Emperors of Rome - A (Chronological) Portrait Gallery

[expat]

My one and only Marcus Ulpius Traianus

[kapphnwn]

Trajan Ae 24 Caesarea Maritima 115 AD Obv Head right laureate Rv Emperor standing left sacrificing over altar. RPC 3955 11.61 grms 24 mm Photo by W. hansen

Despite being a rather crude portrait I think this guy caught the emperor pretty closely

[LONGINUS]

Phenomenal Trajans, CPK and Forum members!

[AncientOne]

Cilicia, Irenopolis-Neronias. Trajan. AD Æ23.

Obv: Laureate head right. rev: Hygieia standing right, holding branch and patera from which she feeds serpent. SNG Levante 1605. 4.5 g., 23 mm.

[Spaniard]

Lydia. Thyateira. Trajan. 98-117 AD. AE 25mm (9.14 gm).
Obv.: ΑΥ ΝΕΡ ΤΡΑΙΑΝΟΝ CΕ ΓΕΡ ΔΑΚΙ , laureate head right.
Rev.: ΘΥΑΤΕΙΡΗΝΩΝ; Athena in long chiton standing facing, head left, holding patera in her extended right hand, resting with left on shield placed on ground beside her, behind which upright spear. RPC III 1823. VF

Plotina, AE18 of Gordus-Julia, Lydia. 98-117. Magistrate Poplios.
Obverse..ΠΛΩTEINA CEBACTH, draped bust right
Reverse..EΠI ΠOΠΛIOY ΓOΡΔHNΩ, Zeus seated left, holding patera and sceptre.
BMC 18.

Trajan ar Denarius 98-117AD 20mm/2.66gr (Minted 103-111AD) Obverse-IMPTRAIANO AVG GER DAC PMTRP laureate bust right, slight drapery on left shoulder Reverse-COS VPPS PQR OPTIMO PRINC Aequitas standing left, holding scales and cornucopiae. RIC II# 118

[DonnaML]

50 minutes ago, LONGINUS said:

Phenomenal Trajans, CPK and Forum members!

All wonderful. Your Trajan/Tyche Syrian tetradrachm looks very close to mine. A possible die match?

[LONGINUS]

21 minutes ago, DonnaML said:

All wonderful. Your Trajan/Tyche Syrian tetradrachm looks very close to mine. A possible die match?

Yes, I think they must be coin siblings. If not, they are certainly very close.

[ambr0zie]

Trajan? OK. 

Always liked this Thyateria portrait 

I find the portrait on this quadrans very artistic

Denarii, with pleasant and expressive portraits:

Another artistic depiction on this Caesarea didrachm 

Early reign, when engravers still had Nerva in mind 

[Coinmaster]

4 minutes ago, LONGINUS said:

Yes, I think they must be coin siblings. If not, they are certainly very close.

Not the same, but definitely from the same die cutter. Very nice!

[GordianAppreciator101]

1 hour ago, kapphnwn said:

Trajan Ae 24 Caesarea Maritima 115 AD Obv Head right laureate Rv Emperor standing left sacrificing over altar. RPC 3955 11.61 grms 24 mm Photo by W. hansen

Despite being a rather crude portrait I think this guy caught the emperor pretty closely

That's a great type. His face has a 3rd Century Crisis sestertius charm to it. Ironically, kinda reminds me of Trajan Decius.

[Herodotus]

Trajan. (AD 98-117). AE Sestertius. Rome Mint. (33mm, 26.24g).

Struck (AD 114-117).

OBVERSE: IMP CAES TRAIANO OPTIMO AVG GER DAC P M TR P COS VI P P; Laureate and draped bust of Trajan right.

REVERSE: SENATVS POPVLVSQVE ROMANVS; Felicitas, draped, standing left, holding up caduceus in right hand and cornucopia in left; S-C.

RIC 671 

[Severus Alexander]

There are some fantastic Trajan portraits above!  BUT... as I browse them (considering the Imperial coins only), I can't help thinking that there's some sort of drop-off in engraving quality as compared to the Caligula-to-Nerva portraits.  Does anyone else sense this as well?  

