Commemorating the Past and Performing Power: Parades of Ancestors on Caligula's Coinage

Abstract

This article explores the interconnection between Caligula's rehabilitation of his family and the performance of imperial power through processions as presented on three of his coin types. It argues that Caligula used the depictions of processions in connection with coin types celebrating his father, mother, and brothers to create a ‘parade of ancestors’. These coins served as portable visual reminders (monumenta) of Germanicus’ pompa triumphalis of 17 CE, the inclusion of Agrippina's image into the pompa circensis as part of the honours granted to Caligula's family members upon his accession, and the likely inclusion of Nero and Drusus’ images at the head of the transvectio equitum during the early years of Caligula's reign. By parading his family members on his coins in this way, Caligula was able to propel himself forward by looking to and commemorating the past, thereby creating permanent monumenta of these public performances of power.

When Gaius Caesar Augustus (Caligula) received ‘authority and judgement of all things’,¹ he had not held the various political offices or powers which had previously been granted to his predecessors, Augustus and Tiberius.² The princeps relied on consensus,³ especially in the early decades of the first century CE when the idea of political power being concentrated into the hands of one man and his family was still in its infancy. Augustus and Tiberius had secured this consensus by highlighting the continuation of Republican powers and by promoting the stability created through the elevation of family members to important political offices coupled with hints of succession planning.⁴ Yet Caligula had held no magistracy before his accession. Moreover, since he had been named as joint heir with Tiberius Gemellus in Tiberius’ will (Suet. Calig. 14.1), he needed to distance himself from the idea of ‘legitimacy through succession’.⁵

While it is clear that Tiberius favoured Caligula in the latter half of his reign, it could be supposed that Caligula resented Tiberius for his inaction – or indeed his involvement, if we can believe what the ancient sources imply⁶ – regarding the imprisonment, exile, and even death of Caligula's immediate family members.⁷ When Germanicus died under suspicious circumstances in the East in 19 CE, rumour spread that Tiberius and Livia may have been indirectly involved.⁸ In 27 CE, Agrippina was forced out of Rome and placed under military guard.⁹ Following the death of Livia in 29 CE, Agrippina and Nero were declared public enemies; Agrippina was then sent in exile to Pandateria, Nero to Pontia. In 30 CE, Drusus was detained in Rome. All died in captivity shortly after. This family history likely contributed to Caligula's actions as princeps, seeking to distance himself from Tiberius and rehabilitate his family's memory.

In order to separate himself from his predecessor, Caligula instead sought to consolidate power and gain acceptance of his position through the rehabilitation of his family, all of whom had been persecuted under Tiberius.

…confestim Pandateriam et Pontias ad transferendos matris fratrisque cineres festinavit, tempestate turbida, quo magis pietas emineret, adiitque venerabundus ac per semet in urnas condidit; nec minore scaena Ostiam praefixo in biremis puppe vexillo et inde Romam Tiberi subvectos per splendidissimum quemque equestris medio ac frequenti die duobus ferculis Mausoleo intulit, inferiasque iis annua religione publice instituit, et eo amplius matri circenses carpentumque quo in pompa traduceretur.

Suet. Calig. 15.1¹⁰

Immediately, he hurried off to Pandateria and the Pontian islands to transfer the ashes of his mother and brother, even in a violent storm, so that his piety might shine forth more. Approaching with reverence, he placed the ashes in the urn with his own hands. Nor with any less theatricality, he brought them to Ostia, fastened in a bireme with a military flag in the stern, and then up the Tiber to Rome, he carried them on two biers to the Mausoleum, by the most distinguished of the equestrians and in the middle of the day, when most crowded. He established annual sacrifices in honour of the dead with public ceremony and more grandly still, circus games for his mother, and a carpentum in which she might be transported in the procession.

