A further aspect to the spread of temple types on early provincial coins, as Burnett
points out, was that many of the temples represented were associated with the im-
perial cult. It is well known that this was one of the main vectors of Roman identity
in the east. The coins therefore reflect the Romanization of the religious culture of
many eastern cities, to which, in the second and third centuriesad, was lent a com-
petitive aspect in the development of the neocorate, as cities vied with one another
for the honor of being granted the right to a provincial temple to the emperor,
with which came the title neokoroi, meaning “temple-guardians” (Price 1984: 64).
Particularly ambitious cities sought the honor several times over: the Smyrnaeans and
Pergamenes eventually became “three times neokoroi,” advertising the fact, and their
three temples, on the coins, while the Ephesians achieved the rank of four (fig. 11.12).
Religious Realia and Scenes of Sacrifice
The preceding Greek repertoire of coin motifs had focused on divine attributes as
religious symbols appropriate for coins – thunderbolts, caducei, cornucopias (horns
overflowing with fruit), bunches of grapes, and so on. The accoutrements of reli-
gion are relatively rare on pre-Roman Greek coins, apart from tripods, which occur
very frequently, though in most cases they probably stand for Apollo. Nor is sacrifice
a major theme, though, as mentioned above, altars do make occasional appearances
and other symbols such as bucrania(bulls’ skulls) clearly allude to it. On Roman
coinage, by contrast, the material culture and the actual business of religious prac-
tice was depicted very frequently. The coins betray a real fascination with objects
associated with the great priestly colleges, and with liquid and animal sacrifice, a sign
of the importance of orthopraxy – the proper performance of ritual – for Roman
religion. The full range is well illustrated in a frieze of Augustan date probably from
the Porticus Octaviae, where symbols of both priesthood and sacrifice appear side
by side, flanked by a pair of bucrania, and clearly representing a familiar and coher-
ent set (Zanker 1987 [1988]: 126 –7, fig. 102a). The frieze also reminds us that
what we see on the coins, as so often, participates in a wider set of iconographical
contexts.150 Jonathan WilliamsFigure 11.12 Bronze coin of Ephesus from the reign of Elagabalus (ad218 –22),
showing the city’s four neocoric temples. 34 mm.