I'm not sure I can put my finger on it, but I wonder if there may be two aspects to the drop-off.  One is that the style of the engraving is just... less impressive.  We're much more likely to get something like this, which is simply a poor style portrait:

The other aspect of the drop-off in quality, at least once you get past the early post-Nerva stage in Trajan's portraiture, and certainly by COS V (103), is that the standardization of the portraits is overwhelming, with the result that they tend to lack that elusive bit of charm we call "character."  We almost always get: 

• a bulgy, unrealistic, sometimes almost Neanderthal brow
• a simplistic division between the hair around the crown circling in one direction, and the rest of the hair circling in the other
• standardized pursed lips (sometimes sticking out, ducklike), small chin (often unrealistically everted), sometimes with a slight double chin
• no sculpting of the cheek to mention, just smooth
• a very simple, standardized eye design
• and... ?

The nose does at least vary a bit, sometimes with a bump on it, and sometimes longer and pointier.  But it seems to me that the engravers didn't much use their creativity to endow their portraits with any character.  There are a few possible explanations for this.  I tend to think all four of the following are involved:

1. Trajan really did look like that!  (For example, if you look at sculptures of Trajan, it seems he did indeed have a pair of well-developed muscles in his brow... maybe from frowning a lot?!)
2. Artistic style: There was a move from realistic portraiture back to a more idealistic portraiture as under Octavian/Augustus.
3. Stricter engraving protocols were enforced at the mint.
4. The sheer quantity of coinage required cutting corners, including in the die-engraving stage.

Arguably we see some of this sort of simplistic standardization already in portraits of Domitian, although I think that's much less true of Domitian's AE coinage.  Whereas with Trajan it's in all metals.  Yes, there's more real estate on a sestertius and so a little more detail on the portraits, but it seems to me that the engravers didn't use that extra real estate to the extent that they could have.

What do you think?  Do coin portraits of Trajan suffer from a drop-off in 1) style, and 2) character as compared with the previous reigns?

It is of course standard wisdom that Roman portraiture was at its height in the first century.  On the coins, I'd say the drop-off begins with Domitian and takes a distinct step at Trajan.  This level of style and standardization largely continues through the reigns of Hadrian and Antoninus Pius (with notable exceptions - much sought after!), and then I'd say there's another drop-off (this time purely in style?) with Marcus Aurelius.

[DonnaML]

2 hours ago, Coinmaster said:

Not the same, but definitely from the same die cutter. Very nice!

I can see that the reverse dies are different, but are you sure that the obverse dies aren't a match?

[DonnaML]

2 hours ago, Severus Alexander said:

the standardization of the portraits is overwhelming, with the result that they tend to lack that elusive bit of charm we call "character."

I wonder if perhaps it's as much a lack of complexity and detail that you find less appealing as it is a lack of individuality. After all, Augustus's portraits are beautiful, but they all looked the same for 40 years! I'd call that standardization. Many of Vespasian's portraits are also pretty standardized, but I still think there's more "there there" than Trajan's. If you look at the Trajan Imperial portraits I posted above, really the only one I'd say has a great deal of "character" -- as well as being non-standardized -- is the very first one, with the mourning Dacian on the reverse.

 

 

Edited January 24, 2023 by DonnaML

[kapphnwn]

Almost forgot about her

Plotina Ar Denarius 112-114 AD Obv Bust right draped Rv Vesta seated left RIC 730 Woytek 705-13.36 grms 20 mm Photo by W. Hansen

As she was instrumental in setting up what we now call the adoptive or 5 good emperors she does deserve some recognition,  

[CPK]

Interesting observations @Severus Alexander. I have always liked Trajan's portrait - it is quite distinct and nearly always immediately recognizable.

But I do see what you're saying, it does seem like the range of artistic variation shrinks slightly under Trajan.

However, in my opinion it's a small shift and Trajan's coins still feature some of the finest in Imperial portraiture. 

