Harold Mattingly, The Imperial “Vota”, London 1951

Harold Mattingly‘s two papers are devoted to coins with images and/or legends that refer to vota publica. They represent the only work so far that deals extensively with the group of vota coinage.

After a brief general introduction to the subject, Mattingly focuses on the vota coinage of the period from Augustus to Galerius in the first article from 1950, while the second paper from 1951 continues his studies until the reign of Zeno. Both papers list the coins in a tabular form which follows a chronological order of minting. Within this list, the author refers to endnotes with comments on dates, historical backgrounds and further literature. The list itself registers the vota coins by stating the obverse and reverse legend and offers a brief description of the coin images, the denomination, the mint and a literature quote (BMC). In addition to the chronological order, there is also an assignment of the vota coins to individual historical occasions, which Mattingly tried to reconstruct from the combination of the numismatic evidence with contemporary sources, such as reign jubilees, weddings or, in case of an illness, the wish of recovery.

In this respect, Mattingly’s work provides a quick overview of the vota coinage of the Roman emperors from Augustus to Zeno, but in most cases, he made no further interpretations of the compiled material. He neglected iconographic aspects of the coins and in particular their development lines; neither did he mention the role of the vota (especially those on reign jubilees) as an expression of imperial victoriousness, which is clearly reflected in the iconography of this group of coins.

However, it should also be mentioned that Mattingly’s essays were written 70 years ago. In the meantime, numismatic research has acquired new knowledge, far more material and, thanks to the “digital humanities”, new opportunities of research that Mattingly were not yet able to use and that therefore could not be incorporated into his work.

“The Imperial Vota” therefore also features material lacunae. It seems that Mattingly primarily dealt with the type catalog “The Roman Imperial Coinage” (RIC), which he had partly published himself, and with the catalog of the coin collection of the British Museum (BMC), and not with the imperial roman coining system itself, because citations from other collections that have further vota types are not mentioned. In addition, there are gaps and fallacies in the catalog. For example, the Augustan coins RIC² 146 – 148 are missing. Hybrid coins were incorrectly added as regular types (e.g. the VOT X MVLT XX silver struck of Jovian from the mint of Arelate, which is clearly a hybrid coin with his predecessor Julian Apostate; see Mattingly 1951, 239). Mattingly’s studies hint in the right direction and form the first reliable material basis for further studies of these coin types, but they only scratch the surface of the topic.

Since I am dealing with vota coinage on the occasion of reign jubilees of the Roman emperors from Antoninus Pius to Iustinianus I (138-565) in my dissertation project, Mattingly’s works form an important basis for my studies. They facilitate material research and give important impulses to interpret vota coins. Primarily, the publication is only useful if you want to deal more deeply with vota coins. As mentioned earlier, Mattingly does not mention the connection to imperial victoriousness as an expression of Roman war culture.

“The Imperial Vota” is first and foremost useful for numismatists. In addition, it is also an important resource for researchers of classical studies who deal with the phenomenon of vota in principate and late antiquity. However, a certain numismatic know-how is essential for the use of these studies.