I wanted to enjoy this book more than I actually did.
The main focus of the book is the saecular games, with each games (and preceding rituals) celebrating/initiating a new saeculum (cyclical era) and thus claiming a return to a renewed Golden Age. A secondary theme is cyclical renewal in general, since by the end of the book the focus has switched from the 100/110 year saeculum to the
phoenix as a symbol of renewal, with it's own 540+ year cycle.
Barker's title of "imperial legitimation" is only lightly touched upon, and refers to
his theory that emperors were utilizing saecular celebrations and golden age
themes of renewal as a form of self-legitimation, especially in cases where the traditional legitimacy of dynastic succession was lacking. The precise nature of "legitimation" conferred by these celebrations and golden age references isn't really spelt out - presumably an assumption of authority by initiating and presiding over such important rituals, as well as wanting to be seen as a force for renewal and
success.
The strongest parts of the book are the introduction, coverage of the saecular coinage of
Septimius Severus and
Philip I, and a later "case study" on the interesting coinage of
Carausius with it's repeated Virgilian references. There is also an interesting "imagined eye witness account" description of the
Severan Ludi Saeculares which seeems to do a
good job of weaving together recorded facts with some invented narrative.
The main weakness of the book is that it isn't really a book at all..
Barker says it was "developed from"
his Master's thesis, but there doesn't seem to have been a whole lot of development done, resulting in a book that
comes across as uneven and poorly structured. Parts of the book, such as chapter 4 on the "
SAECVLI FELICITAS" coin
type appear more like padding, and are endlessly repetitive, offering little more than an assembly of
types. Throughout there are excessively repetitive claims of coins reflecting a "new golden age via cyclical time". I suspect
Barker would see a donut as a Virgilian reference, since he even claims the layout of the
Circus Maximus (being a circular racetrack) "may have represented the nature of cyclical time and the saeculum itself".
The book is extensively footnoted, but to me these seem to add little value, and are more a reflection of it's Master's basis, and an attempt to sprinkle on some academic rigor. Often
Barker will throw out some quoted opinion, maybe important to
his thesis, with zero supporting discussion or evidence other than a footnoted reference.
All told, a
bit of a disappointing book. The subject matter is compelling, and at $40 you are probably getting enough value from the
good bits (incl. many color coin illustrations) to outweigh the bad, but it really could have been improved with some more thematic development and overview, and better editing.
I'd be curious to hear the opinions of others who read it.
Ben