Caligula's actions showcase how imperial power was performed and cultivated through monuments, statuary, processions, and spectacle. The showmanship of Caligula's actions is clearly highlighted in Suetonius’ account; the demonstration of his piety (pietas) even in the face of adversity (in this case, in a violent storm, tempestate turbida) and how he placed the ashes in the urn with his own hands (per semet).¹¹ In fact, Suetonius even comments on the theatricality of the whole event (nec minore scaena). This spectacle of power – the public procession and the commemoration and inclusion of his family members into public religious rituals – helps Caligula to gain public consensus for his position as princeps and distance him from his predecessor.¹²

Caligula's spectacle of commemoration was not novel. His mother, Agrippina, had performed a similar journey to return Germanicus’ ashes to Rome in 20 CE.¹³ Agrippina's own adversity was the winter sea (‘never having been interrupted in her navigation of the winter sea…’, nihil intermissa navigatione hiberni maris, Tac. Ann. 3.1) and she undertook this journey accompanied by two children (likely the two eldest sons). The public procession of Germanicus’ ashes by his family members provided a focal point for an empire united through extravagant communal mourning.¹⁴ This promotion of Germanicus and his family is in direct conflict with the actions of Tiberius and Livia, who abstained from public appearance (publico abstinuere, Tac. Ann. 3.3) and may have even had a hand in Germanicus’ death. Even at this early stage, Tacitus highlights the adversarial nature of the relationship between Tiberius and the family of Germanicus.

This article examines how Caligula, upon becoming princeps, was able to propel himself forward by looking to and commemorating the past. It explores the interconnection between Caligula's rehabilitation of his immediate family and the performance of imperial power through processions, namely the pompa triumphalis, pompa circensis, and transvectio equitum. The depiction of these important processions as part of his commemoration of his father, mother, and brothers on several coins served as a visual parade of ancestors and created permanent monumenta of these public performances of power.

Coins as ‘Parades of Ancestors’

Scholars continue to debate whether, during the principate, the princeps imposed his own ideas for images on coins or whether the decision still lay with the moneyers.¹⁵ While it cannot be determined whether Caligula was personally responsible for the images on coins minted from 37–41 CE, it is generally accepted by scholars that coins were minted under imperial authority to at least some extent, and it seems clear that the promotion of family played a significant role in Caligula's performance of power.¹⁶ It is also evident that these coins were not used as ‘propaganda’ in the sense that they were not designed ‘to persuade’ but rather ‘to remind’.¹⁷ Meadows and Williams argue that coins in the late second century BCE were circulating ideas of memory (memoria) and the things accomplished (res gestae) by their ancestors, thereby creating a monumentum to the moneyer's family.¹⁸ As I will argue, this categorisation can also be applied to Caligula's family coins.

Most of the coins promoting family members depict the bust of the individual and the legend identifying the figure and their family relationship.¹⁹ However, amongst the ‘family coins’, there are three types which are of particular interest in terms of ‘performing’ or ‘parading’ power.²⁰ They show movement through the inclusion of either horses or wheeled vehicles. The idea of reading certain coin types in connection with others is not new in the study of Caligula's coinage. Both Wood (1999: 210) and Jucker (1980: 206) have discussed how Germanicus’ ‘Triumph’ coin and Agrippina's ‘Carpentum’ coin work together, specifically in terms of the depiction of the vehicle, legend, and overall design, as well as the link between the triumphal chariot as a ‘male’ vehicle and the carpentum as a ‘female’ vehicle for self-promotion. Wood has also drawn a connection between Caligula's ‘sisters’ coin and ‘brothers’ coins in terms of their connections to the gods.²¹

The connection between these three ‘parading’ coins and the significance of movement has not yet been made. Each provides a visual representation of a different type of procession involving family members: the pompa triumphalis, pompa circensis, and transvectio equitum. ²² Unlike other large monuments which display depictions of pompae and highlight movement,²³ coins can only provide a limited snap-shot or one image meant to evoke memory of that event. It is likely that these representations of parades played a role in the development of post-event memories,²⁴ thereby promoting Caligula's own position through the commemoration of his family members.

