The same apparent disjunction has been noted for the bronze coins of
Caligula: Dio Cassius says that the Senate decreed their withdrawal and destruction, and moreover that this decree was actually carried out, but
VESTA asses of
Caligula are nevertheless very common today.
Some scholars have therefore doubted Dio's account, suggesting for example that only the government's supply of unissued
Caligula bronzes was melted down, with no attempt to withdraw those in actual circulation.
About fifty years ago, however, it was observed that there is evidence to support Dio's assertion. First, Caligulan bronzes are indeed very uncommon in
hoards buried and at sites abandoned soon after Claudius' accession. Second, the counterstamp
NCAPR is found on most
types of
sestertii and
dupondii of both
Tiberius and
Claudius, and on the
SIGNIS RECEPTIS dupondii struck by
Caligula for
Germanicus but without adding
his own
portrait or name, but virtually never on
sestertii and
dupondii bearing Caligula's
portrait or name: not on
his portrait sestertii, not on
his Temple of
Augustus sestertii, not on
his dupondii for
Nero and
Drusus Caesars bearing Caligula's name on the
reverse,
nor on
his CONSENSV
dupondii of
Divus Augustus because they depict Caligula's statue on the
reverse. I don't know whether
BMC is right to list one exception, which would have to be a mistake:
NCAPR on Caligula's
sestertii of
Agrippina I that call her mother of
Caligula. In any case, the conclusion is clear: coins bearing Caligula's
portrait or name were not
countermarked either because there were none in circulation at the place or places where the
countermark was
applied, or because those that were
still in circulation were withdrawn and melted down rather than being
countermarked and rereleased into circulation!
What, then, about all those bronzes of
Caligula and coins of
Domitian in all metals that have survived until today? I think the explanation is actually very simple: it was impossible for the government to come anywhere near withdrawing all of the coins of a particular emperor which
had entered circulation and were spread in innumerable examples throughout the empire. I would doubt that any emperor was ever able to withdrawn more than say 25% of the circulating coinage of a condemned predecessor. 75% of it remained in circulation or in
hoards, so a lot has been able to survive until today too, and as collectors we hardly notice the difference.
I have never heard of the distinction between abolitio and
damnatio memoriae that David A. reports from
Jones, but doubt that is the correct explanation for the case of either
Caligula or
Domitian.