[Zarco]

I have a few denarii of Trajan to share.

This was my second ancient coin.  There's some sort of delamination going on with it.  I've wondered whether it is a fourree.  Any thoughts?

Trajan, AD 98-117.
AR Denarius, 3.0 g, 21.0 mm, 7 h.
Rome mint, AD 114-117.
Obv: IMP TRAIANO OPTIMO AVG GER DAC P M TR P; Bust of Trajan, laureate, draped, right.
Rev: COS VI P P S P Q R; Column of Trajan surmounted with a statue of Trajan; two eagles at base and a wreath with spirals and dots on column.
Refs: RIC 307.
Acquired from Marc Breitsprecher, Classical Numismatist, 2 February 2018.

 

Trajan, AD 98-117.
AR Denarius, 3.3 g, 20.4 mm, 7 h.
Rome mint, AD 112-114.
Obv: IMP TRAIANO AVG GER DAC P M TR P COS VI P P; Bust of Trajan, laureate, draped, right.
Rev: S P Q R OPTIMO PRINCIPI VIA TRAIANA; Via Trajana, bare to waist, reclining left, head turned back right, holding wheel on right knee and resting left arm on rocks: she holds branch in left hand.
Refs: RIC 266, Sear RCV 3173.
Acquired from Aegean Numismatics, 7 February 2018.

 

Trajan, AD 98-117.
AR Denarius, 3.3 g, 20.4 mm, 7 h.
Rome mint, AD 112-114.
Obv: IMP TRAIANO AVG GER DAC P M TR P COS VI P P; Bust of Trajan, laureate, draped, right.
Rev: S P Q R OPTIMO PRINCIPI VIA TRAIANA; Via Trajana, bare to waist, reclining left, head turned back right, holding wheel on right knee and resting left arm on rocks: she holds branch in left hand.
Refs: RIC 266, Sear RCV 3173.
Acquired from Aegean Numismatics, 7 February 2018.

 

Trajan, AD 98-117.
AR Denarius, 3.3 g, 18.1 mm, 6 h.
Rome mint, AD 103-111.
Obv: IMP TRAIANO AVG GER DAC P M TR P; Bust of Trajan, laureate, right, draped on left shoulder.
Rev: COS V P P S P Q R OPTIMO PRINC DAC CAP; Dacian seated left on a pile of arms in an attitude of mourning; round him, left and right, various arms.
Refs: RIC 98.
Acquired from Silbury Coins, 30 September 2022.
This coin was part of the Ropsley hoard of 522 denarii found by a metal detectorist in Lincolnshire, England on 16 March 2018.  The hoard is believed to have been deposited between AD 150 and 152.

[Octavius]

 Sestertius of Trajan addressing troops and dupondius...

[Severus Alexander]

4 hours ago, DonnaML said:

I wonder if perhaps it's as much a lack of complexity and detail that you find less appealing as it is a lack of individuality. After all, Augustus's portraits are beautiful, but they all looked the same for 40 years! I'd call that standardization.

I think it's both, but I think you're right to call attention to the former. To some extent I suppose it's hard or even artificial to separate the two aspects I tried to identify, style and standardization. But you can tell that at least part of my complaint is about complexity just by how I described the standardization ("simplistic" hair, "simple" eye design).

I also agree that Augustus's portraits, at least on his earlier denarii, are often in very good style, far superior to anything we see for Trajan. On the other hand, the later, mass produced Gaius & Lucius denarii can feature some pretty bad portraits. I do think we see a lot more variety in style and detail than we see for Trajan, though, throughout coinage production for Augustus. Of course it's all idealized, so standardized in a sense, but the engravers still had a lot of latitude.