Germanicus and the pompa triumphalis

The Roman triumph was central to the creation and enforcement of social memory.²⁵ Each triumph was unique, but the repetition of the various components ensured that these events were imprinted in the Roman collective memory.²⁶ When Germanicus celebrated his triumph in 17 CE following his recall from his Germanic campaign, spectators were presented with an image of the victorious general like no other. ‘The admiration of the viewers was heightened by the striking appearance of the general and the chariot which bore his five children’ (augebat intuentium visus eximia ipsius species currusque quinque liberis onustus, Tac. Ann. 2.41).²⁷ Although the triumph was meant to celebrate military victory, the inclusion of children in Germanicus’ triumphal chariot turned this military event into a family one.²⁸ It sent a clear message that it was the domus Augusta which oversaw Rome's victory. One of the children in this chariot was the future princeps, Caligula.²⁹

On a coin of uncertain date (fig. 1), Caligula commemorates his father's recovery of the standards lost by Varus and the triumph in which he himself participated as a child.

Figure 1. Bronze Dupondius, Rome, 37–41 CE, RIC I² (Gaius/Caligula) 57.³⁰ Otago Museum E2017.519. Copyright Tūhura Otago Museum, Dunedin.

The obverse depicts the triumphator in a quadriga with the legend GERMANICUS CAESAR and is likely meant to represent and evoke the memory of the entire celebration of Germanicus’ triumph in 17 CE.³¹ The reverse shows a figure standing with a military standard and the legend SIGNIS RECEPT(is) DEVICTIS GERM(anis) which makes reference to the re-acquisition of those standards, although Germanicus was only able to recapture two of the three that were lost in 9 CE. The military imagery on this coin is striking. The literary accounts highlight that Caligula had spent much of his early life in military camps.³² However, when he came to power, Caligula had yet to embark on any major military campaigns or achieve glory or renown for any of his actions. Instead, he had to rely on the goodwill of the soldiers, many of whom had fought with his father and even remembered him as a small child in the camp.

Triumphal imagery on coinage has a long history. The first example of a coin celebrating an individual's specific triumph dates to the late second century BCE, but coins depicting gods (most commonly Victory or Jupiter) in a quadriga celebrating victory date back to the late third century BCE. A denarius issued by C. Fundanius in 101 BCE depicts the horses as if they were marching in a parade rather than rearing as had been the case with the divine quadriga. This coin likely commemorates Marius’ victory over the Teutones and Cimbri.³⁴ It seems to recall a recent triumph and, while many coin types from this period used ancestral connections to promote themselves and their families,³⁵ Fundanius was not related to Marius. Thus, this is not a coin designed to promote the actions of one's ancestors. Instead, it is likely that Fundanius (a quaestor) might have been attempting to promote Marius’ deeds to connect himself with this military champion in order to further his own aspirations for higher political offices, which he never did achieve. Other triumphal coins with similar imagery continued to be used throughout the first century BCE, such as this example (fig. 2) promoting the expected triumph of Sulla – to take place early 81 BCE – minted by L. Manlius Torquatus (Pro Quaestor).³⁶

Figure 2. Silver Denarius, Rome, 82 BCE, RRC 367/5.³³ Otago Museum E2017.390. Copyright Tūhura Otago Museum, Dunedin.

As Woytek's recent work has shown, many Republican coin types were still in circulation well into the first and second centuries CE.³⁷ It is likely that this promotion of military success through triumphal imagery on coins was part of a broader collective memory during this period and that Caligula's coins could help promote him through the celebration of his father's military success.

