonia und Socia der Romer: Ein neuer Vorschlag zur Auflosung der Buchstaben

SR auf den Munzen von Antiocheia bei Pisidien. In C. Schubert & K. Brodersen (Eds), Rom

und der griechische Osten; Festschrift fur Hatto H. Schmitt zum 65 Geburstag (pp.350�369).

Stuttgart: F. Steiner.

Oliver, J. (1989). In K. Clinton (Ed.), Greek Constitutions . Philadelphia: American Philosophical

Society, (pp.208�215).

Rawson, E. (1985). Intellectual Life in the Late Roman Republic . London: Duckworth.

Robert, L. (1966). Monnaies antiquies en Troade . Geneva: Droz.

Robert, L. (1967). Monnaies grecques: Types, legends, magistrates monetaires et Geographie . Geneva:

Droz.

Robert, L. (1977). La titulature de Nicee et Nicomedie: La gloire et la haine. Harvard Studies in

Classical Philology, 81 , 1�39.

Rodewald, C. (1976). Money in the Age of Tiberius . Manchester: Manchester University Press.

Salmeri, G. (2000). Dio, Rome, and the civic life of Asia Minor. In S. Swain (Ed.), Dio Chrysostom:

Politics, Letters and Philosophy (pp.53�303). Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Sheppard, A. (1984). Homonoia in the Greek cities of the Roman Empire. Ancient Society, 15-17 ,

229�252.

Smith, A. (1986). The Ethnic Origins of Nations . Oxford: Blackwell.

Smith, A. (1991). National Identity. London: Penguin.

Spawforth, A. & Walker, S. (1985). The world of the Panhellenion, I: Athens and Eleusis. Journal of

Roman Studies , 75 , 78�104.

Spawforth, A. & Walker, S. (1986). The world of the Panhellenion, II: three Dorian cities. Journal of

Roman Studies , 76 , 88�105.

Swain, S. (1996). Hellenism and Empire: Language, Classicism and Power in the Greek World, AD 50�250 . Oxford: Clarendon Press.

Vittinghoff, F. (Ed.). (1982). Stadt und Herrschaft. Romische Kaiserzeit und Hohes Mittelalter.

Munich: Historische Zeitschrift.

Wallace-Hadrill, A. (1981). The emperor and his virtues. Historia , 30 , 298�323.

Wallace-Hadrill, A. (1986). Image and authority in the coinage of Augustus. Journal of Roman

Studies , 76 , 66�87.

Weber, M. Economy and Society. In G. Roth & C. Wittich (Eds.), New York: Bedminster Press.

Whitmarsh, T. (2001). Greek Literature and the Roman Empire: The Politics of Imitation . Oxford:

Oxford University Press.

Woolf, G. (1994). Becoming Roman, staying Greek: Culture, identity and the civilizing process in

the Roman East. Proceedings of the Cambridge Philological Society, 40 , 115�143.

20 C. Katsari

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f A

uckl

and

Lib

rary

] at

15:

33 0

5 D

ecem

ber

2014