To illustrate, here's an array of Augustus portraits (not my coins). On the left are two good style early portraits, quite different from each other. (Of course there's a lot more variety than just these two, especially if you include Spanish and eastern mints.) The other four coins are all Gaius & Lucius denarii.  In the middle column are a couple good style portraits that are quite different from each other, and in the right column are two portraits with poor style (especially that bottom right one... yuck!), also different from each other:

So I think Augustus portraits (and Tiberius portraits too) show quite a lot of variety overall, despite the idealization.  Did the latitude engravers' had allow them to endow some portraits with character, exactly?  I'm not sure, it sounds weird to say an idealized portrait has character. But the combination of latitude + varied engraver abilities inevitably produces better portraits at the top end... I guess that's my main point about why Trajan's portraits suffer.  The most skilled engravers weren't free enough to generate any truly superb portraits.

4 hours ago, DonnaML said:

Many of Vespasian's portraits are also pretty standardized, but I still think there's more "there there" than Trajan's.

Agreed about the more "there there" (nice way to put it!), and also about the standardization to some extent - though I do think there's quite a bit of variety on Vespasian's AE coinage.

4 hours ago, CPK said:

I have always liked Trajan's portrait - it is quite distinct and nearly always immediately recognizable.

There's no question that's true. The standardization helps with that, and certainly shouldn't be confused with being generic, like some portraiture in the third and most in the fourth century.

Some of the best engraving, of course, is on dies reserved for aureii, so if we want to see the best Trajan portraits we should look there.  If you look at a bunch on acsearch, though, you'll find the same old standardized portrait. 😞  

On the coin on the right, below (not mine!), we see some of the very best style you can get with the standardized Trajan portrait. It even has some facial modeling to it.  On the left, we see a special issue (probably under Antoninus Pius) which includes the famous "Diomedes" portraits of Hadrian.  This is an individualized portrait where the engraver has allowed himself some freedom.  It's still recognizably Trajan, but it has a style we never see on his ordinary coinage. Not that the style is that superior to the style on the right; it's just less standardized. (Well, actually, it probably is somewhat better in that it is perhaps less of a caricature and more lifelike.) My point is this: you get truly special portraits only when when a skilled engraver is given some latitude; the aureus on the left is at least moving in that direction. (Of course, part of the “specialness” of this portrait lies in the simple fact that it’s different from the norm. For emperors having more variety in portraiture overall, this contributor to our perception of specialness will be less significant.)

4 hours ago, CPK said:

However, in my opinion it's a small shift and Trajan's coins still feature some of the finest in Imperial portraiture. 

I like that! A very clear statement of an opposing position. 😄

Edited January 24, 2023 by Severus Alexander

[shanxi]

Two provincial coins:

Trajan, 98-117 AD.
Phoenicia, Tyre
AR Tetradrachm
Dated year 18 (113/4 AD).
Obv.: AΥTOKΡ KAIC NEΡ TΡAIANOC CEB ΓEΡM ΔAK, Laureate head right; club and eagle below
Rev.: ΔHMAΡC EΞ IH ΥΠATϚ , Tyche seated right on rocks, holding grain ears and poppies, river-god Orontes swimming right below.
Ag, 23.3mm, 14.28 g
Prieur 1501.

 

Lydia. Hierocaesaraea
Trajan
Bronze, AE 20
Obv.: ΑΥ ΝΕΡΒΑΝ ΤΡΑΙΑΝΟΝ, laureate head right
Rev: ΙΕΡΟΚΑΙСΑΡΕΩΝ, Nike standing left, holding wreath and palm.
Æ, 20mm, 5.58g
Ref.: RPC III, 1845B (this coin)
Ex Numismatik Naumann, auction53, lot 472

[mc9]

Here i have some low grade Sestertius, a Dupondius and a Semis from Traianus:

Sestertius:

RIC 534

RIC500

RIC 569

Dupondius: RIC 674

and a Semis: RIC 695

[Limes]

Interesting observation @Severus Alexander, thanks for sharing! Below just my 2 cents...

13 hours ago, Severus Alexander said:

What do you think?  Do coin portraits of Trajan suffer from a drop-off in 1) style, and 2) character as compared with the previous reigns?

13 hours ago, Severus Alexander said:

It is of course standard wisdom that Roman portraiture was at its height in the first century.