By the early first century CE, the triumphal coin type linked ancestral achievements and succession. Minted near the end of Augustus’ life in 13/14 CE, several coins from Lugdunum depict Augustus on the obverse, with Tiberius in a triumphal chariot on the reverse (fig. 3).³⁹

Figure 3. Silver Denarius, Lugdunum, 13/14 CE, RIC I² (Augustus) 222.³⁸ American Numismatic Society 1944.100.39116. Courtesy of the American Numismatic Society

Minted as both aurei and denarii, this coin type employs imagery previously used to showcase the successes of one's ancestors to now promote shared power and to suggest that imperial power can be inherited. These higher denomination coins in particular were commonly used by Augustus to highlight succession, especially from 8 BCE to his death.⁴⁰ Several bronze sestertii were minted in the final years of Tiberius’ life, which depict quadrigae ornamented with trophies,⁴¹ while two types commemorate Divus Augustus in a quadriga with elephants, thereby recalling Augustus’ own triumphal imagery.⁴² If we consider the Germanicus coin within the context of both of the Republican and Imperial traditions, a possible interpretation for Caligula's promotion of his father's triumph could be that it was intended to connect him to his father's achievements in order to promote his own claim to political power.

Suetonius explicitly highlights the expectation of Caligula living up to his father's memory when he states:

Sic imperium adeptus, populum Romanum, vel dicam hominum genus, voti compotem fecit, exoptatissimus princeps maximae parti provincialium ac militum, quod infantem plerique cognoverant, sed et universae plebi urbanae ob memoriam Germanici patris miserationemque prope afflictae domus.

Suet. Calig. 13

Having thus acquired imperium, he fulfilled the prayers of the Roman people — or should I say, all humankind — the ruler most highly favoured by the greater part of provincials and soldiers, whom many had known as a child, and by all the people of Rome [the universal urban plebs] on account of the memory of his father Germanicus and the pity for the near ruined house.

This child of Germanicus, the only surviving male heir, who had been present in that triumphal chariot, had now come to power. The use of Germanicus’ memory to promote Caligula's position as princeps is made explicit. He is highly favoured by the soldiers (because he was known to them) and the people (because of the pity they felt for the ‘near ruined house’). Germanicus had achieved the status of ‘popular hero’ and all of Rome united in mourning his passing, granting him exceptional status in the collective memory.⁴⁴ By promoting his father's military victory on a coin likely used to pay the soldiers, Caligula not only reminded them of their much-loved commander but implied that, as Germanicus’ son, he could also lead them to victory.

Agrippina and the pompa circensis

As discussed in the introduction, Caligula undertook a spectacle of rehabilitation of his family and established a number of rituals and honours to commemorate his deceased family members and further promote those still living.⁴⁵ These exceptional honours and the public performance of mourning could all be interpreted as examples of Flaig's ‘consentic rituals’ by which all of Rome confirmed their political consent (or acceptance) of Caligula's accession through this ritualised behaviour.⁴⁷ These honours included ‘circus games for his mother, and a carpentum in which she might be transported in the procession’ (matri circenses carpentumque quo in pompa traduceretur, Suet. Calig. 15.1).⁴⁸ Coins were then minted that commemorate Agrippina's memory, including a visual representation of the carpentum (fig. 4).⁴⁹

Figure 4. Bronze Sestertius, Rome, 37–41 CE, RIC I² (Gaius/Caligula) 55.⁴³ American Numismatic Society 1944.100.39318. Courtesy of the American Numismatic Society

The carpentum was a carriage, in which Roman matrons were allowed to be conveyed in the public festival processions (a privilege that by this period was only given to imperial family members and had previously been given to Vestal Virgins, the rex sacrorum, and flamines).⁵⁰ It was a state-sponsored product built specifically to command attention, much like the triumphal chariot.⁵¹ As a coin type, carpenta only appear on coins in connection with a member of the imperial family.⁵² The first depiction of a carpentum on a coin dates to 22/23 CE (fig. 5).

Figure 5. Bronze Sestertius, Rome, 22/23 CE, RIC I² (Tiberius) 51.⁴⁶ Otago Museum E2017.512. Copyright Tūhura Otago Museum, Dunedin

There is much debate about what the carpentum on Livia's coin is meant to symbolise. In 22 CE, Livia came down with a terrible illness. According to Tacitus, when the senate heard about her illness, ‘public prayers to the gods and great games were decreed’.⁵³ Ginsburg suggests that the obverse legend, IULIAE AUGUST(ae), commemorates these supplicia for Livia's recovery.⁵⁴ Wood interprets the carpentum as representing the honour of sitting amongst the Vestals in the theatre,⁵⁵ assuming that she would have also received the right to transportation within Rome by carpentum. ⁵⁶ Jucker argues that this image represents an abstraction.⁵⁷ While the Livia coin image may serve as a model for the Agrippina coin, the interpretation of the Agrippina coin is much more straightforward; a clear connection can be made between the literary sources and the numismatic evidence, suggesting that this coin was intended to evoke the memory of a particular event – in this case, her image's inclusion in the pompa circensis.

While carpenta are not always directly connected to the ludi circenses, those that are all date from the imperial period. They became associated with the commemoration of deceased female imperial family members.⁵⁸ This is part of a larger tradition of the gradual incorporation of imperial family members into the pompa. Following the death and deification of Julius Caesar, the image of Divus Iulius was added into the pompa. ⁵⁹ This allowed Octavian to connect himself with his divine father in social memory, reinforced through processions. The appropriation of the pompa circensis to achieve this was a direct result of the newly-deified ancestor's absence from funeral processions. Over time, the pompa circensis became a dynastic tool to ‘honour the memory of predecessors and construct imperial lineages’.⁶⁰ The increased focus on the divine ancestry of the princeps also helped to build consensus for his position of power within the city.⁶¹ This connection is made even more explicit when Caligula changed the starting point for the pompa to the Temple of Divus Augustus, following its completion in 38 CE.⁶²

Although the MEMORIAE AGRIPPINAE coin cannot be definitively dated,⁶³ both the legend memoriae and Suetonius’ description of the honours given to Agrippina situate this coin within the context of Caligula's appropriation of part of the pompa circensis as a pompa funebris for his mother in the months following his accession. The addition of her carpentum in the pompa circensis served to rehabilitate her memory and establish her place alongside Caligula's divine ancestors. This coin provides a portable visual memorial of this event, reinforcing the other honours that increased Agrippina's visibility within the city's ritual calendar and incorporated the entire city in the preservation of her memory.

Nero and Drusus Caesares and the transvectio equitum

In the early 30s CE, Nero died in exile and Drusus died in confinement on the Palatine. Caligula's retrieval of his brother Nero's ashes from the Pontian islands, along with the ashes of his mother from Pandateria, was part of the spectacle of rehabilitation, the description of which introduced this article. While not part of the narrative of the honours granted by Caligula to his family in Suetonius’ Life of Caligula, Suetonius tells us in his Life of Claudius that Caligula also commissioned Claudius to set up statues of Nero and Drusus in Rome during Claudius’ first consulship (37 CE).⁶⁴ It is worth noting that we may not be able to take Suetonius at his word as there is no external evidence corroborating this ‘commissioning’; the statues themselves do not survive, and there is no conclusive evidence what form these statues took (or if they even were completed). However, many equestrian statues had previously been erected to commemorate deceased family members, such as the statues for Lucius and Gaius on an honorific arch erected in the community of Pisa, and the golden equestrian statue of Drusus (son of Tiberius) erected in the Lupercal.⁶⁵ It has thus been suggested by scholars that the statues to Drusus and Nero (if they were actually erected) were also equestrian statues, following the precedent of posthumous honours granted to these other imperial family members, and that the coins minted on three separate occasions during Caligula's principate – depicting the brothers on horseback – are meant to evoke those statues (fig. 6).⁶⁸

Figure 6. Bronze Dupondius, Rome, 40/41 CE, RIC I² (Gaius/Caligula) 49.⁶⁶ Otago Museum E2017.517. Copyright Tūhura Otago Museum, Dunedin

There were no coins depicting honorific equestrian statues erected for previously-deceased members of the imperial family which could serve as a model for this particular coin image. During Gaius Caesar's lifetime, aurei and denarii were minted which depicted him on horseback with aquila in the background (fig. 7). However, given that these coins commemorate the living Gaius and his military successes, without mentioning his brother Lucius, it is unlikely that these coin types served as a model for Caligula's.