Well, you answered your own question 😉

But on a more serious note, if you compare it to, especially Nero, the quality of the portraiture of Trajan is of a more mass-production level. There are of course exceptions, especially aureii and large bronzes. But I think your statement, although not wrong per se, deserves nuance. Trajan's coins are (at least in my opinion) attractive not for their portraiture, but for the commemorative aspect of them. I think he is the emperor who first struck coins commemorating various events on such a large scale, and with so many varied types. I think the underlying message here is obvious; look what the emperor does for the populace and empire, but perhaps also hidden is a personal touch of Trajan, who was less involved with the arts as was Nero? 

Another thing is that Dio Cassius states that Trajan underwent a huge operation to melt down worn, old coinage to replace it with new coins (also for demonetization purposes, as Sear suspects (Vol II, p. 94)). Would it be possible that such an operation required such a large amount of dies, that they also had to be produced on a large scale, that left little room for artistic consideration? 

13 hours ago, Severus Alexander said:

On the coins, I'd say the drop-off begins with Domitian and takes a distinct step at Trajan.  This level of style and standardization largely continues through the reigns of Hadrian and Antoninus Pius (with notable exceptions - much sought after!), and then I'd say there's another drop-off (this time purely in style?) with Marcus Aurelius.

Domitian; I'm not sure. Perhaps @David Athertoncan share his insights. 

Hadrian and Antoninus Pius; I think some of the portraiture is of excellent quality, overall better compared to Trajan. Especially Hadrian; his coins - not all of course - show some exquisite busts. And I'm not only thinking of that sestertius of Antoninianos of Aphrodisias 😄 

And agree on Marcus Aurelius, and Commodus; although some issues, such as the medaillion issues, are beautiful, the portraits on most of the coins of Marcus Aurelius appear 'cartoonish'. I think a large drop in overall quality occurs during the reign of Commodus. 

[Ancient Coin Hunter]

Interesting commentary @Severus Alexander- and I tend to agree. The thing that stands out to me is the brow and sloping forehead which I think, if seen on a real person would look odd. The fact that the coins mass-reproduce this caricature is strange. It's as if one bust served as a model for the vast majority of his coins. That, surely, would not have been possible. If if indeed the policy was to strike as many coins as possible which also communicated the greatness of the empire under Trajan, with victories over Dacia, Germania, Arabia Felix, and the Parthians all the way to the Persian Gulf - then perhaps the standardization is understandable. However it seems like with different hands carving dies achieving the odd standardization would have been difficult....

[David Atherton]

41 minutes ago, Limes said:

Perhaps @David Athertoncan share his insights.

Well, I would agree there was a drop off in portraiture style during Domitian's reign, sometime @ 90 AD. I'll illustrate with two denarii struck either side of that year.

 

 

Domitian

AR Denarius, 3.35g
Rome mint, 87 AD
Obv: IMP CAES DOMIT AVG GERM P M TR P VI; Head of Domitian, laureate, bearded, r.
Rev: IMP XIIII COS XIII CENS P P P; Minerva stg. l., with spear (M4)
RIC 511 (C). BMC 107. RSC 213. BNC 107.

 

 

Domitian

AR Denarius, 3.47g
Rome mint, 92 AD
Obv: IMP CAES DOMIT AVG GERM P M TR P XI; Head of Domitian, laureate, bearded, r.
Rev: IMP XXI COS XVI CENS P P P; Minerva stg. l., with thunderbolt and spear; shield at her l. side (M3)
RIC 732 (C3). BMC 192. RSC 272. BNC 178.
 

Between 84 and 88 was Domitian's stylistic highpoint on the precious metals. The bronze produced fine portraits throughout most of the reign, as did Vespasian and Titus earlier. But clearly some talented engravers went missing after 90.

Literally, just my two denarii worth.

Edited January 24, 2023 by David Atherton

[CPK]

Lovely Trajan portraits, all! We now move on to Hadrian.

This coin is my favorite Hadrian portrait for the simple reason that it's the only one I own.