Figure 7. Silver Denarius, 9 BCE, Lugdunum, RIC I² (Augustus) 199.⁶⁷ American Numismatic Society 1944.100.39113. Courtesy of the American Numismatic Society

Instead, the depiction of Caligula's brothers on horseback bears a striking resemblance to one of the most common Republican coin types, that of the Dioscuri (fig. 8).⁷⁰

Figure 8. Silver Denarius, 148 BCE, Rome, RRC 214/1b.⁶⁹ Otago Museum E2017.330. Copyright Tūhura Otago Museum, Dunedin

In historical/mythographical terms, the Dioscuri were first tied to Rome's military success at the Battle of Lake Regillus,⁷¹ and a temple was built in the forum in fulfilment of Postumius’ battlefield vow.⁷² As tradition has it, the transvectio equitum, a yearly parade on the 15 July, was established to commemorate this success and secure the Dioscuri's position as patron deities of the equites.⁷³ The procession travelled to the temple of Castor in the Roman Forum and was led by two ‘leaders of the youth’ (principes iuventutis).⁷⁴ Augustus seems to have revived this procession after some period of disuse.⁷⁵ This revival has been directly tied to the promotion of Gaius and Lucius and the appropriation of the title princeps iuventutis for members of the imperial family alone.⁷⁶ The Dioscuri then also become connected to the promotion of potential heirs and imperial succession.⁷⁷ Although several other ‘imperial princes’, such as Germanicus and Drusus, and most importantly for the current discussion, Nero and Drusus, were not officially acclaimed as principes iuventutis, ⁷⁸ there is evidence of their connection to the transvectio equitum – albeit after their deaths. Tacitus records that Tiberius ordered the company (turmae) to follow behind Germanicus’ image on the 15 July.⁷⁹ While Tacitus does not explicitly identify this procession as the transvectio equitum, the date (15 July) and the link to the equestrian order in the preceding sentence suggest that we should interpret this honour as relating to this procession specifically.⁸⁰ Drusus was also most likely added to the parade in 23 CE.⁸¹ Following this precedent, it is likely that Caligula ordered his brothers’ images to take this place of honour as well.

The newly revived transvectio itself came to connect the ideological power of the equites with the princeps and members of his family, both living and dead, securing their inclusion into the ‘new more monarchical Roman societal framework’.⁸² This appropriation of the transvectio equitum thus serves as another instance whereby a Republican procession was adapted to actively promote the imperial family,⁸³ similar to the pompa triumphalis and pompa circensis discussed above. The inclusion of images of deceased family members in the parade further strengthened the connection between the equites and the imperial family. In Caligula's case, this bond was further strengthened through the inclusion of the most distinguished of the equestrians in Caligula's own procession of his family's ashes (Suet. Calig. 15.1)

In addition to the Dioscuri's role as saviours of Rome, the Dioscuri likely serve another ideological purpose. In Greek traditions, the divine Polydeuces (Pollux) shared his immortality with his dying brother Castor.⁸⁴ Roman adaptations of this tradition included the feature of shared immortality as a symbol of fraternal piety and Castor's divine elevation as promoting a mortal's ability to gain immortality.⁸⁵ When Tiberius returned from Germany, he celebrated a triumph and with the spoils he dedicated both the temple of Concord and the temple of Pollux and Castor.⁸⁶ The latter he dedicated not only in his name, but also included the name of his brother Drusus, exemplifying his fraternal piety in monumental form.⁸⁷ By rededicating this temple of Castor as the temple of Pollux and Castor, Tiberius is setting himself up as ‘Pollux’ and his brother up as ‘Castor’. Pollux, the son of a god, shares his divinity with his mortal brother after his death and here Tiberius is responsible for bestowing a quasi-divine status on his own dead brother.⁸⁸ In Ovid's Fasti, the connection between the ‘divinity’ of the dedicators and the divinity of the recipients is made explicit: Tiberius and Drusus, brothers from the race of gods (fratres de gente deorum), dedicated this temple to Castor and Pollux, the brother gods (fratres dei).⁸⁹

Both Suetonius and Cassius Dio suggest that Caligula was also responsible for some renovations of this same temple.⁹⁰ Suetonius’ thematic, rather than chronological, structure for his narrative prevents scholars from securely dating this supposed renovation.⁹¹ Cassius Dio's description appears in Book 59, which largely presents events that occurred in 40 CE, although its immediate context is within a more general narrative of imperial cult practices and Caligula's interactions with the divine. For the most part, interpretations of these passages hint at Caligula's inappropriate treatment of the gods and his own claim to divinity and that the renovations might be entirely fictional. If the renovations did in fact occur, the successive issues may follow in the tradition of other ‘architecture’ coin types, such as the Augustan coins depicting the Temple of Mars Ultor.⁹² However, given that these coins do not have any explicit ‘architectural’ component to them, it is more likely that the desire to evoke the Dioscuri through this imagery is not connected directly with the renovations but is of greater ideological significance.⁹³

The inclusion of both living and deceased family members in the transvectio equitum and both Tiberius’ and Caligula's restoration and renovation of the Temple of Castor in the Forum directly connected the imperial family to the Dioscuri. The Dioscuri as symbols of both fraternal piety and succession, as promoted in the early decades CE, added a further layer of meaning that could be deployed by those using their images. Although there is no evidence to prove that either of Caligula's brothers received the title princeps iuventutis or ever led the transvectio equitum, Suetonius (Tib. 54) suggests that Tiberius looked to Drusus and Nero after the deaths of Germanicus and Drusus.⁹⁴ Following their own deaths and the rehabilitation of their memory, Caligula modelled the commemoration of his brothers on previous honours. As with previous pairs of ‘successors’ who died before they were able to fulfil their roles, Caligula was able to evoke the memory of his brothers through spectacle and monumenta.

Conclusion

Caligula's three ‘parading’ coins discussed in this article commemorated his father, mother, and brothers, all of whom had been ‘mistreated’ by Tiberius. Upon his accession, Caligula had not achieved any military or political victories of his own. This was his first real foray into public life. If we interpret his coins in terms of advertising ancestral deeds and actions to promote and build consensus for one's own position, we can see that these coin types follow a similar tradition to the use of ancestors by late Republican moneyers, where the bulk of these coins depict ancestors in order to evoke their memory. Each of Caligula's family coins contains underlying traditionalism or Republican themes which are then overlaid with ideas of dynastic imperial power.

The pompa triumpalis, pompa circensis, and transvectio equitum were key to the construction and promotion of the imperial family. As Caligula searched for ways to commemorate his father and rehabilitate the memory of his mother and brothers, he only had to look to the series of honours and traditions which had become well established. Commemorating his father's triumph of 17 CE some twenty years later allowed Caligula to remind people of his father's military successes, how he could fulfil ‘the prayers of the Roman people’ (Suet. Calig. 13) and follow in his father's footsteps. Adapting the honour of the carpentum used for Livia to carry the image of his mother in the pompa circensis furthered that procession's importance for commemorating imperial family members and constructing imperial lineages. The link drawn between his brothers, the Dioscuri, and the transvectio equitum showcases Caligula's own fraternal piety as well as the continued importance of the equites for the imperial family. The depiction of these important processions as part of his commemoration of deceased family members on several coins served as a visual parade of ancestors and created permanent monumenta of these public performances of power.